Skip to main content

Full text of "Discussion of the scripturalness of future endless punishment"

See other formats 


Boston  Public   Library 

Do  not  write  In  this  book  or  mark  It  with  pen  or 
pencil.      Penalties    for   so   doing   are   imposed    by   the 
Revised  Laws  of  the  Commonwealth  of.  Massachusetts. 

This  book  u'as  Issued  to   the  borrower  on  the  date 
last   stamped   below. 

One  volun 
"arcl  ;  to  be 
and  juvenile 
•ot  to  be  re. 
\vs,  who  w: 
"luditig  F 
irowcrV 
•  rued  01 
Trrowe 


in  the 


cln> 


notic- 


3 

^  DISCUSSIOT 


OF 


THE    SCRIPTURALNESS 


OF 


FUTURE  ENDLESS  PUNISHMENT. 


PART  I:  —  THE  AFFIRMATIVE. 

**"rf 
v 

BY    REV.    NEHEMIAH   ADAMS,   D.D. 


ART  II:  — THE    NEGATIVE. 

BY   KEV.    SYLVANUS    COBB. 


r.E^'SSD  IDrilOtf.-— WITH   VIT 

. 

CJ  3'  I  i  •     r-  /--*( 

J  -  ..._»,. 


<  i  i    t    i     i  j  i  r 


;     :  T  *:  r        ,, ,     •«.  .-     '     ,    -  *•    c  , 

1         -  /     . 


BOSTON: 
SAMUEL    T.    COBB,   PUBLISHER, 

NO,    45    CORNHILL. 

1860v  ^ 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  jear  1859,  by 

SYLVANDS    COBB, 
In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  District  of  Massachusetts. 


' 

/ 


• 

I 

I       I      I    I 


;•;.";  ;     :   -••  :     :;•::  :••: 

,•:  ,;•:  :     :        :     :f;  :  :*•: 
'>'.<.     .'  «.if'««  ••     i 


•  :  •    • 
>     >    ' 

'         ,.,,, 

„___  _______        „  : 

.'.'•'  <  '    c.   '       '    ,     '  I          ,       '   ,     ' 


LltHOTfPED   BY   COWLES  AND   COMPANT, 
17  WASBINC3TON  STREET,   BOStON. 


- 


PUBLISHER'S  PREFACE. 


Rev.  Mr.Cobb,  Editor  of  the  "  Christian  Freeman,"  and 
respondent  in  this  discussion,  after  long-  deliberation 
whether  to  accommodate  the  public  interest  or  the  wishes 
of  his  honorable  opponent,  in  respect  to  the  binding  up  of 
the  "  Argument '  entire,  with  the  "  Reply,"  at  length 
yielded  to  the  latter.  His  feelings  were  tender  towards 
Dr.  Adams  ;  and  as  the  Doctor  persisted  to  the  last  in  pro- 
testing against  the  binding  up  of  his  part  with  the  other, 
he  omitted  it  from  his  edition  of  the  book.  He  reasoned 
that,  in  doing  so,  there  would  be  no  essential  good  with- 
held from  the  public,  inasmuch  as  he  had  reprinted,  in  his 
Reply,  and  duly  explained  all  the  texts  of  Scripture  quoted 
by  his  opponent,  and  all  his  arguments.  And  he  had  the 
Doctor's  testimony  in  a  private  note,  that  he  "  evidently 
strove  to  be  fair  and  candid  ;  '  and  the  very  fact  of  his 
unwillingness  that  his  part  should  be  published  in  the 
book  entire,  Mr.  Cobb  regarded  as  a  public  acknowledg- 
ment that,  in  the  Doctor's  own  judgment,  his  "  Argu- 
ment1' was  answered. 

For  that  first  edition,  it  was  indeed  of  less  importance 
that  the  u  Argument,"  in  its  separate  embodiment,  should 
go  out  in  the  book.  The  copies  of  the  "  Christian  Free- 
man," containing  the  whole,  were  then  accessible  in  all 
parts  of  the  country,  so  that  reference  could  be  made  to 
Part  I.  of  the  Discussion,  if  any  question  should  be  raised. 
But  that  edition  is  exhausted,  and  as  I  have  taken  on  my- 
self the  responsibility  of  stereotyping  the  work,  and  print- 
ing it  in  a  permanent  form,  in  which  it  will  be  doing  its 
mission  with  posterity  when  the  folio  sheets  and  the 


iv  PUBLISHER'S  PREFACE. 

pamphlets  will  be  inaccessible  ;  and  as  the  "  Argument ' 
and  "  Reply  '    are  two  parts  of  one  Discussion,  and  be- 
long together,  and  neither  can  serve  its  proper  mission 
without  the  other,  I  put  in  both  PARTS  in  full. 

To  do  this  is  my  perfect  legal  right,  as  I  take  it  from 
the  columns  of  the  "  Christian  Freeman/1  through  which 
it  was  given  to  the  public  freely,  and  from  which  it  can 
never  be  gathered  up  by  any  subsequent  copy-right.  When 
an  author  has  once  given  his  production  to  the  public 
without  copyright,  he  has  no  more  subsequent  control  of 
it  than  any  other  man.  But  in  doing  this  thing  I  have  re- 
gard to  the  public  religious  instruction.  I  have  heard 
but  an  undivided  voice  of  surprise,  that  the  affirmative 
part  of  this  able  and  instructive  Discussion  should  be 
withheld  from  its  own  native  place  as  part  of  a  whole.  I 
act  upon  the  highest  principle  of  honor  and  right,  in 
presenting  it  to  the  public  in  its  proper  wholeness. 

While  it  is  generally  conceded  that  the  AFFIRMATIVE  AR- 
GUMENT is  one  of  the  most  able  pleas  for  the  doctrine  of 
endless  punishment  which  has  ever  been  given  to  the 
« public,  numerous  testimonials  from  the  highest  intellec- 
tual and  Christian  sources,  estimate  the  REPLY  by  the 
editor  of  the  "  Christian  Freeman  "  as  a  thorough  and  con- 
clusive vindication  of  the  Scriptures  from  the  imputation 
of  the  least  favor  for  that  appalling  theory. 

This  revised  edition  contains  some  additional  notes  in 
the  body  of  the  Reply,  and  a  table  of  contents  following  the 
original  preface,  and  also  an  index  of  texts  explained,  at 
the  end  of  the  book.  Much  pains  has  been  taken  to  make 
it  a  convenient  aid  for  universal  use,  to  a  successful  and 
profitable  study  of  the  Scriptures. 

The  reader's  humble  servant, 

SAMUEL  T.  COBB. 


PREFACE. 


IT  is  with  no  ordinary  degree  of  satisfaction  that  we 
present  to  the  public  a  labored  and  thorough  discussion 
of  Future,  Endless  Punishment,  the  leading  and  affirmative 
part  being  wrought  out  by  so  learned  and  every  way  com- 
petent a  theologian  of  the  Orthodox  school,  as  Rev.  Dr. 
Adams.  The  origin  of  this  discussion  was  as  follows : — 

In  the  month  of  May,  1858,  Dr.  Adams  published  a  dis- 
course in  advocacy  of  the  "  Reasonableness  of  Future, 
Endless  Punishment. fi  This  discourse  we  reviewed  in 
the  columns  of  the  Christian  Freeman ;  and  at  the  close 
of  the  Review  we  addressed  to  the  author  of  the  sermon 
the  following 

NOTE. 

To  REV.  DR.  ADAMS  :  Dear  Sir,  —  In  your  Sermon,  to  the 
review  of  which  I  have  devoted  some  labor  as  above,  and  in  last 
week's  Christian  Freeman,  though  you  propose  to  treat  the 
reasonableness  of  future,  endless  punishment,  yet  you  are  per- 
petually falling  back  on  the  assumption  that  it  is  true,  and  is  assert- 
ed by  the  Scriptures  ;  and  your  argument  for  its  reasonableness  is 
but  little  else  than  an  assumption  based  on  the  former  assumption, 
to  wit,  that  it  must  be  reasonable,  because  in  God's  economy  it  is 
true. 

And  now,  I  respectfully  invite  you,  and  proffer  you  the  columns 
of  the  Christian  Freeman  for  the  work,  to  show  the  Scripturalness 
of  future,  endless  punishment.  And  to  avoid  losing  the  subject 
in  a  wilderness  of  verbiage,  and  in  running  quotations  of  fragmen- 


VI  PREFACE. 

tary  Scripture  passages,  I  propose  that  you  select  the  first  passage 
which,  in  your  judgment,  clearly  announces  this  doctrine ;  or,  if  it 
has  crept  into  the  Bible  so  gradually  and  imperceptibly  that  you 
cannot  put  your  finger  upon  its  beginning,  select  what  you  regard 
as  one  of  the  most  clear  and  unquestionable  declarations  of  it,  and 
show  from  the  subject  of  discourse,  the  natural  force  of  the 
language,  and  the  Scriptural  usus  loquendi,  that  it  teaches  such 
doctrine.  And  we  will  thoroughly  discuss  that  passage  before 
entering  upon  another.  This  will  afford  you  an  opportunity  to 
carry  your  strongest  reasons  into  several  thousands  of  Universalist 
families  ;  and  I  earnestly  hope  you  will  accept  my  proposition. 
Yours  most  truly,  S.  COBB. 

On  the  morning  of  July  6th,  we  received  the  following 
from 

DR.   ADAMS  TO  THE  EDITOR. 

Boston,  July  6,  1858. 

REV.  S.  COBB  :  Editor  of  the  Christian  Freeman.  Dear  Sir,  — 
I  have  received  your  printed  note  in  your  paper  of  the  2d  inst.,  in 
which  you  say  :  "  And  now,  I  respectfully  invite  you,  and  proffer 
you  the  columns  of  the  Christian  Freeman  for  the  work,  to  show 
the  Scripturalness  of  future,  endless  punishment.  This  will  afford 
you  an  opportunity  to  carry  your  strongest  reasons  into  several 
thousands  of  Universalist  families  ;  and  I  earnestly  hope  that  you 
will  accept  my  proposition." 

The  form  in  which  you  propose  that  I  should  do  this,  viz. :  by 
an  exposition  of  isolated  proof  texts,  each  to  be  debated  by  you 
before  I  proceed  to  another,  does  not  strike  me  favorably.  I  will 
comply  with  your  invitation  if  you  will  allow  me  to  do  it  in  my 
own  way,  —  upon  one  condition,  that  there  shall  be  no  notes  or 
comments  on  what  I  write,  in  the  number  or  numbers  of  your 
paper  containing  my  communication. 

Very  respectfully  yours,  N.  ADAMS. 

Several  notes  in  direct  succession  were  subsequently 
interchanged  between  us,  of  which  we  give  the  following 
extract,  which  is  from  our  second  to  the  Doctor : 


PREFACE.  Vll 

i 

Boston,  July  6,  1858. 

REV.  N.  ADAMS,  D.  D., — Your  note  of  this  morning  is  received. 
We  can  undoubtedly  come  to  an  agreement  in  respect  to  the 
manner  of  conducting  the  proposed  discussion.  My  reasons  for 
the  method  I  proposed  will  undoubtedly  commend  themselves  to 
your  good  judgment  on  your  duly  considering  them.  I  have 
observed  that  the  advocates  of  endless  punishment  in  controversial 
encounters  with  Universalists,  usually  fill  their  space  with  a  long 
string  of  promiscuous  quotations  from  the  Bible,  throwing  together 
fragmentary  texts  regardless  of  the  connections  from  which  thev 

O  • 

are  taken,  presenting  no  argument  for  their  use  of  the  passages 
collected,  but  relying  on  the  sound  of  certain  phraseology  upon 
the  ear  of  popular  prejudice.  Then,  when  the  Universalist  follows 
with  his  reply,  he  must  employ  argument  on  each  passage  he  deems 
misused,  and  would  be  obliged  to  fill  a  volume  to  get  through  thus 
with  the  catalogue  of  texts  which  the  other  hastily  huddled 
together.  You  see  the  unfairness  and  unprofitableness  of  this 
course.  If  you  and  I  enter  into  this  discussion,  it  will  be  with 
reverence  for  God's  word,  and  a  sincere  desire  to  promote  an 
understanding  of  it  among  our  readers.  And  the  method  which  I 
propose  is  just  as  fair  for  you  as  it  is  for  me.  It  is,  in  its  main 
features,  the  only  method  by  which  you  can  do  the  work  which 
you  must  do  in  order  to  make  the  discussion  of  any  manner  of  use 
to  the  community. 

You  object  to  my  plan,  requiring  an  "  exposition  of  isolated 
proof  texts,  each  to  be  debated  by  me  before  you  proceed  to 
another."  In  truth  my  plan  no  more  requires  you  to  explain 
isolated  proof  texts,  than  any  other  plan  you  might  propose.  Your 
sending 'to  me  a  collection  of  Scripture  passages  unexplained,  and 
my  printing  them  in  the  Christian  Freeman,  would  be  of  no  ser- 
vice. You  will  agree  with  me  that  you  are  to.  give  your  reasons 
for  your  use  of  Scripture  texts,  and  your  reasons  on  the  texts  one 
by  one.  And  the  method  proposed  by  me  allows,  and  even 
requires  you,  when  you  have  selected  your  supposed  decisive  proof 
text,  to  make  such  quotations  and  use  of  other  and  collateral  texts 
as  you  may  judge  expedient,  in  order  to  sustain  your  use  of  the 


Vlll  PREFACE. 

i 

leading  proof  text.  My  object  is,  not  to  run  a  gauntlet,  but  to 
discuss  these  matters  wherein  we  differ,  rationally,  and  as  Professor 
Stuart  would  say,  "  philologically  and  exegetically." 

Yours  most  truly,  S.  COBB. 

Finally,  we  acceded  to  the  method  proposed  by  Dr. 
Adams,  providing  that  he  should  do  his  complete  work  in 
argument  for  future  endless  punishment  in  one  long 
article.  And  we  now  regard  this  as  the  best  method.  It 
brings  his  whole  argument  in  one  continuous  and  connect- 
ed work,  under  seven  important  classifications,  thus  giving 
us  at  once  the  best  thing  that  can  be  done  for  the  doctrine 
in  question.  If  this  fails,  the  doctrine  cannot  be  sus- 
tained. 

It  will  be  seen  by  the  extract  of  our  second  note  to  the 
Doctor,  that  we  were  particularly  solicitous  that  he  should 
show  reasons  for  whatever  applications  he  might  make  of 
Scripture  texts  to  his  espoused  position.  If  it  shall  be 
found  on  review  that  he  has  not  done  this,  we  are  sure 
that  it  is  not  his  fault,  but  the  difficulty  is  in  the  nature 
of  the  case.  We  regard  the  Argument  for  Future  Endless 
Punishment  as  able  as  any  that  we  have  seen,  and  we  do 
not  believe  a  better  can  ever  be  produced.  And  the 
excellent  spirit  in  which  the  work  is  conducted  is  signally 
creditable  to  the  author.  We  commend  the  whole, 
"  Argument"  and  "  Keview,"  to  the  candid  and  prayerful 
perusal  of  the  lovers  of  truth,  in  hope  that,  by  the  bless- 
ing of  God,  it  will  conduce  to  the  honor  of  His  declarative 
glory,  and  the  spiritual  interests  of  many  people. 

S.  C. 


TABLE    OF    CONTENTS, 


PART    I. 

THE  AFFIRMATIVE,  BY  REV.  NEHEMIAH  ADAMS,  D.  D. 


INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS 13 

SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT. 

I.     The  Scriptures  teach  that  there  is  a  Penalty  for  Disobedience 

awaiting  the  Finally  Impenitent 17 

II.     Redemption  by  Christ  is  represented  as  having  for  its  ob- 
ject Salvation  from  Final  Perdition 34 

III.  The  Fall  of  Angels  and  of  Man,  is  a  Confirmatory  Proof 

of  Future,  Endless  Retribution 49 

IV.  The  Terms  used  with  regard  to  the  Resurrection  of  the 

Dead,  are  Proofs  of  Endless  Retribution 53 

V.     The  Scriptures  Teach  that  the  Law  of  God  has  a  Curse ; 

which  it  has  not  if  Future  Punishment  be  Disciplinary. .         61 

VI.     The  Sentence  passed  upon  the  Wicked  indiscriminately, 

forbids  the  Idea  of  Discipline  in  Future  Punishment. . .         63 

VII.  The  Duration  of  Future  Punishment  is  Expressed  in  the 
New  Testament  by  the  Terms  employed  to  denote  Ab- 
solute Eternity \ 65 

Recapitulation 78 


TABLE    OP   CONTENTS. 


PAKT    II. 

THE  NEGATIVE,  BY  REV.  SYLVAXUS  COBB. 


PRELIMINARY  OBSERVATIONS 83 

CHAPTER  I. 

The   Scriptural  Argument  of  Dr.  Adams'  First  Classification, 

reviewed Ill 

The  Phrase  " Finally  Impenitent/'  criticised Ill 

SEC.  I.         The   Time  and  Nature  of  the  Judgment  of  Christ, 
•with  Reference  to  his  General  or  Entire  Judicial 

Administration 116 

SEC.  II.        Special  Judgments 133 

The  Day  of  Wrath 139 

Destruction  of  Soul  and  Body  in  Gehenna 147 

The  Old  Testament  Usage  of  Gehenna 151 

Gehenna  in  the  New  Testament 15G 

SEC.  III.      Indifferent  Speculations  and  Miscellaneous  Texts. . .  181 

SEC.  IV.      Parable  of  the  Tares  —  End  of  the  World 193 

SEC.  V.        The  Lake  of  Eire  and  Brimstone,  and  the  Smoke  of 

Torment  Eorever 204 

SEC.  VI.      The  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus 218 

SEC.  VII.    The  Case  of  Judas 250 

SEC.  VIII.  Die  in  your  Sins  —  Cannot  Come 259 

CHAPTER  II. 

Reply  to  Dr.  Adams'  Third  Proposition,  to  wit:  "The  Fall  o. 
Angels  and  of  Man  is  a  Confirmatory  Proof  of  Future^  Endless 
Punishment " 272 

CHAPTER  III. 

Argument  from  the  Resurrection,  reviewing  Dr.  Adams'  Third 

Proposition 301 

Resurrection  to  Damnation 331 

CHAPTER  IV. 

The  Curse  of  the  Law ;  or  the  Review  of  the  Fifth  Position  of 

the  "  Argument  " 353 

^hilologically  considered 356 

Ucripturally  considered 361 


TABLE    OP    CONTENTS.  xi 

CHAPTER  V. 

The  Sentence  passed  upon  the  "Wicked ;  or  Review  of  the  Sixth 

Proposition  of  the  "  Argument " 366 

The  Dead,  Small  and  Great,  in  the  Judgment 370 

CHAPTER  VI. 

Terms  of  Duration  ;  or  Review  of  the  Argument  from  the  words 
Everlasting  and  Eternal,  which  is  the  Seventh,  and  the  Promi- 
nent Position  of  Dr.  Adams,  in  support  of  Endless  Punishment  379 

The  New  Witness 409 

The  Better  Witnesses 416-419 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Argument  from  the  Scheme  of  Redemption,  reviewed,  thus,  for 
the  sake  of  a  Better  Climax,  closing  the  "  Reply "  with  the 

consideration  of  the  Second  Position  of  the  "Argument" 420 

The  Infinite  Mistake 427 

Another  Infinite  Mistake 432 

After  this  the  Judgment 466 

Extent  of  Gospel  Provision 469 

Method  and  Consummation  of  Messiah's  Mission 473 

The  Recapitulation 479 

Appendix 481 

Dr.  Adams  at  Home 483 

For  a  Critical  Index  of  Texts,  see  pages 506,  507 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 


-•*-< 


PART   I. 


A  SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT  FOR  FUTURE,  ENDLESS  PUNISHMENT, 


BY  REV.   N.   ADAMS,   D.   D. 


INTRODUCTORY  REMARKS, 
THE  invitation  from  the  Editor  of  the  "  Christian 
Freeman r  to  make  a  statement  of  views  which  the 
"  several  thousands  of  families 7  who,  it  is  said, 
will  read  this  paper,  repudiate,  imposes  a  responsi- 
ble, yet,  for  some  reasons,  a  gratifying  task.  The 
names  of  not  a  few  among  my  ministerial  brethren 
occur  to  me,  in  whose  able  and  more  competent- 
hands  I  would  gladly  place  this  labor,  both  for  the 
gratification  of  the  reader  and,  as  I  view  it,  for 
the  truth's  sake.  I  feel  encouraged  in  this  work  by 
the  comparative  regard  which  many  in  this  denom* 
ination  profess  for  the  Bible.  They  do  not  assail  it 
as  the  manner  of  some  is  who  differ  from  us ;  but 
their  desire  to  make  it  speak  in  their  favor  secures  for 
it  an  acknowledgment  of  its  authority.  As  an  illus- 
tration of  this  remark,  I  refer  to  a  Review  of  Rev.  T, 


14  THEOLOGICAL    DISCUSSION. 

S.  King's  "  Two  Discourses,"  by  Ilcv.  Dr.  Thomas 
Whittemore,  in  the  Universalist  Quarterly  and  General 
Review,  October,  1858.  Dr.  W.  says  :  "  It  seems  to 
us  impossible  to  preserve  the  public  reverence  for  the 
Bible  if  we  suffer  ourselves  to  speak  about  it  as  Mr. 
King  has  done."  "  The  four  Gospels7  according  to  Mr. 
K.,  are  mere  shreds  and  tatters  of  what  Christ  taught. 
His  manner  of  teaching  was  so  peculiar,  and  so 
poetical,  and  fanciful,  that  it  is  quite  a  wonder  that  we 
have  even  those  tatters. >:  "He  (Mr.  K.)  speaks  of 
God  choosing  to  instruct  the  Church  through  a  few 
fragmentary  flashes  of  poetry.  Good  God  !  What 
an  idea  of  revelation  !  What  an  idea  of  Jesus  as  a 
teacher  !  He  has  lost  sight  of  '  the  true  light  which 
lighteth  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world.' 
p.  377. 

Inasmuch  as  nothing  but  the  clearest  conviction 
that  this  doctrine  of  endless  retribution  is  revealed 
in  the  Bible  would  allow  us  for  a  moment  to  believe 
and  inculcate  the  fearful  truth,  which  all  who  believe 
it  receive  with  the  most  solemn  awe,  it  awakens  con- 
fidence and  friendly  feeling  to  think  that  the  most  of 
those  who  will  read  this  article,  thus  regard  the  tes- 
timony of  Scripture,  explained  by  the  ordinary  rules 
of  language,  to  be  of  binding  authority. 

I  have  also  been  led  to  think  of  this  denomination 
as  including  many  who  are  much  exercised  in  their 
minds  on  the  subject  of  future  punishment.  It  is  a 
welcome  effort  to  show  such  individuals  that  some  of 
their  thoughts  with  regard  to  this  subject  and 
its  advocates  are  perhaps  disproportioned  and 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION,  15 

• 

exaggerated.  The  most  of  those  who  believe  in 
future,  endless  punishment  have  far  more  peace  of 
mind  with  regard  to  it  than  they  appear  to  have  who 
•deny  it;  for  with  evangelical  believers  it  sinks  into 
its  just  proportion  in  the  universal  government  of 
God,  as  the  State's  Prison,  Courts  of  law,  Officers  of 
Justice,  blend,  like  the  tonic  element  of  iron  in  the 
blood,  into  the  life  of  a  commonwealth  with  its 
virtuous  and  happy  homes,  its  hundreds  of  thousands 
of  joyous  children,  its  churches,  its  products,  its 
whole  prosperous  tide  of  affairs.  Though  hell  is  not 
the  central  figure  in  the  religious  ideas  of  evangelical 
Christians,  the  belief  in  future,  endless  retribution 
does  exert  its  powerful  influence  upon  us.  We  know 
that  it  is  capable  of  vast  abuse,  as  we  see  illustrated 
in  the  direful  influence  of  its  perversion  by  the  church 
of  Rome.  But  we  find  it  explicitly  revealed,  and 
"  knowing,  therefore,  the  terrors  of  the  Lord,  we  per- 
suade men. '  If  if  were  preached  still  more  affection- 
ately and  plainly  by  us,  conscious  of  our  ill  desert 
and  of  our  obligations  to  redeeming  love,  there  would 
be  a  nearer  approach  to  the  apostolic  model.  Our 
prevailing  associations  with  this  doctrine,  we  are 
happy  to  say,  are  those  of  deliverance,  through  the 
atoning  death  of  the  Son  of  God.  It  is  in  connection 
with  this  sacrifice  for  us  that  we  always  endeavor  to 
preach  it;  so  that  we  trust  we  may  say  concerning 
our  system  of  faith,  as  it  is  said  of  heaven,  "  The 
Lamb  is  .the  light  thereof. '  While  we  believe  that 
the  contemplation  of  future  misery  apart  from  the 
cross  of  Christ  would  be  hurtful  to  the  mind  and 


16  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

heart,  we  also  feel  that  it  cannot  be  of  healthful 
tendency  with  our  moral  natures  to  base  our  religious 
associations  mainly  on  the  one  idea  of  opposition  to 
endless  punishment.  An  evil  thing,  real  or  imaginary, 
which  we  inordinately,  or  upon  wrong  principles, 
oppose,  has  a  retroactive  influence  on  our  minds 
and  hearts,  corresponding  to  its  own  baleful  nature. 
It  is  with  such  views  that  I  now  write,  —  not,  prin- 
cipally, with  antagonists  in  my  mind,  though  my 
statements  will  meet  with  antagonism  ;  —  so  that  if 
any  are  persuaded  by  counter  statements  that  these 
views  are  unscriptural,  they  will  do  me  the  favor,  at 
least,  to  think  of  me  as  their  sincere  well*wisher  and 
friend,  and  as  one  who  has  the  same  eternal  interests 
embarked  in  this  question  as  themselves.  Let  us 
also  keep  in  mind  that  mere  argumentation  never 
convinces  men  of  Spiritual  truths,  but  that  there 
must  be  on  our  part  an  experience,  wrought  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  in  answer  to  prayer,  to  interpret  things 
aright,  which  otherwise  will  be  stumbling  blocks  and 
foolishness.  But  without  further  preface,  I  proceed 
to  my  argument. 


SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT. 
I.      THE    SCRIPTURES    TEACH    THAT     THERE     is    A 

PENALTY     FOR     DISOBEDIENCE    AWAITING      THE     FINALLY 
IMPENITENT. 

This  is  plainly  declared  in  Rom.  ii.  5-12,  16 :  "But 
after  thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart,  treasurest  up 
unto  thyself  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath  and 
revelation  of  the  righteous  judgment  of  God ;  Who 
will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  deeds :  To 
them  who,  by  patient  continuance  in  well-doing,  seek 
for  glory,  honor,  and  immortality,  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.  For  as  many  as  have  sinned  without  law,  shall 
also  perish  without  law  ;  and  as  many  as  have  sinned 
in  the  law,  shall  be  judged  by  the  law,  —  In  the  day 
when  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men  by  Jesus 
Christ  according  to  my  Gospel. '  The  parenthetic 
passages  omitted  here,  which  occur  before  the  last 
of  these  sentences,  are  a  direct  assertion  of  the  full 
accountableness  of  the  heathen  world  to  the  tribunal 
of  God,  for  their  sins  against  their  consciences 
and  the  light  of  nature.  I  take  this  whole  passage  of 


*2 


18  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Scripture  as  a  revelation  of  a  future  judgment  and 
retribution,  in  which  all  men  are  to  be  judged  and 
treated  according  to  their  works. 

The  ideas  which  are  presented  of  heaven,  both  by 
Christ  and  his  apostles,  come  to  us  through  objects 
of  sense.  Every  one  supposes  that  by  these  images, 
as  for  example,  "  sitting  with  Christ  at  his  table  in 
his  kingdom,  r  ^  new  wine, 7  '"'beholding  his  glory/7 
and  "  gates  of  pearl,"  "  streets  of  gold,"  "  harps" 
and  "  crowns/''  it  is  intended  to  give  us  the  idea  of 
the  highest  pleasures  of  which  our  natures,  body  and 
soul,  shall  in  another  world  be  capable.  We  never 
subtract  any  thing  from  these  images  of  heavenly 
joy,  saying,  They  are  only  metaphors  ;  we  rather 
say,  Language  here  is  intensified,  to  convey  the  ideas 
of  future  happiness.  And  as  we  believe  that  we 
shall  have  bodies  in  heaven,  "  like  vmto  Christ's  own 
glorious  body/7  we  are  never  unwilling  to  think  that 
there  will  be  enjoyments  adapted  to  the  body  with 
the  soul, —  spiritual,  of  course,  in  both  cases,  and 
yet  beautifully  distinguished  but  capable  of  blend- 
ing, as  in  this  world.  This  way  of  representing 
unseen  things  to  us  is  not  so  much  "  Oriental '  as 
the  only  possible  way,  at  present,  of  communicating 
spiritual  objects  to  our  understanding.' 

But  while  the  attractions  of  heaven  suffer  nothing 
by  reason  of  criticisms  upon  the  language  in  which 
they  are  presented,  some  do  not  use  the  same  toler- 
ance, nor  apply  the  same  principles  of  interpretation 
when  they  read  or  speak  of  future  punishment. 
Here,  they  say,  all  is  metaphorical,  Oriental ;  they 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  19 

select  certain  images,  and  ask  if  any  suppose  that  the 
wicked  are,  literally,  to  suffer  such  things,  from  just 
these  elements  of  pain.  But  the  representations  of 
heaven  are  certainly  obnoxious  to  the  very  same 
criticisms,  and  similar  questions  may  be  asked  con- 
cerning them.  But  being  of  a  pleasurable  nature, 
they  escape  criticism.  Therefore,  if  we  are  inquired 
of  in  either  case,  Do  you  believe  that  these  things 
are  literally  so  ?  the  proper  answer  seems  to  be  in 
both  cases,  Either  these  things,  or  things  which 
now  can  only  be  expressed  by  them.  Those  earthly 
symbols  approach  nearer  than  any  thing  with  which 
we  are  now  acquainted,  to  the  things  signified. 

The  condition  of  the  wicked  after   death   is   repre- 
sented through    such    svmbols    by    Christ   and    his 

O  *  */ 

apostles  as  a  state  of  positive  punishment.  With  a 
desire  to  speak  cautiously  on  such  a  point,  and  to 
follow  only  the  most  obvious  leadings  of  Scripture, 
very  many  are  constrained  to  believe  that  while  the 
finally  impenitent  will  experience  the  consequences 
naturally  flowing  from  their  moral  condition,  those 
consequences  of  their  sins  will  be  kept  alive  by  the 
power  of  Clod,  and  that  continual  sin  will  receive 
continually  new  punishment.  In  the  sermon  on  the 
reasonableness  of  endless  punishment  before  mention- 
ed, I  assumed,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that 
future  misery  should  consist  only  in  the  natural  con- 
sequences of  evil,  and  then  argued  that  it  was 
reasonable  that  these  should  be  endless.  I  also 
deprecated  any  inquiry  beyond  the  plain  language  of 
the  New  Testament  as  to  the  elements  of  punish- 


20  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

ment.  The  subject  forbade  any  extended  considera- 
tion of  the  nature  of  future  punishment,  nor  did  1 
undertake  to  state  my  own  belief  on  that  point.  In 
attempting  now  to  show  that  the  Scriptures  represent 
the  future  condition  of  the  wicked  to  be  a  state  of 
punishment,  it  will  be  submitted  to  the  reader  whether 
infliction  from  the  hand  of  God  be  not  necessarily 
involved  in  the  language  of  the  Bible. 

One  of  those  indirect  proofs  of  a  thing  which 
sometimes  are  more  forcible  and  convincing  than 
direct  statements,  occurs  in  the  words  of  Christ 
which  I  will  refer  to  as  proving  the  future  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked,  in  which  he  tells  us  to  "fear 
Him  ivhicJi  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in 
hell"  Matt.  x.  28. 

If  God  has  merely  the  natural  ability  to  do  this, 
while  his  character  makes  it  morally  impossible  that 
he  should  ever  do  it,  the  illustration  is  singularly  at 
fault.  It  would  never  be  proper  to  tell  a  child  as  a 
reason  why  it  should  fear  its  father  and  mother  that 
they  have  power  to  inflict  a  punishment  which  wre 
know  is  morally  impossible.  Their  mere  natural 
ability  to  inflict  it  would  not  justify  the  exhortation, 
— "  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  fear  them."  To  associate 
the  idea  of  destroying  both  body  and  soul  in  hell 
with  our  proper  fear  of  God  our  heavenly  Father,  if 
he  would  do  no  such  thing,  would  not  be  in  accord- 
ance with  truth. 

Some,  to  avoid  this  difficulty,  say  that  the  passage 
means  merely  that  God  can  destroy  life.  But  so  can 
they  who  kill  the  body.  There  is  something  more 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  21 

which  God  alone  can  do,  and  which  we  need  rather  to 
fear.  Others,  knowing  that  the  original  word  for  hell 
in  this  passage  cannot  mean  the  grave,  propose  to 
render  the  warning  thus,  that  God  can  cast  those 
whom  he  kills,  into  the  valley  of  Hinnom.  But  so 
could  assassins,  or  judicial  executioners.  We  still 
look  for  that  which  God  alone  can  do.  Some  say  it 
must  be  annihilation.  But  the  valley  of  Hinnom  is 
notoriously  symbolical  of  perpetuity,  the  fire  always 
burning,  the  worm  ever  breeding.  Why,  moreover, 
should  any  place  be  specified  in  which  the  annihila- 
tion, which  is  the  same  thing  every,  where,  should 
occur  ?  Or  what  appropriateness  is  there  in  speaking 
of  the  soul  as  being  annihilated  there  ?  Destroying 
both  soul  and  body  in  hell  seems  to  be  equivalent  to 
that  expression — "  everlasting  destruction,  " — an 
apparent  contradiction  of  terms,  but  conveying  the 
idea  of  perpetual  loss  and  misery. 

We  get  no  relief  from  these  difficulties  with  the 
passage  if  we  turn  to  the  milder  form  in  which  the 
idea  is  expressed  in  Luke  xii.  5.  "  Fear  him  which 
after  he  hath  killed  hath  power  to  cast  into  hell ;  yea, 
I  say  unto  you,  Fear  him."  For  Gehenna,  understood 
literally  as  the  valley  of  Ilinnom,  presents  to  the 
mind  the  most  terrific  image  of  positive  misery. 
Nothing  can  be  more  revolting  or  fearful.  Let  those 
who  are  jealous  at  imputations  cast  upon  the  character 
of  God  by  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  ex- 
plain how  Jesus  could  even  suggest  the  idea  of  the 
Father  casting  his  offspring  into  a  place,  the  name  of 
which  was  borrowed  from  the  most  fearful  object 


22  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION, 

then  known  to  his  hearers.  Until  this  passage  is 
shown  to  imply  no  punishment  from  the  hand  of  God, 
we  must  regard  it  as  an  impregnable  proof  of  future 
visitations  of  misery  upon  the  wicked. 

Some  who  believe  in  future  punishment  seek  to 
mitigate  the  influence  of  the  dread  truth  upon  their 
feelings  by  the  theory  that  future  punishment  will 
consist  only  in  the  natural  effects  of  sin.  This  re- 
lieves them  of  the  necessity  to  think  that  God  will 
inflict  any  thing  directly  upon  the  wicked. 

One  thing  seems  incontrovertible,  viz.  :  The  Bible 
does  not  teach  us  that  sin  is  its  own  complete  pun- 
ishment. It  is  true  that  without  the  elements  of 
misery  in  themselves,  the  Bible  tells  us?  sinners  could 
not  be  made  miserable ;  nor  would  outward  inflictions 
constitute  punishment  unless  there  were  something 
within  for  the  fire  to  kindle.  But  it  admits  of  a  ques- 
tion whether  if  the  sinner  should  be  left  entirely  to 
himself,  undisturbed  by  any  external  power,  adding 
new  energy  to  sorrow,  or  opening  new  sources  of  it, 
he  could  not  in  time  adjust  himself,  as  in  this  world, 
to  any  circumstances.  Even  in  this  world,  trouble  or 
the  infliction  of  pain  and  sorrow,  are  necessary  to 
rouse  the  conscience.  To  some  extent  God  punishes 
men  in  this  world,  for  this  purpose.  "  Because  they 
have  no  changes,  therefore  they  fear  not  God." 
"  Moab  hath  been  at  ease  from  his  youth,  and  he  hath 
settled  on  his  lees,  and  hath  not  been  emptied  from 
vessel  to  vessel."  The  seventy  third  Psalm  describes 
the  wicked  who  "  are  not  in  trouble  as  other  men  ; 
neither  are  they  plagued  like  other  men."  Hence 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  23 

"  their  strength  is  firm.  But  even  tribulation  is 
powerless  in  man}7  cases,  and  the  sinner  is  either  em- 
boldened by  temporary  respite,  or  provoked  by  the 
rod  to  further  opposition.  Pharaoh  is  an  eminent 
example  of  this.  It  is  said  of  another:  "And  in  the 
time  of  his  distress  did  he  trespass  yet  more  against 
the  Lord :  this  is  that  king  Ahaz."  Other  passages 
in  accordance  with  these,  to  prove  the  positions  just 
laid  down,  might  easily  be  cited. 

So  that  however  terrible  and  bitter  the  condition 
of  the  sinner  might  be  at  first,  it  is  not  inconceivable 
that  he  should  at  last  say,  with  Satan  in  Paradise 
Lost, —  "  Hail !  horrors,  hail !  and  thou  profoundest 
hell ! '  if  God  would  but  depart  from  him.  Sinking 
into  a  torpid,  brutish  state,  or  rousing  themselves 
into  defiant  forms  of  hatred  and  blasphemy,  occupy- 
ing themselves  with  plots  and  counterplots  in  their 
strife  with  each  other,  the  wicked  in  hell,  like  bad  or 
abandoned  people  here,  might  make  their  condition 
tolerable.  They  would,  for  example,  feel  the  need  of 
subordination  among  themselves  for  their  own  pro- 
tection ;  selfishness  would  suggest  many  alleviations 
of  misery  by  mutual  forbearance  ;  and  as  the  worst 
of  men  —  pirates,  gamblers,  debauchees,  have  codes 
of  honor,  and  ambition  its  fawning  flatteries,  and 
pride  smothers  its  resentment,  and  selfishness  in  all 
its  forms  is  compelled  to  put  on  the  mask  of  submis- 
sion and  obeisance,  so  the  wicked,  if  left  to  them- 
selves even  with  their  wickedness  festering  and  their 
crimes  becoming  gigantic,  might  manage,  by  self- 
control,  to  reduce  things  into  a  system  which  to  their 


24  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

wretched  natures  might  in  very  many  cases  be  even 
tolerable.  Sin  itself  is  no  misery  to  a  sinner ;  it  must 
meet  with  ill  success,  it  must  be  compelled  to  feel  a 
superior  power  acting  contrary  to  itself;  then  indeed 
it  is  the  occasion  of  misery.  It  is  no  sorrow  to 
wicked  men  here  for  God  to  depart  from  them ;  it  is 
rather  their  desire  ;  "  therefore  they  say  unto  God, 
Depart  from  us,  for  we  desire  not  the  knowledge  of 
thy  ways."  Saul  never  would  have  uttered  that 
bitter  cry,  "  God  is  departed  from  me  and  is  become 
my  enemy,"  if  the  Philistines  had  not  pursued  hard 
after  him.  God  and  he  had  been  for  a  long  time  far 
apart,  but  very  little  did  Saul  care  for  this,  until  the 
day  of  his  calamity  made  haste, 

If,  therefore,  there  is  to  be,  in  the  strict  sense  of 
the  term,  punishment  after  death,  it  would  seem  that 
there  must  in  the  nature  of  things,  be  visitations 
upon  the  wicked  of  that  which  the  Bible  calls  "  indig- 
nation and  wrath,  tribulation  and  anguish."  While 
there  must  be  in  the  sinner  himself  a  state  of  things 
which  will  make  these  inflictions  punishment,  there 
must  also  be  a  mighty  hand  stretched  out  forever  to 
make  the  future  condition  of  the  wicked  one  of  ret- 
ribution. There  is  both  error  and  truth  in  the  com- 
mon saying  with  man}7  that  future  misery  will  proceed 
from  conscience :  —  error,  if  it  be  supposed  that 
conscience  left  to  itself  will  occasion  torment;  for,  if  in 
this  world  with  so  much  to  stimulate  conscience,  it 
so  easily  falls  asleep,  the  provocations,  and  the  ne- 
cessity of  self  defence,  and  redress,  and  all  the  bad 
influences  of  helly  must  have  the  power  totally  to 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  25 

sear  it ;  —  but  there  is  truth  in  the  saying,  if  it  be 
allowed  that  God  is  to  visit  the  wicked  in  ways  that 
will  excite  conscience  against  them ;  this  would  be 
"  infliction/'7  compared  with  which  fire  and  brimstone, 
though  the  most  appalling  images  of  torture,  we  can 
easily  conceive,  do  not  convey  more  terrible  ideas  of 
retribution. 

Now  the  Bible  is  continually  representing  the 
wicked  as  receiving  from  God  positive  inflictions,  and 
not  merely  as  being  abandoned  to  themselves.  Even 
when  it  speaks  of  many  sources  of  misery  which 
might  seem  to  be  the  natural  consequences  of  their 
sin,  it  often  represents  these  consequences  as  being 
administered  by  the  direct  agency  of  the  Almighty. 
So  that  the  two  things  seem  to  be  conbined.  "  Upon 
the  wicked  he  shall  rain  snares,  fire  and  brimstone, 
and  a  horrible  tempest ;  this  shall  be  the  portion  of 
their  cup."  "  Now  consider  this,  ye  that  forget  God, 
lest  I  tear  you  in  pieces  and  there  be  none  to 
deliver."  "  God  is  angry  with  the  wicked  every  day. 
If  he  turn  not,  he  will  whet  his  sword;  he  hath  bent 
his  bow  and  made  it  ready/'  These  passages  teach 
that  sinners  will  not  merely  be  left  to  the  natural 

tf 

consequences  of  sin.  The  ideas  of  arrest,  and  of 
execution,  are  here  presented ;  the  transgressor  is 
not  left  to  himself,  with  merely  his  sin  for  his  punish- 
ment. Then  again  we  read  —  "  Woe  unto  the  wicked, 
it  shall  be  ill  with  him  ;  for  the  reward  of  his  hands 
shall  be  given  him.7'  "  Yea,  woe  unto  them  also 
when  I  depart  from  them."  Even  though  the  wicked 
should  not  suffer  otherwise,  nor  to  a  greater  degree. 


26  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

than  they  are  capable  of  suffering  in  their  minds 
here,  yet,  if  they  are  to  be  punished,  these  sufferings 
must  be  kept  active  by  an  outward  power ;  for  their 
natural  tendency  is  to  harden  and  stupify,  or  to  excite 
passions  whose  gratification  affords  a  certain  redress. 
All  this  we  may  believe  without  venturing  one  step 
into  the  domain  of  fancy  to  depict  the  kind  and  man- 
ner of  those  inflictions  which  are  necessary  to 
constitute  punishment.  Nor  is  it  necessary  j  for 
knowing  as  we  do  by  experience  and  observation, 
what  the  passions  of  the  human  heart  are  when 
restraint  is  weakened  or  removed,  we  need  no  ex- 
ternal images  of  woe  to  represent  what  it  must  be 
for  God  to  minister  excitement  to  them  by  his  pre- 
sence and  his  intercourse  with  them.  In  a  sense  He 
departs  from  them,  as  He  did  from  Saul.  By  this  is 
signified  the  withdrawal  of  every  thing  merciful, 
alleviating,  hopeful,  and  of  a  restraining,  reformatory 
nature.  Yet  He  will  always  make  his  presence  to  be 
felt ;  for  "  if  I  make  my  bed  in  hell,  behold  thou  art 
there."  While,  therefore,  material  images  of  woe,  if 
too  specific,  seem  to  degrade  the  subject,  and  are  apt 
to  pass  over,  in  their  effect  on  some,  from  the  extreme 
of  horror  to  the  grotesque,  the}7  are  not  objectionable 
on  the  score  of  over-statement ;  nothing  which  fancy 
ever  depicted  being  capable  of  expressing  the  misery 
which  must  be  felt  by  a  depraved  soul  opposed  to 
God  and  with  God  for  its  punisher.  We  have  only 
to  think  of  what  is  sometimes  felt  at  funerals  and 
closing  graves,  to  see  what  future  misery  must  be  in 
one  of  its  merely  incidental  forms,  —  the  loss  of  all 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  27 

good,  forever.  If  God  shall  but  keep  perpetually 
fresh  such  sorrows  as  men  feel  here,  he  will  fulfil  a 
large  part  of  that  which  the  Saviour  and  the  apostles 
have  declared  to  be  the  future  portion  of  the  wicked. 
So  that  when  good  men  like  Leighton,  Baxter,  An- 
drew Fuller,  the  Wesleys,  Watts,  and  Edwards  por- 
tray, according  to  their  several  conceptions,  the  pains 
of  the  wicked,  they  fall  far  below  the  truth ;  and  their 
representations,  if  at  all  objectionable,  are  not  so  for 
the  reason  that  they  surpass  the  dread  reality :  for 
that  is  impossible.  Let  us  now  consider  the  follow- 
ing passages. 

il  As  therefore  the  tares  are  gathered  and  are 
burned  in  the  fire,  so  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  the 
world.  The  Son  of  man  shall  send  forth  his  angels 
and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  all  things 
that  offend  and  them  which  do  iniquity,  and  shall  cast 
them  into  a  furnace  of  fire ;  there  shall  be  wailing 
and  gnashing  of  teeth."  These  same  closing  words 
are  used  a  few  verses  afterward,  in  explaining  the 
parable  of  the  Net.  Not  to  burden  the  attention  of 
the  reader,  there  is  one  passage  more  which  I  will 
quote  in  connection  with  the  preceding,  for  the  sake 
of  briefly  remarking  upon  them,  before  passing  to  the 
next  topic. 

The  passage  to  which  I  refer  is  Rev.  xiv.  9,  10,  11. 
"  And  the  third  angel  followed  them,  saying  with  a 
loud  voice,  If  any  man  worship  the  beast  and  his 
image  and  receive  his  mark  in  his  forehead  or  in  his 
hand,  the  same  shall  drink  of  the  wine  of  the  wrath 
of  God  which  is  poured  out  without  mixture  into  the 


28  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

« 

cup  of  his  indignation ;  and  he  shall  be  tormented 
with  fire  and  brimstone  in  the  presence  of  the 
holy  angels  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb : 
And  the  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  up  forever 
and  ever :  and  they  have  no  rest,  day  or  night,  who 
worship  the  beast  and  his  image,  and  whosoever 
receiveth  the  mark  of  his  name." 

If  the  Bible  says  that  angels,  at  the  last  day,  inflict 
on  the  wicked  that  which  can  best  be  compared  only 
to  casting  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire,  I  will  implicitly 
believe  it.  My  reason  ascertains  whether  this  is  said, 
beyond  reasonable  doubt ;  then  reason  bows  to 
revelation.  I  will  not  object  that  such  employment 
does  not  consist  with  my  conceptions  of  angelic 
natures.  If  I  did,  the  question  would  be  appropriate, 
Do  you  consent  that  a  holy  angel  should  have  cut  off* 
the  hundred  and  eighty-five  thousand  Assyrians  of 
Sennacherib's  army  in  one  night,  and  that  another 
should  have  directed  the  pestilence  of  three  days  in 
Israel  ?  What  will  you  do  about  these  things  ?  You 
are  disposed,  perhaps,  to  associate  angels  with 
"  birds  and  flowers,"  with  elves  and  fairies  ;  and  not 
with  garments  rolled  in  blood,  or  hands  reeking  with 
slaughter.  My  reply  is,  I  will  correct  my  natural  or 
acquired  feelings,  by  the  word  of  God.  But  the  word 
of  God  says  that  angels  will  cast  "  all  things  that 
offend,  and  them  which  do  iniquity,  into  a  furnace  of 
fire."  Inanimate  things  are  not  meant;  for  it  is 
added,  "  there  shall  be  wailing  and  gnashing  of  teeth." 
Moreover,  the  word  of  God  says  that  the  idolatrous 
worshippers  of  the  beast  shall  be  tormented  with  fire 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  29 

and  brimstone  in  the  presence  of  the  holy  angels  and 
of  the  Lamb. 

My  only  question  will  be  again.  Does  the  Bible 
mean  by  this  that  men  will  be  made  to  suffer  in  a 
way  which  is  most  appropriately  expressed  by  fire 
and  brimstone  ;  that  even  if  it  be  not  literally  so, 
there  would  really  be  nothing  to  choose  between  the 
two  things,  the  figure  and  the  literal  meaning  ?  And 
does  it  say  that  holy  angels,  and  the  Lamb  of  God 
himself,  will  look  on,  approve,  and  confirm  the  inflic- 
tion ?  If  so,  1  fully  and  firmly  believe  it ;  —  be  it 
figurative,  or  literal,  I  believe  it,  and  I  will  take  it  to 
be  the  same  as  literal.  And  I  will  postpone  the 
explanation  to  my  natural  feelings,  till  I  know  more. 
I  find  that  when  men  fully  understand  the  enormities 
of  some  outrage  upon  a  fellow  creature,  and  the  soul 
is  filled  with  them,  the  punishment,  swift  or  slow, 
meets  with  no  repugnance  in  their  nature.  Perhaps 
when  I  know  more  about  sin,  and  unbelief,  it  will  be 
so  with  regard  to  future  punishment.  Only  let  me  be 
persuaded  that  the  language  of  the  Bible  properly 
interpreted,  declares  any  thing ;  then  there  is  no 
appeal. 

But  I  now  respectfully  ask  the  attention  of  the 
reader  when  I  say  that  if  I  did  not  believe  in  there 
being  a  state  of  future  punishment  which  justifies 
such  language,  I  fear  that  I  could  not  stop  short  of 
the  boldest  infidelity.  I  might  even  assail  the  Bible 
as  unfit  to  be  read.  It  is  no  relief  to  tell  me  that  the 
language  does  not  mean  all  which  it  would  seem  to 
convey.  I  should  reply,  This  is  bad  language,  unless 


30    .  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

there  be  something  which  language  of  this  sort  only 
can  express.  But  if  it  be  an  exaggeration  of  a  truth, 
or  if,  for  the  sake  of  impression  an  idea  is  conveyed 
which  is  false,  a  man  may  as  well  apologize  to  me  for 
a  profane  blasphemer,  saying  that  his  oaths  do  not 
really  mean  all  which  they  express,  as  try  to  reconcile 
me  to  the  belief  that  such  words  as  these  are  in- 
spired. It  is  not  the  truth  which  offends  me,  but  the 
untruth/illness  of  the  language.  The  words  are  not 
decorous ;  my  moral  sense  is  abused,  when  I  read 
such  expressions,  unless  substantial  truth  requires 
them.  The  sin  is  not  against  my  faith,  but  against 
my  understanding.  If  there  be  nothing  in  holy  an- 
gels, and  in  the  Saviour,  which  corresponds  to  these 
representations,  I  should  be  tempted  to  go  at  once 
from  the  Bible  to  the  teaching  and  preaching  of  some 
man  who  rejects  the  Bible,  and  rejects  it  partly 
because  it  uses  such  language.  But  where  should  I 
find  such  a  preacher  who  would  not  trouble  me  with 
the  inconsistency  of  taking  his  text  every  Sabbath 
from  the  very  book  from  which  I  seek  to  flee  ?  So 
true  is  it  that  the  stoutest  unbeliever  cannot  shake 
off  the  hold  which  the  Bible  has  upon  his  moral 
nature.  Absolute  scepticism  seems  to  be  as  impos- 
sible as  universal  knowledge. 

"  Cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire  ; '  u  in  the  pre- 
sence of  the  holy  angels,"  "  and  of  the  Lamb."  Some 
tell  me  that  this  is  "  Oriental ;  "  some  that  it  is  merely 
"  flame-picture  ; '  some  that  it  is  "  mere  hyperbole." 
Now  if  a  mere  show  of  displeasure  is  signified  by 
this  language,  the  objection  is,  not  to  the  punishment, 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  31 

but,  that  such  inappropriate,  such  defamatory  rep- 
resentations should  be  used  in  connection  with  the 
holy  angels  and  the  Lamb  of  God.  If  you  will  insist 
that  the  words  are  true,  I  have  no  objection  to  make. 
But  the  Bible  does  not  observe  the  ordinary  laws  of 

I/ 

decorum  in  language,  unless  truth  would  be  violated 
by  the  use  of  other  and  milder  terms  than  these,  in 
describing  the  future  infliction  of  punishment  upon 
the  wicked. 

The  following  Scriptures,  teaching  that  the  wicked 
are  in  misery  after  death,  confirm  the  foregoing 
statements.  "  The  wicked  is  driven  away  in  his 
wickedness."  "  The  ungodly  are  like  the  chaff  which 
the  wind  driveth  away."  "  The  men  of  Sodom  were 
wicked  and  sinners  before  God  exceedingly."  "  And 
the  Lord  rained  fire  and  brimstone  out  of  heaven  and 
destroyed  them  all."  "  The  rich  man  died  and  was 
buried ;  and  in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  being  in 
torment."  "  Judas  by  transgression  fell  and  went  to 
his  own  place."  "  If  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye 
shall  die  in  your  sins."  "  And  where  I  am  thither  ye 
cannot  come." 

He  who  will  »say  that  such  men  as  are  here  de- 
scribed meet  in  death  with  a  change  of  character 
which  prepares  them  at  once  for  happiness,  may  as 
well  assert,  once  for  all,  that  delusion  is  practised 
upon  us  by  the  representations  of  the  Bible  ;  that  the 
object  is  merely  to  frighten  the  living  ;  that  apparent 
judgments  upon  the  wicked,  death  and  its  terrors,  are 
merely  a  dumb  show,  a  tragic  demonstration,  a  dis- 
solving view  turning,  within  the  veil,  into  manifesta- 


32  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

tions  of  compassion  and  love.  There  have  not  been 
wanting  men  who  in  their  concern  for  the  character 
of  God  have  interpreted  his  words  of  vengeance  and 
his  terrible  acts  towards  the  wicked,  in  this  manner, 
as  though  such  deception  were  any  relief  from  im- 
putations of  undue  severity.  Archbishop  Tillotson 
ventured  such  an  explanation,  and  President  Edwards' 
ironical  reproof  of  him  and  others  for  betraying  their 
Maker's  secret,  is  well  known.  There  are  some  even 
now  who,  like  the  sect  of  Manichees,  seem  to  hold 
that  all  evil  resides  in  matter,  and  therefore  that  in 
the  separation  of  the  soul  from  the  body,  the  soul 
becomes  pure.  But  the  question  before  us  is,  What 
do  the  Scriptures  teach  ?  If  there  be  any  thing  con- 
clusive in  positive  statements,  this  is  placed  beyond 
all  reasonable  dispute,  that  some  men  die  in  their  sins, 
and  that  after  death  they  have  in  themselves  the 
elements  of  misery.  The  rich  man  surely  is  an 
instance  of  this.  Judas's  "  own  place 7  was  not 
heaven. 

We  have  seen  thus  far  that  while  the  Scriptures 
represent  the  wicked  themselves  to  be  an  essential 
source  of  their  own  misery/future  punishment  neces- 
sarily implies  infliction,  or  excitation,  from  a  source 
beyond  the  sinner  himself.  Some  opprobriously  call 
this  "  the  doctrine  of  endless  torture."  But  there  is 
something  more  terrible  here  than  "  torture."  If 
the  sinner  were  made  to  feel  constantly  that  he  is  in 
the  hands  of  a  torturer,  many  a  passion  of  his  nature 
•might  minister  strength  to  his  resistance,  and  impart 
fortitude.  But  to  have  his  own  self  excited  against 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  33 

him,  forever,  so  as  to  seem  the  proximate  cause  of 
his  misery,  is  the  more  helpless  woe.  But  however 
the  sources  of  it  may  be  combined,  we  have  seen 
that  the  wicked  are  in  misery  after  death.  The  ques- 
tion now  is,  Will  their  misery  remain  forever?  Do 
the  Scriptures  teach  that  the  punishment  of  the 
wicked,  made  up  as  it  necessarily  is  from  the  natural 
consequences  of  evil  doing  and  positive  inflictions 
from  the  hand  of  God,  will  be  without  end  ?  The 
affirmative  of  this  question  I  have  undertaken  to 
prove. 

But  it  may  be  said,  You  undertake  an  impossible 
task,  because  you  know  nothing  of  futurity.  Prin- 
ciples may  yet  be  evolved  which  now  are  slumbering 
in  the  bosom  of  God.  You  must  journey  farther 
than  man  has  gone  before  you  can  decide  this  sub- 
ject. "  Have  the  gates  of  death  been  opened  to 
thee  ?  or  hast  thou  seen  the  doors  of  the  shadow  of 
death  ?" 

The  only  question  to  be  considered  is,  What  do 
the  Scriptures  now  teach  as  to  the  future  condition 
of  the  wicked  ?  Do  they  or  do  they  not  represent  it 
as  unalterable?  If  we  can  ascertain  this,  we  need 
not  perplex  ourselves  as  to  ulterior  revelations  ;  nor 
should  we  refuse  to  receive  the  present  testimony  of 
God,  with  the  objection  that  something  more  may 
possibly  be  said  hereafter.  What,  then,  does  the 
Bible  teach  us  as  to  the  state  and  prospects  of  the 
impenitent  after  death  ? 

Let  the  reader  now  endeavor  to  lay  out  of  the  ques- 
tion all  considerations  relating  to  the  reasonableness 


34  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

or  justice  of  future,  endless  punishment.  Let  him 
not  foreclose  the  discussion  in  his  own  mind  by  say- 
ing that  it  is  unreasonable  and  unjust,  and  therefore 
that  it  cannot  be  in  the  Bible.  Rather  let  him  first 
ascertain  whether  it  be  taught  there,  and  then  if  he 
will,  let  him  debate  with  himself  whether,  finding  it 
there,  he  will  or  will  not  receive  the  Bible  itself, 
In  considering  whether  the  Scriptures  teach  that 
the  punishment  of  the  wicked  will  be  without  end, 
we  will  see  if  the  following  proposition  can  be  main- 
tained : 

II.   REDEMPTION  BY  CHRIST  IS  REPRESENTED  AS  HAVING  FOR 
ITS   OBJECT   SALVATION   FROM  FINAL    PERDITION. 

If  upon  the  failure  of  all  which  is  done  in  redemp- 
tion to  save  men,  they  are  to  be  subjected  to  another 
probation  after  death,  there  are  powerful  reasons  to 
think  that  the  surest  way  to  effect  their  recovery,  is, 
to  let  them  know  beforehand  that  God  will  give  them 
a  second  trial. 

For  this  is  manifestly  the  way  in  which  God  pro- 
ceeded with  the  Hebrew  people  whose  reformation 
in  this  world,  and  whose  allegiance,  he  was  seeking 
to  secure.  In  foresight  of  their  apostacy  and  punish- 
ment, they  were  told  beforehand  that  they  should 
have  a  second  probation.  The  following  words  are 
an  explicit  declaration  to  this  effect,  and  are  an 
instance  of  divine  wisdom  which  man  would  never 
have  devised,  from  fear  of  consequences.  After  tell- 
ing Israel  of  the  happy  fruit  which  would  attend 
their  obedience,  and  the  direful  effects  of  their 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  35 

apostacy,  instead  of  leaving  them  in  doubt  whether 
they  will  have  a  second  probation,  God  expressly 
tells  them  that  they  shall  be  again  restored  :  "  When 
thou  art  in  tribulation  and  all  these  things  are  come 
upon  thee,  even  in  the  latter  days,  if  thou  turn  to  the 
Lord  thy  God  and  shalt  be  obedient  unto  his  voice, 
(for  the  Lord  thy  God  is  a  merciful  God,)  he  will  not 
forsake  thee,  neither  destroy  thee,  nor  forget  the 
covenant  of  thy  fathers  which  he  sware  unto  thee." 
Dent.  iv.  30. 

It  might  have  been  argued  with  much  plausibleness 
that  such  an  announcement  would  be  inexpedient ; 
that  it  would  have  a  direct  effect  to  make  men  care- 
less and  presumptuous.  But  infinite  wisdom  judged 
otherwise,  and  proceeded  at  different  times  to  say, 
"  If  his  children  forsake  my  law  then  will  I  visit  their 
transgressions  with  the  rod  ;  —  nevertheless  my  lov- 
ing kindness  will  1  not  utterly  take  from  them."  And 
again  :  "  If  my  covenant  be  not  with  day  and  night, 
then  will  I  cast  off"  the  seed  of  Jacob  ;  —  for  I  will 
cause  their  captivity  to  return,  and  have  mercy  upon 
them."  Again,  "  I  will  for  this  afflict  the  seed  of 
David,  but  not  forever." 

What  principle  in  moral  natures  is  there  which 
makes  this  announcement,  to  sinners,  of  future 
clemency  and  restoration,  wise  and  expedient  ?  The 
obvious  answer  is,  Hope.  Whether  or  not  there  can 
ever  be  repentance  without  hope,  it  is  certain  that 
hope  is  a  powerful  means  of  repentance.  "  How 
many  hired  servants  of  my  father  have  bread  enough 
and  to  spare,  and  I  perish  with  hunger,  I  will  arise 


3G  THEOLOGICAL    DISCUSSION. 

and  go  to  my  father,  and  say  unto  him,  Father,  I  have 
sinned--."  The  promise  of  a  future  trial,  the 
explicit  avowal  of  relenting  in  his  displeasure,  with  a 
view  to  the  final  recovery  of  the  transgressors,  was 
deemed  by  the  Most  High  to  be  essential  in  the 
exercise  of  his  administration  in  ancient  times.  The 
admixture  of  hope  in  his  threatening,  the  line  of  light 
in  the  horizon  below  the  coming  tempest,  was  regard- 
ed by  Jehovah  as  a  necessary  means  of  effecting  the 
ultimate  restoration  of  the  Jews,  so  that  to  this  day 
provision  is  made  for  hope  to  fasten  its  hands  upon 
exceeding  great  and  precious  promises  the  moment 
that  the  thought  arises  of  turning  to  God.  He 
would  have  the  sinners  think  in  their  deep  distress 
under  the  chastising  rod  that  He  would  be  found  of 
them  if  they  returned  and  sought  him,  and  that 
He  made  provision  for  hope  even  while  the  terrible 
blow  was  about  to  descend. 

In  offering  pardon  and  salvation  to  men  through  the 
sufferings  and  death  of  Christ,  and  in  setting  forth 
the  consequences  of  neglecting  so  great  salvation,  if 
God  does  not  intimate  that,  nevertheless,  the  wicked 
shall  not  be  utterly  cast  off,  surely  it  is  not  because*  it 
would  be  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of  his 
moral  government  thus  to  mingle  hope  with  chastise- 
ment. We  have  seen  that  intimations  of  future 
mercy  were  made  to  men  who  were  abusing  the  most 
signal  acts  of  divine  favor;  and  that  to  secure  their 
future  repentance,  God  judged  it  wise  and  prudent 
to  prevent  the  ill  effect  which  wrath  and  punishment 
might  have  upon  them,  by  so  ordering  it  that  they 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  37 

should  recollect  amidst  their  punishment  that  even 
long  before  the  moment  of  descending  wrath,  he 
remembered  mercy,  and  that,  accordingly,  when 
about  to  cast  them  off,  he  said,  "  How  shall  I  give 
thee  up? — my  heart  is  turned  within  me,  my  repent- 
ings  are  kindled  together."  And  the  anointed 
prophet  said  in  his  name,  "  He  will  return,  he  will 
have  mercy  upon  us ;  and  thou  wilt  cast  their 
iniquities  into  the  depths  of  the  sea/'  All  this,  it 
will  be  remembered,  was  not  a  sudden  relenting ;  it 
was  part  of  a  plan  announced  so  long  beforehand  as 
to  give  evidence  of  special  design. 

We.  therefore,  sav,  that  if  no   such  foretokens  of 

•/   / 

far  distant  mercy  and  forgiveness  are  now  made  to 
those  who  reject  Christ,  it  cannot  properly  be  argued 
that  it  would  be  unsuitable,  and  that  wisdom  and 
prudence  forbid.  On  the  contrary,  such  promises 
would  be  in  accordance  with  those  former  dealings 
of  God  with  men  in  which  he  has  manifested  the  most 
peculiar  love  for  transgressors.  It  would  be  anal- 
ogous to  his  former  conduct  should  he  intimate  in  im- 
mediate connection  with  his  threatriings,  that  if  we 
neglect  our  present  opportunity  and  means  of  salva- 
tion, and  subject  ourselves  necessarily  to  a  long  and 
fearful  discipline  of  sorrow,  nevertheless  the  time  will 
come  when  he  will  return  and  be  pacified  toward  us  foi 
all  which  we  have  done.  If  no  such  intimations  are 
given,  we  have  strong  presumptive  evidence  that 
it  is  because  the  condition  of  the  wicked  at  death  is 
final. 

For,  as  we  read  the  threatnings  against  Edom,  and 


38  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

Babylon,  and  Egypt,  and  Tyre,  we  find  no  words  of 
promise  mingled  with  the  predictions  of  their  doom. 
Probation  for  them  is  past ;  hence,  when  God  is 
declaring  his  vengeance  against  them,  not  one  word 
is  uttered  which  in  the  hour  of  their  downfall  would 
come  to  their  memories  as  a  ray  of  hope.  The  utter 
ruin  and  desolation  of  these  kingdoms  show  the 
reason  for  withholding  every  promise  of  future 
mercy;  it  was  intended  that  their  destruction  should 
be  final. 

But  it  may  be  said,  Is  God  under  any  obligation  to 
disclose  all  his  future  purposes  with  regard  to  the 
wicked  ?  Surely  not ;  but  certainly  he  will  not 
deceive  us ;  he  is  not  obliged  to  tell  us  any  thing ; 
but  if  he  tells  us  a  part,  he  will  not  make  false 
impressions. 

But  some  will  say,  It  may  now  be  wise  in  God  to 
vary  his  plan,  and  suffer  the  wicked  to  "  Depart" 
with  the  full  expectation  that  their  doom  is  forever ; 
and  then  he  may  interpose  and  save  them.  Who  will 
deny  that  this  is  possible  ? 

It  is  evidently  the  object  of  the  Gospel  to  save 
men  here  from  their  sins  and  to  rescue  them  from 
future  misery,  limited  or  endless.  Is  it  honest,  or, 
would  it  not  be  like  "  false  pretences/'  to  make  the 
impression  that  there  is  to  be  no  further  probation 
after  death,  if  the  idea  is  utterly  inconsistent  with 
the  character  of  God  !  We  know  what  is  thought 
of  one  who  offers  his  wares  as  positively  the  last, 
and  then  produces  more.  The  question  is  simply 
this :  Would  God  seek  to  save  men  by  making  them 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  39 

think  that  this  is  their  only  chance  of  pardon  when 
He  knows  that  it  is  not  to  be  the  last?  But  if  God 
intended  that  we  should  believe  this  to  be  the  last, 
who  among  the  sons  of  the  mighty  is  entitled  to  the 
merit  of  having  undeceived  us  ?  It  is  impiety  to 
assert  that  there  is  a  future  probation,  against  the 
plain  declarations  of  the  Bible,  if  such  declarations 
are  made. 

Now  let  us  examine  the  inspired  record.  At  the 
very  close  of  the  Bible,  we  read,  "  He  that  is  unjust 
let  him  be  unjust  still,  and  he  that  is  filthy  let  him  be 
filthy  still ;  and  he  that  is  righteous  let  him  be 
righteous  still,  and  he  that  is  holy,  let  him  be  holy 
still."  As  the  "  unjust"  and  "  filthy"  never  could  be 
directed  to  refrain,  in  this  world,  from  efforts  to 
become  good,  (unless  their  day  of  grace  were  past) 
these  words  are  obviously  a  declaration  that  character 
is  unchangeable  after  death.  In  faithful  consistency 
even  to  the  last  with  the  great  distinguishing  feature 
of  the  Christian  religion,  viz. :  regard  for  the  indi- 
vidual, the  closing  words  of  the  Bible  have  reference 
to  each  accountable  member  of  the  human  family : 
"  And  behold  I  come  quickly,  and  my  reward  is  with 
me  to  give  to  every  man  according  as  his  work  shall 
be."  Here  is  the  place  where  we  should  look  for 
intimations,  if  any  could  be  made,  of  future  proba- 
tion. Here  is  the  promontory  which  runs  down  to 
the  unfathomable  main,  looks  forth  on  "  that  ocean 
we  must  sail  so  soon  ;"  and  as  it  terminates  all  earth- 
ly efforts  after  salvation,  does  it  give  us  one  hint 
about  some  future  method  of  recovery?  are  there 


40  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

signals  prepared  on  this  cape  and  head-land  indicating 
to  the  eye  of  despair  afar  off  that  the  cross  of  Christ 
holds  out  proposals  of  reconciliation  still,  to  those 
who  trampled  it  underfoot,  on  their  way  to  eternity? 
On  the  contrary,  every  thing  makes  the  impression 
on  the  vast  majority  of  readers  ever  since  these 
words  were  written,  that  the  results  of  life  are  to  be 
final.  No  hopeful  class  of  probationers  are  represent- 
ed as  "  without,"  when  the  righteous  have  entered 
through  the  gates  into  the  city.  All  the  sublime  images 
in  the  last  chapters  of  this  book  come  thronging 
down  to  that  shore  where  inspiration  lays  aside  its 
pen  and  looks  towards  the  shoreless  waste  beyond 
time.  It  has  been  said  that  the  Old  Testament  ends 
with  a  curse.  This  is  a  mistake.  It  ends  with  a  pro- 
mise of  turning  the  hearts  of  fathers  and  children,  to 
avert  a  curse.  But  no  prediction  of  any  turning  of 
hearts  in  eternity  occurs  at  the  close  of  that  book 
which  gives  us  the  last  information  respecting  the 
future.  Its  silence  is  as  impressive  as  its  few 
decisive  words. 

We  can  imagine  how  Christ  would  have  drawn  the 
picture  of  retribution  had  he  followed  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, in  doing  so,  in  its  hopeful  and  prophetic  inter- 
mingling of  light  with  the  darkness.  Making  the 
prospect  terrific,  at  first,  beyond  all  human  power 
of  description,  to  enforce  the  duty  of  immediate 
repentance,  and  to  deter  from  sin,  then,  appealing  to 
our  sense  of  propriety,  our  magnanimity,  our  shame, 
he  would  have  told  us  how  in  the  future,  more  or  less 
remote,  God  would  visit  his  erring  and  perverse 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  41 

children  with  his  remonstrances  ;  how  he  himself 
would  weep  over  them  and  repeat  the  offers  of 
pardon  ;  and  in  view  of  all  this  we  can  imagine  how 
he  would  expostulate.  Such  n  procedure  would 
accord  with  the  principles  of  human  nature  and  of 
the  divine  government  as  illustrated  in  the  history  of 
Israel.  Is  the  Saviour  less  compassionate  and  ready 
to  forgive  than  the  God  of  the  Old  Testament  ?  for 
we  sec  God  listening  to  catch  the  first  sigh  of 
repentance;  and  when  he  hears  it,  he  proclaims, — 
"  I  have  surely  heard  Ephraim  bemoaning  himself 
thus :  Thou  hast  chastised  me  and  I  was  chastised,  as 
a  bullock  unaccustomed  to  the  yoke  ;  turn  thou  mo 
and  I  shall  be  turned  ;  for  thou  art  the  Lord  my  God." 
Not  one  word  like  this  do  we  hear  from  the  lips  of 
him  who  was  the  brightness  of  the  Father's  glory, 
and  the  express  image  of  his  person.  Where  is 
prophecy  with  her  glowing  tongue  foretelling,  at  the 
hour  of  captivity,  the  sinner's  final  return  ?  The 
opening  of  hell  and  the  final  release  of  Satan  and  his 
angels  and  of  wicked  men,  would  have  been  an  anti- 
cipation sublime  beyond  most  other  visions  •  and,  if 
allowable,  it  could  not  have  failed  to  excite  the 
imagination  of  seers  and  prophets.  But  where  are 
the  Isaiahs  stretching  their  vision  beyond  time  and 
the  captivity  of  hell, -saying,  "  Comfort  ye.  comfort 
ye  my  people,  saith  your  God.  Speak  ye  comfortably 
to  the  cursed,  and  sav  unto  them  that  their  warfare  is 

•>• 

accomplished,  that  their  iniquity  is  pardoned  ;  for 
they  have  received  of  the  Lord's  hand  double  for  all 
their  sins."  Can  it  be  that  not  even  from  you, 


42  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

beloved  John,  is  there  a  vision  or  a  word  of  hope  for 
sinners  after  death  ?  You  saw  the  dead,  small  and 
great,  stand  before  God,  the  books  opened,  and 
another  book,  which  is  the  book  of  life.  You  saw 
the  judgment,  and  the  doom  ;•  the  lake  of  fire  was 
first  prepared  by  casting  death  and  hell  into  it,  and 
when  all  was  ready,  whosoever  was  not  found  written 
in  the  book  of  life  you  saw  him  cast  into  the  lake  of 
fire.  No  syllable  of  mercy?  no  visit  from  the  angel 
that  talked  with  thee,  saying,  Come  up  hither,  to  see, 
from  a  higher  point,  beyond  that  lake  ?  Have  you  no 
yearning  look?  not  even  one  slightly  musical  dark 
saying  upon  the  harp,  to  keep  us  from  suspecting 
that  God  can  ever  be  implacable  ?  In  the  Old  Testa- 
ment he  relents  and  repents.  "  His  soul  was  grieved 
for  the  misery  of  Israel."  "  How  shall  I  make  thee 
as  Admah  !  How  shall  I  set  thee  as  Zeboim  !  My 
heart  is  turned  within  me,  my  repentings  are  kindled 
together.'7  Is  that  Old  Testament,  which  is  represent- 
ed by  scoffers  as  "  cruel,"  "  sanguinary,"  "  vindic- 
tive," actually  more  merciful  in  its  expressions 
toward  rebellious  Israel  than  the  New  Testament 
is  toward  men  who  died  in  their  sins  ? 

How  strange  that  He  who  wept  over  Jerusalem, 
could  say,  "  Depart  from  me  ye  cursed,  into  ever- 
lasting fire  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels," 
and  let  fall  no  expressions  of  commiseration  or  word 
of  hope,  nor  leave  some  elliptical  "  notwithstand- 
ing," —  an  unfinished  sentence,  a  place  with  asterisks, 
a  chance  even  for  a  guess  that  all  would  not  be  for- 
ever determined  for  the  wicked  at  the  last  day. 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  43 

Mark  the  altered  language,  the  different  tone  and 
manner,  of  the  Saviour  toward  the  wicked  in  the 
other  world,  compared  with  his  words  and  behavior 
toward  our  sinful  race  when  he  was  on  earth.  "  The 
master  of  the  house  has  risen  up  and  shut  to  the 
door."  They  knock  ;  he  says,  "  I  tell  you  I  know 
you  not,  whence  ye  are.  Depart  from  me."  The 
direction  is,  "  Bind  him,  hand  and  foot.*'  They  "  cut 
him  asunder^  and  appoint  him  his  portion,"  not  with 
candidates  for  heaven  under  discipline,  but  "with  the 
hypocrites."  He  is  "  thrust  out."  Christ  uses  the 
expressions,  "  lose  his  soul ;"  "  be  cast  away  ;" 
"  salted  with  fire  ;"  "  grind  him  to  powder ;"  "  son  of 
perdition ;"  "  slay  them  before  me  :"  "  seek  me  and 
not  find  me;"  ''gathered  the  good  —  and  cast  the 
bad  away."  "  Great  gulf  fixed  ;"  "  die  in  your  sins  ;" 
"  where  I  am  ye  cannot  come."  In  various  parts  of 
the  Bible  we  meet  with  phrases  of  the  like  tenor  — 
such  as,  "  wrath  to  come ;"  "  shame  and  everlasting 
contempt ;"  "  torment  us  before  the  time  ;"  "  reap 
corruption  ;"  "  wages  of  sin  is  death  ;"  "-more  tolera- 
ble for  Sodom  in  the  day  of  judgment ;"  "  mist  of 
darkness  forever  and  ever."  Indeed  these  incidental 
expressions,  interwoven  every  where  throughout  the 
Bible,  assume  that  the  doctrine  of  future,  endless 
punishment  lor  sin  is  a  matter  of  course.  The  com- 
mon mode  of  referring  to  the  future,  implies  it. 
"  Because  there  is  wrath,  beware  lest  he  take  thee 
away  with  his  stroke  ;"  "  then  a  great  ransom  will 
not  deliver  thee."  "  I  will  laugh  at  your  calamity,  I 
will  mock  when  your  fear  corneth."  The  numerous 


44  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

passages  of  this  tenor  do  not  suggest  any  idea  of 
future  clemency. 

Paul  thus  declares  the  end  of  the  wicked  :  "  The 
Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with  his 
mighty  angels,  in  flaming  fire  taking  vengeance  on 
them  that  know  not  God,  and  obey  not  the  Gospel  of 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  shall  be  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction  from  the  presence  o  the  Lord 
and  from  the  glory  of  his  power,  when 'he  shall  come 
to  be  glorified  in  his  saints,  and  admired  in  all  them 
that  believe,  for  our  testimony  among  you  was 
believed,  in  that  day."  That  this  does  not  apply  to 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  as  the  Papists  and  some 
Protestants  would  have  us  think,  appears  from  the 
next  chapter,  in  which  the  Thessalonians  are  told  that 
"  that  day"  is  not  "  at  hand,"  because  "  the  man  of 
sin"  was  first  to  be  revealed. 

Then  Peter  follows  him  and  says,  "  But  the  heavens 
and  the  earth  which  are  now,  by  the  same  word  are 
kept  in  store,  reserved  unto  fire  against  the  day  of 
judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodly  men." 

Thus,  while  the  Bible  satisfies  us  that  the  redemp- 
tion made  by  Christ  is  a  final  effort  to  save  men,  we 
do  not  wonder  that  those  who  reject  the  Godhead  of 
Christ  and  his  sacrifice  for  sin,  reject  also  the  idea 
of  endless  punishment.  There  is  no  adequate  neces- 
sity for  a  divine  Saviour  with  his  vicarious  sacrifice 
if  there  be  no  penalty  annexed  to  the  law  of  God. 
Every  man  is  then  his  own  redeemer,  either  by  obedi- 
ence or  by  suffering. 

But  the  evangelical  believer  looks  into  the  manger 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  45 

and  upon  the  cross,  and  sees  there  his  God  incarnate. 
He  sees  in  that  Christ  a  sacrifice  for  his  sins.  The 
world  laugh  him  to  scorn.  They  demand  whether  he 
believes  that  his  God  is  dying ;  and  every  form  of 
intellectual  ridicule  is  poured  upon  him.  He  stead- 
fastly maintains  that  "  the  word  was  God/'  that  "  the 
word  was  made  flesh,"  that  this  incarnate  word  was 
on  the  cross,  "  a  ransom  for  many,"  "  a  propitiation 
through  faith  jn  his  blood/'  his  sufferings  a  substitute 
for  the  sinner's  punishment.  The  believer  looks  to 
find  some  necessity  for  such  an  incarnation,  and  for 
the  sacrificial  death  of  such  a  being.  He  cannot  find 
it  in  the  need  of  example,  mora,!  suasion,  or  repre- 
sentation of  the  divine  interest  in  him ;  but  in  the 
declaration  that  Christ  was  once  offered  to  bear  the 
sins  of  many,  he  sees  the  appropriateness  of  the 
incarnation  to  give  a  divine  worth  and  efficacy  to  suf- 
ferings which  are  to  atone  for  sin.  There  is  no 
revelation  to  be  compared  with  this, — -"  God  was 
manifest  in  the  flesh,"  and,  he  "  was  manifested  to 
take  away  our  sins."  By  all  the  methods  of  imagery, 
symbolism,  predictions,  and  most  minute,  pathetic 
delineations  of  his  coming,  his  life,  death,  and  resur- 
rection, by  appeals  from  his  own  lips  and  those  of 
men  "  in  Christ's  stead  ;"  by  that  perpetual  memorial 
of  him  and  of  his  sacrifice,  the  Lord's  supper,  men 
are  admonished,  and,  "  as  though  God  did  beseech 
them,"  urged  to  accept  pardon  through  this  infinite 
provision  made  for  the  forgiveness  of  sin.  This  pro- 
duces the  effect,  generally,  upon  the  mind,  of  a  last 
effort. 


46  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

It  might  have  been  supposed  that  the  work  of 
Christ  would  suffice  for  the  present  dispensation,  and 
that  men  rejecting  or  neglecting  it  would  in  a  future 
state  be  approached  by  those  influences  which  belong 
peculiarly  to  the  work  of  the  third  person  in  the 
Godhead.  But  Christ  said,  "  It  is  expedient  for  you 
that  I  go  away  ;  for  if  I  go  not  away,  the  Comforter 
will  not  come  unto  you,  but  if  I  depart  I  will  send 
him  unto  you.  And  when  he  is  come  he  will  reprove 
the  world  of  sin,  of  righteousness,  and  of  judgment." 
Something  more  than  ordinary  divine  influence  is 
meant  here  by  the  Comforter,  for  the  Saviour's  being 
in  the  world  would  not  of  course  keep  divine 
influence  out  of  it,  or  prevent  the  disciples  from 
receiving  comfort  in  God.  A  special  divine  agency  is 
here  recognized,  and  by  all  the  laws  of  language  a 
special  divine,  personal  agent.  Plis  object  is  to 
reprove  the  world  of  sin,  of  righteousness,  and  of 
judgment.  All  which  is  implied  in  the  idea  of  moral 
omnipotence  is  thus  made  to  bear  upon  the  hearts 
and  minds  of  men  to  effect  their  reconciliation  to 
God,  through  Christ. 

Resistance  to  these  efforts  in  a  certain  way,  it  is 
declared,  shall  have  the  effect,  however  long  a  time 
before  death  it  may  be  made,  to  consign  the  sinner  to 
hopeless  condemnation ;  for  "  whosoever  speaketh 
against  the  Holy  Ghost  it  shall  not  be  forgiven 
him,  neither  in  this  world,  neither  in  the  world  to 


come.' 


It  does  not  seem  easy  to  explain  how  any  one  who 
hath    never    forgiveness,    neither    in    this   world, 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  47 

neither  in  that  which  is  to  come,"  is  to  be  saved ; 
nor  by  what  moral  distinctions  it  can  be  made  to 
appear  that  some  who  commit  one  particular  sin  are 
justly  condemned  to  a  hopeless,  unforgiven  state,  and 
that  all  the  rest  of  mankind  are  to  be  restored.  The 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  the  unpardonable  sin 
against  him  convince  us  that  the  effort  of  mercy 
to  save  men  ends  with  life.  Such  words  as  these 
from  Christ, —  "hath  never  forgiveness,  neither  in 
this  world  nor  in  the  world  to  come,"  admit  of  no 
appeal. 

In  this  connection  let  it  be  observed  that  evan- 
gelical Christians  regard  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
as  of  equal  importance  with  the  death  of  Christ,  and 
as  essential  a  part  of  the  work  of  redemption.  It  is 
from  sin  that  we  are  to  be  redeemed ;  it  is  to  holiness 
that  we  are  to  be  restored ;  hell  and  heaven  are  a 
consummation,  respectively,  of  sin  and  holiness.  But 
we  notice  that  those  who  reject  the  idea  of  future 
punishment  dwell  much  on  sin  and  holiness  as  being 
the  sole  object  of  redemption,  irrespective  of  the 
future  state  to  which  they  lead.  Olshausen,  (Com- 
mentary v.  302),  says,  "  The  Scriptures  know  no  such 
pretended  divestment  of  all  egotism,  that  man  needs 
as  motives  neither  fear  nor  hope,  whether  of  damna- 
tion or  eternal  happiness  ;  — and  rightly  j — for  it  [i.  e, 
this  notion]  exhibits  itself  either  as  fanatical  error, 
as  in  Madame  Guy  on,  or,  which  is  doubtless  most 
common,  as  indifference  and  torpidity."  However 
some  may  regard  it  as  a  narrow  and  selfish  thing  to 
make  so  much,  as  evangelical  Christians  do,  of  "  sal- 


43  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION 

vation"  and  "  safety ;"  we  find  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment sets  us  the  example.  Its  chief  burden  is  holi- 
ness, likeness  to  God ;  but  it  appeals  to  our  love  of 
happiness  and  dread  of  pain;  sentimental  philosophy 
would  substitute  for  these  instincts  a  perception  of 
the  "  good,  the  beautiful  and  the  true  ;"  the  Gospel 
insists  on  these,  but  the  way  to  reach  them  is  through 
the  natural  constitution  which  God  has  given  us. 
Inspiration  does  not  disdain  to  say,  u  God  so  loved 
the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son  that 
whosoever  believeth  ia  him  should  not  perish  but 
have  everlasting  life,'7  u  He  that  believeth  shall  be 
saved,  and  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned." 
"  We  shall  be  saved  from  wrath  through  him." 
"Who  have  fled  for  refuge  to  lay  hold  on  the  hope 
set  before  us."  "  What  shall  it  profit  a  man  if  he 
gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  his  own  soul ;  or  what 
shall  a  man  give  ia  exchange  for  his  soul."  The 
attempt  to  show  that  all  this  is  unworthy  of  our 
"  noble  aspirations,"  is  only  professing  to  be  wise ; 
but  "  the  foolishness  of  God  is  wiser  than  men." 
The  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  applying  the  redemp- 
tion by  Christ  to  the  souls  of  men  has  for  its  object 
not  only  to  save  them  from  sin,  but  from  its  "  wages'* 
which  4t  is  death," 

All  having  failed  and  men  going  from  under  the 
concentrated  influences  of  redeeming  mercy  into  a 
future  state,  if  then  the  God  who  has  provided  such 
a  plan  of  redemption  is  to  meet  them  and,  rather  than 
have  them  perish,  abandon  all  his  terms  and  admit 
them  to  heaven  upon  their  own  conditions,  rather 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  49 

than  see  them  suffer,  if  he  who  became  flesh  and  died 
for  them  will  then  consent  that  punishment  shall  try 
to  effect  that  which  love  and  earthly  discipline 
together  failed  to  accomplish,  and  punishment  proves 
to  be  the  power  of  God  and  the  wisdom  of  God  unto 
salvation,  and  sinners  will  therefore  have  more 
powerful  means  of  grace  in  hell  than  under  the 
Gospel,  we,  for  our  part,  need  another  revelation  to 
inform  us  of  it,  and  then  to  explain  its  consistency 
with  our  present  Bible. 

III.  THE  FALL  OF  ANGELS  AND  OF  MAN,  IS  A  CON- 
FIRMATORY PROOF  OF  FUTURE,  ENDLESS  RETRIBUTION. 

This  will  of  course  have  weight  only  with  those 
who  believe  in  the  existence  and  fall  of  angels,  and 
in  the  fall  of  man.  To  prove  either  of  these,  here, 
would  be  out  of  place ;  and  indeed  the  necessity  of 
proving  them  would  show  that  everything  which  has 
thus  far  been  said  in  this  article  is  superfluous,  because 
it  takes  for  granted  many  things  generally  believed 
which  rest,  however,  on  the  same  kind  of  evidence 
with  the  existence  of  angels  and  their  fall.  The 
Apostles,  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  I  have  not 
thought  it  necessary  to  prove,  had  a  real  existence, 
and  that  they  were  not  merely  personified  principles 
of  good  and  evil.  If  the  reader  be  one  who  rejects 
the  doctrine  of  fallen  angels,  and  of  the  fall  of  man, 
he  will  read  what  is  here  said  merely  as  showing  the 
way  in  which  those  who  believe  these  things  are 
confirmed  by  them  in  their  belief  of  endless  retribu- 
tion. Peter  says,  (2,  ii.  4,)  "  God  spared  not  the 

5 


50  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

angels  that  sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell,  and 

delivered  them  into  chains  of  darkness,  to  be  reserved 

% 

unto  judgment."  Jude  says,  (6,)  "And  the  angels 
which  kept  not  their  first  estate,  but  left  their  own 
habitation,  he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting  chains 
under  darkness  unto  the  judgment  of  the  great 
day." 

If  God  did  not  keep  angels  from  falling,  we  are  not 
constrained  to  think  that  he  will  restore  them.  If  he 
will  hereafter  re-instate  them  by  a  direct  act  of  power, 
the  same  power  could  have  kept  them  from  falling, 
with  no  greater  interference  with  their  free  agency. 
If  he  allowed  them  to  fall  with  a  view  to  some  great 
good  in  their  natures,  suffering  them  in  the  progress 
of  their  experience,  to  ruin  this  world,  and  bring  in 
such  a  fearful  plague  as  sin  has  been  to  our  race,  all 
to  be  compensated  for  in  the  great  sweep  of  ages  by 
this  beneficial  knowledge  of  evil,  we  are  led  to  the 
conclusion  that  sin  and  suffering  are  the  necessary 
means  of  the  greatest  good.  But  what  manner  of 
Supreme  Being  have  we  here  for  a  Universalist  to 
love  and  worship  ?  His  government,  it  would  seem, 
cannot  proceed  without  suffering  a  host  of  angels, 
falling  from  their  thrones  in  heaven,  to  pass  through 
centuries  of  sin  and  mischief.  This  seems  neither 
benevolent  nor  wise. 

In  the  exercise  of  their  liberty  we  are  told  that 
angels  kept  not  their  first  estate  but  left  their  own 
habitation,  and  that  God  hath  reserved  them  in  ever- 
lasting chains  under  darkness  unto  the  judgment  of 
the  great  day.  If  they  are  finally  to  be  restored, 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  51 

God  will  restore  them,  or  they  will  come  back  of 
themselves.  If  God  foresaw  that  he  must  finally 
restore  them,  he  would  have  kept  them  from  falling, 
unless  sin  and  misery  are,  under  his  government,  the 
means  of  the  greatest  good.  If  so,  this  may  be  one 
of  the  cases  in  which  if  a  little  is  good,  more  is  bet- 
ter ;  and  perhaps  the  best  interests  of  the  universe 
will  be  promoted  by  protracting  this  sin  and  suffering 
indefinitely. 

It  is  a  wholly  gratuitous  assumption  that  fallen  an- 
gels and  men  will  at  last  of  their  own  accord,  repent. 
Who  has  travelled  so  far  as  to  know  this?  What 
reason  have  we  to  think  that  hell  will  finally  convince 
and  persuade  men  ?  All  our  present  knowledge  re- 
specting it  contradicts  this  expectation.  Satan  and 
his  angels  have  tried  its  redeeming  power,  if  it  has 
any,  for  at  least  six  thousand  years.  We  see  no 
premises,  therefore,  on  which  to  base  the  assertion 
that  men  will  at  last  universally  repent.  It  does 
not  appear  that  being  in  torment,  even,  will  have 
any  better  effect,  forever,  on  men  than  it  seems  to 
have  had  on  "  the  rich  man"  whose  only  prayer  to 
Abraham  was  for  mitigation  of  pain,  and  for  a  warn- 
ing to  be  sent  to  his  brethren.  He  seems  to  think 
that  if  one  went  to  them  from  the  dead,  they  would 
repent.  Why  had  he  not  repented  himself,  among 
the  dead  ?  Surely  the  very  experience  of  hell  itself 
must  be  a  more  powerful  means  of  good  than  a  mere 
apparition.  But  as  suffering  had  not  made  him  peni- 
tent, it  must  be  that  it  has  no  such  effect  after  death. 
Hell  seems  a  very  cruel  means  of  effecting  the  refor- 


52  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

mation  of  sinners,  when  we  think  that,  if  employed 
for  this  purpose  through  such  great  periods  of  pun- 
ishment, it  will  be  employed  by  him  who  so  easily 
converted  Saul  of  Tarsus,  and  the  woman  that  was  a 
sinner,  and  Zaccheus,  and  the  thief  on  the  cross. 
This  is,  to  my  own  mind,  one  of  the  insuperable  ob- 
jections to  the  theory  of  future  disciplinary  punish- 
ment. I  can  readily  yield  my  assent  to  the  declaration 
that  "  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see 
life ;  "  it  does  no  violence  to  my  understanding  that 
those  who  refuse  salvation  by  Christ  when  notified 
that  their  refusal  will  be  fatal,  should  reap  forever 
that  which  they  sowed,  and  continue  hereafter  to 
sow  that  which  they  reap,  and  thus  without  end.  I 
read  this  in  the  Bible.  I  have  no  controversy  with 
it.  But  that  a  human  soul  should  need  ages,  in  hell, 
with  Satan  and  his  angels,  to  be  made  contrite,  is  as 
contrary  to  all  analogy  as  it  is  destitute  of  Scriptural 
proof.  Besides — If  God  does  all  in  this  world  which 
lie  can  do  without  destroying  free  agency,  to  convert 
certain  men,  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  use  of 
superior  power  in  hell  can  fail  to  destroy  it  utterly. 
If  God  does  not  use  all  proper  means  here  to  save 
men,  how  is  He  infinitely  merciful  ?  But  if  here  he 
goes  to  the  very  boundaries  of  their  free  agency, 
which,  it  is  said,  he  never  passes  over,  and  yet  fails 
to  subdue  them,  it  is  gratuitous  to  say  that  he  will 
certainly  succeed  any  better  hereafter. 

How  much  longer  than  these  six  thousand  years 
past,  angels  are  to  suffer,  we  cannot  tell ;  but  the 
consignment  of  wicked  men  at  the  last  day  to  such 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  53 

company  as  that  of  "  the  devil  and  his  angels/'  looks 
fearfully  unlike  a  remedial  measure  for  angel  or  man. 

The  last  sentence  is  utterly  inconsistent  with  any 
expectation,  or  intention,  on  the  part  of  Christ,  that 
those  on  whom  it  is  pronounced  will  return.  Other- 
wise, he  would  not  have  pronounced  them  cursed. 
Probationers  are  not  accursed.  They  are  prisoners 
of  hope.  Everything  in  the  last  words  of  Christ  to 
the  wicked  is  as  final  as  language  can  make  it. 

But  if  the  wicked  are  to  be  punished  until  they 
repent,  we  say,  Punishment  thus  far  has  not  reformed 
the  original  inhabitants  of  hell.  It  is  incumbent  on 
those  who  advocate  final  restoration  on  this  ground 
to  prove  that  punishment  will  at  last  have  a  restora- 
tive power,  or  they  must  show  how  long  the  wicked 
must  sin  and  suffer  to  make  it  wrong  to  punish  them 
any  more  even  if  they  continue  to  sin. 

IV.  THE  TERMS  USED  WITH  REGARD  TO  THE  RESUR- 
RECTION OF  THE  DEAD,  ARE  PROOFS  OF  ENDLESS  RERTI- 
BUTION. 

In  the  "  Child's  Catechism,"  by  Rev.  0.  A.  Skinner, 
I  find  the  following:  —  (p.  24.) 

Q.  Will  sin  exist  in  the  resurrection  ? 

A.  Now  this  I  say,  brethren,  that  flesh  and  blood 
cannot  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God ;  neither  doth 
corruption  inherit  incorruption.  1  Cor.  xv.  50. 

Q.  What  does  the  Saviour  say  respecting  our  con- 
dition when  raised  ? 

A.  Neither  can  they  die  any  more ;  for  they  are 


5* 


54  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

equal  unto  the  angels ;  and  are  the  children  of  God, 
being  children  of  the  resurrection.     Mark  xii.  25. 

Here,  it  will  be  seen,  it  is  assumed  that  Christ 
refers  to  all  the  dead,  and  that  all  when  they  are 
raised  will  be  the  children  of  God.  This,  it  is  under- 
stood, is  the  prevailing  belief  of  Universalists. 

We  read  that  "  no  Scripture  is  of  any  private  in- 
terpretation ',''  in  other  words  that  the  meaning  must 
be  ascertained  by  comparing  the  Scriptures  one  with 
another.  The  parallel  passage  in  Luke  (xx.  35,  36) 
reads,  "  But  they  that  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to 
obtain  that  world  and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead, 
neither  rnarry  nor  are  given  in  marriage  ;  neither  can 
they  die  any  more,  for  they  are  equal  unto  the  angels  ; 
and  are  the  children  of  God,  being  the  children  of 
the  resurrection.'' 

Our  esteemed  friend,  Mr.  Skinner,  it  seems  to  me, 
is  led  into  a  mistake  by  regarding  the  expression, 
"  children  of  the  resurrection,"  as  meaning  all  who 
have  part  in  the  resurrection ;  and  since  Jesus  de- 
clares "  the  children  of  the  resurrection '  to  be 
synonymous  with  "  children  of  God/'  Mr.  S.  naturally 
concludes  that  all  who  rise  from  the  dead  will  be 
the  children  of  God. 

Now,  allowing  me,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument, 
that  the  wicked  are  raised  from  the  dead  in  their  sins, 
they  are  not,  in  the  Scriptural  sense,  "  children  of 
the  resurrection."  Rising  from  the  dead  does  not 
make  us  "  children  of  the  resurrection."  Being  the 
offspring  of  God  does  not  make  us  "  the  children  of 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  55 

God ;"  the  wicked  would  not  "  come  forth  to  ever- 
lasting life/'  though  coming  forth  to  live  forever. 
The  term,  "children  of  the  resurrection,"  connects 
with  itself  the  further  idea  of  being  qualified  for 
heaven,  —  "counted  worthy  to  obtain  (hat  world." 
This  is  confirmed,  it  seems  to  me,  beyond  all  question, 
by  one  word  of  the  apostle  Paul,  (Phil,  iii :  8-11.) 
"  I  count  all  things  but  loss,  <tc.,  if  by  any  means  I 
might  attain  unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead."  If,  on 
being  raised  from  the  dead,  all  men  are  to  be  fit  for 
heaven,  Paul  need  not  have  used  such  "  means7'  to 
<;  attain"  to  it,  —  nor,  indeed,  any  "  means"  whatever  : 
for  he  was  sure  to  be  raised,  like  the  rest  of  mankind. 
Adopt  the  interpretation  just  given,  viz. :  that  to  be 
accounted  worthy  to  obtain  the  resurrection  from  the 
dead  includes  the  idea  of  a  distinguishing  fitness  for 
heaven,  body  and  soul  re-united,  and  we  can  see  why 
Paul  should  say  he  was  willing  to  count  all  things 
but  loss  to  attain  unto  it  -  -rising  from  the  dead  with 
his  perfected  nature,  body  and  soul,  being,  in  his 
view,  the  consummation  of  preparedness,  in  every 
respect,  for  heaven.  If  such  be  Paul's  meaning  of 
"  attaining  unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,"  the 
wicked,  in  their  sins,  though  raised  from  the  dead,  do 
not  attain  unto  the  resurrection,  and  they  are  not, 
therefore,  in  the  Saviour's  sense,  '•  children  of  the- 
resurrection." 

The  Sadducees  had  said,  "  Whoso  wife  shall  she  be 
in  the  resurrection  ?"  I  will  paraphrase  the  reply  of 
Christ  according  to  my  interpretation  of  his  words  : 
"  It  is,  of  course,  of  no  use  for  me  to  answer  your 


56  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

question  on  the  supposition  that  the  woman  and  her 
seven  husbands  are  not  among  the  saved.  They  that 
have  done  evil  *  shall  come  forth/  as  I  once  said, 
'  to  the  resurrection  of  damnation/  Conjugal  rela- 
tionship amp4ng  them,  or  any  thing  relating  to  happi- 
ness, are  not  supposable.  Your  inquiry,  therefore, 
relates,  of  course,  to  those  who  are  supposed  to  be 
in  a  condition  to  admit  of  friendly  and  loving  rela- 
tionships. As  to  them,  I  say,  that  being  accounted 
worthy  to  obtain  that  world  and  afterward  such  a 
resurrection  as  is  Worthy  of  the  name,  they  stand  in 
no  need  of  earthly  joys,  and  as  they  die  no  more,  the 
necessity  for  re-production  ceases  ;  they  are  equal 
unto  the  angels  ;  and  are  the  children  of  God,  being  in 
distinction  from  the  the  rest  of  the  risen  dead,  '  chil- 
dren of  the  resurrection.' 

This  meaning  of  the  phrase  is  also  illustrated  by  the 
expression,  "  children  of  this  world.7'  Good  people 
are,  in  one  sense,  "  children  of  this  world,'7  equally 
with  the  bad  ;  that  is,  they  are  natives  of  this  world ; 
and  yet  we  read,  —  "  the  children  of  this  world  are 
wiser  in  their  generation  than  the  children  of  light." 

Thus,  the  good  only  are  "  children  of  the  resur- 
rection," though  all  are  raised,  as  the  wicked  only  are 
"  children  of  this  world,"  though  bad  and  good  live 
here  together. 

Paul  said  before  Felix,  and  declared  that  the  Jews 
"  themselves  also  allow"  it,  (for  the  Sadducees  were 
small  in  number  though  high  in  rank  and  power,) 
"  that  tlizre  shall  be  a  resurrection  of  the  dead,  both  of 
the  just  and  unjust"  (Acts  xxiv.  15.) 


THEOLOGICAL    DISCUSSION.  57 

The  idea  advanced  by  Mr.  Skinner  and  others  that 
all  who  are  raised  from  the  dead  are  children  of  God, 
grows,  therefore,  out  of  his  mistake,  as  I  view  it,  in 
interpreting  the  expression  "children  of  the  resurrec- 
tion" to  mean  all  the  risen  dead.  Enough  has  been 
said  in  explanation  of  the  opposite,  and,  as  we  be- 
lieve, the  more  Scriptural  sense  of  the  phrase.  It 
seems  to  us  unaccountable  that  any  should  adopt  the 
idea  that  all  who  are  raised  from  the  dead  will  be  the 
children  of  God,  if  they  have  ever  read  the  parables 
of  Christ  in  Matt.  xiii.  II ow  does  he  there  say  it 
shall  be  in  the  end  of  the  world  ?  "  So  shall  it  be  in 
the  end  of  the  world.  The  Son  of  man  shall  send  forth 
his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  king- 
dom all  things  that  offend,  and  them  that  do  iniquity, 
and  shall  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire ;  there 
shall  be  wailing  and  gnashing  of  teeth."  The 
same  words  are  repeated  at  the  close  of  the  parable 
of  the  net.  Surely  there  will  be  some  of  the  risen 
dead  who  will  not  be  "  children  of  the  resurrec- 
tion," because  they  will  not  be  the  "  children  of  God." 

I  proceed  now  to  the  argument  to  be  derived  from 
the  declarations  of  Christ  in  connection  with  the 
resurrection.  Christ  said,  "  The  hour  is  coming,  and 
now  is  when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son 
of  God,  and  they  that  hear  shall  live."  This  he  said 
to  illustrate  his  commission  to  bestow  spiritual  life  on 
those  who  are  dead  in  sin.  Then  he  proceeds  at 
once  to  assert  a  power  in  confirmation  of  this,  in  the 
way  of  miracle.  "  Marvel  not  at  this"  —  (at  my 
power  to  regenerate  the  soul,)  for  the  hour  is  coining 


58  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

(notice  that  lie  does  not  here  add  —  "and  now  is") 
when  all  that  are  in  their  graves  shall  hear  his  voice 
and  shall  come  forth,  they  that  have  done  good  to  the 
resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that  have  done  evil  to 
the  resurrection  of  damnation." 

"  All  that  are  in  their  graves"  includes  all  who  die, 
from  Abel  to  the  last  victim  of  death  and  the  grave. 
"  They  that  have  done  evil/7  of  course,  then,  are 
there.  Now  it  appears  that  they  who  have  done  evil 
will  not  have  atoned,  in  the  intermediate  state,  for 
the  deeds  done  in  the  body,  because  the  Saviour  says 
they  will  come  forth  "  to  the  resurrection  of  damna- 
tion." But  some  of  them  will  have  been  for  a  very 
long  time  in  the  separate  state.  Wherever  the  rich 
man  went  at  death  he  was  "  in  torment ;"  there  were 
men  before  his  day,  and  there  have  been  men  since 
his  time,  who  were  as  wicked  as  he.  But  can  sin  be 
punished  "in  torment"  so  long?  Peter  tells  us  that 
there  were  "  spirits"  in  his  day  "  in  prison"  to  whom 
Christ  preached  by  the  Spirit  in  the  days  of  Noah, 
that  is  at  least  three  thousand  years  before.  That  is 
a  long  time  for  sin  to  be  punished,  or  even  for  a  sinner 
to  be  detained,  under  the  government  of  a  good  God. 
Now  these  are  yet  to  "  come  forth  unto  the  resurrec- 
tion of  damnation."  If  sin  can  be  so  punished  by 
the  Infinite  Father,  and  if  bodies  are  to  be  added  to 
these  souls,  notwithstanding  this  already  protracted 
experience  of  misery,  and  if  they,  body  and  soul,  are 
at  the  last  day  to  be  doomed  to  "  fire,  prepared  for 
the  devil  and  his  angels,"  on  what  principles  can  all 
this  be  explained  ?  Does  sin  merit  such  punishment, 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION."  59 

as  the  Bible  declares  has  already  been  inflicted? 
Would  an  earthly  parent  punish  thus  ?  Is  there  not 
enough,  in  this  ascertained  infliction  of  punishment 
for  sin,  to  destroy  all  confidence  in  the  government 
of  God,  unless  .sin  deserves  it  all  ?  And  if  it 
deserves  all  this,  we  know  not  how  much  more  it  may 
deserve. 

It  will  be  observed,  in  addition,  that  Christ  does 
not  tell  us,  they  that  have  done  evil,  but  by  the  power 
of  discipline,  shall  have  repented,  shall  come  forth  to 
the  resurrection  of  life,  and  the  incorrigible  to  the 
resurrection  of  a  farther  discipline.  How  is  this  ? 
Has  not  the  long  interval  between  death  and  the 
resurrection  resulted  in  the  salvation  of  any  ? 
Strange  that  some  of  the  more  hopeful  of  the  wicked 
should  not  have  availed  themselves  of  the  oppor- 
tunity between  death  and  the  judgment  to  confess 
and  repent. 

It  is  contrary  to  all  analogy  that  it  should  be  neces- 
sary to  punish  men  so  long  before  they  repent.  On 
the  deck  or  in  the  rigging  of  a  burning  vessel  at  sea, 
when  death  is  absolutely  certain,  it  is  to  be  presumed 
that  it  does  not  take  a  wicked  man  very  long  to 
decide  with  what  feelings  he  will  meet  his  God. 
When  the  soul  after  death  finds  itself  on  the  way  to 
hell,  can  we  suppose  that  an  opportunity  to  escape 
by  repentance,  if  it  were  offered,  would  be  rejected  ? 
If  the  only  object  of  God  is  to  reclaim  the  sinner,  he 
will  release  him  the  first  moment  that  he  repents.  It 
is  so  in  this  world.  "  And  when  he  was  yet  a  great 
way  off,  his  father  saw  him  and  had  compassion  and 


60  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

ran  and  fell  on  liis  neck  and  kissed  him."  If  the 
soul,  at  the  sight  of  its  punishment,  relents  and 
agrees  to  the  terms  of  pardon,  does  a  Universalist 
believe  that  God  will  say,  '•'  No  ;  you  must  suffer  in 
hell  for  your  sins;  even  though  you  have  now  repent- 
ed ?"  Would  an  earthly  father  inflict  punishment  in 
such  a  case  ?  But  the  Bible  represents  the  wicked  to 
have  been  in  hell  from  the  time  of  their  death  till  the 
resurrection,  arid  at  the  resurrection  they  must  yet 
come  forth  "  to  the  resurrection  of  damnation."  It 
is  incredible  that  so  much  time  and  so  much  suffering 
should  be  necessary  to  make  sinners  repent.  Either 
they  repent,  and  God  still  continues  to  punish  them 
"  ages  on  ages  :"  or  they  do  not  repent  between  death 
and  the  resurrection,  nor  at  the  judgment  seat  of 
Christ,  nor  in  the  immediate  prospect  of  going  away 
to  the  society  and  the  punishment  of  the  devil  and 
his  angels.  If  a  soul  which  is  finally  to  be  reclaimed, 
can  pass  through  such  experience  and  not  repent,  it 
requires  larger  hope  and  faith  than  is  common  to  men 
to  expect  that  future  punishment  can  be  a  means 
of  salvation. 

.That  the  guilt  of  a  finite  creature,  man  or  angel, 
should  merit  thousands  of  years  in  hell,  or  that  thou- 
sands of  years  should  be  requisite  to  bring  him  to  his 
right  mind,  no  more  accords  with  our  natural  feelings 
or  with  what  we  call  "  reason/'  than  does  the  idea  of 
endless  punishment.  But  if  the  Bible  conveys  any- 
thing intelligible  to  our  understanding,  it  teaches 
that  angels  and  men  have  been  subjected  to  punish- 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  61 

merit  for  a  longer  period  than  is  "  reasonable "  for 
mere  discipline. 

Surely  the  end  of  future  punishment  cannot  be 
merely  the  recovery  of  the  sinner.  Were  it  so,  more- 
over, it  would  follow  that  sin  injures  no  one  but  the 
sinner  himself.  It  violates  no  duties  toward  God,  no 
interests  of  fellow  creatures.  But  the  law  of  God 
refutes  this ;  the  threatenings  against  those  who 
cause  others  to  fall,  and  the  frequent  punishment  of 
men  who  made  others  to  sin,  prove  that  the  punish- 
ment of  the  sinner  will  have  some  other  end  than  his 
reformation. 

It  being  frequently  argued  that  the  sins  of  a  finite 
creature  cannot  be  punished  forever,  because  a  finite 
creature  cannot  merit  infinite  punishment,  it  will  bo 
enough  to  meet  this,  in  passing,  with  a  single  remark, 
viz:  That,  if  this  be  so,  then,  even  if  the  whole  uni- 
verse should  sin  forever,  the  whole  universe  cannot 
be  punished  forever,  because  the  whole  nniverse7 
after  all,  is  but  finite. 

V.  THE  SCRIPTURES  TEACH  THAT  TFTE  LAW  OF  GOD 
HAS  A  CURSE  :  —  WHICH  IT  HAS  NOT  IF  FUTURE  PUNISH- 
MENT BE  DISCIPLINARY. 

The  punishment,  however  long  and  severe,  which 
shall  result  in  restoring  a  soul  to  holiness  and  an  end- 
less heaven,  under  the  kind  and  faithful  administra- 
tion of  its  heavenly  Father,  it  would  be  unsuitable  to 
call  "  a  curse."  The  theory  of  Restorationists  is,  that 
mercy,  having  failed  to  recover  sinners  in  this  world, 
will  go  on  hereafter,  in  the  same  direction,  with  more 


G2  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

vigorous  methods,  till  it  succeeds, — the  same  undying, 
unfaltering  love  pursuing  the  wanderer,  which  here 
never  ceased  to  plead.  Hereafter  it  will  mingle 
stronger  ingredients,  and  cure  the  disease  of  sin. 
What  "  curse  "  there  is  in  such  loving-kindness  it  is 
hard  to  see.  In  this  world  we  experience  just  this 
treatment, — 

**  Afflictions  sorted,  anguish  of  all  sizes  ; 
Fine  nets  and  stratagems  to  catch  us  in  ;' ' 

and  sometimes  all  the  waves  and  billows  go  over  us. 
Men  are  stripped  of  property,  family,  health,  reputa- 
tion, and  finally  they  turn  to  the  hand  that  smites 
them,  grateful  that  God  did  not  spare  the  rod  for 
their  crying;  and  they  testify  that  through  the  loss 
of  all  things  they  have  gained  eternal  bliss.  Do  they 
call  their  affliction  their  "  curse  ?"  Have  they  suf- 
fered "  the  curse  of  the  law  ?"  All  the  ordinary 
medicines  having  failed,  the  physician  brings  some 
extreme  remedy  and  saves  the  patient.  Was  that  a 
"  curse  ?"  He  amputates  the  limb,  and  thus  prolongs 
a  precious  life.  Did  he  "  curse  '  the  man,  in  doing 
so  ?  We  must,  therefore,  expunge  large  parts  of  the 
Bible,  if  future  punishment  be  only  a  wholesome  dis- 
cipline. "  Christ  has  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of 
the  law,  being  made  a  curse  for  us."  No,  he  has  only 
redeemed  us  from  a  further  dispensation  of  infinite 
mercy,  if  punishment  be  only  for  discipline;  indeed, 
he  prevents  the  bestowment  of  a  greater  proof  of 
love  than  he  himself  gave  us  in  dying  on  the  cross; 
for  if,  after  all  his  love  for  us,  he  will  persist  in  disci- 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  G3 

plining  us  in  hell,  willing  to  see  us  suffer  that  he  may 
finally  save  us,  "  herein  is  love  !"  The  cross  is  not 
the  climax  of  his  love,  but  the  lake  of  fire.  How  it  is 
in  any  sense  a  curse,  we  fail  to  see.  Christians  here 
never  look  upon  the  means  of  sanctification  as  "  the 
curse  of  the  law."  The  sinner  who  by  the  severest 
discipline  is  brought  to  Christ,  feels  that  he  thereby 
escapes  "  the  curse  of  the  law.'*  But  we  cannot  find 
that  curse,  neither  here  nor  hereafter,  unless  there  be 
punishment  which  is  not  intended  for  the  recovery 
of  the  sinner. 

VI.  THE  SENTENCE  PASSED  UPON  THE  WICKED  INDIS- 
CRIMINATELY FORBIDS  THE  IDEA  OF  DISCIPLINE  IN  FUTURE 
PUNISHMENT. 

Among  the  impenitent  at  death  and  in  eternity, 
there  is,  of  course,  great  variety  of  character.  If  tho 
object  of  future  punishment  be  to  reclaim  them,  the 
wise  and  considerate  methods  of  earthly  discipline 
seem  to  be  utterly  discarded  after  death.  We  hardly 
need  to  be  reminded  how  indiscriminate  are  tho 
threatenings  which  are  said  to  be  inflicted  on  the 
wicked.  The  last  sentence  evidently  regards  none 
of  them  as  probationers,  there  is  no  forbearance  in  it 
toward  the  more  hopeful ;  they  are  all  addressed  as 
"ye  cursed."  We  are  considering  the  testimony  of 
the  Scriptures.  What  evidence  do  they  afford  of  any 
discrimination  in  the  treatment  of  the  finally  impeni- 
tent, notwithstanding  the  vast  variety  which  must 
exist  among  them  ?  I  answer,  not  any.  But  the  fol- 
lowing passage?,  among  others,  teach  plainly  that  the 


64  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

doom  of  the  wicked  will  be  indiscriminate,  without 
regard  to  hopeful  diversities  of  character. 

"  And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand  before 
God ;  and  the  books  were  opened,  and  another  book 
was  opened  which  is  the  book  of  life  ;  and  the  dead 
were  judged  out  of  the  things  which  were  written  in 
the  book,  according  to  their  works.  And  the  sea 
gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it,  and  death  and  hell 
delivered  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them ;  and  they 
were  judged  every  man  according  to  their  works." 
Then  follows  this  declaration :  "  And  death  and  hell 
were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.  This  is  the  second 
death."  Some  say,  death  and  hell  are  annihilated. 
But  this  is  not  the  idea  intended,  unless  the  wicked 
also  are  then  to  be  annihilated ;  for  the  next  verse 
concluding  the  subject  says,  "  And  whosoever  was 
not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire."  The  obvious  meaning,  is,  Death  and 
hell,  whatever  they  represent,  will  then  be  added  to 
the  lake  of  fire,  whatever  that  is,  as  new  ingredients, 
and  to  constitute  "  the  second  death,"  and  as  a  final 
gathering  together  of  all  the  elements  of  sorrow  and 
pain,  with  all  the  wicked,  into  one  place.  With  this 
passage  agree  the  words  of  Daniel :  "  And  many  of 
them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall  awake, 
some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame  and  ever- 
lasting contempt."  The  parables  of  Christ  relating  to 
the  end  of  the  world  recognize  only  two  great  divis- 
ions of  men  at  the  last  day.  Wheat  and  tares  only 
are  to  be  in  the  "  field ;"  good  and  bad,  only,  in  the 
"  net."  The  wheat  is  saved,  the  tares  are  burned  j 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  65 


a 


the  good"  in  the  net  are  gathered  into  vessels,  "the 
bad"  are  none  of  them  dismissed  for  amendment,  or 
growth,  but  are  "  cast  away."  And  Christ  tells  us 
that  every  human  being,  will  stand  at  his  right  hand 
or  left  hand,  "  blessed  "  or  "  cursed." 

Now  when  we  call  to  mind  the  justice  of  God,  and 
reflect  that  undue  severity,  or  the  laying  on  man 
more -than  is  meet,  would  alienate  the  confidence  of 
the  good  from  the  Most  High,  and  when  we  consider 
the  declarations  of  Christ  that  sins  of  ignorance  shall 
receive  but  "  few  stripes,"  and  we  still  perceive  that 
the  human  race  are  evidently  to  fall  at  last  into  two 
divisions,  which  will  include  the  whole  with  their 
countless  diversities  and  degrees  as  to  character  in 
each  division,  we  infer  that  no  provision  is  made  for 
a  more  hopeful  class  to  enjoy  a  further  trial.  All 
upon  the  left  hand  are  doomed  alike.  If  there  is  to 
be  a  new  probation  after  death,  the  Bible  surely  does 
not  teach  it. 

VII.  THE  DURATION  OF  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT  IS  EX- 
PRESSED IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  BY  THE  TERMS  EMPLOYED 
TO  DENOTE  ABSOLUTE  ETERNITY. 

There  is,  we  all  admit,  such  a  thing  as  forever.  If 
the  Bible  speaks  of  the  natural  attributes  of  God,  his 
eternity  is  of  course  brought  to  view,  and  there  must 
be  a  term  or  terms  to  convey  the  idea. 

Now  it  is  apparent  to  all,  that  the  words  eternal, 
everlasting ',  forever ,  never  of  themselves  signify  a  lim- 
ited duration.  No  one  ever  learns  from  these  icords 
that  the  duration  to  which  they  refer  is  less  than 


66  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

infinite.     The    idea   of    limitation,  if  it   be  obtained, 
always  is  derived  from  the  context. 

»/ 

It  is  moreover  true  beyond  the  possibility  of  dis- 
pute that  the  words  eternal,  everlasting  and  forever. 
always  mean  the  wJiole  of  something.  There  is  no 
instance  in  which  they  are  used  to  denote  a  part  of  a 
thing's  duration.  It  is  always  the  entire  period  for 
which  that  thing  is  to  last.  This  no  one  will  call  in 
question. 

It  is  well  understood  that  the  words  "forever"  and 
"everlasting"  are  used  to  express  a  duration  com- 
mensurate with  the  nature  of  the  thing  spoken  of. 
"  Everlasting  mountains"  are  coeval  with  creation, 
and  are  to  endure  as  long  as  the  earth.  "  A  servant 
forever/'  is  a  servant  for  life.  We  cannot  take  the 
sense  which  the  word  has  in  connection  with  a  cer- 
tain thing,  and  by  it  prove  or  disprove  any  thing 
relating  to  a  totally  different  thing.  We  cannot 
prove,  for  example,  that  mountains  will  not  last  to 
the  end  of  time  because  forever  applied  to  a  servant 
means  only  for  life.  We  must  consider  the  nature  of 
the  object  to  which  the  word  is  applied.  When  it  is 
applied  to  the  Most  High,  of  course  it  means  unlimit- 
ed duration-  Now  the  words  which  convey  the  idea 
of  absolute  eternity  are  applied,  for  example,  to 
mountains,  and  to  future  punishment,  and  to  the 
being  and  government  of  God.  This  then  is  certain  : 
Because  forever  when  applied  to  some  things,  does 
not  mean  absolute  eternity,  it  does  not  follow  that  it 
does  not  mean  eternity  when  applied  to  future  retri- 
bution. If  it  were  so,  we  could  not  convey  the  idea 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  67 

.of  the  eternity  of  God  ;  for  it  could  be  said  that  for- 
ever is  sometimes  applied  to  a  limited  duration.  That 
is  true.  Now  if  this  proves  that  future  punishment  is 
not  forever,  it  must  also  prove  that  the  being  of  God 
is  not  forever.  — — 

Two  things  are  beyond  dispute.  1.  Forever  and 
everlasting  are  applied  to  future  retributions.  2. 
These  terms  always  mean  the  whole,  as  to  duration,  of 
that  with  which  they  stand  connected.  Jf  applied 
to  life,  it  is  the  whole  of  life ;  if  to  the  existence  of 
the  world,  it  is  the  entire  period  of  its  existence  ; 
if  to  a  covenant,  the  covenant  is  either  without  limit 
as  to  time,  or  it  is  the  whole  of  the  duration  which 
the  subject  permits  ;  and  when  applied  to  Jehovah  it 
refers  to  his  whole  eternity.  - 

What,  then,  does  it  mean,  when  applied  to  future 
retribution?  It  always  means  the  whole  of  something. 
Is  it  the  whole  of  future  existence  ?  No  one  can  base 
a  denial  of  it  on  the  ground  that  the  word  when 
applied  to  human  life  means  only  a  few  years,  or  a 
limited  duration  when  applied  to  the  earth.  For, 
How  is  it  when  applied  to  God  and  the  happiness  of 
heaven?  It  is  certainly  the  place  of  any  who  deny 
endless  retributions  to  show  that  the  words  cannot 
mean  the  ivhole  of  future  existence  when  applied  to 
punishment.  The  words  mean  the  whole  of  future 
existence  when  applied,  by  the  use  of  the  same  Greek 
words  in  the  same  passages,  to  the  happiness  of  the 
righteous.  The  objector  must  show  that  when 
applied  to  the  future  life,  they  mean  only  a  part  of  it, 


(58  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION, 

notwithstanding  they  always  mean  the  whole  of  every 
thing  else  with  which  they  stand  connected. 

Such  are  some  of  the  considerations  drawn  from 
the  word  of  God,  which  satisfy  my  own  mind  that 
retributions  after  death  are  without  end.  Mr.  Foster 
speaks  of  it  as  "  the  general,  not  very  far  short  of 
universal,  judgment  of  divines."  Such  multitudes  of 
the  best  of  men  and  women  are  still  firmly  persuaded 
of  its  truth,  that  we  are  led  to  say,  There  must  be  a 
foundation  for  it  in  the  word  of  God, — and  for  this 
reason :  If  mankind  could  have  divested  themselves 
of  the  conviction  that  it  is  found  in  the  word  of 
God,  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that  it  would  long  since 
have  been  discarded.  Nay,  rather  who  would  have 
invented  such  a  doctrine  ?  Good  men  would  not 
have  palmed  it  upon  the  world,  for  more  reasons 
than  one.  Besides,  many  an  error  has  been  exploded  ; 
it  is  unaccountable,  if  this  be  error,  that  it  should 
have  kept  its  hold  upon  the  human  mind.  No 
Protestant,  it  would  seem,  would  quote  a  belief  in 
purgatory  as  a  parallel  case.  We  have  no  coercion, 
nor  any  kind  of  motive  to  bias  our  minds  toward 
this  article  of  faith.  We  use  no  terms  on  this  sub- 
ject,— certainly  we  approve  of  none,  which  are  not 
derived  from  the  Bible.  We  are  not  superstitious, 
nor  fanatical,  nor  priest  ridden,  nor  cruel,  and  we 
think  we  have  far  more  exalted  reasons  for  believing 
in  the  infinite  love  of  God  than  any  have  who  do  not 
see  it,  as  we  do,  in  the  atoning  cross.  However 
good  and  amiable  the  opposers  of  this  doctrine  may 
be,  they  will  not  assume  that  they  are  more  humane, 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  69 

more  pitiful,  more  gentle,  more  the  friends  of  God 
and  man  than  those  who  believe  it.  In  view  of  the 
hold  which  it  has  on  the  minds  of  men  it  would  be  so 
great  a  marvel  that  the  doctrine  should  not  be  found 
in  the  Scriptures  that  nothing  could  be  more  astound- 
ing, not  even  the  fearful  truth  itself. 

And  that  it  may  be  seen,  further,  how  we  are 
confirmed  in  our  persuasion  that  we  read  the  Bible 
aright,  I  refer  not  only,  as  above,  to  the  convictions 
of  believers,  that  the  doctrine  is  scriptural,  but  to  the 
positive  statements  of  some  who  have  rejected  it. 

Mr.  Foster  tells  us  :  "  And  the  language  of  Scrip- 
ture is  formidably  strong, — so  strong  that  it  must  be 
an  argument  of  extreme  cogency  that  would  author- 
ize a  limited  interpretation." 

Dr.  Thomas  Burnett,  an  English  divine,  writing  in 
favor  of  final  restoration,  says,  "  Human  nature 
revolts  from  the  very  name  of  future  punishment. 
But  the  sacred  Scriptures  seem  to  be  on  the  other 
side."  ["Natura  humana  abhorret  ab  ipso  nomine 
paBnarum  seternarum. — At  Scriptura  sacra  a  partibus 
contrariis  stare  videtur."  De  Statu  Mort.  et  Resurg. 
p.  228,  2d  ed.] 

One  effect  of  the  recent  discussion  of  this  subject 
in  this  city  has  been  to  elicit  from  a  distinguished 
advocate  of  final  restoration,  the  following  state- 
ment: 

"  And  yet  I  freely  say  that  I  do  not  find  the  doctrine 
of  the  ultimate  salvation  of  all  souls  clearly  stated 
in  any  text  or  in  any  discourse  that  has  ever  been 
reported  from  the  lips  of  Christ.  I  do  not  think  that 


70  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

we  can  fairly  maintain  that  the  final  restoration  of  all 
men  is  a  prominent  and  explicit  doctrine  of  the  four 
Gospels."  [Rev.  T.  S.  King's  Two  Discourses, 
p.  5.] 

To  this,  I  am  able  to  add  the  explicit  testimony  of 
Rev.  Theodore  Parker.  Wishing  to  verify  a  quota- 
tion which  a  friend  had  tried  in  vain  to  find  for  me 
in  one  of  Mr.  Parker's  volumes,  I  addressed  a  note  to 
Mr.  P.,  asking  hi  in  to  give  me  the  reference.  The  fol- 
lowing polite  and  obliging  answer  will  speak  for 
itself.  All  the  italics  are  Mr.  P.'s  : — 

"  BOSTON,  Dec.  1st.,  1858. 

"  HEV.  DR.  ADAMS  :  Dear  Sir,  —  I  am  ill  now,  and  cannot 
recollect  that  the  passage  you  refer  to  occurs  in  any  of  my 
volumes,  yet  it  might,  in  several.  I  am  sure  it  does  in  some 
printed  sermons  —  pamphlets,  but  cannot  now  say  which.  I  will 
try  to  find  the  passage. 

"  To  me  it  is  quite  clear  that  Jesus  taught  the  doctrine  of  eternal 
damnation  if  the  Evangelists  —  the  first  three  I  mean  —  are  to  be 
treated  as  inspired.  I  can  understand  his  language  in  no  other 
way.  But  as  the  Protestant  sects  start  with  the  notion,  which  to 
me  is  a  monstrous  one  —  that  the  words  of  the  N.  T.  are  all 
miraculously  inspired  by  God,  and  so  infallibly  true,  and  as  this 
doctrine  of  eternal  damnation  is  so  revolting  to  all  the  human  and 
moral  feelings  of  our  nature,  men  said,  "  The  words  must  be 
interpreted  in  another  way."  So,  as  the  Unitarians  have  misinter- 
preted the  N.  T.  to  prove  that  the  Christos  of  the  fourth  Gospel 
had  no  pre-existence,  the  Universalists  misinterpreted  other 
passages  of  the  Gospels  to  show  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth  never 
taught  eternal  damnation.  So  the  Geologists  misinterpret  Genesis 
to-day  —  to  save  the  divine  infallible  character  of  the  text. 

Yours  trulv, 

»   l 

THEODORE  PARKER. 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  71 

It  was  but  fair  to  let  Mr.  P.  state  his  whole  belief 
oil  the  subject.  Thus,  in  his  view,  if  the  Evangelists 
are  to  be  believed,  Christ  taught  that  future  retribu- 
tions are  to  be  endless. 

There  is  nothing  to  be  surprised  at  in  this ;  but  it 
will  be  seen  that  it  is  not  without  good  reason  that 
those  who  receive  the  Bible  implicitly  as  the  word  of 
God  have  so  generally  believed  in  endless  retribution 
as  a  doctrine  of  Scripture. 

The  question  then  arises,  whether  our  human 
instincts  or  divine  revelation,  whether  man  the  sinner, 
or  God  the  Sovereign,  shall  dictate  the  penalty  of 
sin  ?  Mr.  Foster,  seeking  relief  to  his  mind  from  the 
terrible  idea  of  endless  sin  and  misery,  says  of  the 
doctrine  of  the  annihilation  of  the  wicked,  "  It 
would  be  a  prodigious  relief."  Some  one  respectful- 
ly replies  to  him  that  "  the  divine  government  is  not 
for  the  relief  of  the  imagination,  but  for  the  relief  of 
the  universe." 

The  question  is  often  asked,  How,  allowing  end- 
less retribution  to  be  a  scriptural  doctrine,  can  you 
have  peace  of  mind  in  your  belief? 

I  answer,  We  believe  that  no  one  will  perish  who 
does  not  reject  the  Saviour  of  the  world  ;  or.  if  he 
be  a  heathen,  does  not  sin  against  light  and  convic- 
tion sufficient  to  save  him. 

It  has  an  effect  to  quiet  our  minds  when  we  reflect 
that  our  thoughts  and  feelings  at  the  loss  of  the  soul 
were  surpassed  in  Him  whose  soul  for  us  was  exceed- 
ing sorrowful  even  unto  death.  Tears  were  shed  by 
him  over  sinners :  "  God  hath  laid  on  him  the 


72  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

iniquity  of  us  all."  If  the  thought  of  endless  retri- 
bution is  so  terrible  to  us  who  know  so  little  about 
it,  we  are  constrained  to  think  that  there  was  never 
any  sorrow  like  unto  the  sorrow  of  him  who  loved  us 
and  gave  himself  for  us,  when  he  sees  that  he  must, 
nevertheless,  pronounce  upon  any  for  whom  he  died, 
the  sentence  of  that  everlasting  punishment  from 
which  he  became  incarnate  and  died  to  save  us. 
Great  as  our  astonishment  and  sorrow  are,  we  cannot 
forget  that  they  are  infinitely  less  than  his.  If, 
through  grace,  we  are  saved,  we  look  to  him,  who 
knows  what  his  own  tears  have  been,  to  wipe  away 
all  tears  from  our  eyes, 

We  also  consider  that  the  basis  of  future  punish- 
ment is  a  chosen  and  cherished  state  of  mind  which 
leads  men  here  to  reject  Christ  notwithstanding  his 
known  character  and  his  efforts  for  them.  This  may 
lead  them  to  still  reject  him ;  for,  as  already  stated, 
we  do  not  find  that  even  the  loss  of  heaven  and  the 
experience  of  chains  under  darkness  have  reconciled 
lost  angels  to  God,  While  they  choose  to  sin,  there- 
fore, we  see  no  injustice  in  their  being  punished, 
even  if  they  sin  forever. 

ThatHhe  Bible  contains  forewarnings  and  instruct- 
ions which  ought  to  be  sufficient  to  deter  men 
from  future  misery,  we  learn  even  from  the  reply  of 
Abraham  to  the  rich  man  in  hell.  The  rich  man 
desired  that  Lazarus  might  be  sent  to  his  father's 
house  with  testimony  concerning  that  "  place  of 
torment,"  Abraham  replied  that  "  they  have  Moses 
and  the  prophets,  let  them  hear  them."  The  rich 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  73 

man  could  easily  have  reminded  Abraham,  if  truth 
permitted,  that  there  is  nothing  about  that  place  in 
the  Old  Testament.  He  makes  no  such  answer,  but 
pleads  the  supposed  efficacy  of  a  visiter  from  the 
unseen  world.  Abraham  replied  that  such  a  visiter 
could  have  no  effect  on  those  who  do  not  believe  the 
testimony  of  the  Old  Testament  on  that  subject.  All 
this  is  from  the  lips  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Inasmuch  as  we  cast  no  blame  on  God  for  the 
present  condition  and  conduct  of  cannibals,  and 
pagans,  and  atheists,  and  blasphemers,  and  slave 
traders,  and  every  other  description  of  wicked  men, 
neither  do  they  themselves  impute  blame  to  him.  wo 
do  not  feel  that  God  will  be  responsible  for  the  end- 
less wickedness  and  misery  of  sinners  ;  nor  will  they 
charge  him  with  injustice  more  than  they  now  do. 

We  believe  that  the  God  of  the  New  Testament  is 
the  same  unchangeable  God  of  the  Old  Testament ; 
that  Christ  has  not  modified  the  divine  character 
nor  altered  one  principle  of  the  divine  administration  ; 
but  that  the  New  Testament  reveals  the  mercy  of 
God  in  full  orbed  beauty,  though  its  outlines  were 
always  visible  from  the  beginning ;  that  all  which 
was  terrible  in  the  God  who  destroyed  the  old  world 
and  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  cast  down  rebel 
angels  from  heaven  to  hell,  is  still  the  same,  and  that 
when  mercy  has  failed  under  the  New  Testament  to 
recover  sinners,  the  God  of  the  Old  Testament  and 
of  the  New  will  be  their  Judge  and  King.  We  road 
that  "  it  is  a  fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the 
living  God/' — "  For  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire." 
7 


74-  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

And  we  have  our  choice,  to  love  and  serve  such  a 
God  as  this,  or  to  reject  him  and  take  the  consequen- 
ces. Our  private  experience  persuades  us  that  He  is 
good.  He  has  always  been  just  and  kind,  gentle, 
easy  to  be  entreated.  In  all  our  afflictions  he  was 
afflicted,  and  the  angel  of  his  presence  saved  us. 
Knowing  this,  his  stern,  uncompromising  hatred  of 
sin,  his  power  to  inflict  suffering,  and  to  look  upon 
it,  forever,  if  necessary,  give  us  confidence  in  Him. 
"We  may  need  such  attributes  for  the  foundation  of 
our  safety  and  of  our  confidence  in  God,  as  much  as 
that  attribute  which  we  now  separate  from  the  rest 
of  his  character  and  call  his  love. 

We  believe  that  the  Bible  teaches, —  for  surely  it 
follows  of  course  from  all  which  has  now  been  ad- 
duced,— that  some  proportion  of  pain  and  misery  will 
forever  exist  under  the  government  of  God.  The 
idea  that  they  are  to  be  wholly  expurgated  is  contra- 
dicted by  the  Scriptures,  and  is  mere  fancy.  But 
the  scale  of  things  being  hereafter  enlarged  to  our 
"apprehension,  and  the  reasons  for  one  thing  and 
another  which  are  now  but  partially  explained,  being 
more  fully  apparent,  we  think  we  see  in  the  present 
feelings  of  good  citizens  with  regard  to  law,  and  pun- 
ishments, and  the  officers  of  justice,  how  future  pain 
and  misery  in  their  relation  to  the  infinitely  blessed 
system  of  government  over  a  universe  of  free  agents, 
will  by  no  means  diminish  the  happiness  of  that  mul- 
titude of  obedient  souls  which  no  man  can  number. 

I  have  always  been  struck  by  the  consideration 
that  the  passages  from  which  Universalists  infer  the 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  75 

final  happiness  of  all  men,  do  not  occur  in  the  Bible 
in  connection  with  the  punishment  of  the  wicked. 
This  is  of  the  utmost  importance.  It  is  one  presump- 
tive proof  that,  occurring  as  they  do  apart  from  any 
mention  of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  they  be- 
long to  other  subjects.  And  so  we  find  them,  in 
connection  with  the  blessedness  of  the  righteous,  the 
ultimate  victories  of  Christ  over  his  enemies,  his 
final  reign,  and  the  happiness  of  heaven.  But  we 
look  in  vain  for  passages  where  promises,  prophecies, 
hints,  of  ultimate  restoration  occur  in  connection 
with  the  subject  of  future  punishment.  It  will  not  be 
disputed  that  there  are  passages  which  seem  to  teach 
future,  endless  punishment ;  and  the  attempt  is  to 
show  that  they  are  "  metaphorical."  But  some  ap- 
pear to  think  that  "metaphorical'  means  "fictitious" 
"  unreal ;"  on  the  contrary  "  metaphorical  "  language 
is  generally  the  stronger  way  of  asserting  any  thing, 
being  resorted  to  for  the  purpose  of  intensifying  the 
expression.  But  how  remarkable  it  is  that  we  find 
no  clause  nor  phrase,  neither  literal,  nor  "metaphor- 
ical,'-' limiting  the  main  drift  of  a  passage  which 
speaks  of  future,  endless  punishment,  or  suggesting 
the  idea  of  restoration.  The  bold,  terrific  language 
of  Scripture,  asserting  the  future  punishment  of  the 
wicked,  has  not  one  word  of  qualification. 

We  frequently  meet  with  such  representations,  and 
illustrations  as  the  following,  in  modern  writers, — 
from  whom  I  had  intended  to  quote  several  passages : 
but  the  following  statement  of  their  views  will  suffice: 
The  soul  is  God's  child.  Will  a  mother  ever  cast  off 


76  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

its  offspring  ?  No,  neither  will  the  great  "  Mother 
of  us  all/'  the  love  of  God.  The  worst  of  men  — 
the  Judases,  the  Neroes,  and  Caligulas  will  at  last 
fulfil  their  career  of  sin  and  sorrow,  and  return  to  the 
bosom  of  God.  As  the  earth  in  some  parts  of  its  or- 
bit drives  away  from  the  sun,  but  soon  comes  "round- 
ing back  again/7  so  every  creature  that  God  ever 
made,  Satan  and  all,  (if  there  be  any  Satan,)  will  at 
last  accomplish  its  terrible  career,  and  passing  its 
solstice,  rejoice  in  a  new  moral  existence.  Some 
astronomical  difficulties  in  this  borrowed  illustration 
we  will  all  excuse. 

The  brief  reply  to  all  such  fancies,  is  this  :  Have 
we  a  Bible  ?  Does  it  give  us  any  intimation  of  such 
a  revolution,  such  an  orbit,  for  the  lost  soul  ?  We 
read  of  "  wandering  stars,  to  whom  is  reserved  the 
mist  of  darkness  forever  and  ever  ;7)  but  where  does 
the  Bible,  in  speaking  of  the  spirit  launching  forth  on 
its  aphelion,  intimate  that  its  path  is  a  cycle,  and  not 
a  straight  line  ? 

We  see  one  part  of  the  race  "  go  away  into  ever- 
lasting punishment.7'  But  this  is  said  to  be  merely 
"  a  metaphor."  We  will  be  grateful  even  for  "  a 
metaphor,"  if  there  be  any,  representing  their  re- 
turn. 

We  have  lately  been  furnished,  from  high  authority 
in  the  Universalist  denomination,  with  some  of  the 
principal  proof  texts  in  the  discourses  of  Christ  in 
favor  of  the  salvation  of  all  men.  They  occur  in  the 
review  already  spoken  of  (in  the  preface  to  this  arti- 
cle,) written  by  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  Whittemore,  in  which 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION.  77 

he  endeavors  to  answer  Rev.  T.  S.  King's  assertion 
that  he  could  not  find  any  text  or  discourse  of  Christ 
which  contains  the  doctrine  of  the  final  happiness  of 
all  men.  Dr.  W.,  of  course,  would  here  bring  forth 
some  of  his  strong  proofs,  for  he  says  of  Mr.  K.'s 
Discourses,  "  We  think  they  will  do  as  much  to  break 
down  Universalism  as  to  break  down  the  doctrine  of 
endless  misery."  The  following  are  Dr.  W.'s  quota- 
tions from  the  words  of  Christ  to  prove  that  He 
taught  the  final  salvation  of  all  men. 

1.  John  iv:  42.     "  This  is  indeed  the  Christ,  the 
Saviour  of  the  world/'      Dr.  W.  gives  an  extended 
exposition   of  the  discourse  of  Christ  at  the  well  of 
Samaria,  which  gave  occasion  to  these  words  of  the 
Samaritans  ;  and  he  says,    "  Jesus  Christ,  let  it  be  re- 
membered, is  declared  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world  ; 
and  how  could  he  be  justly  called  the  Saviour  of  the 
world  if  the  world  shall  never  be  saved  ?  '•     p.  390. 

2.  "All  things  are  delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father." 
This  is  a  major  premise.     "All  that  the  Father  hath 
given  me  shall  come  to  me,"  is  the  minor  premise. 
"To  come  to  Christ  is  to  become  a  Christian." — p. 
391.     This  involves  the  ergo  of  the  proposition.     He 
adds,  "  We  have  by  no  means  exhausted  our  proof," 
p.  392,  and  he  gives  us, 

3.  "'And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will 
draw  all  men  unto  me.'      We  have  the  word  of  Christ 
for  it — '  will  draw  all  men  unto  me.7      p.  392. 

4.  "  Jesus  answered,  i  Ye  do  err,  not  knowing  the 
Scriptures,  nor  the  power  of  God.     For  in  the  resur- 
rection, they  neither  marry,  nor  are  given  in  marriage 


78  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

hut  are  as  the  angels  of  God  in  heaven.'  If  angels 
are  holy,  mankind  are  to  be  holy :  if  angels  are  to  be 
happy,  mankind  are  to  be  happy."  "  This  is  a  dis- 
tinct and  positive  declaration*  of  the  purity  and  happi- 
ness of  all  men.7'  "  How  then/7  Dr.  W.  says,  "  can 
we  adopt  the  language  of  Mr.  King  and  say,  '  I  do 
not  find  the  doctrine/  <fec.  Strange  declaration  ! 
Jesus  joined  two  great  facts  together,  the  resurrec- 
tion of  all  men  and  their  exaltation  to  the  condition 
of  angels.77  p.  395. 

Such  passages  are,  in  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Whitte- 
more,  a  plain,  obvious  refutation,  from  Christ  himself, 
of  that,  in  Dr.  W.'s  view,  dangerous  assertion  by  Mr. 
K.  that  "  the  ultimate  salvation  of  all  souls  is  not 
clearly  taught  in  any  text  or  discourse  in  the 
Gospels." 

I  close  by  recapitulating  the  principal  topics  which 
have  now  been  considered. 

The  Scriptures  reveal  a  future  state  of  reward  and 
punishment. 

They  teach  that  the  body  and  soul  will  be  joined 
in  future  happiness  and  misery. 

Christ  teaches  that  God  can  destroy  both  body  and 
soul  in  hell.  If  God  cannot  morally  do  this,  the  dec- 
laration is  unintelligible  j  it  answers  no  purpose  of 
instruction. 

Future  punishment  will  therefore  be  a  natural 
operation  of  moral  laws,  sustained  and  made  effectual 
by  the  hand  of  God  upon  the  sinner ; — who,  by  his 
state  of  depravity,  will  be  made  susceptible  to  misery 
forever. 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION7.  79 

The  essential  elements  of  misery  remain  in  the 
wicked  after  death. 

Redemption  by  Christ  is  represented  as  having  for 
its  object  salvation  from  final  perdition. 

The  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  as  a  part  of  redemp- 
tion, and  the  unpardonable  sin  against  him,  prove 
that  the  present  is  the  final  effort  to  save  men. 

None  of  the  passages  relied  on  to  prove  final 
restoration  occur  in  connection  with  the  subject  of 
future  punishment,  but  with  the  reign  of  Christ  and 
the  happiness  of  the  righteous. 

No  passage  of  the  Bible  discloses  the  future  repen- 
tance of  the  wicked. 

Promises  of  restoration,  made  to  sinners  who  in 
this  world  were  to  become  penitent,  always  occur  in 
connection  with  threatenings  and  doom.  No  such 
promises  are  made  in  connection  with  the  threaten- 
ings of  future  punishment  or  with  the  final  doom  of 
the  wicked. 

The  Bible  closes  with  an  express  declaration  of  the 
future  unchangeableness  of  character. 

There  are  no  prophetic  visions  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment which  contemplate  deliverance  from  hell,  and 
corresponding  to  visions  of  God's  ancient  people  in 
captivity  and  of  their  release  and  restoration. 

The  fall  of  angels  and  of  man  is  a  confirmatory 
argument  in  favor  of  future  punishment,  seeing  that 
if  God  did  not  keep  them  irom  falling  he  can  con- 
sistently refuse  to  restore  them. 

The  terms  used  with  regard  to  the  resurrection  of 
the  dead  show  that  the  wicked  will  have  experienced 


80  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

no  change  since  death,  but  will  come  forth  from  their 
graves  to  the  resurrection  of  damnation. 

If  the  wicked  are  punished  hereafter  merely  for 
their  own  good,  there  is  no  such  thing  as  sin  against 
God,  or  our  neighbor; — which  is  contrary  to  Scrip- 
ture. 

The  law  of  God  has  no  curse,  if  future  punishment 
be  in  all  cases  disciplinary. 

The  sentence  passed  upon  the  impenitent  indis- 
criminately, forbids  the  idea  of  discipline  in  future 
punishment. 

It  is  inconceivable  that  fallen  angels  and  "  the 
spirits  in  prison  '  who  were  on  earth  "  in  the  days  of 
Noah,"  should  not  long  ago  have  repented  of  their 
sins,  if  repentance  were  the  object  sought  by  their 
punishment. 

If  death  and  the  scenes  within  the  veil  previous  to 
the  judgment  day,  do  not  effect  repentance  in  the 
wicked,  there  is  no  ground  to  think  that  their  ban- 
ishment from  Christ  with  the  fallen  angels  at  the  last 
day  is  intended  for  their  reformation,  or  would  effect 
it. 

"  Forever  "  and  "  Everlasting  r  always  denote  tJie 
tuhole,  as  to  duration,  of  that  with  which  they  stand 
connected. 

If  a  finite  being  cannot  justly  be  punished  forever, 
then  if  the  whole  universe  should  sin  forever,  it 
could  not  be  punished  forever,  because  the  whole 
intelligent  universe  also  is  finite. 

The  duration  of  future  punishment  is  expressed  in 
the  New  Testament  by  the  terms  employed  to  denote 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  81 

absolute   eternity   in   cases   which   are   never   ques- 
tioned. 

The  provision  made  in  the  incarnation,  sufferings, 
and  death  of  the  Son  of  God  for  pardon  and  salvation, 
and  the  abundant  calls  to  repentance  and  offers  of 
eternal  life  through  Christ,  to  all,  will  make  the  final 
impenitence  of  sinners  inexcusable,  and  their  misery 
will  be  of  their  own  procuring. 

I  may  be  allowed,  in  closing,  to  quote  the  words 
of  the  Apostle  Paul,  which  those  who  preach  and  are 
set  for  the  defence  of  the  Gospel,  must  not  hesitate 
to  adopt :  "  For  we  are  unto  God  a  sweet  savor  of 
Christ  in  them  that  are  saved  and  in  them  that  perish. 
To  the  one  we  are  the  savor  of  death  unto  death,  and 
to  the  other  the  savor  of  life  unto  life.  And  who  is 
sufficient  for  these  things?  '  2  Cor.  ii.  15,  16. 

Pursuing  my  ordinary  labors,  a  Universalist  and 
Unitarian  clergyman  of  this  city  invited  me  to  repeat 
in  his  pulpit,  a  sermon  on  this  subject  to  which  he 
had  listened  in  my  church.  As  I  profess  not  to  be 
ashamed  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  which,  in  my  view, 
involves  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  I  com- 
plied with  his  request.  This  has  led  to  the  present 
communication.  Had  mere  controversy  been  my 
object,  I  would  not  have  sought  to  discuss  the  Scrip- 
tural view  of  this  subject,  with  such  admissions  be- 
fore me  as  those  of  Rev.  T.  S.  King  and  Rev.  Theo- 
dore Parker.  When  I  read  them,  I  thought  that  one 
whose  only  object  was  to  get  the  advantage  of  an 
opponent  might  be  justified  in  feeling  with  regard  to 
the  doctrine  of  Restoration,  as  Joab  did  when  he 


82  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

found  Absalom  in  the  tree,  and  he  blew  a  trumpet  and 
all  the  people  returned  from  the  battle.  Such  men 
as  Mr.  K.  and  Mr.  P.,  seeing  the  doctrine  of  endless 
punishment  in  the  literal  speech  of  the  Bible  as  inter- 
preted by  us,  and  rejecting  its  inspiration  partly 
because  they  find  it  there,  relieve  us  greatly  from  the 
need  of  holding  controversies  on  this  subject.  Con- 
troversy has  not  been  my  motive.  I  have  sought  to 
persuade  my  reader  to  flee  with  me  for  refuge,  to  lay 
hold  upon  the  hope  set  before  us. 

In  the  foregoing  discussion,  I  am  not  aware  that 
there  is  any  thing  which  intentionally  reflects  upon 
the  understanding  or  motives  of  others.  It  has  cost 
no  effort  to  abstain  from  being,  in  any  way,  derisory, 
or  satirical,  or  contemptuous.  Conscious  only  of 
kindness  and  good  will  to  all,  and  grateful  for  this 
opportunity  to  state  and  defend  important  principles, 
I  am,  the  reader's  friend  and  servant, 

N.  ADAMS. 
Boston,  December  10, 1858. 


II 


NEGATIVE    ARGUMENT. 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 


PART   II 


THE     NE  G  A  TI  VE: 

OR, 

A  REVIEW  OF  DR,  ADAMS'  AFFIRMATIVE  "SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT." 

BY   REV.   SYLVANUS   COBB. 

PRELIMINARY    OBSERVATIONS. 

IN  entering  upon  a  work  of  so  great  magnitude  as 
this  which  lies  before  us,  our  self-distrust  leads  us  to 
press  near  in  prayer  to  the  Father  of  lights,  that  we 
may  lose  our  weakness  in  the  majesty  and  might  -of 
Christian  truth.  We  may  as  well,  here  in  the  outset, 
state  the  real  question  before  us,  in  such  form  that 
the  reader  may  be  possessed  from  the  beginning  of  a 
just  conception  of  its  nature,  in  its  relations  to  the 
honor  of  G.od  and  the  interests  of  human  existence. 
It  is,  whether  the  creation  of  God,  and  his  system  of 
moral  government,  shall  so  eventuate,  as  to  make  the 
result  of  creation  upon  the  whole  a  catastrophe,  and 
the  ultimate  employment  of  the  mass  of  his  children 
the  lamenting  of  existence,  cursing  Him  who  made 


86  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

them,  and  howling  in  infinite  torments.  For  the 
affirmative  of  this  tremendous  question,  arguments 
variously  classified,  scholastically  arranged,  and  in- 
geniously conducted,  by  one  of  the  most  naturally 
talented,  theologically  learned,  and  practically  expert 
Doctors  of  the  popular  schools,  we  have  had  the 
moral  courage  to  spread  out  in  our  columns  before 
our  thousands  of  readers  ;  and  now  it  devolves  upon 
us  as  a  bounden  religious  duty  to  search  these  argu- 
ments— in  the  fear  of  God  and  love  of  truth.  And 
we  seriously  believe,  and  are  confident  that  our 
readers  generally,  who,  with  prayerful  candor,  accom- 
pany us  in  this  review,  will  see  with  us,  that  the 
Doctor's  arguments,  though  sincerely  estimated  by 
himself  as  sufficient,  do  wholly  fail  of  showing  the 
"  Scripturalness  "  of  the  doctrine  in  question. 

We  say  not  this  to  forestall  the  judgment  of  the 
people,  but  to  elicit  a  scrutinizing  attention  to  what 
we  expect  to  show.  We  have  looked  the  arguments 
through,  and  the  fact  is,  that  the  learned  Doctor  has 
assumed  his  main  positions.  And  we  have  a  fraternal 
apology  to  present  on  his  behalf,  forefending  the 
impeachment  of  his  moral  integrity,  for  this  assump- 
tion of  his  main  positions.  These  assumed  positions 
of  his,  have,  for  centuries,  been  established  and 
cardinal  doctrines  of  the  nominally  Orthodox  Coun- 
cils and  Synods  of  the  Church.  This  is  an  apology 
for  his  assumption  of  the  ground  principles  of  his 
arguments,  which  could  not  be  pleaded  on  our  behalf 
for  any  assumption  whatever.  All  our  positions  it  is 
required  of  us  that  we  prove. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  87 

«p 

In  respect  to  the  settled  theological  authority 
which  we  so  fraternally  make  our  learned  friend's 
apology  for  taking  his  main  positions  for  granted, 
Miss  Catharine  Beecher,  daughter  of  the  venerable 
Dr.  Lyman  Beecher,  in  her  "  Common  Sense  Applied 
to  Religion"  gives  some  interesting  historical  facts. 
Speaking  of  the  theological  warfare  which  raged 
between  Augustine  and  Pelagius,  of  the  Fifth  Cen- 
tury, Miss  Beecher  says : 

"At  this  period  all  matters  of  doctrine  were  settled  by  ecclesias- 
tical councils.  The  first  council  on  this  matter  was  in  Africa,  and 
led  by  Augustine,  they  condemned  the  views  of  Pelagius.  The 
two  next  councils  were  in  Palestine,  and  both  sustained  his  teach- 
ings. Next,  in  Italy,  the  Pope,  then  at  the  early  period  of  pontifi- 
cal power,  first  sustained  Pelagius,  but  finally,  by  the  exertions  of 
Augustine  and  his  party,  was  led  to  condemn  him  with  the  greatest 
severity.  Finally,  the  emperors  were  enlisted  against  him  with 
their  civil  pains  and  penalties.  The  result  was,  Pelagius  and  his 
followers  suffered  the  perils  and  miseries  of  civil  ecclesiastical  per- 
secution. '  And  thus,'  says  the  historian,  '  the  Gauls,  Britons,  and 
Africans  by  their  councils,  and  the  emperors  by  their  edicts,  de- 
molished this  sect  in  its  infancy,  and  suppressed  it  entirely.' 

"  It  is  very  probable  that,  if  Pelagius  had  had  the  power  and 
adroitness  of  Augustine,  the  edicts  of  the  emperors  and  decrees  of 
councils  would  have  maintained  his  views,  and  those  of  Augustine 
would  have  gone  into  obscurity.  But  ever  since  that  day  the  or- 
ganized power  of  the  Latin,  Greek,  and  Protestant  churches  has 
been  arrayed  to  sustain  the  theories  thus  inaugurated." —  pp.  299, 
300. 

So,  then,  courtly  intrigue  on  the  part  of  the  End- 
less-miserian*  Augustine,  wielding  the  bloody  power 

*  This  is  an  adjective  of  our  own  coining,  which  we  compounded  many 
years  ago,  to  supply  a  want  in  descriptive  terms.  It  is  not  designed  as 
an  opprobrius  epithet,  expressive  of  personal  disrespect,  any  more  than 
the  term  Trinitarian,  Unitarian,  Calvanist,  or  Universalist.  There  has 


88  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

of  semi-barbarous  western  princes,  vanquished  by 
physical  force  the  Universalist  Pelagius*  and  his 
confriers,  and  established  for  the  Church  a  system  of 
orthodoxy,  which,  to  this  day,  commands  the  un- 
questioning reverence  of  thousands  and  millions, 
including  learned  and  good  men,  rolling  on  in  the 
fearful  majesty  of  Juggernaut's  car,  loved  and  adored 
while  it  crushes  the  heart  and  outrages  the  moral 
nature.  This  is  not  declamation.  Our  readers  will 
see  it  to  be  sober  fact,  as  we  attend,  shortly,  to  the 
effort  of  our  worthy  friend  on  that  side  to  adjust  the 
obnoxious  doctrine  to  the  benevolent  pleadings  of  his 
moral  sense. 

But  as  we  have  quoted  from  the  talented  Miss 
Beecher  in  relation  to  the  adroitness  of  Augustine, 
in  procuring  the  decrees  of  Councils  and  enlisting 
the  swords  of  tyrants  for  the  suppression  of  Pelgian- 
ism,  we  will  present  her  very  pleasant  but  reasonable 
speculations  on  the  probable  results  of  Pelagius'  sue- 
not  been  in  use  any  single  term  which  properly  designates  believers  in 
endless  punishment.  The  epithets  Partiulist,  and  Limitarian,  convey 
an  implication  which  those  to  whom  they  are  applied  may  not  acknowl- 
edge just.  But  Endless-Miserian  expresses  precisely  the  character- 
istic, in  respect  to  doctrine,  by  which  the  opposers  of  Universalism  are 
distinguished.  This  epithet,  therefore,  we  apply  to  Augustine,  to  avoid 
a  circumlocution  which  would  spoil  the  measure  of  the  sentence. 

*The  Universalist  Pelagius.  The  ecclesiastical  historians  of  the 
church  have  not  yet  been  interested  to  bring  out  the  Universalism  of 
Pelagius.  His  advocacy  of  the  unity  in  opposition  to  the  trinity  of  the 
Godhead,  and  of  the  unselfishness  and  benevolence  of  the  Divine  nature 
and  government,  and  of  man's  susceptibility  of  spiritual  culture,  has 
been  well  known.  But  Rev.  J.  C.  Pitrat,  member  of  the  French  Acad- 
emy of  Arts  and  Sciences,  and  a  convert  from  the  Roman  Catholic 
Priesthood,  who  reads  ecclesiastical  history  in  all  languages  as  familiarly 
as  we  read  our  mother  tongue,  in  a  series  of  original  papers  published 
in  the  Chridian  Freeman,  Vol.  XVIII.  pp.  125,129,  145,  shows  that 
Pelagius  held  the  finite  nature  of  sin,  the  disciplinary  character  of  pun- 
ishment, the  purpose  of  Christ's  mission  to  save  from  sin  and  not  from 
any  arbitrary  penalty  of  the  law,  and  the  parental  character  and  bless- 
ed result  of  the  Divine  administration. 


REPLY   TO    DR.    ADAMS.  89 

cess,  had  he  possessed  Augustine's  tact  and   effront- 
ery : 

"  It  is  a  matter  for  interesting  conjecture  as  to  the  probable  re- 
sults on  Christendom  had  the  theory  of  Pelagius  been  established 
by  pope,  emperor,  and  councils,  instead  of  that  of  Augustine. 

"  In  that  case  we  may  suppose  that  the  efforts  and  energies  of 
the  churches,  instead  of  to  these  rites  and  forms,  would  have  been 
mainly  directed  to  the  rigid  training  of  the  human  mind  iii  obedi- 
ence to  all  the  physical,  domestic,  social,  and  moral  laws  of  the 
Creator. 

"Instead  of  instituting  two  standards  of  right  and  wrong,  the 
'  common '  and  the  '  evangelical,'  as  is  now  so  generally  done,  children 
would  have  been  taught  that  all  that  was  just,  honorable,  benevo- 
lent, and  lovely  in  their  feelings  and  conduct  was  as  acceptable  and 
right  to  God  as  it  is  to  men.  Their  parents,  instead  of  that  sense 
of  helpless  inability  resulting  from  the  belief  that  their  little  ones 
could  feel  and  do  nothing  but  sin  until  new  mental  powers  were 
given,  and  that  the  gift  was  bestowed  by  the  rule  of  sovereign 
*  election,'  would  have  felt  that  every  successful  effort  to  cuMvate  all 
lovely  and  right  habits  and  feelings  was  advancing  their  offspring 
noarer  to  God  and  their  heavenly  home,  and  that,  when  their  wis- 
dom failed,  the  promise  of  « the  Comforter '  was  given  to  encourage 
them  in  this  great  work." — pp.  310,  311. 

But  the  theory  of  Augustine,  by  monarchial  and 
military  power,  prevailed.  And  here  it  is  worthy  of 
observation,  that  while,  as  noted  by  Miss  Beecher, 
the  Eastern  or  Asiatic  Councils,  covering  the  region 
which  was  the  compass  of  Jesus'  personal  ministry, 
and  that  of  most  of  his  apostles,  sustained  the  Uni- 
versalist  Pelagius,  Augustine  enlisted  the  power  of 
the  arbitrary  governments  of  Europe,  as  if  there  was 
a  marital  affinity  between  the  spirit  of  those  govern- 
ments and  that  of  the  espoused  theology. 

One  purpose  in  the  introduction  of  these  facts  and 


90  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

reflections  here,  is,  to  prepare  the  minds  of  our  read- 
ers to  see  our  respected  friend  of  the  Augustinian 
side  in  this  discussion,  assume  that  certain  Scripture 
passages  refer  to  future  endless  punishment,  as  a 
matter  of  course.  For  when  this  doctrine  was  estab- 
lished by  the  powers  that  ivere,  the  ingenuity  of  the 
tacticians  was  expert  in  reading  at  it  all  the  Scripture 
records  of  legal  penalties,  denunciations  and  judg- 
ments :  and  great  and  good  men,  in  the  Orthodox 
line  of  reading  from  childhood,  read  such  Scriptures 
along  in  the  same  line  with  no  dishonorable  intention. 
But  more  of  this  in  a  future  chapter,  where  it  is 
directly  called  up  by  the  Doctor. 

From  these  preliminary  observations,  we  proceed 
to  a  particular  notice  of  two  or  three  things  in  our 
learned  friend's 

"  INTRODUCTORY      REMARKS." 

Of  the  two  or  three  things  referred  to,  which  we 
must  notice  before  proceeding  to  the  "  SCRIPTURAL 
ARGUMENT,"  the  following  is  worthy  of  very  serious 
attention. 


4. 


The  most  of  those  who  believe  in  future,  endless  punishment 
have  far  more  peace  of  mind  with  regard  to  it  than  they  appear  to 
have  who  deny  it ;  for  with  evangelical  believers  it  sinks  into  its 
just  proportion  in  the  universal  government  of  God,  as  the  State's 
Prison,  Court  of  law,  and  Officers  of  Justice,  blend,  like  the  tonic 
element  of  iron  in  the  blood,  into  the  life  of  a  commonwealth  with 
its  virtuous  and  happy  homes,  its  hundreds  of  thousands  of  joyous 
children,  its  churches,  its  products,  its  whole  prosperous  tide  of 
affairs." 

The  frame  of  mind  and  feeling  designed  to  be  ex- 
hibited in  this  remarkable  paragraph,  must  have  cost 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  9J 

the  heart  of  its  benevolent  author  a  severe  prepara- 
tory discipline.  Of  course  he  had  a  purpose  in  pre- 
senting this  expression  of  it  in  his  Introductory 
Remarks.  He  writes  nothing  without  a  purpose. 
And  if  his  design  was  to  produce  such  an  influence 
upon  the  minds  of  our  readers  as  to  predispose  them 
to  receive  his  Scriptural  Arguments  for  the  doctrine 
in  question  with  less  scrunity,  it  is  worthy  of  some 
reasonable  labor  here,  on  our  part,  to  counteract  that 
unwholesome  influence,  and  prepare  the  minds  of  the 
people  to  approach  the  whole  subject  as  unbiased  and 
scrutinizing  judges,  settling  every  question  upon  its 
own  merits. 

There  is  a  question  suggested  by  the  foregoing 
paragraph,  which  we  feel  called  upon  to  notice  in 
various  bearings. 

Is  this  a  truthful  representation  of  the  "just propor- 
tion" which  the  doctrine  in  question  bears,  or  of  its 
relative  importance,  in  the  whole  system  of  this  world? 
We  strongly  suspect  that  the  benevolent  feelings  of 
the  Doctor  have  urged  him  to  an  effort  at  harmoniz- 
ing his  moral  susceptibilities  with  his  theology,  or 
his  theology  with  those  susceptibilities,  by  which  he 
has  unwittingly  deceived  himself.  In  no  point  of 
view  do  his  analogies  hold  good. 

1.  As  it  respects  the  spirit  and  manner  of  the 
inflictions,  the  difference  is  infinite.  "  The  State's 
Prison"  removes  the  offender  from  the  midst  of 
society,  for  the  protection  of  society,  and  his 
restraint  and  safe  keeping.  But  when  he  is  there 
the  "  Officers  of  Justice  "  manifest  to  him  their  sym- 


92  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

pathies,  and  afford  him  every  comfort  which  they 
are  able  to  bestow.  They  make  his  apartment  as 
pleasant  and  healthful  as  may  be,  in  temperature,  his 
labor  reasonable,  his  clothing  comfortable,  his  food 
nourishing  and  wholesome,  and  his  whole  treatment 
humane  and  conciliating.  And  so  far  from  their 
taking  pains  to  prevent  reformation  by  excluding  all 
means  toward  it,  appropriate  means  are  assiduously 
employed  to  enlighten  the  mind  and  improve  the 
heart.  Among  these  means  are  religious  books, 
kindly  conversation,  the  Sunday  School,  and  the 
services  in  general  of  a  pious  and  loving  Chaplain. 
Such  is  the  State's  Prison,  in  connection  with  the 
agencies  of  Officers  of  Justice. 

But  how  is  it  with  our  learned  friend's  future,  end- 
less punishment  ?  '  Turn  over  to  his  vivid  description 
of  it  in  his  "  Scriptural  Argument "  numbered  I.  In 
opposition  to  the  idea  held  by  some  believers  in  the 
eternity  of  punishment,  that  the  instrument  of  pun- 
ishment shall  be  their  own  conscience  only,  he 
says,— 

"  So  that  however  terrible  and  bitter  the  condition  of  the  sinner 
might  be  at  first,  it  is  not  inconceivaole  that  he  should  at  last  say, 
with  Satan  in  Paradise  Lost, — 'Hail !  horrors,  hail !  and  thou  pro- 
foundest  hell ! '  if  God  would  but  depart  from  him.  Sinking  into 
a  torpid,  brutish  state,  or  rousing  themselves  into  defiant  forms  of 
hatred  and  blasphemy,  occupying  themselves  with  plots  and  coun- 
ter plots  in  their  strife  with  each  other,  the  wicked  in  hell,  like  the 
bad  or  abandoned  people  here,  might  make  their  condition  tolerable. 
....  If,  therefore,  there  is  to  be,  in  the  strict  sense  of  he  term, 
punishment  after  death,  it  would  seem  that  there  must  in  the  na- 
cure  of  things,  be  visitations  upon  the  wicked  of  that  which  the 
Bible  calls  '  indignation  and  wrath,  tribulation  and  anguish.' 


REPLY  TO  DR.    ADAMS.  93 

While  there  must  be  in  the  sinner  himself  a  state  of  things  which 
will  make  these  inflictions  punishments,  there  must  also  be  a  mighty 
hand  stretched  out  forever  to  make  the  future  condition  of  the 
wicked  one  of  retribution.  There  is  both  error  and  truth  in  the 
common  saying  with  many  that  future  misery  will  proceed  from 
conscience  ; —  error,  if  it  be  supposed  that  conscience  left  to  itself 
will  occasion  torment ;  for  if  in  this  world  with  so  much  to  stimulate 
conscience,  it  so  easily  falls  asleep,  the  provocations,  and  the  ne- 
cessity of  self-defence,  and  redress,  and  all  the  bad  influences  of 
hell,  must  have  the  power  to  totally  sear  it ; —  but  there  is  truth  in 
the  saying,  if  it  be  allowed  that  God  is  to  visit  the  wicked  in  ways 
that  will  excite  conscience  against  them  ;  this  would  be  "  inflic- 
tion," compared  with  which  fire  and  brimstone,  though  the  most 
appalling  images  of  torture,  we  can  easily  conceive  do  not  convey 
more  terrible  ideas  of  retribution." 

In  this  style  our  friend  proceeds  at  considerable 
length  to  exhibit  and  elucidate  his  views  of  the 
miseries  of  hell,  as  being,  in  great  part,  positive  in- 
flictions by  the  hand  of  God  We  stop  not  to  raise 
questions  here  as  to  the  correctness  of  his  applica- 
tion of  the  Scriptures  he  quotes  in  this  connection,  to 
future  punishment.  This  will  be  attended  to  when 
we  reach  that  point  of  his  argument  in  our  review. 
Our  present  aim  is  to  bring  his  subsequent  descrip- 
tion of  this  assumed  punishment  into  one  connected 
view  with  the  representation  of  it  given  in  his  Intro- 
ductory Remarks.  If  the  Christian  people  of  Charles- 
town,  while  going  to  and  from  their  business  from 
day  to  day,  and  to  and  from  the  house  of  God  on 
Sabbath  morning,  noon  and  night,  should  hear  the 
voices  of  wailing,  and  the  screeches  of  anguish  from 
the  State's  Prison,  and  on  inquiry  find  that  the  officers 
of  the  prison,  lest  the  prisoners  should  relapse  into 
insensibility  to  their  unhappy  state,  were  employing 


94  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

most  of  their  time  in  jeering  at  their  degradation, 
and  stirring  them  up  to  a  sense  of  their  wretchedness 
by  positive  and  outward  inflictions,  by  racks,  pincers, 
goads,  nettles,  scalds  and  burns, — every  feeling  of 
humanity  would  be  outraged,  the  whole  city  would 
be  up  in  arms,  and  the  whole  State,  as  the  news 
should  spread,  and  hurl  those  fiends  from  their  posts 
of  dishonored  power.  But  our  friend  represents  that 
the  infinite  Jehovah  will  shut  out  millions  of  his 
dependent  creatures,  finally,  from  all  beauty,  light 
and  good,  and,  lest  their  habitual  gloom  and  wretch- 
edness should  conduce  to  their  insensibility,  he  will 
then  employ  his  great  power  in  positive  inflictions  of 
pain,  and  stirring  up  and  exciting  their  anguish,  that, 
through  endless  ages,  they  may  roll  and  writhe  in 
ceaseless  living  torment.  He  will  say,  if  this  is  God's 
truth  we  must  believe  it  whether  it  comports  with 
our  moral  consciousness  of  honor  and  right  or  not. 
But  this  is  not  now  the  question.  We  will  give 
sober  attention  to  that  by  and  by.  We  are  now 
showing  that  the  Doctor's  Argument  does  not  make 
any  such  tame  and  comfortable  thing  of  endless  pun- 
ishment, as  a  subject  of  faith  and  reflection,  as  his 
Introduction  would  have  it.  It  occupies,  in  its  spirit 
and  manner,  no  such  relative  proportion  in  the  sys- 
tem of  the  world,  as  prisons  and  officers  of  justice 
occupy  in  relation  to  all  the  enterprise  and  good  of 
the  Commonwealth. 

2.  And  then,  in  respect  to  extent,  or  numerical 
proportion,  the  representation  in  the  Introduction  is 
infinitely  wide  of  the  reality.  The  tenants  of  the 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  95 

State's  Prison,  and  of  all  the  penitentiaries,  compose 
but  a  very  small  fraction  of  all  the  population  of  the 
State.  But  according  to  the  theory  of  our  friend 
and  those  whom  he  calls  "evangelical  Christians/' 
the  tenants  and  heirs  of  hell  are  the  mass  of  mankind. 
The  absence  from  amongst  them  of  the  few  heirs  of 
heaven  will  hardly  make  a  perceptible  difference  of 
the  bulk  of  the  great  whole,  more  than  the  absence  of 
the  prison  tenants  makes  of  the  whole  community  of 
our  State.  Of  the  eight  hundred  millions  of  living 
people  on  our  globe,  a  great  majority  are  heathen, 
none  of  whom,  except  the  little  handful  converted  by 
the  Missionaries,  will  be  saved.  Our  friend's  theory 
as  presented  by  himself,  admits  of  no  hope  for  them. 
In  his  tract  on  Instantaneous  Conversion,  entitled 
"  Truths  for  the  Times,  Number  Two/'  he  employs 
the  following  phraseology : — "  A  man  may  be  the 
most  perfect  of  moralists,  and  if  this  be  all  he  will 
yet  fail  to  be  saved ;  because  God  has  not  appointed 
morality  to  be  the  ground  of  justification."  (p.  21.) 
"  If  the  Saviour  be,  to  some,  Supreme  God,  but  to 
others  only  '  the  young  man  of  Nazareth  /  or  if  he  be 
to  some  an  atoning  sacrifice  for  sin,  and  to  others 
only  an  efflorescence  of  human  perfectibility ;  and 
again,  if  he  be  to  us  One  who  was  '  with  God/  as  well 
as  '  God/  and  to  others  merely  a  superhuman  testi 
mony  of  divine  love,  a  created  being  greatly  endow- 
ed,— our  views  and  feelings  on  religious  subjects  will 
totally  differ  in  things  esteemed  by  some  to  be  essen- 
tial to  salvation."  (p.  2.)  Here  it  will  be  observed 
that  he  speaks  expressly  of  things  esteemed  by  some, 


96  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

himself  included  of  course,  as  essential  to  salvation. 
And  of  fhese  things  is  the  belief  in  Jesus  as  Supreme 
God,  and  as  an  atoning,  meaning  a  vicarious  sacrifice 
for  sin.  Again  Ire  says,  "  To  begin  and  be  good  is 
not  the  divinely  appointed  method  of  being  saved, 
but  to  be  'justified'  from  our  sins  by  exercising 
faith  in  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ  as  a  satis- 
faction to  divine  justice.,  and  thus  to  receive,  by  the 
grace  of  God,  a  change  of  nature.'7 

The  substance  of  all  this,  and  that  whole  tract,  is, 
that  there  is  no  possible  way  by  which  men  can  be 
saved,  by  which  he  means 

"T  escape  from  hell  and  fly  to  heaven," 

but  by  having  wrought  in  them  a  preternatural 
change  of  nature  by  the  immediate  agency  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  accompanied  by  the  trmitarian  belief  in 
the  proper  Deity  of  Christ,  and  his  vicarious  suffer- 
ings in  the  way  of  satisfying  the  demands  of  justice 
upon  the  chosen  ones.  And  this  excludes,  of  course, 
all  the  heathen ;  and  it  excludes  also  more  than  •nine- 
teen-twentieths,  perhaps  ninety-nine  hundredths  of 
the  population  of  nominal  Christendom.  The  great 
mass  of  good  citizens  whom  the  Doctor  meets  when 
be  walks  abroad,  and  with  whom  he  holds  business 
and  social  intercourse,  are,  according  to  his  theory, 
heirs  of  hell.  And,  unlike  the  penitentiary  abode  of 
a  very  few  for  a  brief  space  of  time  where  they  have 
administered  to  them  sympathy  and  kindness  and 
comfort,  that  dire  abode  of  the  mass  of  mankind  for 
eternity  has  the  Dragon  and  his  angels  appointed  as 
God's  agents  in  the  work  of  torturous  inflictions,  and 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  97 

in  the  lead  of  all,  God  himself  will  be  eternally  em- 
ployed in  sharpening  up  their  pains  ! 

How,  then,  in  view  of  this  theory  of  future  endless 
punishment,  involved  in  his  "Argument ):  before  us, 
and  his  other  publications,  can  our  friend  command 
his  feelings  so  as  to  profess  so  comfortable  a  "  peace 
of  mind  with  regard  to  it,"  insomuch  that  it  sinks 
into  a  proportion  in  relation  to  the  whole  race  and 
their  destiny,  like  that  of  courts  and  prisons  in  rela- 
tion to  the  population  and  interests  of  the  State  ? 
Some  may  uncharitably  suggest  that  his  theology  has 
hardened  his  heart  and  calloused  his  moral  feelings. 
But  it  is  not  so.  All  who  know  him  will  cheerfully 
accord  to  his  claim  where  he  says  in  his  "Argument" 
before  us,  X<>.  VII,  "I  am  not  cruel."  As  we  said 
before,  tho  frame  of  mind  and  feeling  designed  to  be 
exhibited  in  the  remarkable  paragraph  we  have  been 
criticising,  must  have  cost  the  heart  of  its  benevolent 
author  a  severe  preparatory  discipline.  And  wo 
think  that,  instead  of  his  success  in  soothing  himself 
into  this  idea  of  satisfaction  and  rest  resulting  from 
hardness,  it  implies  an  undercurrent  from  the  force 
of  his  Christian  feelings,  bringing  in,  unconsciously 
to  his  intellect,  a  secret  heart-hope  of  better  things. 

3.  But  there  are,  and  have  been,  many  of  the 
greatest  and  noblest  minds,  in  the  educated  faith  of 
endless  punishment,  who  were  unable  to  pathetize 
themselves  into  so  comfortable  a  frame  in  relation 
to  it. 

m 

The  pious  and  eloquent  Saurin,  having  been  por- 
9 


98  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

fraying  the  horrors  of  endless  damnation,  broke  forth 
in  the  following  affecting  strain  : 

"I  sink  !  I  sink  under  the  awful  weight  of  my  subject;  and  I 
declare,  when  I  see  my  friends,  my  relations,  the  people  of  my 
charge,  this  whole  congregation ;  when  I  think  that  I,  that  you, 

that  we  are  all  threatened  with  these  torments ;  when  I  see  in  the 

* 

lukewarmness  of  my  devotions,  in  the  languor  of  my  love,  in  the 
levity  of  my  resolutions  and  designs,  the  least  evidence,  though  it 
be  only  presumptive,  of  my  future  misery,  yet  I  find  in  the  thought 
a  mortal  poison,  which  diffuseth  itself  into  every  period  of  my  life, 
rendering  society  tiresome,  nourishment  insipid,  pleasure  disgust- 
ful, and  life  itself  a  cruel  bitter.  I  CEASE  TO  WONDER  THAT  THE 

FEAR  OF  HELL  HATH  MADE  SOME  MAD  AND  OTHERS  MELANCHOLY." 

Kev.  Albert  Barnes,  D.  D.,  one  of  the  most  talented 
and  popular  living  Orthodox  divines  in  our  own 
country,  thus  ingenuously  confesses  his  deep  anguish 
of  spirit  from  the  legitimate  irxfluence  of  the  doctrine 
in  question : 

"  That  the  immortal  mind  should  be  allowed  to  jeopard  its  infi- 
nite welfare,  and  that  trifles  should  be  allowed  to  draw  it  away  from 
God,  and  virtue,  and  heaven;  that  any  should  suffer  forever  —  lin- 
gering on  in  hopeless  despair,  and  rolling  amidst  infinite  torments 
without  the  possibility  of  alleviation  and  without  end  ; —  that  since 
God  can  save  men,  and  will  save  a  part,  he  has  not  purposed  to 
save  all ,  —  that  on  the  supposition  that  the  atonement  is  ample, 
and  that  the  blood  of  Christ  can  cleanse  from  all  and  every  sin,  it 
is  not  in  fact  applied  to  all ; — that,  in  a  word,  a  God,  who  claims 
to  be  worthy  of  the  confidence  of  the  universe,  and  to  be  a  Being 
of  infinite  benevolence,  should  make  such  a  world  as  this  —  full  of 
sinners  and  sufferers;  and  that  when  an  atonement  had  been  made, 
he  did  not  save  all  the  race,  and  put  an  end  to  sin  and  woe  forever. 
....  I  have  read,  to  some  extent,  what  wise  and  good  men  have 
written.  I  have  looked  at  their  theories  and  explanations.  I  have 
endeavored  to  weigh  their  arguments  —  for  my  whole  soul  pants 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  99 

for  light  and  relief  on  these  questions.  But  I  get  neither  ;  and  in  the 
distress  and  anguish  of  my  own  spirit,  I  confess  that  I  see  no  light 
whatever.  I  see  not  one  ray  to  disclose  to  me  the  reason  why  sin 
came  into  the  world  ;  why  the  earth  is  strewed  with  the  dying  and 
dead,  and  why  man  must  suffer  to  all  eternity.  I  have  never  seen 
a  particle  of  light  thrown  on  these  subjects  that  has  given  a  mo- 
ment's ease  to  my  tortured  mind,  nor  have  I  an  explanation  to  offer, 
or  a  thought  to  suggest,  which  would  be  of  relief  to  you.  I  trust 
other  men  —  as  they  profess  to  do  —  understand  this  better  than  I 
do,  and  that  they  have  not  the  ANGUISH  OF  SPIRIT  which  I  have  ; 
but  I  confess,  when  I  look  on  a  worlU  of  sinners  and  sufferers  ; 
upon  death-beds  and  grave-yards  ;  upon  the  world  of  woe  filled 
with  hosts  to  suffer  forever;  when  I  see  my  friends,  my  parents,  my 
family,  my  people,  my  fellow-citizens  —  when  I  look  upon  a  whole 
race,  all  involved  in  this  sin  and  danger,  and  when  I  see  the  great 
mass  of  them  wholly  unconcerned,  and  when  I  feel  that  God  can 
only  save  them,  and  yet  he  does  not  do  it,  I  am  struck  dumb.  It 
is  all  dark  —  dark  —  dark  to  my  soul  —  and  I  cannot  disguise  it.  — 
Barnes'  Prac.  Sermons"  pp.  123  — 


Professor  Stuart,  than  whom  the  Orthodox  church 
can  boast  none  more  profoundly  learned  and  univer- 
sally beloved,  exposed  his  fine  moral  feelings  in 
relation  to  this  subject  in  a  manner  which  honors  the 
man.  We  transfer  to  this  article  the  following  ex- 
tract of  the  Biblical  licjwsitory,  from  the  Christian 
Freeman  of  Dec.  27th,  1850,  with  the  editorial  re- 
marks which  we  then  made  when  the  venerable  Pro- 
fessor was  in  the  active  service  of  life. 

"  Speaking  of  the  fact  that  a  great  many  preachers 
and  laymen  in  the  Orthodox  churches  have  a  secret 
belief  in  Universalism,  the  reasons  of  it  the  Professor 
gives  in  the  following  language  :- 

"  There  are  minds  of  a  very  serious  cast,  and  prone  to  reasoning 
and  inquiry,  that  have  in  some  way  come  into  such  a  state,  that 

9* 


100  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

doubt  on  the  subject  of  endless  punishment  cannot  without  the 
greatest  difficulty,  be  removed  from  them. 

"  They  commence  their  doubts,  it  is  probable,  with  some  a  priori 
reasoning  on  this  subject.  God  is  good.  His  tender  mercy  is  over 
all  the  works  of  his  hands.  He  has  no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  the 
sinner.  He  has  power  to  prevent  it.  He  knew,  before  he  created 
man,  and  made  him  a  free  agent,  that  he  would  sin.  In  certain 
prospect  of  his  endless  misery,  therefore  his  benevolence  would 
have  prevented  the  bringing  of  him  into  existence.  No  father  can 
bear  to  see  his  own  children  miserable  without  end,  not  even  when 
they  have  been  ungrateful  and  rebellious  ;  and  God  our  heavenly 
Father,  loves  us  better  than  any  earthly  parent  does  or  can  love 
his  children. 

"  Besides,  our  sins  are  temporary  and  finite ;  for  they  are  com- 
mitted by  temporary  and  finite  beings,  and  in  a  world  filled  with 
enticements  both  from  without  and  within.  It  is  perfectly  easy  for 
Omnipotence  to  limit,  yea,  to  prevent,  any  mischief  which  sin  can 
do  ;  so  that  the  eiidlesss  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  unnecessary, 
in  order  to  maintain  the  Divine  government,  and  keep  it  upon  a 
solid  basis.  Above  all,  a  punishment  without  end,  for  the  sins  of  a 
few  days  or  hours,  is  a  proportion  of  misery  incompatible  with  jus- 
tice as  well  as  mercy.  And  how  can  this  be  any  longer  necessary, 
when  Christ  has  made  atonement  for  sin  and  brought  in  everlast- 
ing redemption  from  its  penalty  ? 

"  The  social  sympathies,  too,  of  some  men  are  often  deeply  con- 
cerned with  the  formation  of  their  religious  opinions.  They  have 
lost  a  near  and  dear  friend  and  relative  by  death,  one  who  never 
made  any  profession  of  religion,  or  gave  good  reason  to  suppose 
that  his  mind  was  particularly  occupied  with  it.  What  will  they 
think  of  his  case  ?  Can  they  believe  that  one  so  dear  to  them  has 
become  eternally  wretched  —  an  outcast  forever  from  God?  Can 
they  endure  the  thought  that  they  are  never  to  see  or  associate 
with  him  any  more  ?  Can  heaven  itself  be  a  place  of  happiness  for 
them,  while  they  are  conscious  that  a  husband,  or  a  wife,  or  a  son, 
or  a  daughter,  a  brother  or  sister,  is  plunged  into  a  lake  of  fire 
from  which  there  is  no  escape  ?  '  It  is  impossible,'  they  aver,  '  to 
overcome  such  sympathies  as  these.  It  would  be  unnatural  and 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  101 

even  monstrous  to  suppress  them.'  They  are,  therefore,  as  they 
view  the  case,  constrained  to  doubt  whether  the  miseries  of  a  fu- 
ture world  can  be  endless. 

"  If  there  are  any  whose  breasts  are  strangers  to  such  difficul- 
ties as  these,  they  are  to  be  congratulated  on  having  made  attain- 
ments almost  beyond  the  reach  of  humanity  in  the  present  world  ; 
or  else  to  be  pitied  for  ignorance,  or  the  want  of  a  sympathy  which 
seems  to  be  among  the  first  elements  of  our  social  nature.  With 
the  great  mass  of  thinking  Christians,  I  am  sure  such  thoughts  as 
these  must,  unhappily  for  them,  be  acquaintances  too  familiar. 
That  they  agitate  our  breasts  as  storms  do  the  mighty  deep,  will  be 
testified  by  every  man  of  a  tender  heart,  and  who  has  a  deep  con- 
cern in  the  present  and  future  welfare  of  those  whom  he  loves. 

"  It  would  seem  to  be  from  such  considerations,  and  the  like  of 
these,  that  a  belief  in  the  future  repentance  and  recovery  of  sin- 
ners has  become  so  wide-spread  in  Germany,  pervading  even  the 
ranks  of  those  who  are  regarded  as  serious  and  evangelical  men  in 
respect  to  most  or  all  of  what  is  called  Orthodox  doctrine  saving 
the  point  before  us.  Such  was  the  case,  also,  with  some  of  the  an- 
cient fathers ;  and  such  is  doubtless  the  case  with  not  a  few  of  our 
day." 

We  agree  with  the  Professor,  of  course,  that  all 
good  men,  who  reflect  at  all,  must  be  conscious  of 
the  thoughts  and  feelings  above  expressed,  and  that 
by  these  feelings  many  are  led  to  hope  for  the  ulti- 
mate salvation  of  all  men.  And  many  more  are  led 
by  it  to  such  a  candid  and  earnest  search  of  the 
Scriptures,  as  discovers  to  their  view  this  hope,  clear 
as  noon-day,  everywhere  taught  in  the  word  of  God. 
And  we  are  confident  that  Prof.  Stuart  himself,  if  it 
were  not  for  the  embarrassing  influence  of  his  official 
name  and  station,  would  see  this  hope,  so  consonant 
with  all  his  Christian  prayers  and  sympathies,  and 
sense  of  justice ,  to  be  the  conspicuous  revelation  of 
the  gospel. 


102  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

4.  And  not  only  have  a  great  many  of  the  great- 
est and  best  of  men  felt  the  crushing  weight  of  the 
doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  in  its  irreconcilable 
warfare  against  their  moral  sense  and  social  sympa- 
thies, but  not  a  few  such  have  found  it  the  destroyer 
of  their  peace  in  life  by  the  uncertainty  in  which  it 
involves  their  own  case.  Believing  that  their  eternal 
all,  for  happiness  or  woe  irreversible,  is  to  be  deter- 
mined at  a  given  day,  by  a  jealous  king  and  inexora- 
ble judge  whose  rule  of  government  is  his  own  glory 
and  not  the  good  of  his  creatures,  (as  if  he  might 
have  a  glory  in  opposition  to  the  interest  of  his  cre- 
ation,) and  believing  that  the  final  decision  is  to  be 
based  upon  the  discernment,  by  his- all-searching 
eye,  of  a  nicely  balanced  model  of  Orthodox  belief 
and  experience,  their  modest  self-distrust  shrinks  and 
quails,  and  their  lives  are  distressed  with  harassing 
fears. 

An  interesting  and  instructive  example  of  this  un- 
happy influence  of  the  doctrine  in  question,  is  fur- 
nished in  the  case  of  Miss  Catherine  Beecher,  before 
quoted,  as  drawn  by  herself  in  her  "  Common  Sense 
Applied  to  Religion."  It  will  be  borne  in  mind 
that  she  is  a  lady  of  the  first  order  of  intellectual 
ability,  and  literary  culture,  and  of  fine  moral  mould ; 
and  that  she  was  religiously  educated  from  the 
cradle  by  one  of  the  most  faithful  and  pious  fathers, 
and  eminent  Doctors  of  the  Divinity  under  discussion. 
She  says  : 

"  In  the  earlier  periods  of  my  religious  train,  my  parents,  in  their 
instructions,  and  also  my  little  hymns  and  catechisms,  made  the 
impression  that  God  loved  little  children,  and,  though  he  -was  an- 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  103 

gry  when  they  did  wrong,  he  was  pleased  when  they  did  right ;  and 
as  parental  government  was  tender  and  loving,  my  impression  of 
the  feelings  of  the  heavenly  Parent  were  conformed  to  this,  my 
past  experience. 

"  But  when,  in  more  mature  years,  I  came  under  the  influence 
of  '  revival  preaching,'  all  this  impression  seemed  to  be  reversed. 
I  was  taught  to  look  at  God  as  a  great  '  moral  governor,'  whose 
chief  interest  was  '  to  sustain  his  law.'  Then  there  seemed  to  be 
two  kinds  of  right  and  wrong,  the  '  common  '  and  the  '  evangelical.' 
According  to  this  distinction,  I  could  not  feel  or  do  any  thing  that 
was  right  or  acceptable  to  God  till  my  birth-gift  of  a  depraved 
heart  was  renewed  by  a  special  divine  interposition. 

"  Meantime,  there  did  not  seem  to  be  any  direct  and  practical 
way  of  securing  this  supernatural  interference  ;  for  it  was  to  be 
the  result,  not  of  any  efforts  of  mine,  nor  were  any  divine  promises 
or  encouragements  offered  to  secure  my  efforts.  On  the  contrary, 
the  selection  of  the  recipients  of  this  favor  was  regulated  by  a  di- 
vine decree  of  '  election,'  without  reference  to  any  acts  of  a  being 
who  did  nothing  but  evil,  and  only  evil,  till  this  favor  was  bestowed. 
Moreover,  all  the  exhortations  to  effort  were  based  simply  on  the 
fact  that,  ordinarily,  those  who  took  a  certain  course  were  selected, 
though  I  perceived  that  sometimes  those  who  did  the  least  were 
chosen,  while  those  who  did  the  most  were  passed  by. 

"  It  was  this  view  of  the  case  that  had  the  chief  influence  in  lead- 
ing to  an  entire  neglect  of  all  religious  concerns.  It  was  so  nearly 
like  a  matter  of  mere  chance,  and  there  seemed  so  little  adaptation 
of  means  to  ends,  that,  to  one  so  hopeful,  and,  at  the  same  time, 
so  practical,  there  was  very  little  motive  of  any  kind  to  lead  to  a 

religious  life." — pp.  16 — 18. 

*********** 

"  At  twenty  that  betrothal  took  place,  so  soon  and  so  fatally 
ended  !  It  was  the  realization  of  all  my  favorite  dreams  of  earthly 
bliss.  Affection,  taste,  ambition,  every  thing  most  desirable  to 
me  and  to  family,  friends,  seemed  secured.  In  a  few  months  all 
was  ended,  and  in  the  most  terrible  and  heart-rending  manner. 

"  After  the  first  stunning  effect  was  over,  the  next  feeling  was, 
«  This  is  that  indispensable  sorrow.  This  is  to  save  me  from  eter- 
nal death  / '  And  so,  as  soon  as  I  could  do  any  thing,  I  began  a 


104  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

course  of  religious  reading,  prayer,  and  mental  conflict.  I  tried  to 
remedy  that  pernicious  mental  habit  of  reverie  and  castle  building ; 
I  tried  to  do  I  know  not  what  in  '  becoming  a  Christian.' 

"  Shut  up  in  entire  seclusion,  all  my  dearest  hopes  forever 
crushed,  without  hope  or  object  in  life,  overwhelmed  with  grief, 
horrified  less  at  his  dreadful  death  than  at  the  awful  apprehensions 
he  himself  had  imparted  that  he  was  unprepared  to  die,  I  spent 
week  after  week  in  reading  the  stern  and  powerful  writings  of 
President  Edwards,  Dwight's  System  of  Theology,  and  other  similar 
works.  I  hoped  for  nothing,  cared  for  nothing  but  to  become  a 
Christian.  Yet  no  one  could  tell  me  intelligibly  how  to  do  it, 
•while  it  was  clear  that  all  expected  nothing  from  my  efforts,  and 
that  all  was  dependent  on  a  divine  efflatus  that  was  to  change  the 
birth-gift  of  a  depraved  heart. 

"  Next,  I  went  to  visit  the  parents  of  the  friend  I  had  lost. 
Here  I  read  his  private  records  of  years  of  almost  superhuman  ef- 
fort to  govern  his  mind,  and  to  achieve  the  very  thing  I  was  labor- 
ing for,  and  yet  to  his  mind,  all  ended  in  entire  failure  ;  and  this, 
too,  without  any  murmuring,  or  any  accusation  of  any  one  but  him- 
self. It  was,  as  he  maintained,  because  he  was  so  ungrateful,  so 
hardened,  so  obstinately  '  unwilling,'  so  averse  from  God  and  his 
service.  And  yet  he  was  the  model  of  every  domestic,  social,  and 
official  virtue  ;  so  reverent  to  God,  so  tender  as  a  son  and  brother, 
so  conscientious  and  faithful  as  an  instructor  !  In  not  a  single  duty 
did  he  fail  that  the  closest  intimacy  could  discover ;  and  yet,  by 
his  own  showing,  he  had  no  love  to  God,  and  was  entirely  'unwill- 
ing '  to  love  and  serve  him. 

"  At  the  same  time,  I  found  his  intelligent,  tender,  heart-broken 
mother,  had  for  years  been  living  just  such  a  conscientious  life, 
without  any  hope  that  she  was  a  Christian,  while  now  her  pride 
and  darling  son  was  lost  to  her  forever  on  earth,  and  oh !  where 
was  he  ?  and  where  should  she  meet  him  at  last  ?  And  thus  she 
died.  The  only  brother  too,  as  conscientious  and  exemplary,  was, 
and  long  continued  in  the  same  position  of  mind."  pp.  xix  —  xxi. 

With  what  perfect  truth  and  naturalness  this  sketch 
of  experience  is  given.  And  the  experience  belongs 
to  the  theory  to  which  it  is  here  ascribed,  as  effect 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  105 

to  cause.  Miss  Catharine  was  discouraged  on  finding 
that  so  many  of  her  dearest  friends,  persons  of  the 
best  culture  and  highest  moral  excellence,  were  in 
her  own  predicament.  They  were  reposing  full  con- 
fidence in  a  theology,  (so  sovereign  was  the  power 
of  education  over  their  minds,)  which  made  them 
totally  corrupt  sinners,  and  heirs  of  hell,  while  they 
were  straining  every  effort  to  be  and  do  right.  And 
the  reason  why  they  could  not  believe  themselves  to 
be  Christians,  wras,  that  their  intellect  and  moral  na- 
ture warred  against  their  theology. 

But  to  return  to  the  experience  of  Miss  Catharine. 
After  speaking,  as  quoted  above,  of  the  astounding 
discovery,  that  so  many  of  her  most  orthodox  and 
cherished  friends  were  cursed  with  the  same  war  of 
the  creed  with  their  moral  nature,  she  continues : — 

"  These  revelations  took  away  all  hope  of  any  good  from  any 
farther  efforts  of  mine.  At  this  period  I  almost  lost  my-  reason. 
For  some  days  I  thought  I  should  go  distracted.  The  first  decided 
'  change  of  mind  '  I  now  recall  was  an  outburst  of  indignation  and 
abhorrence.  I  remember  once  rising,  as  I  was  about  to  offer  my 
usual,  now  hopeless  prayer,  with  a  feeling  very  like  this  ;  that  such  a 
God  did  not  deserve  to  be  loved  ;  that  I  would  not  love  him  if  I 
could,  and  I  was  glad  I  did  not!/ It  was  but  momentary,  and  the 
long  training  of  years  resumcoits  sway. 

"  It  was  at  this  period  that  I  framed  my  first  attempt  at  serious 
argument  in  a  letter  to  my  father.  I  took  this  position,  that  our 
own  experience  and  consciousness  were  the  highest  kind  of  evidence  ' 
cf  our  mental  power,  and  that  I  had  this  evidence  of  our  mental 
inability  to  love  God  as  required.  My  father's  reply  was  published 
in  the  Christian  Spectator,  and  was  regarded  as  masterly  and  un- 
answerable. Its  chief  aim  was  to  lessen  confidence  in  my  own 
consciousness,  and  to  show  that,  as  Gcd  was  just  and  good,  and 


106  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

certainly  did  require  supreme  love  to  him,  we  had  the  power  to 
obey.  I  was  unable  to  meet  the  argument,  and  so  allowed  that  it 
must  be  so,  and  that  all  that  was  in  my  way,  was  my  own  obstinate 
'  unwillingness.'"  pp.  xxi — xxii. 

It  appears  from  this  that  her  father's  treatment  of  the 
subject  was  sophistical  and  arbitrary,  entangling  the 
mind  in  its  snare,  while  the  heart  throbbed  convulsive- 
ly its  moral  protest.  But  she  proceeds  in  a  strain  which 
shows  that  her  reason  was  but  partially  paralyzed  : — 

"  But  there  was  another  point  about  which  I  attempted  to  reason 
that  I  did  not  give  up  so  easily.  According  to  the  theory  of  '  ob- 
stinate unwillingness,'  there  was  nothing  in  the  Bible  by  way  of 
promise,  or  even  encouragement,  for  any  like  me.  For  how  could 
God  feel  sympathy  for  obstinate  rebels,  or  how  make  promises 
of  hope  and  encouragement  to  those  whose  only  difficulty  was 
an  unreasonable  dislike  to  God  and  his  service  ?  Such  texts  as  I 
quoted  to  the  contrary  (as  Prov.  ii.  1 — 5  ;  Matt.  vii.  7  ;  John  iv.10;) 
were  not  for  such  as  I,  but  for  those  already  converted ;  and  no 
prayers  even  were  acceptable  till  offered  by  a  renewed  heart.  So 
it  seemed  impossible  in  any  case,  to  pray  acceptably  to  God  for  the 
greatest  of  all  boons,  redemption  from  the  awful  doom  of  eternal 
death ;  for  at  regeneration  the  blessing  was  already  given,  and 
before  that  act  no  prayer  was  acceptable.  So  there  was  no  place 
for  such  a  prayer.  This  I  never  accepted,  though  I  did  not  quite 
venture  to  oppose  it." 

How  clearly  this  brilliant  paragraph  exposes  the 
perplexity  of  the  orthodox  theory,  associating  the 
duty  to  try,  with  the  utter  inability  to  do.  We  were 
sometimes  almost  distracted,  in  our  childhood,  by  the 
shifting  of  the  ministry  to  which  we  listened,  back- 
ward and  forward,  to  and  from  the  injunction  to  pray 
for  a  new  heart,  and  the  assurance  that,  until  after  we 
should  have  got  a  new  heart  our  very  prayers  would 
be  an  abomination  to  God, and  sink  us  deeper  in  hell. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  107 

While  we  honor  the  motives  of  those  who  labor  to 
propagate  such  a  system  of  theology,  honestly  be- 
lieving it  to  be  true,  we  cannot  but  believe  it  to  be 
unfavorable  in  its  influence  with  regard  to  the  en- 
couragement and  progress  of  the  mass  of  minds  in 
the  pursuit  of  Christian  knowledge  and  the  achieve- 
ment of  Christian  culture. 

We  are  protracting  this  division  of  our  labor  be- 
yond our  first  intention ;  but  our  friend  has  given 
our  mind  an  impulse  in  this  direction,  and  we  desire 
to  have  the  subject  in  these  experimental  and  practi- 
cal bearings  well  understood.  And  to  this  end  we 
will  present  two  or  three  more  specimens  of  the 
influence  of  the  doctrine  of  the  "  Scriptural  Argu- 
ment '  before  us,  to  torture  the  souls  of  great  and 
good  men  with  self-fears,  as  well  as  sympathetic 
anguish. 

The  following  is  a  paragraph  of  a  sermon,  preached 
between  twenty  and  thirty  years  ago,  by  Rev.  Dr. 
Tenny,  of  Weathersfield,  Ct.,  at  the  funeral  of  Dr. 
Austin,  for  many  years  pastor  of  the  elder  Orthodox 

Society  in  Worcester,  Mass. 

• 
"  But  for  the  last  three  or  four  years,  a  thick  and  dark  cloud 

has  hung  over  the  course  and  enveloped  in  dismay  the  mind  of  our 
revered  friend.  He  lost  nearly  all  hope  of  his  own  reconciliation 
to  God  and  interest  in  the  Redeemer.  He  sunk  into  a  settled, 
deep  religious  melancholy,  which  occasionally  appeared  in  parox- 
ysms of  despair  and  horror.  His  bitter  groanings  were,  at  times, 
sufficient  to  wring  with  sympathetic  anguish  the  most  unfeeling 
heart." 

Commenting  on  this  case,  the  Unitarian  Advocate 
for  July,  1831,  says  : — 


108  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

"  Dr.  Austin,  for  a  long  time  before  his  death,  was  in  a  state  lit- 
tle short  of  madness ;  and  we  do  not  see  what  is  to  hinder  that  ef- 
fect in  a  man  who  sincerely  believes  in  endless  misery,  and  ap- 
lies  his  doctrine  to  himself.  The  same  remark  may  be  made  con- 
cerning the  celebrated  Dr.  Bellamy,  well-known  as  an  orthodox 
divine.  Cowper,  the  beautiful  poet,  it  is  well  known,  more  than 
once  attempted  to  destroy  his  life  through  the  influence  of  religious 
melancholy.  i  He  was  led  into  a  deep  consideration  of  his  relig- 
ious state  ;  and  having  imbibed  the  doctrine  of  election  and  repro- 
bation in  its  most  appalling  rigor,  he  was  led  to  a  very  dismal  state 
of  apprehension.  We  are  told  "  that  the  terror  of  eternal  judgment 
overpoivered  and  actually  disordered  his  faculties ;  and  lie  remained 
seven  mojiths  in  a  continual  expectation  of  being  instantly  plunged 
into  eternal  misery" '  Although  he  at  times  recovered  from  this 
dreadful  depression,  he  at  last  sunk  under  it,  being  gradually  worn 
out,  and  he  expired  upon  his  bed." 

But  we  must  rest  our  quotations  on  this  point, 
which  might  be  continued  indefinitely.  Our  purpose 
in  this  department  has  been,  as  before  explained,  to 
set  the  doctrine  in  question  before  the  reader's  mind 
in  its  true  character,  and  in  its  "  just  proportions  " 
as  a  part  of  the  whole  system.  We  do  not  mean  to 
avert  the  Scriptural  Argument,  but  to  prepare  the 
mind  to  come  to  that  argument  in  a  proper  attitude. 
We  would  have  the  reader  see  tha|  there  is  no  such 
beauty  in  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  or  a 
priori  reason  and  probability  of  its  truth,  as  should 
persuade  us  to  employ  forced  constructions  and  ap- 
plications of  Scripture  in  its  support.  Let  us  not 
undertake  to  speak  for  the  Bible,  but  let  the  Bible 
speak  for  itself. 

Our  friend  further  says  in  his  preface : — 

"  While  we  believe  that  the  contemplation  of  future  misery  apart 
from  the  cross  of  Christ  would  be  hurtful  to  the  mind  and  heart,  we 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  109 

also  feel  that  it  cannot  be  of  healthful  tendency  with  our  moral  na- 
tures to  base  our  religious  associations  mainly  on  the  one  idea  of 
opposition  to  endless  punishment." 

This  is  a  creditable  concession,  that  the  contempla- 
tion of  hell;  of  itself,  is  debasing  and  hurtful  in  its 
influence  upon  the  mind  and  heart.  And  even  the 
cross  of  Christ,  as  it  stands  in  the  theory  under  dis- 
cussion, is  a  matter  of  such  dubious  uncertainty  in 
its  relation  to  individuals,  and  will  so  certainly  prove 
to  be  of  no  avail  to  the  mass  of  mankind,  that  it  can 
generally  exert  but  feeble  power  to  divert  the  mind, 
when  it  believes  in  that  future  misery,  from  the  con- 
templation of  it. 

And  here  we  will  be  equally  candid  in  relation  to 
the  last  clause  of  the  above  quoted  paragraph  : — "  We 
also  feel  that  it  cannot  be  of  healthful  tendency  with 
our  moral  natures  to  base  our  religious  associations 
mainly  on  the  one  idea  of  opposition  to  endless 
punishment."  We  sincerely  thank  the  Doctor  for 
this  good  and  true  word.  It  relates  to  those  pre- 
tended Universalists  who  are  merely  anti-orthodox. 
They  are  good  for  nothing — nay,  they  are  worse 
than  nothing,  in  relation  to  our  cause  and  denomina- 
tion. We  have  known  little  societies,  here  and  there 
in  the  country,  thrown  up  into  being  by  the  repulsive 
force  of  the  doctrines  and  manoeuvres  of  the  domi- 
nant sects,  appropriating  to  themselves  the  name 
Universalist : — but  where  this  centrifugal  force  was 
the  only  or  principal  moving  power,  they  have 
been 

"  Like  bubbles  on  the  sea  cf  matter  borne  ; 
They  rise,  they  break,  and  to  that  sea  return." 

10 


110  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

But  Universalism  proper,  is  not  a  mere  system  of 
negations.  It  is  a  living  system  of  positive  principle 
of  faith  and  practice.  Its  mission,  and  that  of  its 
church  and  ministry,  is,  to  win  home  the  alienated 
affections  of  God's  wandering  children  in  faith  and 
love  to  Him  their  Father  through  Jesus  Christ,  and 
to  a  life  of  childlike  trust,  reverential  and  filial  devo- 
tion, and  cheerful  obedience. 

One  thing  more.  Dr.  Adams,  in  his  Introductory 
Remarks,  says : — 

"  I  feel  encouraged  in  this  work  by  the  comparative  regard  which 
many  in  this  denomination  profess  for  the  Bible.  They  do  not  as- 
sail it  as  the  manner  of  some  is  who  differ  from  us  ;  but  their  de- 
sire to  make  it  speak  in  their  favor  secures  for  it  an  acknowledg- 
ment of  its  authority." 

This  ingenuous  testimonial  shows  to  our  friends  that 
we  have  an  honorable  man  to  deal  with  in  this 
discussion.  We  suggest  but  one  amendment  of  the 
above  paragraph,  and  that  is  the  striking  out  of  the 
words  "  many  in,'  which  were  interlined  in  the  Doc- 
tor's manuscript  after  he  wrote  it,  perhaps  thinking 
of  some  names  as  Universalists  philosophically,  who 
are  not  of  our  denomination.  Striking  out  these 
words,  the  paragraph  will  be  a  testimony  to  the 
"  regard  which  this  denomination  profess  for  the 
Bible."  It  is  the  ground  of  our  faith  and  the  man  of 
our  counsel ;  and  we  shall  make  it  our  authoritative 
appeal  as  we  go  with  our  learned  friend,  in  our  suc- 
ceeding numbers,  into  the  SCRIPTURAL  ARGUMENT. 


CHAPTER  I. 

SCRIPTURAL   ARGUMENT   OP    DR.   ADAMS*    FIRST    CLASSIFI- 
CATION,  REVIEWED. 

Dr.  Adams,  in  his  Scriptural  Argument  for  Future, 
Endless  Punishment,  presents  his  whole  case  under 
seven  classifications,  to  each  of  which  we  will  devote 
a  distinct  chapter  in  our  Review.  We  begin  with 
the  following: — 

I.  THE  SCRIPTURES  TEACH  THAT  THERE  IS  A  PENALTY 
FOR  DISOBEDIENCE  AWAITING  THE  FINALLY  IMPENITENT. 

On  the  terms  of  this  general  proposition  we  have  a 
few  remarks  to  offer  before  proceeding  to  his  use  of 
Scripture  in  the  case. 

That  "  the  Scriptures  teach  that  there  is  a  penalty 
for  disobedience,'*  we  most  unreservedly  concede. 
And  it  is  not  enough  to  say  that  we  concede  it; — we 
most  emphatically  affirm  it,  always  and  everywhere. 
And  that  penalty  is  awaiting,  always  awaiting,  the 
transgressor. 

But  the  last  two  words  of  the  above  Proposition, 
finally  impenitent,  require  a  little  criticism.  What 
does  the  Doctor  mean  by  the  finally  impenitent?  If 
he  means  a  class  of  people  who  will  remain  impeni- 


112  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

tent  to  all  eternity,  we  must  remind  him  that  tho 
assumption  that  there  shall  be  such  a  class,  is  beg- 
ging, in  the  outset,  the  whole  question  in  discussion. 
If  any  portion  of  the  human  family  will  remain  end- 
lessly sinful  and  impenitent,  that  portion  of  the 
human  family  will  be  endlessly  miserable,  and  the 
controversy  is  closed.  But  there  is  no  such  thought 
written  in  the  Book, — nor  any  such  phraseology  as 
finally  impenitent. 

Nevertheless,  there  is  a  sense,  and  a  very  good 
sense,  in  which  we  may  say  of  some,  that  they  are 
finally  impenitent.  In  this  admission  we  use  the 
word  finally  in  a  restricted  and  special  sense,  as 
relating  to  a  given  order  of  series.  The  finale  of  a 
tragedy  is  the  termination  of  that  play.  The  finis  of 
a  book  is  the  termination  of  that  particular  work. 
And  every  vicious  course  of  practice,  when  persisted 
in,  has  its  natural  and  legitimate  finale,  its  resulting 
harvest  of  accumulated  evil.  So,  then,  though  the 
devotee  to  any  vicious  habit  is,  by  virtue  of  the 
ever-living  law  and  ever-operative  judgment  of  God, 
a  recipient  from  day  to  day  of  a  punitive  recompense 
of  reward, — even  as  St.  Paul,  in  the  connection  into 
which  we  are  about  to  follow  our  opponent's  quota- 
tion, testifies  of  such  as  "  receiving  in  themselves 
that  recompense  of  their  error  which  was  meet," 
(Rom.  i.  27,)  yet  a  persistence  in  that  habit  produces 
a  condition  of  things  in  his  character,  and  his  circum- 
stances in  various  relations,  which  shall  at  length, 
or  finally, — i.  e.  in  the  result  or  finale  of  this  course 
of  things,  bring  him  signal  disaster.  In  this  sense  we 


REPLY   TO   DR,   ADAMS.  113 

can  speak  of  i\\Q  finally  impenitent, — persons  rushing 
on  in  the  career  of  sin  through  the  full  period  which 
the  nature  and  relations  of  things  will  admit,  to  the 
resulting  calamity.  Or,  to  employ  the  language  of 
Scripture  which  will  come  in  for  particular  exposi- 
tion before  we  close  this  chapter,  such  are  "  treasur- 
ing up  unto  themselves  wrath  against  the  day  of 
wrath  and  revelation  of  the  righteous  judgment  of 
God."  (Rom.  ii.  5.)  It  is  so  in  all  ages,  and  in  all 
cases,  that  a  persistent  course  in  any  criminal  prac- 
tice has  its  legitimate  cycle,  at  a  given  point  of 
which,  by  the  ordinance  of  God,  the  ultimate  must 
come,  and  an  "  awaiting  r  penalty  make  the  climax  of 
a  progressive  series  of  miseries. 

But  does  this  cycle  sweep  into  the  life  immortal, 
and  run  the  round  of  eternity, — the  cycle,  wre  mean, 
of  moral  corruption,  vice  and  misery  ?  This  is  the 
great  question  of  the  present  discussion,  the  affirma- 
tive of  which  is  assumed  by  Dr.  Adams.  And  here 
follows  his  leading  Scriptural  proof : 

"  This  is  plainly  declared  in  Rom.  ii:5 — 12, 16:  '  But  after  thy 
hardness  and  impenitent  heart,  treasurest  up  unto  thyself  wrath 
against  the  day  of  wrath  and  revelation  of  the  righteous  judgment 
of  God  ;  Who  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  deeds  : 
To  them  who  by  patient  continuance  in  well-doing,  seek  for  glory, 
honor,  and  immortality,  eternal  life.  But  unto  them  that  are  con- 
tentious and  do  not  obey  the  truth,  but  obey  unrighteousness,  in- 
dignation 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  per- 
sons with  God.  For  as  many  as  have  sinned  without  law,  shall 
also  perish  without  law ;  and  as  many  as  have  sinned  in  the  law, 


114  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

shall  be  judged  by  the  law, —  In  the  day  when  God  shall  judge  the 
secrets  of  men  by  Jesus  Christ  according  to  my  Gospel.'  The  pa- 
renthetic passages  omitted  here,  which  occur  before  the  last  of  these 
sentences,  are  a  direct  assertion  of  the  full  accountablcness  of  the 
heathen  world  to  the  tribunal  of  God,  for  their  sins  against  their 
consciences  and  the  light  of  nature.  I  take  this  whole  passage  of 
Scripture  as  a  revelation  of  a  future  judgment  and  retribution,  in 
which  all  men  are  to  be  judged  and  treated  according  to  their 
works." 

This,  we  say,  is  the  Doctor's  leading  Scriptural 
proof  j  and  it  is  nearly  the  only  one  offered  to  this 
leading  and  fundamental  Proposition.  The  rest  of 
this  first  division  of  his  "  Scriptural  Argument," 
which  is  his  longest  and  most  labored  division,  is 
chiefly  occupied  in  exposition  of  his  view  of  the  use 
of  metaphors,  and  the  various  species  of  figures  in 
the  Bible,  especially  as  applied  to  punishments, — and 
maintaining  that  they  represent  something  that  is  a 
reality.  In  all  this  he  is  right,  and  we  shall  only 
have  occasion  to  give  it  a  passing  notice  in  its  place, 
and  that  a  notice  of  approval.  He  throws  in,  also,  at 
the  latter  part  of  this  division,  a  few  more  Scripture 
quotations  as  proof  texts,  without  an  attempt  to 
show  them  germain  to  the  question  ;  and  these,  too 
we  will  suitably  examine  in  their  place. 

But  it  is  of  the  first  importance  that,  now  and 
here,  we  faithfully  examine,  and  form  an  enlightened 
and  conclusive  decision,  in  respect  to  this,  the 
Doctor's  opening  Scriptural  argument.  If  he  is 
right  here,  his  work  throughout,  in  the  main,  will 
stand.  If  he  is  wholly  and  utterly  wrong  here,  his 
whole  effort  is  a  failure.  The  reader  will  see,  there- 
fore, that  we  must  not  hurry  over  the  matter  of  this 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  115 

opening  plea  of  the  Doctor,  with  which  the  whole 
must  stand  or  fall. 

By  what  process  does  our  friend  bear  away  the 
above  cited  portion  of  Scripture  to  an  application  to 
events  and  conditions  of  the  future  world?  There  is 
no  visible  process.  He  gives  us  no  manner  of  reason 
for  such  an  application.  It  is  a  magic  leap  in  the 
dark,  and  there  is  no  light  shining  on  the  way.  We 
respectfully  recall  him  to  the  starting  point ;  and  we 
will  endeavor  to  accompany  each  other  in  our  re- 
search for  the  sense  and  application  of  this  section  of 
the  Record. 

And  here,  as  a  preparatory  step  in  this  research, 
let  it  be  distinctly  observed,  that  the  time  of  fulfil- 
ment of  this  Scripture,  is  the  day  of  judgment  by  Jesus 
Christ.  Passing,  for  the  present,  all  between  verses 
6th  and  16th,  we  have  it  thus, — "  Who  will  render  to 
every  man  according  to  his  deeds,  ....  in  the  day 
when  God  shall  judge  the  secrets  of  men  by  Jesus 
Christ,  according  to  my  gospel."  Hence  it  is  the 
next  regular  step  in  this  momentous  research,  to  as- 
certain 

THE    TIME  AND  NATURE  OP  THE  JUDGMENT  OF  CHRIST. 

1st.    Of  the  General  Judgment, — using  the  word 
general  in  opposition  to  special  or  particular. 
2d.    Of  special  or  particular  Judgments. 


116  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 


SECTION  I. 

TJte  Time  and  Nature  of  the  Judgment  of  Christ 
with  reference  to  his  general  or  entire  judicial  adminis- 
tration. 

St.  Paul  says  to  the  Athenians,  (Acts  xvii.  30,  31,) 
"And  the  times  of  this  ignorance  God  winked  at ;  but 
now  commandeth  all  men  every  where  to  repent ; 
because  he  hath  appointed  a  day  in  which  he  will 
judge  the  world  in  righteousness  by  that  man  whom 
he  hath  ordained ;  whereof  he  hath  given  assurance 
unto  all  men,  in  that  he  hath  raised  him  from  tho 
dead." 

When  is  the  day,  appointed  of  God,  and  foreshown 
in  prophesy,  in  which  he  would  judge  the  world  in 
righteousness  by  Jesus  Christ?  Dr.  Adams  may 
assert  one  thing,  and  we  another,  and  a  third  theorist 
yet  another  : — but  none  of  these  assertions  are  of  the 
least  value  to  the  Christian  student  any  farther  than 
they  are  sustained  by  an  intelligible  "  thus  saith 
the  Lord."  If  the  Scriptures  inform  us  on  this  point, 
we  will  receive  their  instruction.  If  not,  we  must 
let  it  pass  as  a  matter  unrevealed  and  unknown.  But 
the  Scriptures  do  give  us  most  clear  and  decisive 
information  on  the  question  in  hand.  Be  patient, 
gentle  reader.  Let  us  be  faithful  Bible  students.  Be 
not  holden  in  chains  of  error  by  the  mere  sound  of 
words  and  phrases  as  toned  by  semi-barbarian  coun- 
cils, and  prolonged  by  reverence  for  ecclesiastical 
authority.  With  all  due  respect  for  human  authori- 
ties, let  us  respect  supremely  the  word  oi  God. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  117 

When  is  the  day  appointed  of  God  and  foretold  by 
the  prophets,  in  which  he  would  judge  the  world  in 
righteousness  by  Jesus  Christ  ?  The  theory  of  our 
learned  friend  assumes  that  it  is  a  day  beyond  the 
close  of  this  mundane  system,  when  all  the  individ- 
uals of  the  human  race,  including  Adam  and  his  latest 
posterity,  shall  be  simultaneously  arraigned  at  the  bar 
of  the  Divine  judgment,  and  receive  sentence  for 
eternity  according  to  character  formed  or  works  done, 
in  the  brief  life  on  earth. 

But  before  we  get  the  concurrent  voice  of  the 
whole  train  of  Bible  testimony  on  the  subject,  the 
very  terms  of  this  passage  itself  repudiate  and  ex- 
plode such  a  use  and  interpretation.  And  so  we  shall 
find  generally,  on  careful  examination,  that  there  is 
that  in  the  very  proof  texts  themselves,  appropriated, 
to  the  support  of  endless  punishment,  which  forbids 
such  an  application.  In  this  case  the  popular  appli- 
cation destroys  the  harmony  of  the  passage  in  the 
bearings  and  relations  of  its  parts.  Paul  had  been 
making  reference  to  the  benighted  and  idolatrous 
condition  and  practices  of  the  Gentiles,  without  a 
supernatural  revelation.  "And  the  times  of  this  ig- 
norance God  winked  at,  (or  suffered  to  remain,  as  the 
same  idea  is  expressed  in  chapter  xiv.  16,  '  Who  in 
times  passed  suffered  all  nations  to  walk  in  their  own 
ways,')  but  now  commandeth  all  men  every  where  to 
repent."  Wky,  now  ?  Why  is  the  ministry  of  re- 
pentance, or  of  a  turn  from  idolatry  to  the  great  and 
good  Father,  sent  out  now,  to  the  nations  who  in 
times  passed  were  suffered  to  walk  in  their  own  ways? 


118  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

The  apostle  proceeds  to  answer: — "  Because  he  hath 
appointed  a  day,  in  which  he  will  judge  the  world 
in  righteousness  by  that  man  whom  he  hath  or- 
dained.7' 

Why  should  this  fact,  the  fact  of  the  approaching 
day  appointed  of  God  for  judgment  by  Jesus  Christ, 
constitute  a  reason  for  sending  the  gospel  ministry  of 
repentance  to  the  Gentile  nations  now,  more  than  in 
the  former  ages?  The  application  of  this  passage  to 
the  "  Orthodox ;:  theory  of  judgment  renders  impos- 
sible an  answer  to  this  question.  How  should  the 
fact,  which  that  theory  assumes,  that  there  is  an  ap- 
pointed future  day  of  Judgment,  which  shall  arraign, 
and  sentence  for  eternity  according  to  works  in  time, 
all  men  of  all  former  as  well  as  present  and  future 
ages,  constitute  a  reason  why  the  gospel  ministry  of 
repentance  should  be  sent  to  "  all  men  every  where" 
now,  more  than  in  former  ages  ?  Will  it  be  said  that 
it  is  because  the  people  of  the  present  and  coming 
ages  are  to  be  amenable  at  that  judgment?  The 
same  is  true,  upon  the  theory  in  question,  of  all  men 
of  the  former  ages.  And  this  theory  makes  nonsense 
of  the  passage.  It  makes  the  fact  of  the  judgment 
of  Christ  to  constitute  no  reason  why  all  men  every 
where  should  be  commanded  to  repent  now,  more 
than  in  the  former  ages.  Therefore  the  popular  the- 
ory is  a  false  one.  Any  theory  of  the  appointed 
judgment  by  Jesus  Christ,  which  does  not  make  it 
involve  a  reason  why  the  ministry  of  a  supernatural 
revelation  unto  repentance  should  commence  in  the 
apostolic  time,  to  go  out  into  the  Gentile  nations,  and 
not  in  former  ages,  is  certainly  a  false  theory. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  119 

Now,  therefore,  we  will  go  more  directly  into  our 
inquiry  for  Tlie  Time  and  Nature  of  the  Judgment  of 
Christ.  And  when  we  shall  have  accumulated  the 
light  of  the  Scriptures  on  these  points,  which  is  full 
and  lucid,  we  will  recur  again  to  the  question  of  har- 
mony in  the  relative  parts  of  the  passage  in  Acts  xvii. 

The  similarity  of  language  in  this  declaration  of 
Paul  to  the  Athenians,  carries  us  back  to  the  pro- 
phetic breathings  of  Isaiah,  which  abound  in  the  book 
of  his  prophecies,  especially  in  chap.  xi.  Indeed  we 
know  that  his  mind  was  a  store-house  of  the  prophetic 
teachings,  and  he  was  constantly  "  reasoning  with 
the  people  out  of  the  Scriptures  '  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. Isaiah  had  said  (xi.  1-10,)  "And  there  shall 
come  forth  a  rod  out  of  the  stem  of  Jesse,  and  a 
branch  shall  grow  out  of  his  roots ;  and  the  spirit  of 
the  Lord  shall  rest  upon  him ;  .  .  .  .  and  he  shall  not 
judge  after  the  sight  of  his  eyes,  neither  reprove 
after  the  hearing  of  his  ears  j  but  with  righteousness 
shall  he  judge  the  poor,  and  reprove  with  equity  for 
the  meek  of  the  earth.  And  he  shall  smite  the  earth 
with  the  rod  of  his  mouth,  and  with  the  breath  of  his 

lips  shall  he  slay  the  wicked The  wolf  also 

shall  dwell  with  the  lamb,  and  the  leopard  shall  lie 
down  with  the  kid  ;  and  the  calf,  and  the  young  lion, 
and  the  falling  together ;  and  a  little  child  shall  lead 

them And  in  that  day  there  shall  be  a  root 

of  Jesse,  which  shall  stand  for  an  ensign  of  the  peo- 
ple ;  to  it  shall  the  Gentiles  seek :  and  his  rest  shall 
be  glorious." 

Bear  in  mind  that  we  are  now  inquiring  for  the 
time  and  nature  of  the  judgment  of  Christ,  And 


120  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

here  we  have  clear  and  decisive  information.  The 
subject  of  this  prophetic  Scripture  is  the  same  judg- 
ment by  Him  whom  God  had  ordained,  as  that 
spoken  of  in  Acts  xvii.  30,  31.  Indeed  the  apostle 
evidently  had  this  chapter  of  the  prophet  in  his  mind. 
He  says,  "  Because  he  hath  appointed  a  day,  in  the 
which  he  will  judge  the  world  in  righteousness,  by  that 
man  whom  he  hath  ordained.'7  So  the  prophet  had 
said,  "  And  the  spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  rest  upon 
him,*  .  ,  .  and  with  righteousness  shall  he  judge  the 
poor,7'  <fcc. 

But  you  will  remind  me  that  St.  Paul  calls  the 
time  of  his  judgment  "  a  day."  So  does  the  prophet. 
After  describing  the  operations  of  his  judgment,  ho 
adds,  "  And  in  thai  day  there  shall  be  a  root  of  Jesse, 
which  shall  stand  for  an  ensign  of  the  people ;  to  it 
shall  the  Gentiles  seek;  and  his  rest  shall  be 
glorious,*' 

When  was  to  be  this  appointed  judgment  .by  the 
Messiah?  Answer,  when  the  Gentiles  were  to  seek 
unto  his  standard.  Hence,  if  we  can  ascertain  when 
the  Gentiles  were  to  seek  unto  the  standard  of 
Christ,  and  find  his  glorious  rest,  we  shall  have  ascer- 
tained when  is  the  day  or  dispensation  of  judgment 
in  righteousness  by  Him.  And  in  respect  to  this 
point,  all  Christendom  know  that  the  time  when  the 
Gentiles  were  to  seek  unto  the  standard  of  Christ  is 
the  gospel  day,  or  time  of  his  Mediatorial  reign;  which 
commenced  when  he  set  up  his  kingdom  in  the 
world,  and  will  continue  to  the  great  consummation. 

There   is  no   mistake  here;   there  can  be  none. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  121 

You  cannot  misunderstand  this  subject ;  if  you  try 
to  do  so,  you  cannot.  The  testimony  of  the  prophet 
before  us  is  decisive.  Speaking  of  the  Messiah's 
judging  in  righteousness  and  equity,  he  says,  "  And 
in  that  day  there  shall  be  a  root  of  Jesse,  which  shall 
stand  for  an  ensign  of  the  people;  to  it  shall  the 
Gentiles  seek."  And  all  Christendom  know,  as  we 
have  said,  that  the  time  when  the  Gentiles  should 
seek  unto  the  standard  of  Christ  is  the  gospel  day, 
or  time  of  Christ's  Mediatorial  reign,  which  is  now  in 
progress.  This,  then,  is  the  day  of  judgment  by 
Jesus  Christ. 

The  original  terms  rendered  judge  and  judgment 
in  the  Scriptures,  primarily  denote  light,  decision, 
order,  &c.  And  as  government  is  designed  for  order 
and  involves  decision,  the  same  word  is  often  used 
for  rule,  or  govern.  When  we  read  of  Samson, 
Jephthah,  Ibzon,  Elon,  and  others,  that  they  judged 
Israel  respectively  a  given  term  of  years,  it  is  not 
meant  that  they  were  engaged  exclusively  in  decid- 
ing character  and  meting  out  rewards  and  punish- 
ments. They  governed  Israel.  The  business  of 
deciding  disputed  cases,  and  meting  out  adequate 
recompense,  was  included  in  the  business  of  the 
office ;  but  the  term  judge  was  not  applied  to  this 
business  alone,  but  to  the  general  administration  of 
him  who  governed  the  people. 

That  such  is  the  application  of  the  term  judge  in 
its  broadest  sense,  when  appropriated  to  the  official 
character  of  Jesus  Christ,  will  be  rendered  the  more 
clear  by  the  following  quotations  from  our  evangeli- 


122  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

cal  prophet.  See  Isa.  xlii.  "  Behold  my  servant 
whom  I  uphold, — I  have  put  my  spirit  upon  him ;  ho 

shall   bring   forth  judgment   to  the    Gentiles 

He  shall  bring  forth  judgment  unto  truth.  He  shall 
not  fail  nor  be  discouraged,  till  he  have  set  judgment 
in  the  earth ;  and  the  isles  shall  wait  for  his  law." 
Here,  his  judgment,  which  he  should  establish  in  the 
earth,  and  for  the  law  of  which  the  isles  should  wait, 
is  obviously  his  government,  his  kingdom.  And 
now,  to  describe  the  nature,  and  the  ultimate  design 
of  this  government  or  judgment,  the  prophet  thus 
proceeds  : — "  Thus  saith  God  the  Lord,  ...  I  the 
Lord  have  called  thee  in  righteousness,  and  will  hold 
thine  hand,  and  will  keep  thee,  and  give  thee  for  a 
covenant  of  the  people,  for  a  light  of  the  Gentiles ; 
to  open  the  blind  eyes,  to  bring  out  the  prisoners 
from  the  prison,  and  them  that  sit  in  darkness  out 
of  the  prison-house." 

Observe,  he  had  just  said,  "  He  shall  bring  forth 
judgment  to  the  Gentiles."  And  here,  "  He  shall  be 
a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles  ;  to  open  the  blind 
eyes,  and  bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the  prison ;" 
thus  showing  conclusively,  that  the  bringing  forth 
of  judgment  to  the  Gentiles,  is  the  extension  of  his 
kingdom  among  the  Gentiles.  And  whatever  exter- 
nal means  his  judgment  or  kingdom  may  employ ; 
though  it  may  employ  teachings,  gifts,  promises, 
threatenings,  rewards,  punishments, — yet  these  are 
all  instrumentalities  in  the  hand  of  one  government, 
with  one  spirit  and  aim,  concurring  to  one  ultimate, 
the  deliverance  of  mankind  from  the  prison  of  dark- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  123 

ness,  sin  and  death.  The  same  operation  and 
ultimate  effect  of  the  judgment  of  the  Messiah  is 
described  in  the  quotation  we  made  from  Isa.  xi.  He 
shall  judge  in  righteousness  and  equity,  smiting  the 
earth  with  the  rod  of  his  mouth,  and  slaying  the 
wicked  with  the  breath  of  his  lips,  the  word  of  his 
truth,  justice  and  love,  so  that  the  most  stubborn 
and  lion-like  spirits  of  rebellion  shall  be  subdued  to 
the  beautiful  loveliness  of  the  peaceful  lamb. 

The  application  which  we  have  been  led,  by  force 
of  truth  in  the  connections,  to  make  of  the  foregoing 
prophecies  of  the  judgment  of  Christ,  to  his  reign,  is 
the  exact  and  direct  New  Testament  application. 
St.  Matthew,  in  his  record  of  Christ's  charge  to  the 
people  in  a  given  case  not  to  make  him  known  to 
his  enemies  who  were  seeking  to  kill  him,  adds, 
"  That  it  might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by 
Esaias  the  prophet,  saying,  Behold  my  servant  whom 
I  have  loved,  ....  I  will  put  my  spirit  upon  him, 
and  he  shall  show  judgment  to  the  Gentiles.  He 
shall  not  strive  nor  cry,  ....  the  smoking  flax 
shall  he  not  quench,  till  he  send  forth  judgment 
unto  victory.  And  in  his  name  shall  the  Gentiles 
trust," 

It  is  this  adorable  view  of  the  mission  of  God's 
judgment  by  Jesus  Christ,  that  gives  tone  and  form 
to  the  royal  Poet's  jubilant  song,  in  Psalm  xcvi. 
"  Let  the  heavens  rejoice,  and  let  the  earth  be  glad  ; 
let  the  sea  roar,  and  the  fulness  thereof.  Let  the 
field  be  joyful  and  all  that  is  therein ;  then  shall  all 
the  trees  of  the  wood  rejoice  before  the  Lord;  for 


124  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

he  cometh,  for  he  cometh  to  judge  the  earth :  he 
shall  judge  the  world  with  righteousness,  and  the 
people  with  his  truth." 

We  have  now  ascertained,  from  the  Scriptures,  the 
lime  and  nature  of  the  judgment  of  Christ.  Its  time 
is  the  time  of  his  Mediatorial  reigri.  In  respect  to 
its  nature,  in  the  broadest  sense,  as  we  have  seen,  it 
is  synonymous  with  his  kingdom.  And  when  used 
in  a  restricted  and  special  sense,  as  applied  to  the 
administration  of  rewards  and  punishments,  it  is  a  co- 
operative branch  of  his  kingdom. 

And  here  we  have  common  sense  as  well  as  Bible 
sense.  Whence  did  you  ever  hear  of  the  thought, 
except  from  human  theology,  of  a  kingdom  without 
a  judgment,  arid  the  judgment  postponed  to  the  end 
of  the  kingdom?  When  did  you  ever  know  of  a 
good  family  government  without  a  judgment,  and  the 
judgment  put  off  to  the  end  of  the  government? 
What  a  thought !  Is  not  the  judgment  a  co-operative 
branch  of  the  family  government?  Always.  When 
did  you  ever  hear  of  a  good  civil  government  with- 
out a  judgment,  the  judgment  being  assigned  to  the 
end  of  the  government  ?  Never.  Is  not  the 
judgment  a  co-existent  and  co-operative  branch  of 
the  civil  government  ?  Always. 

So  with  the  Divine  government.  When  the  great 
Father  commenced  the  exercise  of  his  government 
over  his  intelligent  family,  he  commenced  the 
administration  of  judgment.  When  our  first  parents 
transgressed,  how  soon  they  were  called  to  judgment, 
and  sentence  pronounced.  And  that  heinous  sinner, 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS,  125 

Cain.  How  soon  he  was  arraigned  at  the  bar  of  God. 
Hear  the  examination;  — "  What  hast  thou  done?" 
And  the  witness ;  — "  The  voice  of  thy  brother's 
blood  crieth  unto  me  from  the  ground.7'  And  the 
sentence  ;  —  "A  fugitive  and  a  vagabond  shalt  thou 
be  in  the  earth.5'  And  the  culprit  cries  out,  "  My 

punishment" What  does  he  mean?     What,  a 

punishment  when  there  has  been  no  judgment  ?  The 
punishment  were  as  likely  to  be  wrong  as  right  if 
there  were  no  judgment.  But  there  was  a  judgment, 
a  righteous  judgment ;  and  we  wonder  not  that  the 
subject  of  it  exclaimed  in  anguish,  "  My  punishment 
is  greater  than  I  can  bear."  How  many  young  peo- 
ple now,  for  the  want  of  a  knowledge  and  faith  of 
their  amenability  to  the  living,  operative  judgment 
of  God,  putting  far  away  their  accountability,  and 
imagining  devices  of  escape  from  it  all,  make  them- 
selves subjects  of  this  awful  sentence,  —  "A  fugitive 
and  a  vagabond  shalt  thou  be  in  the  earth." 

And  so  all  through. — Moses  says,  (Deut.  xxxii.  4,) 
"All  his  ways  are  judgment,"  That  is,  in  all  the  dis- 
pensations of  his  govemnent  he  proceeds  upon  a 
just  and  righteous  decision.  And  so  Nebuchadnezzar 
was  constrained  to  attest,  that  "  all  his  works  are 
truth,  and  his  ways  judgment."  (Dan.  iv.  37.) 
David  says,  (Ps.  Iviii.  11,)  "  So  that  a  man  shall  say, 
Verily  there  is  a  reward  for  the  righteous ;  verily  he 
is  a  God  that  judgeth  in  the  earth."  And  Solomon, 
"  Though  hand  join  in  hand,  the  wicked  shall  not  be 

unpunished Behold,    the  righteous    shall   be 

recompensed  in  the  earth;  much  more  the   wicked 


126  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

and  the  sinner."  (Prov.  xi.  21,81.)  And  Jeremiah, 
(xvii.  10,)  "  I,  the  Lord,  search  the  heart,  try 
the  reins,  even  to  give  every  man  according  to  his 
ways,  and  according  to  the  fruit  of  his  doings."  And 
the  Bible  abounds  with  this  plain  and  truthful  senti- 
ment of  judgment,  making  it  the  government,  or  a 
co-existent  and  co-operative  branch  of  the  govern- 
ment of  God. 

But  in  these  latter  days  God  judgeth  the  world  in 
righteousness  by  Jesus  Christ.  "  And  hath  given 
him  authority  to  execute  judgment  also,  because  he 
is  the  Son  of  Man."  (John  v.  27.)  "  He  hath 
appointed  a  day,  in  the  which  he  will  judge  the  world 
in  righteousness  by  that  man  whom  he  hath  ordain- 
ed f  which  is  the  passage  had  before  under  considera- 
tion. And  here,  too,  as  well  as  under  the  former  dis- 
pensation, the  judgment  is  a  co-operative  branch  of 
the  government,  as  we  have  fully  proved  in  this 
chapter. 

In  respect  to  this  whole  subject,  embracing  both 
dispensations,  as  it  relates  to  the  retributive  and 
disciplinary  operations  of  the  judgment,  St.  Paul 
gives  us  the  following  summary,  in  Heb.  ii.  2,  3  ; 
"  For  if  the  word  spoken  by  angels  (that  is  the  "  law 
given  by  the  disposition  of  angels  ")  was  steadfast, 
and  every  transgression  and  disobedience  received  a 
just  recompense  of  reward,  how  shall  we  escape  if 
we  neglect  so  great  salvation  ?"  Here  is  the  truth 
recognized,  that,  under  the  former  dispensation, 
every  transgression  and  disobedience,  sins  of  com- 
mission and  omission,  received  a  just  recompense  of 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  127 

reward.  And  it  is  followed  by  the  interrogatory 
assertion,  that  neither  can  we,  under  the  gospel  dis- 
pensation, when  God  judgeth  the  world  in  righteous- 
ness by  Jesus  Christ,  escape  a  like  just  recompense 
of  reward,  if  we  trangress  and  abuse  the  principles 
of  the  gospel  of  our  salvation. 

And  this  is  precisely  the  subject  of  the  same 
apostle's  testimony  in  Rom.  ii.  made  by  Dr.  Adams 
his  leading  and  fundamental  proof  text  of  future  end- 
less punishment.  The  testimony  here  is,  that  God, 
who  under  the  old  dispensation  rendered  to  "  every 
transgression  and  disobedience  a  just  recompense  of 
reward,'7  "  will  render  to  every  man  acc&rding  to  his 
deeds  —  in  the  day  when  he  shall  judge  the  secrets 
of  men  by  Jesus  Christ ;"  —  "  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  worketli  good.'7  We  shall 
presently  attend  more  particularly  to  all  the  important 
expressions  of  this  whole-  passage ;  but  it  was 
imperatively  necessary  that  we  should  first  obtain 
the  clear  Scriptural  light  of  the  main  subject  of 
judgment  in  general,  as  a  Divine  system,  or  economy. 
And  the  light  which  we  have  gained  on  this 
general  subject,  and  which  will  shine  unto  perfect 
clay  as  we  shall  progressively  study  the  subject 
in  all  its  bearings,  special  as  well  as  general, 
places  us  in  a  commanding  position  for  a  true 
observation  and  correct  application  of  all  the 
particular  and  progressively  developing  parts.  Dr. 
Adams,  after  the  manner  of  all  who  have  gone  before 


128  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

him  on  that  side  of  the  question,  makes  up  his  roll 
of  texts,  taking  those  generally  which  relate  to 
special  dispensations  of  judgment,  and  bounds  with 
them  into  eternity,  and  there  opens  and  distributes 
his  awards,  just  as  if  there  was  no  question  of  their 
being  there  in  their  appropriate  sphere.  If  they 
could  show  that  the  general  judgment  of  Christ  is 
alone  a  judicial  tribunal,  for  the  bestowment  of 
awards  for  the  future  in  consideration  of  the  past, 
and  that  its  place  is  at  the  end  of  time  and  the  open- 
ing of  eternity,  then  the  familiar  testimonies  of  the 
Scriptures  in  relation  to  special  judgments  and  retri- 
butions would  very  naturally  fall  in  as  parts  of  the 
same  economy,  and  there  would  be,  at  least,  great 
plausibility  in  the  Endless-rniserian  argument.  But 
this  is  all  assumed.  This  view  of  the  character,  the 
time,  and  mission  of  the  judgment  of  Christ,  is 
assumption  altogether.  No  man  on  earth  ever 
attempted  to  show,  by  Scriptural  argument,  that  any 
passage  of  Scripture  utters  such  a  view  of  Christ's 
judgment.  There  was  never  a  better  reason  offered, 
or  attempted,  than  our  friend  offers  in  the  argument 
before  us,  from  Rom.  ii.  5-16,  —  which  is  in  these 
words  :  —  "I  take  this  whole  passage  of  Scripture  as 
a  revelation  of  a  future  judgment  and  retribution, 
(meaning  a  judgment  in  the  future  world)  in  which 
all  men  are  to  be  judged  and  treated  according  to 
their  works."  "  Yes,  "  /take  this  whole  passage  of 
Scripture"  so  to  mean.  We  are  perfectly  aware  of 
this.  But  why  do  you  take  it  away  into  such  an 
application  ?  This  is  a  question  which  we  hope  our 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  129 

friend  will  attempt  to  answer  in  our  columns,  when 
we  shall  have  closed  our  Reply  to  his  Scriptural 
Argument,  It  would  have  been  an  even  reply  on  our 
part,  to  say,  "  /take  this  whole  passage  of  Scripture 
as  a  revelation  of  a  judgment  then  about  being 
established  by  Christ  on  earth,  involved  in  his 
spiritual  kingdom,  which,  in  its  retributive  dispensa- 
tion, renders  unto  every  man  according  to  his  deeds." 
This  would  be  barely  setting  our  opinion  against  his. 
But  we  are  not  inclined  to  serve  the  reading  public 
to  any  such  fare.  We  feel  bound  to  make  good 
improvement  of  this  rare  opportunity  to  promote 
Biblical  knowledge,  and  hence  we  labor  to  lead  the 
inquiring  mind  into  a  clear  and  comprehensive  dis- 
covery of  the  Scripture  teachings  in  relation  to  this 
supremely  important  subject.  We  set  the  ample  testi- 
monies of  the  Scriptures  against  human  assumptions. 
The  assumptions  even  of  great  and  good  men  are 
nothing,  when  opposed  to  the  inspired  record.  And 
we  have  shown  conclusively,  and  intend  to  show 
more  fully  in  subsequent  portions  of  this  Reply,  that 
the  Scriptures  do,  definitely,  and  in  various  illustrative 
and  explanatory  connections,  set  forth,  in  relation  to 
the  time  of  the  judgment  of  Christ,  that  it  is  the  time 
of  his  Mediatorial  reign,  which  commenced  when  he 
set  up  his  kingdom  in  the  world,  and  will  continue 
unto  the  great  consummation,  when  he  shall  resign 
the  kingdom  to  the  Father,  having  put  down,  destroy- 
ed, all  rule,  and  all  authority  and  power,  i.  e.  all  in 
opposition  to  his  own,  leaving  no  satan's  kingdom  in 
the  universe,  and  having  subdued,  harmonized,  all 


130  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

things  to  himself,  (1  Cor.  xv.  20-28) ; — and  in  relation 
to  the  nature  of  his  judgment,  that  it  is,  in  its  broad 
and  general  sense,  synonymous  with  his  kingdom; 
and  in  all  applications  to  special  dispensations  of 
reward  and  punishment,  it  is  a  co-operative  branch  of 
his  kingdom.  If  the  simplest  idea,  or  matter  of  fact, 
can  be  intelligibly  expressed  by  the  use  of  human 
language,  this  is  the  Scriptural  view  of  the  judgment 
of  Christ.  And  for  the  reason  of  this  declaration 
we  commend  not  the  reader  to  any  human  authority 
or  church  tradition,  but  to  candid  Bible  reading. 

Now  the  importance  of  the  special  pains  we  have 
taken  to  be  right  at  this  grand  starting  point,  and  to 
show  the  unscripturalness  and  consequent  worthless- 
ness,  of  the  Doctor's  capital  assumption  on  which  he 
builds  his  whole  fabric,  is  obvious  to  all  who  have 
understanding.  In  the  light  which  we  have  obtained 
on  the  time  and  nature  of  the  judgment  of  Christ,  as 
a  general  economy,  it  will  be  easy  to  explain  and 
apply  all  the  testimonies  of  particular  and  special 
judgments,  because  they  all  come  within  the  scope 
of  the  general  economy.  Accordingly  all  that  is 
particular  in  the  testimony  of  rewards  and  punish- 
ments in  the  Doctor's  leading  proof  passage,  declared 
to  come  within  the  compass  of  the  judgment  of 
Christ,  must  be  understood  as  relating  to  the  awards 
of  the  operative  administration  of  his  judgment  estab- 
lished in  the  earth. 

In  concluding  our  present  labor  on  the  general 
judgment  of  Christ,  before  proceeding  to  the  par- 
ticular consideration  of  special  dispensations  of 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  131 

judgment,  which  are  all,  \vitk  unquestioning  compla- 
cency, referred  by  our  opponent  direct  to  his  assum- 
ed future  and  final  tribunal,  we  will  go  back  with  our 
present  information,  and  see  how  it  is  with  the  har- 
mony of  parts  in  St.  Paul's  testimony  of  the  judgment 
of  Christ  in  Acts  xvii.  We  specially  noted  the  fact 
that  the  apostle  speaks  of  the  appointed  day  or  dis- 
pensation of  judgment  by  Jesus  Christ,  as  the  reason 
why  God  now  sends  out  the  ministry  of  repentance 
to  the  Gentile  nations,  who  in  times  past  were  suffer- 
ed to  remain  in  their  general  ignorance  of  the 
character  and  purpose  of  God.  We  saw  that  the 
u  Orthodox"  view  of  the  appointed  day  of  judgment 
by  Jesus  Christ,  making  it  a  simultaneous  arraign- 
ment of  all  men  of  all  ages,  at  the  end  of  the 
mundane  system,  to  sentence  them  for  eternity 
according  to  their  works  in  time,  would  make  it 
constitute  no  reason  why  the  ministry  of  repentance 
should  be  sent  to  all  men  every  where  now,  more 
than  in  all  former  ages.  But  in  the  Scriptural 
light  of  the  subject  which  we  have  now  attained,  all 
in  this  passage  is  clear  and  consistent.  It  stands 
thus  :  "  And  the  times  of  this  ignorance  God  winked 
at,"  or  suffered  to  remain.  He  did  not  in  the  former 
ages  send  inspired  messengers  with  supernatural 
revelations  to  the  Gentiles.  He  made  the  Hebrews 
a  chosen  people  to  whom  he  committed  his  oracles 
as  a  preparatory  economy  ;  and  the  embodiment  of 
the  religious  system  which  he  committed  to  them 
was  .adapted  to  that  people  specially,  and  not  to  the 
other  natiops.  Hence  the  prophets  and  teachers  of 


132  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

that  preliminary  covenant  and  religion  had  no  minis- 
try nor  mission  for  the  Gentiles.  It  was  a  covenant 
with  the  house  of  Israel  and  Judah.  It  did  not 
belong  to  others.  But  now  comes  in,  at  Paul's  time 
it  was  opening,  the  new  dispensation,  the  better 
covenant,  the  Messiah's  reign,  of  whom  it  was  fore- 
appointed  that  he  should  "  set  judgment  in  the 
earth/'  and  be  a  covenant  to  Israel,  a  light  of  the 
Gentiles,  and  salvation  to  the  ends  of  the  earth.  His 
covenant  embraces  all  people ;  his  religion  is  alike 
adapted  to  all  nations  j  his  kingdom  is  designed  to  be 
universal ;  in  him  is  the  gift  of  life  immortal  for  all. 
Therefore,  now,  God  sends  out  his  specially  qualified 
messengers,  ministers  of  this  better  covenant  and 
kingdom,  to  all  nations,  because  the  covenant  of 
which  they  are  ministers,  and  the  kingdom  and  judg- 
ment, belongs  to  them  all. 

So  beautiful  is  the  harmony  of  Scripture,  when  it 
is  understood  in  the  light  of  Scripture.  The  follow- 
ing paraphrase  will  present  this  interesting  passage, 
(in  which  "  Orthodoxy '  makes  the  apostle  stultify 
himself,)  in  the  relative  and  consistent  bearing  of  its 
parts.  "  And  in  these  former  ages  God  suffered  the 
prevailing  ignorance  of  the  Gentiles  to  remain,  the 
revelation  made  to  the  Hebrews  not  being  designed 
for  them.  And  even  during  the  personal  life  of  our 
Master  on  earth,  it  was  not  meet  that  even  his  Am- 
bassadors should  go  in  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  but 
only  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.  But 
now  he  hath  broken  do^yn  the  middle  wall  of  partition 
between  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  has  enlarged  the 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  133 

sphere  of  our  mission,  commanding  us  to  go  into  all 
the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel  of  universal  love, 
and  of  repentance  and  salvation,  to  all  people.  And 
this  is  because  he  hath  appointed  a  day  or  dispensa- 
tion, and  it  is  now  being  ushered  in,  when  he  would 
judge  or  rule  the  world  in  righteousness,  by  that 
Man  whom  he  hath  ordained  to  "  bring  forth  judg- 
ment to  the  Gentiles/  and  '  to  be  his  salvation  to  the 
ends  of  the  earth.' 

Will  our  learned  friend  show  us  any  essential  mis- 
take committed,  thus  far,  in  our  Scripture  studies  ? 

SECTION   II. 

Special  Judgments. 

In  the  preceding  Section  of  this  Chapter  wo 
brought  out  the  Scripture  light  on  the  general  judg- 
ment of  God,  and  especially  of  Christ.  We  found 
that  the  judgment,  in  its  broadest  sense,  is  the  king- 
dom or  government,  and  in  any  restricted  application, 
a  co-operative  branch  of  the  government.  According- 
ly, the  day  of  judgment  by  Jesus  Christ  is  the  day  or 
dispensation  of  his  spiritual  reign,  which  is  now  in 
progress ;  and  the  leading  proof  text  of  Dr.  Adams, 
Rom.  ii.  5-16,  has  no  reference  to  such  an  arraign- 
ment of  the  universe  as  he  has  assumed,  at  the  end 
of  time  and  opening  of  eternity.  God  has  not  made 
this  infantile,  momentary  life  a  state  of  probation  for 
eternitv.  and  fixed  a  dread  tribunal  at  the  end  of 

V      / 

mortal  time,  which  shall  strike  off  their  fate  for 
eternity,  to  infinite  bliss  or  woe,  according  to  their 


134  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

improvement  of  the  infantile  moment.  No  such  idea 
is  anywhere  stated  or  implied  in  the  Bible.  We  shall 
see,  as  we  progress,  that  Dr.  Adams,  whose  eager 
and  practised  eye  would  have  caught  the  passage  if 
there  had  been  any  such,  has  not  even  attempted  to 
show  that  any  text  of  Scripture  expresses  such  a 
thought.  God  has  provided  this  earth  as  the  abode 
of  his  human  children  in  their  rudimental  and 
mortal  state.  He  is  their  Governor  and  Judge, 
disciplining  them  by  want  and  supply,  pleasure  and 
pain,  sunshines  and  storms,  gifts  and  bereavements, 
teachings  and  admonitions,  rewards  and  punishments, 
all  of  which  are  adapted  to  their  state  and  nature  in 
this  sphere  of  their  being,  but  never  involving  in 
these  things  the  fate  of  eternity.  This  is  the  view 
of  the  Divine  administration  visible  on  every  page 
of  the  Bible,  and  confirmed  by  experience,  observa- 
tion and  history.  We  don't  mean  to  leave  the  reader 
to  take  this  truthful  view  of  the  subject  at  our  hand. 
He  who  studiously  goes  with  us  through  this  investi- 
gation will  see  it  to  be  the  uniform  and  prominent 
Bible  view,  as  clearly  as  he  ever  saw  that  the  surface 
of  the  earth  is  variegated  with  hills,  valleys  and 
plains. 

Having  shown  from  the  Scriptures  that  the  general 
judgment,  that  is,  the  Divine  judgment  as  a  general 
and  complete  administration,  is  a  branch  of  the 
Divine  government,  now,  always, — we  are  prepared  to 
understand,  and  to  apply  with  truth  and  accuracy, 
the  particular  judgments,  or  special  administrations 
of  recompense,  as  we  come  across  the  Scripture 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  135 

records  of  them.  Dr.  Adams  having,  by  assumption 
alone,  placed  the  general  judgment  in  the  resurrec- 
tion state,  and  made  it  a  dispenser  of  final  dooms,  as 
naturally  draws  after  him  into  that  state  and  to  that 
purpose  all  the  records  of  special  judgments,  as  the 
great  magnet  draws  the  steel  filings  to  itself.  But 
finding  the  general  judgment  to  be  comprised  in  the 
general  and  ever  operative  government  of  God,  we 
shall  find  the  special  judgments,  which  are  the  ever- 
operative  workings  of  the  general  judgment,  to  come 
in,  with  perfect  naturalness  and  certainty  of  truth, 
with  this  corrected  view  of  the  general  adminis- 
tration. 

In  this  light  of  the  subject,  let  us  trace  the  legiti- 
mate application  of  the  particular  judgments  embrac- 
ed in  the  Doctor's  grand  fundamental  proof  text, 
which  we  have  had  under  general  consideration. 
They  were  all  to  take  place  under  the  general  admin- 
istration of  Christ,  who  should  "  set  judgment  in  the 
earth;"  and  "  bring  forth  judgment  unto  victory." 

Well,  what  are  they?  The  Doctor  commences  his 
quotation  at  the  5th  verse.  "But  after  iliy  hardness 
and  impenitent  heart  treasurest  up  unto  thyself  wrath 
against  the  day  of  wrath  and  revelation  of  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God." 

1.  "  Treasurest  up  unto  thyself  wrath.'9  In  what 
sense  do  the  Scriptures  teach  us  that  vicious  people 
treasure  up  unto  themselves  wrath  ?  This  single 
sentence  does  not  answer  the  question.  We  must 
look  into  the  general  teachings  of  the  Scriptures  on 
the  subject.  We  said  at  the  opening  of  this  chapter, 


136  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

in  relation  to  the  Doctor's  leading  proposition,  that 
every  vicious  course  of  practice,  when  persisted  in, 
besides  its  current  awards  of  evil,  has  its  natural  and 
legitimate  finale,  its  resulting  harvest  of  accumulated 
evils.  Such  a  habit,  continued,  produces  a  condition 
of  things  in  respect  to  character  and  circumstances, 
which  shall  bring  signal  disaster.  Hence,  while  he  is 
suffering  evil,  eating  of  the  fruit  of  his  doings,  he  is 
treasuring  up  evil  for  an  impending  out-break.  And 
this  we  shall  iind  to  be  the  idea  of  the  passage  before 
us,  as  it  is  of  the  Bible  record  throughout. 

Open  the  New  Testament,  and  read  from  the 
beginning  of  the  preceding  Chapter,  which  com- 
mences the  Epistle  to  the  Komans.  The  apostle  was 
addressing  a  Christian  Church  of  Gentiles,  who  were 
in  the  midst  of  the  idolatries  and  moral  corruptions 
of  Gentile  nations,  and  who,  themselves,  as  it  appears, 
were  retaining  too  much  of  that  moral  defilement. 
After  speaking  of  the  revelation  of  the  righteousness 
of  God  from  faith  to  faith  ill  the  gospel,  he  adds, 
"  For  the  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven 
against  all  ungodliness  and  unrighteousness  of  men, 
who  hold  the  truth  in  unrighteousness."  This,  while 
true  for  universal  application,  was  spoken  particular- 
ly for  the  admonition  of  those  "  who  held  the  truth 
in  unrighteousness,"  —  that  is,  professing  Christians 
to  whom  adhered  the  heathen  corruptions.  And  this 
revelation  of  wrath  has  no  reference  to  any  ad- 
ministration of  God  in  another  world.  Any  person, 
even  of  the  humblest  capacity,  who  will  attentively 
read  along  the  whole  connection  here  will  see  that  it 


KEPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  137 

refers  to  the  current  administration  of  the  Divine 
government  in  our  world,  running*  in  full  course  with 
the  view  established  in  the  preceding  section  of  this 
chapter,  in  respect  to  the  judgment  of  God  as  a  co- 
existent branch  of  his  ever  operative  government. 

The  word  wrath,  as  applied  to  the  Deity,  cannot, 
consistently  with  any  rational  and  reverent  view  of 
the  Infinite,  be  taken  to  denote  any  passionate  and 
changeable  emotions  of  the  Divine  Mind.  Some- 
times it  refers  to  dispensations  of  his  visible 
providence  in  raging  calamities,  and  sometimes  to  the 
condemnatory  operation  of  his  law  against  trans- 
gressors, by  a  spiritual  administration.  This  we  shall 
see  most  clearly  elucidated  as  we  proceed  with  our 
Scripture  investigations. 

The  apostle  proceeds,  in  this  first  chapter,  to 
exhibit  the  modus  operandi  of  the  Divine  judgment 
in  manifestation  of  wrath,  or  condemnatory  power, 
against  unrighteousness.  "  Because,  when  they  knew 
God,  they  glorified  him  not  as  God/'  but  made  defile- 
ment and  self-indulgence  their  God,  —  "  for  this  cause 
God  gave  them  up  to  vile  affections,  ....  working 
that  which  is  unseemly,  ....  and  receiving  in 
themselves  that  recompense  of  their  error  which  was 
meet."  Here  it  is  shewn  that  it  is  one  of  the 
methods  of  God's  judgment,  when  his  counsels  are 
persistently  despised,  to  give  over  the  sinner  to  the 
full  rage  and  natural  consequences  of  his  vices. 

The  apostle  proceeds,  —  "  Who,  knowing  the  judg- 
ment of  God,  (that  they  who  commit  such  things  are 
worthy  of  death,)  not  only  do  the  same,  but  have 


138  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

pleasure  in  them  that  do  them."  Here  the  same 
living  judgment  of  God  is  kept  in  view  ;  and  the 
transgressors  are  held  up  in  two  classes,  the  heathen 
idolaters,  and  the  unworthy  Christian  professors  who 
held  the  truth  in  unrighteousness,  condemning  the 
heathen  corruptions  in  form,  yet  imitating  them  in 
practice.  For  he  thus  proceeds  into  chap,  ii :  — 
"  But  we  are  sure  that  the  judgment  of  God  is 
according  to  truth,  against  them  which  commit  such 
things.  And  thinkest  thou  this,  0  man,  that  judgest 
(that  is,  condemnest)  them  which  do  such  things, 
and  doest  the  same,  that  thou  shalt  escape  the  judg- 
ment of  God  ?  Or  despiseth  thou  the  riches  of  his 
goodness,  and  forbearance,  and  long-suffering  j  not 
knowing  that  the  goodness  of  God  leadeth  thee  to 
repentance."  And  here  follows  the  Doctor's  proof 
text:  —  "  But  after  thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart 
treasurest  up  unto  thyself  wratli"  Why,  it  is  difficult 
to  conceive  of  the  frame  of  mind  in  which  a  man  of 
talent  can  assume  that  the  apostle  is  here  describing 
God's  dealings  with  mankind  in  the  immortal  world. 
If  anything  in  the  simplest  expression  is  plain,  it  is, 
that  the  apostle  was  describing  existing  character, 
and  both  existing  and  impending  consequences, 
under  the  current  administration  of  God. 

With  regard  to  the  "  treasuring  up  lorath"  as 
denoting  an  accumulative  force  of  evil  to  persistent 
transgressors,  to  result  in  special  calamity,  the 
Scriptures,  as  well  as  the  world  of  fact,  are  full  of  it. 
But  we  must  only  afford  space  here  for  two  or  three 
citations. 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  139 

Moses,  in  the  Song  which  he  spoke  in  the  ears  of 
the  congregation  of  Israel,  prophetically  denoting 
the  approaching  calamities  on  their  enemies,  spoke 
thus  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  :  —  "  Is  not  this  laid  up 
in  store  with  me,  and  sealed  up  with  me  ?  To  me 
belongeth  vengeance  and  recompense ;  their  foot 
shall  slide  in  due  time  ;  for  the  day  of  their  calamity 
is  at  hand,  and  the  things  that  shall  come  upon  them 
make  haste."  (Deut.  xxxii.  84,  35.)  With  reference 
to  accumulating  evils  to  the  portion  of  Ephraim,  to 
be  more  fully  realized  by  him  afterwards,  making  no 
reference,  however,  to  eternity,  the  prophet  Hosea 
says,  (xiii.  12,  13,)  "  The  iniquity  of  Ephraim  is 
bound  up  ;  his  sin  is  hid.  The  sorrow  of  a  travailing 
woman  shall  come  upon  him;  he  is  an  unwise  son." 
But  this  binding  up  of  the  iniquity  of  Ephraim,  or 
treasuring  it  up  as  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath, 
even  our  opponent  will  not  claim  as  denoting  his 
doom  to  endless  punishment ;  for,  in  another  division 
of  his  argument  he  expressly  refers  to  the  Divine 
promise  of  Ephraim's  restoration. 

And  so,  throughout  the  Scriptures,  in  a  thousand 
different  forms,  this  idea  is  expressed,  of  the 
accumulation  of  dangers  by  persistence  in  sin,  to 
terminate  in  special  judgment. 

2.  "  Against  the  day  of  ivratli  and  revelation  of  the 
righteous  judgment  of  God"  Is  this  day  of  wrath, 
which  should  reveal  the  righteous  judgment  of  God, 
a  day  beyond  Christ's  Mediatorial  reign,  for  striking 
off  eternal  dooms  ?  So  Dr.  Adams  assumes.  But 
we  have  put  out  of  the  way  that  off-hand  assumption 


140  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

by  showing  from  the  Scriptures,  that  the  day  of  judg- 
ment by  Jesus  Christ,  as  a  general  administration, 
which  is  the  general  period  wherein  all  these  special 
dispensations  of  judgment  must  take  place,  is  the  day 
of  his  Mediatorial  reign,  which  is  now  in  progress. 
And  we  invite  the  attention  of  the  reader  to  the 
beautiful  harmony  of  the  Scriptures  in  relation  to 
this  subject,  in  this  clear  light  of  it  in  which  we  now 
stand. 

In  the  book  of  Job,  speaking  of  the  portion  of  him 
who  seeks  to  live  by  the  gain  of  oppression,  in 
addition  to  the  constant  disquiet  of  his  life  which  is 
expressed  by  the  saying,  "  he  shall  not  feel  quietness 
in  his  belly,  he  shall  not  save  of 'that  which  he 
desireth,  —  it  is  said,  (Job  xx.  28,  29,)  "  The  increase 
of  his  house  shall  depart,  and  his  goods  shall  flow 
away  in  the  day  of  his  wrath.  This  is  the  portion  of 
a  wicked  man  from  God,  and  the  heritage  appointed 
unto  him  by  God."  Again,  (Job  xxi.  28-33.) 
"  Where  are  the  dwelling  places  of  the  wicked?  — 
Have  ye  not  asked  them  that  go  by  the  way  ?  And 
do  ye  not  know  their  tokens,  that  the  wicked  is 
reserved  to  the  day  of  destruction  ?  They  shall  be 
brought  forth  to  the  day  of  wrath,  ....  Yet  shall 
he  be  brought  to  the  grave,  and  shall  remain  in  the 
tomb.  The  clods  of  the  valley  shall  be  sweet  unto 
him."  Even  our  opponent  will  admit  that  this  relates 
solely  to  temporal  destruction ;  yet  it  is  a  destruction 
to  which  the  wicked  were  reserved,  and  to  be  con- 
summated in  the  day  of  wrath. 

David  prophesied,  (Ps.  ex.  5;  6,)  "  The  Lord  at  thy 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  141 

right  hand  shall  strike  through  kings  in  the  day  of 
his  wrath.  He  shall  judge  among  the  heathen,  he 
shall  fill  the  places  with  the  dead  bodies  ;  he  shall 
wound  the  heads  of  many  countries."  By  reading 
the  whole  Psalm  it  will  be  seen  that  the  passage  just 
quoted  stands  in  connection  with  prophecies  of  the 
Messiah's  reign ;  and  of  course  it  refers  to  some 
special  judgment  upon  the  enemies  of  truth  which 
should  take  place  during  the  general  reign  and  judg- 
ment of  Christ. 

Again,  (Prov.  xi.  4.)  "  Riches  profit  not  in  the  day 
of  wrath  :  but  righteousness  delivereth  from  death." 
Here,  too,  the  day  of  wrath  stands  for  any  time  of 
raging  calamity  and  sweeping  desolation,  when  a 
man's  riches  would  rather  increase  his  danger  than 
promote  his  safety. 

In  further  elucidation  of  the  Scripture  phraseology 
under  consideration,  read  the  prophecy  of  Zephaniah, 
(i.  13-18.)  "  Therefore  their  goods  shall  become  a 
booty,  and  their  houses  a  desolation.  The  great  day 
of  the  Lord  is  near,  it  is  near,  and  hasteth  greatly, 
even  the  voice  of  the  day  of  the  Lord.  That  day  is 
a  day  of  wrath,  a  day  of  trouble  and  distress,  and  a 
day  of  wasteness  and  desolation,  a  day  of  darkness 
and  gloominess,  a  day  of  clouds  and  thick  darkness. 
A  day  of  trumpet  and  alarm  against  the  fenced  cities 
and  against  the  high  towers."  The  time  here  de- 
scribed, because  of  its  marking  a  severe  and  deso- 
lating calamity  which  no  man  will  stultify  himself  by 
applying  to  any  other  than  a  national  and  temporal 
desolation,  perhaps  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by 


142  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

the  Babylonians,  and  perhaps  that  by  the  Romans,  is 
called  the  great  day  of  the  Lord,  the  day  of  wrath,  and 
the  day  of  trouble  and  distress,  or  "  tribulation  and 
anguish." 

Of  the  same  character  shaM  we  find,  when  we  come 
to  it  in  review  of  another  of  the  Doctor's  Scriptual 
Arguments,  the  day  of  wrath  in  Rev.  vi.  17  :  —  "  For 
the  great  clay  of  his  wrath  is  come ;  and  who  shall  be 
able  to  stand?" 

In  relation  to  special  judgments,  or  the  revelation 
of  wrath  and  the  righteous  judgment  of  God  in  just 
and  ample  retributions,  from  time  to  time  under  the 
general  administration  of  his  government  and  judg- 
ment, we  must  take  room  for  one  other  Scripture 
quotation.  See  Ezek.  vii.  — "  Thus  saith  the  Lord 
God  unto  the  house  of  Israel.  Now  is  the  end  come 
upon  thee,  and  I  will  send  mine  anger  upon  thee,  and 
will  judge  thee  according  to  thy  ways,  and  will  re- 
compense upon  thee  all  thine  abominations.  .  .  .  Now 
will  I  shortly  pour  out  my  fury  upon  thee,  and  ac- 
complish mine  anger  upon  thee  ;  and  I  will  judge 
thee  according  to  thy  ways,  and  will  recompense  thee 

for  all  thine  abominations The  time  is  come, 

the  day  draweth  near.  The  sword  is  without,  and 
the  pestilence  and  the  famine  withki."  Here  a 
national  temporal  calamity  is  described  as  being  suf- 
ficient to  accomplish  God's  anger  upon  the  wicked 
people  referred  to,  and  to  recompense  them  for  al^their 
abominations.  Mark  ye,  these  calamities  poured  out 
upon  those  exceedingly  wicked  people  on  the  earth, 
are  distinctly  certified  by  the  inspired  record  to  be  an 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  143 

accomplishment ,  a  full  accomplishment  of  the  Divine 
anger  upon  them,  and  to  be  a  judgment  according  to 
their  ways,  and  a  recompense  for  all  their  abominations. 
This  single  passage  is  a  full  and  effectual  bar  to  all 
theological  pleas  for  a  post  mortem  judgment  and 
endless  punishment,  in  order  justly  to  recompense 
this  life's  doings. 

But  no  such  descriptions  are  ever  applied  in  the 
Scriptures  to  the  scenes,  conditions,  and  events  of 
eternity,  or  the  immortal,  spiritual  world.  We  now 
see  clearly  that  our  opponent's  reliance  on  the  mere 
sound  of  the  words,  "  treasuring  up  wrath  against 
the  day  of  wrath,"  as  proof  of  sin,  corruption,  and 
calamity,  in  the  spiritual  world,  is  utterly  vain  and 
futile.  The  light  which  we  have  now  obtained  on  the 
time  and  nature  of  the  general  judgment  of  God,  and 
of  his  Messiah,  and  of  the  times  and  natures  of  the 
special  judgments,  which  are  but  timely  administra- 
tions of  the  general  judgment,  settles  this  point  most 
conclusively. 

But  before  proceeding  to  other  proof  texts  of  the 
Doctor,  we  will  briefly  glance  at  other  phraseology 
of  this  first  proof  passage.  "  To  them  who,  by 
patient  continuance  in  well  doing,  seek  for  glory,  and 
honor,  and  immortality ;  eternal  life."  This  natural- 
ly describes  a  current  good  life  and  its  fruits,  and  it 
is  clumsy  work  to  wrench  it  out  in  this  connection 
and  fbfce  it  into  the  future  world.  The  word 
rendered  immortality  here  is  not  athanasia,  which  is 
rendered  immortality  in  connection  with  the  resur- 
rection and  deathless  state,  —  but  it  is  aphtharsia, 


144  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

which  signifies  incorrnption,  and  is  familiarly  used  in 
the  sense  of  Parkhurst's  second  definition,  "  incor- 
ruptness  in  a  moral  or  spiritual  sense,  freedom  from 
corrupt  doctrines  and  designs,'7  In  Eph,  vi.  24,  it  is 
rendered  sincerity.  "  Grace  be  with  all  them  that 
love  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  in  sincerity ;"  that  is,  with 
pure  and  incorrupt  affections.  The  same  Greek  word 
occurs  in  the  same  sense  in  Titus  ii.  7  :  "In  doctrine, 
showing  incorritgAness"  There  can  be  no  reasonable 
question  of  its  bearing  this  sense  in  the  passage 
under  consideration ;  "  to  them  that  seek  .for  glory, 
honor,  and  meorruptnesa  of  principles."  Coming 
down  as  we  now  do  from  the  preceding  connection 
in  the  apostle's  letter,  there  is  visible  a  great  degree 
of  beauty  and  force  in  this  expression,  taken  in  this 
sense.  He  had  just  been  exhibiting  a  most  disgust- 
ful degree  of  moral  defilement  and  corruption ;  and 
now,  to  set  forth  the  principles  of  moral  purity  and 
Incorruption  as  the  high  aim  of  human  effort,  is  a 
most  symmetrical  process  of  apostolic  labor. 

"  Eternal  (aionion)  life."  To  those  who  seek  for 
incorruptness  in  doctrine  and  life,  the  judgment  of 
Christ  awards  aionion  life.  This  phrase,  generally, 
when  used  in.  such  practical  relations,  describing  the 
living  -influence  and  experimental  fruit  of  a  given 
attainment  of  mind,  denotes  a  characteristic  prop- 
erty of  the  Christian  life,  "  He  that  believeth 
on  the  Son,  hath  everlasting  (aionion)  life."  (John 
iii.  36.)  tl  And  this  is  life  eternal,  (aionion,)  that 
they  might  know  thee,  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus 
Christ  whom  thou  hast  sent."  (John  xvii,  3.)  The 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  145 

single  term,  life,  is  also  familiarly  used  to  express  the 
same  thing.  "  Verily,  verily,  T  say  unto  you,  He  that 
heareth  my  word,  and  believeth  on  him  that  sent  me, 
hath  everlasting  (aionion)  life,  and  shall  not  come 
into  condemnation,  but  is  passed  from  death  unto 
life."  (John  v.  24.)  This  is  the  life  spoken  of  by 
Solomon  : — '•'  Happy  is  the  man  that  findeth  wisdom  ; 
....  she  is  a  tree  of  life  to  them  that  lay  hold  upon 
her,  and  happy  is  every  one  that  retaineth  her." 
(Prov.  iii.  13,  18.) 

"  But  unto  them  that  are  contentious,  and  do  not 
obey  the  truth,  but  obey  unrighteousness,  indigna- 
tion 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  per- 
sons with  God." 

How  naturally  this  language  applies  to  the  current 
awards  of  the  progressive  administration  of  the 
Divine  government,  bearing  upon  living  characters. 
And  the  closing  sentence  of  the  passage,  announcing 
that  these  administrations  of  just  and  appropriate 
recompense  are  dispensed  under  the  general  govern- 
ment and  judgment  of  God  by  Jesus  Christ,  which 
we  have  shown  to  be  one  and  simultaneous  with  the 
Messianic  reign,  confirms  this  import  of  the  language 
on  the  special  judgments  in  detail. 

We  have  been  thus  particular  in  establishing  cer- 
tain great  principles  at  the  foundation  of  the  general 
subject  under  discussion,  and  thoroughly  to  dispose 
13 


1  H;  THEOLOGICAL    DISCUSSION. 


of  our  opponent's  opening  argument,  that  the  way 
may  be  clear  to  understand  other  and  collateral 
Scripture  testimonies,  and  to  dispose  of  his  other 
and  relative  and  depending  positions  and  argu- 
ments. 

Dr.  Adams  fills  some  space  succeeding  the  effort 
which  we  have  now  answered,  in  exposition  of  his 
views  of  the  nature  and  instrumentalities  of  his 
assumed  future  punishment.  He  seems  to  have  im- 
agined that  we  might  object  to  the  pertinence  of 
some  of  his  proof  texts  to  the  use  he  would  make  of 
them  as  descriptive  of  future  punishment,  on  account 
of  the  sensible  and  material  objects  employed  in  their 
description.  After  enumerating  several  sensible 
objects  of  a  pleasant  nature  which  describe  the 
enjoyments  of  heaven,  he  says  : 

"  But  while  the  attractions  of  heaven  suffer  nothing  by  reason 
of  criticisms  upon  the  language  in  which  they  are  presented,  some 
do  not  use  the  same  tolerance,  or  apply  the  same  principles  of  in- 
terpretation when  they  read  or  speak  of  future  punishment.  Here, 
they  say,  all  is  metaphorical,  Oriental  ;  they  select  certain  images, 
and  ask  if  any  suppose  that  the  wicked  are,  literally  to  suffer  such 
things,  from  just  these  elements  of  pain.  But  the  representations 
of  heaven  are  certainly  obnoxious  to  the  very  same  criticisms,  and 
similar  questions  may  be  asked  concerning  them.  But  being  of  a 
pleasurable  nature,  they  escape  criticism.  Therefore,  if  we  are  in- 
quired of  in  either  case,  Do  you  believe  that  these  things  are  liter- 
ally so  ?  the  proper  answer  seems  to  be  in  both  cases,  Either  these 
things,  or  things  which  now  can  only  be  expressed  by  them.  Those 
earthly  symbols  approach  nearer  than  any  thing  with  which  we  are 
now  acquainted,  to  the  things  signified." 

Indeed,  there  will  be  no  controversy  between  the 
Doctor  and  oursclf  in  respect  to  the  fitness  of  all  the 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  147 

imagery  and  symbolical  representations  employed  in 
the  Scriptures  to  indicate  whatever  punishments  God 
has  ordained,  and  wherever  executed.  However  figur- 
ative the  descriptions,  they  mean  something;  they 
denote  positive,  and  sometimes  very  terrible  suffer- 
ings. But  the  question  is,  in  each  case,  what  punish- 
ment ?  and  where  ?  Dr.  Adams  proceeds  to  answer : 

"  The  condition  of  the  wicked  after  death  is  represented  through 
such  symbols  by  Christ  and  his  apostles  as  a  state  of  positive  pun- 
ishment." 

Let  him  prove  this  assumption,  in  a  single  case, 
and  the  argument  is  his.  His  fir^t  earnest  effort  has 
proved  futile ;  and  here  we  come  to  his  second, 
which  is  this  : 

DESTRUCTION   OF   SOUL   AND   BODY  IN  GEHENNA. 

The  Doctor  says : 

"  One  of  those  indirect  proofs  of  a  thing  which  sometimes  are 
more  forcible  and  convincing  than  direct  statements,  occurs  in  the 
words  of  Christ  which  I  will  refer  to  as  proving  the  future  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked,  in  which  he  tells  us  to  "fear  Him  which  is 
able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  hell."  Matt.  x.  28. 

As  the  Doctor  makes  much  account  of  this  passage 
in  his  "  Scriptural  Argument,"  and  as  it  is  commonly 
relied  upon  by  those  of  his  side  with  more  assurance 
than  any  other  words  of  Scripture,  we  must  devote 
to  it  deliberate  and  candid  attention.  And  as  our 
friend  does  attempt  some  argument  here,  at  least 
some  negative  argument,  making  objections  to  cer- 
tain other  interpretations  of  the  passage,  we  will 
transfer  to  this  connection  all  he  says  upon  it, — thus : 


148  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

"  If  God  has  merely  the  natural  ability  to  do  this,  while  his  char- 
acter makes  it  morally  impossible  that  he  should  do  it,  the  illus- 
tration is  singularly  at  fault.  It  would  never  be  proper  to  tell  a 
child  as  a  reason  why  it  should  fear  its  father  and  mother,  that 
they  have  power  to  inflict  a  punishment  which  we  know  is  morally 
impossible.  Their  mere  natural  ability  to  inflict  it  would  not  jus- 
tify the  exhortation, —  '  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  fear  them.'  To  asso- 
ciate the  idea  of  destroying  both  body  and  soul  in  hell  with  our 
proper  fear  of  God  our  heavenly  Father,  if  he  would  do  no  such 
thing,  would  not  be  in  accordance  with  truth. 

"  Some,  to  avoid  this  difficulty,  say  that  the  passage  means 
merely  that  God  can  destroy  life.  But  so  can  they  who  kill  the 
body.  There  is  something  more  which  God  alone  can  do,  and 
which  we  need  rather  to  fear.  Others,  knowing  that  the  original 
word  for  hell  in  this  passage  cannot  mean  the  grave,  propose  to 
render  the  warning  thus,  that  God  can  cast  those  whom  he  kills, 
into  the  valley  of  Hinnom.  But  so  could  assassins,  or  judicial  ex- 
ecutioners. We  still  look  for  that  which  God  alone  can  do.  Some 
say  it  must  be  annihilation.  But  the  valley  of  Hinnom  is  noto- 
riously symbolical  of  perpetuity,  the  fire  always  burning,  the  worm 
ever  breeding.  Why,  moreover,  should  any  place  be  specified  in 
which  the  annihilation,  which  is  the  same  thing  every  where,  should 
occur  ?  Or  what  appropriateness  is  there  in  speaking  of  the  soul 
as  being  annihilated  there  ?  —  Destroying  both  soul  and  body  in 
hell  seems  to  be  equivalent  to  that  expression  —  '  everlasting  de- 
struction,' —  an  apparent  contradiction  of  terms,  but  conveying  the 
idea  of  perpetual  loss  and  misery. 

"  We  get  no  relief  from  these  difficulties  with  the  passage  if  we 
turn  to  the  milder  form  in  which  the  jdea  is  expressed  in  Luke  xii. 
5.  '  Fear  him  which  after  he  hath  killed  hath  power  to  cast  into 
hell :  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  Fear  him.'  For  Gehenna,  understood 
literally  as  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  presents  to  the  mind  the  most 
terrific  image  of  positive  misery.  Nothing  can  be  more  re- 
volting or  fearful.  Let  those  who  are  jealous  at  imputations  cast 
upon  the  character  of  God  by  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment, 
explain  how  Jesus  could  even  suggest  the  idea  of  the  Father  cast- 
ing his  offspring  into  a  place,  the  name  of  which  was  borrowed 
from  the  most  fearful  object  then  known  to  his  hearers.  Until 


REPLY   TO    DR.    ADAMS.  149 

this  passage  is  shown  to  imply  no  punishment  from  the  hand  of 
God,  we  must  regard  it  as  an  impregnable  proof  of  future  visita- 
tions of  misery  upon  the  wicked." 

Now  the  leading  question  is,  does  Jesus  here  use 
the  term  Gehenna  as  the  name  of  a  place  of  torture 
beyond  death  and  the  resurrection  ?  To  this  our 
opponent  answers,  yes  •  and  we,  with  all  the  emphasis 
of  devout  love  for  the  honor  of  God  and  reverence 
for  his  word,  reverberate,  NO  !  Come,  now,  to  the 
study  of  the  subject,  philologically  and  exegetically. 

Dr.  Adams  himself  makes  note  of  the  fact  here, 
though  not  with  sucli  particularity  as  to  make  him- 
self well  understood  by  his  unlearned  readers,  that 
the  word  in  the  original  language  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment which  is  rendered  hell  in  this  passage,  is 
Gehenna,  and  that  this  is  literally  the  Valley  of  Hin- 
nom  ; — and  furthermore,  that  Jesus  "borrowed'  this 
literal  name  of  that  odious  valley,  for  a  secondary 
or  metaphorical  use  in  relation  to  the  subject  of  his 
discourse.  So  far  he  is  unquestionably  right.  But 
this  word  was  in  very  familiar  use  as  a  metaphor,  and 
as  Jesus  does  not  explain  it  in  this  case  as  turned 
out  of  its  common  usage,  we  are  to  be  guided  in  our 
judgment  of  it  here  by  what  we  can  know  of  such 


usage. 


But  there  was  no  usage  in  the  world,  by  which 
Gehenna  was,  or  ever  had  been,  in  our  Saviour's  time, 
appropriated  as  the  name  of  a  place  or  state  of  future 
punishment.  We  are  aware  that  it  has  been  asserted 
by  some  of  the  learned,  that  this  word  was  used  by 
the  Jews,  in  our  Saviour's  time,  as  the  name  of  such 
a  place,  making  it  synonymous  with  the  heathen 


150  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

fabulous  Tartarus.  If  it  were  so,  it  would  be  most 
natural  to  suppose  that  Jesus,  who  was  the  Messiah 
of  the  prophets,  and  the  exponent  of  the  Scriptures 
and  not  of  heathen  fables,  used  it  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment sense.  But  that  assumption  in  respect  to  the 
usage  of  the  word  by  the  Jews  of  the  Saviour's  time, 
is  without  historical  proof.  It  has  been  so  easy  and 
natural  for  learned  men,  of  biased  minds,  to  assume  on 
mere  presumption,  even  in  questions  of  fact  where 
authorities  were  at  hand,  that  it  was  assumed,  and 
generally  conceded,  until  recently,  that  Gehenna  is 
used  in  the  Apocrypha  for  a  place  of  after-death  pun- 
ishment. Some  theologians,  in  an  unaccountable 
manner,  caught  such  an  impression ;  and,  there  being 
not  much  criticism  on  such  matters,  they  promul- 
gated it  as  fact  without  even  searching  to  see.  But 
the  late  Rev.  Walter  Balfour,  who  was  educated  in 
Lady  Huntington's  School,  and,  while  preacher  of  a 
Baptist  Society  in  Charlestown,  Mass.,  was  put  upon 
a  train  of  study  by  Prof.  Stuart's  controversial  writ- 
ings against  Unitarians,  which  resulted  in  his  conver- 
sion to  Universalism,  being  a  good  reader  of  Hebrew 
and  Greek,  read  the  original  of  the  Apocrypha 
through  with  this  question  in  view,  and  found  that 
the  term  Gehenna  does  not  occur  in  those  writings 
at  all. 

But  more  common  reference  has  been  made,  as  the 
only  other  evidence,  to  Hie  Targums,  which  are  Jew- 
ish Scripture  commentaries,  for  proof  of  the  assump- 
tion that  Gehenna  was  used  in  our  Saviour's  time  for 
a  place  of  future  punishment,  And  here,  too,  the 
evidence  vanishes  on  inspection.  It  is  granted  that 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS. 


some  of  the  Targums  use  the  term  tinder  c          er~- 
tion  for  a  place  of  future  punishment  j  but  acco       £ 
to  the  best   authority,   and   accredited   "  Orthodo 
authority,  the  earliest  of  them,  which  uses  the  term 

thus,  that  of  Jonathan  Ben  Uzziel,  was  not  written 

4* 

earlier  than  the  third,  or  more  probably  not  earlier 
than  the  fourth  century  of  the  Christian  era.  Some 
critics  have  referred  the  work  to  as  late  a  date  as  the 
seventh  or  eighth  century.  * 

So,  then,  the  term  in  question  was  not  in  use 
among  the  Jews  of  our  Saviour's  time,  in  the  sense 
which  Dr.  Adams  attaches  to  it.  Therefore,  in  the 
process  of  coming  at  the  sense  in  which  our  Lord 
employed  it  in  the  New  Testament,  we  are  shut  up 
exclusively  to  the  Old  Testament  usage  of  it,  and  the 
explanations  afforded  by  the  occasions  and  connec- 
tions of  its  usage  in  his  discourses. 

With  regard  to  the  Old  Testament  usage  of  Gehen- 
na, it  is, 

1.  The  proper  name  of  a  valley.  Parkhurst,  in  his 
Greek  and  English  Lexicon,  says,  "  The  Gehenna  of 
the  New  Testament  is  a  corruption  of  the  two  Hebrew 
words,  ge,  a  valley,  and  Hinnom,  the  name  of  a  person 
who  was  once  the  possessor  of  it.  This  valley  of  Ilin- 
nom  lay  near  Jerusalem,  and  had  been  the  place  of 
those  abominable  sacrifices  in  which  the  idolatrous 


*Balfour's  First  Inquiry,  Gehenna,  Sec.  v.  Uni.  Expositor,  vol  iii., 
p.  433.  Ib.  vol.  ii.,  p.  3i8;  referring  to  Prideaux's  Connections,  vol. 
iv.  pp.  215-220;  vol.  ii.  p.  130.  Gesenius  Jesaia,  Einleit,  §  11.  Jahn's 
Introduction  to  the  Old  Testament,  Gen.  Introd.  §  47,  p.  66.  New- 
York,  1827.  Eichhorn's  Einleit,  in  das  alte  Test,  Kap.  iii".  §  226,  227. 
Bertholdt'fl  historieche  Einleit.  in  Schriften  des  alt.  und  neu.  Test. 
Zweyter  Th.  §  173.  Home's  Introduction,  voL  ii.  p.  160. 


152  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Jews  burned  their  children  alive  to  Moloch,  Baal,  or 
the  sun.  A  particular  place  in  this  valley  was  called 
Tojtht-t,  and  the  valley  itself  the  valley  of  Tophet, 
from  the  fire  stove,  toph,  in  which  they  burned  their 
children  to  Moloch." 

King  Josiah,  in  his  reign,  in  order  to  put  a  stop  to 
the  idolatrous  practices  of  his  people  there,  "  defiled 
Tophet/'  making  it  a  common  receptacle  of  garbage 
and  filth  from  the  city.  A  fire  was  kept  constantly 
burning  to  consume  the  principal  part  of  the  garbage, 
and  the  worms -were  constantly  preying  upon  the 
scattered  portions  in  the  valley.  So  much  of  the 
history  of  the  place  Dr.  Adams  takes  note  of,  in  the 
words  as  quoted  in  their  place,  "  the  fire  always 
burning,  the  worm  ever  breeding." 

2.  From  these  characteristics  of  ghe  ben  Hinnom, 
the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom,  it  came  into  use  by 
the  Jews  as  an  emblem  or  metaphor  of  odiousness 
and  wretchedness.  To  catch  up  a  visible  scene,  or 
the  name  of  a  place,  with  reference  to  its  prominent 
characteristic,  and  use  it  metaphorically,  for  the  good 
or  the  bad  as  the  case  may  be,  is  common  in  all  ages. 
How  soon,  after  the  Russians  made  Sebastopol  their 
strong  hold  in  their  late  war  with  France  and 
England,  was  the  main  position  of  a  party,  and  the 
strong  point  of  a  lecture,  a  Sebastopol  of  the  party 
and  the  orator.  Thermopylae  of  Greece,  as  the  stand 
point  of  contestants,  and  Egypt  as  the  surname  of 
darkness,  are  equally  familiar. 

Ge  hiunom  came  to  be  used  by  the  prophets,  as  a 
metaphorical  representation  of  the  suffering  and 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  153 

desolation  which  should  consummate  the  overthrow 
and  dispersion  of  the  Jewish  nation.  Jeremiah 
prophesied,  saying :  ^  And  they  have  built  the  high 
places  of  Tophet,  which  is  in  the  valley  of  the  son  of 
Hinnom,  (ghe  ben  Hinnom,)  to  burn  their  sons  and 
their  daughters  in  the  fire.  Therefore,  behold,  the 
days  come,  saith  the  Lord,  that  it  shall  no  more  be 
called  Tophet,  nor  the  valley  of  the  son  of  Hinnom, 
but  the  valley  of  slaughter ;  for  they  shall  bury  in 
Tophet  till  there  be  no  place.  And  the  carcasses  of 
this  people  shall  be  meat  for  the  fowls  of  heaven,  and 
for  the  beasts  of  the  earth  ;  and  none  shall  fray  them 
away."  (Jer.  vii.  31-33.)  There  are  two  prominent 
reasons  why  such  a  denunciation  as  this  should  have 
been  of  terrible  import  to  the  Jews.  First,  they 
placed  such  an  estimate  on  what  they  called  a  burial, 
or  what  was  such  in  Jewish  form,  and  such  infamy 
on  the  non-reception  of  this  rite,  that  the  common 
sentiment  and  feeling  is  truthfully  expressed  by  Solo- 
mon when  he  says,  that  if  a  man  "  have  no  burial,  an 
untimely  birth  is  better  than  he."  In  the  second 
place,  the  associating  of  the  valley  of  Hinnom  with 
this  extensive  destruction  of  life  and  exposure  of 
their  bodies,  filled  out  a  most  horrid  picture  to  their 
minds.  And  as  such  a  judgment  must  affect  their 
nation  universally,  this  prophecy  represented  the 
whole  nation  as  subjected  to  the  punishment  of  Ge- 
henna. So  again,  (Jer.  xix.  12,)  "  Thus  will  I  do 
unto  this  place,  saith  the  Lord,  and  to  the  inhabitants 
thereof,  and  even  make  this  city  as  Tophet." 

So,  then,  while,  as  Schleusner  observes,  among  the 


154  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Jews  "  any  severe  punishment,  especially  a  shameful 
kind    of    death,    was    denominated    Gehenna,"   the 
prophets  made  it  especially  a  metaphor,  or  analogical 
representation,  of  the  judgment  upon  their  nation, 
which  should  desolate  their  city,  and  dissolve  their 
church  and  polity.     And   this  is  the  farthest.     It  is 
the    extreme     to     which     the     prophets     went    in 
emblemizing  punishment  by  the  valley   of  Hinnom. 
Indeed,  they  could  not  go  farther.     God,  who  made  it 
their  mission  to  warn  the  people  of  all  real  dangers, 
never  inspired  them  with  any  knowledge  or  conception 
of  a    greater  and  more  terrible  judgment  than  this. 
The  prophet  Daniel,  (xii.  1,)   speaking  in  relation  to 
this  judgment,  said,  "  And  there  shall  be  a  time   of 
trouble,  such  as  never  was  since  there  was  a  nation 
even  to  that  same  time."     And  Jesus,  in  his  last  dis- 
course to  his  disciples  on  this  subject,  the  judgment 
being  then  near  at  hand,   (Matt.  xxiv.  21,  34,)   said, 
"  For  then  shall  be  great  tribulation,  such  as  was  not 
since  the  beginning  of  the  world  to  this  time,  no,  nor 
ever  shall  be.     Verily  I  say  unto  you,  This  generation 
shall  not  pass  till  all  these  things   shall  be  fulfilled." 
And  Josephus,  in  recording  this  judgment  after  it 
had  transpired,   expressed  the   opinion    that  all  the 
sufferings  of  all  cities  and  nations,,  including  Sodorn 
and    Gomorrah,    put  together,   would  not  make  an 
aggregate  equalling  the  miseries  of  his  people  in  that 
dispensation  of  judgment.    This  was,  then,  emphatical- 
ly, and  in  the  highest  sense  of  that  metaphor,  accord- 
ing to  the  prophetic   testimonies  of  Daniel,  and   of 
the  Lord  Jesus,  and  the   confirmations  of  authentic 
history,  "  Tlie punishment  of  Gehenna" 


REPLY  TO   DR,    ADAMS.  155 

Such  is  the  light  with  which  we  enter  upon  the 
New  Testament  usage  of  Gehenna.  Let  it  be 
suitably  noticed,  and  reverently  appreciated,  by  every 
reader.  As  we  go  to  take  our  seat  at  the  feet  of 
Jesus,  to  hear  from  his  lips  the  word  Gehenna,  either 
as  a  literal  place  of  execution  or  as  an  emblem  of 
punishment,  we  go  without  the  prepossession  of  a 
thought  in  our  minds  of  its  being  the  name  or  emblem 
of  a  place  of  future,  endless  torments.  In  'this  atti- 
tude, I  mean,  we  go  as  Bible  students,  and  students 
of  Jewish  history.  For  the  word  was  never  used  in 
such  a  sense  in  the  Old  Testament,  nor  in  any  Jewish 
writing  known  to  have  been  extant  in  our  Saviour's 
time.  And,  more  than  this,  coming  up  to  Jesus  from 
the  reading  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  first  of 
Genesis  to  the  last  of  Malachi,  we  bring  with  us  no 
thought  of  a  future  state  of  punishment  revealed  in 
any  language  whatever.  This  is  generally  conceded 
by  the  most  eminent  "  Orthodox"  theologians, —  that 
the  doctrine  of  future  punishment  is  not  revealed  in 
the  Old  Testament.  And  this  we  will  make  plain  by 
the  record  itself,  when  we  come  to  Dr.  Adams'  next 
Scripture  Argument,  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus. 

And,  further,  while  we  come  to  Jesus,  without  any 
Old  Testament  revelation  of  a  place  of  future  torment, 
under  the  name  gehenna,  sheol,  hades,  or  any  other 
appellation,  we  come  impressed  with  the  fact  that  the 
old  covenant  is  the  legal  covenant,  depending  chiefly 
on  external  sanctions  to  enforce  obedience,  and  that 
we  are  to  find  the  new  covenant  a  covenant  of  "  grace 
and  truth,"  the  revealments  of  which  are  distinguish- 
ed by  the  appellation,  Gospel,  or  good  tidings.  What 


156  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

a  surprise  it  would  be.  then,  if  we  should  find  this 
good  tidings  to  uncap  a  fiery  pit  of  endless  burnings, 
appointed  of  God  as  the  final  home  of  most  of  his 
offspring, — a  horror  which  the  voice  of  Sinai's 
thunder  never  hinted.  Let  us  not,  Christian  friends, 
on  our  way  to  Jesus  as  a  Teacher,  abandon  the  route 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  meander  through  the 
smoking  underground  regions  of  heathen  fables,  and 
thence  gather  up  the  rudiments  of  a  theology  to 
throw  into  the  face  of  our  new  Master.  The  com- 
munications of  God,  at  sundry  times  and  in  diverse 
manners,  by  the  Patriarchs,  Moses,  and  the  Prophets, 
are  the  preparatory  revealments  by  which  we  are  to 
come  directly  to  Jesus.  So  let  us  come. 

GEHENNA    IN    THE    NEW    TESTAMENT. 

Our  esteemed  friend,  Dr.  Adams,  as  a  standard 
bearer  in  the  cause  of  "  Future,  Endless  Punish- 
ment," plants  himself  confidently,  as  we  have  seen, 
upon  the  words  of  our  Lord  concerning  the  destruc- 
tion of  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna,  Matt.  x.  28  ;  and 
Luke  xii.  4,  5.  But  as  the  mere  sound  of  the  word 
Gehenna  is  not,  in  the  estimation  of  him  who  derives 
his  religious  education  from  the  Bible,  enough  to 
create  a  world  of  "  immortal  pains,'7  we  have  been 
seeking,  and  do  now  seek,  a  fair  and  reliable  exegesis 
of  the  passage.  We  renew  and  press  the  inquiry, 
whence  does  our  friend  derive  the  idea  which  he 
foists  upon  the  word  in  question  in  the  case  which 
lie  has  chosen  ?  Not,  as  we  have  seen,  not  from  the 
use  of  it  by  the  Jews,  even  the  apostatized  Jews,  in 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  157 

» 

our  Saviour's  time, —  and  surely  not  from  the  use  of 
it  in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  For  we  have 
shown  it  to  be  clear  beyond  controversy  or  cavil,  and 
a  fact  which,  happily,  is  not  controverted,  that  ge 
Hinnom  in  the  Old  Testament,  literally  the  valley  of 
Hinnom,  when  used  as  an  emblem  of  punishment,  in 
no  case  emblemizes  a  punishment  farther  or  greater 
than  that  which,  in  the  end  of  the  Jewish  age,  should 
involve  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  city  and 
nation.  With  this  light  in  our  minds  we  come  to  the 
usage  of  the  word  by  the  Master  himself. 

Its  first  occurrence  in  the  New  Testament  is  in  the 
following  passage  : 

"  Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said  by  them  of  old  time,  thou  shalt 
not  kill :  and  whosoever  shall  kill  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgment. 
But  I  say  unto  you,  that  whosoever  is  angry  with  his  brother  without 
a  cause,  shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgment ;  and  whosoever  shall 
say  to  his  brother,  Haca,  (shallow  brains),  shall  be  in  danger  of  the 
council ;  but  whosoever  shall  say  to  his  brother,  Thou  fool,  (Moreh, 
apostate),  shall  be  in  danger  of  hell-fire."  (  Gehenna  Jire).  (Matt, 
v.-21,  22.) 

Here,  coming  up  from  the  old  prophets,  whose 
mission  it  was.  as  we  have  said  before,  to  warn  the 
people  of  all  real  danger?,  we  meet  the  great  Messiah 
for  the  first  time,  in  a  discourse  on  punishment  in- 
tensified by  the  word  Gehenna.  And  how  does  the 
occasion  and  manner  of  his  use  of  it  in  this  instance 
explain  to  us  his  meaning?  Does  it  appear  to  be  the 
announcement  of  a  new  doctrine?  Is  this  the  first 
development,  in  the  revelations  of  God,  of  a  world 
of  endless  woe  for  man  ?  If  it  is  announced  here  at 
14 


158  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

* 

all,  it  is  the  first  announcement,  the  original  revelation 
of  the  astounding  economy.  For  we  have  seen  that 
neither  the  patriarchs,  Moses,  nor  the  prophets,  ever 
announced  it ;  and  this  is  the  first  utterance  of  our 
Lord  which  the  advocates  of  such  a  post-mortem 
world  for  man  have  presumed  to  claim  as  an  announce- 
ment of  it. 

In  our  original  note  of  invitation  to  Dr.  Adams  to 
enter  with  us  into  a  discussion  of  "  The  Scriptural- 
ness  of  Future,  Endless  Punishment/7  which  we  have 
placed  in  the  preface  to  the  Discussion,  we  used  the 
following  words : 

"And  to  avoid  losing  the  subject  in  a  wilderness  of  verbiage, 
and  in  running  quotations  of  fragmentary  Scripture  passages,  I  pro- 
pose that  you  select  the  first  passage  which,  in  your  judgment, 
clearly  announces  this  doctrine;  or,  if  it  has  crept  into  the  Bible 
so  gradually  and  imperceptibly  that  you  cannot  put  your  finger  upon 
its  beginning,  select  what  you  regard  as  one  of  the  most  clear 
and  unquestionable  declarations  of  it,  and  show  from  the  subject 
of  discourse,  the  natural  force  of  the  language,  and  the  Scriptural 
usus  loqueiidi,  that  it  teaches  such  doctrine." 

The  Doctor  did  not  accede  to  this  proposition  in- 
so-far  as  to  undertake  the  discovery  of  the  Jirst 
ap2iearo.nce  of  his  doctrine  in  the  Bible.  Nor  did  he 
pledge  himself,  neither  has  ho  attempted,  to  "  show 
from  the  subject  of  discourse,  the  natural  force  of 
the  language,  and  the  Scriptual-mws  loquendi,"  that 
any  text  "  teaches  such  a  doctrine."  But  he  has 
selected  a  passage  which  he  undoubtedly  regards  as 
1  one  of  the  most  clear  and  unquestionable  declara- 
tions of  it."  Whether  it  be  so  or  not  depends  on  the 
sense  in  which  \\c  shall  see  our  Saviour  to  have  used 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  159 

the  word  Gehenna.  The  first  instance  of  his  use  of 
it  is  before  us,  and  we  repeat  the  inquiry,  does  he 
astonish  his  disciples  and  the  world,  in  this  blessed 
sermon  on  the  Mount,  by  flashing  upon  their  eyes 
through  this  word  the  revealment  of  a  world  of  end- 
less torments?  We  do  not  believe  there  is  a  Sunday 
School  pupil  in  our  land,  who,  looking  upon  this 
passage  from  the  stand  point  which  we  now  occupy, 
would  not  resist,  as  sacrilegious,  the  imputation  of  any 
such  meaning  to  this  saying  of  Jesus.  There  are 
three  successive  grades  of  punishment  named  here, 
as  all  belonging  to  one  series  of  civil  administration, 
—  viz:  the  judgment,  the  council,  and  Gehenna-fire. 
So  that  if  there  is  one  "  Orthodox"  hell  designated 
here,  there  are  three.  The  terms  judgment  and 
council  might  just  as  well  have  been  translated 
hell,  in  the  vulgar  sense,  as  the  term  Gehenna. 

Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  in  his  Commentary,  says  upon 
this  passage  : 

"It  is  very  probable  that  our  Lord  means  no  more  here  than 
this  ;  if  a  man  charge  another  with  apostacy  from  the  Jewish 
religion,  or  rebellion  against  God,  and  cannot  prove  his  charge, 
then  he  is  exposed  to  that  punishment  (burning  alive)  which  the 
other  must  have  suffered  if  the  charge  had  been  substantiated. 
There  are  three  kinds  of  offences  here,  which  exceed  each  other  in 
their  degrees  of  guilt.  1.  Anger  against  a  man,  accompanied 
with  some  injurious  act.  2.  Contempt,  expressed  by  the  op- 
probrious epithet,  Eaca,  or  sliallow  brains.  3.  Hatred  and  mortal 
enmity,  expressed  by  the  term  Moreli,  or  apostate,  where  such 
apostacy  could  not  be  proved.  Now.  proportioned  to  these  three 
offences,  were  three  different  degrees  of  punishment,  each  exceed- 
ing the  other  in  severity,  as  the  offences  exceed  each  other  in  their 
different  degrees  of  guilt.  1.  The  judyment,  or  council  of  twenty- 


ICO  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

three,  which  could  inflict  the  punishment  of  strangling.  2.  The 
sanhedrin,  or  great  council,  which  could  inflict  the  punishment  of 
sinning.  3.  The  being  burnt  alive  in  the  valley  of  the  son  of 
Hinnom.  This  appears  to  be  the  meaning  of  our  Lord.  (See 
Clarke's  Com.  in  loco.) 

It  would  not  be  unworthy  of  our  Lord  to  give  his 
disciples  the  instruction  which  this  would  comprise 
taken  literally  as  Dr.  Clarke  here  represents  it.  His 
disciples  were  unlearned  men,  and  in  the  faithful  dis- 
charge of  their  duties  as  Christian  teachers  would  be 
exposed  to  contumelious  treatment  from  men  in  whom 
they  would  discern  the  characters  described  by  the 
epithets  here  designated.  They  we/e  of  like  passions 
as  other  men,  and  if  they  were  not  suitably  circum- 
spect and  guarded  they  might  throw  themselves  into 
the  power  of  those  who  were  watching  for  occasions 
to  accuse  them,  to  subject  them  to  legal  punishment. 
We  are  aware  that  it  has  been  objected  to  the  literal 
acceptance  of  this  passage,  that  there  was  no  court 
which  could  punish  for  mere  anger.  But  we  think 
Dr.  Clarke's  view  is  a  fair  one,  that  Jesus  meant  to 
imply  in  the  word  anger,  such  injurious  act  as 
usually  accompanied  hasty  outbursts  of  violent 
passion. 

But  admitting  this  whole  passage  to  be  figurative, 
employing  the  three  grades  of  civil  adjudication  and 
punishment  as  analogies  of  the  appropriate  degrees 
of  recompense  according  to  desert  administered  by 
the  moral  government  of  God,  it  creates  no  new  hell, 
it  puts  no  new  sense  upon  the  term  "  Gehenna,"  any 
more  than  upon  the  "  judgment,'-'  and  the  "  council." 
Taken  as  figurative  it  does  but  elucidate  and  enforce 


EEPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS. 

the  doctrine  which  Universalists  above  all  others 
admit  and  maintain,  to  wit,  that  recompense  is  wisely 
and  justly  apportioned  to  character,  by  the  Divine 
administration, 

Gehenna  occurs  again  in  the  29th  and  30th  verses 
of  the  same  chapter.  "  And  if  thy  right  eye  offend 
thee,  pluck  it  out  and  cast  it  from  thee ;  for  it  is  pro- 
fitable for  thee  that  one  of  thy  members  should 
perish,  and  not  that  thy  whole  body  should  be  cast 
into  Gehenna."  The  other  verse  is  a  repetition  of 
this,  with  the  difference  only  of  substituting  the  hand 
for  the  eye.  St.  Mark  (ix.  43)  records  the  same  in 
the  folloAving  words:  —  "And  if  thy  hand  offend 
thee,  cut  it  off  ;  it  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  life 
maimed,  than  having  two  hands  to  go  into  hellr 
(Gehenna,)  into  the  fire  that  never  shall  be  quench- 
ed ;"  or,  as  the  most  literal  translation  is,  into  the  un- 
quenchable fire  ;  "where  their  worm  dieth  not  and 
the  fire  is  not  quenched."  This  word  is  twice  repeat- 
ed in  the  same  sense  in  the  verse  which  follows  the 
above. 

And  what  here  do  we  learn  from  Jesus  in  respect 
to  his  use  of  Gehenna  ?  Has  he  put  upon  it  any  new 
definition  ?  Or  has  he  inoculated  his  theology  with 
the  heathen  Tartarus,  and  transferred  Gehenna  to 
that  as  its  proper  name  ?  Nothing  of  the  sort.  Not 
a  shadow  of  occasion  does  he  give  for  such  an  inter- 
pretation, but  every  consideration  connected  with 
these  passages  forbids  it.  We  have  said  before,  that 
there  is  in  all  cases  something  in  the  very  texts  them- 
selves employed  as  proof  of  future  endless  punish- 
14* 


162  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

ment,  besides  the  surroundings  and  general  Scripture 
teachings,  which  forbids  the  use  to  which  they  im- 
perturbably  subject  them.  So  here.  The  language 
of  this  record  involves  the  fact  that  one  might  enter 
into  the  life  set  in  opposition  to  Gehenna,  maimed, 
and  that  too  on  account  of  parting  with  the  offensive 
member.  This  cannot  apply  to  the  immortal  world. 
Even  our  learned  opponent  will  not  contend  nor  ad- 
mit that  any  saint  will  enter  into  the  immortal  heaven 
maimed,  and  that,  too,  for  having  done  so  well  on 
earth  as  to  suppress  impure  desires  and  sacrifise  in- 
terests which  would  have  involved  offence  against 
the  truth.  No  such  thing  is  supposable.  But  here 
one  may  curtail  selfish  desires  and  practise  self-sacri- 
fice in  various  ways,  for  the  gospel's  sake,  and  thus 
enter  into  the  aionion  life  of  the  gospel,  yet  feeling  a 
kind  and  degree  of  maimedness  from  some  of  those 
sacrifices,  especially  if  they  were  the  loss  of  social 
friendships.  So  here,  but  never  hereafter,  the  self- 
sacrificing  Christian,  through  faith  and  obedience  of 
the  gospel,  may  enter  into  life  maimed.  And  as  the 
going  into  Gehenna,  into  the  unquenchable  fire,  is  set 
over  against  the  entering  into  life  maimed,  it  of  course 
refers  to  a  temporal  evil  to  which  apostates  would 
subject  themselves,  who  should  foster  the  offensive 
member  until  the  corruption  should  spread  through 
the  whole  body.  It  is  probable  that  Jesus  had  refer- 
ence here  to  that  approaching  judgment  on  his  nation 
which  was  emphatically  tlte  punishment  of  Gehenna. 
But  then,  for  general  application  in  all  ages,  the  sen- 
timent is  sound,  both  physically  and  morally.  It  is 


KEPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  163 

« 

wise  to  part  with  a  member  of  the  body  through 
which  a  virus  is  spreading,  rather  than  that  the  virus 
should  spread  to  the  destruction  of  the  whole  body. 
And  in  a  moral  respect  it  is  better  to  cut  off  any 
cherished  associate  or  habit  of  hurtful  influence,  than 
that  our  whole  character  should  be  ruined  and  our 
life  made  wretched. 

With  regard  to  the  unquenchable  fire  of  Gehenna, 
"  where  their  worm  dieth  not  and  the  fire  is  not 
quenched,"  Dr.  Adams  recognizes  the  whole  fact  of 
its  history  in  these  few  words  before  quoted,  ''the  fire 
always  burning,  the  worm  ever  breeding." 

When  used  as  an  emblem  of  punishment,  the  un- 
quenchable fire,  or  fire  that  shall  not  be  quenched, 
simply  denotes  that  the  judgment,  or  tribulation,  or 
calamity,  signified  by  it,  should  not  be  hindered.  To 
this  point  Jeremiah  prophesied,  (vii :  17,  20,)  "  Seest 
thou  not  what  they  do  in  the  cities  of  Judah,  and  in 
the  streets  of  Jerusalem  ?  Therefore  thus  saith  the 
Lord  God,  Behold,  mine  anger  and  my  fury  shall  be 
poured  out.  upon  this  place,  upon  man,  and  upon 
beast,  and  upon  the  trees  of  the  field,  and  upon  the 
fruit  of  the  ground  ;  and  it  shall  burn  and  shall  not  be 
quenched."  If  our  opponent  assumes  that  the  mere 
phraseology,  "  mine  anger  and  my  fury  shall  be 
poured  out  upon  this  place,"  is  proof  sufficient  that 
it  refers  to  God's  treatment  of  the  wicked  after  death, 
which  would  be  as  good  as  any  of  his  arguments, 
or  of  those  on  his  side  generally,  he  is  reminded 
that  this  wrath  was  to  be  poured  out  "  upon  man, 
and  upon  beast,  and  upon  the  trees  of  the  field,  and 


164  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

upon  the  fruit  of  the  ground."  If  all  this  may  be 
assumed  to  be  descriptive  of  events  in  the  immortal 
world,  then  there  is  no  longer  any  mark  of  distinction 
between  the  two  worlds.  But  all  will  admit  this  to 
be  a  testimony  of  a  temporal  judgment,  which  was 
in  part  to  consist  in  pestilence  and  famine,  affecting 
the  beasts  of  the  field  and  fruits  of  the  ground.  Yet 
it  was  a  fire  of  wrath  which  should  not  be  quenched  ; 
— that  is,  it  should  not  be  prevented,  nor  checked 
short  of  its  completed  retributive  action.  Again  the 
same  prophet, — (Jer.  xvii.  27,)  "  Then  will  I  kindle  a 
fire  in  the  gates  thereof,  and  it  shall  devour  the  pal- 
aces of  Jerusalem,  and  it  shall  not  be  quenched." 
Such  descriptions  are  familiarly  employed  in  the 
Bible,  of  scenes  and  events  of  earth,  but  never  of  the 
life  immortal  which  is  brought  to  light  through  the 
gospel. 

Another  instance  of  the  use  of  Gehenna  by  our 
Lord  is  in  Matt,  xxiii.  83  ;  "  Ye  serpents,  ye  genera- 
tion of  vipers  !  how  can  ye  escape  the  damnation  of 
hell  ? '  (tes  kriseos  tes  Gehennes ;  literally  the  condem- 
nation, or  punishment  of  Gehenna.}  Does  Jesus  here 
give  us  notice  of  a  change  in  his  use  of  this  word, 
insomuch  as  to  make  it  the  name  of  an  after-death 
prison  of  torment?  No,  not  a  hint  in  this  direction. 
On  the  contrary,  he  uses  it  in  a  connection  which 
renders  it  obvious  that,  in  the  exact  sense  of  the 
prophets,  he  makes  it  to  emblemize  the  desolating 
judgment  upon  the  Jewish  nation.  In  the  other 
cases  which  we  have  noticed  of  his  use  of  this  word, 
it  was  in  addresses  to  his  disciples.  But  here  he  is 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  165 

addressing  the  unbelieving  Jews,  with  regard  to 
whose  nation  the  prophet  had  admonished  them  that 
their  great  city  should  be  like  unto  Tophet  in  ge 
Hinnom.  But  they  were  blind  to  their  true  charac- 
ter and  condition,  though  that  very  judgment  was 
impending.  Accordingly  he  said  unto  them  in  this 
connection,  "  Woe  unto  you  Scribes,  and  Pharisees, 
hypocrites  !  because  ye  build  the  tombs  of  the  proph- 
ets, and  garnish  the  sepulchres  of  the  righteous,  and 
Bay,  If  we  had  been  in  the  days  of  our  fathers  we 
would  not  have  been  partakers  with  them  in  the 
blood  of  the  prophets.  Wherefore  ye  bo  witnesses 
unto  yourselves,  that  ye  are  the  children  of  them 
which  killed  the  prophets.  Fill  ye  up  then  the  meas- 
ure of  your  fathers.  Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of 
vipers,  how  can  ye  escape  the  punishment  of  Gehen- 
na? '  How  obviously  he  uses  the  term  in  the  meta- 
phorical sense  of  the  prophets  ;  as  if  he  had  said, 
"  How  can  you,  bearing  the  very  character  on  which 
your  prophets  based  their  prediction  that  your  land 
and  city  should  be  like  Tophet  in  ge  Hinnom,  how 
expect  to  escape  that  doom  ?  And  that  this  was  his 
subject,  his  words  which  immediately  follow  render  it 
unquestionably  certain.  For  he  proceeds  immediately 
to  say : 

"  Wherefore,  behold,  I  send  unto  you  prophets,  wise  men  and 
scribes,  and  some  of  them  ye  shall  kill  and  crucify,  and  some  of 
them  shall  ye  scourge  in  your  synagogues,  and  persecute  them 
from  city  to  city;  that  upon  you  may  come  all  the  righteous 
blood  shed  upon  the  earth,  from  the  blood  of  righteous  Abel 
to  the  blood  of  Zacharias,  son  of  Barachias,  whom  ye  slew 
between  the  temple  and  the  altar.  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 


166  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

All  these  things  shall  come  upon  this  generation.  O  Jerusa- 
lem, Jerusalem,  ....  how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  chil- 
dren together,  even  as  a  hen  gathercth  her  chickens  under  her 
wings,  hut  ye  would  not.  Behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you  deso- 
late. For  I  say  unto  you,  Yc  shall  not  see  me  henceforth,  till  ye 
shall  say,  Blessed  is  he  that  comcth  in  the  name  of  the  Lord." 

Wo  think  that  no  one  of  our  readers,  of  any  sect, 
on  reading  this  whole  connection,  can  fail  to  see  that 
the  pumsliment  of  Gehenna  in  this  case,  which  is  ren- 
dered "  damnation  of  hell,"  is  the  destruction  of  the 
Jewish  city  and  nation.  And  all  our  readers  must, 
by  this  time,  be  agreeably  impressed  with  the  fact^ 
that  when  we  have  attained  to  a  true  basis  of  Scrip- 
ture interpretation,  all  the  Bible  testimonies  on  kin- 
dred topics  concurrently  flow  in  to  confirm  and 
establish  our  positions. 

There  are  two  other  cases  of  the  use  of  Gehenna, 
in  the  New  Testament,  besides  our  opponent's  chosen 
proof  text.  The  first  of  these  is  by  our  Lord,  (Matt, 
xxiii.  15,)  "  Woe  unto  you  Scribes  and  Pharisees, 
hypocrites  !  for  ye  compass  sea  and  land  to  make  one 
proselyte,  and  when  ye  have  made  him  he  is  two-fold 
more  the  child  of  hell  (Gehenna)  than  yourselves." 
We  doubt  whether  even  our  learned  friend  will  as- 
sume that  this  should  be  rendered,  "  two-fold  more 
the  child  of  a  place  of  future  endless  punishment "  As 
the  valley  of  Ilinnom  was,  in  Jewish  usage,  an  em- 
blem of  odiousness  as  well  as  of  suffering,  the  design 
of  Jesus  wras  to  intensify  his  description  of  the  odi- 
ousness  of  the  Jewish  proselytes,  by  calling  them 
children  of  the  valley  of  Hirincm. 


REPLY   TO    DR.    ADAMS.  167 

The  other  case  to  which  we  have  referred,  is 
James  iii.  6 ;  "  And  the  tongue  is  a  fire,  a  world  of 
iniquity  ;  and  is  set  on  fire  of  Gehenna."  The  sense 
here  is  similiar  to  that  in  the  last  case  noticed; — de- 
noting mischievous  odiousness. 

And  now  we  come  to  the  instance  of  the  use  of 
Gehenna,  on  which  our  opponent  has  planted  himself 
for  defense  of  his  favorite  doctrine,  that  of  "future 
endless  punishment."  How  does  he  make  his  proof 
in  this  case  ?  We  have  correctly  noted  the  use  of  ge 
Hinnom  before  Christ,  by  the  prophets  ;  and  its  non- 
use  in  the  Jewish  writings  of  our  Saviour's  time  ; 
and  we  have  carefully  studied  every  case  of  its  use 
by  Jesus  except  this  now  in  question ;  and  it  was 
never  used  either  as  the  name  of  a  place  or  the  em- 
blem of  a  place  of  future  endless  punishment.  To 
this  statement  every  reader  who  has  deliberately  and 
intelligently  accompanied  us  in  this  investigation  will 
respond  with  an  emphatic  amen.  Therefore  the 
destruction  of  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna  is  not  the 
consignment  of  the  person  to  a  place  of  future  end- 
less punishment,  because  Gehenna  is  not  the  name  or 
emblem  of  any  such  place  or  state.  The  Doctor 
might,  with  a  small  degree  of  plausibility,  take  it  to 
denote  an  extinction  of  being.  But  he  offers  as  an 
argument  against  this,  that  "the  valley  of  Hinnom  is 
notoriously  symbolical  of  perpetuity,  the  fire  always 
burning,  the  worm  ever  breeding.'7  But  he  assumes 
here  for  the  valley  of  Hinnom  what  is  not  true  in 
fact.  The  perpetuity  applies  to  the  instruments  of 
punishments  and  not  to  the  sufferings  of  any  individ- 


168  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

ual.  They  who  were  burned  in  the  fire  of  Tophet, 
whether  sacrificed  k)  Moloch  or  executed  for  crime, 
were  despatched  very  quickly,  So  there  is  virtually 
a  slight  of  words,  though  not  so  designed,  in  this 
attempt  of  the  Doctor  to  make  the  valley  of  Hinnom 
symbolical  of  his  theory  of  endless  punishment  in 
opposition  to  annihilation.* 

But  the  passage  proves  neither.  Whatever  it  may 
mean,  it  does  not  utter,  by  any  implication  or  figure, 
future  endless  punishment ;  because  Gehenna  is  not, 
ia  any  Scripture  usage,  either  the  name  or  emblem 
of  a  place  or  state  of  such  punishment.  Therefore, 
so  far  as  our  discussion  with  the  Doctor  is  concerned, 
we  need  say  nothing  more  on  this  portion  of  Scrip- 
ture. But  we  make  it  our  principle,  while  we  tear 
down  error,  to  build  up  truth,  and  to  promote  the 
faith  and  love  of  the  Scripture-s  by  elucidating  their 
harmonious  teachings.  Therefore  we  will  devote  a 
brief  labor  to  what  we  regard  as  a  truthful  exposition 
of  the  passage. 

Some  very  able   and   candid  expounders  of  Scrip- 

• 

*Dr,  Adams'  argument  against  the  Destructionist,  from  the  apparent 
reference  to  a  place,  in  his  proof  text,  turns  equally  against  himself. 
He  says  "  Why,  moreover,  should  .any  plftce  be  specified  in  which  the 
annihilation,  which  is  the  same  thing  everywhere,  should  occur  ?"  This 
question  is  equally  pertinent  tuined  hack  upon  him.  "  Why,  more- 
over, should  any  place  be  specified  in  which  spiritual  punishment,  which 
is  the  same  every  where,  should  occur?"  Does  fee  think  it  will  occsir 
in  a  place  called  the  Valley  of  Hinnom?  No.  He  takes  the  Gehenna- 
fire  to  be  a  symbol  of  Future  punishment.  Then  what  about  its  meaning 
n  place  ?  He  seems  to  he  slightly  confused  in  this  matter.  At  one  time 
he  views  Gehenna  RS  a  symbol  of  future  punishment ;  and  th-en  Ive  talks 
of  it  as  .the  proper  name,  of  n, place  of  future  punishment. 

With  regard  to  "everlasting  destruction,"  which  the  Doctor  takes  to 
be  "  an  apparent  contradiction  of  terms,"  we  shall  doubtless  find,  when 
we  come  to  consider  it  in  its  place,  that  it  involves  no  contradiction 
at  all. 


REPLY   TO    BE.    ADAMS.  169 

ture  have  adopted  the  opinion,  that  this  casting  into 
Gehenna  after  killing  the  body,  or  destroying  both 
soul  and  body  in  Gehenna  as  it  is  recorded  by 
Matthew,  means  the  destruction  of  the  very  principle 
of  human  existence,  after  the  death  of  the  body,  so 
that  man  should  never  live  again.  They  have  not 
understood,  however,  that  God  would  ever  do  this, 
annihilate  his  offspring, — for  it  would  be  against  the 
leading  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  the  resurrection  of  all 
men  from  the  dead,  immortal  and  incorruptible.  The 
sentiments  that  some  men  are  to  be  so  destroyed  as 
never  to  exist  again,  and  that  all  men  are  to  be  made 
alive  in  Christ,  immortal  and  incorruptible,  cannot 
both  be  true.  Therefore,  as  the  latter  is  unquestion- 
ably a  Scripture  doctrine,  the  former  cannot  be. 

Consequently  they  who  suppose  that  the  destruc- 
tion in  Gehenna  here  spoken  of,  means  the  destruction 
of  men's  existence  so  as  to  prevent  their  living  again, 
lay  particular  stress  on  the  word  power ;  "Fear  him, 
who,  after  he  hath  killed,  hath  power  to  cast  into 
hell;"  or  as  in  Matthew,  "-Who  is  able  to  destroy 
both  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna"  They  understand 
that  Jesus  designed  this  as  merely  a  reference  to  the 
power  of  God ;  and  that  his  object  was  to  inspire  the 
disciples,  unto  whom  those  words  were  addressed, 
with  confidence  in  that  power, — saying  directly  after, 
"  But  even  the  very  hairs  of  your  head  are  all  num- 
bered. Fear  ye  not,  therefore ;  ye  are  of  more  value 
than  many  sparrows."  Thus  they  view  the  saying, 
"  who  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in 
Gehenna,"  to  be  designed  as  merely  an  expression  of 
15 


170  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

the  power  of  God,  like  the  saying,  "  God  is  able  of 
these  stones  to  raise  up  children  unto  Abraham." 

But  Dr.  Adams  alleges  that  if  the  passage  refers  to 
God's  natural  ability  to  do  what  is  here  meant  to  be 
expressed  by  the  destruction  of  soul  and  body, 
"  while  his  character  makes  it  morally  impossible  that 
he  should  ever  do  it,  the  illustration  is  singularly  at 
fault."  However  this  may  be,  our  friend  appears 
even  more  singularly  at  fault  when  subjected  to  this 
scale  of  reasoning.  St.  Paul  says  of  Christ,  (Phil.  iii. 
21,)  "  he  is  able  even  to  subdue  all  things  unto  him- 
self." But  the  Doctor  will  not  allow  this  to  consti- 
tute the  least  reason  for  hoping  that  he  will  do  so 
good  a  work.  Nay,  more.  The  inspired  record 
positively  affirms  that  "  God  will  have  all  men  to  be 
saved ;"  that  "  The  Father  sent  the  Son  to  be  the 
Saviour  of  the  world ;"  that  "  For  this  purpose  was 
the  Son  of  God  manifested,  that  he  might  destroy 
the  works  of  the  devil,"  which  are  sin  and  all  its 
evils ;  that  he  hath  "  made  known  unto  us  the  mys- 
tery of  his  will,  according  to  his  good  pleasure,  wliicli 
he  hath  purposed  in  himself,  that  in  the  dispensation 
of  the  fulness  of  times  he  might  gather  together  in 
one  all  things  in  Christ."  But  all  this  must  go  for 
little  or  nothing.  What  all  good  men  pray  for,  God 
desires  and  purposes,  and  Christ  was  commissioned 
to  accomplish,  it  is  heresy,  presumptuous  heresy  to 
expect !  But  with  regard  to  the  destruction  of  soul 
and  body  in  Gehenna,  it  being  first  misconstrued  to 
mean  what  it  does  not  denote  or  imply,  an  infinite 
instead  of  a  limited  evil,  the  mere  mention  of  God's 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  171 

being  able  to  inflict  it,  must  be  taken  as  positive 
assurance  that  the  thing  shall  be  done  ! 

Well,  we  only  draw  this  picture  to  delinenate  the 
unenviable  condition  of  mind  in  relation  to  the  testi- 
monies of  God's  word,  in  which  the  opposition  is 
involved.  As  it  respects  the  passage  under  consid- 
eration, we  shall  not  differ  from  the  Doctor  upon  the 
question  of  its  relating  to  a  real  danger.  We  think 
Jesus  designed  to  admonish  his  disciples  of  a  real 
danger.  But  what  was  that  danger  ?  It  was  the 
danger  of  becoming  involved  in  some  temporal  de- 
struction, of  such  a  nature  as  to  be  appropriately 
described  as  the  punishment  of  Gehenna. 

That  endless  punishment  was  not  the  danger  refer- 
red to  has  been  sufficiently  shown.  The  phrase,  "  to 
destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna,"  no  more 
proves  endless  punishment,  than  the  phrase  "  So  they 
took  up  Jonah  and  cast  him  forth  into  the  sea," 
proves  endless  punishment.  For  Gehenna  no  more 
means  a  place  or  state  of  such  punishment  than  the 
sea  does.  True  our  translators  have  rendered  Gehen- 
na, hell ;  and  so  they  make  Jonah  call  his  place  in 
the  sea  "  the  belly  of  hell ;"  but  the  original  writers 
in  either  case,  had  no  reference  to  such  a  place  as 
Augustinian  Christians  have  distinguished  by  this 
name. 

Neither  does  his  language  denote  annihilation,  in 
the  sense  of  modern  destructionists,  or  semi-saddu- 
cees.  The  destruction  of  soul  or  life  and  body  in 
Gehenna,  to  the  mind  of  a  Christian  of  that  primitive 
Christian  age,  conveyed  no  idea  of  a  forfeiture  of 


172  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

their  immortal  existence,  or  the  destruction  of  the 
resurrection  life.  The  word  ^.swfce,  rendered  life  in 
this  passage,  is,  we  think,  never  used  in  the  Scriptures 
for  existence,  or  state  of  being t  in  the  abstract;  nor  for 
the  life  from  the  dead,  or  the  life  immortal,  which 
shall  have  the  victory  when  "  mortality  shall  be  swal- 
lowed up  of  life  ;"  nor  for  the  spiritual  life.  In  all 
these  relations  the  word  for  life  is  zoe.  Psuke  is 
familiarly  used  for  persons,  as,  "  We  were  all  in  the 
ship  two  hundred  and  seventy-six  souls  ;"  for  the 
affections  of  the  mind,  as,  "  Thou  shalt  love  the  Lord 
thy  God  with  all  thy  heart  and  with  all  thy  soul ;" 
and  for  the  natural  life,  of  which  we  will  give  a  few 
of  the  many  cases  for  examples : 

Peter  told  Jesus  that  he  would  lay  down  his  life  for 
his  sake.  And  Jesus  said  that  he  came  to  give  his 
life  a  ransom  for  many.  In  these  cases  the  same 
word  is  rendered  life  that  is  rendered  soul  in  the  text ; 
but  no  one  understands  that  Peter  and  Jesus  meant 
to  give  their  immortal  souls  a  ransom  for  others. 
Jesus  said  to  his  disciples,  "  If  any  man  come  to  me, 
and  hate  not  his  father,  and  mother,  and  wife, 
and  children,  and  brethren,  and  sisters,  yea,  and 
his  own  life  (psuke)  also,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple. ?; 
That  is,  one  must  have  such  a  supreme  love  to  the 
Redeemer's  cause,  as  to  be  prepared  to  abandon  all 
these  things  for  the  sake  of  it,  if  occasion  should 
require.  But  who  will  suppose  that  Jesus  meant  to 
require  his  disciples  to  abandon  their  immortal  souls 
for  his  sake  ?  And  Paul  said,  "  Neither  count  I  my 
life  (psuke)  dear  unto  ine."  Surely  Paul  did  not  mean 


EEPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  173 

that  he  did  not  count  his  immortal  soul  dear  unto 
him.  The  immortal  existence  for  which  he  hoped 
was  infinitely  dear  unto  him.  It  is  written  also  that 
when  the  Pharisees  murmured  because  Jesus  healed 
on  the  Sabbath  day,  he  said  unto  them,  "  I  will  ask 
you  one  thing :  Is  it  lawful  on  the  Sabbath  days  to 
do  good,  or  to  do  evil?  to  save  life  or  to  destroy  it?" 
Here  it  is  implied  that  it  was  possible  for  man  either 
to  preserve  or  destroy  the  life,  psuke,  the  same  that 
in  the  text  is  rendered  soul. 

It  is  indeed  a  plain  case  that  the  language  of  the 
passage  before  us  could  not  have  conveyed  to  the 
minds  of  his  hearers  the  idea  of  any  other  than 
temporal  destruction,  or  physical  death  under  circum- 
stances of  aggravated  suffering  and  shame.  The 
destruction  of  psulw  and  soma,  life  and  body,  would 
suggest  no  other  thought.  The  coupling  of  life  and 
body  in  this  case,  as  elsewhere,  intensifies  the  idea 
of  completeness  or  thoroughness.  St.  Paul  employs 
this  mode,  and  the  addition  of  spirit,  for  the  same 
purpose  of  expressing  completeness,  but  in  relation 
to  a  different  experience.  "  And  the  very  God  of 
peace  sanctify  you  wholly  ;  and  I  pray  God  your 
(pneuma,  psuke,  soma)  spirit,  and  life,  and  body,  be 
preserved  blameless  unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ."  The  destruction  of  life  and  body, 
applied  directly  to  the  person,  has  the  same  sense  of 
thoroughness  that  destruction  root  and  branch  has  in 
figurative  speech.  And  it  will  be  distinctly  observed 
that  the  body,  the  same  physical  body  which  men 
could  kill  or  torture,  is  here  coupled  with  the  psuke, 
15* 


174  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

life,  as  sharing  the  same  destruction.  This  is  another 
circumstance  which  forbids  our  opponent's  applica- 
tion of  the  passage. 

But  the  critical  student  will  ask  us  how,  upon  this 
view  of  the  subject,  we  can  explain  the  language  of 
Jesus,  implying  that  men  could  kill  the  body,  but 
were  not  able  to  destroy  the  life  ?  Introductory  to 
our  answer  to  this  inquiry,  we  ask  the  reader  to  con- 
sider that  Jesus  was  addressing  his  own  disciples 
alone,  instructing  them  as  to  the  duties  before  them, 
and  the  dangers  which  should  surround  them.  He 
knew  that  the  strongest  temptation  they  would  have 
to  betray  their  post  of  duty  in  his  cause,  would  be 
the  fear  of  harm  from  men  in  consequence  of  their 
Christian  labors,  and  the  prospect  of  safety  by  band- 
ing with  his  enemies.  In  view  of  these  circumstances 
he  instructed  them  that,  in  his  service,  they  were 
appointed  messengers  of  God  for  a  mission  which 
men  could  not  thwart  nor  hinder.  While  they  were 
faithful  to  the  work  of  his  mission,  though  it  would 
be  permitted  that  men  might  scourge  their  bodies, 
and  inflict  upon  them  temporal  privations,  God  would 
preserve  their  lives.  But  if,  for  fear  of  men,  they 
should  betray  the  cause  of  Christ,  they  would  subject 
themselves  to  the  destruction  of  life  also,  by  the 
retributive  judgment  of  God.* 

*  One  eminent  theologian,  among  his  later  productions,  assumes  that 
the  person  referred  to  by  the  pronoun  him,  whom  the  disciples  were 
rather  to  fear,  was  not  (jod,  but  the  Roman  Emperor,  who  alone  had 
legal  authority  to  put  his  subjects  to  death.  But  this  view  does  not 
appear  to  us  to  harmonize  with  the  scope  of  the  passage.  It  would 
make  human  authority  to  be  the  highest  or  governing  fear,  —  while  it 
appears  to  be  the  design  of  the  Saviour  to  warn  them  against  being 
Bwayed  from  the  course  of  duty  by  the  fear  of  any  human  power  what- 
ever. As  ambassadors  of  Christ,  they  were  immortal  to  the  work  of 
their  mission,  in  spite  of  any  human  power,  Jewish  or  Roman. 


REPLY   TO    DR.    ADAMS.  175 

Such  appears,  from  the  occasion,  the  leading 
design,  and  the  whole  scope  of  this  address  of  the 
Master  to  his  disciples,  to  be  the  sentiment  of  this 
passage.  And  the  particular  language  employed  here 
is  very  properly,  while  very  succinctly  expressive  of 
this  sentiment.  We  know  that,  in  the  common  usage 
of  the  term  kill,  the  killing  of  the  body  would  imply 
the  destroying  of  life.  But  this  form  of  expression 
in  such  case  would  be  a  clumsy  one,  and  is  never 
used.  We  never  speak  of  killing  men's  bodies,  but 
of  killing  the  men,  or  taking  their  lives.  Xor  is  the 
killing  of  the  body  any  where  else  named,  in  this 
form  in  the  Scriptures.  Therefore,  the  use  of  this 
singular  phraseology  in  this  case,  naturally  implies 
that  the  word  kill  as  here  applied  to  the  body  in  dis- 
tinction from  the  life,  is  employed  in  a  modified  sense, 
me-ininer  something  short  of  taking  the  life.  In  such 

o  o  o 

modified  sense  our  word  kill  is  sometimes  used  ;  as 
where  Paul  says,  quoting  from  the  Psalms,  "  For  thy 
sake  we  are  killed  all  the  day  long."  That  is,  they 
were  subjected  to  physical  privations  and  sufferings. 
But  the  Greek  word  rendered  kill  in  the  case  before  us, 
admits  of  construction  in  the  modified  sense  with  the 
strictest  propriety,  when  the  connection  requires  it. 
The  word  apokteino,  here  rendered  kill,  signifies,  ac- 
cording to  Schrevelius,  to  kill,  to  slay,  to  take  away,  to 
remove,  to  beat  almost  to  death,  to  tease  or  plaque,  &c. 
How  obvious,  therefore,  it  is,  from  all  the  con- 
siderations which  we  have  noted,  that  Jesus  spoke  of 
the  physical  privations  and  discomforts  which  they 
might  expect  to  suffer  at  the  hands  of  men,  while,  if 


176  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

they  were  true  and  faithful,  men  should  not  be  per- 
mitted to  take  away  their  lives. 

But  could  not  men  destroy  the  lives  of  those 
ambassadors  of  Christ  ?  No ;  in  the  theory  of 
thought  to  which  Jesus  was  here  elevating  the 
disciples'  minds  they  could  not.  Faithful  to  duty 
they  were  immortal  to  the  performance  of  the 
work  of  their  mission.  And  this  is  the  sentiment 
with  which  Jesus  was  here  laboring  to  inspire 
them. 

There  are  two  senses  in  which  it  is  true  that  men 
could  not  destroy  the  lives  of  the  innocent  disciples 
of  Jesus.  In  the  first  place,  the  Jews,  who  were  the 
only  violent  enemies  of  the  gospel  in  that  age,  had  no 
legal  authority,  being  subject  to  the  Roman  govern- 
ment, to  put  any  man  to  death.  When  Pilate,  before 
whom  the  Jews  brought  Jesus  for  a  mock  trial, 
requested  them  to  take  him  and  judge  him  according 
to  their  law,  they  said  unto  him,  "  It  is  not  lawful  for 
us  to  put  any  man  to  death."  Neither  was  there  in 
that  age  any  law  of  the  Roman  government,  by  ^\hich 
the  innocent  disciples  of  Jesus  could  be  put  to  death 
for  their  religious  belief.  So  that  in  respect  to  legal 
authority,  no  man  had  power  to*  put  to  death  those 
Christians  who  were  obedient  to  the  Jaw  of  Christ. 

Another,  and  higher  sense,  and  that  which  we  take 
to  be  the  sense  of  the  text,  in  which  the  disciples 
might  rest  assured  that  men  had  not  power  to  kill 
their  lives,  is  in  this, —  That  God  had  engaged  his 
power  to  protect  them,  if  they  would  remain  faithful 
to  his  cause,  and  men  had  no  power,  not  even 
the  physical  power,  to  prevent  the  fulfilment  of 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  177 

the  divine  promise.  Christ  had  given  a  promise 
for  the  faithful,  saying,  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway, 
even  unto  the  end  of  the  world,"  or  age.  If 
they  abandoned  his  cause,  they  would  have  their 
lives  destroyed  in  the  most  miserable  manner,  by  the 
punishment  which  the  power  of  God  would  execute. 
But  if  they  were  faithful  in  his  service,  whatever 
men  might  ivish  to  do  to  them,  no  earthly  power 
could  take  them  out  of  the  specially  pledged  divine 
protection,  so  as  to  destroy  their  lives.  For  though 
Jesus  told  his  disciples  that  some  of  them,  their 
enemies  would  kill  and  crucify,  yet  this  could  only  be 
in  such  individual  cases,  as  when  God  should  see  that 
it  was  necessary  to  give  them  up  to  their  enemies, 
to  be  sacrificed  for  the  sake  of  the  cause  of  truth. 
And  in  such  cases  he  would  inspire  them  with  that 
spirit  and  power,  by  which  they  would  cheerfully  lay 
down  their  own  lives  in  the  cause  they  supremely 
loved.  It  could  then  in  truth  be  said  of  them,  as 
Jesus  said  of  himself,  "  No  man  taketh  it  (my  life) 
from  me,  but  I  lay  it  down  of  myself."  Though  men 
might  be  instruments  of  taking  some  of  the  disciples 
lives,  yet  as  long  as  God  had  anything  for  his  faithful 
servants  to  do,  no  man  was  able  to  destroy  their  lives. 
But  if,  for  fear  of  men,  they  should  forsake  duty  and 
band  with  the  enemies  of  Jesus,  they  would  be 
brought  to  some  such  shameful  and  miserable  end  as 
might  appropriately  be  called  the  destruction  of  life 
and  body  in  Gehenna. 

With  this  construction  the  passage  in  question 
speaks  a  sentiment  which  is  abundantly  taught  in  the 
Scriptures.  It  is  the  general  sentiment  of  the 


178  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Scriptures,  that,  though  we  should  heed  the  caution, 
"  Beware  of  men"  we  should  yet  fear  God  rather 
than  man ;  that  the  greatest  evil  we  have  occasion  to 
fear  is  the  evil  of  sin,  or  the  misery  which  the 
established  government  of  God  will  execute  upon  us, 
if  we  go  in  the  way  of  transgression.  The  word  of 
the  Lord  saith  by  the  prophet,  (Isa.  viii.  12,)  —  "  Say 
ye  not,  A  confederacy,  to  all  them  to  whom  this  peo- 
ple shall  say,  A  confederacy  ;  neither  fear  ye  their 
fear,  nor  be  afraid.  Sanctify  the  Lord  of  hosts  him- 
self; and  let  him  be  your  fear,  and  let  him  be  your 
dread."  And  in  Isa.  li.  12, —  it  is  said,  "I,  even  I, 
am  he  that  comforteth  you  :  who  art  thou,  that  thou 
shouldst  be  afraid  of  a  man  that  shall  die,  and  of  the 
son  of  man  which  shall  be  made  as  grass, —  and  for- 
gettest  the  Lord  thy  Maker?'7 

And  the  sentiment  before  us,  that  the  disciples' 
greatest  fear  should  be  of  the  evils  of  an  apostacy 
from  their  Master's  cause,  Jesus  himself  directly 
urged  upon  them  in  various  other  places.  See  Matt, 
xvi.  24;  "  Then  said  Jesus  unto  his  disciples.  If  any 
man  will  come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself,  and 
take  up  his  cross  and  follow  me.  For  whosoever  will 
save  his  life  shall  lose  it ;  and  whosoever  will  lose 
his  life  for  my  sake,  shall  find  it."  That  is,  if  any 
should  abandon  the  cause  of  Christ  with  a  view  to 
save  their  lives,  they  would  in  consequence  be  sub- 
jects of  that  judgment  which  should  destroy  their 
lives ; — but  if  they  faithfully  adhered  to  his  cause, 
though  it  might  seem  to  human  view  as  if  they  were 
hereby  losing  their  lives  for  Christ's  sake,  their  lives 


REPLY  TO   DR,   ADAMS.  179 

should  be  preserved.  And  in  Matt.  xxiv.  48  :  Jesus, 
speaking  of  the  judgment  of  that  generation,  which 
he  elsewhere,  as  we  have  seen,  denominated  the  pun- 
ishment of  Gehenna,  that  greatest  of  all  tribulations 
that  ever  were  or  shall  be,  said  unto  his  disciples, 
— "  But  if  that  evil  servant  shall  begin  to  say  in  his 
heart,  My  Lord  delayeth  his  coming ;  and  shall  begin 
to  smite  his  fellow  servants,  and  to  eat  and  drink  with 
the  drunken ;  the  Lord  of  that  servant  shall  come  in 
a  day  when  he  looketh  not  for  him,  and  in  an  hour 
that  he  is  not  aware  of,  and  shall  cut  him  asunder, 
and  appoint  him  his  portion  with  the  hypocrites ; 
there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth." 

But  the  general  preservation  of  life  through  all 
those  calamities,  to  the  servants  of  Jesus  abiding  in 
their  fidelity,  is  a  familiar  theme  of  prophecy  by  the 
Jewish  seers,  and  of  promises  by  Jesus  Christ.  Daniel, 
prophesying  of  these  tribulations,  said,  "  Then  shall 
thy  people  be  delivered,  every  one  that  shall  be  found 
written  in  the  book."  And  the  Revelator,  writing 
as  the  judgment  of  that  age  was  at  hand,  speaks  of 
the  angels'  sealing  in  their  foreheads  the  servants  of 
God,  who  should  be  preserved  in  the  midst  of  the 
general  desolation.  (Eev.  viii.  3.)  And  Jesus,  de- 
scribing the  same  judgment,  which  he  expressly  dated 
as  an  event  of  that  generation,  said,  "  he  shall  send 
forth  his  angels  with  the  great  sound  of  a  trumpet, 
and  they  shall  gather  together  his  elect  from  the  four 
winds,  from  one  end  of  heaven  to  the  other."  (Matt. 
xxiv.  31.)  This  is  a  figurative  description  of  the  in- 
strumentalities which  should  be  employed  to  inspire 


180  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION7. 

and  guide  the  disciples  in  their  escape  for  preserva- 
tion, according  to  the  direction  given,  "  Let  them 
which  be  in  Judea  flee  into  the  mountains." 

But  notwithstanding  so  much  was  said  by  the 
Master,  and  properly  and  necessarily  said,  (as  it  was 
so  essentially  related  to  the  comfirmation  of  the 
prophets,  the  lives  of  the  Christians,  and  the  preser- 
vation of  the  church  to  her  subsequent  mission  in  the 
world,)  upon  the  signal  and  pre-eminent  judgment  of 
that  age,  yet  all  along  there  was  an  individual  respon- 
sibility and  an  operative  judgment.  Hence,  Judas, 
•when  he  had  betrayed  his  Master,  came  to  his  death 
in  so  miserable  a  manner,  and  connected  with  such 
shame  and  obloquy,  as  rendered  it  in  a  striking  sense, 
the  punishment  of  Gehenna. 

We  would  not  be  understood  as  urging  the  doc- 
trine of  slavish  fear.  In  the  path  of  duty  we  have 
nothing  to  fear.  Father  Murray  was  strong  in  this 
confidence,  when,  on  being  entreated  by  his  friends 
to  descend  from  his  pulpit  in  Boston  lest  he  should 
be  killed  by  the  miscreants  who,  inspired  with  hatred 
by  his  theological  opposers,  were  casting  stones  at 
him  through  the  pulpit  window,  he  calmly  responded, 
tl  While  the  Lord  has  a  work  for  me  to  do,  all  the 
stones  in  Boston  cannot  prevent  it."  Nor  have  we, 
in  any  case,  occasion  to  fear  the  ultimate  failure  of 
that  purpose  of  grace  in  Christ,  which  shall  finally 
destroy  death,  and  sin,  and  misery.  The  grand  and 
leading  principle  of  Christian  obedience  is  the  love 
of  God  and  of  duty.  But  circumstanced  as  we  are  in 
this  life,  occasionally  temptations  may  beset  us,  and 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  181 

promise  us  an  escape  from  evil,  or  a  gain  in  the 
enjoyment  of  good,  by  doing  wrong.  In  such  case 
it  is  profitable,  and  instead  of  promoting  bondage, 
frees  from  it,  to  be  assured  that  the  promise  of  our 
escaping  evil,  or  obtaining  benefit,  by  doing  wicked- 
ly is  all  delusion  ;  that  the  evils  which  we  have 
the  greatest  reason  to  dread,  will  be  found  in  that 
destruction  which  the  government  of  God  will  exe- 
cute on  transgressors.  "  The  way  of  transgressors 
is  hard."  But  "  great  peace  have  they  that  love 
God's  law,  and  nothing  shall  offend  them."  And 
though  they  may  occasionally  meet  with  trials  in  thi^ 
excellent  way,  they  need  not  fear,  for  God  is  with 
them  there. 

SECTION   III. 

Indifferent  Speculations,  and  Miscellaneous  Texts. 

By  indifferent  speculations  we  refer  to  the  labor  of 
our  learned  friend  on  his  theory  of  future  punish- 
ment respecting  the  manner  of  its  infliction.  On  this 
point  he  differs  from  some  of  the  Endless-miserian 
Doctors,  in-as  much  as  he  holds  that  the  poignancy 
of  future  endless  sufferings  will  proceed  mainly  from 
immediate  and  of  course  miraculous  inflictions  of 
torture,  by  the  hand  of  God.  Ue  devotes  more  than 
thirteen  pages  *  to  this  point,  arguing  that  if,  as  some 
of  his  brethren  affirm,  the  punishment  of  eternity  is 
to  consist  in  the  wicked  being  finally  left  to  the 

*"  Argument,"  pp.  19-32. 
16 


182  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

natural  operation  of  their  own  evil  principles  and 
passions,  and  of  their  outraged  consciences,  they  will 
at  length  become  so  callous  to  it  from  sameness  as  to 
be  measurably  insensible  to  suffering  ;  and  that,  to 
prevent  any  such  lulling  of  their  pain,  God  will  make 
it  an  important  part  of  his  administration  to  all  eter- 
nity to  blow  the  fire  of  their  torment  directly  with  his 
own  breath,  and  pierce  their  souls  with  torturous 
instruments  wielded  by  his  own  hand.  We  quoted 
liberally  from  this  part  of  the  Doctor's  "  Argument  *: 
in  our  Preliminary  Observations,  when  disposing  of 
his  effort  in  his  "  Introductory  Remarks"  to  sink  the 
doctrine  of  endless  punishment  to  the  proportion  in 
the  whole  economy  of  God  which  our  courts  and 
prisons  bear  to  the  interests  of  the  whole  state.  It 
is  entirely  uncalled  for  that  we  sl^Diild  step  aside 
from  our  main  course  to  dispute  with  our  opponent 
about  the  instruments  and  qualities  of  future  punish- 
ment, until  he  gives  us  some  sort  of  proof  of  the  fact 
of  future  punishment  itself.  We  have  looked  to  him 
in  vain,  thus  far,  for  jany  proof  of  such  an  economy ; 
nor  do  the  passages  which  he  proceeds  to  quote  in 
this  connection  make  any  reference  to  human  condi- 

•/ 

tion  in  another  state  of  being.  We  think  that  he 
himself  could  not  have  quoted  them  as  affording  any 
evidence  in  themselves  of  a  reference  to  the  future 
life.  But  presuming  that  he  had  proved  the  fact  of  a 
future  state  of  punishment  by  the  prominent  texts 
which  we  have  been  considering,  he  uses  these  mis- 
cellaneous quotations  for  argument  in  favor  of  his 
views  of  the  nature  and  manner  of  punishment  there. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  183 

But  as  we  have  removed  the  false  main  position  in 
respect  to  judgment  and  retribution,  and  planted 
ourself  on  the  Bible  position  of  judgment  as  an  ever- 
existing  branch  of  the  Divine  government,  the  many 
thousands  of  Bible  students  who  read  this  will  per. 
ceive,  as  fast  as  they  glance  at  our  opponent's  texts 
of  this  class,  that  they  describe  punishments  adminis- 
tered by  the  government  of  God  which  was,  and  is, 
and  is  to  be.  So,  then,  strike  out  the  Doctors  inter- 
polation, "future"  and  he  and  I  can  read  together,  as 
members  of  one  Bible  Class,  his  Scripture  lessons  of 
punishment ;  and  I  can  adopt  his  reading,  comments 
and  all,  with  a  slight  modification  of  a  few  words. 
The  following  is  his  paragraph,  embracing  his  Scrip- 
ture quotations  and  brief  comments,  from  which  even 
he  drops  his  usual  prefix  of 'future  to  punishment : 

"Now  the  Bible  is  continually  representing  the  wicked  as 
receiving  from  God  positive  inflictions,  and  not  merely  as  being 
abandoned  to  themselves.  Even  when  it  speaks  of  many  sources 
of  misery  which  might  seem  to  be  natural  consequences  of  their 
sin,  it  often  represents  these  consequences  as  being  administered 
by  the  direct  agency  of  the  Almighty.  So  that  the  two  things 
seem  to  be  combined.  "Upon  the  wicked  he  shall  rain  snares, 
fire  and  brimstone,  and  a  horrible  tempest;  this  shall  be  the 
portion  of  their  cup."  "Now  consider  this,  ye  that  forget  God, 
lest  I  tear  you  in  pieces  and  there  be  none  to  deliver."  "  God  is 
angry  with  the  wicked  every  day.  If  he  turn  not,  he  will  whet  his 
sword ;  he  hath  bent  his  bow  and  made  it  ready."  These  passages 
teach  that  sinners  will  not  merely  be  left  to  the  natural  consequen- 
ces of  sin.  The  ideas  of  arrest,  and  of  execution,  are  here  present- 
ed ;  the  transgressor  is  not  left  to  himself,  with  merely  his  sin  for 
his  punishment.  Then  again  we  read — "  Woe  unto  the  wicked,  it 
shall  be  ill  with  him  ;  for  the  reward  of  his  hands  shall  be  given 
him."  "  Yea,  woe  unto  them  also  when  I  depart  from  them." 


184  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

It  was  sufficient  for  our  friend  to  barely  quote 
these  passages.  Bat  as  the  purpose  for  which  he 
quotes  them  is  to  elucidate  the  nature  of  punishment 
in  the  immortal  world,  and  as  it  is  our  mission  to  aid 
the  reader  in  a  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures,  we  will 
go  over  again  with  this  list  of  texts,  note  their  places 
in  the  Record,  and  refer  to  a  few  collaterals. 

1.  "  Upon  the  wicked  he  shall  rain  snares,  fire  and 
brimstone,  and  an  horrible  tempest.    (Ps.  xi.  G.)    The 
following   are   a  few    collaterals :     "  Then   the    Lord 
rained  upon  Sodom  and  upon   Gomorrah  brimstone 
and  fire  from  the  Lord  out  of  heaven."     (Gen.  xix. 
24.)     "  Yea,  the  light  of  the  wicked  shall  be  put  out, 
....  the  light  shall  be  dark  in  his  tabernacle,  .... 
it  (destruction)  shall  dwell  in  his  tabernacle,  because 
it  is  none  of  his  ;  brimstone  shall  be  scattered  upon 
his  habitation."     (Job  xviii.)  "  He  gave  them  hail  for 
rain,  and  flaming  fire  in  their  land."     (Ps.  cv.  32.) 
"  Fear,  and  the  pit,  and  the  snare  are  upon  thee,  0 

inhabitants  of  the  earth And  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."    (Tsa.  xxiv.)    "  And  I  will 
plead  against  him    (Gog)    with   pestilence   and  with 
blood ;  and  I  will  rain  upon  him,  and  upon  his  bands, 
and  upon  the   many   people  that  are  with    him,    an 
overflowing  rain,  and  great  hail-stones,  fire  and  brim- 
stone."    (Ezek.  xxxviii.  22.)     Thus  familiarly  do  the 
Scriptures  attest  the  idea  of  the  first  of  the  foregoing 
catalogue  of  texts,  as  a  usual  dispensation  of  God's 
government  in  our  world. 

2.  "  Now  consider  this,  ye  that  forget  God,  lest  I 


EEPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS,  185 

tear  you  in  pieces  and  there  be  none  to  deliver/7  (Ps. 
1.  22.)  Fora  collateral  see  Hosea  v.  14; — "For  I 
will  be  unto  Ephraim  as  a  lion,  and  as  a  young  lion 
to  the  house  of  Judah ;  I,  even  I,  will  tear  and 
go  away  ;  I  will  take  away,  and  none  shall  rescue 
him."  Precisely  the  same  sentiment,  and  essentially 
the  same  language.  Yet  Dr.  Adams  takes  pains  to 
prove,  in  his  second  division  which  we  shall  come  to 
by-and-by,  that  Ephraim,  of  whom  this  was  spoken, 
had  the  assurance  of  restoration. 

3.  "  God  is  angry  with  the  wicked  every  day.  If 
he  turn  not  he  will  whet  his  sword  ;  he  Lath  bent  his 
bow  and  made  it  ready."  (Ps.  vii.  11,  12.)  Our 
learned  friend  will  not  himself  say  a  word  nor  indulge 
a  thought  of  God  so  irreverent,  as  that  he  is  every 
day  literally  agitated  with  anger.  Such  a  definition 
of  wrath  ascribed  to  God,  in  connection  with  the  idea 
that  he  is  to  have  men  in  their  wicked  characters 
before  him  to  all  eternity,  would  make  the  eternal 
life  of  God  one  of  restless  perturbation.  But,  with 
the  view  which  we  think  many  of  the  learned  of  all 
denominations  hold,  that  the  word  anger  applied  to 
God  describes  a  visible  manifestation  of  his  provi- 
dence and  condemnatory  operation  of  his  law  against 
transgressors,  the  saying  that  God  is  angry  with  the 
wicked  every  day,  expresses  full}7  and  emphatically 
what  we  have  shown  and  will  show  to  be  the  uniform 
teachings  of  the  Bible  on  the  perfection  of  God's 
moral  government  in  our  world,  even  in  its  judicial 
and  retributive  department.  As  it  respects  his  bend- 
ing his  bow  for  a  more  signal  infliction  if  the  wicked 
16* 


186  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

turn  not,  which  i$  the  idea  elucidated  in  the  second 
section  of  this  chapter,  on  treasuring  up  wrath 
against  the  day  of  wrath,  the  Psalmist  proceeds 
directly  to  elucidate  the  idea  in  the  following  verses 
of  the  same  Psalm: — "He  made  a  pit,  and  digged  it, 
and  is  fallen  into  the  ditch  which  he  made.  His 
mischief  shall  return  upon  his  own  head,  and  his 
violent  dealing  shall  come  down  upon  his  own 
pate." 

4.  "  Woe  unto  the  wicked,  it  shall  be  ill  with  him  ; 
for   the    reward   of  his  hands   shall  be  given   him." 
(Isa.  iii.  11.)     We  need  not  take  room   for  quoting 
collaterals  here,  for  the  reason  that  the  fact  and  the 
manner  of  the  wicked's  receiving  the   reward  of  his 
hands  have  been  fully  elucidated,  and  the  reading  out 
of  this  chapter  discovers  that  the  recompense  here 
particularly    referred   to,    sliould  come    in    national 
calamities. 

5.  "  Yea,  woe  also   unto  them  when  I   depart  froai 

« 

them."  (Hosea  ix.  12.)  This  also  is  said  of  Eph- 
raim,  referring  solely  to  temporal  calamities,  to  con- 
sist in  part  in  a  withdrawal  of  those  favors  which 
they  had  been  receiving  from  God's  hand.  "  As  for 

Ephraim,  their  glory  shall  fly  away  like  a  bird 

Though  they  bring  up  their  children,  yet  will  I 
bereave  them:— -Yea,  woe  also  to  them  when  I 
depart  from  them."  And  here  again  we  remember 
the  fact  that  our  opponent  advocates  the  restoration 
of  Ephraim.  Therefore  his  picture  of  the  effect, 
deduced  from  this  passage,  of  God's  departing  from 
a  portion  ol  his  children  in  eternity,  must  be  regard- 
ed as  a  fancy  sketch. 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  187 

We  have  now  completed  our  examination  of  this 
collection,  made  by  the  Doctor,  of  Scripture  phrase- 
ology in  relation  to  the  punishment  of  the  wicked  ; 
and  we  find  it  all  decisively  confirmatory  and  illus- 
trative of  the  principles  which  we  have  set  forth, 
and,  as  we  think,  Scripturally  established.  Thus 
much,  however,  these  passages  clearly  indicate  of 
the  view  to  which  he  adduced  them.  —  to  wit,  that 
punishment  often  involves  external  inflictions  addi- 
tional to  internal  sufferings.  But  they  do  not  prove 
that,  generally,  these  external  evils  are  inflicted  by 
the  hand  of  God  in  a  direct  and  miraculous  manner. 
True,  in  some  cases,  as  in  that  of  the  hail  and  tempest 
upon  Egypt,  which  came,  and  disappeared,  by  the 
instance  of  Moses  as  God's  specially  instructed  ser- 
vant, the  instruments  of  the  calamities  were  put  in 
motion  by  an  immediate  exertion  of  the  Divine 
power.  But  usually,  as  we  have  seen  by  reading  the 
quoted  passages  in  their  connections,  even  the  exter- 
nal evils  which  were  suffered  as  punishments,  con- 
sisting in  wars,  commotions,  famines,  and  the  like, 
were  induced  in  the  ordinary  way,  by  the  natural 
operations  of  their  follies,  vices  and  crimes,  private, 
social  and  national.  Yet  they  are  described  as  pun- 
ishments from  the  hand  of  God,  (the  prophets  speak- 
ing in  the  name  of  God  saying,  /,  the  Lord,  ivill  do 
this  unto  you,  I  will  bring  these  plagues  and  calamities 
iipon  you,)  because  they  were  to  be  brought  about 
by  the  regular  administration  of  God's  laws,  which 
he  hath  in-wrought  with  the  physical  and  moral 
natures  of  man,  and  the  relations  of  society.  So  it 


188  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

comes  out,  in  relation  to  the  execution  of  punish- 
ment by  the  administrative  authority  of  God.  and  yet 
through  the  operation  of  established  laws,  as  our 
friend  well  expresses  it,  —  "  that  the  two  things  seem 
to  be  combined."  It  is  so  ;  and  it  is  comprehensively 
expressed  in  the  oracles  of  wisdom,  thus :  "  For  the 
ways  of  man  are  before  the  eyes  of  the  Lord,  and  he 
pondereth  all  his  goings.  His  own  iniquities  shall 
take  the  wicked  himself,  and  he  shall  be  holden  with 
the  cords  of  his  sins."  (Prov.  v.  21,  22.)  Again, 
"  Thine  own  wickedness  shall  correct  thee,  and  thy 
backslidings  shall  reprove  thee."  (Jer.  ii.  19.) 

In  continuation  of  the  same  topic,  the  constant 
presence  and  agency  of  God  in  the  direct  infliction 
of  sufferings  upon  the  wicked,  (in  eternity,  he  means) 
our  friend  proceeds  to  argue,  —  "  Yet  he  will  always 
make  his  presence  to  be  felt ;  for  f  if  I  make  my  bed 
in  hell,  behold  thou  art  there.'  Now  it  is  to  be 
observed  that,  when  the  Doctor  uses  the  word  hell, 
he  means  hell,  not  in  the  sense  of  the  Hebrew  slieol, 
or  the  Greek  hades,  or  the  old  English  or  Saxon  helle, 
but  in  the  more  modern  and  perverted,  or  rather 
theological  sense  of  the  word.  So  by  his  quotation 
of  the  Psalmist's  words,  "  if  I  make  my  bed  in  hell," 

-  he  intends  to  direct  his  readers'  minds  to  a  place 
of  endless  torment  in  the  spirit  world.  But  this 
appears  to  us,  and  we  are  sure  it  will  appear  to  our 
intelligent  readers  generally,  a  palming  upon  David  a 
clumsy  illustration  of  the  omnipresence  of  God. 
Such  is  the  subject  of  the  passage  from  which  these 
few  words  are  taken.  The  whole  illustration  reads 


REPLY   TO  DR.   ADAMS.  189 

thus  :  "  "Whither  shall  I  go  from  thy  spirit  ?  or  whither 
shall  I  flee  from  thy  presence  ?  If  I  ascend  up  into 
heaven,  thou  art  there  ;  if  I  make  my  bed  in  hell, 
(liades)  behold,  thou  art  there.  If  I  take  the  wings  of 
the  morning,  and  dwell  in  the  uttermost  parts  of  the 
sea ;  even  there  shall  thy  hand  lead  me,  and  thy  right 
hand  shall  hold  me."  (Ps.  dxxxix.  7-10.)  There  is 
no  moral  state  referred  to  here,  but  there  is  an  elo- 
quent poetic  expression  of  God's  omnipresence. 
The  literal  heaven  is  meant,  (not  the  spiritual,)  the 
etherial  heights,  —  and  the  literal  hades,  the  opposite 
lowest  depths  ;  and  then  for  breadth,  added  to  the 
height  and  depth,  the  literal  extremity  of  the  sea. 
But  the  music  of  the  stanza  is  shockingly  marred 
when  our  opponent  substitutes  his  place  of  endless 
torment  for  the  Psalmist's  hades. 

Here  is  a  similar  representation  of  God's  omni- 
presence, addressed  to  Israel  in  transgression,  admon- 
ishing them  of  the  impossibility  of  escaping  the 
Divine  judgments  :  "  And  I  will  slay  the  last  of  them 
with  the  sword ;  he  that  fleeth  of  them  shall  not  flee 
away,  and  he  that  escapeth  of  them  shall  not  be 
delivered.  Though  they  dig  into  hell,  thence  shall 
mine  hand  take  them ;  though  they  climb  up  to 
heaven,  thence  will  I  bring  them  down  ;  and  though 
they  hide  themselves  in  the  top  of  Carmel,  I  will 
search  and  take  them  out  thence ;  and  though  they 
be  hid  from  my  sight  in  the  bottom  of  the  sea,  thence 
will  I  command  the  serpent  and  he  shall  bite  them  ; 
and  though  they  go  into  captivity  before  their  ene- 
mies, thence  will  I  command  the  sword  and  it  shall 


190  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

slay  them."  This,  in  its  own  proper  sense,  is  a  har- 
monious combination  of  imagery  to  represent  the  idea 
intended,  the  searching:  severity  and  unavoidable 

O  v 

certainty  of  the  impending  judgment  of  God  upon 
transgressing  Israel.  There  was  no  aerial  height, 
nor  hadean  depth  •  no  feint  of  surrender,  nor  distance 
of  flight,  by  which  they  could  evade  the  threatened 
calamity.  But  let  our  esteemed  friend,  learned  in 
the  theology  of  the  schools,  displace  the  old  hades 
with  his  scholastic  pit  of  future  endless  punishment, 
and  all  is  ajar  again  ;  the  representation  becomes  even 
ludicrous.  It  would  be  indeed  surprising  to  see  a 
host  of  people,  enlightened  into  the  nature  of  the 
place  as  our  friend  appears  to  think  the  people  of 
God.  or  Hebrews  were,  digging  down  into  the  place 
of  endless  torments  to  get  away  from  punishment ! 
And  it  would  be  even  more  surprising  that  Jehovah, 
when  they  had  committed  such  a  blunder,  should 
take  them  out  to  punish  them  ! 

If  it  shall  seem  to  any  that  there  is  somewhere  here 
a  use  of  the  sacred  record  which  borders  on  irrever- 
ence, we  call  on  all  men  to  witness  that  it  is  not  our 
fault  that  it  is  so,  but  that  it  is  our  effort  to  remedy 
the  evil,  and  vindicate  the  Scriptures  from  such  dis- 
honor. Let  a  view  of  the  sad  havoc  made  of  the 
Scriptures  by  a  perverted  theological  u^e  of  their 
phraseology,  incite  us  to  a  faithful  de  novo  study  of 
the  sacred  pages. 

We  do  not  here  stop  for  a  general  view  of  the 
Scripture  sense  of  hell  as  rendered  from  hades ;  this 
work  will  come  in  our  way  directly.  We  have  only 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  191 

shown,  as  we  were  passing,  how  unjustifiable  is  our 
friend's  quotation  of  it  for  the  use  to  which  he  puts 
it,  in  the  case  just  noticed. 

A  little  further  on  in  the  same  paragraph,*  he 
refers  to  the  deep  anguish  sometimes  felt  at  funerals 
and  closing  graves,  and  adds,  "  If  God  shall  but  keep 
perpetually  fresh  such  sorrows  as  men  feel  here,  he 
will  fulfil  a  large  part  of  that  which  the  Saviour  and 
the  apostles  have  declared  to  be  the  future  portion 
of  the  wicked."  And  then  speaking  of  Andrew 
Fuller,  and  Edwards,  men  who  seemed  to  take  a 
savage  delight  in  horrid  fancy  paintings  of  the  future 
torments  of  the  non-elect,  representing  God  as  holding 
them  over  the  flames  of  hell  eternally  as  you  would 
hold  a  spider  over  the  blaze  of  the  candle,  our  friend 
endorses  them  all,  saying  that  their  portraitures  "  fall 
far  below  the  truth,"  and  that  to  "  surpass  the  dread 
reality  —  is  impossible." 

As  a  brief  specimen  of  what  Dr.  Adams  fully  en- 
dorses in  Dr.  Edwards,  and  which  he  thinks  "  falls  far 
below  the  truth,"  we  will  transcribe  the  following 
from  his  Sermon  on  the  Eternity  of  Hell  Torments: 

"  How  dismal  it  will  be  when  you  are  under  these  racking  tor- 
ments, to  know  assuredly  that  you  never,  never  shall  be  delivered 
from  them ;  to  have  no  hope.  When  you  shall  wish  that  you  might 
be  turned  into  a  toad  or  serpent,  but  shall  have  no  hope  of  it ; 
when  you  would  rejoice,  if  you  might  but  have  any  relief,  after 
you  have  endured  these  torments  millions  of  ages,  but  shall  have 
no  hope  of  it ;  when,  after  you  have  worn  out  the  ages  of  the  sun, 
moon,  and  stars,  in  your  dolorous  groans  and  lamentations,  with- 

*  "  Argument,"  p.  2". 


192  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

out  rest  day  or  night,  or  one  minute's  ease,  yet  you  shall  have  no 
hope  of  ever  being  delivered ;  when,  after  }rou  have  worn  out  a 
thousand  more  such  ages,  yet  you  shall  have  no  hope,  but  shall 
know  that  you  are  not  one  whit  nearer  the  end  of  your  torments  ; 
but  that  still  there  are  the  same  groans,  the  same  shrieks,  the 
same  doleful  cries  incessantly  to  be  made  by  you,  and  that  the 
smoke  of  your  torments  shall  still  ascend  forever  and  ever ;  and 
that  your  souls  which  have  foeen  agitated  by  the  wrath  of  God  all 
this  while,  yet  will  still  exist  to  bear  more  wrath ;  your  bodies 
which  will  have  been  burning  and  roasting  all  this  while  in  these 
glowing  flames,  yet  shaJl  not  have  been  consumed,  but  will  remain 
to  roast  through  an  eternity  yet,  which  will  not  have  been  at  all 
shortened  by  what  shall  have  been  past." 

Such  is  the  strain  in  which  Dr.  Jonathan  Edwards 
was  wont  to  "  charge  God  foolishly,7'  aye,  and  as  we 
view  it,  wickedly  too.  I  would  not  utter  these  words 
in  the  house  of  God,  to  be  understood  as  expressing 
my  own  thoughts  of  God,  for  all  the  gold  of  Galconda. 
I  would  be  afraid  to  utter  them  even  in  the  lone  field 
or  in  the  wilderness,  both  as  I  would  shrink  from 
belching  out  the  most  odious  blasphemy,  and  would 
fear  to  be  struck  dead  for  such  an  open  insult  to 
the  Most  High. 

But  my  opponent  will  plead,  as  the  apology  of  his 
theological  model,  and  as  his  own  apology  for  endors- 
ing all  this,  that  the  Scriptures  warrant  it.  We  re- 
spectfully suggest,  however,  that  it  would  have  been 
wise  and  prudent  in  him.  to  show  that  "  the  Saviour 
and  the  apostles  have  declared '  any  such  "  future 
portion  of  the  wicked,"  or  have  in  any  case  testified 
that  there  shall  be  such  a  class  as  the  wicked  in  the 
immortal  world,  before  making  so  free  with  these 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  193 

• 

horrible  paintings  of  the  great  Father  of  men  as  their 
eternal  tormenter.  No  such  showing  has  yet  appear- 
ed. But  we  will  pursue  our  search. 

SECTION   IV. 

Parable  of  the  Tares  —  End  of  the  World. 

The  "  Argument  for  Future,  Endless  Punishment  " 
makes  its  next  effort  in  the  following  paragraph : 

Let  us  now  consider  the  following  passages : 

"'As  therefore  the  tares  are  gathered  and  are  burned  in  the 
fire,  so  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  the  world.  The  Son  of  man  shall 
send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  all 
things  that  ofi'end  and  them  which  do  iniquity,  and  shall  cast  them 
into  a  furnace  of  fire ;  there  shall  be  wailing  and  gnashing  of 
teeth.'  These  same  closing  words  are  used  a  few  verses  afterward, 
in  explaining  the  parable  of  the  Xet." 

Here,  as  elsewhere,  the  essential  deficiency  of  the 
"Argument '  is,  that  it  does  not  argue.  But  our 
friend  is  not  to  be  censured  for  this,  since  it  is  the 
only  way  for  that  side  of  the  question.  No  advocate 
of  this  theory  has  done  better.  They  all  habitually 
assume,  outright,  the  application  of  such  passages  to 
the  final  condition  of  mankind,  from  the  sound  of 
certain  phraseology,  without  attempting  to  show  the 
reason  wh}^.  Long  habit  has  made  it  natural.  But 
it  devolves  upon  us,  according  to  the  injunction  of 
our  Master,  to  "  search  the  Scriptures."  We  rev- 
erence the  method  of  Jeshua,  Bani,  and  others,  who, 
in  the  great  reformation  of  Israel,  "  read  in  the  book 
in  the  law  of  God  distinctly,  and  gave  the  sense,  and 
17 


194  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

caused  them  to  understand  the  reading.  (Neh. 
viii.  8.) 

Now  let  us  look  for  the  sense  of  the  parable  of  the 
tares,  as  applied.  by  our  Lord.  The  first  thing  for 
which  we  inquire  is  the  time  of  the  transaction  de- 
scribed. "  So  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  this  world." 
This  is  the  time.  But  we  ask  further,  the  end  of  what 
ivorld?  For  the  Doctor  to  throw  in  this  fragmentary 
quotation  of  an  important  portion  of  the  great  Teach- 
er's discourse,  in  a  connection  and  manner  to  float 
along  the  unquestioning  mind  of  the  prejudiced  and 
uninstructed  reader  with  the  whole  subject  into  eter- 
nity, as  if  the  end  of  the  mundane  system,  or  material 
world,  were  unquestionably  the  time  referred  to,  is 
an  expedient  that  may  do  for  the  theologian,  but  in 
the  scholar,  such  as  he  is,  it  is  hardly  excusable.  He 
knows  perfectly  well  that  the  original  word  aionos, 
here  rendered  world,  does  not  mean  world,  in  the 
usual  sense  of  that  term,  that  is,  not  the  material 
world,  but  an  age,  or  periodical  dispensation  of  God's 
providence. 

And  here,  before  we  proceed  another  step  in  the 
exposition,  we  will  have  one  other  matter  settled. 
The  learned  opponents  of  Universalism,  (we  refer 
not  to  Dr.  Adams,)  seeing  that,  in  some  important 
proof  texts,  they  derive  an  advantage  from  taking  the 
words  used  by  King  James'  translators,  and  these  in 
a  certain  canonized  theological  sense,  attempt  to  dis- 
courage common  inquiry  in  these  cases  by  sneering 
at  our  reference  to  the  original.  But  in  these  cases 
there  is  nothing  pedantic  in  such  references  :  it  is  a 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  195 

necessity,  and  a  Christian  duty.  A  mistranslation  of 
hades  and  geJienna,  by  the  word  hell,  and  the  change 
in  the  use  even  of  this  English  word  since  the  Com 
mon  Version  was  made  ;  and  awnos  by  world ;  and 
aionion  by  eternal ;  and  krisis  by  damnation, —  con 
stitutes  the  chief  instrumentality  by  which  the  advo- 
cates of  endless  punishment  manage  to  keep  their 
theory  in  countenance  with  the  public.  And  it  is 
not  pedantic,  we  repeat,  to  refer  to  the  original,  and 
that  familiarly,  in  the  case  where  these  words  occur. 
The  Greek  words  of  this  class  have  become  Angli- 
cised. They  have  long  been  so  familiarly  introduced 
and  explained  in  religious  publications,  that  every 
child  trained  to  systematic  study  of  the  Bible  is  as 
familiar  with  them  as  with  his  mother  tongue.  And 
it  should  be  so.  The  translators  of  our  Common 
Version  produced  an  excellent  translation  as  a  whole; 
but  in  some  of  these  important  cases  they  must  needs 
conform  the  rendering  to  the  doctrines  of  their  church. 
They  had  but  just  emerged  from  the  dark  night 
of  Romanism.  If  religious  discussion  and  Biblical 
knowledge  in  the  Protestant  church  had  then  ad- 
vanced to  its  present  state,  we  believe  those  high- 
minded  men  would  have  Angelicised  hades,  gehenna, 
and  aion  and  its  derivatives,  and  left  4hem  in  the  text 
untranslated.  It  was  thus  that  they  did  with  the 
Greek  baptize,  \\  hen  used  for  a  religious  rite.  The 
word  primarily  signifies  immersion,  or  dipping.  But 
it  is  used  in  different  shades  of  meaning,  such  as 
drenching,  washing,  &c.  The  church  differed  as  to 
the  manner  in  which  it  should  be  applied  as  a  religious 


196  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

rite,  and  therefore  the  translators  judiciously  Angli- 
cised the  word  and  left  it  untranslated,  thus  leaving 
it  for  every  reader  to  judge  for  himself  by  the  general 
light  of  the  Scriptures  on  the  subject.  If  they  had 
rendered  it  sprinkle,  every  Baptist,  great  and  small, 
would  have  been  made  familiar  with  the  original,  and 
would  have  referred  to  it  whenever  the  subject  should 
come  under  discussion.  But  we  have  infinitely  greater 
reason  to  refer  to  the  original  in  the  controverted 
passages  now  alluded  to,  because  they  refer  to  infi- 
nitely more  important  subjects.  And  our  children, 
in  the  family  and  in  the  Sunday  School,  should  be 
made  as  familiar  with  the  prominent  original  words  in 
these  cases,  as  with  the  multiplication  table. 

And  now  to  the  time  in  question,  denoted  in 
Christ's  application  of  the  parable  of  the  tares.  It  is 
the  end  of  the  aionos.  This  word  is  defined  by  Done- 
gan's  popular  Lexicon,  thus,  — "  time ;  a  space  of 
time  ;  life  time,  and  life ;  the  ordinary  period  of  man's 
life  ;  the  age  of  man  ;  man's  estate  ;  a  long  period  of 
time  ;  eternity  ;  in  the  memory  of  man."  No  case  is 
found  by  this  approved  Greek  Lexicographer,  in  all 
classic  writings,  of  the  use  of  aionos  for  world.  Its 
use  for  eternity  is  rare  and  exceptional ;  and  our 
opponent  would  not  put  this  sense  upon  it  in  the 
New  Testament,  for  then  he  would  make  an  end  of 
eternity.  Nor  is  it  ever  used  in  the  New  Testament, 
any  more  than  in  the  classics,  for  world.  It  here 
denotes  an  age,  or  periodical  dispensation  of  God's 
providence.  We  challenge  contradiction  here. 

Kosmos  is  the  Greek  word  for  world,  the  universe, 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  197 

the  earth  and  its  inhabitants.  It  occurs  in  this  same 
explanation  by  our  Lord  of  the  parable  of  the  tares, 
in  Matt,  xiii.,  at  verse  88  ;  "  The  field  is  the  world.'' 
(Kosmos.)  And  at  verse  39,  "  The  harvest  is  the  end 
of  (not  kosmoSj  the  world,  but  aianoSj)  the  age."  Did 
not  Jesus,  and  his  historian,  Matthew,  understand  their 
words?  Why  did  they  not  speak  of  the  end  of  the 
same  kosmos  which  was  the  field  ?  Because  they 
meant  no  such  thing.  The  field  is  the  icorld, — the 
harvest  is  the  end  of  the  age.  Of  what  age  ?  Jesus 
informs  us  in  the  very  next  verse.  "  As,  therefore, 
the  tares  are  gathered  and  burned  in  the  fire,  so  shall 
it  be  at  the  end  of  this  aionos."  Mark  ye,  the  Divine 
Teacher  is  so  particular  in  this  case,  as  to  use  the 
pronoun  this,  though  he  usually,  in  relation  to  the 
same  event,  employs  the  article  the.  "  So  shall  it  be 
at  the  end  of  this  age."  He  of  course  referred  to  the 
end  of  the  Jewish  age.  The  language  of  the  Saviour 
is  decisive  to  this  point. 

The  parable  of  the  tares  sown  by  an  enemy  into 
his  neighbor's  wheat-field,  represented  the  infusion 
into  the  church,  by  the  spirit  of  evil,  of  false  doc- 
trines and  corrupt  moral  principles,  the  influence  of 
which  constituted  their  recipients  characteristically 
children  of  diabolos,  which  denotes  imposture  and 
enmity.  Those  who  were  characterized  by  imposture 
and  evil  principles,  were  called  children  of  diabolos, 
by  the  same  form  of  speech  by  which  persons, 
usually,  who  were  distinguished  by  any  remarkable 
quality,  were  called  the  children  of  that  quality. 
They  of  thundering  eloquence  were  called  sons  of 
17* 


198  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

thunder ;  and  enlightened  men  were  called  children 
of  light.  The  London  Improved  Version  of  the  New 
Testament  has  the  following  truthful  note  to  tho 
phrase,  "  children  of  the  wicked  one  "  : —  "  The  prin- 
ciple of  evil  personified.  '  Sons  of  the  evil  one  ;  are 
wicked  men.  Such  in  the  Old  Testament  are  called 
sons  of  Belial,  or  worthlessness ;  i.  e.  worthless 


men.' 


"  So  shall  it  be  at  the  end  of  this  age.  The  Son  of 
man  shall  send  forth  his  angels,  (messengers  of  his 
power,)  and  they  shall  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  all 
things  that  offend,  and  them  which  do  iniquity ;  and 
shall  cast  them  into  a  furnace  of  fire ;  there  shall 
be  wailing  and  gnashing  of  teeth."  Here  again  it  is 
seen  how  harmoniously  all  the  parts  are  found  to 
work  together,  when  we  get  up  a  true  basis  of  Scrip- 
ture exposition ;  whereas,  a  false  main  position  is 
constantly  encountering  insuperable  difficulties.  "  His 
kingdom,"  in  this  passage,  is  taken  by  our  opponent 
to  be  the  immortal  heaven  of  purity  and  bliss  in  the 
spirit  world.  But  how  should  they  that  offend  and 
do  iniquity  be  there  ?  And  how  should  they,  for  a 
considerable  season,  have  been  living  and  flourishing 
there,  among  the  holy  angels  and  glorified  saints  ? 
For,  the  intelligent  reader  will  observe  that,  to  main- 
tain the  analogy  of  the  application  and  the  parable, 
they  who  offend  and  do  iniquity  are,  for  the  season 
denoted,  among  the  true  disciples,  as  the  tares  among 
the  wheat;  and  that,  as  in  the  harvest  the  tares  are 
separated  from  the  wheat,  so  at  the  end  of  that  age 
those  evil  doers  should  be  separated  from  the  true 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  199 

disciples,  or  gathered  out  of  the  Master's  kingdom. 
This  is  turned  all  into  jargon  by  our  opponent's 
application,  making  the  kingdom  here  the  resurrec- 
tion state  of  bliss.  And  yet  without  this  view  of  the 
kingdom,  and  of  the  end  of  the  world,  his  effort  with 
this  passage  to  prove  his  theory,  as  with  all  the  oth- 
ers we  have  examined,  proves  an  utter  failure. 

Now  see  the  consistency  and  harmony  of  this  part 
with  the  whole  parable  and  the  whole  explanation, 
when  viewed  in  the  light  which  the  Scriptures  shed 
upon  themselves.  In  the  New  Testament  usage  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  arid  kingdom  of  heaven  or  of  God, 
are  one.  When  John,  the  fore  runner  of  Christ,  pro- 
claimed his  approach,  he  preached,  saying,  "  Repent, 
for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand."  And  Jesus, 
said,  "  Now  is  the  kingdom  of  God  come  unto  you," 
meaning  the  Messianic  reign.  But  as  the  name  of  a 
kingdom  is  sometimes  attached  to  the  community 
which  is  nominally  classed  under  the  kingdom,  so 
the  name,  "  kingdom  of  heaven,"  is  sometimes  applied 
to  Christ's  visible  church,  or  the  body  or  community 
of  professors,  who  were  nominally  ranked  under  his 
kingdom,  or  claimed  to  receive  him  as  the  Messiah. 
But  among  these  there  were  foolish  and  hypocritical 
ones.  To  this  point  see  Matt.  xxv.  1.  In  describ- 
ing a  series  of  signal  events  which  should  transpire 
in  that  generation,  our  Lord  continued,  "  Then  shall 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  be  likened  unto  ten  virgins 
....  And  five  of  them  were  wise,  and  five  were 
foolish."  The  kingdom  of  heaven  in  this  case  cannot 
mean  the  spiritual  reign  of  Jesus  in  the  abstract ;  for 


200  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

that  was  not  half  foolish.  And  certainly  it  cannot 
mean  the  glorified  state  of  immortal  purity  and  bliss ; 
for  neither  is  that  half  foolish.  It  clearly  is  used 
here  for  the  visible  church,  or  the  body  of  Christian 
professors.  And  a  portion  of  these  were  foolish, 
having  come  into  the  profession  of  the  Christian 
name  from  false  views  and  sinister  motives.  These, 
in  the  time  of  trial  to  men's  souls  in  the  conclusion 
of  that  age,  would  appear  in  their  real  character,  fail 
to  receive  the  benefits  of  Christ's  warnings  and  in- 
structions, and,  mingling,  in  spirit  and  conduct,  with 
the  enemies  of  Jesus,  would  miserably  perish  with 
them.  And  in  the  same  sense  in  which  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  is  represented,  as  above,  as  comprising 
both  wise  and  foolish  people,  it  is  represented  in  the 
parable  of  the  tares  as  containing,  with  the  wise  and 
good,  them  that  offend  and  do  iniquity.  And  in  both 
cases  the  latter  class  are  doomed  to  be  separated  and 
made  wretched  by  the  judgment  of  that  age. 

This  matter  was  repeatedly  and  urgently  pressed 
upon  the  attention  of  the  disciples  by  our  Lord,  in 
various  discourses.  In  that  remarkable  discourse  to 
his  disciples  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  of  which  the 
words  are  a  part  which  we  have  just  quoted  from 
Matt,  xxv.,  this  peculiar  danger  to  false  and  treacher- 
ous Christians  was  emphatically  depicted.  Jesus  first 
announced  the  woes  that  would  become  the  portion 
of  the  unbelieving  Jews  in  general :  and  he  then 
dwelt  upon  the  causes  which  would  be  likely  to 
induce  the  defection  of  some  of  his  disciples,  and 
the  consequences  of  such  defections  as  far  as  they 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  201 

should  occur.  "  And  many  false  prophets  shall  arise, 
and  deceive  many.  And  because  iniquity  shall 
abound  the  love  of  many  shall  wax  cold.  But  he 
that  shall  endure  unto  the  end,  the  same  shall  be 
saved."  That  is,  they  who  remained  steadfast 
Ihroughout  should  be  preserved.  And  it  was  so. 
Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  whose  head  is  a  historical  library, 
says  on  this  passage,  "  It  is  very  remarkable  that  not 
a  single  Christian  perished  in  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  though  there  were  many  there  when 
Cestius  Gallus  invested  the  city  ;  and  had  he  perse- 
vered in  the  seige,  he  would  have  rendered  himself 
master  of  it ;  but  when  he  unexpectedly  and  unac- 
countably raised  the  seige,  the  Christians  took  that 
opportunity  to  escape."  But  they  who  were  not 
thoroughly  believing,  and  truthful,  and  watchful 
according  to  the  Lord's  direction,  would  not  be  in 
circumstances  to  avail  themselves  of  the  provided 
measures  of  safety.  Accordingly,  after  declaring 
that  the  then  present  generation  should  not  pass 
until  all  these  things  should  be  fulfilled,  but  of  the 
particular  day  and  hour  no  one  knew  but  the  Father 
only,  so  that  he  could  not  give  them  a  memorandum 
of  the  time  for  escape,  but  they  must  watch  the  signs 
which  he  gave  them,  he  said,  "  But,  and  if  that  evil 
servant  shall  say  in  his  heart,  My  Lord  delayeth  his 
coming ;  and  shall  begin  to  smite  his  fellow  servants, 
and  to  eat  and  drink  with  the  drunken  ;  the  Lord  of 
that  servant  shall  come  in  a  day  when  he  looketh  not 
for  him,  and  in  an  hour  that  he  is  not  aware  of,  and 
shall  cut  him  asunder,  and  appoint  him  his  portion 


202  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

with  the   hypocrites ;    there  shall  be   weeping   and 
gnashing  of  teeth." 

All  this,  from  Matt.,  xxiv.  is  descriptive  of  events 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  were  to  be  fulfilled  in  that 
generation,  and  was  delivered  in  answer  to  the  ques- 
tions of  the  disciples  suggested  by  his  prediction  of 
the  destruction  of  the  temple,  saying,  "  When  shall 
these  things  be  ?  and  what  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy 
coming  and  of  the  end  of  the  world  ? '  (Aionos, 
age.) 

(A  more  fall  exposition  of  the  coming  of  Christ  here 
referred  to,  and  the  end  of  the  tvorld,  will  be  brought 
out  in  our  Chapter  vi.,  which  ivitt  be  devoted  to  the 
Doctor's  classification  vii.,  on  the  TERMS  ivhich  express 
the  duration  of  future  punish/ nent.) 

These  evil  servants  who  should  connect  themselves 
with  the  iniquities  of  the  Jews,  and  should  have 
their  portion  with  them  in  wailing  and  gnashing  of 
teeth  ;  these  foolish  virgins  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
or  visible  church,  who  should  find  the  door  of 
Christian  blessings  shut  against  them  when  the  day 
of  calamity  should  come ;  and  the  things  that  offend 
and  do  iniquity,  which  should  be  gathered  out  of  the 
Messiah's  kingdom  or  church,  and  cast  into  a  furnace 
of  fire,  —  all  at  the  end  of  that  aionos ;  these  are  all 
one  description  of  class,  character,  and  condition, 
presented  in  connection  with  different  illustrations, 
called  out  by  different  occasions.  As  it  respects  the 
metaphor  employed  in  the  latter  case,  the  parable  of 
the  tares,  to  represent  the  intensity  of  the  sufferings 
to  which  they  should  be  subjected,  viz.  "  a  furnace 


REPLY  TO   DR,    ADAMS.  203 

of  fire,"  while  no  theological  acumen  has  shown  us  a 
passage  in  the  Bible  which  employs  it  in  description 
of  any  human  condition  in  the  immortal  world,  the 
Scriptures  abound  in  the  use  of  the  same  and  similar 
descriptions  of  judgments  in  this  world,  and  particu- 
larly of  that  to  which  the  parable  of  the  tares  is 
applied,  at  the  end  of  that  aionos.  A  remarkable  in- 
stance of  this  description  is  the  following :  "  And  the 
word  of  the  Lord  came  unto  me,  saying, —  Son  of 
man,  the  house  of  Israel  to  me  has  become  dross  ; 
all  they  are  brass,  and  tin,  and  iron,  and  lead,  in  the 
midst  of  the  furnace ;  they  are  even  the  dross  of 
silver.  Therefore,  thus  saith  the  Lord  Go  d  ;  Because 
ye  are  all  become  dross,  behold,  therefore  I  will 
gather  you  into  the  midst  of  Jerusalem.  As  they 
gather  silver,  and  brass,  and  iron,  and  lead,  and  tin, 
into  the  midst  of  the  furnace,  to  blow  the  fire  upon 
it,  to  melt  it ;  so  will  I  gather  you  in  mine  anger  and 
in  my  fury,  and  I  will  leave  you  there,  and  melt  you. 
Yea,  I  will  gather  you,  and  blow  upon  you  in  the  fire, 
of  my  wrath,  and  ye  shall  be  melted  in  the  midst 
thereof.  As  silver  is  melted  in  the  midst  of  the  fur- 
nace, so  shall  ye  be  melted  in  the  midst  thereof;  and 
ye  shall  know  that  I  the  Lord  have  poured  out  my 
fury  upon  you.'7  (Ezek.  xxii.  17-22.)  How  natural 
and  appropriate  it  was  for  Jesus  to  represent  the 
messengers  of  the  Divine  power  as  casting  the  apos- 
tates signified  by  the  tares,  ".into  a  furnace  of  fire/7 
when  treating  of  the  same  judgment  in  connection  with 
which  the  prophet  had  employed  the  same  figure. 
Indeed,  the  description  of  direful  calamities  on  the 


204  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

earth  by  the  figure  of  raging  and  devouring  fire,  is 
common  throughout  all  the  Bible.  See  one  other 
impressive  instance  :  "  Therefore  wait  you  upon  me, 
saith  the  Lord,  until  the  day  that  I  rise  up  to  the 
prey :  for  my  determination  is  to  gather  the  nations, 
that  I  may  assemble  the  kingdoms,  to  pour  out  upon 
them  mine  indignation,  even  all  my  fierce  anger ;  for 
all  the  earth  shall  be  devoured  with  the  fire  of  my 
jealousy."  (Zeph.  iii.  8.)  But  this  fire  is  not  endless 
punishment,  for  it  was  both  to  do  its  work  on  the 
earth,  and  to  prove  reformatory  in  its  results.  For 
the  next  words  are,  "  For  then  (after  consuming  the 
earth  with  the  fire  of  Divine  jealousy)  will  I  turn  to 
the  people  a  pure  language,  that  they  may  all  call 
upon  the  Lord,  to  serve  him  with  one  consent." 

No,  all  our  readers  must  see,  even  our  esteemed 
friend  on  the  other  side  must  see  upon  this  review, 
and  this  explanation  of  Scripture  by  Scripture,  that 
he  has  made  discovery  of  no  furnace  of  fire  which  is 
a  synonym  of  endless,  or  even  future  punishment. 

SECTION  v. 

TJie  Lake  of  Fire  and  Brimstone,  and  the  Smoke  of 

Torment  forever. 

After  closing  his  remarks  on  the  burning  of  the 
tares,  or  casting  those  who  were  represented  by  the 
tares  into  a  furnace  of  fire,  Dr.  Adams  proceeds  as 
follows : 

"  Not  to  burden  the  attention  of  the  reader,  there  is  one  passage 
more  which  I  will  quote  in  connection  with  the  preceding,  for  the 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  205 

sake  of  briefly  remarking  upon  them,  before  passing  to  the  ntxt 
topic. 

The  passage  to  which  I  refer  is  Rev.  xiv.  9,  10,  11..  'And  the 
third  angel  followed  them,  saying  with  a  loud  voice,  If  any  man 
•worship  the  beast  and  his  image,  and  receive  his  mark  on  his  fore- 
head or  in  his  hand,  the  same  shall  drink  of  the  wine  of  the  wrath 
of  God  which  is  poured  out  without  mixture  into  the  cup  of  his 
indignation  \  and  he  shall  be  tormented  with  fire  and  brimstone  in 
the  presence  of  the  holy  angels,  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb  ; 
And  the  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  up  forever  and  ever ; 
and  they  have  no  rest,  day  nor  night,  who  worship  the  beast  and 
his  image,  and  whosoever  receiveth  the  mark  of  his  name/ 

What  is  here  called  being  "  tormented  with  fire  and 
brimstone/'  is  elsewhere  in  this  vision  called  being 
cast  into -a  lake  of  lire  and  brimstone.  il  And  the 
beast  was  taken,  and  with  him  the  false  prophet  that 
wrought  miracles  before  him,  with  which  he  deceived 
them  that  had  received  the  mark  of  the  beast,  and 
them  that  worshipped  his  image.  These  both  were 
cast  alive  into  a  lake  of  fire  burning  with  brimstone," 
(Rev.  xix.  20.)  Again,  "  And  the  devil  that  deceived 
them  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone, 
where  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  are,  and  shall 

be  tormented  day  and  night  forever  and  ever 

And  death  and  hell  where  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire. 
This  is  the  second  death.  And  whosoever  was  not 
found  written  in  the  bt>ok  of  life  was  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire."  (Chap.  xx.  vs.  10,  14,  15.) 

We  ask  now,  where  is  this  lake  of  fire?     There  are 

thousands  of  theologians,  good  men,  whose  testimony 

we   would   not   hesitate    to    receive   in    any   matter 

whereof  they  know,  who  are   ready  to  answer   in- 

18 


200  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

stanter,  "  Lo  here !  and  lo  there  ! "  But  we  most 
respectfully  set  aside  their  testimony  in  this  case, 
and  come  to  the  Revelator  himself.  Where  is  this 
lake  of  fire  ?  The  Revelator  answers,  It  is  where  the 
beast  and  the  false  prophet  are.  See  his  words  just 
quoted  as  above  :  "  And  the  devil  that  deceived  them 
was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  where 
the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  are."  What  beast? 
See  him  described  in  chap,  xiii.,  coming  up  out  of 
the  sea,  "  having  seven  heads  and  ten  horns,  and 
upon  his  horns  ten  crowns."  This  beast,  with  his 
seven  heads,  and  ten  horns  and  crowns,  John's  guid- 
ing angel  explains  to  represent  certain  wicked  kings 
and  kingdoms  of  the  earth,  and  the  false  prophet  was 
his  leading  emissary.  These  were  in  the  lake  of  fire  ; 
and  of  course  the  lake  of  fire  was  presented  to  the 
Revelator  in  vision  as  a  metaphorical  representation 
of  the  judgments  in  which  those  kings  and  kingdoms 
were  and  were  to  be  involved  in  the  earth.  We  do 
not  undertake,  and  no  sane  man  in  our  time  will 
undertake,  to  explain  and  apply  minutely  and  in  detail 
all  the  visionary  scenes  and  bold  poetic  figures  of 
the  book  of  Revelation.  Dr.  Adam  Clarke  sets  off  in 
its  supremely  ludicrous  light  the  presumption  of  those 
self-conceited  expositors  who  have  come  out  suc- 
cessively with  their  theories  of  interpretation,  clap- 
ping every  symbol  and  every  expression  upon  some 
particular  person  and  event,  each  exploded  shortly 
by  actual  events,  and  another  to  succeed  him  with 
equal  presumption.  And  this  great  expounder  con- 
fesses that  he  does  "  not  understand  the  book."  And 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  207 

in  general  consistency  with  this  modest  concession, 
with  but  occasional  and  slight  theological  guess-work, 
he  makes  his  commentary  of  this  book  to  be  mainly 
scientific  and  historical,  to  aid  in  a  discovery  of  the 
derivation  of  the  imagery.  But  notwithstanding  we 
would  not  undertake  to  give  a  particular  explanation 
and  circumstantial  application  of  all  the  minute  parts 
of  this  book,  it  is  not  difficult,  when  we  start  upon 
the  correct  view  of  its  date,  to  perceive  the  general 
subject  of  its  main  divisions,  and  the  principles,  legal 
and  evangelical,  which  gleam  out  from  its  teachings. 
And  more  especially  is  it  easy  in  various  cases,  as  in 
the  one  before  us,  to  determine  decisively  what  cer- 
tain portions  of  the  book  do  not  mean,  thus  explod- 
ing certain  false  assumptions  with  regard  to  their 
teachings.  In  this  case  we  have  proved  positively 
by  the  Revelator  himself,  that  he  does  not  mean,  by 
the  lake  of  fire,  a  place  of  torment  in  the  immortal 
world,  —  but  that  he  does  mean  to  represent  by  it 
certain  temporal  judgments,  involving  in  their  retri- 
butive force  earthly  kings  and  kingdoms. 

The  visions  of  St.  John,  in  these  revelations,  imaged 
to  his  mind  much  of  the  metaphorical  scenery  of  the 
old  prophets.  How  vividly  Isaiah,  (chap,  xxxiv.) 
paints  to  our  imagination  a  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone, 
though  not  using  the  name  :  "  For  my  sword  shall  be 
bathed  in  heaven ;  behold,  it  shall  come  down  upon 
Idumea,  and  upon  the  people  of  my  curse,  to  judg- 
ment. For  it  is  the  day  of  the  Lord's  vengeance, 
and  the  year  of  recompense  for  the  controversy  of 
Zion.  And  the  streams  thereof  shall  be  turned  into 


208  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

pitch,  and  the  dust  thereof  into  brimstone,  and  the 
land  thereof  shall  become  burning  pitch.  It  shall  not 
be  quenched  night  nor  day ;  the  smoke  thereof  shall 
go  up  forever ;  from  generation  to  generation  it  shall 
lie  waste ;  none  shall  pass  through  it  forever  and 


ever.' 


This  description,  which  pictures  to  your  mind  a 
whole  country  as  burning  pitch  and  brimstone,  figures 
to  your  view  a  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone.  That  this 
describes  a  judgment  in  the  earth  all  will  admit,  and 
yet  it  employs  the  very  terms  in  reference  to  dura- 
tion, forever  and  ever,  which  our  friend  regards  as 
his  strongest  proof  of  future  endless  suffering  con- 
nected with  the  lake  of  fire  in  Kevelation.  But  we 
have  shown  conclusivelv  that  the  latter,  even  as  this 

»*  / 

in  Isaiah,  does  not  describe  the  scenes  of  eternity,  but 
that  it  is  definitely  applied,  by  its  own  connections,  to 
events  on  earth.* 

We  have  spoken  of  the  date  of  the  book  of  Keve- 
lation, as  affording  aid  to  an  understanding  of  its 
general  descriptions.  The  authors  of  the  Common 
Version  adopt  the  year  96,  which  makes  it  subse- 
quent to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  leaves  no 
series  of  events  which  were  then  "  shortly  to  come 
to  pass,'7  to  which  the  progressive  openings  of  the 
visions  would  well  apply.  But  Dr.  Clarke,  whom  we 
have  spoken  of  as  being  in  himself  a  historical  library, 
says  that  the  most  respectable  testimonies  place  the 
date  of  the  book  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

*  Our  full  discussion  of  these  terms  expressing  duration,  we  reserve  to 
Chapter  vi. 


HEPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  209 

Though  the  external  testimonies  are  divided  on  this 
point,  yet  to  tin's  most  respectable  external  testimony 
add  the  internal  evidence  of  the  book  itself,  and  tho 
point  is,  to  our  mind,  conclusively  settled. 

The  internal  evidence  to  which  we  refer,  is  the 
correspondence  between  the  prophetic  representa- 
tions of  the  book,  and  the  events  which  immediately 
preceded  and  accompanied  the  destruction  of  the 
Jewish  city,  church  and  polity.  The  Revelation 
opens  with  the  following  prologue  : — "  The  Revelation 
of  Jesus  Christ,  which  God  gave  unto  him,  to  show 
unto  his  servants  things  which  must  shortly  come  to 
pass  ;  and  he  sent  and  signified  it  by  his  angel  unto 
his  servant  John ;  who  bare  record  of  the  word  of 
God,  and  of  the  testimony  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  of 

*? 

all  things  that  he  saw.  Blessed  is  lie  that  roadeth, 
and  they  that  hear  the  words  of  this  prophecy,  and 
keep  those  things  which  are  written  therein :  for  the 
time  is  at  hand/'  Then  proceed  the  addresses  to  the 
angels  or  ministers  of  the  seven  churches  of  Asia, 
administering  commendation  and  reproof.  And  here 
again  the  angel  testifies  of  the  near  approach  of  the 
things  which  were  the  principal  topics  of  his  com- 
munications. To  the  angel  of  the  Church  of  Phila- 
delphia, John  was  instructed  to  write, — "  Because 
thou  hast  kept  the  word  of  my  patience,  I  also  will 
keep  thee  from  the  hour  of  temptation,  which  shall 
come  upon  all  the  world,  to  try  them  that  dwell  upon 
the  earth.  Behold,  I  come  quickly:  hold  that  fast 
which  thou  hast,  that  no  man  take  thy  crown."  Then 
follows  the  opening,  successively,  of  the  seven  seals, 
18* 


210  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

which,  being  read  in  connection  with  the  discourse  of 
Jesus  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  recorded  in  Matt,  xxiv., 
xxv.,  Mark  xiii.,  and  Luke  xxi.,  are  seen  to  develop 
the  same  series  of  signs,  commotions,  wars  and  trib- 
ulations, terminating  in  the  same  national  devastation. 
There  is  more  here  of  the  metaphorical ;  but  as  far 
as  Jesus  employed  figures  in  that  discourse  they  are 
the  same  as  here  in  the  opening  of  the  seven  seals. 
In  filling  out  the  description  of  the  train  of  calamities 
to  their  consumation,  the  seven  trumpets  are  sounded, 
and  the  seven  thunders  utter  their  voices  ;  and  the 
seven  last  plagues,  and  the  seven  vials  of  wrath  are 
poured  out  upon  the  earth.  Further  descriptions  are 
made  to  fill  out  the  great  picture,  including  those  of 
the  lake  of  fire  into  a  consideration  of  which  we  have 
been  led  by  the  Doctor's  use  of  it  in  his  "Argument." 
And  at  the  close  the  angel  reiterates  the  near  ap- 
proach of  the  events  the  revealment  of  which  was 
the  leading  purpose  of  this  particular  prophetic  mis- 
sion. "And  he  said  unto  me,  These  sayings  are  faith- 
ful and  true ;  and  the  Lord  God  of  the  holy  prophets 
sent  his  angel  to  show  unto  his  servants  the  things 
which  must  shortly  be  done.  Behold,  I  come  quick- 
ly  And  he  said  unto  me,  seal  not  the  sayings 

of  the  prophecy  of  this  book ;  for  the  time  is  at 
hand." 

We  have  taken  pains  at  this  point  to  exhibit  some 
of  the  internal  evidence  of  the  book  itself,  to  confirm 
Dr.  Clarke's  "  most  respectable  external  evidence," 
that  it  was  written  just  before  the  destruction  of  Je- 
rusalem, while  the  preceding  signs  before  described 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  211 

by  Jesus  were  being  fulfilled  ;  and  that,  though  there 
are  occasional  developments  of  great  principles  which 
belong  to  all  ages,  and  of  the  gospel  purpose,  which 
runs  to  the  consummation  of  the  Messianic  age,  (which, 
by  the  way,  was  not  then  at  hand,)  yet  it  mainly  re- 
lates to  events  connected  with  the  special  judgment 
of  that  age,  which  was  then  "  shortly  to  come  to 
pass."  And  the  labor  which  we  have  now  devoted 
to  this  matter  will  make  it  convenient  for  us  to  be 
the  more  brief  with  the  references  which  the  Doctor 
makes  to  this  book  in  subsequent  parts  of  his  "Argu- 
ment." 

In  relation  to  the  Son  of  man's  sending  forth  his 
angels  to  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  them  which  do 
iniquity,  and  cast  them  into  a  furnace*  of  fire, — and 
to  the  torment  of  the  worshippers  of  the  beast  in 
the  presence  of  God  and  the  holy  angels,  Dr.  Adams 
remarks : 

If  the  Bible  says  that  angels,  at  the  last  day,  inflict  on  the 
wicked  that  which  can  best  be  compared  only  to  casting  them  into 
a  furnace  of  fire,  I  will  implicitly  believe  it.  My  reason  ascertains 
whether  this  is  said,  beyond  reasonable  doubt ;  then  reason  bows 
to  revelation.  I  will  not  object  that  such  employment  does  not 
consist  with  m-r  conceptions  of  angelic  natures.  If  I  did,  the 
question  Vould  be  appropriate.  Do  you  consent  that  a  holy  angel 
should  have  cut  off  the  hundred  and  eighty-five  thousand  Assyrians 
of  Sennacherib's  army  in  one  night,  and  that  another  should  have 
directed  the  pestilence  of  three  days  in  Israel  ?  What  will  you  do 
about  these  things  ? — Argument,  p.  28. 

Yes,  we  will  believe  what  the  Bible  says  of  these 
things  ;  but  we  should  not  force  upon  the  Bible  Ian- 


212  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

guage  a  meaning  which  should  make  the  very  paper 
it  is  printed  on  writhe  like  the  sensitive  plant  at  the 
rude  touch.  The  Bible  says  nothing  that  tasks  the 
benevolent  Christian  soul  with  the  painful  labor  of 
crushing  out  its  manhood  and  suppressing  its  finest 
moral  sensibilities,  in  order  to  be  conformed  in  feel- 
ing to  its  teachings.  We  know  that  the  Bible  says, 
the  angels  of  the  Lord  shall  gather  out  of  his  king- 
dom them  which  do  iniquity,  and  cast  them  into  a 
furnace  of  fire  ;  but  it  does  not  impute  to  them  the 
act  of  plunging  any  creature  into  endless  sufferings. 
Nor  does  it  inform  us  what  the  angels  were  that 
were  to  be  made  the  instruments  of  this  calamity  on 
the  impostors,  represented  by  the  furnace  of  fire. 
Our  friend  knows  that  the  word  angel  describes  not 
the  nature  of  a  being,  but  an  office.  It  signifies  an 
agent  or  messenger.  It  is  applied  often  to  spiritual 
beings,  and  often  to  others,  animate  and  inanimate, 
when  employed  as  messengers  of  God.  "  He  maketh 
the  wind  his  angels,  and  the  flaming  fire  his  min- 
isters.'7 Such  is  said  by  the  learned  to  be  the  literal 
rendering  of  Ps.  civ.  4.  Whatever  instrumentalities 
God  employs  in  the  administration  of  his  government 
are  the  messengers  of  his  will. 

As  it  respects  the  worshippers  of  the  beast  being 
tormented  in  the  presence  of  the  holy  angels,  it  is 
sufficient  to  receive  it  as  signifying  that  God,  in  this, 
as  in  all  the  other  dispensations  of  his  government, 
has  the  approval  of  all  enlightened  and  holy  moral 
beings.  Of  the  heavenly  angels,  it  is  represented  in 
the  Scriptures  that  they  have  a  living  sympathetic 


REPLY   TO   DE.    ADAMS.  213 

interest  for  the  welfare  of  mankind.  When  Gabriel 
announced  to  the  Shepherds  the  advent  of  the 
Saviour  of  the  world,  a  multitude  of  the  heavenly 
host  descended  with  an  anthem  of  joy  and  praise. 
And  Jesus  informs  us  that  the  angels  of  heaven 
rejoice  at  every  step  the  work  of  salvation  advan- 
ces among  men.  But  they  know  that  mankind 
here  are  in  a  rudimental,  peccable  state ;  that  they 
are  liable  to  all  possible  degrees  of  mortal  sin  and 
mortal  suffering.  But  they  know  that  it  is  a  wise 
economy  in  the  system  of  the  Creator  that  man 
should  commence  his  being  in  such  a  rudimental 
state,  and  suffer  whatever  discipline  the  Father 
seeth  best.  And  when  they  witness  human  suffer- 
ings, it  is  in  the  spirit  in  which  Jesus  wept  in  view 
of  the  sufferings  which  should  come  upon  the  Jews — 
yet  all  full  of  comfort,  because  they  know  that,  in 
due  time,  the  human  "  creation  shall  be  delivered 
from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into  the  glorious 
liberty  of  the  children  of  God."  But  if  the  thought 
should  enter  the  angelic  minds  that  God  will  make 
the  existence  of  any  of  his  creatures  an  endless  round 
of  suffering,  it  would  fill  all  heaven  with  sorrow,  and 
with  sorrow  not  to  be  assuaged  until  the  thought 
should  be  removed. 

No,  there  is  no  judgment  of  God  but  what  angels 
and  good  men  will  fully  approve  when  they  under- 
stand the  design.  God's  enlightened  servants,  in 
heaven  and  earth,  can  cordially  respond  amen  to  the 
sentiment  of  the  Psalmist,  "  Also  unto  thee,  O  Lord, 
belongeth  mercy ;  for  thou  renderest  unto  every 
man  according  to  his  work." 


214  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

With  regard  to  the  question  proposed  by  our 
friend,  "do  you  consent  that  a  holy  angel  should 
have  cut  off  the  hundred  and  eighty-five  thousand 
Assyrians  of  Sennacherib's  army  in  one  night?'1  we 
answer,  that  God,  even  in  his  judgments,  rules  in 
wisdom  and  love,  not  disregarding  the  ultimate  good 
of  any  of  his  creatures.  For  "  the  Lord  is  good  to 
all,  and  his  tender  mercies  are  over  all  his  works." 
We  therefore  consent,  and  that  most  cheerfully,  that 
God  should  act  as  his  wisdom  may  direct  his  actions, 
and  that  he  should  employ  such  instrumentalities  as 
he  seeth  best  to  employ.  If  I  should  see  a  merciless 
cannibal  pursuing  my  child  to  slay  him,  and  the  next 
minute  see  that  cannibal  fall  dead,  I  should  thank 
God  for  the  providential  preservation  of  my  child  ; 
and  whether  the  stroke  which  averted  the  death-blow 
to  him,  were  by  a  direct  interposition  of  Divine 
power,  or  by  a  spiritual  messenger,  or  by  my  cher- 
ished Christian  friend,  I  should  look  upon  that  instru- 
ment or  agent  of  God's  good  will  with  no  disaffection. 
But  if  either  of  the  personages  here  referred  to 
should  take  that  cannibal,  after  having  disabled  him 
from  injuring  any  one,  and  put  him  to  torture  a  life- 
time, a  year,  a  day,  or  an  hour,  out  of  retaliation,  and 
for  the  sake  of  his  injury,  I  should  frown  upon  the 
fiendish  transaction  with  everlasting  contempt. 

Sennacherib,  to  whom  our  friend  refers,  threatened 
the  destruction  of  Israel,  and  vaunted  blasphemously 
against  Israel's  God.  It  belonged  to  the  economy  of 
God  which  chose  that  people  to  be  the  repository 
of  his  name  and  his  oracles,  and,  by  plagues  upon 
Egypt,  and  the  destruction  of  Pharaoh  and  his  host 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  215 

in  the  Red  Sea,  and  many  other  special  interpositions, 
redeemed,  preserved,  and  led  them  on  to  the  fulfil- 
ment of  this  mission  ;  it  belonged  to  this  economy,  I 
say,  to  interpose  in  their  behalf  in  this  case,  and  to 
do  so  in  suck  a  manner  as  to  make  evident  his  own 
presence  in  the  work.  Accordingly  he  destroyed  so 
large  a  number  of  the  invading  army,  as  to  cause  the 
king  of  Assyria  to  retire  with  the  residue  of  his 
forces.  What  the  angel  was  that  smote  them,  the 
record  does  not  inform  us.  It  says  in  brief,  "  Then 
the  angel  of  the  Lord  went  forth,  and  smote  in  the 
camp  of  the  Assyrians  a  hundred  and  four  score  and 
five  thousand."  None  will  assume  that  a  personal 
messenger  from  God  went  to  each  of  these  Assyrians 
and  smote  him  to  death  with  his  fist,  or  with  a  sword. 
It  was  undoubtedly  pestilence  that  did  the  work; 
and  the  record  does  not  require  us  to  construe  it  as 
implying  the  direct  agency  of  any  other  angel. 

So  with  regard  to  the  pestilence  of  three  days  in 
Israel,  recorded  in  1  Chron.  xxi.  David  was  permit- 
ted to  choose  between  three  things,  the  last  of  which 
was  three  days  pestilence,  called  the  sword  of  the 
Lord.  He  preferred  the  latter,  which  he  called 
falling  into  the  hand  of  the  Lord.  "  So  the  Lord  sent 
pestilence  upon  Israel.'7  This  is  the  whole  affair.  It 
does  not  appear  that  there  was  any  angelic  person 
either  inflicting  or  directing  the  pestilence  of  the 
three  days.  But  when  the  desolating  scourge  ap- 
proached the  great  city,  the  fact  was  represented  to 
the  vision  of  David  by  the  appearance  of  an  angel 
standing  between  earth  and  heaven,  over  the  city, 


THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

with  a  drawn  sword  in  his  hand,  in  a  threatening 
attitude.  And  to  denote  the  pleasure  of  the  Lord  to 
stay  the  plague,  the  angel  was  commanded  to  put  up 
liis  sword.  Whatever  this  visible  angel  was,  for  he 
was  visible  and  communicative  to  David,  the  repug- 
nance to  our  moral  sense,  of  the  doctrine  of  endless 
torment,  cannot  be  in  the  least  modified  by  a  com- 
paris'on  with  the  agency  of  this,  or  any  of  God's 
messengers,  in  the  administration  of  his  moral  gov- 
ernment on  earth.  And  we  cannot  but  regret  that 
our  worthy  friend  should  feel  constrained,  by  the 
necessities  of  his  theology,  to  exercise  his  eminent 
talents  in  the  way  of  representing  those  ancient 
Scripture  records  of  the  Divine  primitive  administra- 
tion in  the  most  unfavorable  light,  so  as  to  make 
them  appear  unnecessarily  oppugnant  to  refined 
Christian  sentiment  and  feeling.  Mankind,  from 
early  childhood,  meet  with  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
harmonizing  many  of  the  events  under  God's  provi- 
dence on  earth,  with  the  idea  that  God  is  infinitely 
wise  and  good.  And  it  seems  to  be  the  true  mission 
of  the  Christian  teacher,  not  infinitely  to  aggravate 
these  difficulties  by  resolving  those  mysterious  dis- 
pensations into  a  principle  which  will  culminate  in 
infinite  evil,  but  to  reconcile  the  mind  to  God  by 
explanations  which  shall  fill  the  soul  with  the  assur- 
ance that  they  shall  yet  see  and  know  that,  as  the 
friend  of  all  his  creatures,  God  doeth  all  things  well. 

In  his  solicitude  to  attune  our  moral  feelings  to  the 
doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  the  Doctor  says  in 
this  same  connection,  — u  I  find  that  when  men  fully 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  217 

understand  the  enormities  of  some  outrage  upon  a 
fellow  creature,  and  the  soul  is  filled  with  them, 
the  punishment,  swift  or  slow,  meets  with  no  repug- 
nance in  their  nature."  He  here  refers  to  the  class 
of  cases  where  the  multitude,  enraged  by  some 
bloody  enormity,  thirst  for  the  blood  of  the  criminal, 
and,  if  the  legal  process  is  slow,  lynch  him  at  venture. 
But  this  is  not  the  principle  which  Jesus  taught,  and 
illustrated  by  his  life,  and  his  prayer  on  the  cross. 
He  repeatedly  referred  to  this  principle,  but  to  con- 
demn€  it.  It  cannot,  therefore,  be  His  theology, 
which  would  discipline  the  heart  to  the  likeness  of 
this  blood-thirsty  spirit.  It  is  true  that  the  reason- 
able punishments  administered  by  those  laws  of  the 
State  which  are  just  and  humane,  meet  with  no 
repugnance  in  our  nature  involving  censure,  though 
they  pain  our  sympathies,  as  the  punishments  of  the 
Jews  pained  the  sympathies  of  Jesus.  But  every  act 
of  barbarity,  every  infliction  of  pain  for  the  sake  of 
pain,  every  deprivation  not  required  by  the  good 
of  the  offender  or  the  safety  of  the  community,  or 
both,  even  if  perpetrated  by  civil  government,  must 
excite  the  deep  repugnance  and  stern  reprobation  of 
every  enlightened  Christian.  And  even  the  lynching 
mob,  in  all  their  violence,  if  they  should  see  the 
victim  of  their  rage  struggling  long  in  his  death 
agony,  would  be  unable  to  endure  the  sight,  and 
hasten  to  end  his  sufferings.  No,  you  cannot  find 
upon  earth,  bad  as  it  is,  even  outside  of  the  Christian 
religion,  a  fair  synonym  of  the  spirit  involved  in  the 
doctrine  of  endless  punishment. 
19 


218  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

To  our  friend's  statement,  and  amplification 
through  the  next  long  paragraph,  of  the  conditions 
which  would  lead  him  to  reject  the  Bible  as  un- 
worthy of  respect  as  the  word  of  God,  we  will  devote 
due  consideration  when  we  come  to  his  use  of  Theo- 
dore Parker  as  a  witness  for  his  "  Scriptural  Argu- 
ment. " 

SECTION  VI. 

The  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus. 

The  following  is  the  next  cluster  of  Scripture 
quotations  in  the  "  Argument  for  Future,  Endless 
Punishment : ' 

"  The  following  Scriptures,  teaching  that  the  wicked  are  in 
misery  after  death,  confirm  the  foregoing  statements.  '  The  wicked 
is  driven  away  in  his  wickedness.'  '  The  ungodly  are  like  the  chaif 
which  the  wind  driveth  away.'  '  The  men  of  Sodom  were  wicked 
and  sinners  before  God  exceedingly.'  '  And  the  Lord  rained  fire 
and  brimstone  out  of  heaven  and  destroyed  them  all."  — '  The  rich 
man  died  and  was  buried ;  and  in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being 
in  torment.'  '  Judas  by  transgression  fell,  and  went  to  his  own 
place.'  '  If  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins. 
And  where  I  am  thither  ye  cannot  come.' " 

Notwithstanding  we  admonished  our  friend  in  our 
second  preliminary  note  to  him,  that  our  printing  in 
the  Christian  Freeman  promiscuous  collections  of 
texts  made  by  him  without  reasons  given  for  the 
uses  for  which  they  are  quoted,  would  be  of  no  good 
service,  yet  it  is  perceived  that  he  goes  extensively 
into  this  line  of  argument.  Not  the  least  effort  is 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  219 

made  in  the  present  case  to  show,  from  the  connec- 
tions and  subjects  of  discourse  respectively,  that  any 
of  the  passages  adduced  refer  to  the  condition  of  hu- 
manity in  the  future  life.  Some  of  our  friends  have 
expressed  disappointment  at  this,  which  is  the  same 
throughout ;  but  we  had  no  reason  to  expect  aught 
else.  There  arenio  reasons  for  the  popular  applica- 
tion of  these  passages,  besides  the  mere  detached 
phraseology  itself,  taken  in  a  theologically  canonized 
sense.  No  man  on  earth  ever  attempted  any  other 
argument  than  our  friend  has  employed,  which  is 
assumption. 

Of  the  passages  here  thrown  together,  none  will 
require  a  labored  examination  but  that  referring  to 
the  llich  Man  and  Lazarus.  To  this  we  will  devote 
some  extended  attention,  and  then  the  others  will 
only  require  a  word  of  remark,  such  as  may  be  sug- 
gested by  their  language  and  positions. 

The  story  of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus  has  been 
regarded  by  many  as  the  most  evidently  declarative 
of  punishment  after  death  of  any  portion  of  the 
sacred  record.  For  here,  they  say,  is  an  account  of 
one  who  died  and  was  buried,  and  subsequently  lifted 
up  his  eyes  in  hell,  being  in  torment.  "  What  will 
you  do  with  this  ?"  Verily  we  have  nothing  to  do 
with  it  but  to  inquire  what  Jesus  meant  to  be  under- 
stood as  teaching  by  it. 

1st.  We  inquire,  Is  this  story  to  be  taken  as  a  lit- 
eral history,  or  a:»  a  parable  ?  Well,  says  one,  if  it  is 
a  parable  it  must  mean  something.  Our  opponent  has 
taken  pains  to  show  that  parables,  and  metaphors, 


220  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

and  symbols,  mean  something  that  is  real.  They  are 
not  mere  "  flame-picture.7'  True,  herein  he  is  right, 
and  we  perfectly  agree  with  him.  If  the  story  before 
us  is  a  parable,  it  is  a  parabolic  representation  of 
some  solemn  reality.  So  we  shall  find  it.  But  wo 
choose  first  to  inquire  whether  it  is  parabolic,  or  a 
literal  narrative. 

If  this  be  a  literal  narrative,  then  hades,  which  is 
the  word  rendered  hell  in  this  case,  is  here  declared 
by  our  Lord  to  be  a  place  of  torment  after  death.  If 
so,  it  is  the  first  and  only  time  it  is  so  declared  in  the 
Scriptures.  It  is  not  so  represented  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament. Hades  in  the  Septuagint  or  Greek  version 
of  the  Old  Testament  is  generally  used  for  the  sheol 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  The  literal  meaning  of  hades, 
from  a,  negative,  and  eidea,  to  see,  is  unseen,  or  invis- 
ible. Accordingly  the  word  is  literally  employed  to 
denote  any  hidden  depth  ;  and  by  accommodation  it 
is  used  for  the  state  of  the  dead,  as  being  unseen  and 
unknown.  The  learned  and  Orthodox  Dr.  Campbell, 
in  the  6th  of  his  Preliminary  Dissertations  to  the 
Four  Gospels,  has  the  following  truthful  observations  : 

"As  to  the  word  hades,  which  occurs  in  eleven 
places  in  the  New  Testament,  and  is  rendered  hell  in 
all  except  one,  where  it  is  translated  grave,  it  is  quite 
common  in  classical  authors,  and  frequently  used  by 
the  Seventy  in  the  translation  of  the  Old  Testament. 
In  my  judgment  it  ought  never  in  Scripture  to  be  ren- 
dered hell,  at  least  in  the  sense  wherein  that  word  is 
now  universally  understood  by  Christians.  In  the 
Old  Testament  the  corresponding  word  is  sheol, 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  221 

which  signifies  the  state  of  the  dead  in  general,  with- 
out regard  to  the  goodness  or  badness  of  the  persons, 
their  happiness  or  misery." 

We  make  this  quotation  from  Dr.  Campbell,  to 
which  agree  Prof.  Stuart  and  the  learned  generally, 
who  have  given  particular  attention  to  the  subject, 
not  that  we  would  rest  the  question  on  the  decision 
of  a  Commentator,  but  because  the  theology  of  such 
men  demands  of  them  the  use  of  as  much  evidence  as 
they  can  find  for  future  endless  punishment,  and  con- 
sequently their  ingenuous  and  unhesitating  relin- 
quishment  of  all  evidence  for  this  doctrine  from  the 
Scripture  use  of  this  word,  is  a  testimony  to  us  that 
the  most  learned  and  talented  men,  when  ingenuous, 
while  they  want  the  evidence  of  such  doctrine  in  this 
word,  cannot  find  it  there.  And  this  circumstance 
supersedes  the  necessity  of  our  detailing  the  reader 
with  so  minute  and  full  examination  of  the  Scripture 
use  of  this  word,  as  might  otherwise  have  been  ex- 
pedient. It  may  be  regarded  as  a  settled  question. 
And  it  will  be  remarked  that  the  decision  of  Dr. 
Campbell  comprehends  both  Testaments.  Of  hades 
he  says,  "  In  my  judgment  it  ought  never  in  the  Scrip- 
tures to  be  rendered  hell,  at  least  in  the  sense  where- 
in that  word  is  now  universally  understood  among 
Christians."  This  throws  out  the  word  hell,  in  the 
"  Orthodox  7  sense,  from  the  story  of  the  Rich  Man 
and  Lazarus.  But  even  with  regard  to  the  word  hell, 
Dr.  Campbell  goes  on  to  say,  what  all  the  learned 
know,  that,  "  In  its  primitive  signification  it  perfectly 
corresponded  '  with  the  meaning  of  sheol  and  hades. 
19* 


222  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION' 

"  For,  says  he,  "at  first  it  denoted  only  what  was 
secret  or  concealed.  The  word  is  found  with  but 
little  variation  of  form,  and  precisely  in  the  same 
meaning,  in  all  the  Teutonic  dialects."  Dr.  Park- 
hurst,  in  his  Greek  Lexicon,  speaking  of  this  agree- 
ment of  the  word  hell,  in  its  primitive  signification, 
with  hades,  savs  that  in  the  time  of  his  writing  the 

7  »/  O 

word  was  familiarly  so  used  in  some  of  the  western 
counties  in  England.  "  To  heUe  over  a  thing,  is  to 
cover  it." 

So,  then,  the  English  word  hell,  like  some  other 
words,  has  had  its  definition  changed  since  the  ren- 
dering of  king  James'  Version.  And  it  is  rather 
strange  that  so  learned  a  man  as  our  opponent  should 
quote  scraps  of  Scripture  containing  this  word,  rely- 
ing on  the  mere  occurrence  of  the  word  as  an  argu- 
ment for  future  endless  punishment.  Let  us  illustrate 
this  impropriety  by  reference  to  other  words  which 
have  changed  their  meaning  since  the  date  of  the 
Common  Version.  The  word  prevent  then  signified 
to  anticipate,  or  go  before.  David  says,  (Ps.  cxix.  147, 
148,)  "  I  prevented  the  dawning  of  the  morning,  and 
cried.'7  That  is,  he  anticipated  the  dawning  of  the 
morning,  or  awaked  before  dawn,  and  engaged  in 
supplication.  "  Mine  eyes  prevent  the  night  watches, 
that  I  might  meditate  in  thy  word."  Now  if  a  relig- 
ious teacher  should  assert  that  David  possessed  and 
exercised  miraculous,  power  to  hinder  the  dawning 
of  the  day,  and  should  quote  the  above  words  of 
Scripture  to  prove  it,  he  would  pain  his  sensible  con- 
gregation. But  if  you  should  invite  him  to  look  into 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  223 

the  primitive  meaning  of  the  word  prevent,  and  into 
the  connection  in  which  it  is  used  in  the  case  refer- 
red to,  that  he  might  see  his  error,  and  understand 
that  David  did  not  speak  of  hindering  the  dawn,  but 
of  awaking  before  it,  he  would  peradventure  sneer 
at  your  pedantic  reference  to  the  primitive  sense 
of  the  word,  and  to  the  connection  in  which  it  was 
used,  pronouncing  with  emphasis,  "  David  says,  1 1 
prevented  the  dawning  of  the  morning;'  and  pre- 
vent means  prevent, — it  is  God's  word,  and  that  is 
enough."  And  you  would  be  obliged  to  let  him  go. 
Again,  the  word  let  has  been  entirely  turned  about. 
It  used  to  signify  hinder.  Now  it  means  permit.  God 
pays  by  Isaiah,  "  I  will  work,  and  who  shall  let  it?' 
The  idea  is.  that  none  could  let  it :  that  is,  none  could 
hinder  it.  Xow  suppose  that  some  teacher  who  in- 
sists that  a  word  is  a  word,  and  we  must  not  concern 
ourselves  about  what  it  once  was,  should  declare  that 
no  man  will  permit  God  to  work,  and  should  prove  it 
by  these  words,  "  I  will  work,  and  who  shall  let  it?5 
Your  intelligent  children  would  look  upon  him  with 
wonder. 

We  have  no  unkind  allusion  in  these-  illustrations. 
There  are  many  of  the  greatest  and  best  of  men  who, 
being  incurnbered  with  a  scholastic  theological  edu- 
cation which  is  unscriptural,  feel  not  the  same  liberty 
to  criticise  in  matters  of  essential  doctrine,  which 
they  exercise  on  those  of  smaller  moment.  Vv  hat  we 
mean  by  these  references  to  change  of  meaning  with 
other  English  words,  and  the  impropriety  of  insisting 
on  their  being  taken  in  their  modern  sense  when 


224  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

found  in  ancient  writings,  is  to  illustrate  the  neces- 
sity of  our  studying  important  Scripture  words  and 
phrases  in  the  light  of  their  primitive  signification, 
the  connections  in  which  they  occur,  and  their  com- 
mon usage  when  the  Scriptures  were  spoken  or  writ- 
ten. 

To  return  to  the  word  hades ;  though  the  conces- 
sions of  the  learned  of  the  "  Orthodox '  schools 
render  it  unnecessary  that  we  should  go  into  an 
extensive  examination  of  its  Scripture  usage,  yet  we 
will  glance  along  through  the  sacred  volume,  suffi- 
ciently to  enable  all  to  see  for  themselves  that  those 
Doctors  are,  in  these  concessions,  decidedly  right. 

In  the  first  instance  in  which  the  word  hades  is 
rendered  hell  in  the  Old  Testament,  'it  is  used  in  its 
most  literal  sense,  referring  to  hidden  and  unseen 
depths.  It  is  in  Deut.  xxxii.  22.  "  For  a  fire  is 
kindled  in  mine  anger,  and  shall  burn  unto  the  lowest 
hell."  That  this  was  designed  to  signify  deep  and 
hidden  recesses  of  the  earth  is  seen  by  reading  the 
verse  out ; — "  and  shall  consume  the  earth  with  her 
increase,  and  set  on  fire  the  foundations  of  the  moun- 
tains." By  reading  the  whole  chapter  it  will  be  seen 
that  the  general  sentiment  is  the  same  as  that  repre- 
sented by  the  prophet  Amos,  in  the  passage  noticed 
before,  saying  that  though  they  should  dig  into  hades, 
God's  hand  would  take  them  thence.  The  idea  is 
that  no  secret  depth  should  avail  the  wicked  to  screen 
them  from  the  righteous  judgment  of  God. 

Hades  occurs  in  three  instances  before  this,  where 
it  is  rendered  grave.  In  the  first  instance  it  is  used 


REPLY  TO   DR,   ADAMS.  225 

by  Jacob,  saying,  "  I  will  go  down  to  hades  to  my 
son,  mourning; '  and  in  the  second  instance,  by  the 
same  in  his  charge  to  his  sons  concerning  Benjamin  ; 
and  in  the  third,  by  Judah  in  his  plea  before  Joseph, 
— on  the  danger  of  bringing  down  the  gray  hairs  of 
the  patriarch  with  sorrow  to  hades.  Surely  Jacob 
did  not  deliberately  calculate  on  going  down  to  a 
place  of  future  punishment  to  his  son  Joseph  ;  nor 
did  Jacob  apprehend  that  any  misfortune  to  Benjamin 
would  bring  down  the  gray  hairs  of  his  father  to  such 
a  place. 

The  words  of  David,  (Ps.  ix.  17,)  "  The  wicked 
shall  be  turned  into  hell,  and  all  the  nations  that 
forget  God," — have  been  familiarly  used  by  advocates 
of  future  punishment  as  an  expression  of  that  doc- 
trine. If  hades  does  take  upon  itself  this  before 
unknown  meaning  in  this  place,  it  must  be  shown, 
not  by  the  force  of  the  word,  for  it  had  no  such 
force,  but  by  the  connection  in  which  it  occurs.  But 
the  connection  here  explains  it  in  accordance  with 
its  familiar  Jewish  usage,  as  signifying  the  state  of 
the  dead,  or  temporal  destruction.  Read  the  whole 
Psalm.  David  was  praying  for  deliverance  from  the 
power  of  his  enemies,  and  prophesying  their  destruc- 
tion. "  The  heathen  are  sunk  down  in  the  pit  which 
they  digged  :  in  the  net  which  they  hid  is  their  own 
foot  taken.  The  wicked  shall  be  turned  into  hades, 
and  all  the  nations  that  forget  God."  Thus  should 
they  sink  in  the  pit  which  they  digged  for  David  and 
his  people.  What  was  that  pit?  It  was  temporal 
destruction.  The  heathen  did  not  plan  a  place  of 


226  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

endless  punishment  for  Israel,  but  only  their  tem- 
poral overthrow.  This  should  become  their  own  lot. 
This  was  the  pit,  or  the  hades,  into  which  they  should 
sink.  Precisely  the  same  idea  is  expressed  (Ps.  Ixiii. 
9,  10)  in  the  following  terms  : — "  But  those  that  seek 
my  soul  (my  life)  to  destroy  it,  shall  go  into  the 
lower  parts  of  the  earth.  They  shall  fall  by  the 
sword,  they  shall  be  a  portion  for  foxes.7'  If  any 
take  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth,  in  this  case,  which 
are  the  sheol  or  hades  of  the  ninth  Psalm,  to  be  a 
place  of  future  torment,  they  will  consistently  follow 
their  hand  by  metamorphosing  the  foxes  into  devils 
as  tormentors. 

Isaiah  (xiv.)  employs  hades  in  its  commonly  accom- 
modated application,  to  the  state  of  the  dead,  in 
connection  with  bold  poetic  imagery.  Predicting 
the  restoration  of  Israel  from  Babylonish  captivity, 
he  says,  "  Thou  shalt  take  up  this  proverb  against 
the  king  of  Babylon,  and  say,  How  hath  the  oppres- 
sor ceased  !  The  golden  city  ceased  !  The  whole 
earth  is  at  rest  and  quiet ;  they  break  forth  into 
singing.  Yea,  the  fir-trees  rejoice  at  thee,  and  the 
cedars  of  Lebanon,  saying,  Since  thou  art  laid  down, 
no  feller  is  come  up  against  us.  Hell  from  beneath 
is  moved  for  thee  to  meet  thee  at  thy  coming :  it 
stirreth  up  the  dead  for  thee,  even  all  the  chief  ones 
of  the  earth  ;  it  hath  raised  up  from  their  thrones  all 
the  kings  of  the  nations.  All  they  shall  speak  and 
say  unto  thee,  Art  thou  also  become  weak  as  we  ? 
art  thou  become  like  unto  us?  Thy  pomp  is  brought 
down  to  the  grave,  and  the  noise  of  thy  viols ;  the 


REPLY   TO    DR.    ADAMS. 


worm  is  spread  under  thee,  and  the  worms  cover 
thee."  It  is  clear  that  hades  is  here  used  for  the 
grave,  or  rather  tho  state  of  the  dead,  which  was 
then  regarded  as  a  state  of  darkness,  silence,  uncon- 
sciousness, and  inactivity.  For  Solomon  says, 
"  There  is  no  work,  no  device,  nor  knowledge,  nor 
wisdom,  in  hades"  Why  then  does  Isaiah  represent 
hades  as  being  moved  to  meet  the  king  of  Babylon, 
and  the  dead  kings  therein  as  rising  up  and  address- 
ing him?  We  answer,  it  is  by  precisely  the  same 
rhetorical  personification,  that  the  fir-trees  and  cedars 
are  represented  as  rejoicing,  and  addressing  the  fallen 
monarch.  His  fall  was  an  event  of  so  signal  interest 
to  the  world,  and  especially  to  Israel,  that  all  depart- 
ments of  living  nature  are  represented  as  rejoicing  at 
his  egress,  and  the  dead  as  greeting  his  coming. 
This  is  a  style  of  personification  common  to  poets 
and  orators  of  all  times,  though  coming  nearer  the 
common  style  of  earlier  ages.  American  patriots 
arouse  the  national  pride  of  their  countrymen  by 
citing  them  to  the  voice  of  their  father's  blood,  cry- 
ing unto  them,  "  Sons  !  scorn  to  be  slaves."  Nobody 
misunderstands  such  language,  except  theologians  ; 
nor  they,  but  when  they  read  it  in  the  Bible. 

With  regard  to  the  word  under  inquiry,  to  multiply 
references  to  the  Old  Testament  usage  is  unneces- 
sary ;  but  wTe  must  make  two  or  three  citations 
more. 

Job  says,  (xiv.  13,)  "  0  that  thou  wouldest  hide 
me  in  hades,  that  thou  wouldest  keep  me  secret,  until 
thy  wrath  be  past,  that  thou  wouldest  appoint  me  a 


228  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

set  time,  and  remember  me."  Job  did  not  pray  to 
be  hid  in  "  a  mad  snlplmrious  tide '  of  wrath  ;  but 
by  hades  he  meant  a  condition  of  repose  from  all 
those  raging  evils  which  were  signified  by  the  wrath 
of  God.  But  this  condition,  and  the  dispensations 
of  wrath,  he  regarded  as  temporary,  destined  to  pass 
away,  when  he  should  be  remembered  of  God  in  his 
loving  favor. 

Jonah  said  in  his  song  of  deliverance,  "  Out  of  the 
belly  of  hell  (hades)  cried  I,  and  thou  heardest  my 
voice." 

David  said,  in  praise  to  his  God,  "  Great  is  thy 
mercy  towards  me ;  for  thou  hast  delivered  my  soul 
from  the  lowest  hell." 

And  here  is  a  glorious  prophecy  with  which  we 
must  close  our  Old  Testament  citations:  —  "I  will 
ransom  them  from  the  power  of  hades  ;  I  will  redeem 
them  from  death.  O  death,  I  will  be  thy  plagues  ;  O 
hades,  I  will  be  thy  destruction."  Not,  surely,  a  place 
of  endless  punishment,  is  that  hades. 

And  now  we  come  to  the  use  of  the  term  hades  in 
the  New  Testament.  Has  it,  in  the  mouths  of  God's 
inspired  servants,  or  by  revelation  of  Jesus  Christ, 
received  any  new  sense  since  the  last  of  the  prophets  ? 
We  will  briefly  notice  all  the  cases  of  its  occurrence 
in  the  New  Testament,  which  are  eleven  only.  For 
the  reader  will  bear  in  mind  that  in  twelve  of  the 
cases  in  which  the  word  hell  occurs  in  our  Common 
Version  of  the  New  Testament,  the  original  is  Gehen- 
na; and  all  these  cases  have  been  fully  considered  in 
this  Chapter  of  our  Reply  to  Dr.  Adams.  What  we 


REPLY- TO   DE.   ADAMS.  229 

are  now  to  examine  is  the  New  Testament  usage  of 
the  word  hades,  which  is  rendered  hell  in  the  story 
of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus;  and  in  nine  other  cases, 
and  grave  in  one  instance. 

The  first  case  of  its  occurrence  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  Matt.  xi.  23.  "  And  thou,  Capernaum,  which 
art  exalted  to  heaven,  shall  be  brought  down  to 
(hades)  hell."  None  will  assume  that  the  exaltation 
of  Capernaum  to  heaven,  (ouranos,  literally  the  serial 
regions  above  the  earth,)  signified  the  location  of 
that  city  in  the  spirit  land.  It  is  a  figurative  repre- 
sentation of  their  temporal  exaltation  in  wealth  and 
privilege.  So  their  being  brought  down  to  hades,  lit- 
erally a  hidden  deep,  is  a  figurative  representation  of 
the  depth  of  degradation  and  ruin  into  which  that 
city  was  doomed  to  fall.  We  are  not  aware  that  there- 
is  any  Commentator  whatever  who  takes  a  different 
view  of  this  passage.  And  this  is  the  first  instance 
of  the  occurrence  of  hades  in  the  New  Testament  — 
precisely  a  continuation  of  its  Old  Testament  usage. 

The  same  words  of  Jesus  are  recorded  by  Luke, 
x.  15,  which  require  no  separate  consideration. 

The  next  instance  to  be  noticed  is  Matt.  xvi.  18. 
"  And  upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church,  and  the 
gates  of  (hades)  hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it." 
Here  it  is  used  for  the  grave,  or  the  state  of  death. 
Gates  are  ways  of  ingress  and  egress.  The  idea  isr 
that  none  of  the  powers  of  death,  or  instrumentalities 
that  consign  men  to  the  grave,  should  destroy  the 
church  of  Christ.  It  is  virtually  a  prophecy  that  his 

church  should  be  perpetual,  in  spite  of  all  forms  of 
20 


230  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

opposition,  even  the  machinery  of  death.  We  think 
the  learned  of  all  religious  opinions  are  agreed  also 
on  this  passage. 

We  come  next  to  Acts  ii.  27,  31.  "  Because  thou 
wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  (hades)  hell,  neither  wilt 
thou  suffer  thine  Holy  One  to  see  corruption/'  "  lie 
(David)  seeing  this  before,  spake  of  the  resurrection 
of  Christ,  that  his  soul  was  not  left  in  (hades)  hell, 
neither  his  flesh  did  see  corruption.7'  We  hardly 
need  say  a  word  by  way  of  comment  here.  Nobody 
understands  that  hades,  in  this  passage,  means  a  place 
of  endless  punishment ;  for  into  it  the  soul  of  Christ 
entered.  The  Papists,  to  be  sure,  regard  it  as  refer- 
ring to  their  purgatory,  into  which  they  believe  Christ 
entered  betwee'n  his  death  and  resurrection.  But  it 
is  with  them,  as  is  the  application  of  hades  to  a  place 
of  endless  punishment  by  Calvinistic  Protestants,  a 
mere  assumption.  It  is  used  here,  in  its  Old  Testa- 
ment sense,  for  the  state  of  death,  into  which  Joseph 
went  and  Jacob  was  going  ;  and  in  which  Job  desired 
to  be  hidden  until  the  reign  of  evil  should  have 
passed  away.  The  idea  is  that  Jesus  was  not  left  in 
the  state  of  death  until  his  body  underwent  decay. 

V  ^f 

We  pass  to  Rev.  i.  18.  "  I  am  he  that  liveth,  and 
was  dead  ;  and,  behold,  I  am  alive  forever  more  ;  and 
have  the  keys  of  (hades)  hell,  and  of  death."  The 
keys  are  an  ensign  of  official  authority  and  power. 
And  the  assurances  that  Christ,  the  unchanging  Friend 
of  man,  has  the  keys  of  hades  and  of  death,  saves  us 
from  the  fear  of  death,  and  puts  into  our  mouth  the 
song  of  David  vitalized,  "  Though  I  walk  through  the 


REPLY  TO   DR.  ADAMS. 


valley  of  the  shadow  of  death  I  will  fear  no  evil  ;  for 
thou  art  with  me  :  thy  rod  and  thy  staff  they  comfort 


me.' 


Again  we  find  the  word  under  notice,  in  Rev.  vi, 
8.  "  And  I  looked,  and  behold  a  pale  horse  :  and  his 
name  that  sat  on  him  was  Death ;  and  hell  (hades) 
followed  with  him."  Hades  is  always  associated  with 
the  work  of  death,  as  it  was  in  the  mind  of  Jacob 
with  regard  to  his  deceased  son,  and  to  his  own 
approaching  lot.  It  is  the  lot  of  all.  Solomon  says, 
(Eccl.  iii.  20,)  "  All  go  unto  one  place  :  all  are  of  the 
dust,  and  all  turn  to  dust  again."  Accordingly  it  fol- 
lows, that  when  being  turned  into  hades  is  spoken 
particularly  of  the  wicked,  as  a  dispensation  of  pun- 
ishment, either  the  word  is  used  figuratively  for  tem- 
poral degradation  and  wretchedness,  or  reference  is 
made  to  an  unusual  harvest  to  the  grave  by  a  raging 
calamity.  Hence,  though  it  may  be  objected  by  a 
superficial  opposer  that  being  turned  into  hades  in 
the  case  of  the  wicked  must  mean  more  than  temporal 
destruction,  because  all,  even  the  righteous  must  die, 
— yet  the  intelligent  Bible  student  will  perceive  that 
this  objection  is  invalid,  in-as-much  as  it  would,  if 
admitted,  lie  against  the  numberless  Scripture  records 
which  are  acknowledged  by  all  to  denounce  and  to 
narrate  temporal  destruction  in  the  line  of  punish- 
ments for  sin. 

We  pass  to  the  only  remaining  case  of  the  use  of 
hades  in  the  book  of  Revelation.  "  And  the  sea  gave 
up  the  dead  which  were  in  it ;  and  death  and  hell 
(hades)  gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them  ;  and 


232  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION.  ' 

they  were  judged  every  man  according  to  their  works. 
And  death  and  hell  (hades)  were  cast  into  the  lake 
of  fire.  This  is  the  second  death."  (Rev.  xx.  13, 
14.)  Our  friend,  Dr.  Adams,  quotes  this  passage  in 
his  classification  of  Argument,  No.  VI.,  and  holds  the 
following  language : 

Some  say,  death  and  hell  are  annihilated.  But  this  is  not  the 
idea  intended,  unless  the  wicked  also  are  then  to  be  annihilated ; 
for  the  next  verse  concluding  the  subject  says,  "  And  whosoever 
was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was  cast  into  the  lake  of 
fire."  The  obvious  meaning  is,  Death  and  hell,  whatever  they  re- 
present, will  then  be  added  to  the  lake  of  fire,  whatever  that  is,  as 
new  ingredients,  and  to  constitute  "  the  second  death,"  and  as  a 
final  gathering  together  of  all  the  elements  of  sorrow  and  pain 
with  all  the  wicked,  into  one  place. 

So  it  seems  the  Doctor  is  in  doubt  as  to  the  mean- 
ing of  hades,  and  also  of  the  lake  of  fire,  in  this 
place.  He  says,  "  The  obvious  meaning  is,  that  death 
and  hell,  whatever  they  represent,  will  then  l>e  added  to 
the  lake  of  fire,  whatever  that  is."  Hitherto  he  had 
seen  no  reason  to  doubt,  or  query,  but  that  hades  is 
the  place  of  endless  punishment,  and  the  lake  of  fire 
is  the  place  of  endless  punishment.  The  mere  occur- 
rence of  these  terms  any  where  had  seemed  to  him 
prima  facie  evidence  of  the  existence  of  a  place  of 
"  future,  endless  punishment."  But  now  he  wavers. 
He  doubtless  perceives  that  it  would  be  rather  ludi- 
crous to  talk  of  taking  one  place  of  endless  punish- 
ment and  casting  it  into  another  place  of  endless 
punishment. 

To  show  that  our  learned  friend  is  not  alone  in  his 
discovery  of  this  difficulty,  (for  we  think  he  did  dis- 


EEPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS. 

cover  it),  we  will  quote  Dr.  Campbell's  remarks  upon 
it,  in  his  Dissertation  before  cited.  On  the  passage  now 
before  us  he  says,  "  Indeed,  in  this  sacred  book, 
(meaning  the  book  of  Revelation)  the  commencement 
as  well  as  the  destruction  of  this  intermediate  state 
(meaning  hades')  are  so  clearly  marked,  as  to  render 
it  almost  impossible  to  mistake  them.  In  a  preceding 
chapter,  vi.  8,  we  learn  that  hades  follows  close  at  the 
heels  of  death  ;  and  from  the  other  passage  quoted, 
that  both  are  involved  in  one  common  ruin  at  the 
universal  judgment.  Whereas,  if  we  interpret  hades t 
hell,  in  the  Christian  sense  of  the  word,  the  whole 
passage  is  rendered  nonsense.  Hell  is  represented  as 
being  cast  into  hell :  for  so  the  lake  of  fire,  which  is 
in  this  place  also  denominated  the  second  death,  is 
universally  interpreted." 

So  much  from  the  learned  Campbell.  The  Doctors 
find  insuperable  difficulties  in  the  way  of  getting 
straight  through  the  Book  with  their  false  theological 
definitions  of  Scripture  words  and  phrases.  We 
showed  in  Section  V.  of  this  Chapter,  that  the  lake  of 
fire  is  not  a  place  of  future  endless  punishment,  but 
that  it  -is,  as  explained  by  the  guiding  angel  of  John,  a 
metaphorical  representation  of  certain  calamities  in 
the  earth.  For  the  seven  headed  and  ten  horned 
beast,  representing  certain  kings  and  kingdoms  of 
the  earth,  was  in  the  lake  of  fire.  And  as  the  lake  of 
fire  was  a  figure  of  earthly  national  calamities,  the 
casting  into  it,  of  death  and  hades,  can  neither  mean 
the  merging  into  it  of  a  place  of  endless  punishment, 
nor  even  of  the  place  of  limited  after  death  purga- 


234  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

torial  punishment,  which  Dr.  Campbell  thinks  is  here 
signified  by  the  term  hades.  When  we  come  to  reply 
to  Dr.  Adams'  sixth  department  of  his  extended 
"  Argument,"  where  he  regularly  introduces  this  pas- 
sage, we  will  endeavor  to  show  clearly  what  is  meant 
by  death  arid  hades  being  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire. 
In  this  place  we  have  only  quoted  his  remarks  on  this 
passage  for  the  purpose  of  showing  that  even  he  saw 
insuperable  difficulties  in  the  way  of  making  hades, 
here,  to  be  a  place  of  endless  punishment.  All  must 
see  that  it  bears  no  such  sense  in  this  passage. 

There  is  but  one  other  instance  of  the  use  of  the 
word  hades,  in  the  New  Testament,  outside  of  the  story 
of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus',  which  is  before  us.  This 
is  in  1  Cor.  xv.  The  great  apostle  had  been  giving  his 
luminous  testimony  of  the  resurrection  of  all  men 
from  the  dead  in  the  image  of  the  heavenly  man ; 
"  For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive  ;"  and  he  brings  his  argument  to  this 
result ; — "  So  when  this  corruptible  shall  have  put  on 
incorruption,  and  this  mortal  shall,  have  put  on  immor- 
tality, then  shall  be  brought  to  pass  the  saying  that 
is  written,  Death  is  swallowed  up  in  victory.  0  death, 
where  is  thy  sting?  0  hades,  where  is  thy  victory?" 
If  hades  were  a  place  of  future  endless  punishment, 
to  be  thronged  eternally,  as  a  popular  theology 
assumes,  with  countless  millions  of  the  human  race, 
she  would  respond  in  tones  of  eternal  defiance, 
through  the  howling  voices  of  legions  of  devils  and 
damned  re-embodied  spirits,  "  Here  I  am,  in  full  blast, 
with  my  splendid  victory  in  the  long  contest  with  the 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  235 

• 

Son  of  God,  a  victory  embracing  more  of  God's  chil- 
dren than  adorn  his  courts  above,  and  a  victory  which 
I  will  maintain  as  long  as  God's  throne  stands."  No, 
no.  God  forgive  us  for  even  writing  this  impious 
thought.  The  apostle's  jubilant  exclamation,  "  0 
hades,  where  is  thy  victory  ?"  has  the  significance 
of  an  interrogatory  assertion,  that  not  a  victim  shall 
remain  in  the  embrace  of  hades,  nor  hades  le  to  give 
an  answer. 

YvTe  come  now  to  a  direct  consideration  of  the 
story  of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus,  furnishing  the 
only  other  mention  of  hades  in  the  New  Testament. 
What  is  the  sense  of  this  word  in  this  case  ?  and 
what  was  the  story  designed  to  teach  ?  We  stand 
before  the  Saviour  here,  and  listen  to  his  discourse, 
with  the  knowledge  of  all  the  teachings  of  Moses 
and  the  prophets,  and  of  Jesus  himself  up  to  this  time, 
and  we  have  derived  no  thought,  from  any  of  these 
sources,  of  hades  being  a  place  of  after-death  punish- 
ment. Accordingly  his  use  of  the  word  hades  in  this 
case  does  not,  of  itself,  suggest  to  our  minds  any 
such  thought.  Nevertheless,  if  Jesus  publishes  a 
new  and  improved  history  of  hades  in  this  instance, 
drawn  from  a  new  survey  and  new  discoveries,  and  in 
this  new  history  he  describes  it  as  a  place  of  torment 
in  the  immortal  world,  we  are  bound  to  receive  his 
history  as  reliable,  and  to  recognize  hades  as  a  place 
of  after-death  punishment. 

And  now  we   devoutly  ask  for  the    truth  on   this 

V 

point.      Let  there  be  no  haste,  no  attempt  at  perver- 
sion.     God's  truth  will  stand,  and  all  the  evil  conse- 


236  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

• 
quences  of  sin  which  his  law  ordains  will  be  verified, 

however  we  may  misinterpret  his  word.  And  it  will 
be  borne  in  mind  that  the  proclamation  of  unreal  dan- 
gers and  false  alarms  is  no  less  injurious  than  the 
hiding  of  real  dangers.  What  we  want  is  the  truth. 

Well,  says  our  friend,  we  here  have  the  declaration 
of  Jesus,  that  the  rich  man  died,  and  was  buried,  and 
in  hades  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torment.  What 
more  do  you  want  ?  What  more  ? — We  Want  to  know 
whether  Jesus  delivered  this  story  as  apiece  of  literal 
history,  or  as  a  parable. 

But  before  proceeding  to  this  question  direct,  we 
will  take  the  occasion  to  remark,  that,  however  liter- 
ally you  construe  this  story,  it  affords  no  proof  of 
future  endless  punishment.  For  we  have  seen  it  to 
be  the  most  positive  assurance  of  God's  word,  sure 
as  his  eternal  purpose  in  Christ  Jesus,  that  hades  shall 
be  emptied  of  all  its  tenants,  and  itself  destroyed. 
Sometimes  a  shrewd  opponent  has  said  to  us,  "  There 
is  an  account  of  a  rich  man  in  hell.  How  will  you 
get  him  out  ?"  We  reply,  There  is  an  account  of  the 
resurrection  of  all  men  from  the  state  of  death,  when 
death  shall  be  swallowed  up  in  victory,  and  hades, 
hell,  the  state  of  death,  shall  be  without  a  victim,  and 
itself  shall  be  destroyed.45'  And  we  retort  the  ques- 
tion, When  all  men  shall  be  delivered  from  hades,  and 
itself  destroyed,  how  will  you  get  them  back  into 
hades  again  ? 

But  we  return  to  the  inquiry,  whether  Jesus  deliv- 
ered this  story  as  a  piece  of  literal  history  of  any,  even 
a  limited  term  of  torment  in  hades,  or  as  a  parable. 

•  *  Hosea  xiii.  14.  1  Cor.  xv.  55. 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  237 

1st.  "We  will  show  that  no  Christian  in  this  en- 
lightened age  can  receive  it  as  a  literal  history.  It 
represents  the  abode  of  the  subject  of  the  story  to 
be  a  place  of  literal  fire,  and  his  body  to  be  material, 
and  his  tongue  to  be  parched  with  the  heat  of  the 
flame,  and  his  conception  to  be  that  his  broiling 
tongue  might  be  soothed  by  a  drop  of  water  sprink- 
led by  a  friendly  finger.  All  this  must  be  understood 
as  literally  so  if  the  story  is  taken  as  a  veritable 
history  of  fact.  For  to  say  that  there  was  no  flame 
of  fire  there,  and  no  body  capable  of  being  scorched 
and  pained  by  the  fire,  and  no  broiling  tongue,  and 
no  call  on  Lazarus  to  come  with  a  drop  of  water  to 
cool  the  agonized  tongue, — but  that  all  this  is  figura- 
tive, is  to  ignore  the  historic  literality  of  the  whole 
thing. 

And  then,  allowing  the  strict  literalizer  to  mix  his 
narrative  with  figure  enough  to  have  Abraham's 
bosom  to  signify  heaven,  the  story  represents  heaven 
and  hell  as  being  in  one  and  the  same  country,  on  a 
level,  separated  by  a  gulf  or  river,  yet  in  such  con- 
tiguity that  the  inhabitants  of  the  two  places  can  and 
do  hold  familiar  conversation  with  each  other.  Does 
any  Christian  believe  this  to  be  literally  true?  Does 
even  Dr.  Adams  believe,  with  all  his  warm  and 
benevolent  heart,  that  those  of  his  dear  friends  and 
relatives  who  were  not  quite  Orthodox  enough  to  be 
entitled  to  his  theoretic  heaven,  will  be  forever 
broiling  in  a  flame  in  plain  sight  just  over  the  river 
Styx,  where  he  shall  hold  converse  with  them,  and 
repel  their  often  entreaties  that  he  may  obtain  per- 


238  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

mission  of  God,  or  of  father  Abraham,  to  bring  them 
water  to  assauge  their  anguish  ?  We  venture  to 
affirm  that  he  believes  no  such  thing.  This  descrip- 
tion answers  precisely  to  the  heathen  fables  of  hades, 
with  its  Elysian  fields,  and  its  Tartarian  prison  of  firo, 
separated  by  the  river  Styx ;  but  it  bears  no  resem- 
blance to  the  view  of  any  Christian  sect,  with  regard 
to  heaven  and  hell. 

But  the  throwing  out  of  this  conversational  inter- 
course between  their  heaven  and  hell,  is  throwing 
out  the  very  evidence  which  our  opponent  relies 
upon  to  prove  that  hades,  in  this  particular  instance 
if  in  no  other,  is  a  place  of  after-death  torment.  For 
all  the  evidence  is  in  the  description  of  the  condition 
which  impelled  Dives  to  lift  up  his  eyes  to  Abraham, 
and  the  words  ascribed  to  him  in  conversation  with 
Abraham,  "  for  I  am  tormented  in  this  flame."  Now 
by  denying  the  reality  of  personal  conversational 
intercourse  between  the  inhabitants  of  heaven  and 
hell,  they  deny  the  reality  of  all  the  testimony  they 
have  in  this  story,  of  hades  being  a  place  of  torment. 

No,  there  is  not  a  Christian  amongst  us,  even  of 
the  class  who  employ  as  a  proof  of  future  punish- 
ment so  much  of  this  story  as  our  opponent  quotes, 
who  will  take  it  as  a  piece  of  history.  They  do  not 
believe  in  any  such  relation  between  their  heaven 
and  hell  as  this  story  represents  between  Abraham 
and  Dives. 

Again,  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  disciples  of  Jesua 
did  not  understand  him  to  relate  a  historical  fact,  in 
the  utterance  of  this  story.  For,  while  all  these 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  239 

i 

things  were  uttered  in  parables  to  them  who  were 
without,  Jesus  gave  his  disciples  understanding  of 
them  all.  And  what  they  heard  in  secret,  they  were 
to  proclaim  upon  the  house-tops.  Therefore  if  they 
had  understood  their  Master  in  this  instance  to  teach 
that  hades  is  a  place  of  after-death  torment,  it  would 
have  startled  them  as  a  new  and  terrific  revelation, 
no  teacher  from  God  having  divulged  such  a  fact 
before,  and  they  would  have  sought  an  early  private 
interview  with  him  now  on  the  subject  so  new,  so 
strange  and  exciting.  For  so  they  did  on  various 
other  occasions  when  they  did  not  clearly  understand 
their  Master.  And  possessing  themselves  fully  of 
the  new  and  astounding  revelation  of  torment  in 
hades,  they  would  have  proclaimed  it  in  thunder  tones 
upon  the  house-tops,  to  Jews  and  Gentiles,  in  "  all 
the  world."  But  not  a  word  of  this  do  we  find  in  all 
the  apostolic  ministry.  In  all  the  apostolic  Epistles 
the  word  hades  is  not  used  at  all,  except  in  1  Cor.  xv., 
before  quoted,  "  0  hades  \  where  is  thy  victory  ? ' 
which  is  St.  Paul's  jubilant  exclamation  of  the  univer- 
sal triumph  of  life  immortal  over  death  and  hades.  Nor 
in  all  of  the  recorded  ministry  of  the  apostles  does 
this  word  occur  at  all,  except  in  the  discourse  of 
Peter  to  the  Jews,  recorded  in  Acts  ii.,  which  also 
we  have  adduced  before,  reciting  the  prophecy  of 
David,  that  the  Messiah  should  not  be  left  in  hades 
till  his  flesh  should  see  corruption.  It  is  not  among 
the  moral  possibilities  that  the  apostles  should  have 
utterly  omitted  to  preach  a  hades  of  after-death  pun- 
ishment, to  saints  or  sinners,  if  they  had  received  a 


240  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

revelation  of  any  such  fact  from  their  Master. 
"&£*£' They  did  not  so  understand  him  in  the  story  of  the 
Rich  Man  and  Lazarus.  ^£3* 

Now,  therefore,  these  are  the  facts.  The  word  hades, 
or  the  corresponding  word  in  the  Hebrew,  sheol,  had 
never  been  used  by  any  patriarch  or  prophet,  or  by 
the  Son  of  God,  up  to  this  time,  as  a  place  of  future 
punishment ;  there  is  nothing  in  the  occasion  of  the 
introduction  of  this  story,  nor  in  the  manner  of  its 
delivery,  which  suggests  a  design  to  introduce  any 
such  new  doctrine,  but  all  the  reverse  as  we  sfrall 
see  ;  his  disciples,  to  whom  he  gave  an  understanding 
of  his  parables,  and  especially  of  his  literal  teachings, 
did  not  understand  him  to  introduce  any  such  doc- 
trine in  this  case ;  and  no  modern  Christian  will 
receive  this  storv,  including  the  conversational 

•/  /  o 

portion  which  is  about  the  whole  of  it,  as  literal  his- 
tory, 

2.  The  only  alternative,  and  the  natural,  easy  and 
legitimate  method  of  Scripture  reading^  is  to  receive 
it  as  a  paroMe. 

And  what  Is  a  parable  ?  It  is  a  story,  borrowing 
its  imagery  either  from  natural  scenery,  or  from  his- 
toric incidents,  or  from  popular  opinions,  to  represent 
some  truth  in  principle,  or  event  in  fact.  Of  the  first 
named  class,  the  borrowing  of  the  imagery  from  nat- 
ural scenery,  is  Jotham's  parable  of  the  trees  assem- 
bling to  choose  them  a  king.  (Judges  ix.)  Of  the 
second,  are  such  parables  as  those  of  the  lost  sheep, 
the  prodigal  son,  and  the  unjust  steward.  Of  the 
third  class,  borrowing  the  imagery  from  popular  opiu- 


REPLY  TO   DK.   ADAMS.  241 

ions,  is  the  following: — "When  the  unclean  spirit  is 
gone  out  of  a  man,  he  walketh  through  dry  places, 
seeking  rest,  and  findeth  none.  Then  he  saith,  I  will 
return  into  my  house  from  whence  I  came  out ;  and 
when  he  is  come,  he  findeth  it  empty,  swept  and  gar- 
nished. Then  he  goeth,  and  taketh  with  himself 
seven  other  spirits  more  wicked  than  himself,  and 
they  enter  in  and  dwell  there  ;  and  the  last  state  of 
that  man  is  worse  than  the  first.  Even  so  shall  it  be 
with  this  generation."*  We  think  no  sane  man  will 
assume  that  Jesus  related  this  as  a  literal  narrative  of 
the  habits  of  a  class  of  evil  personal  beings,  and  the 
manner  of  their  clubbing  together  and  consecrating 
the  persons  of  men  as  their  houses,  or  places  of 
abode.  Jesus  was  in  no  more  danger  of  being  so 
understood  by  men  of  common  sense,  than  our  ora- 
tors, when  they  introduce,  for  embellishment  and 
illustration,  Mars  as  the  God  of  war,  Jupiter  as  the 
God  of  thunder,  Neptune  as  the  God  of  the  ocean, 
Minerva  as  the  God  of  wisdom,  and  Mammon  as  the 
God  of  riches,  are  in  danger  of  being  understood  to 
sanction  the  fables  which  have  created  these  pieces 
of  fancy  work.  In  this  story  of  the  unclean  spirit, 
Jesus  took  up  some  one  of  the  "  Old  wives  fables  ' 
which  abounded  among  the  apostatized  Jews,  for  the 
purpose  of  illustrating  this  one  idea,  that  the  last 
state  of  that  generation  of  Israel  should  be  worse 
than  the  first.  So  Jesus  applies  it. 

The  word  parable  is  defined  in  our  English  Diction- 

*Matt,  xii.  43-45;  Luke  xi.  24-20. 

21 


242  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

aries  in  agreement  with  the  construction  of  it  which 
we  have  given  above  : — thus — "  Parable, — A  method 
of  conveying  instruction  by  the  use  of  short  fables  or 
tales  ;  a  fable  conveying  instruction  :  a  comparison  ; 
a  similitude."  (J.  E.  Worcester.)""  And  the  parable 
before  us,  that  of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus,  evinces 
remarkable  wisdom  in  its  selection  and  application,  in 
that  it  makes  a  perfect  finishing  of  the  train  of  theo- 
logical and  prophetic  instructions  which  commenced 
with  the  preceding  chapter ;  and,  while  it  lays  the 
scene  of  its  story  in  the  heathen  fables  partially 
adopted  by  the  Jews  to  the  neglect  of  their  Scrip- 
tures, makes  it  to  explode  those  fables  by  reproving 
the  Jews  for  their  adoption  of  them,  and  remanding 
them  back  to  Moses  and  the  prophets. 

This  parable,  we  say,  makes  a  perfect  finishing  of 
the  train  of  theological  and  prophetic  instructions 
which  commenced  with  the  preceding  chapter.  By 
commencing  the  preceding  chapter,  (Luke  xv.)  and 
reading  the  two  chapters  through,  it  will  be  seen  that 
this  of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus  closes  a  series  of 
parables  the  occasion  of  which  is  given  in  these 

*  Dr.  Albert  Barnes,  an  eminent  Presbyterian  author  and  commenta- 
tor, says, — "  A  parable  is  a  narrative  of  some  fictitious  or  real  event,  in 
order  to  illustrate  more  clearly  some  truth  that  the  speaker  wished  to 
communicate.  It  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that  the  narrative  is 
strictly  true.  The  main  thing,  the  inculcation  of  spiritual  truth,  was 
gained  equally  whether  it  was  true  or  only  a  supposed  case.  Nor  was 
there  any  dishonesty  in  this.  It  was  well  understood;  no  person  was 
deceived.  The  speaker  was  not  understood  to  affirm  the  thing  literally 
narrated,  but  only  to  fix  the  attention  more  firmly  on  the  moral  truth 
presented."  And  since  we  penned  this  reference  to  the  parable  of  the 
unclean  spirit,  we  have  observed  a  quotation  from  Dr.  Lightfoot,  giv- 
ing the  same  view  of  that  parable.  Lightfoot  says  of  this  case, — "Here 
the  Saviour  takes  a  parable  from  something  commonly  believed  and 
entertained,  that  he  might  express  the  thing  propounded  more  plainly 
and  fully." 


EEPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  243 

words :  "  Then  drew  near  unto  him  all  the  publicans 
and  sinners  for  to  hear  him.  And  the  Pharisees  and 
Scribes  murmured,  saying,  This  man  receiveth  sin- 
ners, and  eateth  with  them."  In  answer  to  these 
sneers  at  his  kind  attentions  to  sinners,  he  delivers, 
first,  the  parable  of  the  lost  sheep.  Here  he  takes 
them  on  their  own  ground,  and  shows  them  that,  ad- 
mitting they  were  as  sheep  who  were  not  astray,  they 
were  unreasonable  in  their  scoffings  at  his  mission 
for  the  recovery  of  the  lost.  Then  follows  the  par- 
able of  the  lost  piece  of  money,  further  to  illustrate 
the  same  idea.  The  parable  of  the  prodigal  son  follows, 
to  paint  in  stronger  colors  the  meanness  of  the  spirit 
which  they  manifested  towards  his  work  of  love  for 
sinners.  He  did  not  mean  to  admit  that  they  had 
always  been  faithful  sons,  never  having  wandered 
from  the  Father's  house  ;  but  as  they  held  this  con- 
ceit of  themselves,  he  took  them  on  their  own  ground, 
to  make  the  application  and  reproof  of  the  parable 
the  more  unmistakable  and  scathing.  He  made  them 
see  their  own  character  mirrored  in  that  of  the  elder 
brother,  who  was  angry  and  refused  to  go  into  the 
father's  banquet,  because  his  poor  miserable  brother 
that  was  lost  was  received  with  favor.  Next  comes 
the  parable  of  the  profligate  steward,  who  was  turned 
out  of  his  stewardship.  In  this  Jesus  begins  to  turn 
upon  the  Jews  with  a  representation  of  their  real 
character,  and  their  impending  condition.  They  were 
really  unfaithful  stewards,  and  were  soon  to  be  ejected 
from  the  inheritance  which  had  been  committed  to 
them  as  God's  chosen  people.  But  the  Pharisees 
who  stood  by,  and  knew  the  points  of  his  parables, 


244  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

"  derided  him."  Then  he  closed  up  the  series  of 
parables  for  that  occasion,  with  this  of  the  Rich  Man 
and  Lazarus,  going  yet  another  step,  and  while,  as  in 
the  last  preceding  parable,  that  of  the  wasteful  stew- 
ard, he  represents  the  fall  of  the  Jews,  he  adds  the 
representation  of  the  conversion  and  exaltation  of 
the  Gentiles. 

But  the  opposer  will  urge  that  Jesus  says,  TJiere 
was  a  certain  Eicli  Man,  &c.  To  be  sure ;  and  so 
parables  usually  commence  the  story  employed  as  a 
parable  with  an  affirmative  statement  as  of  a  fact. 
Jotham  said,  "  The  trees  went  forth  on  a  time  to  anoint 
a  king  over  them."  Jesus  said,  "  Behold,  a  sower 
went  forth  to  sow  ;"  "  A  certain  man  had  two  sons  ; 
"  There  was  a  certain  rich  man  which  had  a  steward.'7 
The  parable  must  employ  a  tale  or  fable  which  affirms 
something ;  but  it  uses  the  tale  for  the  representation 
of  some  truth  not  asserted  by  the  original  story. 

We  have  spoken  of  the  admirable  wisdom  in  the 
framing  and  application  of  this  parable,  borrowing  its 
imagery  from  the  heathen  fables  partially  adopted  by 
the  Jews,  and  introducing  a  part  in  its  conclusion 
which  directly  explodes  those  fables,  and  reproves 
the  people  for  adopting  them.  That  he  lays  the 
scene  of  the  parable  in  the  heathen  fabulous  geogra- 
phy of  hades,  is  evident,  because  the  description 
precisely  agrees  with  the  construction  of  those 
fables  ;— the  prison  of  fire,  the  Elysian  fields,  (called 
here,  to  adapt  the  parable  to  the  Jewish  conception 
of  the  source  of  their  help,  Abraham's  bosom,)  and 
the  separating  gulf  or  river.  So  much  of  the  story 
as  relates  to  the  feast  of  a  rich  man,  and  a  poor  beg- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  245 

gar  out  at  the  gate,  was  ready  at  hand  to  be  taken  up 
by  our  Lord  for  use  in  this  case.  It  was  contained 
in  a  work  then  extant,  the  Gemara  Babylonicum, 
where,  as  cited  by  learned  commentators,  it  runs 
thus :  —  "A  king  made  a  great  feast,  and  invited  all 
the  strangers  ;  and  there  came  one  poor  man,  and 
stood  at  his  gates,  and  said  unto  them,  give  me  one 
bit  or  portion  ;  and  they  considered  him  not.  And 
he  said,  my  lord,  the  king,  of  all  the  great  feasts  that 
thou  hast  made,  is  it  hard  in  thine  eyes  to  give  me 
one  bit,  or  fragment,  among  them?''  And  in  the 
Gemara  the  title  of  this  passage  is,  u  A  parable  of  a 
Idng  of  flesh  and  blood."  So,  taking  up  this  parable 
of  the  rich  king  and  the  poor  beggar,  in  closing  up 
his  reply  to  the  sneer  of  the  vaunting  Pharisees,  who 
murmured  at  his  kind  regards  to  the  despised  Gen- 
tiles, he  adds  to  it  an  after  scene,  drawn  from  the 
Judaized  heathen  fables  of  the  under  world,  repre- 
senting the  approaching  change  of  the  relative  con- 
ditions of  the  Jews  and  Gentiles,  and  introduces  a 
colloquy  between  the  rich  man  and  Abraham,  which 
draws  from  Abraham  a  reproof  to  his  people  for  their 
resort  to  these  fables.  For  when  the  rich  man  in  the 
parable  asks  that  Lazarus  be  sent  to  his  people  to 
admonish  them,  lest  they  should  come  to  the  same 
place  of  torment,  Abraham  is  made  to  reply,  "  They 
have  Moses  and  the  prophets,  let  them  hear  them." 
Let  them  hear  Moses  and  the  prophets  about  what? 
Surely  not  about  a  place  of  torment  in  hades,  for  they 
never  said  a  word  of  such  a  thing.  This  we  have 
already  shown,  and  it  is  almost  universally  conceded 
20* 


246  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

by  the  learned.  Jesus  did  not  mean,  then,  by  put- 
ting these  words  into  the  mouth  of  Abraham,  to 
represent  him  as  referring  the  Jews  to  Moses  and  the 
prophets  for  information  of  a  place  of  torment  in 
hades ;  but  he  meant  to  make  the  parable  utter  this 
sentiment :  — "  Your  neglect  and  perversion  of 
Moses  and  the  prophets,  who  have  abundantly  warn- 
ed you  of  all  the  real  dangers  which  impend  over  the 
way  of  sin  and  transgression,  and  your  resort  to  the 
heathen  fables  of  distant,  false,  silly,  under-world 
dangers,  is  working  your  ruin.  Moses  and  the 
prophets  have  told  you  in  your  Scriptures,  how  that 
your  persistence,  after  minor  chastisements,  in  a 
course  of  corruption  and  crime,  shall  bring  upon  you 
such  *  great  tribulation  as  never  was  since  there  was 
a  nation/  and  the  desolation  of  your  city  and  coun 
try.*  These  calamities  are  now  approaching,  and 
your  determined  course  of  life  is  hastening  their 
consummation ;  yet  your  study  and  obedience  of 
Moses  and  the  prophets  would  avert  the  impending 
desolation.  But  if  you  will  not  hearken  to  Moses 
and  the  prophets,  one  sent  to  you  from  the  dead 
with  a  reiteration  of  their  teachings  would  only  be 
mocked  and  scouted  by  you."  And  it  was  so.  When 
Lazarus  was  raised  from  the  dead  as  a  witness  of 
Christ's  Messiahship,  they  sought  to  kill  him ;  and 
though  Jesus  himself,  when  they  had  slain  him,  was 
raised  from  the  state  of  death,  they  believed  not,  but 
rushed  on  to  the  predicted  destruction. 

So  then,  in  the  parable  of  the  Rich  Man  and  Laz- 

*Lev.  xxvi.    Deut.  xxix.    Dan.  xii. 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  247 

arus,  in  which  our  opponent  thinks  he  finds  direct 
proof  of  a  place  of  torment  in  hades,  we  find  a  most 
effective  repudiation  of  that  fable,  from  the  highest 
authority,  that  of  the  Son  of  God.  "\Ve  repeat, — It  is 
admirable  wisdom  in  the  great  Teacher,  in  this  clos- 
ing parable  of  the  series  in  reply  to  the  censure  of 
the  vaunting  Pharisees  for  his  grace  to  Gentile  sin- 
ners, that  he  should  take  up  a  parable  of  a  rich  man 
and  poor  man  from  one  of  their  books,  to  represent 
them  and  the  Gentiles,  and  add  to  it  a  scene  drawn 
from  the  fables  by  which  they  were  corrupted,  for 
the  double  purpose  of  representing  an  approaching 
change  in  the  relative  conditions  of  the  two  parties, 
and  a  reproof  for  the  adoption  of  those  fables,  in  the 
injunction  that  they  go  back  to  their  own  Scriptures, 
to  Moses  and  the  prophets,  and  hear  and  heed  their 
wholesome  prescriptions  of  duty,  and  warnings  of 
real  dangers. 

This  view  of  the  subject,  in  the  main,  seems  to 
have  been  held  without  opposition,  by  some  of  the 
older  and  most  eminent  Orthodox  commentators. 
The  later  Doctors  of  that  school  have  been  made 
more  desperate  by  the  prevalence  of  Biblical  knowl- 
edge and  benevolent  views  ;  and,  the  sphere  of  evi- 
dence being  narrowed,  they  cling  more  pertinacious- 
ly to  some  detached  phraseology  of  such  passages  as 
this.  Our  learned  friend,  for  instance,  deems  it 
sufficient  to  quote  the  words,  "  and  in  hell  he  lifted 
up  his  eyes,  being  in  torment,"  to  prove  future 
endless  punishment.  But  the  old  commentators, 
though  they  had  not  all  the  advantages  of  extended 


248  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

Protestant  Biblical  criticism  which  is  the  privilege 
now  of  them  who  will  use  it,  compassed  very  clear 
views,  honorable  to  their  heads  and  hearts,  of  this 
parable. 

Whitby,  in  his  annotation  on  the  passage,  says: — 

That  this  is  only  a  parable,  and  not  a  real  history  of  what  was 
actually  done,  is  evident:  (1.)  Because  we  find  this  very  parable 
in  the  Oemara  Bcibylonicum,  whence  it  is  cited  by  Mr.  Shering- 
ham,  in  the  preface  to  his  Joma.  (2.)  From  the  circumstances  of 
it,  viz.,  the  rich  man's  lifting  up  his  eyes  in  hell,  and  seeing  Laza- 
rus in  Abraham's  bosom,  his  discourse  with  Abraham,  his  com- 
plaint of  being  tormented  with  flames,  and  his  desire  that  Lazarus 
might  be  sent  to  cool  his  tongue ;  and  if  all  this  be  confessedly 
parable,  why  should  the  rest,  which  is  the  very  parable  in  the 
Gemara,  be  accounted  history  ? 

Lightfoot,  in  his  Hebrew  and  Talmudic  Exercises, 
on  Luke  xvi.  19,  says  : — 

Whosoever  believes  this  not  to  be  a  parable,  but  a  true  story,  let 
him  believe  also  those  little  friars,  whose  trade  it  is  to  show  the 
monuments  at  Jerusalem  to  pilgrims,  and  point  exactly  to  the 
place  where  the  house  of  the  "  rich  glutton"  stood.  Most  accu- 
rate keepers  of  antiquity  indeed !  who,  after  so  many  hundreds  of 
years,  such  overthrows  of  Jerusalem,  such  devastations  and 
changes,  can  rake  out  of  the  rubbish  the  place  of  so  private  a 
house,  and  such  a  one  too,  that  never  had  any  being,  but  merely 
in  parable.  And  that  it  was  a  parable,  not  only  the  consent  of  all 
expositors  may  assure  us,  but  the  thing  itself  speaks  it. 

The  main  scope  and  design  of  it  seems  this  —  to  hint  the  de- 
struction of  the  unbelieving  Jews,  who,  though  they  had  Moses  and 
the  prophets,  did  not  believe  them  —  nay,  would  not  believe, 
though  one  (even  Jesus)  rose  from  the  dead.  For  that  conclusion 
of  the  parable  abundantly  evidenceth  what  it  aimed  at :  If  they  hear 
not  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  &c. 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  249 

"Wakefield  also  maintains  decidedly  that  this  pas- 
sage is  a  parable.  So  also  do  Hammond,  and 
Theophylact,  a  more  ancient  critic,  and  others.  But 
we  must  add  a  quotation  from  the  very  Orthodox 
Gill.  After  having,  in  his  exposition  of  the  passage, 
run  it,  for  the  sake  of  his  theology,  into  the  future 
state,  for  the  credit  of  his  understanding,  he  explains 
as  follows  : — 

" '  The  rich  man  died :'  It  may  also  be  understood  of  the  politi- 
cal and  ecclesiastical  death  of  the  Jewish  people,  which  lay  in  the 
destruction  of  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  and  of  the  temple,  and  in  the 
abolition  of  the  temple  worship,  and  of  the  whole  ceremonial  law ; 
a  Loammi  was  written  upon  their  church  state,  and  the  covenant 
between  God  and  them  was  broken ;  the  gospel  was  removed  from 
them,  which  was  as  death,  as  the  return  of  it,  and  their  call  by  it, 
will  be  as  life  from  the  dead ;  as  well  as  their  place  and  nation, 
their  civil  power  and  authority  were  taken  away  from  them  by  the 
Romans,  and  a  death  of  afflictions,  by  captivities  and  calamities  of 
every  kind,  has  attended  them  ever  since." 

In  hell  —  in  torments  ;  "  Ihis  may  regard  the  vengeance  of  God 
on  the  Jews,  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  when  a  fire  was  kin- 
dled against  their  land,  and  burned  to  the  lowest  hell,  and  con- 
sumed the  earth  with  her  increase,  and  set  on  fire  the  foundations 
of  the  mountains  ;  and  the  whole  land  became  brimstone,  salt,  and 
burning  ;  and  they  were  rooted  out  of  it  in  anger,  wrath,  and  great 
indignation  —  see  Deut.  xxix.  23,  27,  28,  xxxii.  22  —  or  rather  the 
dreadful  calamities  which  came  upon  them  in  the  times  of  Adrian, 
at  Either ;  when  their  false  Messiah,  Bar  Cochab,  was  taken  and 
slain,  and  such  multitudes  of  them  were  destroyed,  in  the  most 
miserable  manner,  when  that  people,  who  before  had  their  eyes 
darkened,  and  a  spirit  of  slumber  and  stupidity  fallen  upon  them, 
in  those  calamities  began  to  be  under  some  convictions." 

"We  have  been  the  more  particular  in  our  expo- 


250  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

sition  of  this  parable,  because  we  have  had  written 
requests  for  an  explanation  of  it,  from  candid  inquir- 
ers after  truth,  and  because  it  is  clung  to  more 
pertinaciously  than  any  other  passage  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, as  at  least  favoring  the  doctrine  of  future 
endless  punishment.  We  have  shown  that  the  word 
hades,  in  no  other  instance  in  the  Bible,  is  used  for  a 
place  of  future  punishment ;  that  if  it  were  so  used 
here,  it  could  prove  only  punishment  in  an  intermedi- 
ate state,  because  all  shall  be  raised  out  of  hades,  and 
the  state  itself  be  destroyed  ;  but  that  the  passage 
does  not  prove  even  that  limited  punishment  in 
hades,  since  it  cannot  be  received  as  a  real  history, 
but  must  be  taken  as  a  parable, — and  as  such,  though 
a  part  of  its  imagery  is  drawn  from  the  heathen 
fables  of  the  under-world,  instead  of  giving  sanction 
to  those  fables,  it  forbids  our  adoption  of  them,  and 
commands  us  back  to  the  word  of  God  in  the  Scrip- 
tures of  truth.  To  this  word  let  us  hearken. 


SECTION   VII. 

The  Case  of  Judas. 

In  the  cluster  of  fragmentary  passages  thrown  to 
gether  by  our  learned  opponent,  which  we  transcribed 
into  the  beginning  of  the  preceding  Section,  succeed- 
ing the  reference  to  the  rich  man  in  hades,  is  the  follow- 
ing: "  Judas  by  transgression  fell,  and  went  to  his  own 
place"  There  is  an  error  here  in  the  quotation,  as 
the  reading  of  the  text  is,  not,  and  went  to  his  own 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  251 

place,  but,  "  that  lie  might  go  to  his  own  place."  A 
careless  reader  might  overlook  the  importance  of  this 
error  in  the  Doctor's  quotation  ;  but  the  critical  stu- 
dent will  perceive  that  there  is  a  significance  in  the 
true  reading  of  the  record  which  has  an  instructive 
bearing  upon  the  sense  of  the  passage.  It  makes  the 
going  to  his  own  place  the  fulfilment  of  a  prophecy 
or  purpose.  If  it  relates  to  Matthias,  as  some  emi- 
nent Orthodox  commentators  suppose,  it  expresses 
the  purpose  for  which  the  election  fell  to  him  by  lot ; 
and  if  it  refers  to  Judas,  it  expresses  the  purpose  for 
which  he  withdrew  from  the  apostleship,  or  his  allot- 
ment in  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy.  "  And  they 
prayed,  and  said,  Thou,  Lord,  which  knowest  the 
hearts  of  all  men,  show  whether  of  these  two  (Barsa- 
bas  or  Matthias)  thou  hast  chosen,  that  he  may  take 
part  of  this  ministry  and  apostleship,  from  which  Ju- 
das by  transgression  fell,  that  he  might  go  to  his  own 
place."  (Acts  i.  24,  25.)  The  idea  is,  that  it  was 
for  the  purpose  that  he  might  fill  the  place  assigned 
him  by  the  counsel  of  God  prophetically  revealed, 
or  else,  that  he  might  return  to  his  former  occupation, 
that  he  by  transgression  fell. 

But  Dr.  Adams  considers  the  mere  quotation  of 
this  scrap  of  the  record  an  "  argument ''  for  future 
punishment.  He  gives  us  not  a  word  explanatory  of 
his  reason  for  so  regarding  it,  except  the  following  in 
his  next  sentence,  "  Judas'  l  own  place '  was  not 
heaven."  How  does  he  know  it  was  not?  If  Para- 
dise was  the  place  of  the  thief  on  the  cross,  even  if  it 
be  placed  on  the  ground  of  his  dying  expression  of 


252  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

respect  for  Jesus,  what  authority  has  Dr.  Adams  to 
assert  that  it  was  not  the  place  of  Judas,  who  uttered 
the  strongest  dying  testimony  of  the  purity  of  Jesus, 
and  gave  practical  proof  of  the  sincerity  of  his  peni- 
tence by  throwing  down  the  price  of  his  perfidy  at 
the  feet  of  his  seducers,  and  either  they  or  he  pur- 
chased with  it  a  field ;  and  so  severe  was  his  anguish 
that  "  he  burst  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all  his  bow- 
els gushed  out,"  —  or  his  heart  broke,  as  the  word 
bowels  is  sometimes  used  in  the  Scriptures  for  heart. 
With  this  agrees  a  fair  rendering  of  Matt,  xxvii.  5, 
reading,  instead  of  "  hanged  himself,"  choked  of  an- 
guish. Thus  are  the  records  of  Matthew  and  Luke, 
•which  in  the  Common  Version  are  contradictory,  seen 
to  be  in  harmony.  —  both  implying  the  death  of  Judas 
by  internal  rupture  from  excessive  anguish  on  ac- 
count of  his  sin  in  betraying  innocent  blood.*  His 
repentance  was  as  real  as  that  of  the  thief  on  the 
cross,  and  no  man,  even  on  the  popular  scheme  of 
making  the  hereafter  heaven  a  reward  of  dying  peni- 
tence, can  say  that  Judas'  place  is  not  heaven. 

But  we  do  not  understand  that  heaven  ivas  meant 
by  this  language  in  the  case  before  us,  —  neither  a 
place  of  future  endless  punishment.  Some  place,  or 
position,  or  allotment,  was  evidently  referred  to, 

*  On  the  manner  of  Judas'  death,  Dr.  Clarke  quotes  with  fall  ap- 
proval the  following  from  Rev.  John  Jones,  in  his  Illustrations  of  the 
Four  Gospels  :  —  "So  sensible  became  the  traitor  of  the  distinguished 
rank  which  he  forfeited,  and  of  the  deep  disgrace  into  which  he  precip- 
itated himself,  by  betraying  his  Master,  that  he  was  seized  with  such 
violent  grief,  as  occasioned  the  rupture  of  his  bowels,  and  ended  in  suf- 
focation and  death."  "The  late  Mr.  Wakefield,"  says  Clarke,  "  de- 
fends this  meaning  with  great  learning  and  ingenuity."  And  Dr. 
Clarke,  I  may  say,  endorses  this  opinion,  and  adds,  that  "  the  Greek 
•word  which  we  (that  is,  King  James'  Assembly)  translate  hanged  him- 
self, is  by  the  very  best  critics  rendered,  was  choked.*'  For  more  on 
this  subject,  see  the  APPENDIX. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  253 

either  which  Judas  had  in  view  upon  abandoning  Je- 
sus, or  which  he  was  to  fill  in  the  verification  of 
prophecy  in  relation  to  the  mission  and  trials  of  Jesus. 

But  wre  will  present  our  readers  with  the  opinions, 
and  the  arguments  too,  of  numbers  of  the  most  emi- 
nent Orthodox  Biblical  critics;  on  the  case  of  Judas, 
and  on  this  passage  in  particular.  We  do  not  under- 
stand that  our  opponent  is  to  receive  those  revered 
Doctors  of  his  school  as  authority;  but  we  would 
have  it  clearly  understood,  that  his  mere  paraphrastic 
quotation,  Judas  "  went  to  his  own  place/'  adding  the 
sententious  assertion,  "  Judas'  '  own  place  '  was  not 
heaven,"  has  no  weight  at  all  against  the  deliberate 
opinions  and  exegetical  arguments  of  his  learned  and 
honored  brethren.  And  we  would  have  it  under- 
stood that  these  Doctors  whom  we  shall  quote  were 
believers  in  "  future,  endless  punishment/7  and  were 
predisposed  to  find  in  the  Scriptures  all  the  support 
for  it  which  they  could  conscientiously  apply  as 
such,  —  so  that  it  was  by  the  force  of  truth  upon  their 
understandings,  against  their  prejudices,  that  they 
were  compelled  to  throw  out  this  passage  from  the 
use  to  which  they  wanted  it. 

On  the  phraseology  in  question,  "  that  he  might  go 
to  his  own  place/'  Dr.  ADAM  CLARKE,  in  his  commen- 
tary on  the  passage,  says, —  "  1.  Some  suppose  that 
the  words  that  he  might  go  to  his  own  place,  are  spoken 
of  Judas,  and  his  punishment  in  hell.  2.  Others  refer 
them  to  the  purchase  of  the  field,  made  by  the  thirty 
pieces  of  silver,  for  which  he  had  sold  our  Lord.  So 
lie  abandoned  the  ministry  and  apostolote,  that  he  might 
22 


254  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

go  to  his  own  place,  viz :  that  which  he  had  purchased. 
3.  Others  with  more  seeming  propriety  state,  that  his 
own  place,  means  his  own  house,  or  former  occupation  ; 
he  left  the  ministry  and  apostleship,  that  he  might 
resume  his  former  employment  in  conjunction  with 
his  family,  &?.  This  is  the  primary  meaning  of  it  in 
Num.  xxiv.  25.  "  And  Balaam  returned  to  HIS  OWN 
PLACE,  i.  e.  to  his  own  country,  friends,  and  em- 
ployment. 4.  Others  think  it  simply  means  the  state 
of  the  dead  in  general,  independently  of  either  rewards 
or  punishments ;  as  is  probably  meant  by  Eccl.  iii :  20. 
All  go  unto  ONE  PLACE :  all  are  of  the  dmt,  and  all 
turn  to  dust  again.  But,  5.  Some  of  the  best  critics 
assert  that  the  words  (as  before  hinted)  belong  to 
Matthias  —  his  own  place  being  the  office  to  which  he 
was  about  to  be  elected." 

Now  it  is  to  be  remarked  that  all  these  critics  to 
whom  Dr.  Clarke  refers  with  so  much  consideration, 
are  eminent  Orthodox  theologians.  He  seems  to  give 
his  own  preference  to  the  third  hypothesis,  taking  his 
own  place  to  be  his  former  occupation,  for  the  sake  of 
which  he  abandoned  the  ministry  of  Jesus  when  he 
discovered  that  he  was  not  to  set  up  an  earthly  king- 
dom to  be  shared  with  his  disciples. 

HAMMOND  argues  extensively  for  the  opinion  that 
the  phrase,  "  that  he  might  go  to  his  own  place,"  re- 
fers to  Matthias,  as  going  to  the  place  or  office  which 
became  his  own  by  lot,  having  been  vacated  by  Judas. 
He  says,  "  It  was  not  Luke's  office  to  pass  sentence 
on  Judas,  any  further  than  by  setting  down  the  hein 
ousness  of  his  crime,  which  he  had  done,  vs.  16-19, 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  255 

and  was  not  to  proceed  to  judge,  or  affirm,  aught  of 
God's  secrets,  such  as  his  going  to  hell.  And  it  is 
St.  Chrysostoris  observation  on  v.  16,  behold  the  tcis- 
dom  of  St.  Luke,  how  he  doth  not  reproach  or  insult,  on 
Judas;  but  simply  sets  down  the  matter  of  fact  with- 
out any  descant  on  it ;  and  what  he  adds  —  he  dis- 
courses on  the  present  vengeance  —  belongs  evidently 
to  what  befell  him  in  this  present  world,  and  so  ex- 
cludes all  enlarging  to  his  future  damnation."  (Ham- 
mond's Annotations  on  the  place.)  GILPIN,  PEARCE,  and 
KNATCHBULL,  offer  similar  views  and  arguments. 

The  phrase,  son  of  perdition,  which  Jesus  applied 
to  Judas  as  the  one  lost  to  his  apostleship,  (John  xvii. 
12),  is  very  justly  explained  by  Wakefield,  thus:  — 
"  TJie  son  of  mischief :  a  Hebrew  phrase  for  a  destruc- 
tive, pernicious  person  ;  upon  which  mode  of  speak- 
ing see  my  commentary  on  Matt.  v.  9." 

Dr.  CLARKE,  whom  we  have  quoted  so  freely  above, 
when  he  wrote  his  commentary  on  Matt.  xxvi.  24, 
"  It  had  been  good  for  that  man  if  he  had  not  been 
born,"  treats  this  expression  as  proof  of  Judas'  final 
damnation.  He  argues  it  in  the  following  emphatic 
strain,  as  being  proud  of  his  point:  —  "Can  this  be 
said  of  any  sinner  if  there  be  any  redemption  from 
hell's  torments  ?  If  a  sinner  should  suffer  millions  of 
millions  of  years  in  them,  and  get  out  at  last  into  the 
enjoyment  of  heaven ;  then  it  was  well  for  him  that 
he  had  been  born,  for  still  he  has  an  eternity  of  bless- 
edness before  him.  Can  the  doctrine  of  the  non- 
eternity  of  hell's  torments  stand  in  the  presence  of 
such  a  saying?  "  But  when  he  had  progressed  in  his 


256  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

work  to  the  first  chapter  of  Acts,  he  had  so  far  ad- 
vanced in  Biblical  knowledge  as  to  see  that  neither 
this  saying  of  Jesus,  nor  any  other  Scripture  testimo- 
ny, means  the  endless  damnation  of  Judas.  In  his 
commentary  on  the  passage  in  this  chapter  which  we 
have  been  considering,  after  showing  that  the  words, 
his  own  place,  cannot  be  reasonably  understood  as  re- 
ferring to  a  future  state  of  misery,  and  presenting  an 
honorable  plea  for  the  genuineness  of  Judas'  repent- 
ance, and  the  probability  of  his  salvation  through  the 
great  mercy  of  Ood  in  Christ,  he  refers  to  that  argu- 
ment on  the  saying  in  Matthew,  and  thoroughly  dis- 
poses of  it,  as  follows :  — "  What  renders  his  case 
most  desperate,  are  the  words  of  our  Lord,  Matt, 
xxvi.  24,  f  Woe  unto  that  man  by  whom  the  Son  of 
Man  is  betrayed  !  It  had  been  good  for  that  man  if 
he  had  not  been  born  ! '  I  have  considered  this  say- 
ing in  a  general  point  of  view,  in  my  note  on  Matt, 
xxvi.  24,  and  were  it  not  a  proverbial  form  of  speech 
among  the  Jews  to  express  the  state  of  any  flagrant 
transgressor,  I  should  be  led  to  apply  it,  in  all  its 
literal  import,  to  the  case  of  Judas,  as  I  have  done  in 
that  note  to  the  case  of  any  damned  soul ;  but  when 
I  find  that  it  was  a  proverbial  saying,  and  that  it  has 
been  used  in  many  cases  where  the  fixing  of  the  irre- 
versible doom  of  a  sinner  is  not  implied,  it  may  be 
capable  of  a  more  favorable  interpretation  than  what 
is  generally  given  to  it.'7  The  learned  Commentator 
then  proceeds  to  present  a  catalogue  of  cases,  from 
Jewish  writers,  where  the  same  saying  as  this  applied 
to  Judas,  it  had  been  good  for  that  man  if  he  had  not 


KEPLY  TO  I>E.   ADAMS,  257 


"been  born,  is  used  to  denote,  simply,  that  this  earthly 
life,  that  isr  living  to  manhood,  would  hardly  be  desir- 
able viewed  in  connection  with  certain  specified  ig- 
nominy and  suffering.  lie  might  have  added  to  his 
catalogue  several  cases  from  the  Old  Testament  Scrip- 
tures, such  as  Job's  cursing  the  day  of  his  birth  be- 
cause of  the  afflictions  of  his  life.  —  and  Solomon's 
saying  that  if  a  man  live  many  years,  and  beget  an 
hundred  children,  and  sees  not  good  in  life,  and  has 
no  burial,  an  untimely  birth  is  better  than  Jie. 

It  is  curious  to  observe  how  the  amiable  and  learn- 
ed Clarke,  in  this  last  extract  from  his  pen,  was  the 
vacilating  subject  of  a  mighty  struggle  between  his 
theology  and  his  understanding.  In  his  labor  to 
release  Judas  from  the  doom  to  which  he  had,  by  his 
former  construction,  made  this  saying  of  Jesus 
consign  him,  he  shows  that  its  meaning  in  common 
usage  was  such,  that  it  could  not  have  been  taken 
by  the  hearers  of  our  Lord  as  referring  to  Judas* 
final  state.  Then  of  course  it  referred  to  nobody's 
final  state,  because  it  was  said  directlyof  Judas,  and 
nobody  else.  And  yet  Clarke,  while  explaining  it  of 
Judas  as  implying  only  temporal  shame  and  anguish, 
so  handles  his  words  as  to  appear  not  to  relinquish 
his  former  argument  from  the  saying  as  applied  to 
other  "  damned  souls.7'  Alas,  how  little  does  human 
greatness  appear  when  striving  against  Godrs  truth. 
But  we  rejoice  that  this  great  Christian  scholar  has 
brought  out  so  much  of  the  fruit  of  increased  Bibli- 
cal knowledge  in  the  later  portions  of  his  Scripture 
Commentaries.  His  able  exposition  of  Dr.  Adams? 
*22 


258  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

proof  text,  that  lie  might  go  to  his  own  place,  is  brought 
to  this  conclusion  :  "  And  I  contend  further,  that  there 
is  no  positive  evidence  of  the  final  damnation  to  Judas 
in  the  sacred  text. 

Our  readers  have  seen  that  our  opponent,  in  the 
concluding  division  of  his  argument,  brings  forward 
the  opinion  of  THEODORE  PARKER,  that  the  Evangel- 
ists in  their  reports  of  the  discourses  of  Jesus,  make 
him  to  teach  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment ; 
and  he  regards  this  testimony,  from  one  who  rejects 
endless  punishment,  Bible  and  all,  as  being  almost 
decisive  in  the  settlement  of  the  controversy.  What 
is  the  case  ?  Why,  the  good  man,  Parker,  was  educated 
in  the  belief  of  endless  punishment,  and  in  the  associ- 
ation with  that  punishment  of  the  sound  of  all  those 
lists  of  Scripture  phraseology  which  Dr.  Adams  has 
applied  to  it  so  laconically  in  his  "  Argument."  He 
has  great  benevolence,  not  profound  intellect,  but 
clear  intellectual  and  moral  perceptions  to  see  the 
opposition  between  this  doctrine  and  the  principle  of 
honor  and  right  in  God.  And,  in  his  disgust  of  the 
dogma  with  which  chimes  the  sound  of  the  Scripture 
phraseology  in  the  ear  tuned  by  false  education,  and 
yet,  too  impatient  to  achieve  the  trial  of  eradicating 
the  false  impressions  of  the  sense  of  Scripture  phrase- 
ology by  a  thorough  de  novo  Scripture  study,  and  hav- 
ing but  small  reverence  for  what  is  old,  he  cuts  the 
Gordian  knot,  throws  the  Bible  away  with  its  false 
interpretations  en  masse,  and  makes  reason  alone  his 
revelator.  And  his  testimony,  Dr.  Adams  calls  in, 
upon  the  meaning  of  Scripture.  We  scout  it  as  "  the 
idle  winds,  which  we  respect  not." 


EEPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  259 

But  what  have  we  here,  upon  our  side  of  the  ques- 
tion. Our  opponent  quotes  the  words  spoken  of 
Judas,  "  that  he  might  go  to  his  own  place,"  as  proof 
needing  no  comment,  of  future  punishment  — for  one 
man  at  least.  And  we  call  in  a  host  of  the  Doctors 
and  Rabbis  of  his  own  school,  wanting  all  the  Bible 
proof  they  can  get  for  his  very  doctrine  of  endless 
punishment,  and  educated  in  the  very  habit  of  apply- 
ing this  passage  to  that  doom,  who,  by  prayerful 
Biblical  study  in  the  exercise  of  reason,  have  been 
compelled  to  relinquish  this  passage  as  a  testimony 
for  such  a  doctrine,  and  become  empowered  to  show, 
by  able  and  learned  argument,  that  it  has  no  such  mean- 
ing. Will  not  our  learned  friend  perceive  that  his 
merely  transcribing  these  few  words  from  the  Book, 
has  no  manner  of  weight  against  the  opinions  and 
labored  arguments  of  his  elder  Biblical  critics,  and 
against  the  concurrent  testimonies  of  the  Scriptures, 
in  proof  of  "  Future,  Endless  Punishment?'' 


SECTION  vm. 
Die  in  Your  Sins  —  Cannot  Come. 

There  are  a  few  passages  in  the  last  cluster  which 
we  transcribed  of  our  opponent's  quotation  as  "  teach- 
ing that  the  wicked  are  in  misery  after  death,"  which 
we  have  not  noticed,  and  which  require  no  labored 
exposition.  They  are  the  following :  "  The  wicked 
is  driven  away  in  his  wickedness."  Universalists, 
above  all  other  Christians,  urge  and  maintain  that  the 


260  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

wicked  are,  by  the  very  law  of  their  moral  nature, 
banished  from  true  home  and  true  good  in  life,  that 
they  are  as  lost  sheep  driven  away  from  pasture,  wan- 
dering from  valley  to  hill,  "  and  have  forgotten  their 
resting  place."  "There  is  no  peace  to  the  wicked, 
saith  my  God."  But  this  does  not  prove  that  they 
will  follow  after  iniquity  in  the  spirit  land.  "  The 
ungodly  are  like  the  chaff  which  the  wind  driveth 
away."  Another  important  utterance  of  moral  truth, 
of  like  import  with  the  foregoing.  "  The  men  of 
Sodom  were  wicked  and  sinners  before  God  exceed- 
ingly." Undoubtedly.  "And  the  Lord  rained  fire 
and  brimstone  out  of  heaven  and  destroyed  them  all." 
We  never  doubted  the  truth  of  this  piece  of  historical 
record,  relating  to  the  desolating  tempest  upon 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah.  But  how  this  record  proves 
that  men  are  in  misery  after  death  we  are  unable  to 
understand,  and  our  friend  neglects  to  show  us.  And 
then,  after  the  reference  to  the  rich  man  in  hades,  and 
Judas  to  his  oivn  place,  which  we  have  quite  fully  con- 
sidered, he  finishes  this  cluster  and  closes  the  quota- 
tions of  proof  texts  for  the  first  division  of  his  argu- 
ment, with  the  following: 

"  If  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  ity 
your  sins."  "  And  where  I  am,  thither  ye  cannot 
come"  This  seems  to  have  been,  designed  to  be  a 
quotation  of  John  viii.  21. 

There  is,  though  seemingly  slight,  yet  really  an 
essential  error,  in  the  Doctor's  arrangement  and 
wording  of  this  quotation.  He  designed  no  wrong, 
for  he  is  undoubtedly  sincere  in  the  belief  that  Jesus 


REPLY  TO  DR.  ADAMS.  261 

intended  to  teach  what  his  re-arrangement  of  parts 
and  addition  of  a  word  is  designed  to  favor.  He 
takes  the  last  member  of  the  24th  verse  and  puts  in 
place  of  the  first  member  of  the  21st  verse  ;  and  then 
supplies  the  word,  and,  to  connect  with  this  the  last 
member  of  the  same  verse.  He  desired  to  make  the 
verity  of  the  saying,  "  whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come," 
depend  on  the  condition  of  their  dying  in  their  sins. 
But  such  is  not  the  fact.  The  true  reading  of  verse 
21st  is  as  follows: — "Then  said  Jesus  again  unto 
them,  I  go  my  way ;  and  ye  shall  seek  me,  and  shall 
die  in  your  sins :  Whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come." 
Here  are  two  distinct  prophetic  statements,  the  latter 
not  depending  on  the  former  as  a  condition.  1st, 
"  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins."  2d,  "  Whither  I  go  ye 
cannot  come." 

1st.  "  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins.'7  What  is  signified 
by  this  expression  ?  It  does  not  appear  from  the 
connections  that  Jesus  spoke  of  individual  natural 
death,  and  the  state  of  mind  and  character  in  which 
individuals  might  die.  And  we  will  here  take 
occasion  to  remark,  that  the  inspired  servants  of 
God,  under  either  dispensation,  never  sought  to 
excite  the  dying  with  fear  and  terror  as  to  what 
should  become  of  them  after  death,  nor  to  fill  the 
minds  of  friends  with  distress  in  view  of  a  final 
separation  from  each  other,  some  to  infinite  bliss  and 
others  to  endless  woe.  No  instance  of  the  kind  can 
be  found.  In  the  Old  Testament,  the  closing 
account  of  the  subjects  of  its  history,  of  diverse 
characters,  is,  that  they  slept  with  their  fathers,  and 


262  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

were  buried  in  their  respective  family  grounds  or 
sepulchres.  And  in  the  New  Testament,  in  all  the 
records  of  the  ministry  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles,  and 
the  experience  and  exhortations  of  converts,  and  the 
mourning  of  friends  for  the  loss  of  friends,  there  is 
no  intimation  of  anxiety  and  distress  from  the  con- 
templation of  an  eternal  separation.  If  any  such 
thing  had  been  believed  and  preached  then,  as  it  is 
now,  the  New  Testament  records  must  have  had  a 
sprinkling  of  it  all  through,  just  as  the  preaching, 
and  exhortations,  and  experiences,  and  addresses  to 
the  sick,  and  dying,  and  mourners,  among  persons 
believing  it,  have  at  the  present  day.  But  there  is 
nothing  of  it  in  the  New  Testament.  Its  ministers 
labored  faithfully  to  teach  men  how  to  live,  admonish- 
ed them  of  the  evils  of  a  course  of  sin  ;  and  for  their 
moral  and  spiritual  regeneration  and  growth,  they 
gave  to  man  the  revelation  of  a  future  life  as  a 
subject  of  grateful  and  purifying  hope.  In  the  spirit 
and  purpose  of  this  truth,  how  affectionately  and 
persuasively  Jesus  conducted  his  intercourse  with 
the  ignorant  and  them  who  were  out  of  the  way. 
And  St.  Paul  exhorted  believers,  whose  deceased 
friends  had  generally  died  even  in  heathen  idolatry, 
not  to  be  ignorant  concerning  them  who  were  asleep, 
that  they  should  sorrow  not  even  as  others  who 
have  ho  hope.* 

The  fact  is,  that  many  modern  religious  teachers, 
who  have  a  Christianity  adulterated  with  error,  take 
up  the  denunciations  of  public  and  national  judg- 

*1  Thess.  iv.  13. 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  263 

^. 

ments  which  Jesus  and  his  apostles  denounced  upon 
the  most  wicked  though  the  most  religious  people  in 
the  world,  who,  under  hypocritical  pretences  of  god- 
liness were  persecuting  the  truth  of  God  and  his 
servants  with  a  high  hand,  and  they  go  with  these 
denunciations  as  the  bread  of  heaven  for  all  classes 
of  men,  women,  and  children, — for  the  sick,  even  the 
most  virtuous  and  lovely  if  not  Orthodox,  for  the 
dying,  and  the  mourning ;  and  upon  all  these  they 
palm  them  as  descriptions  of  the  general  treatment 
of  God  to  mankind,  and  of  the  general  human 
condition,  in  the  immortal  world.  It  is  a  terrible 
mistake. 

But  to  return  to  the  question  of  the  dying  in  sin, 
denoted  by  the  denunciation  of  Jesus  upon  the  Jews 
in  the  case  before  us. 

Jesus  in  this  place  makes  no  reference  to  the  views 
and  feelings,  or  even  the  character,  in  which  men 
ordinarily  die.  Nor  does  he  here  refer  to  individual 
physical  death  at  all.  By  reading  that  whole  chapter 
you  will  see  that  it  is  a  direct  and  close  conversation 
with  the  leaders  of  the  Jews  in  relation  to  their 
concerted  opposition  to  him,  and  their  purpose  to 
destroy  him.  And  at  the  twenty-first  verse,  he  does 
not  speak  of  the  character  in  which  they  would  indi- 
vidually suifer  physical  death,  but  he  announces  the 
doom  of  that  people  which  should  be  suffered  in 
consequence  of  their  moral  corruptness  and  spiritual 
blindness,  and  their  criminal  persecution  of  him  and 
his  cause.  "  I  go  my  way,  and  ye  shall  seek  me,  and 
shall  die  in  your  sins.*7  There  is  no  if  about  it.  It  is 


264  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

a  direct  denunciation  of  judgment  which  they  had 
incurred,  a  national  death  in  their  blindness  and 
persistent  moral  corruptness.  Dying  to  sin  is  living 
to  God ;  dying  in  sin  is  wandering  from  God,  The 
if  in  verse  24th  relates  to  the  unbelief  which  was 
and  would  be  the  cause  of  their  sinful  opposition  to 
him  and  his  gospel.  And  this  doom  to  a  succeeding 
age  of  national  blindness  and  desolation  is  repeatedly 
spoken  of,  in  different  terms  and  on  different 
occasions,  by  our  Lord.  In  relation  to  this  same 
people  on  occasion  of  their  persistent  opposition,  it 
Is  said,  (Luke  xix.  41-43.)  "  And  when  he  was  come 
near,  he  beheld  the  city,  and  wept  over  it,  saying,  If 
thou  hadst  known,  even  thou,  at  least  in  this  thy 
day,  the  things  which  belong  unto  thy  peace  !  But 
now  they  are~  hid  from  thine  eyes.  For  the  days 
shall  come  upon  thee,  that  thine  enemies  shall  cast  a 
trench  about  thee,  and  compass  thee  round,  and  keep 
thee  in  on  every  side." 

In  this  case,  as  in  the  text  under  special  considera- 
tion, the  occasion  was  the  vituperous  opposition  of 
the  Jews,  and  the  subject  was  the  withdrawal  from 
them  for  a  season  of  the  opportunities  with  which 
they  had  been  favored,  and  their  subjection  J:o  rational 
desolation.  Again,  (Matt  xxiii.32,  33.)  "  Fill  ye  up 
then  the  measure  of  your  fathers.  Ye  serpents,  ye 
generation  of  vipers,  how  can  ye  escape  the  punish- 
ment of  Gehenna?'  That  is,  as  we  explained  in 
Section  II.  of  this  chapter,  the  judgment  which  was 
foretold  by  the  prophets,  that  should  make  their  city 
and  land  like  unto  Tophet  in  the  valley  of  Hinnorn. 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  265 

And  a  little  further  on  in  the  same  chapter,  he  sig- 
nified to  the  same  people  the  same  approaching  des- 
olation or  death  in  their  sins,  as  follows  : — "  O  Jeru- 
salem, Jerusalem,  thou  that  killest  the  prophets,  and 
stonest  them  which  are  sent  unto  thee,  how  often 
would  I  have  gathered  thy  children  together,  even 
as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and 
ye  would  not !  Behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you 
desolate.  For  I  say  unto  you,  Ye  shall  not  see  me 
henceforth,  till  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh 
in  the  name  of  the  Lord." 

Such  then  is  the  doom  of  the  Jewish  nation,  de- 
nounced by  the  words  of  our  Lord  in  the  text  under 
consideration,  "  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins."  That 
very  determined  and  violent  hostility  to  him  and  the 
spirit  of  his  mission,  which  was  being  displayed  in 
that  very  instance,  as  they  were  reviling  him  and 
seeking  to  kill  him,  furnished  the  usual  occasion  for 
his  admonishing  them  of  the  ruin  upon  which  they 
were  rushing. 

The  same  moral  and  political  death  in  one,  as  we 
have  before  seen  in  this  discussion,  is  also  represented 
by  the  unjust  steward  deposed  from  his  stewardship, 
and  by  the  rich  man  dead  and  in  hades. 

2d.  And  what  of  the  other  clause  of  the  text, 
"  Whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come?r  By  the  opposers  of 
our  faith  it  has  been  construed  to  denote  an  endless 
exclusion.  Is  it  so  ?  You  must  not  insist  upon  this 
construction  if  it  be  not  the  necessary  meaning  of 
the  language/' because  it  would  represent  Christ, 
whose  mission  it  was  by  the  Father's  appointment  to 
23 


266  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

destroy  all  sin  and  death,  and  save  the  world,  as 
standing  up,  when  his  work  was  but  just  begun,  and 
declaring  that  he  would  not  do  it.  We  should  not 
necessarily  place  THE  SENT  OF  GOD  in  such  an 
attitude  of  dishonor. 

But  look  again.  Will  you  yet  insist  that  the  words 
of  Christ  to  the  Jews,  "  Whither  I  go  ye  cannot 
come,"  necessarily  import  an  endless  exclusion? 
We  take  you  at  your  i\  ord  for  a  moment.  Now  turn 
over  to  the  words  of  Jesus  to  his  own  disciples,  John 
xiii.  33.  "  Little  children,  yet  a  little  while  I  am  with 
you.  Ye  shall  seek  me ;  and  as  I  said  unto  the  Jews, 
whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come,  so  now  I  say  to  you." 
There,  my  opposing  friend,  if  you  are  right,  if  you 
have  proved  anything  by  your  definition  of  the  words 
of  Jesus  to  the  Jews,  you  have  proved  the  final  ban 
ishment  and  endless  exclusion  of  the  faithful  disci- 
ples. For  you  say  that  the  proper  and  necessary 
sense  of  the  sa}7ing  to  the  Jews  is  an  endless  exclu- 
sion ;  and  now  Jesus  applies  the  same  words  to  his 
disciples,  and  is  particular  to  certify  them  that  it  is 
precisely  what  he  said  to  the  Jews.  "  Ye  shall  seek 
me  ;  and  as  I  said  unto  the  Jeivs,  whither  I  go  ye  can- 
not come,  so  now  I  say  to  you" 

What  will  you  do  now  ?  Will  you,  for  the  sake  of 
your  favorite  construction  of  John  viii.  21,  give  up 
as  lost  forever  Christ's  primitive  disciples  ?  "  No," 
say  you,  "  because  Jesus  said  to  the  disciples  when 
Peter  asked  him,  '  Whither  goest  thou  ?  '  l  Whither  I 
go  thou  canst  not  follow  me  now  f  but  thou  shalt 
follow  me  afterward/  Then  you  show  conclusively 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  267 

that  the  phrase  addressed  to  the  Jews  and  to  the 
disciples,  "  whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come,"  does  not 
import  a  final  exclusion. — does  not  signify  but  that 
they  would  come  unto  him  afterward.  And  now,  in 
this  light  of  the  subject,  for  you  to  go  back  and  insist 
on  your  old  construction  of  these  same  words  to  the 
Jews,  as  proving  their  final  exclusion,  will  be  inexcu- 
sably reckless  of  truth. 

In  both  cases,  the  saying  of  Jesus,  "  Whither  I  go 
ye  cannot  come,"  had  reference  to  his  passing  off 
from  this  field  of  labor,  and  going  to  the  Father, 
where  the  Jews  could  not  come  to  him  as  they  were 
then  seeking  to  do,  with  hostile  intent,  and  where  his 
disciples  could  not  continue  their  familiar  resort  to 
him  for  personal  intercourse.  This  is  plainly  the 
whole  import  of  the  language,  as  it  was  addressed  to 
the  two  parties  respectively. 

]t  is  seen  now  that  there  is  no  such  condition  ex- 
pressed in  this  text,  on  which  depended  the  inability 
of  the  Jews  to  come  where  Jesus  was  to  be,  as  the 
frequent  supply  of  the  word  if  introduces,  and  that 
by  our  opponent  in  this  discussion,  and  instead  of  if, 
was  intended  to  imply.  For  to  say,  "if  ye  die  in 
your  sins  whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come,"  makes  their 
dying  in  their  sins  the  reason  why  they  could  not  go 
to  him.  But  no  such  thought  is  involved  in  the  text. 
Each  clause  of  the  text  announces  a  separate  truth. 
"  I  go  my  way."  This  is  a  fact  that  did  not  depend 
on  any  other  fact  expressed  in  the  passage.  "  And 
ye  shall  (or  will)  seek  me."  Another  separate  fact. 
They  would  still  seek  him  or  his  representatives  with 


268  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

evil  designs.  "And  ye  shall  (or  will)  die  in  your  sins." 
This  is  yet  another  fact  by  itself.  They  would  con- 
tinue in  their  blindness  and  hardness  of  heart,  unto 
their  national  desolation.  "  Whither  I  go  ye  cannot 
come."  Another  fact  depending  on  no  if.  He  was 
going  to  the  Father,  beyond  the  personal  reach  of 
the  Jews  to  persecute  him,  or  of  the  disciples  to  ask 
his  counsel  as  they  had  been  wont  to  do. 

No,  Jesus  did  not,  in  the  case  we  have  been  study- 
ing, dishonor  himself  by  the  announcement  of  a  re- 
cantation of  his  purpose  and  failure  of  his  mission. 
As  his  saying  to  the  disciples,  the  same  which  he  had 
spoken  to  the  Jews,  did  not  contradict  the  saying 
that  they  should  follow  him  afterward,  so  the  same 
saying  to  the  Jews  was  not  a  throwing  up  of  the  pur- 
pose of  his  mission,  which  was  "  to  seek  and  save 
that  which  was  lost/'  and  with  a  fidelity  and  success 
equal  to  that  of  the  shepherd  who  never  gives  up  his 
pursuit  until  the  last  lost  sheep  is  brought  into  the 
fold  rejoicing. 

This  temporary  alienation  and  deadness  in  sin  of 
the  Jews  is,  as  we  have  shown,  often  spoken  of  by 
Jesus  and  his  apostles.  Jesus  said  to  the  Pharisees, 
"  The  publicans  and  harlots  go  into  the  kingdom  of 
God  before  you."  Again,  "  the  first  shall  be  last,  and 
the  last  first;  r  meaning  that  the  Jews,  who  were  first 
in  respect  to  privilege,  would  be  later  in  their  recep- 
tion of  the  gospel  than  the  Gentiles,  who  had  been 
reckoned  last.  Yet  it  implies  that  the  Jews  were  at 
last  to  come  in.  The  same  is  denoted  by  the  passage 
before  quoted : — "  0  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem, 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  269 

Your  house  is  left  unto  you  desolate,  and  ye  shall 
not  see  me  henceforth,  until  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is 
he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord."  Here  is 
implied  an  age  of  darkness  and  desolation  to  that 
people,  and  then  a  regeneration  by  the  light  of  Christ. 
And  St.  Paul  is  full  and  instructive  on  this  subject,  in 
Rom.  xi.  "  Blindness  in  part  is  happened  unto  Israel, 
until  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in.  And 
so  all  Israel  shall  be  saved."  Read  the  entire  chap- 
ter, which  is  wholly  devoted  to  the  ways  of  God's 
providence  through  the  devious  windings  and  alter- 
nate ups  and  downs  of  human  condition,  coming  out 
at  such  an  enrapturing  view  of  the  glorious  result  in 
universal  harmony  and  peace,  as  impelled  this  adoring 
exclamation :  "  0  the  depth  of  the  riches  both  of  the 
wisdom  and  knowledge  of  God  !  How  unsearchable 
are  his  judgments,  and  his  ways  past  finding  out  I 
For  of  him,  and  through  him,  and  to  him  are  all 
things,  to  whom  be  glory  forever.  Amen. 

NOTE. 

In  the  last  Section  of  this  chapter,  (p.  26,)  on  the 
Jew's  dying  in  their  sins,  we  spoke  of  Dr.  Adams'  quo- 
tations as  presenting  the  subject  matter  of  the  21st 
verse  of  John  viii.,  but  involving  a  re-arrangement 
and  the  supply  of  the  word,  and.  His  quotations 
stand  thus : 

"  If  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die  in  your 
sins"  "And  where  I  am,  thither  ye  cannot  come" 

But  now,  in  looking  over  the  record  in  surrounding 
chapters,  having  had  our  attention  called  to  the  case 
23* 


270  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

by  a  note  from  Dr.  A.,  we  perceive  that  in  chapter 
vii.  v.  34,  these  words  occur,  "And  where  I  am, 
thither  ye  cannot  come."  And  this  was  the  verse 
from  which  the  Doctor  culled  those  words  in  his 
quotation.  This  exonerates  him  from  the  interpolation 
of  the  word  and,  but  makes  it  to  appear  a  more  labored 
and  intentional  "  re-arrangement.'7  While  the  dying 
in  sin,  and  not  coining  where  he  was,  were  comprised 
in  the  21st  verse  of  chapter  viii.,  in  Jesus'  own 
manner  of  expression,  our  friend  searches  out  the  last 
clause  of  viii.  24,  and  the  last  clause  of  vii.  34,  and, 
though  denoting  them  by  quotation  marks  as  separate 
fragments,  places  them  in  a  relative  position  to  ap- 
pear as  connected  in  the  expression  of  a  sentiment. 
Of  course  this  wide  search  for  fragments  to  combine 
in  a  quotation  was  for  a  purpose,  and  that  purpose 
was  to  make  out  an  expression  in  Scripture  words  by 
"  re-arrangement,"  of  a  relation  between  the  parts, 
which  the  single  quotation  of  viii.  21,  would  not  ex- 
press. 

This  new  discovery,  which  we  take  pains  to  notice 
here  for  the  sake  of  accuracy,  and  of  perfect  justice 
to  all  parties,  while  it  exonerates  our  friend  from 
the  supply  of  the  word  and,  at  the  same  time  show- 
ing greater  labor  in  the  re-arrangement,  helps  us  to 
an  unquestionable  testimony  to  the  correctness  of  our 
view  of  the  meaning  of  our  Lord,  by  the  saying, 
"  Whither  I  go  ye  cannot  come  ; '  or,  as  in  vii.  84, 
"And,  where  I  am  thither  ye  cannot  come."  The 
whole  connection  in  which  the  latter  phraseology 
occurs,  is  the  following : — "  And  the  Pharisees  and 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  271 

chief  priests  sent  officers  to  take  him.  Then  said 
Jesus  unto  them,  Yet  a  little  while  am  I  with  you,  and 
then  I  go  unto  him  that  sent  me.  Ye  shall  seek  me, 
and  shall  not  find  me ;  and  where  I  am,  thither  ye 
cannot  come."  Here  the  words,  "  ye  shall  seek  me," 
were  suggested  by  the  then  present  fact  that  the 
Pharisees  and  chief  priests  sent  officers  to  take  him. 
It  was  the  extermination  of  his  cause  that  they  sought, 
and  they  would  still  seek  this  object.  But  Jesus,  the 
source  of  all  power  in  this  cause  and  kingdom  of  his, 
returning  to  Him  who  sent  him,  would  be  beyond 
their  reach,  on  a  throne  of  power  to  which  they  could 
not  have  access,  and  where  they  could  not  come  ; 
and  where,  as  in  xiii.  33,  neither  could  his  disciples 
come.  So  then,  the  conjunction  and,  vii.  34,  connects 
the  saying,  "  where  I  am  thither  ye  cannot  come," 
with  the  saying  that  he  should  go  to  Him  that  sent 
him,  and  they  should  seek  him  and  not  find  him. 
Whereas  Dr.  A.'s  re-arrangement  transports  it  to  a 
place  after  the  last  clause  of  viii.  24,  and  thus  makes 
it  connect  the  idea  of  their  not  coming  where  he  is, 
with  their  dying  in  their  sins.  It  is  an  essential  trans- 
postion ;  yet,  as  we  kindly  said  before,  our  friend 
meant  no  harm,  for  he  honestly  believed  that  the  lat- 
ter two  ideas  really  depend  on  each  other,  and  he 
clearly  saw  that  such  a  transposition  would  compose 
a  paragraph  more  suggestive  of  such  dependency. 
Fiat  justitia,  &c. 


CHAPTER  II. 

The  second  fundamental  proposition  of  Dr.  Adams, 
is  in  these  words : 

II.  REDEMPTION   BY  CHRIST  13   REPRESENTED  AS  HAVING 
FOR   ITS    OBJECT   SALVATION   FROM   FINAL   PERDITION. 

This  we  shall  lay  over  for  the  present,  reserving  it 
for  our  concluding  Chapter,  because  it  will  lead  us 
into  the  discussion  and  exploration  of  a  subject  which 
will  form  and  complete  with  the  whole  a  glorious 
CLIMAX.  In  accordance  with  this  plan  we  pass 
now  to  the  Doctor's  third  proposition,  to  wit : 

III.  THE    FALL    OF    ANGELS  AND   OF    MAN,  IS   A   CON- 
FIRMATORY PROOF   OF  FUTURE,  ENDLESS   RETRIBUTION. 

His  discussion  of  this  point,  the  Doctor  very  con- 
siderately opens  in  the  manner  following : — 

This  will  of  course  have  weight  only  with  those  who  believe  in 
the  existence  and  fall  of  angels,  and  in  the  fall  of  man.  To  prove 
either  of  these,  here,  would  be  out  of  place ;  and  indeed  the 
necessity  of  proving  them  would  show  that  everything  which  has 
thus  far  been  said  in  this  article  is  superfluous,  because  it  takes  for 
granted  many  things  generally  believed,  which  rest,  however,  on  the 
same  kind  of  evidence  with  the  existence  of  angels  and  their  fall 
The  Apostles,  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  I  have  not  thought  it 
necessary  to  prove,  had  a  real  existence,  and  that  they  were  not 
merely  personified  principles  of  good  and  evil.  If  the  reader  be 


REPLY  TO   DR.  ADAMS.  273 

one  who  rejects  the  doctrine  of  fallen  angels,  and  of  the  fall  of  man, 
he  will  read  what  is  here  said  merely  as  showing  the  way  in  which 
those  who  believe  these  things  are  confirmed  by  them,  in  their 
belief  of  endless  retribution. 

Precisely  so.  We  will  look  upon  the  matter  in  this 
light.  But  then,  if  the  doctrine  of  endless  punish- 
ment, with  them  who  believe  it,  derives  essential  sup- 
port from  the  hypothesis  of  holy  angels  having  fallen 
and  become  metamorphosed  into  such  a  Satan,  and 
such  legions  of  devils,  as  Milton  poetizes,  it  is  of 
some  interest  to  us  to  know  on  what  ground  this 
hypothesis  is  made  to  rest,  on  what  testimony  it  is 
based. 

But,  in  the  outset,  we  will  clear  the  Doctor's  posi- 
tion of  the  confusion  of  ideas  in  which  he  has  involv- 
ed it.  He  puts  into  the  statement  of  his  hypothesis 
two  ideas  which  have  no  relation  to  each  other.  He 
expects  that  his  argument  under  this  classifica- 
tion will  "  have  weight  only  with  those  who  believe 
in  the  existence  and  fall  of  angels.  This  is  making  the 
existence  of  angelic  beings  in  the  spiritual  state,  and 
their  fall,  in  the  orthodox  sense,  one  proposition,  as 
if  the  latter  assumption  were  necessarily  embraced  in 
the  former.  This  working  of  the  matter  into  a  false 
issue  must  have  been  an  oversight  of  our  friend ;  for 
we  esteem  him  as  above  the  practice  of  duplicity. 
But  it  is  obvious  to  every  mind,  that  to  believe  that 
the  great  and  good  Father  has  surrounded  himself 
with  sweet  angelic  spirits,  pure  and  blessed  immortals, 
is  one  thing  ;  and  to  believe  that  any  of  these  bright 
seraphs  have,  in  the  high  courts  of  heaven,  conceived 


274  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

lust  and  brought  forth  sin;  and  subsided  into  a  host 
of  fiends  and  devils;  is  another  and  quite  different 
thing.  We  believe  the  former,  but  not  the  latter. 
For  the  honor  of  God,  and  the  love  of  heaven,  we 
pronounce  utterly  fabulous  the  theory  that  sins,  dev- 
ils and  satans,  are  the  indigenous  products  of  that 
spirit  realm,  that  court  of  the  Eternal,  that  heavenly 
Canaan,  to  which  the  Christian  looks  with  hope  as  his 
safe,  and  blessed  and  final  home. 

But  our  learned  friend  gives  us  to  understand,  in 
the  paragraph  of  his  above  quoted,  that  his  faith  in 
the  real  existence  of  such  a  diabolical  progeny  of 
heaven  as  historical  persons,  stands  on  the  same 
ground  as  his  belief  in  the  personal  existence  of  the 
Apostles,  Scribes  and  Pharisees.  "With  a  significant 
implication,  he  says,  "  The  Apostles,  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees,  I  have  not  thought  it  necessary  to  prove, 
had  a  real  existence,  and  that  they  were  not  merely 

f  mf  v 

personified  principles  of  good  and  evil."  So,  then, 
he  would  have  it  understood,  that  if  we  take  the 
words  devil  and  satan  in  the  Scriptures,  when  not 
applied  to  human  beings,  as  personifications  of  evil 
principles,  we  adopt  a  rule  of  interpretation  which, 
carried  out  fairly,  would  turn  all  historic  persons  into 
mere  personified  principles. 

Let  us  see  if  the  Doctor  will  abide  by  his  rule.  If 
we  take  anything  mentioned  in  the  Scriptures  or  any 
other  book,  to  be  a  literal  historical  person,  we  shall 
take  any  physiological  description  of  his  person,  in 
the  same  history,  to  be  also  literal.  For  instance, 
when  we  read  of  Goliath,  of  Gath,  that  his  height  was 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS,  275 

six  cubits  and  a  span,  we  understand  that  such  was 
the  real  height  of  a  real  person,  of  the  name  afore- 
said. When  Jesus  describes  the  dress  of  the  Phari- 
sees as  being  embellished  with  widened  borders,  and 
their  habit  of  passing  themselves  off  as  eminently 
pious  by  making  broad  their  phylacteries,  we  under- 
stand that  these  descriptions  of  dress  and  habit, 
being  applied  to  real  historical  persons,  are  literally  as 
stated.  So  likewise  when  St.  Paul  speaks  of  his  rep- 
utation with  some,  as  being  mighty  in  his  letters,  but 
in  his  bodily  presence  weak,  we  naturally  understand 
that  the  apostle  was  not  reputed  to  be  prepossessing 
in  his  personal  appearance. 

But  we  will  now  take  our  learned  friend  to  a  Bible 
description  of  the  person  of  the  devil  and  satan.  See 
Rev.  xii.  "  And  there  appeared  another  wonder  in 
heaven ;  and,  behold,  a  great  red  dragon,  having 
seven  heads  and  ten  horns,  and  seven  crowns  upon 
his  heads.  And  his  tail  drew  the  third  part  of  the 
stars  of  heaven,  and  did  cast  them  to  the  earth.  .  .  . 
And  there  was  war  in  heaven:  Michael  and  his 
angels  fought  against  the  dragon ;  and  the  dragon 
fought,  and  his  angels, — and  prevailed  not ;  neither 
was  their  place  found  any  more  in  heaven.  And  the 
great  dragon  was  cast  out,  that  old  serpent,  called 
the  Devil,  and  Satan,  which  deceiveth  the  whole 
world ;  he  was  cast  out  into  the  earth,  and  his  angels 
were  cast  out  with  him." 

Here,  Doctor,  is  a  description  of  the  person  of 
satan.  He  is  a  gentlemanly  looking  person,  with 
seven  heads,  and  ten  horns ;  and  a  tail  so  long  that 


276  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

he  can  enfold  with  it  a  third  part  of  the  stars  of 
heaven,  as  easily  as  the  full  grown  Anaconda  can 
enfold  the  horse  and  his  rider.  Just  think,  upon 
your  literal  hypothesis  of  the  personality  of  satan, 
what  a  length  of  tail  he  has.  The  stars  are  countless 
millions  of  miles  apart,  and  of  these  there  are  many 
thousands,  and^  the  devil,  with  his  tail,  drew,  or,  if 
you  take  it  as  a  prophecy,  is  to  draw  a  third  part  of 
them  with  one  swoop  to  the  earth  1  If  all  this  is 
literal,  as  it  must  be  if  the  devil  is  a  real  person,  we 
should  treat  him  civilly,  lest,  if  we  should  offend  him, 
he  should  take  our  earth  as  a  very  little  thing  in  a 
single  fold  of  his  tail,  and  drag  it  in  an  instant  be- 
yond the  verge  of  the  solar  system,  and  cast  it  off 
into  void. 

If  you  charge  us  here  with  ridiculing  the  Scrip- 
tures, we  kindly  and  respectfully  retort  the  charge. 
You  force  unnatural  and  ludicrous  constructions 
upon  the  Scriptures,  which  turn  them  into  ridicule. 
You  concede  that  the  service  to  which  your  theology 
puts  the  Scriptures  has  driven  into  semi-infidelity  so 
good  a  man  as  Rev.  Theodore  Parker  ;  and  you  are 
aware  that  he  is  but  one  of  many  thousands  of  in- 
stances of  the  like  character.  Yet  you  take  no 
admonition  from  these  terrible  effects  of  such  treat- 
ment of  the  sacred  record,  to  study  it  anew,  whether 
these  things  are  so.  Our  earnest  endeavor  is,  by 
exploding  false  interpretations,  and  promoting  a  just 
understanding  of  the  Scriptures,  to  promote  a  devout 
love  and  enlightened  reverence  for  their  beautiful 
and  heavenly  teachings. 


fcEPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  277 

The  writer  of  the  book  of  Revelation  had  no  appre- 
hension that  these  visionary  scenic  descriptions; 
which  all  had  a  proper  significance  as  such  in  rela- 
tion to  the  operations  of  principles  and  powers 
among  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  and  in  the  kingdom 
of  the  Messiah,  would  ever  be  taken  by  any  intellec- 
tual being  as  literal  descriptions  of  real  persons  and 
things.  Nor  could  any  inspired  speaker  or  writer, 
unless  it  were  by  an  inspiration  of  the  foresight  of 
the  lamentable  defection  of  the  church  in  later  ages, 
have  imagined  that  they  should  be  understood  in  any 
case,  except  by  way  of  epithet  to  human  beings,  as 
meaning  by  the  devil  and  satan  a  personal  being, 
Let  us  lay  aside  unworthy  prejudice,  and  look  for 
truth  on  this  subject. 

By  fallen  angels,  the  Doctor  means,  of'course,  per- 
sonal devils,  having  one  mighty  leader,  called  by  way 
of  eminence,  the  Devil,  Satan,  arid  Beelzebub.  For 
the  fallen  angels  would  be  of  but  little  service  to  the 
popular  theology  if  they  were  not  devils,  tempters, 
and  eternal  tormentors.  Our  inquiry  under  this  head 
must  consequently  be  directed  in  the  main  to  the 
Scripture  teachings  concerning  the  devil  and  satan. 
A  brief  notice,  however,  must  be  taken  of  the  fall  of 
angels,  this  being  the  phraseology  in  which  our 
opponent  puts  the  point,  and  in  which  the  subject  is 
couched  in  the  one  single  passage  of  Scripture  on 
which  he  rests  his  whole  position.  And  we  are 
brought  here  into  very  narrow  quarters ;  for  this 
passage  in  Peter,  with  the  corresponding  one  in 
24 


278  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

Jude  who  is  generally  supposed  to  have  copied  from 
Peter,  thus  making  both  passages  virtually  one,  is  the 
only  case  in  which  the  fall  of  angels  is  spoken  of  in 
the  Scriptures.  To  be  sure  it  may  be  urged  that  the 
passage  just  quoted  from  Revelation^  of  the  dragon 
being  cast  out  of  heaven,  and  his  angels  with  him,  is 
another  instance  parallel  with  our  opponent's  quota- 
tion from  Peter  and  Jude.  But  this  does  not  relate 
to  the  same  event,  The  angels  in  Peter  are  repre- 
sented as  having  been  recreant  to  some  sacred  trust ; 
but  the  dragon  and  his  angels  are  represented  as 
having  assaulted  heaven  from  an  already  existing 
dragon  character.  Again,  in  Peter,  the  sinning 
angels  were  cast  down  to  Tartarus^  for  this  is  the 
original  word  rendered  kdl  in  that  place,  and  it  is  the 
only  instance  of  its  occurrence  in  the  Bible; — but  in 
the  other  case,  the  dragon  and  his  angels  were  cast 
out  of  heaven  into  the  earth.  And  yet  again,  when 
the  dragon,  the  devil  and  satan,  was  cast  out  of 
heaven  into  the  earth,  he  is  said  to  have  been  over- 
come by  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  and  the  testimony 
of  the  saints,  who  shouted  praise  to  God  that  the 
accuser  of  their  brethren  was  cast  down.  All  this 
involves  the  conditions,  that  when  this*  expulsion 
from  whatever  is  here  meant  by  heaven  took  place, 
the  earth  was  here,  and  was  inhabited,  and  the  blood 
of  Christ  had  been  shed,  and  his  church  militant  was 
in  being  and  in  action.  This  event,  therefore,  was 
not  the  one  which,  in  theological  fable,  transpired 
before  the  earth  was  made,  to  Lave  a  devil  in  readi- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  279 

ness  to  visit  God's  new  made  children  on  the  earth 
the  first  day  of  their  being,  to  circumvent  their  very 
infancy,  and  effectuate  their  ruin. 

No,  this  scenic  representation  of  the  war,  and  the 
fall  of  the  dragon,  can  afford  our  friend  no  support 
in  his  theory  of  the  conversion  of  angels  to  devils. 
Where,  then,  do  we  find  the  history  of  such  a  fall? 
There  is,  I  believe,  but  one  other  passage  which  has 
been  appropriated  to  the  use  of  supporting  such  a 
theory,  and  that  we  quoted  in  Section  VI,  of  the  pre- 
ceding Chapter  of  this  Reply,  when  discussing  the 
Bible  use  of  hades.  It  is  Isa.  xiv.  12.  "  How  art 
thou  fallen  from  heaven,  0  Lucifer,  son  of  the  morn- 
ing ! '  This  has  really  been  quoted,  by  Doctors  and 
teachers  in  the  church,  as  supporting  the  theological 
fable  of  the  fall  of  the  archangel  of  heaven,  or,  as  Mil- 
ton styles  him,  Generalissimo  of  heaven,  into  the  estate 
of  Generalissimo  of  devils.  But  the  reading  of  the 
same  verse  out,  spoils  this  magnificent  falsehood. 
The  next  words  are,  "  how  art  thou  cut  down  to  the 
ground  which  didst  weaken  the  nations  ! '  So  this 
relates  to  the  fall  of  some  monarch  who  had  weak- 
ened the  nations  before  his  fall,  but  could  no  more 
work  mischief  afterwards.  Whereas  our  Doctor's 
mighty  fallen  angel  does  all  his  mischief  since  his  fall. 
But  the  reading  of  verse  4th  of  this  chapter  sets  the 
matter  in  its  true  light,  and  informs  us  who  this  fallen 
dignitary  was.  "  Thou  shalt  take  up  this  proverb 
against  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  say,  How  hath  the 
oppressor  ceased!  the  golden  city  ceased  I"  It  is  a 


280  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

prophetic  description  given  before  the  event,  of  the 
fall  of  the  king  of  Babylon,  and  of  his  realm. 

Accordingly  we  find  ourselves  shut  up  to  this  pas- 
sage in  Peter,  copied  by  Jude,  for  our  information  on 
the  fall  of  angels.  The  following  is  the  passage,  as 
written  in  both  Peter  and  Jude,  and  as  quoted  by  my 
opponent,  (and  it  is  all  lie  has  quoted),  to  his  third 
great  position : 

Peter  says  (2  Pet.  ii.  4),  "  God  spared  not  the  angels  that  sinned, 
but  cast  them  down  to  hell,  and  delivered  them  into  chains  of 
darkness,  to  be  reserved  unto  judgment."  Jude  says,  (6)  "And 
the  angels  which  kept  not  their  first  estate,  but  left  their  own  hab- 
itation, he  hath  reserved  in  everlasting  chains  under  darkness  unto 
the  judgment  of  the  great  day." 

Now  as  this  is  our  opponent's  only  proof-text  for 
his  theory  of  fallen  angels,  he  must  make  the  most  of 
it  he  fairly  can.  But,  making  the  most  of  it  possible, 
making  any  thing  of  it,  either  as  a  piece  of  sacred 
history,  or  as  a  quotation  from  a  fabulous  book,  it 
cannot  be  made  to  apply  to  the  Orthodox  theory. 
For  these  angels  referred  to  by  Peter  and  Jude,  on 
sinning,  or  leaving  their  own  habitation  or  sphere  of 
duty,  were  cast  down  into  Tartarus,  and  held  there  in 
chains,  unto  the  great  judgment  specified.  This  refers 
to  an  entirely  different  set  of  apostates  from  my  op- 
ponent's fallen  angels.  For  the  latter,  composing  the 
family  of  devils  with  Satan  at  their  head,  while  the 
Orthodox  "  judgment  of  the  great  day"  is  yet  far  in 
the  future,  have,  ever  since  the  morn  of  creation,  had 
full  possession  and  free  range  of  all  the  earth,  as  uni- 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  281 

versally  present  as  the  circumambient  air,  and  as  un- 
trammelled as  the  winds.  And  not  only  so,  but  this 
Satan  of  my  opponent,  with  his  tribe,  has  been  able 
to  institute  and  conduct  a  successful  warfare  in  this 
field  of  operation-,  against  the  Deity,  for  the  govern- 
ment and  possession  of  the  human  family,  God's  own 
children,  —  a  warfare  so  successful  as  to  have  wrested 
from  the  great  Father  almost  the  entire  kingdom,  and, 
thus  far,  gained  possession  of  almost  the  whole  fam- 
ily, and  secured  his  title  to  them  as  his,  so  effectually 
that  the  judgment  of  the  great  day  shall  pronounce 
and  seal  them  his  forever.  It  is  certain,  therefore, 
that,  whatever  the  apostate  angels  of  Peter  and  Jude 
were,  they  were  not  the  Orthodox  tribe  of  devils,  be- 
cause they  were  thrust  down  into  Tartarus,  and  held 
there  in  chains  unto  the  judgment.""'  So  that  our  op- 
ponent is  left  without  a  single  passage  in  all  the  Bible 
referring  to  his  species  of  fallen  angels,  or  to  the  ori- 
gin of  his  Devil: 

*  Into  this  perfect  wreck  of  ideas  the  amiable  Dr.  Watts  fills,  when 
he  sin^s,  Hymn  44,  i>.  ii. ,  speaking  ot  the  hell  of  "  immortal  pains," — 

'*  There  Satan,  the  first  sinner,  lies, 
And  roars,  and  biles  his  iron  bauds; 
Iti  vain  the  rebel  strives  to  rise, 
Crushed  with  the  weight  of  both  thy  hands." 

"What  a  monstrosity  of  intellectual  conception  !  Satan  lyins:  in  the 
prison  of  hell,  "far  iu  the  deep,"  held  in  "  iron  bands"  which  he  bites 
but  cannot  break,  and  from  the  toils  of  whLh  he  vainly  strives  to  rise, 
and,  more  than  this,  held  and  crushed  down  with  the  infinite  weight  of 
both  the  Almighty's  hands;  and  yet  this  same  Satan,  all  this  while, 
roaming  freely  all  over  this  world,  and  subverting  God's  government, 
defying  his  power,  and  capturing,  and  sealing  as  his  own  forever,  God's 
children.  llo\v  constantly  we  are  reminded,  in  these  investigations,  of 
•what  we  have  repeatedly  remarked  in  substance,  that  great  and  good 
men  cannot  do  otherwise  than  make  themselves  perfect  fools,  when  they 
commit  themselves  to  the  maintenance  of  the  theological  chimei-as  of 
the  dark  and  semi-barba  ous  ages.  Pardon  this  apparently  uncouth 
expression  of  feeling;  —  how  could  we  restrain  it? 

24* 


282  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

This  is  a  sufficient  reply  to  Dr.  Adams  on  this 
point ;  but  as  we  are  interested  to  show  what  is  true 
as  well  as  what  is  not  true,  we  will  inquire,  with  brev- 
ity, concerning  the  probable  meaning  of  this  proof- 
text.  And  here  we  will  recall  the  reader's  mind  to 
the  fact,  that  the  word  angel  applies  to  any  messenger, 
whether  human  or  spiritual.  Newcomh's  translation, 
and  the  London  Improved  Version  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  these  quoting  from  "  Simpson's  Essays," 
give  the  following  rendering  to  this  passage  ;  —  "  The 
messengers  who  watched  not  duly  over  their  own 
principalities,  but  deserted  their  proper  habitation,  he 
kept  with  perpetual  chains  under  darkness  (punished 
them  with  judicial  blindness  of  mind)  unto  the  judg- 
ment of  a  great  day."  And  they  add  this  note : 
"  Alluding  to  the  falsehood  and  punishment  of  the 
spies,  Numbers  xiv.  See  Simpson's  Essays,  p.  210. 
Perhaps,  however,  the  writer  may  refer  to  some  fan- 
ciful account  of  the  fail  of  angels  contained  in  the 
apocryphal  book  which  lay  before  him,  without  mean- 
ing to  vouch  for  that  fact  any  more  than  for  the  inci- 
dent mentioned  in  verse  9.  He  might  introduce  it 
merely  to  illustrate  his  argument.  At  any  rate,  a  fact 
so  important  is  not  to  be  admitted  upon  such  preca- 
rious evidence."  See  Newcomb's  New  Testament, 
and  London  Improved  Version,  in  loco. 

In  confirmation  of  this  general  view  taken  by  those 
learned  translators  and  commentators,  we  call  the 
reader's  attention  to  the  circumstance,  that  this  is  not 
offered  by  the  apostle  as  an  original  historical  entry, 
or  a  new  revelation.  It  is  a  reference,  for  illustration 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  283 

of  the  main  subject  of  the  chapter,  to  examples,  either 
in  history  or  story,  with  which  the  people  were  sup- 
posed to  be  familiar.  He  describes  certain  false 
teachers  who  had  crept  into  the  Christian  church, 
who  were  depraved,  self-willed,  and  disorderly, — 
treating  with  contempt  all  rules  of  order,  and  all  au- 
thority in  Church  or  State.  He  urges  the  considera- 
tion that,  however  they  might  contemn  human  author- 
ity, the  Divine  authority  they  could  not  invalidate. 
They  should  be  holden  to  a  strict  accountability  to 
the  moral  government  and  operative  judgment  of 
God.  The  whole  tenure  of  the  connection  shows  that 
the  apostle  had  in  mind  the  system  of  God's  ever  per- 
fect moral  government,  and  operative  judgment  as  a 
branch  of  it,  together  with  the  certainty  of  accumu- 
lated evil  in  due  time  if  sin  is  persisted  in,  which  we 
so  fully  explained  and  illustrated  in  Sections  I.  and  If. 
of  our  preceding  Chapter.  Speaking  of  those  false 
teachers,  he  says,  "  And  through  covetousness  shall 
they  with  feigned  words  make  merchandise  of  yon, 
whose  judgment  now  of  a  long  time  lingercth  not, 
and  their  damnation  (condemnation  or  punishment) 
slumbereth  not."  What  a  direct  expression  we  have 
here  of  the  theory  of  judgment  which  we  have  ex- 
plained as  noted  above.  And  he  proceeds  to  illus- 
trate :  —  "  For  if  God  spared  not  the  angels  that  sinned, 
but  cast  them  down  to  hell,  (Tartarus),  and  delivered 
them  in  chains  of  darkness,  to  be  reserved  unto  judg- 
ment; and  spared  not  the  old  world;  ....  and  turn- 
ing the  cities  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  into  ashes, 
condemned  them  with  an  overthrow,  making  them  an 


284  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

ensample  unto  those  that  after  should  live  ungodly  ; 
and  delivered  just  Lot;  —  the  Lord  knoweth  how  to 
deliver  the  godly  out  of  temptation,  and  to  reserve 
the  unjust  unto  the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished." 

We  have  seen  that  the  day  of  judgment,  in  this 
special  sense,  to  any  nation,  city,  or  individual,  is  the 
time  and  occasion  when  a  persistent  course  of  wrong 
eventuates  in  special  and  aggravated  calamity.  The 
subject  is  fully  explained  in  our  discussion  of  the 
"  treasuring  up  of  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath," 
in  the  Sections  above  referred  to. 

From  the  foregoing  quotation  of  the  context  it  is 
seen  that  what  is  said  of  the  sinning  angels,  is  a  refer- 
ence to  some  record  or  story  extant.  Where  is  there 
a  record  of  apostate  angels  or  messengers,  to  which 
Peter  may  have  made  reference  ?  If  he  referred  to  any 
event  of  Scripture  record,  that  adduced  by  Simpson, 
Newcomb  and  others,  the  defection  of  the  spies  sent  to 
Canaan,  who  were  subsequently  destroyed  by  a  plague, 
is  most  probably  the  one.  But,  from  the  circumstance 
that  the  word  Tartarus  is  here  used  as  the  prison  of 
the  false  messengers,  which  is  not  an  Old  Testament 
word,  and  is  in  no  other  instance  used  in  the  New 
Testament,  we  are  rather  inclined  to  the  opinion  that 
the  quotation  was  made  from  an  apocryphal  book,  for 
the  purpose  of  illustrating  a  principle  by  reference 
to  the  common  sense  of  mankind,  as  developed  in 
the  very  fabulous  poetry  of  the  age.  The  principle 
illustrated  is  that  of  the  strict  accountability  of 
moral  beings  to  the  moral  government  of  God,  whose 
awards  even  then,  and  for  those  very  false  teachers 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  285 

who  were  the  subject  of  discourse,  lingered  not  for  a 
long  time. 

Seeing  now  that  Dr.  Adams  finds  no  account  of  the 
origin  of  the  Orthodox  Devil  and  Satan,  we  will  cast 
a  look  into  the  Bible  with  reference  to  his  existence. 
Originate  as  he  might,  by  transmutation  of  a  good 
angel,  or  by  immediate  creation,  or  by  self-existence, 
co-eternal  with  the  good  God,  is  there  any  Bible 
account  of  his  existence  at  all? 

There  is  no  appearance  of  such  a  being  in  the 
history  of  the  first  human  temptation.  The  serpent, 
the  most  subtle  of  all  the  beasts  of  the  field,  is  there 
introduced  as  the  agent  of  seduction.  To  say  that 
there  was  a  pre-existent  Devil  that  conceafed  himself 
in  the  serpent  and  made  him  the  medium  of  his  com- 
munication, is  entirely  gratuitous.  It  is  supposing 
the  agency  of  a  being  that  has  no  historical  existence. 
And  this  gratuitous  assumption  makes  the  serpent 
the  visible  speaker  to  the  woman.  And  it  is  suppos- 
ing an  inferiority  of  the  female  sex  which  we  cannot 
admit,  to  assume  that,  while  the  man  had  discernment 
enough  to  name  all  the  animals  according  to  their 
respective  natures,  the  woman  was  so  stupid  as  to 
believe  that  the  snake  was  a  rational,  social  being, 
capable  of  being  her  teacher  !  The  idea  outrages 
common  sense.  There  was  never  a  writer,  from 
Adam  to  this  day,  who  would  introduce  a  serpent  as 
holding  part  in  a  conversation,  without  meaning  to  be 
understood,  and  knowing  that  he  would  be  understood, 
as  using  a  metaphor  or  allegory,  just  as  obviously  as 
Jotham's  parable  of  the  trees  choosing  them  a  king 


286  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

was  allegprical.  As  the  serpent  is  an  emblem  of  wis- 
dom, and  of'tener  of  low  mischievous  cunning,  it  is 
here  made  a  strong  metaphor  of  that  deceitful  lust 
which  lures  to  sin.  St.  James  says,  "  Every  man  is 
tempted  when  he  is  drawn  away  of  his  own  lust,  and 
enticed/'' 

With  regard  to  the  word  satan  t  it  is  the  Hebrew 
term  untranslated,  and  in  English,  is  enmity  or  an  ad- 
versary. Hebrew  scholars  tell  us  that  the  word  Sit- 
nakj  Gen.  xxvi.  21,  is  a  form  of  the  same  Hebrew 
word ;  and  this  is  the  first  instance  of  its  occurrence 
in  the  Bible.  It  is  appropriated  as  the  name  of  a 
well,"because  of  the  strife  and  hostility  between  dif- 
ferent herdsmen  about  the  well. 

The  next  occurrence  of  the  word  satan  in  the 
Bible  is  in  Num.  xxii.  22  ;  where  it  describes  the 
good  angel  of  the  Lord  who  resisted  Balaam,  and  is 
translated  adversary.  "  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord 
stood  in  the  way  for  an  adversary  (a  satan)  against 
him." 

Third  instance,  1  Sam.  xix.  4  ;  where  it  is  applied 
to  David,  whom  the  princess  of  the  Philistines  pro- 
posed to  eject  from  amongst  them,  lest  he  should  be 
an  adversary  (  a  satan)  unto  them. 

Fourth  instance,  2  Sam.  xix.  22,  in  the  plural  num- 
ber, and  applied  by  David  to  the  sons  of  Zeruiah, 
asking  why  they  should  be  adversaries  (satans)  unto 
him. 

In  the  same  manner,  descriptive  of  different  men 
in  their  relations  to  other  men,  is  the  word  used  in  1 
Kings  v.  4  ;  xi.  14,  23,  25  ;  Fs.  xxxviii.  20  ;  Ixxi.  13 ; 
cix.  4,  20,  29. 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS. 


287 


In  1  Chron.  xxi.  1,  it  is  said,  "  And  Satan  stood  up 
against  Israel;  and  provoked  David  to  number  Israel. " 
"We  suppose  the  circumstance  that  our  translators 
were  pleased  to  leave  the  Hebrew  word  untranslated 
in  this  case,  which  is  the  first  instance  of  their  leav- 
ing it  so,  is  not  a  circumstance  which  will  weigh  with 
minds  disposed  to  treat  the  Scriptures  seriously,  to 
call  up  out  of  nonentity  such  a  being  as  our  Doctor 
figures  in  his  mind  for  the  canonical  Satan.  Jf  the 
word  had  been  here  put  into  English  as  in  other 
cases  cited,  it  would  have  read,  "  And  an  adversary 
stood  up  against  Israel/'  &c.  The  adversary  may 
have  been  some  member  of  David's  court ;  or  it  may 
have  been  his  own  royal  vanity. 

Again  the  word  stands  in  its  Hebrew  form  inZech, 
iii.  1,  2.  "  And  he  showed  me  Joshua  the  high  priest 
standing  before  the  angel  of  the  Lord,  and  Satan 
standing  at  his  right  hand  to  resist  him.  And  the 
Lord  said  unto  Satan,  the  Lord  rebuke  thee,  O 
Satan."  This  describes  a  visionary  scene,  in  which 
the  prophet  was  shown  an  adversary  at  the  right 
hand  of  Joshua,  thus  describing  the  method  or  order 
of  the  Jewish  court  of  trial,  where  the  adversary  or 
accuser  was  placed  at  the  right  hand  of  the  accused 
that  he  might  be  confronted  by  him. 

This  completes  the  catalogue  of  cases  where  the 
word  satan  occurs  in  the  original  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, except  the  book  of  Job.  It  is  used  as  the 
name  of  a  well,  of  the  good  angel  of  God,  of  David, 
of  the  sons  of  Zeruiah,  of  a  member,  probably,  of 
David's  court,  and  of  an  accuser  in  Zechariah's  vision 
of  a  court  scene.  It  is  really  calculated  to  try  the 


288  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

charity  and  weary  the  patience  of  one  who  loves 
God's  word,  to  see  the  Orthodox  theory  of  the  Devil 
and  Satan  palmed  upon  the  church,  in  this  age  of 
Bible  reading,  as  a  Bible  doctrine. 

By  the  way,  speaking  of  the  Devil,  this  word  is 
only  used  in  the  Old  Testament  four  times,  always  in 
the  plural,  and  for  idols.  The  places  are  Lev.  xvii. 
7 ;  Deut.  xxii.  17  ;  2  Chron.  xi.  15  ;  and  Ps.  cvi.  37. 

But  what  is  the  Satan  of  the  book  of  Job  ?  Is 
there  not  proof  here  of  the  popular  theory?  No,  it 
Is  all  the  reverse.  Let  any  man  of  fair  intellect  read 

•> 

this  Epic  poem  through  with  the  critical  attention 
with  which  he  would  read  any  other  book  put  into 
his  hand  for  perusal  and  review,  and  he  will  renounce 
the  popular  theory  concerning  Satan  if  he  had  held  it 
before.  He  will  see  that  theory  to  be  full  of  irrever- 
ence and  impiety.  It  makes  the  book  of  Job  repre- 
sent that  a  great  and  wise  fallen  angel,  omnipresent, 
knowing  the  hearts  of  all  men,  so  well  as  to  be  able 
to  take  the  best  advantage  of  their  states  of  mind  to 
wield  his  arts  and  tempt  their  souls  all  over  the  world 
the  same  moment,  knowing  of  course  that  Job  was 
an  honest  man,  and  knowing  that  God,  of  infinite 
prescience,  could  not  be  deceived,  did  really  under- 
take to  persuade  God  to  believe  that  Job  was  a 
hypocrite.  And  it  makes  it  represent  that  the  allwise 
God,  knowing  the  character  of  this  fallen  angel,  and 
of  Job,  .sent  all  those  sore  afflictions  upon  his  right- 
eous servant  just  for  the  sake  of  convincing  that  all- 
knowing  adversary  of  what  God  knew  that  he  knew 
perfectly  well  already,  viz:  that  Job  was  not  a 


REPLY   TO    DR.    ADAMS.  289 

hypocrite.  It  makes  the  whole  thing  a  stultifying 
farce. 

But  coming  to  the  book  of  Job  without  the  least 
Bible  information  of  any  such  personage  as  the  Satan 
of  modern  Orthodoxy,  and  of  course  bringing  no 
such  creature  along  in  our  minds,  the  book  of  Job  is 
found  to  be  rich  in  sentiment,  harmonious  in  all  its 
conceptions,  and  beautiful  and  reverent  in  its  poetic 
personifications,  which  are  common  in  all,  and 
especially  in  ancient  poetry. 

What  is  the  adversary  that  goes  up  and  down  in 
human  nature,  and  breaks  up  the  quiet  of  the  virtu- 
ous and  the  peace  of  society  ?  It  is  envy.  It  not 
unfrequently  goes  in  even  with  worshippers  when 
they  appear  before  the  Lord,  or  in  the  place  of  devo- 
tion. And  it  is  especially  active  when  it  sees  a 
neighbor  in  the  enjoyment  of  a  high  replication  for 
excellence.  It  always  suggests  that  all  his  reputed 
excellence  is  heartless  and  false,  and  that  if  he  should 
be  brought  into  such  straightened  circumstances  as 
some  other  folks  are  placed  in,  his  hypocrisy  would 
be  manifest  to  all.  This  is  precisely  the  adversary 
of  the  book  of  Job.  And  it  pleased  the  Lord,  as  it  is 
sometimes  his  will,  to  so  order  his  providence  as  to 
subject  the  good  man  to  the  very  trials  which  envy 
had  whispered  would  prove  his  defection  ;  but  he 
maintains  his  integrity,  the  mean  spirit  of  envy  is 
shamed,  the  same  trials  result  in  the  good  man's  own 
welfare ;  so  that  all  accords  with  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  God,  and  redounds  to  the  praise  of  his 
glory.  In  this  light  the  book  of  Job  is  a  record  of 
25 


290  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

i 

wisdom  and  beauty;  while,  by  making  its  Satan  the 
Orthodox  fallen  Generalissimo  of  heaven,  it  is  turned, 
as  we  have  seen,  into  perfect  nonsense.  This  per- 
sonification of  the  evil  spirit  of  envy,  and  giving  it  a 
part  in  colloquy  with  the  Governor  of  the  world  as 
questioning  his  justice  and  accusing  his  servant,  is  in 
the  same  impressive  style  of  instruction  as  that 
which  makes  the  trees  to  hold  an  election,  the 
valleys  to  sing,  the  hills  to  rejoice,  and  wisdom  to 
build  her  house,  provide  her  entertainment,  and  call 
in  her  guests. 

With  regard  to  the  New  Testament  usage  of  the 
words  devil  and  satan,  it  is  unnecessary  to  undertake 
a  notice  of  all  the  cases  of  their  occurrence.  The 
Greek  diabolos,  which  is  rendered  devil  in  the  New 
Testament,  is  synonymous  with  the  Hebrew  satan, 
denoting  an  impostor  or  enemy.  Both  words  are 
used  in  the  New  Testament  as  the  latter  is  in  the  Old, 
sometimes  descriptive  of  a  person,  and  sometimes 
personifying  evil  principles.  Jesus  said  to  Peter, 
when  the  latter  betrayed  views  adverse  to  the  spirit 
and  purpose  of  his  mission,  "  Get  thee  behind  me, 
Satan."  And  of  Judas  he  said  to  the  twelve,  "  You 
twelve  have  I  chosen,  and  one  of  you  is  a  devil." 
Sometimes,  however,  Jesus,  in  conversation  with  the 
unbelieving  Jews,  uses  the  names  Satan  and  Beelze- 
bub, as  in  the  character  in  which  they  existed  in 
their  heathenized  opinions.  They  believed  the  air  to 
be  filled  with  demons,  which  are  also  rendered  devils 
in  the  New  Testament,  which  they  thought  to  be  the 
ghosts  of  wicked  men,  delighting  to  take  up  their 


EPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS  291 

abode  in  the  persons  of  mankind,  and  to  inflict  upon 
them  various  physical  and  mental  disorders.  And 
these  bad  a  prince  called  Beelzebub,  and  Satan. 
And  Jesus,  when  arguing  with  them  on  their  own 
ground  in  reference  to  powers  they  ascribed  to  their 
Satan,  uses  the  name  simply  as  you  would  use  the 
names  Neptune,  Mars  and  Jupiter,  in  conversation  with 
a  people  believing  in  and  worshipping  deities  under 
those  names.  But  as  it  respects  the  once  heavenly 
archangel,  and  now  omniscient  and  nearly  omnipotent 
personal  Devil  of  the  endless  punishment  theory, 
such  a  being  is  never  presented  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment any  more  than  in  the  Old.  Take  any  passage 
in  the  Gospel  histories,  where  the  devil  or  a  satan  is 
represented  as  acting  a  part,  and  attempt  to  follow 
him  through  his  part  in  the  capacity  of  the  canonical 
Satan,  and  the  idea  explodes  itself  as  effectually  as  in 
the  trial  we  made  on  the  book  of  Job.  Take,  for 
instance,  the  account  of  the  temptations  of  Jesus. 
The  devil  is  represented  as  taking  Jesus  up,  and 
placing  him  at  one  time  on  a  high  mountain,  and  at 
another  time  on  the  pinnacle  of  the  temple,  and  mak- 
ing to  him  certain  propositions.  Who  really  believes 
that  this  account  was  intended  to  describe  a  personal 
being,  with  a  long  tail  and  cloven  foot,  such  as  the 
Puritan  pulpits  and  mothers  used  to  frighten  children 
with,  as  taking  up  Jesus  in  his  claws  and  bearing  him 
away  through  the  air,  and  placing  him  literally  on 
the  pinnacle  of  the  temple,  and  there  attempting  to 
persuade  him  to  worship  himself,  that  is,  the  Devil. 
Why,  if  there  were  any  such  a  wise  and  knowing 


292  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Devil,  he  would  know  better  than  to  think  of  tempt 
ing  you  or  me  in  such  a  way  as  this.  When  you 
glance  at  the  affair  in  this  light,  the  whole  thing 
appears  farcical  and  ludicrous.  But  take  the  account 
as  embracing  a  personification  of  the  principles  of 
ambition  and  worldly  fame,  which  his  possession  of 
miraculous  powers  would  naturally  present  before  his 
mind  as  available,  just  as  they  did  the  changing  of 
stones  into  bread,  and  all  is  beautifullv  and  consis- 

/  •• 

tently  instructive.  And  so,  all  through  the  New 
Testament,  take  these  words,  when  not  applied  to 
human  beings  as  in  Jesus'  address  to  Peter  and  to 
Judas,  as  personifications  of  adverse  and  delusive 
suggestions  or  principles,  and  you  find  all  clear  and 
consistent. 

To  this  conclusion  the  learned  Professor  Bush  has 
come,  after  a  mature  re-examination  of  this  whole 
subject.  He  has,  until  the  recent  development  of 
sympathy  with  the  Swedenborgians,  held  the  highest 
position  in  the  Orthodox  School,  and  now  his  general 
theory  would  find  it  convenient  to  retain  the  Satan 
of  that  School.  But  the  de  novo  criticism  of  the  Bible 
teachings  in  relation  to  the  subject  has  brought  him 
out  in  this  frank  and  decided  avowal  of  opinion,  that 
the  Satan  of  the  Scriptures  is  a  personification  of  the 
principle  of  evil. 

In  the  New  Testament,  when  the  word  devil  is 
used  for  beings  supposed  to  take  up  their  abode  in 
living  persons,  the  Greek  term  is  demon,  meant  to 
designate  the  ghosts  of  wicked  men  deceased,  in- 
festing the  atmosphere,  and  inflicting  injuries  upon 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS. 


293 


mankind.  The  inspired  servants  of  God  have  given 
no  sanction  to  this  foolish  superstition.  It  would 
not  have  comported  with  the  highest  success  of  their 
mission  to  be  frittering  away  their  time,  and  multi- 
plying the  entanglements  of  their  labors,  with  petty 
disputes  about  all  the  foolish  whims  of  the  people, 
one  by  one.  They  made  direct  attacks  upon  the 
most  prominent  moral  wrongs,  and  promulgated  and 
established  the  great  system  of  faith  in  God's  univer- 
sal and  fatherly  government,  and  purpose  of  grace, 
which  should  kill  out  these  thousands  of  errors  and 
superstitions,  just  as  the  effective  panacea  which  puts 
the  vital  functions  all  in  healthful  order  will  kill  out 
the  cutaneous  festers.  Take  any  of  the  accounts  of 
demoniacal  possessions,  and  attempt  to  look  at  them 
in  the  light  of  a  canonized  theory,  and  it  will  make  you 
laugh  yourself  out  of  that  theory  entirely.  Take,  for 
instance,  that  of  the  maniac  that  dwelt  among  the 
tombs.  Just  imagine  that  there  were  a  legion  of 
separate  personal  beings  (we  know  not  whether  our 
friend  regards  them  as  of  the  tribe  of  his  fallen 
angels)  all  living  in  the  body  of  that  man,  as  a  swarm 
of  bees  in  a  hive,  and  all  talking  with  Jesus  out 
through  his  mouth,  and  nostrils,  and  ears,  and  the 
pores  of  his  skin, —  what  an  apparition  !  You  don't 
believe  that  thing.  You  slide  along,  half  asleep,  in 
the  impression  that  you  believe  in  the  heathen  doc- 
trine of  demons,  but  have  never  opened  your  eyes  to 
look  at  it.  When  you  do  so,  it  will  vanish. 

Deranged   people  usually  entertain  the   opinions, 
especially  -on  marvellous  subjects,  which  are  preva- 
25* 


294  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

lent  in  their  time.  The  maniac  of  course  thought 
himself  possessed  of  demons,  and  all  his  conversation 
with  Jesus  was  consequently  shaped  accordingly.  And 
it  was  his  conversation  that  was  ascribed  to  the 
demons.  This  was  the  common  way  of  reporting. 
In  Luke  xi.  14,  we  read,  "  And  he  was  casting  out  a 
demon,  and  it  was  dumb.  And  it  came  to  pass  when 
the  demon  was  gone  out,  the  dumb  spake."  Here 
the  dumbness  is  ascribed  to  the  demon;  but  it  was 
the  man  that  was  dumb  ;  and  he  it  was  that  spake 
when  the  demon,  or  the  infirmity,  was  removed. 

The  enlightened  and  reverent  reader  of  the  New 
Testament,  sees  Jesus  in  his  work  of  love  and  power, 
healing  all  manner  of  diseases,  without  wrangling 
about  the  causes  of  the  diseases,  or  the  names  by 
which  they  were  commonly  called.  The  writers  of 
the  Gospel  histories  set  down  the  deeds  performed  in 
the  language  of  the  country.  It  was  not  their  office 
as  faithful  and  trust-worthy  historians,  to  wander  off 
and  distract  their  narratives  with  discussions  of  those 
incidental  questions  of  causes  and  cognomens.  There 
is  a  disease  amongst  us  called  St.  Anthony's  fire; 
another  called  St.  Vitus9  dance;  and  another  called 
Lunacy,  i.  e.  Moonstruck.  We  familiarly  use  these 
names  of  diseases,  without  any  explanation,  and  yet 
we  have  no  apprehension  of  being  understood  to 
ascribe  the  diseases  to  St.  Vitus,  or  St.  Anthony,  or 
the  moon.  Intellectual  and  learned  men  don't  stultify 
themselves,  except  in  matters  of  theology. 

But,  as  it  respects  those  heathenish  doctrines  of 
demons  adopted  by  the  Pharisees,  they  iire  not  left 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  295 

in  the  New  Testament  entirely  to  the  silent  operations 
of  the  Christian  doctrines  for  their  removal, 

St.  Paul  directly  condemns  them.  He  connects  the 
reception  of  "  the  doctrines  of  (or  concerning) 
demons/7  with  apostacy  from  the  Christian  faith.* 

THE  FALL  OF  MAN  Dr.  Adams  associates  with 
the  foil  of  angels,  as  an  argument  for  future  endless 
punishment.  There  is  no  occasion  for  an  extensive 
treatise  on  this  point  in  the  present  discussion.  Our 
friend  does  not  explain  what  he  means  by  the  fall  of 
man,  nor  is  it  easy  to  find  any  settled  position  in  rela- 
tion to  it,  at  the  present  time,  in  the  Trinitarian  School. 
It  is  sufficient  for  us  to  say  here,  that  if  the  fall  of 
man  involves  the  loss  of  his  moral  nature,  so  that  he 
bears  no  moral  relation  to  God  on  which  to  be  based 
moral  obligations,  and  that  he  is  not  susceptible  of 
moral  education,  or  capable  of  receiving  right  moral 
impressions  and  motives, — then  our  discussion  may 
as  well  end  here;  for  in  such  case,  man  is  not  a  moral 
being ;  is  not  a  subject  of  moral  government,  nor 
judgment,  nor  reward  or  punishment,  either  endless 
or  limited.  But  it  is  not  so.  Man  is  everywhere 
treated  in  the  Scriptures  as  a  moral  being,  susceptible 
to  moral  influence  by  appropriate  means,  and  capable 
of  moral  as  well  as  of  intellectual  education. 

But,  as  it  respects  the  fall  of  man,  we  believe  in  all 
the  fall  which  the  Scriptures  denote,  a  fall  into  sin, 
and  into  ten  thousand  errors  and  follies. 

The  Doctor's  argument,  however,  from  this  fall, 
and  from  the  fall  of  angels,  appears  to  us  to  be  entire- 

*  1  Tim.  iv.  1. 


296  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

ly  groundless  and  void.  "We  have  no  occasion  to  fol- 
low him  in  his  effort  at  argument  from  his  assumed 
theory  of  the  fall  of  angels,  since  we  have  found  that 
there  is  no  fact  in  the  theory.  And  his  argument 
against  the  hope  of  ultimate  universal  SLlvation,  from 
the  discouraging  circumstance  that  the  sufferings  in 
hell  of  angels  and  men  for  six  thousand  years  has  not 
reformed  them,  is  of  the  same  weight  that  an  argu- 
ment would  be  if  based  on  Gulliver's  Geograpy  of 
Lilliput.  Yet,  waving  for  the  moment  the  incompe- 
tency  of  the  argument  for  the  want  of  fact  for  its 
basis,  we  will  show  that  our  friend's  argument  is  faulty, 
even  admitting  his  premises.  On  the  assumption  that 
God  has  permitted  angels  to  fall,  and  men  also,  and 
to  remain  in  a  fallen  state,  some  of  them  at  least  six 
thousand  years,  he  infers  that  it  is  just  as  reasonable 
to  believe  that  he  will  abandon  them  to  an  eternity  of 
ruin.  This  is  bad  philosophy.  Means  and  ends, 
though  related,  are  radically  different  things.  The 
parent  inflicts  a  deprivation  upon  his  child  for  his 
profitable  discipline,  which  he  could  not,  consistently 
with  his  love  to  his  child,  continue  through  life,  as  the 
end  of  his  being.  If  there  had  been  angels  and 
human  spirits  in  hades  six  thousand  years,  the  fact 
would  not  have  furnished  the  least  argument  against 
the  hope  of  what  reason  would  infer  from  the  wisdom 
and  love  and  power  of  God,  and  what  we  have  seen 
God's  word  to  promise,  to  wit,  —  the  destruction  of 
hades  in  due  time,  and  the  ultimate  and  universal 
victory  of  life  and  good.*  But  the  reasoning  of  the 

*  Hos.  xiii.  14.     1  Cor.  xv.  54,  55.    EpK  i.  9.  10. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  297 

Doctor  on  the  adaptedness  of  six  thousand  years  or 
more  in  the  hell  of  his  sort,  as  a  purifying  process, 
we  turn  over  to  the  Papists.  The  Bible  is  clear  of 
the  charge  of  any  such  doctrine  of  discipline. 

But  here  is  one  specimen  of  reasoning  employed 
by  the  Doctor  in  this  section  of  his  "  Argument," 
which  we  must  notice  as  we  pass.  He  says : 

If  he  allowed  them  (the  angels)  to  fall  with  a  view  to  some  great 
good  in  their  natures,  suffering  them  in  the  progress  of  their  ex- 
perience, to  rtlin  this  world,  and  bring  in  such  a  fearful  plague  as 
sin  has  been  to  our  race,  all  to  be  compensated  for  in  the  great 
sweep  of  ages  by  this  beneficial  knowledge  of  evil,  we  arc  led  to 
the  conclusion  that  sin  and  suffering  are  the  necessary  means  of 
the  greatest  good.  But  what  manner  of  Supreme  Being  have  we 
here  for  a  Universalist  to  love  and  worship  ?  His  government,  it 
would  seem,  cannot  proceed  without  suffering  a  host  of  angels 
falling  from  their  thrones  in  heaven,  to  pass  through  centuries  of 
sin  and  mischief.  This  seems  neither  benevolent  nor  wise. 

What  does  this  mean  ?  Is  not  the  Doctor  inex- 
cusably at  fault  when  he  undertakes  to  dictate  to 
infinite  wisdom  as  to  the  choice  of  the  best  means  for 
the  greatest  ultimate  good  ?  We  know  that  love,  as 
a  moral  principle  and  affection,  is  the  same  in  God 
and  his  children.  "  For  he  that  dwelleth  in  love 
dwelleth  in  God  and  God  in  him."  And  we  know 
that  love  always  seeks  the  best  good  of  its  objects. 
But  we  do  not  always  know  what  are  the  best  means 
for  the  good  we  wish.  God  knows.  We  know  that 
God,  who  is  love,  seeks  the  best  good  of  all  his 
children.  But  we  do  not  nresume  to  decide  as  to  the 
means.  Now  hear  the  iJoctor  on  the  subject  of 
means.  In  presenting  a  God' "for  a  Universalist  to 


298  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

love  and  worship/'  he  ascribes  to  him  a  good  and 
benevolent  end,  a  regard  to  the  highest  ultimate  good 
of  all  his  rational  creatures  in  all  the  purposes  of  his 
creation  and  government ;  but  his  chosen  means  are 
above  the  Doctor's  comprehension.  To  him  they 
"  seem  neither  benevolent  nor  wise."  "What  then 
seems  to  him  benevolent  and  wise  ?  He  proceeds  to 
inform  us : 

If  God  foresaw  that  he  must  finally  restore  them,  he  would  have 
kept  them  from  falling,  unless  sin  and  misery  are,  under  his  govern- 
ment, the  means  of  the  greatest  good.  If  so,  this  may  be  one  of 
the  cases  in  which  if  a  little  is  good,  more  is  better  ;  and  perhaps 
the  best  interest  of  the  universe  will  be  promoted  by  protracting 
this  sin  and  suffering  indefinitely. 

Ah,  here  we  have  our  friend's  philosophy.  View- 
ing it  as  the  desire  and  purpose  of  the  great  and 
good  Father  to  effectuate  the  highest  ultimate  good 
of  all  his  children,  for  him  to  subject  them  all  to  a 
temporary  discipline  of  evil,  differing  in  duration  and 
degree,  to  eventuate  in  the  greater  universal  good  of 
which  every  individual  is  to  share,  would  not  seem 
benevolent  and  wise.  But  to  subject  one  portion  of 
his  children  to  endless  and  unimitigated  suffering,  as 
a  means  of  enhancing  the  enjoyment  of  the  other 
portion,  that  "  the  best  interests  of  the  universe  may 
be  promoted  ;  by  the  infinite  protraction  of  suffering 
with  a  part,  this  seems  to  him  "  benevolent  and  wise." 
The  former  governing  for  the  good  of  all  by 
means  above  the  Doctor's  comprehension,  he  concedes 
to  us  Universalists  as  ml  object  of  our  love  and 
reverence,  and  we  accept  and  adore  him.  The  other, 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  299 

subjecting  one  portion  to  infinite  suffering  for  the 
greater  enjoyment  of  the  other  portion,  he  claims  as 
the  Orthodox  God ;  and  we  concede  him  to  them  • 
though  it  is  with  sorrow  we  do  it.  We  know  it  does 
not  conduce  to  their  happiness  to  worship  such  an 
ideal  in  their  God.  We  know  that  a  great  many  of 
them  are  benevolent  people,  and  that  they  would 
cheerfully  agree  to  forego  all  the  additional  enjoy- 
ment which  they  might  derive  from  the  infinite  pro- 
traction of  the  misery  of  their  neighbor,  for  the  sake 
of  having  him  come  in.  too,  and  love  and  enjoy  their 
Father  and  his  Father,  and  their  God  and  his  God. 

But  leaving  that  part  of  the  argument  which  relates 
to  those  beings  of  fable,  whom  our  friend  classifies 
under  the  head  of  fallen  angels,  we  will  close  this 
chapter  with  a  remark  on  fallen  men.  That  men  have 
fallen  into  error  and  sin,  is  a  fact  of  universal  obser- 
vation and  experience,  and  of  course,  of  Scripture 
recognition.  But  to  argue  hence  the  eternity  of  evil, 
is  to  sweep  away  every  vestige  of  hope  and  confidence 
in  God.  To  say  that,  if  a  present  evil  is  consistent 
with  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  God,  an  eternity  of 
evil  must  be  alike  consistent  with  his  infinite  wisdom 
and  goodness,  is  to  ignore  every  principle  of  argu- 
ment by  which  to  "  vindicate  the  ways  of  God  to 
men."  It  annihilates  all  ground  of  consolation  in 
trouble,  and  of  Christian  trust  in  the  government  of 
the  Infinite.  And  while  it  puts  an  end  to  reasoning 
by  confounding  reason,  it  ignores  the  whole  Christian 
scheme  pf  revelation.  St.  Paul  says,  (Rom.  viii.  20, 
21.)  "For  the  creature  (creation)  was  made  subject 

«•  .'...,,.'  >  C.'i  ?  I  I  V          * 


300  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

to  vanity,  not  willingly,  but  by  reason  of  him  who 
hath  subjected  the  same  in  hope  ;  because  the  crea- 
ture (creation)  itself  also  shall  be  delivered  from  the 
bondage  of  corruption,  into  the  glorious  liberty  of 
the  children  of  God/'  And  now  we  put  the  question, 
and  we  would  sound  it,  if  we  could,  to  the  uttermost 
borders  of  Christendom,  IS  the  fact,  that  the  creation 
was  made  subject  to  vanity  by  reason  of  him  who 
hath  subjected  the  same  in  hope,  an  argument  that 
the  same  creation  shall  NOT  u  be  delivered  from  the 
bondage  of  corruption  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the 
children  of  God!" 

We  leave  this  significant  question  to  our  learned 
friend,  and  to  all  our  readers,  while  we  pass  on  to  his 
next  proposition. 


CHAPTER     III. 

Argument  from  the  Resurrection. 

WE  have  passed  over  a  few  rather  noteworthy 
expressions  of  Dr.  A.,  thrown  into  the  preceding 
division  of  his  Argument,  but  not  particularly  related 
to  his  main  subject,  which  we  shall  recur  to  for 
remark  when  we  take  up  other  points  of  his  Argument 
which  shall  call  them  in.  In  this  chapter  we  shall 
give  due  attention  to  his  fourth  Proposition,  as  fol- 
lows : — 

IV.  THE  TERMS  USED  WITH  REGARD  TO  THE  RESUR- 
RECTION OP  THE  DEAD,  ARE  PROOFS  OF  EXDLES3  RETRI- 
BUTION. 

The  argument  under  this  head  is  opened  by  quota- 
tions from  the  Child's  Catechism/'  by  Rev.  0.  A.  Skin- 
ner. Mr.  Skinner  explains  to  the  inquiring  child  the 
condition  of  the  future  or  resurrection  state  of  man 
kind,  by  the  quotation  of  Luke  xx.  36.  "  Neither 
can  they  die  any  more  :  for  they  are  equal  unto  the 
angels ;  and  are  the  children  of  God,  being  the  chil- 
dren of  the  resurrection." 

On  this  Dr.  A.  remarks  as  follows  : — 

Here,  it  will  be  seen,  it  is  assumed  that  Christ  refers  to  all  the 
dead,   and  that  all  when  they  are  raised  will  be  the  Children  of 
26 


302  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

God.  This,  it  is  understood,  is  the  prevailing  belief  of  Universa- 
lists.  We  read  that  "  no  Scripture  is  of  any  private  interpreta- 
tion ;"  in  other  words,  that  the  meaning  must  be  ascertained  by 
comparing  the  Scriptures  one  with  another.  The  whole  passage 
in  Luke  (xx.  35, 36)  reads,  "  But  they  that  shall  be  accounted  worthy 
to  obtain  that  world  and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  neither 
marry  nor  are  given  in  marriage ;  neither  can  they  die  any  more, 
for  they  are  equal  unto  the  angels  ;  and  are  the  childr  en  of  God 
being  the  children  of  the  resurrection."  Our  esteemed  friend, 
Mr.  Skinner,  it  seems  to  me,  is  led  into  a  mistake  by  regarding 
the  expression,  "  Children  of  the  resurrection,"  as  meaning  all 
who  have  part  in  the  resurrection  ;  and  since  Jesus  declares  "  the 
children  of  the  resurrection"  to  be  synonymous  with  "  children 
of  God,"  Mr.  S.  naturally  concludes  that  all  who  rise  from  the 
dead  will  be  the  children  of  God. 

The  Doctor  proceeds  to  say, — 

Now,  allowing  me,  for  the  sake  of  the  argument,  that  the  wicked 
are  raised  from  the  dead  in  their  sins,  they  are  not,  in  the  Scrip- 
ural  sense,  '"  tke  children  of  the  resurrection." 

Ah,  but  ws  don't  allow  you  any  sucli  thing.  That 
those  who  were  accounted  the  wicked  on  earth,  will 
be  raised  from  the  dead  in  their  sins,  our  friend  has 
not  shown,  nor  can  it  be  shown  by  any  argument, 
Scriptural  or  philosophical.  The  contrary  will  appear 
before  we  close  this  chapter.  But  what  is  the  argu- 
ment ?  It  is  this  ;  —  that  "  rising  from  the  dead  does 
not  make  us  children  of  the  resurrection."  The 
phrase,  children  of  the  resurrection,  he  assumes,  de- 
notes those  who  died  righteous,  an'd  not  all  who  shall 
have  part  in  the  resurrection.  And  further  down  he 
argues,  — 

This  meaning  of  the  phrase  is  also  illustrated  by  the  expression, 
"children  of  this  world."  Good  people  are,  in  one  sense,  "  chll- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  303 

dren  of  this  world,"  equally  with  the  bad ;  that  is,  they  are  natives 
of  this  world ;  and  yet  we  read, — "  the  children  of  this  world  are 
wiser  in  their  generation  than  the  children  of  light."  Thus,  the 
good  only  are  "  children  of  the  resurrection,"  though  all  are 
raised,  as  the  wicked  only  are  "  children  of  this  world,"  though 
bad  and  good  live  here  together. 

In  this  argument  we  think  the  Doctor  misappre- 
hends the  meaning  of  the  phrase  "  children  of  this 
world  ;''  and  the  restriction  he  places  on  the  applica- 
tion of  the  phrase,  "  children  of  the  resurrection," 
is  singularly  arbitrary,  and  compels  him  to  a  vacillat- 
ing course,  while  it  forces  harmonious  passages  of 
Scripture  into  jarring  discord. 

With  regard  to  the  phrase,  "  children  of  this 
world,"  it  does  not  imply  viciousness  or  criminality 
in  the  persons  it  describes.  It  does  not  describe 
moral  character  at  all.  We  have  before  had  occasion 
to  recognize  the  fact,  that  those  who  are  noted  for 
any  quality  or  trait,  are  called  the  children  of  that 
quality  or  trait.  The  occasion  on  which  Jesus  intro- 
duced the  comparison  between  the  children  of  this 
world  and  the  children  of  light,  was  not  a  discourse 
on  the  wickedness  of  the  former,  but  on  their  vigil- 
ance and  forecast  in  their  business.  The  saying, 
"  The  children  of  this  world  are  wiser  in  their  genere- 
tion  than  the  children  of  light,"  obviously  means 
that  men  devoted  to  worldly  or  secular  business, 
are  usually  more  attentive  and  earnest  in  their  pur- 
suit of  those  interests,  than  his  disciples  were  in 
regard  to  the  interests  of  religion.  And  if  men  in 
that  regard  in  which  they  are  involved  in  worldly 


304  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

business  are  called  the  children  of  this  world,  then, 
by  the  same  manner  of  description,  are  they  who  are 
subjects  of  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  children 
of  the  resurrection. 

We  admire  Dr.  A.'s  principle  of  Scripture  interpre- 
tation, which  he  deduces  from  the  saying  that  "  no 
Scripture  is  of  any  private  interpretation,"  —  to  wit, 
"  that  the  meaning  will  be  ascertained  by  comparing 
the  Scriptures  one  with  another."  We  respectfully 
invite  him  to  put  to  use  this  excellent  rule.  He  says, 
"  rising  from  the  dead  does  not  make  us  children  of 
the  resurrection."  Luke  reports  Jesus  to  have  said, 
"  They  that  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to  obtain  that 
world,  and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  ....  are 
the  children  of  God,  being  the  children  of  the  resur- 
rection." All  who  shall  obtain  the  resurrection  from 
the  dead,  are  children  of  the  resurrection,  and  chil- 
dren of  God  of  course.  And  who  are  they?  Who 
shall  obtain  the  resurrection  from  the  dead  ?  St.  Paul 
answers,  and  his  answer  is  quoted  by  our  friend  in 
this  very  connection,  seemingly  without  careful  atten- 
tion to  its  bearing  upon  the  subject.  He  says,  Acts 
xxiv.  14,  15, — "  But  this  I  confess  unto  thee,  that 
after  the  way  which  they  (the  Pharisees)  call  heresy, 
so  worship  I  the  God  of  my  fathers,  believing  all 
things  which  are  written  in  the  law  and  in  the  pro- 
phets ;  and  have  hope  toward  God,  which  they  them- 
selves also  allow,  that  there  shall  be  a  resurrection  of 
the  dead,  both  of  the  just  and  unjust."  All  classes 
of  the  human  race,  then,  shall  obtain  the  resurrection 
from  the  dead;  and,  according  to  the  passage  which 


fZEPLl  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  305 

the  Doctor  has  placed  before  us  from  Luke,  all  who 
obtain  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  i.  e,  all  men  of 
all  classes,  shall  be  children  of  God,  being-  children  of 
the  resurrection. 

And  here  is  an  infinitely  important  idea  in  that  tes- 
timony of  St.  Paul,  which  Dr.  A.  neglects  to  notice, 
ind  avoids  quoting.  The  apostle  had  hope  towards- 
God,  not  towards  any  fallible  agency,  but  towards 
God,  that  there  shall  be  a  resurrection  of  the  deadr 
both  of  the  ju?t  and  unjust.  This  resurrection  even 
:>f  the  unjust,  was,  with  the  apostle,  a  subject  of  hope. 
A.nd  it  was  the  statement  of  the  subject  matter  of  the 
^reat  Christian  hope  that  constituted  the  chief  aim 
rf  this  address  of  his  to  Felix.  IIowr  then,  the  read- 
er will  ask,  did  Dr.  Adams  contrive  to  bring  forward 
i  quotation  from  this  address  of  the  apostle,  so  as  to 
)mit  the  Jwpe  ?  lie  quoted  it  in  this  form : 

Paul  said  before  Felix,  and  declared  that  the  Jews  "  themselves 
ilso  allow"  it,  (for  the  Saddueees  were  small  in  number  though 
ligh  in  rank  and  power,)  "that  there  shall  lea  resurrection  of  the 
lead,  both  (>f  the  just  and  unjust." 

This  is  not  strictly  correct.  Paul  did  not  say  before 
Felix,  that  there  shall  be  a  resurrection  of  the  dead. 
3e  said  he  had  hope  toicard  God  that  there  shall  be  a 
resurrection  of  the  dead,  both  of  the  just  and  unjust. 
We  wouldn't  exchange  this  Christian  record  for  our 
Yiend's  version  of  it,  for  all  the  world.  This  hope, 
standing  in  the  connection  which  it  occupies  here,  is 
:ichly  big  with  meaning.  It  gives  us  a  world  of  in- 
struction as  to  the  nature  and  result  of  the  universal 
resurrection.  He  hoped  for  it  all.  Of  course  it  is  de- 
26* 


306  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

sirable  as  well  as  expected.  Hope  includes  the  ideas 
of  desire  and  expectation  united.  We  may  desire 
that  for  which  we  have  no  hope,  not  having  an  ex- 
pectation of  it.  And  we  may  expect  that  for  which 
we  have  no  hope,  having  no  desire  for  it.  Now  if  we 
should  hear  a  man  say  that  he  desires  the  resurrection 
of  a  large  portion  of  his  friends  and  neighbors  into  a 
state  of  endless  and  excruciating  torments,  we  should 
either  believe  that  a  tight  pinch  in  argument  had 
forced  his  lips  to  belie  his  heart,  or  else  that  he  was 
a  fiend,  fit  only  to  be  hunted  out  from  human  societjT, 
and  not  fit  to  dwell  with  the  brutes.  The  Christian 
11  hope  maketh  not  ashamed,  because  the  love  of  God 
is  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  by  the  Holy  Ghost  which 
is  given  unto  us."  But  a  hope  for  the  resurrection 
of  our  neighbors  to  endless  pain,  which  no  moral  be- 
ing could  ever  cherish  but  in  a  furious  gust  of  fiend- 
ish passion,  would  make  ashamed.  When  I  was  a 
youth,  an  impulsive  man  once  said  to  me  in  a  religiour 
controversy,  speaking  of  the  wicked,  "  They  ought 
to  be  eternally  damned,  and  I  hope  they  will  be."  I 
reported  his  remark,  and  some  of  his  religious  breth- 
ren, surprised  at  it,  undertook  to  give  him  a  repri- 
mand ; — and  he  was  so  utterly  ashamed  of  it  that  he 
denied  having  said  it.  But  the  Christian  hope  maketh 
not  ashamed,  because  the  Jove  of  God  is  shed  abroad 
in  our  hearts,*  —  that  love  which  was  attested  by  the 
blood  of  Christ,  who,  by  the  grace  of  God,  tasted 
death  for  every  man.f  This  hope  abideth  with  chari- 
ty or  love.  "  Now  abideth  faith,  hope,  charity.":):  A 

*Rom  v.  5.    fHcb.  ii.  9.    Jl  Cor.  xiii.    13. 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  307 

blessed  trinity,  all  blending  in  one  perfect  sympathy. 
The  love  embracing  all  of  human  kind  ;*  the  hope  as- 
sured of  all  which  love  desires  j  and  "faith  the  sub- 
stance of  things  hoped  for."f  He  who  has  a  faith 
looking  for  a  result  of  the  Divine  administration 
which  is  undesirable,  has  so  much  of  a  belief  which  is 
foreign  to  the  Christian  faith. 

No  man  can  hope  for  his  own  rising  from  the  sleep 
of  death  into  a  life  of  "  immortal  pains."  To  be  sure 
some  old  theologians,  in  their  agony  to  make  their 
theory  practical,  used  to  talk  of  being  willing  to  be 
finally  damned,  as  a  prerequisite  to  salvation.  But, 
poor  souls,  whenever  any  one  of  them  has  lost  all 
hope  for  himself,  he  has  become  a  maniac.  But  even 
those  hard-headed  theologians  never  went  so  far  as  to 
require  that  any  should  liope  for  their  own  damnation. 
And  if  a  Christian,  in  his  love  for  himself,  cannot 
hope  for  his  own  damnation,  he  cannot,  in  his  love  to 
his  neighbor,  hope  for  his  neighbor's  final  ruin.  St. 
Paul  had  no  such  hope.  To  charge  him  with  hoping 
that  his  neighbors  should  be  raised  up  from  death's 
deep  sleep  into  a  life  of  never-ending  agony,  would 
be  to  cast  a  foul  stigma  on  his  character,  which  the 
rankest  infidelity  would  never  venture. 

But  Paul  hoped  for  the  resurrection  of  all  men 
from  the  dead,  because  he  believed  that  it  was  to  be 
an  infinite  good  to  all.  And  so  the  fact  of  a  future 
immortal  life  for  man  is  always  represented  in  the 
Scriptures, — a  subject  of  grateful  and  joyful  hope. 
The  life  and  immortality  which  is  brought  to  light 

*Matt.  v.  44.    fHeb.  xi.  1. 


308  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

through  the  gospel,  was  given  us  in  Christ  Jesus 
before  the  world  began,  "  according  to  the  purpose 
and  grace  of  God."  That  mankind  shall  live  again, 
and  never  die,  is  not  merely  a,  purpose  to  be  believed, 
but  a  grace  also  to  be  hoped  for. 

So  it  is  represented  in  the  passage,  the  Doctor's 
comments  upon  which  have  led  us  into  this  course 
of  argument.  "  They  that  shall  be  accounted  worthy 
to  obtain  that  world  (that  is,  the  future  state  of 
being)  and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,  ....  are 
equal  unto  the  angels ;  and  are  the  children  of  God, 
being  the  children  of  the  resurrection." 

But  our  opponent  fastens  upon  the  words,  they 
that  shall  be  accounted  WORTHY  to  obtain  that  world. 
In  his  effort  to  make  this  single  expression  the 
ground-work  of  a  theory  in  opposition  to  the  great 
leading  thought  of  the  gospel  ministry  of  the  life 
immortal  everywhere,  he  evinces  talent  and  skill, 
which,  in  a  good  cause,  would  pre-eminently  shine. 
But  to  force  upon  an  incidental  expression  an  un- 
necessary meaning  which  shall  make  it  ignore  and 
break  up  the  main  sentiment  of  the  discourse  in 
which  it  stands,  is  not  wise.  And  now,  we  invite 
our  friend  and  all  our  readers,  to  his  own  excellent 
rule  prescribed  for  Scripture  exposition, — that  is, 
"  comparing  the  Scriptures  one  with  another/'  and 
consulting  their  surroundings. 

What  are  the  surroundings,  and  what  is  the  lead- 
ing thought,  of  this  conversation  of  Jesus?  We  will 
first  take  the  report  of  it  given  by  St.  Matthew,  him- 
self an  apostle,  and  an  ear-witness  of  the  couversa- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  309 

tion.  The  Pharisees  had  schemed  to  entangle  Jesus 
in  his  talk,  and  for  this  purpose  put  to  him  the  ques- 
tion about  paying  tribute  to  Cjesar.  When  they 
were  confounded  by  the  profound  wisdom  of  his 
reply,  the  Sadducees  tried  their  hand  at  confounding 
him  on  his  well-known  leading  and  fundamental  doc- 
trine, that  of  a  future  immortal  life  for  mankind,  or 
the  resurrection  of  the  human  dead.  So  Matthew 
proceeds  with  the  record:  (Matt.  xxii.  23-30.)  "  The 
same  day  came  to  him  the  Sadducees,  which  say  that 
there  is  no  resurrection."  They  then  presented  to 
him  the  case  of  the  woman  who  had  in  succession 
seven  brothers  for  husbands,  and  asked  him  whose 
wife,  of  the  seven,  she  should  be  in  the  resurrection." 
"  Jesus  answered  and  said  unto  them,  Ye  do  err,  not 
knowing  the  Scriptures  nor  the  power  of  God.  For 
in  the  resurrection  they  neither  marry,  nor  are  given 
in  marriage,  but  are  as  the  angels  of  God  in 
heaven." 

Here  let  it  be  observed,  that  according  to  this 
record,  Jesus  was  noted  and  distinguished  as  the 
teacher  of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  He  preach- 
ed this  doctrine  in  the  familiar  labors  of  his  personal 
ministry,  of  which  we  have  no  record.  Mark  well, 
that  the  doctrine  which  he  was  understood  by  the 
people  to  preach,  was  that  of  the  resurrection  of  the 
human  dead,  without  limitation ;  the  future  life  of 
mankind  as  a  family,  a  species,  a  grade  of  beings. 
This  is  as  certain  as  that  he  was  understood  to  teach 
any  future  existence  for  any  of  the  human  race  at  all. 
As  a  means  of  ascertaining  the  sentiment  of  a  public 


310  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

teacher  on  a  prominent  point  of  doctrine,  next  to 
hearing  him  ourselves,  is  the  having  of  access  to  the 
universal  understanding  of  it  by  his  hearers,  friends 
and  foes,  by  himself  not  contradicted  even  when 
confronted  on  the  subject,  but  admitted  and  main- 
tained. The  fact  stands  out  in  the  record,  in  so 
unmistakable  a  light  that  to  the  mind  that  will  dispute 
it  no  record  can  be  of  any  account,  that  the  Saddu- 
cees  understood  Jesus  to  teach  the  resurrection  of 
mankind,  as  a  species,  from  the  state  of  the  dead. 
Their  case  presented  with  the  view  of  entangling 
him,  was  conceived  in  this  understanding  of  his 
sentiment.  The  seven  husbands  were  presented  in 
the  case,  without  any  reference  to  their  characters, 
but  simply  as  human  beings,  without  any  proviso  in- 
timating the  least  occasion  to  doubt  that,  according 
to  the  doctrine  of  Jesus,  they  would  all  be  raised 
from  death,  and  into  the  same  state  of  being.  And 
Jesus  in  his  reply  gives  them  no  intimation  that  he 
had  been  misunderstood  on  this  point.  He  does  not 
tell  them  that  if  the  woman  and  her  seven  husbands 
should  all  go  to  Tartarus,  as  they  doubtless  would 
if  they  were  Sadducees,  the  quarrel  of  the  seven 
husbands  for  one  wife  would  be  a  fit  means  of  adding 
to  the  severity  of  their  just  punishment ;  or  that,  if 
the  woman  should  be  so  fortunate  as  to  attain  to 
Elysium,  the  average  proportion  of  the  saved  to  the 
lost  would  not  probably  warrant  the  expectation  that 
more  than  one  of  the  husbands  would  be  there  with 
her.  Nothing  of  this  sort.  He  proceeds  directly 
and  ingenuously  to  answer  them,  on  the  ground  of 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  311 

their  just  understanding  of  his  doctrine.  "  Ye  do 
err,  not  knowing  the  Scriptures  nor  the  power  of 
God.  For  in  the  resurrection  they  neither  marry 
nor  are  given  in  marriage,  but  are  as  the  angels  of 
God  in  heaven."  If  there  are  any  of  mankind  who 
are  not  included  in  this  testimony  and  description  of 
the  resurrection,  they  are  to  have  no  resurrection  at 
all,  but  are  to  be  left,  perished  like  the  brutes.  For 
this  is  the  whole  of  Jesus'  doctrine  of  the  resurrec- 
tion. But  it  leaves  none  out.  It  is  the  doctrine  of 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 

"We  pass  on  to  the  second  record  of  this  conversa- 
tion, that  made  by  St.  Mark,  xii.  18-27.  Here  the 
same  circumstances  introductory  to  the  conversation 
are  noted,  the  same  case  proposed,  and  the  same 
question,  —  "In  the  resurrection,  therefore,  when 
they  rise,  whose  wife  shall  she  be  of  them  ?  '  And 
Mark's  record  of  Jesus'  answer  is  substantially  the 
same  as  that  of  Matthew ; — "  For  when  they  shall 
rise  from  the  dead,  they  neither  marry  nor  are  given 
in  marriage  ;  but  are  as  the  angels  which  are  in 
heaven." 

And  now  we  have  another  record  of  the  same  con- 
versation, Luke  xx.  27-38.  The  occasion  and  the 
question  are  the  same,  and  the  answer  of  Jesus,  which 
of  course  is  the  same,  is  entered  by  St.  Luke  in  the 
following  form  : — "  But  they  which  shall  be  accounted 
worthy  to  obtain  that  world,  and  the  resurrection 
from  the  dead;  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  mar- 
riage ;  neither  can  they  die  any  more ;  for  they  are 
equal  unto  the  angels ;  and  are  the  children  of  God; 
being  the  children  of  the  resurrection.'' 


312  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

And  now,  I  demand  —  pardon  my  earnestness,  an( 
my  change  of  style  to  the  more  direct  first  persoi 
singular, — I  demand  reverent  attention  to  the  inquiry 
does  this  report  of  Luke  introduce  any  new  am 
differing  sentiment  from  the  reports  just  read  fron 
Matthew  and  Mark?  What  authority  has  any  man  t< 
impute  to  Luke  the  ascription  to  Jesus  of  an  inf 
tritely  different  sentiment  from  that  ascribed  to  hin 
by  the  other  Evangelists  in  their  record  of  the  sam< 
breath  of  his  discourse  ?  I  call  on  my  opponent  t< 
respect  his  own  law  of  interpretation,  comparing 
Scripture  with  Scripture.  Especially  should  this  b< 
done  in  the  .study  of  the  records  made  by  differen 
reporters  of  the  same  thing.  If  three  faithful  wit 
nesses  hear  a  discourse  from  a  reverend  teacher  on  '< 
subject  of  deepest  interest  to  mankind,  and  report  it 
while  they  may  vary  in  some  of  their  expressions 
and  one  may  report  some  incidental  remark  whic] 
the  others  omit,  they  will  all  represent  the  leadins 
and  essential  thought  or  thoughts  and  sentiments 
Now  if  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrection  as  taught  b; 
Jesus  was  the  offer  of  a  future  existence  to  then 
who  might  tarn  it,  this  characteristic  of  it  would  cor 
fctitute  its  main  feature,  and  must  always  have  beei 
pat  in  front  view  whenever  the  subject  was  presented 
Indeed,  there  would  have  been  in  this  case  no  sucl 
doctrine,  no  such  Christian  truth  as  a  subject  of  gos 
pel  testimony,  as  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  I 
would  have  been  an  offer  of  a  future  life  to  such  a 
should  create  themselves  a  claim  to  it  by  their  merit 
marks.  In  such  a  case  the  propounding  of  the  resm 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  313 

rection  of  the  dead,  in  these  general  terms,  as  a  doc- 
trine of  revealed  truth,  would  have  been  a  falsehood. 
The  ministry  of  Jesus  and  his  apostles  in  relation  to 
a  resurrection,  would,  everywhere,  have  been  the 
proclamation  of  a  chance  for  men,  who  might  be  fa- 
vorably situated  for  the  experiment,  to  purchase  a 
claim  to  another  life.  This  idea  each  of  the  three 
Evangelists  who  have  recorded  the  conversation  be- 
tween Jesus  and  the  Sadducees,  would  have  made 
prominent  in  their  record.  And  what  is  the  fact  ? 

Matthew  is  the  earliest  writer  of  tn"e  Christian  his- 
tory, being  generally  supposed  to  have  written  his 
Gospel  in  Hebrew,  within  about  eight  years  after 
Christ's  ascension.  And  Dr.  Clarke  truly  remarks  of 
him,  that,  "As  Matthew  was  one  of  the  twelve  disci- 
ples, his  history  is  an  account  of  what  he  heard  and 
saw,  being  a  constant  attendant  on  our  blessed  Lord." 
Consequently,  though  all  the  Evangelists  were  quali- 
fied to  report  faithfully  the  true  thought  of  our  Lord, 
Matthew  was  most  likely  to  give  the  very  icords  of 
the  Master.  For  it  must  be  known  to  all,  that  when 
three  Evangelists  have  reported  one  expression  of 
their  Master  in  language  somewhat  different,  they 
have  not  all  employed,  throughout,  his  own  identical 
words.  And  it  will  be  by  all  conceded  that,  in  the 
case  before  us,  we  have  reason  to  presume  that  Mat- 
thew reported,  most  nearly,  the  expressions  of  Jesus. 
And  his  record  represents  Jesus  as  reaffirming  the 
doctrine  which  had  given  him  public  notoriety,  that 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  human  dead ;  and  pro- 
pounding it  as  the  truth  of  God's  purpose  of  grace, 
27 


314  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

that  through  the  resurrection,  mankind,  that  is,  the 
human  race  as  a  species,  shall  be  raised  into  a  state 
of  equality  with  "  the  angels  of  God  in  heaven." 
And  this  general  view  of  the  subject,  as  appertaining 
to  the  destiny  of  man  as  man,  that  is,  of  mankind 
universally,  is  confirmed  by  the  summing  up  by  Luke 
of  the  argument  for  a  future  life  from  the  showing  of 
God  to  Abraham, —  declaring,  Avith  reference  to  the 
relation  in  which  mankind  all  stand  to  God's  purpose 
of  life  immortal,  "  For  all  live  unto  him." 

The  record  of  Mark  is  almost  verbally  the  same  as 
that  of  Matthew.  Luke  employs  a  phrase  out  of 
which  my  opponent  has  created  the  doctrine — of 
what?  The  resurrection  of  a  part  only,  leaving  the 
greater  portion  in  what  the  French  Infidels  call 
death,  "  an  eternal  sleep  ? '  This  is  all  he  can  make 
of  it,  if  he  limits  the  number  here  meant  by  them 
"  that  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to  obtain  that  world 
and  the  resurrection  from  the  dead."  The  question 
between  Jesus  and  the  Sadducees  was,  ivhether  man- 
kind shall  exist  hereafter  or  not.  Jesus  had  the  affirm- 
ative of  the  question,  and  his  affirmative  was  compris- 
ed in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  If,  therefore,  there 
are  any  who  shall  not  be  sharers  in  the  resurrection 
from  the  dead  here  spoken  of,  they  will  not  exist  be- 
yond death..  You  can  make  nothing  else  of  it.  And 
Dr.  Adams,  not  being  willing  to  have  the  wicked,  or 
rather  the  unevangelical,  left  in  endless  nonentity,  thus 
robbing  endless  torment  of  its  prey,  talks  about  their 
not  having  a  resurrection  worthy  to  be  called  such, 
or  rather,  about  the  favored  class  "  being  worthy  to 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  315 

obtain  that  world,  and  afterwards  such  a  resurrection 
as  is  worthy  of  the  name  ; '  thus  confusing  and  frit- 
tering away  what  the  sacred  record  presents  in  a 
light  simple  and  plain,  Jesus  said  nothing  here  of 
two  resurrections,  first  raising  all  men  into  "  that 
world,"  and  aftemvards  granting  a  worthy  portion 
"  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,"  or  "  such  a  resur- 
rection as  is  worthy  of  the  name.'7  It  seems  to  us 
that  our  friend  owes  to  God  and  the  Christian  public 
an  acknowledgment  for  this  effort  at  corrupting  and 
mystifying  the  simple  record  of  Christian  truth. 
There  is  but  one  resurrection  here  spoken  of,  and 
that  is  the  resurrection  from  the  dead.  And  the  obtain- 
ing of  "  that  world  '  is  the  obtaining  of  the  resurrec- 
tion state.  As  we  shall  directly  find  it  to  be  the  case 
with  St.  Paul,  so  with  Jesus,  he  knows  of  but  two 
states  of  being,  the  present  state  and  the  resurrection 
state,  the  mortal  and  the  immortal,  the  earthly  and  the 
heavenly.  "  The  children  of  this  world  (or  state  of 
being)  marry  and  are  given  in  marriage  ;  but  they 
which  shall  be  accounted  worthy  to  obtain  that 
world,"  or  state  of  being  —  What  state  of  being? 
The  resurrection  state,  of  course,  the  life  after  death, 
"  the  resurrection  from  the  dead,"  "  are  equal  unto 
the  angels,"  &c. 

It  is  now  clear  that  Luke  uses  the  word  worthy,  not 
for  moral  desert,  but  for  the  honor,  dignity,  or  value, 
with  which  God  has  invested  his  moral  creatures  in 
their  relation  to  himself  and  his  purposes.  To  con- 
strue it  otherwise  would  make  it  to  give  the  doctrine 
of  the  resurrection  an  entirely  different  character, 


316  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

which  could  not  have  been  left  in  the  back-ground, 
as  we  before  said,  in  any  case,  especially  not  by  the 
other  reporters  of  this  discourse  of  the  Master. 
CAMPBELL  renders  the  passage,  TJiey  which  shall  be 
honored  to  share  in  the  resurrection  and  the  other  world. 
The  phrase,  accounted  worthy  to  obtain,  or,  as  Camp- 
bell translates  it,  honored  to  share,  refers,  not  to  moral 
desert,  but  to  the  estimate  which  God  sets  upon  his 
intelligent  offspring.  In  the  same  sense  the  word 
value  is  used,  in  another  place.  "  Ye  are  of  more 
value  than  many  sparrows."  This  had  no  reference 
to  moral  desert,  because,  in  that  respect,  there  could 
be  no  comparison  between  men  and  sparrows.  It 
refers  to  the  dignity  of  their  being,  in  the  estimation 
of  the  Creator.  And  the  force  of  the  argument  for 
the  Divine  care  for  man,  rests  upon  this  estimate  of 
the  Creator.  So  in  the  case  before  us.  God's  esti- 
mate of  man  as  his  moral  child,  made  after  the  image 
of  his  intelligence,  is  the  reason  of  his  honoring  him 
with  a  resurrection  to  another  life.  And  this  idea 
Luke  throws  into  his  record  of  the  Master's  doctrine. 
He  did  not  hear  the  discourse  of  Jesus,  as  Matthew 
did.  He  opens  his  history  with  the  statement  that 
he  received  information  of  these  things  from  those 
who  were  eye-witnesses  from  the  beginning.  His 
mind  was  possessed  of  the  same  great  thought  of 
Jesus,  as  delivered  to  the  Sadducees,  of  which  Mat- 
thew's mind  was  possessed.  But  he  had  superior 
education,  and  employed  more  florid  style.  And  the 
record  of  the  same  great  thought  he  put  down  with 
more  embellishment.  The  case  proposed  by  tho 


REPLY   TO  DB.  ADAMS.  317 

* 

Sadducees  betrayed  low  conceptions  of  the  future 
life,  admitting  there  should  be  such  a  life.  And  Luke 
presents  the  doctrine  of  Jesus  against  their  degraded 
thought,  in  a  manner  more  emphatically  to  ignore  and 
denounce  it ; —  as  if  he  had  said, — "  Why  !  how  low 
and  beastly  are  your  conceptions  of  this  subject ! 
The  class  of  beings  that  God  has  constituted  in  the 
image  of  his  intelligence,  and  heirs  of  immortality,  to 
be  crowned  with  his  eternity,  he  will  raise  into  a  su- 
perior life,  in  which  they  shall  never  die  any  more, 
but  shall  be  equal  unto  the  angels,  and  shall  be  the 
children  of  God,  being  the  children  of  the  resurrec- 
tion.''' And  who  are  they  ?  Answer : —  they  are  the 
human  race,  "  the  just  and  the  unjust."  This  is 
shown,  not  only  by  the  whole  aspect  of  the  subject  in 
this  case  and  all  its  surroundings,  but  directly  and 
explicitly,  as  before  noted,  by  the  conclusion  which 
Luke's  own  record  gives  to  the  argument  of  Jesus 
from  the  word  of  God  to  Abraham,  touching  his  pur- 
pose of  immortal  life  for  man, — "for  all  live  unto 
him."  And  that  their  being  the  children  of  God  in- 
volves an  inheritance  of  blessedness  with  him,  our 
opponent  justly  concedes. 

We  will  remark  as  we  pass,  that  the  Doctor's  para- 
phrase, in  which  he  represents  Jesus  as  revolving  in 
his  mind,  but  purposely  concealing  from  the  Saddu- 
cees, his  doctrine  of  endless  woe  as  the  estate  into 
which  the  resurrection  will  introduce  most  of  man- 
kind, and  into  which  it  might  introduce  most  or  all 
of  the  family  connections  in  the  case  they  presented, 
—  is  not  a  paraphrase,  because  there  is  nothing  in  the 
27* 


318  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

case  out  of  which  to  make  it.  It  is  the  spinning  of  a 
thread  out  of  the  Doctor's  own  mind  entirely. 

And  now,  as  the  doctrine  of  a  future  life  for  man 
is  the  burden  of  the  gospel,  and  the  soul  of  Chris- 
tianity, we  will  extend  our  examination  on  the  subject 
as  it  stands  in  the  Scriptures,  that  our  minds  may  bo 
clear,  and  our  faith  sure  and  steadfast. 

The  most  labored,  extended,  argumentative  and  ex- 
planatory treatise  of  the  gospel  doctrine  of  the  resur- 
rection, in  the  inspired  Record,  is  in  1  Cor.  xv.  The 
great  apostle  had,  by  his  personal  ministry,  reared  a 
church  at  Corinth  ;  but  soon  after  he  had  left  them  he 
was  informed  of  schisms  amongst  them,  and  of  diver- 
sity of  opinion  as  to  the  fact  of  a  future  life.  They 
all  admitted  theMessiahship  of  Jesus,  and  his  personal 
resurrection,  but  some  of  them  disbelieved  the  resur- 
rection of  mankind  as  a  species.  Hence  the  manner 
in  which  this  particular  subject  is  opened  with  the 
fifteenth  chapter: — "  Moreover,  brethren,  I  declare 
unto  you  the  gospel,  which  I  preached  unto  you, 

by  which  also  ye  are  saved,  if  ye  keep  in 

memory  what  I  preached  unto  you,  unless  ye  have 
believed  in  vain.  For  I  delivered  unto  you  first  of 
all,  that  which  I  also  received,  how  that  Christ  died 
for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures ;  and  that  he 
was  buried,  and  that  he  rose  again  the  third  day  accor- 
ding to  the  Scriptures Now  if  Christ  be 

preached  that  he  rose  from  the  dead,  how  say  some 
among  you  that  there  is  no  resurrection  of  the 
dead?  ....  For  if  the  dead  rise  not,  then  is  not 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  319 

Christ  raised  ;  and  if  Christ  be  not  raised,  your  faith 
is  vain  ;  ye  are  yet  in  your  sins.  Then  they  also 
which  are  fallen  asleep,  in  Christ  are  perished."  Here 
let  it  be  remarked  as  we  pass,  that  the  subject  of  the 
apostle  is  not  the  calling  down  of  millions  of  living, 
conscious,  acting  and  happy  persons  from  heaven,  and 
of  other  millions  alike  conscious  and  active,  up  from 
hell,  to  put  upon  them  a  clothing  of  the  old  ashes  of 
their  mortal  and  dissolved  bodies.  That  dust  differs 
not  from  other  dust,  and  has  no  concern  with  the  res- 
urrection, as  we  shall  see  presently.  The  question  is, 
between  a  future  existence,  and  no  future  existence,  to 
man.  Hence  all  my  opponent's  hypothetical  argument 
for  the  continuance  of  punishment  eternally,  upon 
those  who  had  been  many  thousands  of  years  pun- 
ished in  hell,  without  being  reformed,  before  the  resur- 
rection of  those  old  ashes,  falls  to  nothing  for  the 
want  of  the  least  shadow  of  truth  as  a  ground  for 
the  hypothesis.  When  the  spirit  of  man,  beyond  its 
service  in  this  mortal  body,  is  clothed  upon  with  a 
spiritual  body,  so  as  to  possess  a  personal  conscious 
existence,  that  man  has  become  a  subject  of  the  resur- 
rection. When  the  worm  has  passed  into  a  butterfly 
there  is  an  old  carcass  left  which  never  becomes  a 
component  of  the  new  creature.  When  the  kernel 
of  grain  dies,  (and  this  is  one  of  the  illustrations 
employed  by  the  apostle  in  this  chapter),  and  the 
germ  springs  up  and  bears  new  grain  with  a  new 
body,  that  old  dead  kernel  is  never  re-united  with  the 
new  grain.  So  with  the  resurrection  ;  it  clothes  not 
the  spirit  with  the  old  dust,  but  with  a  spiritual  body. 


320  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

So  the  apostle  represents  it  in  his  second  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  v.  1-4.  "  For  we  know,  that  if  our 
earthly  house  of  this  tabernacle  were  dissolved,  we 
have  a  building  of  God,  a  house  not  made  with  hands, 
eternal  in  the  heavens.  For  in  this  we  groan,  earn- 
estly desiring  to  be  clothed  upon  with  our  house 
which  is  from  heaven  ....  For  we  that  are  in  this 
tabernacle  do  groan,  being  burdened  j  not  for  that  we 
would  be  unclothed,  but  clothed  upon,  that  mortality 
might  be  swallowed  up  of  life."  This  obviously 
describes  the  same  fact  which  is  described  in  the 
chapter  before  us,  (1  Cor.  xv.)  at  verse  54th.  "  So 
when  this  corruptible  shall  have  put  on  incorrup- 
tion,  and  this  mortal  shall  have  put  on  immortality, 
then  shall  be  brought  to  pass  the  saying  that  is  writ 
ten,  Death  is  swallowed  up  in  victory."  That  just 
quoted  from  2  Cor.  v.,  clearly  represents  the  work 
of  the  resurrection,  like  that  of  propagation  and 
death  in  the  earthly  or  Adamic  nature,  to  be  a  pro- 
gressive work.  The  work  of  life  never  stops.  When 
the  spirit  goes  out  at  death,  to  Him  who  gave  it,  safe 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Father's  love,  the  working  of  his 
omnific  power  effectuates  the  re-organization  in  a 
spiritual,  heavenly,  glorious  person,  that  can  never 
die  any  more.  And  if  any  falter  here,  it  is  because 
they  "  know  not  the  Scriptures  nor  the  power  of  God" 
To  be  sure  the  argumentative  strain  of  the  apostle  in 
the  chapter  now  mainly  before  us,  embodies  the  resur- 
rection as  if  into  one  simultaneous  event,  altogether 
future.  This  form  of  treating  the  subject  in  this  set 
argument,  as  a  whole  subject,  was  the  most  conveni- 
ent. And  then,  as  a  consummation,  and  as  a  subject 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  321 

of  hope  to  the  living,  it  is  future.  But  our  purpose 
in  this  digression  is,  to  show,  that  the  question  of  the 
resurrection  as  presented  in  the  gospel,  is  not  that 
of  my  opponent,  the  calling  of  immortals  from  heaven 
and  hell  to  clothe  them  with  mortal  dust,  but  the 
question  of  life  from  the  state  of  death. 

To   resume  the   argumentative  testimony   of   the 
apostle : — "  But  now  is  Christ  risen  from  the  dead, 

and  become  the  first  fruits   of  them  that  slept 

For  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive."  It  is  impossible  that  any  man  should 
misunderstand  this.  The  universality  of  the  relation 
of  the  human  race  to  the  earthly  Adam  is  recognized 
and  affirmed,  and  their  participation  of  mortality  and 
death  in  that  relation  ;  and  the  equal  universality  of 
the  divinely  purposed  relation  of  mankind  to  Christ, 
the  heavenly  man,  and  their  participation  of  life  and 
immortality  in  that  relation.  He  who  will  say  that 
this  verse,  and  this  chapter,  relates  to  the  resurrec- 
tion only  of  a  fraction  of  the  human  family,  places 
himself  in  a  position  in  which  he  cannot  be  addressed 
as  a  rational  being  on  the  subject  of  Bible  testimony 
or  religion.  To  such  a  man  it  can  make  no  difference 
as  to  what  the  Bible  says.  I  am  glad  that  my  oppo- 
nent was  wise  enough  not  to  run  into  this  chapter,  to 
impose  upon  himself  the  necessity  of  such  a  handling 
of  God's  word,  to  the  stultification  of  himself.  How 
lamentable  is  the  condition  of  thousands  of  learned 
men,  whose  theological  prejudices  and  relations  im- 
pose upon  them  the  necessity  of  infinitely  magnifying 
and  multiplying  all  the  evil,  and  infinitesimally  fritter- 


322  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

ing  away  the  good,  provided  for  God's  children  in  the 
purpose  of  his  government,  and  revealed  in  his  word. 
If  we  found  any  such  necessity  of  expanding  here,  and 
frittering  there,  in  supporting  our  cause  from  the  Bible, 
though  a  more  noble  and  heavenly  cause,  we  would 
give  up  in  despair. 

Yes,  if  there  is  anything  to  be  understood  by 
human  language,  in  its  most  direct  and  simple  expres- 
sion, we  have  here  the  explicit  testimony  to  the  resur- 
rection of  all  of  Adam's  race,  in  Christ  the  heavenly 
man. 

"But  every  man  in  his  own  order."  Not  every  man 
in  his  own  former  character.  That  would  make  up  a 
motley  society  in  the  future  world,  even  if  separate 
apartments  were  given  to  the  several  sects.  This 
"  order7'  relates  to  primacy  and  subordination.  It 
has  reference  to  the  method  in  the  Mosaic  ceremonials. 
There  were  two  orders  in  the  harvest,  the  first  fruits, 
and  the  general  harvest.  These  included  the  whole. 
And  that  this  order  is  the  matter  of  reference  in  this 
last  quotation  from  Paul,  is  shown  by  the  words  fol- 
lowing it.  "  But  every  man  in  his  own  order.  Christ 
the  first  fruits  ;*  afterward  they  that  are  Christ's,  at 
his  coming."  That  is,  they  that  are  Christ's,  all 
the  members  of  the  body  of  him  who  is  "  the  head  of 
every  man ;"  (1  Cor.  xi.  3  ;)  all  who  are  given  him, 
by  the  Father  who  "  hath  given  all  things  into  his 

*  Though  mankind  may  have  been  progressively  rising  since  the  work 
of  physical  death  commenced  in  our  world,  Christ  is  "  the  resurrection 
and  the  life,"  he  being  the  impersonation  and  representative  of  the  sec- 
ond life,  and  being  the  head  of  the  human  creation  in  that  heavenly 
state  as  Adam  is  of  the  earthy;  and  he  is  "  the  first  fruits  of  them  that 
slept,"  as  being  the  exemplar  of  the  resurrection  in  God's  scheme  of 
revelation  to  men  on  the  earth. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  323 

hands  ;"  (John  iii.  35  ;)  all  whom  he  hath  bought  with 
a  price,  having  given  himself  a  ransom  for  all,  (1  Tim. 
ii.  6?)  shall  be  made  alive  in  Christ  at  his  coming.  And 
this  coming  of  his  to  every  man  will  be  in  that 
embrace  of  his  love  and  power  which  shall  bring  them 
to  life  from  the  dead. 

The  apostle  continues : — "  Then  cometh  the  end, 
(the  ultimatum  of  the  gospel  plan,)  when  he  shall 
have  delivered  up  the  kingdom  to  God,  even  the 
Father  ;  when  he  shall  have  put  down  all  rule,  and  all 
authority  and  power."  Jesus  will  not  present  himself 
before  the  Father,  saying,  "  Thou  didst  give  me  a 
kingdom,  and  dominion  and  glory,  that  I  might  sub- 
due and  reconcile  all  things  unto  myself  and  thee,* 
destroying  the  works  of  the  devil, f  which  are  sin  and 
its  evils,  and  destroying  him  that  hath  the  power  of 
death,  that  is  the  devil  ;J  but  thou  seest  these  count- 
less millions  of  thine  offspring  whom  thou  didst  give 
me  to  redeem, — Satan's  kingdom  has  so  fast  a  hold 
upon  them  that  I  cannot  reach  their  moral  natures. 
I  give  them  up,  and  resign  back  to  thee  my  kingdom." 
No,  never  thus.  When  he  resigns  his  commission, 
when  he  delivers  up  the  kingdom  to  the  Father,  he 
will  have  accomplished  the  purpose  for  which  it  was 
given  him  ;  he  will  have  put  down,  destroyed,  all  rule, 
that  is,  all  but  his  own,  and  all  authority  and  power  in 
opposition  to  his  spiritual  reign  ;  there  shall  be  no 
Satan's  kingdom  then,  vaunting  itself  in  unbroken 
rule  and  dominion  over  a  full  moiety  of  God's  moral 
creation,  co-eternal  with  the  kingdom  of  God.  Uni- 

*Dan.   vii.  14  ;  Eph.  i.   9,  10  ;  Col.  i.   20.    fl  John  iii.  8.     JHeb. 
ii.  14. 


324  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

versal  harmony  in  love  shall  constitute  the  moral 
beauty  of  God's  intelligent  creation,  world  without  end. 

"  The  last  enemy  shall  be  destroyed,  (which  is) 

death And    when  all   things  shall  be  subdued 

unto  him,  then  shall  the  Son  also  himself  (as  the  head 
of  every  man)  be  subject  unto  him  that  put  all  things 
under  him,  that  God  may  be  all  in  all." 

And  so  the  great  apostle,  his  mind  beaming  with 
the  light,  and  his  whole  soul  glowing  with  the  spirit 
of  Heaven,  piles  up  testimony  upon  testimony,  cover- 
ing every  phase  of  the  subject,  to  build  up  and  estab- 
lish our  faith  in  a  better  life  for  man  by  a  resurrection 
from  the  dead,  and  the  ultimate  triumphant  and  uni- 
versal victory  of  life  and  good  over  death  and  evil. 
How  do  you  think  our  Doctors  will  appear,  ivhen  we 
come  over  to  the  spot  where  we  shall  inspect  them  in  their 
assertion,  that  there  is  the  same  evidence  of  the  eternity 
of  sin  and  satan,  and  death  and  evil,  as  of  GOD  and 
TRUTH,  and  LIFE,  and  GOOD  ? 

But  our  apostle,  as  if  he  would  yet  make  more  per- 
fect an  already  seemingly  perfect  testimony  to  the  ex- 
cellence of  the  future  life,  returns  to  the  subject  of 
the  resurrection  with  additional  testimonies  and  illus- 
trations. Speaking  of  different  kinds  and  grades  of 
bodies,  terrestrial  and  celestial,  the  glory  of  the  differ- 
ent bodies  differing  from  one  another,  he  adds,  "  So 
also  is  the  resurrection  of  the  dead."  That  is,  so  also 
does  the  resurrection  state  differ  from  this  present. 
"  It  (that  is,  man  represented  by  grain  sown,  as  in 
verses  36-38,)  is  sown  in  corruption  •  it  is  raised  in 
incorruption  :  it  is  sown  in  dishonor ;  it  is  raised  in 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS,  325 

glory :  it  is  sown  in  weakness  ;  it  is  raised  in  power : 
it  is  sown  a  natural  body  ;  it  is  raised  a  spiritual 
body.  ...  The  first  man  is  of  the  earth,  earthy :  the 

v  i  **     / 

second  man  is  the  Lord  from  heaven.  As  is  the 
earthy,  such  are  they  also  that  are  earthy,  and  as  is 
the  heavenly,  such  are  they  also  that  are  heavenly. 
And  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the  earthy,  we 
shall  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly." 

This,  it  will  be  observed,  is  the  same  subject  con- 
tinued for  further  illustration,  the  subject  of  the 
universal  resurrection.  It  is  a  more  particular  de- 
scription of  the  character  and  condition  of  that  state 
of  being  into  which  the  resurrection  introduces  our 
race.  It  amplifies  the  argument  drawn  from  Christ 
as  the  first-fruits,  offered  in  Rom.  xi.  16  •  "  For  if  the 
first-fruits  be  holy,  the  lump  is  also  holy."  If  any 
will  contend  for  a  corrupt,  inglorious,  sinful,  and 
miserable  resurrection  state,  let  them  show  us  a 
sample  or  first-fruits  of  such  a  resurrection.  They 
cannot  do  this.  Christ  is  the  only  first-fruits  of  the 
resurrection  from  the  dead,  given  to  the  gospel 
teacher  of  life  and  immortality  for  exhibition  as  an 
ensample.  There  is  no  other  life  and  immortality 
brought  to  light  through  the  gospel  than  this  which 
we  have  now  seen,  with  grateful  admiration,  exhibited 
by  the  spirit  of  revelation.  Will  my  opponent  ex- 
claim in  his  wonder,  How  can  this  thing  be?  "  Ye 
do  greatly  err,  not  knowing  the  Scriptures,  nor  the 
power  of  God."  It  is  not  his  physical  so  much  as  his 
moral  power  that  you  misapprehend. 

But  notwithstanding  the  great  apostle  has  risen  so 
28 


326  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

high,  and  made  the  light  of  his  testimony  on  this 
sublimely  glorious  subject  advance  us  seemingly,  into 
perfect  day,  his  CLIMAX  is  yet  before  and  above  us. 
He  has  testified  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ  as  the 
head  of  every  man  and  first-fruits  of  the  human  race 
from  the  dead ;  of  the  resurrection  of  all  men  in  him 
into  a  state  and  organism  spiritual,  heavenly  and 
glorious ;  of  the  destruction  of  all  opposing  princi- 
ples and  powers  in  the  moral  system,  and  the  subjec- 
tion of  all  things  to  Christ ;  and  now  he  exclaims  in 
rapture:  "  Then  shall  be  brought  to  pass  the  saying 
that  is  written,  Death  is  swallowed  up  in  victory  !  0 
death,  where  is  thy  sting?  O  HADES,  where  is  thy 
victory  ?" 

But  since  it  was  the  business  of  my  opponent  to 
maintain  another  doctrine  in  relation  to  the  resurrec- 
tion, it  was  judicious  in  him  to  avoid  this  full  blaze 
of  gospel  day,  and  search  out  some  incidental  expres- 
sion of  Scripture  which  is  more  susceptible  of  a 
"private  interpretation."  Speaking  of  his  opinion 
that  "  the  children  of  the  resurrection '  are  only  a 
portion  of  mankind  who  earn  a  resurrection  which 
alone  is  worthy  of  the  name,  he  says,  "  This  is  con- 
firmed, it  seems  to  me,  beyond  all  question,  by  one 
word  of  the  apostle  Paul,  (Phil.  iii.  8-11,)  <I  count 
all  things  but  loss,  &c.,  if  by  any  means  I  might 
attain  unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.7  The  Doctor 
continues,—"  If,  on  being  raised  from  the  dead,  all 
men  are  to  be  fit  for  heaven,  Paul  need  not  have 
used  such  *  means  7  to  *  attain  '  to  it, — nor,  indeed, 
any  '  means '  whatever ;  for  he  was  sure  of  being 


REPLY  TO  DR.    ADAMS.  327 

raised,  like  the  rest  of  mankind. "  Here  we  will 
remark  as  we  pass,  that  he  uses  the  phrase,  "  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,"  even  when  applied  to  the  event 
of  raising  men  to  the  life  immortal,  in  so  vacillating 
and  dubious  a  sense  as  to  give  the  mind  pain  in  its 
effort  to  understand  him.  It  means  one  thing  or 
another,  just  as  caprice  may  select.  At  one  time  it 
means,  in  his  usage,  the  raising  of  all  men  from  the 
dead  into  another  life  ;  and  anon  he  has  it  to  signify 
the  passing  of  some  men  into  heaven  after  all  men  are 
raised  from  the  dead.  But  letting  this  confusion  of 
thought  pass,  the  Doctor  is  clearly  in  error  in  his 
interpretation  of  the  words  last  quoted  from  St.  Paul. 
They  cannot,  without  utter  violence  to  the  immedi- 
ate connection,  and  to  all  the  teachings  of  the  same 
apostle  in  relation  to  the  subject,  be  construed  as 
applying  to  the  actual  event  of  the  resurrection  from 
the  state  of  death.  Let  us  read  with  care  from  the 
7th  verse. 

"  But  what  things  were  gain  to  me,  those  I  counted 
loss  for  Christ.  Yea,  doubtless ;  and  I  count  all 
things  but  loss  for  the  excellency  of  the  knowledge 
of  Christ  Jesus  my  Lord  ;  for  whom  I  have  suffered 
the  loss  of  all  things,  and  do  count  them  but  dung 
that  I  may  win  Christ."  Now  nothing  could  be 
plainer  than  that  Paul  is  here  treating  on  the  supe- 
rior value  of  Christianity  as  a  life  possession,  over  all 
which  the  world  calls  wealth,  and  over  all  worldly 
honor.  He  continues,- — uAnd  be  found  in  him,  not 
having  mine  own  righteousness,  which  is  of  the  law, 
but  that  which  is  through  the  faith  of  Christ,  the 


328  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

righteousness  which  is  of  God  by  faith  ;  that  I  may 
know  him,  and  the  power  of  his  resurrection,  and  the 
fellowship  of  his  sufferings,  being  made  conformable 
unto  his  death ;  if  by  any  means  I  might  attain  unto 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead"  Altogether  this  relates 
to  the  present  life  of  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
extent  to  which  spiritual  advancement  was  attainable. 
When  he  speaks  of  being  made  conformable  unto 
Christ's  death,  he  does  not  mean  that  it  was  the  high 
object  of  his  efforts  to  be  literally  put  to  death  as 
Jesus  was.  My  opponent  himself  will  agree  with  me 
in  the  judgment  that  he  means  by  this,  that  he  desir- 
ed to  attain  to  the  self-sacrificing  spirit  which  Jesus 
exercised  even  unto  death,  and  to  a  deadness  of  the 
governing  power  of  the  flesh.  The  same  idea  is 
expressed  in  Rom.  vi.  6  ;  "  Knowing  this,  that  our  old 
man  is  crucified  with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might 
be  destroyed,  that  henceforth  we  should  not  serve 
sin.'  (We  would  that  the  Doctor  was  at  liberty  to 
use  his  written  rule,  explaining  Scripture  by  Scrip- 
ture.) Now  as  this  being  "  made  conformable  unto 
his  death,"  verse  10,  is  the  crucifixion  of  the  Justs  of 
the  flesh  and  the  power  of  sin  in  the  present  life  of 
Christian  faith,  of  course  the  next  words,  "  if  by  any 
means  I  might  attain  unto  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,"  signify  a  conformity,  in  like  manner,  to  the 
likeness  of  Christ's  resurrection,  which  is  the  likeness 
of  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  for  which  he  hoped. 
And  his  next  words  are,  "  Not  as  though  I  had 
already  attained,  either  were  already  perfect ;  but  I 
follow  after,  if  that  I  may  apprehend  that  for  which 


EEPLT  TO  DR.  ADA3IS.  329 

also  I  am  apprehended  of  Christ  Jesus."  To  make 
Paul  here  say  to  his  brethren  that  he  had  not  yet 
really  and  literally  died  and  been  raised  from  the 
dead  into  the  life  immortal,  would  be  inflicting  upoii 
him  as  ludicrous  a  truism  as  anecdote  tells  of  the 
greenest  sons  of  Erin.  He  designed  to  caution  his- 
brethren  not  to  understand  him  as  claiming  yet  to 
have  attained  to  the  spiritual  perfection  which  he 
had  described,,  and  to  which  he  aspired  ;  but  he  was 
passing  on  towards  it. 

The  precise  sentiment  of  the  saying.  "  Being  made 
conformable  unto  his  death  r  if  by  any  means  I  might 
attain  unto  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,"  is  often 
and  variously  expressed  by  the  same  apostle.  For 
another  instance,  see  Bom.  vi.  1-5.  "  What  shall  we 
say  then?  shall  we  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may 
abound?  God  forbid.  How  shall  we  that  are  dead 
to  sin  live  any  longer  therein-  ?  Know  ye  not  that  so 
many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus  Christ  were 
baptized  into  his  death?  Therefore  we  are  buried 
with  him  by  baptism  into  death  ;  that  like  as  Christ 
was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the 
Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of 
life.  For  if  we  have  been  planted  together  in  the 
likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall  be  also  in  the  likeness, 
of  his  resurrection." 

All  this  is  clear  and  unmistakable  in  its  meaning. 
The  actual  event  of  the  resurrection  into  another 
state  of  being  beyond  physical  death,  St.  Paul  never 
speaks  of  as  laboring  to  earn  or  striving  to  procure. 
But,  to  the  victory  of  faith,  and  the  spiritual  advance- 
28* 


330  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

ment  which  should  constitute  in  his  life  a  transcript 
of  that  resurrection  state  of  glory  which  was  the 
object  of  the  Christian  hope,  he  did  faithfully  labor 
to  attain. 

Though  we  may  have  spent  more  time  than  was 
necessary  on  this  effort  of  our  opponent  to  make  the 
resurrection  an  uncertain  thing  of  barter,  yet  we 
must  call  the  attention  of  our  readers  to  one  other 
point  of  view,  in  which  its  futility  is  strikingly  visi- 
ble. This  attaining  to  the  resurrection  of  the  dead, 
(Phil.  iii.  11,)  is  what  the  apostle  was  not  assured  of. 
He  was  striving,  if  by  any  means  he  might  attain  to 
it.  See  into  what  a  dubious  position  our  learned 
friend,  and  that  with  seeming  unconsciousness,  throws 
the  great  apostle,  who  has  so  boldly  and  lucidly 
declared,  as  a  great  fact  in  the  counsel  of  God,  and 
as  the  burden  of  the  gospel  revelation,  the  resurrec- 
tion of  all  men  from  the  dead  into  a  state  of  incorrup- 
tion  and  glory,  now  to  represent  him  as  doubtful 
whether  there  will  be  any  resurrection  of  the  dead  at 
all — barely  deeming  it  possible  that  lie  might,  for 
himself,  earn  a  future  existence !  No  :  the  apostle 
has  never  committed  himself  to  any  such  contradic- 
tion. In  respect  to  the  spiritual  elevation  for  which 
he  was  laboring  in  the  present  sphere,  after  the  like- 
ness of  the  heavenly  man  of  the  immortal  resurrec- 
tion, he  could  not  be  assured  as  to  what  degree  he 
should  attain,  because  in  this  rudimental  state  he 
found  another  law  in  his  members  warring  against 
the  law  of  his  mind,  sometimes  bringing  him  into 
captivity  to  the  law  of  sin  which  was  in  his  mem- 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  331 

bers.*  He  could  only  say  that  he  would  work  on, 
"  press  forward  "  to  that  high  aim.  But  with  regard 
to  the  result  of  God's  revealed  purpose  of  Grace,  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  into  the  life  and  immortality 
brought  to  light  through  the  gospel,  he  was  in  no 
doubt  or  uncertain tv.  His  soul  filled  with  the  burn- 

•/ 

ing  light  of  this  truth,  he  joyously  exclaims, — "  For 
we  KNOW,  that  if  our  earthly  house  of  this  taberna- 
cle were  dissolved,  we  have  a  building  of  God,  a 
house  not  made  with  hands,  eternal  in  the  heavens." 

Resurrection  to  Damnation. 

We  come  now  to  Dr.  A.'s  only  remaining  Scripture 
proof  of  his  position  before  us, — to  wit,  that  "  THE 
TERMS  USED  WITH  REGARD  TO  THE  RESURRECTION  OF 
THE  DEAD,  ARE  PROOFS  OF  ENDLESS  RETRIBUTION." 
He  introduces  it,  in  connection  with  comments, 
thus  : 

"  Christ  said,  '  The  hour  is  coming,  and  now  is,  when  the  dead 
shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  they  that  hear  shall 
live.'  This  he  said  to  illustrate  his  commission  to  bestow  spiritual 
life  on  those  who  are  dead  in  sin.  Then  he  proceeds  at  once  to 
assert  a  power  in  confirmation  of  this,  in  the  way  of  miracle. 
'  Marvel  not  at  this ' — (at  my  power  to  regenerate  the  soul),  for 
the  hour  is  coming  (notice  that  he  does  not  here  add — '  and  now 
is ')  when  all  that  are  in  their  graves  shall  hear  his  voice  and  shall 
come  forth,  they  that  have  done  good  to  the  resurrection  of  life, 
and  they  that  have  done  evil  to  the  resurrection  of  damnation." 
(John  v.  25-29.) 

Here,  as  in  the  other  case,  our  friend  has  turned 
away  from  the  full,  clear,  and  unquestionable  testi- 

*Rom.  vii  23. 


332  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

monies  of  the  real  resurrection  of  the  literally 
dead,  and  searched  out  a  passage  whose  terms  of 
expression  and  entire  surroundings  show  it  to  be 
figurative,  referring  to  another  matter. 

1.  The  very  terms  of  this  passage  suggest  to  the 
careful  and  reverent  reader  that  it  must  refer  to  a 
different  event  from  that  of  the  literal  and  universal 
resurrection    from    the    dead.      The    description   is 
entirely  unlike  all  the  unquestionable  descriptions  of 
the  ultimate  resurrection. 

2.  There  is  a  slight  error  in  the   Doctor's   quota- 
tion.    He   substitutes,  unawares,  the  pronoun  their 
for  the   article  the.     It  may  at  first  view  seem  that 
the  mistake  is  unessential ;  but  on  careful  consideration 
the  Bible  student  will  perceive  that  Jesus  used  the 
phraseology  as  it  is  in  the  record  for  good  reason. 
All  that  are  in  the  graves,  is  a  better  expression  in 
view  of  the  term  graves  being  used  figuratively,  than 
their  graves  would  have  been. 

3.  These    words  were  uttered,  as   my    opponent 
also  allows,  on  an  occasion  when  the  subject  in  hand 
was  not  the   literal  resurrection   from  the  dead,  but 
events    figuratively    called    resurrections,    and    the 
Messianic  authority  of  Judgment,     Having  just  spok- 
en of  the  derivation  of  his  authority  from  the  Father, 
and  the  power  of  his  word  to  give  life  to  them  who 
receive  it,  he  makes  a  more  formal  announcement  of 
the  principle,  thus  :  "  Verily,  verily,  I   say  unto  you, 
the  hour  is   coming  and   now  is,  when  the  dead  shall 
hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God,  and  they  that  hear 
shall  live."     He  continues,—"  For  as  the  Father  hath 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  333 

life  in  himself,  so  hath  he  given  to  the  Son  to  have 
life  in  himself;  and  hath  given  him  authority  to  exe- 
cute judgment  also,  because  he  is  the  Son  of  man.'' 
And  because  the  people  might  regard  him  as  assum- 
ing too  much  in  this  last  remark,  he  immediately 
adds, — "  Marvel  not  at  this."  Marvel  not  at  what  ? 
Dr.  Adams  explains,  "at  my  power  to  regenerate  the 
soul."  But  this  is  wrong.  It  was  particularly  at  his 
claim  of  authority  to  execute  judgment,  that  he  bade 
them  not  to  marvel.  And  he  proceeded  immediately 
to  assure  them  that  the  time  was  near  when  this 
authority  to  execute  judgment  would,  like  his  power 
to  spiritually  quicken  the  soul  in  that  present  time, 
be  attested  by  fact.  "For  the  hour  is  coming" — 
"  notice,"  says  the  Doctor,  "  that  he  does  not  here 
add,  and  now  is"  No,  for  it  was  not  true  that  the 
execution  of  judgment  which  he  proceeded  to  pre- 
dict, then  was.  It  was  about  to  be.  "  For  the  hour  is 
coming,  when  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  his 
voice."  It  was  an  event  about  to  be. 

The  phrase  erchetai  hora,  which  is  here  rendered 
the  hour  is  coming,  occurs  in  six  other  instances  in 
John's  Gospel,  in  all  of  which  it  applies  to  events 
which  were  then  approaching.  See  chap.  iv.  verses 
21  and  23  ;  and  chap.  xvi.  verses  2,  4,  25,  and  32. 
These  passages  relate  to  the  more  perfect  establish- 
ment of  spiritual  gospel  worship,  the  persecutions  to 
be  endured  by  the  Christian  disciples,  their  dispersion 
at  the  time  of  his  crucifixion,  and  his  afterwards  show- 
ing them  more  plainly  of  the  gracious  counsels  of 
God.  These  were  all  approaching  events,  and  ac- 


834  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

cordingly  Jesus  said  of  them,  as  of  the  event  before 
us,  crchetai  hora,  the  hour  is  coming.  Thus  in  every 
other  case  where  John's  Gospel  has  the  phrase  which 
in  this  passage  is  rendered,  the  hour  is  coming,  it  is 
used  in  reference  to  an  event  which  was  approaching. 
And  the  Scriptures  generally,  perhaps  we  may  say 
invariably,  when  they  say  of  anything  that  it  is  coming, 
or  it  cometh,  mean  that  it  approacheth,  or  that  it  is 
next  in  order  of  time  to  something  else  spoken  of. 

And  now,  what  remarkable  execution  of  judgment, 
Scripturally  ascribed  to  the  Son  of  man,  was  then  ap- 
proaching ?  To  this  we  will  look,  after  one  other 
consideration. 

4.  The  circumstance  that  the  coming  forth  here 
spoken  of  is  from  the  graves, — mnemeiois,  the  tombs 
or  sepulchres,  is  a  weighty,  and  we  think  a  conclusive 
argument,  against  its  being  understood  of  the  immor- 
tal resurrection.  This  latter  is  never  spoken  of  in 
the  Scriptures  as  a  coming  forth  from  mnemeiois,  the 
sepulchres  or  graves.  It  is  from  hades,  the  state  of 
death,  never  used  in  the  plural.  St.  Paul's  exclama- 
tion, in  view  of  the  victory  of  life  through  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead,  is  not,  0  mnemeiois,  graves, — 
but  "  0  hades,  (state  of  death)  where  is  thy  victory?" 

Dr.  Adams  says,  "All  that  are  in  their  (the)  graves," 
includes  all  who  die,  from  Abel  to  the  "  last  victim  of 
death."  ]t  is  not  so.  Millions  of  the  human  race, 
i.  e.,  their  bodies,  have  been  sunk  in  the  sea,  burned 
to  ashes,  and  left  to  decay  on  the  surface  of  the 
ground.  They  have  no  graves  or  sepulchres  ;  but  all 
go  to  hades,  and  thence  the  literal  resurrection  bears 
them  into  life  immortal. 


BEPLY  TO   DR.    ABA3IS,  335 

5.  But  though  the  mnemeiois,  or  sepulchres,  are 
not  used  in  the  Scriptures  in  description  of  the  state 
from  which  the  immortal  resurrection  delivers   our 
race;  because,  as  we  showed  before,  that  resurrection 
has   nothing  to  do  with  the  ashes  in  the  tombs,  yet 
they  are  familiarly  employed  in  the  way  of  figurative 
descriptions    of  a  state   of  degradation   and  despon- 
dency,    And  the  redemption  of  persons  from  this  low 
state  of  trouble,  is    called  their  being  brought  up  out 
of  their  graves.     See  Ezek.  xxxvii.  11,  12,  13  ;  "  Then 
he  said  unto  me,  son  of  man,  these  bones  are  the 
whole  house  of  Israel ;  behold,  they  say,  Our  bones 
are  dried,  and   our  hope  is  lost : — we  are  cut  oif  for 
our  parts.     Therefore  prophesy  and  say  unto  them. 
Thus  saith  the  Lord  God,  Behold,  0  my  people,  I  will 
open  your  graves,  and  cause  you  to  come  up  out  of 
your  graves,  and  bring  you  into  the  land  oi  Israel. 
And  ye  shall  know  that  I  am  the  Lord,  when  I  have 
opened  your  graves,  and  brought  you  up  out  of  your 
graves,    .  .  .  and  shall  place  you  in  your  own  land/' 
Here  the  redemption  of  the  Jews  from  their  seventy 
years  Babylonish   captivity,  was  signified  to  them  by 
the  promise   of  God,  that  he  would    cause  them  to 
come  up   out  of  their  graves,  to  inherit   the  land  of 
Israel. 

6.  The  prophet  Daniel  (chap,  xii.)  testifies  of  a 
judgment,  his  description   of  which    enables   us  to 
identify  it  with  certainty,  in  terms  so  similar  to  those 
employed  by  Jesus  in  the  passage  before  us,  that  the 
two  have  been   universally  regarded   by  theologians 
and  commentators  as  parallel  passages.     "And  at  that 
time  shall  Michael  stand  up,  the  great  Prince  which 


336  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION, 

standeth  for  the  children  of  thy  people  :  and  there 
shall  be  a  time  of  trouble,  such  as  never  was  since 
there  was  a  nation,  even  unto  that  same  time;  and 
at  that  time  thy  people  shall  be  delivered,  every  one 
that  shall  be  found  written  in  tire  book.  And  many 
of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall 
awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame 
and  everlasting  contempt." 

This  Scripture,  as  we  have  said,  learned  divines  of 
•all  denominations  have  considered,  and  that  with  the 
•greatest  propriety,  to  be  parallel  with  John  v.  28,  29. 
'The  awakening  from  the  dust  of  the  earth,  some  to  ever- 
lasting life,  and  some  to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt, 
in  Daniel ;  and1"7ie  coming  forth  from  the  graves,  they 
that  have  done  good  unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  &c.. 
in  John  —  are  evidently  spoken  of  as  the  same  event. 
And  since  Jesus  so  clearly  informs  us  in  what  event 
this  prophecy  of  Daniel  was  to  have  its  fulfilment, 
this,  paralleled  with  the  other,  explains  that. 

Jesus,  in  disc-cursing  to  his  disciples  on  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem  and  events  connected  therewith, 
referred  to  this  very  chapter  in  Daniel,  saying, 
41  When  ye  therefore  shall  see  the  abomination  of  des- 
olation spoken  of  by  Daniel  the  prophet,  —  then  let 
them  which  be  in  Judea  flee  into  the  mountains ;  for 
then  shall  be  great  tribulation,  such  as  was  not  since 
the  beginning  of  the  world  to  this  time,  no,  nor  ever 
shall  be."  *  Here  Jesus  speaks  of  the  same  time  of 
trouble  of  which  Daniel  spoke }  and  he  then  fixes 
the  time  to  that  generation. 

*Matt  xsiv.  15-21.    Mark  siiL  14-19.    Luke  xxi.  20-24. 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  337 

In  the  generation  in  which  Christ  was  on  earth, 
therefore,  was  that  fulfilled  which  Daniel  spoke;  ''And 
there  shall  be  a  time  of  trouble,  such  as  never  was 
since  there  was  a  nation  even  to  that  same  time. 
And  many  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth  shall 
awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to  shame 
and  everlasting  contempt/7  And  I  cannot  see  the 
least  shadow  of  reason  to  doubt  that  Jesus  in  the 
passage  in  question  spoke  of  the  same  event.  We 
should  very  naturally  have  supposed,  that  when  Jesus 
was  addressing  the  people  to  whom  the  prophets 
spoke,  and  on  a  particular  judgment  which  they  had 
predicted,  he  would  sometimes  use  the  language 
which  they  had  employed  on  the  same  subject.  And 
this  event,  the  judgment  of  that  age,  was  in  the  time 
very  naturally  implied  by  the  phrase,  the  hour  is  com- 
ing, which  we  have  seen  to  denote  an  approaching 
time.  And  furthermore,  this  is  the  judgment  which 
is  uniformly  represented  in  the  New  Testament  as 
verifying  the  authority  of  Christ  "  to  execute  judg- 
ment," which  he  announced  in  the  passage  before 
us. 

It  is  plain  that  events  did  take  place  in  the  time 
of  that  judgment,  which,  considering  the  ancient 
mode  of  speaking  and  writing,  justified  the  strong 
language  of  Daniel  and  Jesus,  as  spoken  with  refer- 
ence to  it.  When  Jesus  was  here,  he  used  to  ad- 
dress the  Jews  as  the  most  wicked  people  on  earth. 
Yet  he  found  them  hiding  under  false  pretensions  of 
piety :  and  calculating  to  escape  the  divine  threaten- 
ings,  to  which  their  works  so  clearly  proved  them  to 
29 


338  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

be  subject.  And,  according  to  Josephus,  tliough; 
after  this  time,  succeeding  and  increasing  calamities 
came  upon  them,  yet  they  slept  on  still.  They  ap- 
peared to  be  blind  to  the  enormity  of  their  sins,  and 
cleaf  to  all  the  threatenings  of  God,  —  until  they 
began  to  experience  this  "  great  tribulation,  such  as 
was  not  since  the  beginning  of  the  world,  no,  nor 
ever  shall  be."  When  these  terrible  calamities  began 
to  break  forth  upon  them,  then  they  were  waked  from 
the  dust;  they  were  called  forth  from  the  graves, 
or  the  secret  places,  in  which  they  had  been  sleeping, 
—  they  were  roused  from  their  dormancy.  They 
came  forth  to  a  sense  of  their  own  shame,  to  the  res- 
urrection of  condemnation,  and  suffered  that  dreadful 
punishment,  of  which  Moses  and  the  prophets,  and 
the  Son  of  God,  had  so  repeatedly  forewarned  them. 
And  this  judgment  did  not  affect  the  wicked  alone  ; 
it  affected  the  faithful  disciples  of  Jesus,  too.  It 
called  them  forth  into  a  more  full  enjoyment  of  life 
and  happiness.  They  had  been  pressed  down  under 
grievous  persecutions,  and  the  calamities  of  war  pre- 
vailed in  the  land.  And  when  every  thing  in  the 
natural  world  appeared  blackness  and  darkness,  no 
doubt  considerable  darkness  brooded  over  their  minds. 
We  know  that  some  things  which  Christ  said  to  his 
disciples  when  he  was  with  them,  they  did  not  un- 
derstand until  after  they  were  fulfilled.  For  instance, 
though  he  had  repeatedly  told  them  that  he  should 
be  put  to  death,  and  should  rise  again  on  the  third 
day,  yet  when  he  was  crucified  they  were  disconso- 
late, and  understood  not  what  fre  had  told  them,  until 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  339 

(iTJie  Lord  had  risen  indeed  "  So,  likewise,  notwith- 
standing Jesus  had  given  his  disciples  frequent  in- 
structions concerning  this  most  dreadful  judgment, 
and  had  engaged  that  they  should  meet  deliverance, 
even  as  Daniel  said,  "  Then  shall  thy  people  be  de- 
livered, every  one  that  shall  be  found  written  in  the 
book,"  yet  we  may  reasonably  conclude  that  when 
the  terrible  calamities  of  war,  pestilence  and  famine, 
were  added  to  the  grievous  persecutions  they  were 
experiencing  from  the  hands  of  the  Jews,  they  were, 
for  a  time,  in  great  darkness  and  trouble.  But  they 
were  all  delivered  from  the  calamities  of  this  war; 
and  likewise  from  the  persecutions  of  the  Jews.  This 
explained  and  fulfilled  the  promises  of  Jesus  relating 
to  their  salvation  in  this  judgment, — and  at  the  same 
time  that  it  saved  them  from  the  principal  of  their 
temporal  distresses,  it  of  course  cleared  away  the 
clouds  which  these  evils  had  spread  over  their  minds, 
confirmed  their  faith  and  confidence  in  him,  raised 
them  into  more  light,  and  renewed  and  advanced  their 
enjoyment  of  gospel  life  and  peace. 

Now  this  important  change  in  the  condition  of 
the  disciples,  so  wonderfully  wrought,  was  as  proper- 
ly called  their  coming  forth  from  the  graves,  through 
the  authority  of  Christ,  to  the  resurrection  of  life,  as 
the  redemption  of  the  Jews  from  Babylonish  captiv- 
ity into  their  own  land,  was  called  of  the  Lord  by 
Ezekiel,  the  bringing  of  them  up  from  their  graves  to 
inherit  the  land  of  Israel.  And  equally  striking  is  the 
declaration,  They  that  have  done  evil  shall  come  forth 
to  the  resurrection  of  condemnation,  to  express  this 


340  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

effectual  arousing  of  the  wicked  and  unbelieving 
from  the  graves  of  secrecy  and  refuge  of  lies;  to  misery, 
"  shame  and  contempt." 

Since  I  published  in  pamphlet  form,  more  than 
thirty  years  ago,  the  same  exposition  which  I  here 
give,  (but  more  extensively  elucidated)  of  John  v. 
28,  29,  I  have  had  the  privilege  of  reading  the  works 
of  Newcomb  Cappe,  an  English  Divine,  in  which  I 
find  the  same  explanation  given  this  Scripture  that  I 
have  here  given  it,  As  he  was  a  believer  in  the  doc- 
trine of  future  punishment,  his  prejudices  would  have 
inclined  him  to  apply  this  Scripture  to  that  subject 
were  it  not  that  he  felt  obliged  by  the  clear  evidence 
in  the  case  to  apply  it  otherwise.  And  I  think  it 
must  have  been  the  clear  evidence  in  the  case,  that 
led  two  persons,  of  different  sentiment  on  the  subject 
of  future  punishment,  residing  in  distant  parts  of  the 
world,  and  having  no  knowledge  of  each  other's 
writings,  to  give  this  Scripture  so  precisely  the  same 
sense,  and  in  a  manner  so  similar.  The  following  is 
his  paraphrase  of  these  two  verses,  including  that  on 
the  27ib,  and  referring  to  the  verses  preceding  : 

Nevertheless,  it  is  not  for  such  gracious  purposes  alone,  that  I 
am  ordained  unto  a  kingdom  :  though  I  am  a  Son  of  man,  low  as  I 
now  am,  and  undistinguished  from  among  the  common  of  mankind, 
I  am  appointed  also  to  judge,  and  to  execute  judgment  upon  this 
untoward  generation.  (28,  29.)  Let  not  what  I  say  amaze  you ; 
suffer  not  yourselves  to  be  lost  in  groundless  hesitating  and  unprofit- 
able wonder :  believe  me,  for  it  is  true,  not  only  that  the  hour  is 
very  near  at  hand,  when  some  who  are  now  perfectly  inattentive, 
and  insensible  to  my  call,  shall  hear  the  voice  in  which  I  will  ad- 
dress them,  from  my  approaching  state  of  exaltation,  and  being 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  341 

obedient  thereto,  shall  live ;  but  it  is  alike  true,  that  though  farther 
off,  yet  the  time  is  at  no  great  distance,  within  the  compass  of  this 
present  generation,  when  all  that  now  are  in  the  graves,  who  at 
present  sit  in  darkness  and  the  shadow  of  death,  the  whole  body 
of  the  Jewish  people,  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  God,  sum- 
moning them  to  judgment ;  and  being  then  at  length  awakened  to 
perceive  who  and  what  he  is,  shall  come  forth  out  of  their  present 
state  of  darkness  and  ignorance,  to  a  new  state  of  mind,  to  a  resur- 
rection, which,  to  those  who  have  been  obedient  to  the  calls  of 
Providence,  shall  issue  in  the  preservation  of  their  lives,  amidst 
the  calamities  which  shall  overwhelm  their  country ;  to  those  who 
have  refused  to  hearken  to  them,  shall  issue  in  their  condemnation 
to  fall  among  them  that  fall,  and  to  take  their  share  in  all  the  bit- 
terness of  the  calamities  that  are  hastening  to  involve  this  country. 

Such  is  the  agreement  of  Cappe's  opinion  with  the 
view  we  have  offered  on  this  Scripture.  We  call  to 
it  the  most  rigid  scrutiny  ;  and  such  scrutiny  will 
prove  its  correctness.  Blessed  be  God  that  he  has 
given  the  revelation  of  his  great  purpose  of  "  grace 
and  truth/'  his  purpose  of  life  and  immortality  for 
man,  in  such  full  and  determinate  expressions,  and  in 
such  a  flow  of  spirit  and  power,  that  no  human  inge- 
nuity can  cloud  or  obscure  it,  even  by  the  perversion 
of  incidentals  and  figures. 

There  is  one  other  Scripture  expression  in  which 
the  word  resurrection  occurs,  which,  though  Dr. 
Adams  does  not  quote  it,  we  will  briefly  notice, 
because  some  of  our  readers  of  inquiring  minds  may 
think  of  it  as  favoring  his  argument  from  the  term 
worthy,  in  Luke  xx.  35.  It  is  Luke  xiv.  14.  "  For 
thou  shalt  be  recompensed  at  the  resurrection  of  the 
just."  But  the  careful  reader  will  observe  at  a  glance 
29* 


342  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

that  this  is  not  the  anasasis,  resurrection  or  rising  of 
the  dead.  There  is  nothing  in  this  connection  to  sug- 
gest the  thought  of  the  immortal  resurrection.  The 
above  written  Greek  word,  though  it  is  the  word  usu- 
ally employed  when  the  rising  from  the  state  of  death 
is  the  subject,  is  used  in  relation  to  other  risings.  The 
word  is  defined  by  Parkhurst  to  signify, — 

"  1.  A  standing  on  the  feet  again,  or  rising  as 
opposed  to  falling."  This  sense  of  the  word,  which 
he  sets  down  as  its  primary  meaning,  he  illustrates 
by  reference  to  Luke  ii.  34.  "  And  Simeon  blessed 
them,  and  said  unto  Mary  his  mother,  Behold,  this 
child  is  set  for  the  fall  and  rising'  again  of  many  in 
Israel."  He  .says  the  word  occurs  twice  in  the  Greek 
of  the  Old  Testament,  "in  both  which  it  signifies  to 
rise,  to  stand  up"  These  two  cases  are  Sam.  iii.  62  ; 
"  The  lips  of  those  that  rose  up  against  me  ;"  and 
Zeph.  iii.  8  ;  "  Until  the  day  that  I  rise  up  to  the 
prey." 

We  have  said  that  there  is  nothing  in  this  connec- 
tion which  suggests  the  subject  of  the  rising  of  the 
dead.  Jesus  was  commending  the  practice  of  making 
entertainments  for  the  poor  rather  than  the  rich, 
because,  though  they  were  not  able  at  present  to 
reciprocate  the  favor,  they  should  be  recompensed  at 
the  rising  up  of  the  just.  To  so  construe  this  as  to 
make  Jesus  refer  to  the  resurrection  state  for  a  motive 
on  the  score  of  reward  for  all  their  little  acts  of 
courtesy  and  kindness,  even  the  inviting  of  poor 
neighbors  to  a  feast,  is  to  belittle  the  great  Teacher, 
and  to  degrade  his  religion  by  making  its  highest 


REPLY  TO   DR.  ADAMS,  343 

motives  to  be  rattles  and  rock-horses.  The  aim  of 
Jesus  in  this  case  was  the  suggestion  of  a  judicious 
system  of  social  intercourse  and  kindness,  not  orig- 
inal with  him,  but  commended  by  wise  men  of  old. 
There  are  changes  and  revolutions  in  the  affairs  of 
human  life  ;  and  especially  when  the  wise  and  good, 
the  pure  and  just,  are  contemned  and  oppressed,  a 
speedy  revolution  of  events  shall  bring  them  up,  and 
cast  down  the  oppressors.  And  they  who  remember 
and  bless  the  poor  in  their  depression,  while  they 
have  that  sublime  blessedness  in  their  souls  which  is 
a  large  reward,  are  sure  to  be  remembered  with  favor 
at  the  rising  of  the  poor  and  oppressed  into  power. 
This  idea  is  often  presented  in  the  Scriptures.  Solo- 
mon says,  in  respect  to  deeds  of  charity,  "  Cast  thy 
bread  upon  the  waters ;  for  thou  shalt  find  it  after 
many  days.  Give  a  portion  to  seven,  and  also  to 
eight,  for  thou  knowest  not  what  evil  shall  be  upon 
the  earth."  That  is,  we  know  not  how  soon  we  shall 
need  the  favor  of  those  we  now  relieve.  And,  when 
Jesus  was  in  the  work  of  his  ministry  on  earth,  he 
often  spoke  of  an  approaching  revolution,  when  there 
should  be  a  special  and  extensive  rising  up  of  those 
who  practised  the  charities  of  his  religion. 

Dr.  Adams  throws  into  this  division  of  his  "  Argu- 
ment" several  other  fragments  of  Scripture  passages, 
as  descriptive,  he  says,  of  the  character  and  condition 
of  men  in  the  immortal  resurrection  state,  which  we 
need  not  tarry  here  to  consider,  having  alread}- 
explained  them  all,  as  we  came  to  them  in  earlier  parts 
of  his  production.  He  says, — 


344  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

It  seems  to  us  unaccountable  that  any  should  adopt  the  idea  that 
all  who  are  raised  from  the  dead  will  be  the  children  of  God,  if 
they  have  ever  read  the  parables  of  Christ  in  Matt.  xiii.  How 
does  he  there  say  it  shall  be  in  the  end  of  the  world  ? 

"  The  end  of  this  world,"  it  reads  in  the  Book ; — 
that  is,  as  we  have  shown,  the  end  of  that  present  age. 
But  the  Doctor  proceeds  to  reiterate,  here,  certain 
words  which  occur  at  the  conclusion  of  the  parables 
of  the  tares  and  the  net,  of  casting  into  a  furnace  of 
fire,  just  as  if  his  having  copied  these  words  into  his 
first  division  settled  their  meaning  in  his  way.  We 
assure  our  friend  that  his  wonder  at  our  not  regarding 
these  words  as  descriptive  of  human  condition  in  the 
resurrection  state,  cannot  half  equal  our  astonishment 
that  a  man  of  his  education  and  moral  principle,  know- 
ing that  the  word  written  by  the  pen  of  the  Evangelist 
where  world  is  used  in  our  version,  signifies  "  an  age 
or  periodical  dispensation  of  providence,"  should  so 
studiously  keep  dark  this  fact,  and  so  cooly  quote  and 
reiterate  the  passage  as  if  it  unquestionably  described 
the  end  of  the  material  world,  and  events  of  succeed- 
ing eternity. 

And  now  it  is  refreshing  to  find  our  esteemed 
friend  to  throw  himself  into  the  attitude  of  reasoning. 
He  is  a  good  reasoner  when  he  has  materials  to 
reason  with,  and  he  has  the  milk  of  kindness  flowing 
about  his  heart.  He  seems  to  have  some  just  con- 
ceptions of  what  is  good  and  right,  but  the  rudiments 
of  his  theology  are  so  fraught  with  the  spirit  of 
cruelty  and  unreason,  that  when  he  starts  with 
reason  and  runs  into  his  theology,  his  reasoning 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  345 

becomes  wrecked  and  scattered.     The  following  are 
specimens : 

"  When  the  soul  after  death  finds  itself  on  the  way 
to  hell,  can  we  suppose  that  an  opportunity  to  escape 
by  repentance,  if  it  were  offered,  would  be  rejected?" 
This  question  is  put  in  a  form  to  imply  in  the  Doc- 
tor's mind  the  opinion  that  the  very  sight  of  hell 
would  induce  repentance  in  every  soul  that  needed 
it,  if  permitted.  This  may  be  very  reasonable  ;  and 
the  repentance  induced  by  the  sight  of  hell  after 
death,  would  probably  be  worth  as  much  as  that  in- 
duced by  the  fear  of  hell  before  death.  But  he 
supposes  that  God  will  not  permit  them  to  repent. 
Is  this  reasonable  ?  Our  friend,  as  we  are  about  to 
see,  presumes  to  appeal  to  the  principles  which 
govern  a  father's  conduct  towards  his  children.  Will 
a  father,  who  punishes  a  child  for  disobedience,  pro- 
hibit, or  render  impossible,  the  child's  repentance? 
The  hypothesis,  however,  from  which  our  friend  sets 
out  with  his  reasoning,  that  of  the  souFs  seeing  itself 
on  the  way  to  hell  after  death,  we  have  shown  to  be 
romance.  We  will  hear  the  Doctor  further: 

<:  If  the  only  object  of  God  is  to  reclaim  the  sinner,  he  will 
release  him  the  first  moment  he  repents.  It  is  so  in  this  world. 
'  And  when  he  was  yet  a  great  way  off,  his  father  saw  him  and 
had  compassion  and  ran  and  fell  on  his  neck  and  kissed  him.'  If 
the  soul,  at  the  sight  of  its  punishment,  relents  and  agrees  to  the 
terms  of  pardon,  does  a  Universalist  believe  that  God  will  say, 
'  No  ;  you  must  suffer  in  hell  for  your  sins,  even  though  you  have 
now  repented?  Would  an  earthly  father  inflict  punishment  in 
such  a  case  ?" 


346  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

No,  indeed  !  What  does  our  worthy  friend  think 
Universalism  is  ?  Does  he  suppose  that  Universalists 
believe  in  a  future  hell  in  which  men  will  be  punished 
after  they  repent,  in  order  to  make  up  a  given  quanti- 
ty of  suffering?  Why,  Dear  Sir,  you  are  looking 
into  Universalism  through  Orthodox  spectacles.  Or- 
thodoxy makes  the  law  of  God  to  regard,  primarily, 
its  own  honor  rather  than  the  good  of  its  subjects. 
It  requires  so  much  infliction  of  suffering  for  so  much 
sin,  length  and  breadth;  and,  however  the  sinner 
may  have  reformed,  the  law  can  never  be  satisfied 
but  by  the  infliction  of  just  that  measure  of  ven- 
geance, either  upon  the  sinner,  or  upon  a  substitute. 
This  is  Orthodoxy  ;  but  it  is  not  Christianity,  and  of 
course  it  is  not  Universalism.  God's  law,  given  to 
man,  is  the  law  of  a  father,  adapted  to  the  dearest 
interests  of  his  children.  No  other  law  would  be 
honorable  in  itself,  or  honorable  to  its  author.  The 
penalties  of  God's  law  are  in  its  own  spirit,  designed 
to  promote  its  own  aim,  as  preventive  and  remedial 
agents.  Accordingly  it  cannot  continue  punishment 
after  reformation,  nor  seek  satisfaction  in  the  torture 
of  a  substitute.  The  punishment  of  the  innocent 
would  be  the  greatest  conceivable  violation  of  all  the 
principles  of  God's  law.  And  however  one  may 
have  been  far  astray  in  the  paths  of  sin,  when  he 
comes  out  of  those  ways  by  genuine  repentance, 
there  is  no  law  that  can  condemn  him.  Accordingly 
the  apostle  says, — "  There  is,  therefore,  now  no  con- 
demnation to  them  which  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  who 
walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  spirit."  Why? 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  347 

Is  it  because  Christ  has  satiated  the  Divine  ven- 
geance by  being  punished  as  a  substitute?  No, — and 
nothing  of  the  kind  ever  happened.  Paul  proceeds 
to  inform  us  why  there  is  no  condemnation  to  them 
who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh, 
but  after  the  spirit : — "  For  the  law  of  the  spirit  of 
life  in  Christ  Jesus  hath  made  man  free  from  the  law 
of  sin  and  death." 

No,  the  curse  or  condemnation  of  the  law  ceases, 
when  the  love  and  power  of  sin  are  thrown  off.  There 
is  a  rich  and  harmonious  system  of  principles  here  in 
Universalism,  which  we  would  that  our  friend  might 
come  to  understand.  We  know,  morally,  of  no  hell 
beyond  or  outside  of  sin.  The  salvation  of  the  gospel 
is  a  spiritual  work,  and  not  a  letting  off  from  an  ex- 
traneous and  foreign  vengeance  by  the  expedient  of 
killing  a  substitute.  Therefore  it  appears  to  us  a 
strange  question  to  be  put  from  so  intelligent  a 
source  at  this  late  day,  "  If  the  soul  relents,  and 
agrees  to  the  terms  of  pardon,  does  a  Universalist 
believe  that  God  will  say,  No ;  you  must  suffer  in 
hell  for  your  sins  ?"  He  adds,  "  Would  an  earthly 
father  inflict  punishment  in  such  a  case?"  We 
answer,  no.  Neither  would  an  earthly  father  ever 
punish  but  with  reference  to  the  ultimate  correction 
and  benefit  of  his  child.  But  do  you,  Sir,  design 
this  reference  to  the  earthly  parent  for  illustration 
of  the  principles  of  the  Divine  government  ?  In  this 
way  our  blessed  Master  improves  his  appeals  to  the 
affections  of  the  father  and  the  principles  of  his 
family  government.  "Much  more"  than  earthly 


348  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

parents  will  our  heavenly  Father  seek  the  good  of 
his  offspring.  But  your  purpose,  generally,  in  your 
appeals  to  the  parental  affection  and  policy,  is  to 
present  an  antagonism  to  the  principles  of  the  Divine 
government.  How  must  your  benevolent  soul  ago- 
nize in  this  dire  necessity,  imposed  upon  you  by  an 
iron  creed. 

Here  is  one  other  attempted  Bible  argument  in  this 
division,  which  we  deem  it  expedient  to  notice.  It 
is  in  these  words,  Argument,  page  58 : 

"  Peter  tells  us  that  there  were  "  spirits  "  in  his  day  "  in  prison," 
to  whom  Christ  preached  by  the  Spirit  in  the  days  of  Noah,  that 
is  at  least  three  thousand  years  before.  That  is  a  long  time  for 
sin  to  be  punished,  or  even  for  a  sinner  to  be  detained,  under  the 
government  of  a  good  God." 

No,  my  dear  Sir,  asking  your  pardon  for  contra- 
dicting the  word  of  one  I  so  highly  esteem,  but  my 
esteem  for  Christ  and  his  truth  is  first  of  all, — but 
Peter  tells  us  no  such  thing.  He  tells  us  that  Christ 
was  "  put  to  death  in  the  flesh,  but  quickened  by  the 
spirit ;  by  which  also  he  went  and  preached  unto  the 
spirits  in  prison,  which  some  time  were  disobedient, 
when  once  the  long  suffering  of  God  waited  in  the 
days  of  Noah."  Here  are  several  things  in  succes- 
sion ;  1st,  put  to  death  in  the  flesh ;  2d,  quickened 
by  the  spirit  j  3d,  going  in  the  spirit  and  preaching  to 
the  spirits  in  prison.  It  was  to  the  spirits  in  prison 
that  Jesus  by  the  spirit  preached  when  he  had  been 
quickened  by  it,  and  not  to  spirits  before  they 
became  prisoners.  If  the  Doctor  takes  these  spirits 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  849 

in  prison  to  be  the  Fpirits  of  deceased  men  in  hell,  as 
he  assuredly  does,  he  has  ventured  to  tamper  with  a 
passage  which,  taking  its  connected  expression  with 
this  application  of  his,  explodes  his  whole  theory  of 
no  grace,  no  mercy,  no  change  after  death,  proving 
that  the  blessed  Saviour,  since  his  resurrection,  visits 
that  dark  abode,  and  preaches  there  the  gospel  of 
love,  grace  and  salvation. 

But  we  do  not  avail  ourself  of  this  argument  for 
the  abolition  of  our  opponent's  hell.  We  have  shown 
it  never  to  have  been. 

We  have  several  reasons  for  discrediting  the  idea 
that  Peter  here  spoke  of  deceased  men,  then  in 
prison,  or  in  the  heathen  fabulous  under-world. 

1st.  No  such  thing  is  revealed  in  any  other  part 
of  the  Bible;  and  Peter  does  not  introduce  the  idea 
which  he  meant  here  to  express,  as  a  new  revelation, 
nor  as  the  main  subject  of  discourse.  He  was  urging 
upon  his  brethren  the  example  of  Christ,  who 
attested  the  faithfulness  of  his  love  to  men  even  by 
his  death  ;  and  who,  being  raised  from  the  dead, 

4 

pursued  their  interests  still,  by  enlightening  the 
prisoners  of  darkness. 

2d.  If  Peter  designed  to  teach  that  all  who  had 
died  in  unbelief  before  the  death  of  Christ  were  then 
in  prison,  it  is  unaccountable  that  he  should  have 
singled  out  the  persons  in  particular  who  were 
drowned  in  the  flood.  The  reference  to  the  antedi- 
luvians, and  the  few  of  them  who  were  saved  upon 
the  water  by  the  influence  of  Noah,  indicates  a  com- 
parison between  this  as  a  historical  incident,  and 
30 


350  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

something  in  the  ministry  of  Christ  which  was  the 

o  •/ 

main  subject  of  discourse. 

3d.  As  this  ministry  to  prisoners  is  introduced  as 
a  reference  to  some  familiar  fact,  we  are  led  to  inquire, 
what  is  the  tact  referred  to  ?  What  information  do 
we  gather  from  the  Scriptures,  in  relation  to  the  mis- 
sion of  Christ  to  prisoners  after  his  death  and  resur- 
rection ?  On  this  subject  we  have  much  and  diversi- 
fied information.  The  prophets  had  variously  foretold 
that  Christ  should  be  a  covenant  of  Israel  and  light 
of  the  Gentiles.  And  the  latter  were  usually  described 
as  in  darkness  and  the  prison-house.  "  I  will  give 
thee  for  a  covenant  of  the  people,  for  a  light  of  the 
Gentiles  ;  to  open  the  blind  eyes,  to  bring  out  the 
prisoners  from  the  prison,  and  them  that  sit  in  darkness 
out  of  the  prison-house."  But  this  ministry  of 
light  to  the  Gentiles  could  not  be  carried  out  until 
after  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ.  He 
charged  his  disciples,  while  he  was  yet  with  them, 
not  to  go  in  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  but  to  the  lost 
sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.  But  when  he  was  risen 
jrom  the  dead,  he  commissioned  his  ambassadors  to 
go  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  gospel  to  every 
creature.  But  in  all  their  gospel  labors  the  disciples 
went  out  in  the  spirit  and  power  of  Christ.  Thus  it 
was  the  spirit  of  Christ  which  wrought  in  and  through 
them,  in  all  the  gospel  ministry  to  the  Gentiles,  or  to 
the  spirits,  or,  as  Wakefield  renders  it,  the  minds  of 
men  in  prison.  And  the  wonderful  success  of  the 
ministry  of  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles  now,  by  the 
spirit  of  the  risen  Jesus,  is  made  to  appear  noteworthy 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  351 

by  a  strong  contrast,  referring  to  iliefew  who  were 
influenced  by  the  preaching  of  a  servant  of  God  of 
old,  that  is,  Noah.  Wakefield  gives  the  passage  a 
rendering  which  directly  expresses  this  comparison, 
— thus  :  "  By  which  he  went  and  preached  to  the 
minds  of  men  in  prison,  who  were  disobedient  as 
those  upon  whom  the  long-suffering  of  God  waited 
in  the  days  of  Noah."  But  the  sense  appears  to  us 
as  clear  without  the  supply  of  the  comparative  as. 
There  is  a  sense  in  which  people  of  one  class,  in 
different  generations,  are  called  the  same  people.  So 
wrere  the  Jews,  and  so  are  they  to  this  day,  the  peo- 
ple to  whom  God  spoke  by  the  prophets.  And  so 
were  the  heathen  to  whom  Christ's  ambassadors 
preached  by  his  spirit  in  Peter's  time,  the  same  peo- 
ple characteristically  as  were  the  heathen  in  Noah's 
time. 

Not  only  the  learned  and  orthodox  Wakefield,  but 
Newcomb,  and  Lindsey,  and  the  London  Improved 
Version,  take  the  same  view  of  this  passage.  These 
all  agree  in  the  following  exposition: 

By  which,  "  i.  e.  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  which,  after 
his  ascension  (see  v.  22),  he  communicated  to  his 
apostles,  he  preached  to  spirits,  i.  e,  to  persons  in 
prison,  to  idolatrous  heathen,  the  slaves  of  ignorance 
and  vice  ;  he  thus  proclaimed  liberty  to  the  captives  ; 
Isa.  xlii.  6,  7 ;  xlix.  9."  "  He  preached,  not  to  the 
same  individual  persons,  but  to  men  like  them,  in  the 
same  circumstances,  to  the  race  of  the  Gentiles,  to 
the  descendants  of  those  who  had  formerly  been  dis- 
obedient, and  refused  the  call  of  the  spirit  in  Noah's 


352  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

time.  But  it  was  now  very  different.  Many  had  been 
obedient.  The  apostle  is  contrasting  the  success  of 
the  gospel  with  the  unsuccessfulness  of  Noah's 
preaching  tinder  the  direction  of  the  same  spirit  of 
God."  Newcomb,  and  London  Ira.  Ver.  in  loco — Lind- 
sey's  Sequel,  p.  288. 

We  cannot  doubt  the  correctness  of  this  view  of 
the  passage.  But  if  our  opponent  insists  on  having 
the  "  prison"  here  to  be  the  Orthodox  hell,  he  gives 
the  passage  a  force  which  abolishes  his  own  hell,  by 
the  introduction  there  of  the  gospel  of  grace  and 
salvation.  For,  chop  and  transpose  as  he  will,  he 
cannot  expunge  the  fact  that  it  was  to  the  spirits  in 
prison,  whoever  they  might  be,  by  the  spirit  of 
Christ  after  he  was  quickened,  that  this  ministry  of 
grace  was  given. 

•This  brings  us  to  the  close  of  Dr.  A.'s  ingeniously 
conducted  argument  for  endless  punishment,  from 
"  the  terms  used  with  regard  to  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead.'1  But  we  find  that  even  his  great  learning  and 
practised  skill  in  theological  tactics,  are  utterly  fu- 
tile, in  the  attempt,  by  the  handling  of  a  few  inciden- 
tal metonomies,  and  figurative  expressions  in  connec- 
tion with  entirely  different  subjects,  to  mar  or  obscure 
the  glorious  gospel  doctrine  of  life  and  immortality 
for  the  dying  family  of  man,  "  according  to  the  pur- 
pose and  grace  of  God."  We  would  that  all  might 
be  brought  to  an  enlightened  faith  in  this  Gospel  of 
God,  that  they  might  live  and  breathe  and  act  in  the 
elevating  consciousness  that  they  are  children  of  God 
and  brothers  of  angels,  being  heirs  of  a  blessed  im- 
mortality. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

The   Curse  of  the  Law. 

We  now  come  to  Dr.  Adams'  fifth  great  proposition, 
to  wit : 

V.  THE  SCRIPTURES  TEACH  THAT  THE  LAW  OF  GOD  HAS 
A  CURSE  : — WHICH  IT  HAS  SOT  IF  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT  BE 
DISCIPLINARY. 

This  position  he  proceeds  to  argue  thus : 

"  The  punishment,  however  long  and  severe,  which  shall  result 
in  restoring  a  soul  to  holiness  and  an  endless  heaven,  under  the 
kind  and  faithful  administration  of  its  heavenly  Father,  it  would 
be  unsuitable  to  call  '  a  curse.' ' 

The  implication  in  this  paragraph,  that  we  hold  it 
to  be  the  mission  of  punishment  "to  restore  the  soul 
to  holiness  and  an  endless  heaven/7  is  simply  chimeri- 
cal. We  do  not  think  the  Doctor  intended  to  misrep- 
resent, but  it  has  not  entered  into  his  mind  to  see, 
nor  into  his  heart  to  conceive,  of  the  beauties  and  har- 
monies of  Universalism.  If  his  mind  could  emerge 
from  the  artificial  and  discordant  theory  of  Calvinism, 
into  the  sweet  and  beautiful  light  of  Bible  Evangel- 
ism, he  would  feel  to  be  born  again,  by  the  word  of 
God  which  liveth  and  abide! h  forever. 


354  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

We  do  not  regard  it  as  the  mission  of  punishment 
to  restore  the  soul  to  holiness  and  heaven.  This 
work  can  only  be  effected  by  the  spirit  and  power  of 
Christian  truth  in  the  soul,  through  knowledge  and 
faith  and  love.  Nevertheless  punishment  is  disci- 
plinary, tending  to  check  the  career  of  sin,  and  to 
bring  the  sinner  to  reflection  in  a  state  of  mind  to 
ask  after  the  better  way,  and  thus  become  condition- 

•/    7 

ed  to  be  acted  upon  by  the  saving  power  of  truth. 
Such,  as  we  shall  presently  show,  is  always  the  Scrip- 
ture definition  of  the  purpose  of  punishment,  when- 
ever its  purpose  is  explained  at  all.  And  how  other- 
wise could  it  be,  without  transmuting  the  government 
of  God  into  a  Pandemonium  of  fiends?  To  say  that 
it  is  one  purpose  of  punishment  upon  transgressors 
to  exert  an  admonitory  influence  upon  the  whole 
community,  does  not  change  the  principle  at  all. 
This  tendency  results  from  the  social  nature  and  rela- 
tions of  man.  For  this  cause  all  individual  experi- 
ence, good  or  evil,  exerts  a  social  influence.  But  the 
primary  design  of  punishment  is  the  correction  of  its 
subjects.  The  learned  Dr.  Priestly  calls  particular 
attention  to  the  fact  that  the  Greek  word  kolasin, 
rendered  punishment  in  Matt,  xxv.  46, — "  And  these 
shall  go  away  into  aionion  punishment," — was  primi- 
tively applied  to  the  pruning  of  trees,  and  radically 
signifies  correction.  And  by  this  single  argument  he 
explodes  the  idea  that  the  punishment  denoted  in  that 
passage  is  endless.  Newcomb,  and  the  London  Im- 
proved Version,  note  the  same  fact,  and  attach  to  it 
the  same  weight  in  argument.  But  more  of  this 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADA1IS.  355 

/ 

shen  we  come  to  our  opponent's  argument  from  the 
terms  of  duration. 

Before  taking  this  fifth  argument  of  the  Doctor 
directly  in  hand,  we  must  take  leave  to  expunge  from 
his  proposition  the  adjective  future,  prefixed  to 
punishment.  It  is  a  remarkable  stroke  of  ingenuity 
in  him,  to  be  continually  slipping  into  his  sentences 
qualifying  terms  which  shall  somnambulize  the  un- 
wary mind  into  the  dream  that  the  immortal  world  is 

if 

the  field  of  our  operation  when  we  are  discussing 
rewards  and  punishments.  The  advantage  he  seeks 
by  this  means  is  in  the  stand-point  from  which  he 
would  have  you  join  with  him  in  viewing  the  subject 
of  retribution.  Standing  in  the  eternal  world,  and 
looking  upon  rewards  and  punishments  as  dispensa- 
tions of  that  world,  and  presuming  that  you  will 
admit  that  the  rewards  of  that  world  are  endless 
happiness,  he  thinks  to  effectually  spring  upon  you 
the  inference  that  the  other  side  of  the  antithesis,  the 
punishments,  must  be  endless  misery.  The  argument 
would  not  hold,  even  allowing  him  his  stand-point,  for 
the  reason  that,  as  he  also  admits,  the  extent  of  dura- 
tion denoted  by  aionion  is  determined  by  the  nature 
of  the  subject  to  which  it  is  applied.  And  everybody 
knows  that  the  kingdom  of  sin  and  misery  is  a  very 
different  affair  from  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his 
righteousness.  It  is  the  very  revealed  purpose  of 
the  latter,  which  "  shall  never  be  destroyed,"  to 
"  make  an  end '  of  the  former.  But  then  our 
opponent  has  no  business  with  this  subject  at  that 
stand-point,  His  getting  into  eternity  with  his  sin, 


356  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

and  guilt,  and  judgment ;  and  his  punishment,  and 
curse,  and  lake  of  fire,  and  furnace  of  fire,  and  wail- 
ing and  gnashing  of  teeth, — is  really,  though  not  so 
designed,  a  ruse-de-guerre.  There  is  no  Bible  authori- 
ty for  it.  We  have  already,  in  our  part  of  this  dis- 
cussion, examined  our  friend's  Bible  arguments  for 
this  broad  assumption,  sufficiently  to  be  satisfied,  if 
there  is  anything  certain  from  the  plainest  expression 
of  human  language,  that  there  is  no  Bible  authority 
for  introducing  satan,  and  sin,  and  corruption,  and 
misery,  upon  a  foot-hold  in  the  immortal  resurrection 
\vt>rldv 

"  The  world  to  come,  redeemed  from  all 
The  mis'ries  that  attend  the  fall, 
New-made  and  glorious,  shall  submit 
At  our  exalted  Saviour's  feet." 

So,  then,  as  by  future  in  this  connection,  our  friend 
means  to  denote  the  future  state  of  being,  we  rub  out 
this  word  from  his  proposition  as  a  subject  of  present 
debate.  For  he  and  I  are  not  discussing  the  duration 
of  future-world  punishment,  but  the  purpose  and 
duration  of  punishment,  as  a  Divine  dispensation. 

And  now  the  Doctor's  argument  is,  that  as  the 
punishment  denounced  by  the  law  is  called,  some- 
times, a  "  curse,"  it  cannot  be  limited  and  disciplin- 
aiy,  because  then  "  it  would  be  unsuitable  to  call  it 
a  l  curse.'  A  few  words  will  show  the  unsoundness 
of  this  argument,  both  philologically  and  Scripturally. 

1st.  PHILOLOGICALLY.  The  Doctor's  argument, 
carried  out,  would  take  from  us  the  use  of  all  words 
descriptive  of  things  as  they  are  in  themselves.  It 


REPLY  TO   DR.  ADAMS.  357 

would  require  us  to  riame  all  events  and  things  for 
what  we  may  regard  as  an  ultimate  use  to  which 
Providence  will  over-rule  them.  For  instance,  if  a 
person  who  has  a  lurking  disease  in  the  system,  falls 
seriously  and  distressingly  sick,  and  that  sickness 
induces  the  appliance  of  remedies  which  root  out  the 
old  infirmity  and  place  the  patient  in  better  health 
than  was  enjoyed  before,  this  argument  would  not 
admit  that  the  distressing  sickness  was  sickness,  or 
that  the  pain  suffered  in  it  was  pain.  It  was  all 
health  and  pleasure,  because  it  was  at  length  made  a 
means  of  conducing  to  improved  health  and  pleasure ! 
Dr.  A.  says, — "  Men  are  stripped  of  property,  family, 
health,  reputation,  and  finally  they  turn  to  the  hand 
that  smites  them,  grateful  that  God  did  not  spare  the 
rod  for  their  crying :  and  they  testify  that  through 
the  loss  of  all  things  they  have  gained  eternal  bliss. 
Do  they  call  their  affliction  their  '  curse  ?'  Have 
they  suffered  '  the  curse  of  the  law  ?'  Yes,  most 
certainly.  The  loss  of  property,  family,  health  and 
reputation,  by  reason  of  their  vices,  was  indeed  the 
suffering  of  a  great  curse.  And  if  their  great  tribu- 
lations made  them  sin-sick,  and  they  turned  to  Christ, 
and  by  the  efficiency  of  his  truth  and  love  became 
freed  from  the  love  and  power  of  sin,  they  praised 
and  adored  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus,  but  this 
did  not  change  their  views  of  sin  and  its  miseries. 
"Have  they  suffered  the  curse  of  the  law?"  Of 
course  they  have,  and  they  are  thankful  to  be 
redeemed  from  it. 

The  Doctor  continues, — "  He/'  the  physician,  "  am- 


358  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

pu  tales  the  lirnb,  and  thus  prolongs  a  life.  Did  he 
curse  the  man,  in  doing  so  TJ  Answer,  the  amputation 
of  the  limb  was  the  interposition  of  a  lesser  evil  to 
prevent  a  greater.  But  the  circumstance  which 
required  the  amputation  of  the  lirnb  WHS  an  evil,  and 
the  loss  of  the  limb  is  an  evil  or  curse  for  life. 

Once  more  the  Doctor: — "  '  Christ  has  redeemed  us 
from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being  made  a  curse  for 
us :' — No,  he  has  only  redeemed  us  from  a  further 
dispensation  of  infinite  mercy,  if  punishment  be  only 
for  discipline  ;  indeed,  he  prevents  the  bestowment 
of  a  greater  proof  of  love  than  he  himself  gave  us  in 
dying  on  the  cross."  Omitting  the  rest  of  the  sen- 
tence (p.  62,)  because  it  relates  to  that  "  discipline  in 
hell"  which  is  a  piece  of  uninteresting  romance  to 
which  we  have  given  sufficient  attention  already,  we 
will  frankly  confess  that  this  is  the  sharpest  argument 
of  all  which  our  opponent  has  produced.  It  is  con- 
fessedly an  effort  of  genius.  It  is  so  handsomely 
done  that  it  seems  to  be  a  pity  to  disturb  it.  But 
after  all,  it  is  a  mere  fallacy  which  must  be  exposed. 
The  argument  is,  that  if  punishment  is  disciplinary, 
Christ  only  redeems  us  from  a  further  dispensation 
of  mercy  by  saving  us  from  the  necessity  of  its  con- 
tinuance. The  idea  involved  in  this  argument  is, 
that  if  punishment  is  disciplinary,  it  would  be  the 
greatest  good  of  the  sufferer  to  have  sin  and  punish- 
ment continue  to  all  eternity.  An  endless  disciplinary 
punishment!  It  must  have  cost  our  friend  a  great 
intellectual  effort  to  conceive  of  the  idea.  We  sup- 
pose it  is  the  common  sense  of  mankind  that  punish- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  359 

ment,  to  be  disciplinary  or  corrective;  must  be 
limited  of  course, — being  not  an  end;  but  a  means  to 
an  end;  to  issue  in  correction.  Well,  when  the  soul 
is  wearied  in  suffering,  and  sick  of  sin;and  has  turned 
to  Christ,  received  his  light  and  risen  into  the  life  of 
his  truth  and  love,  his  spirit  assimilated  to  the  spirit 
of  the  Eternal^  needing  punitive  discipline  no  more, 
Dr.  A.  thinks  he  will  then  desire  to  go  back  into 
darkness  and  sin,  and  the  consequent  suffering  of 
punishment,  for  the  sake  of  being  disciplined  back 
again  to  sin-sickness  and  to  Christ ! 

Well,  this  argument  is  not  original  with  my  worthy 
friend.  It  was  wielded  against  the  doctrines  of  St. 
Paul  in  his  day.  Because  he  held  that  God  over-rules 
evil  for  good,  it  was  slanderously  reported  of  him 
that  he  said,  "  Let  us  do  evil  that  good  may  come/ 
(Rom.  iii.  8.)  And  because  he  taught  that,  u  where 
sin  abounded  grace  did  much  more  abound/'  it  was 
charged  to  be  the  tendency  of  his  doctrine  to  lead 
men  to  continue  in  sin  that  grace  might  abound.  But 
the  apostle  disposes  of  the  opposing  argument  thus  : 
—  "  Shall  we  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may  abound  ? 
God  forbid.  How  shall  we  that  are  dead  to  sin  live 
any  longer  therein."  (Rom.  v.  20  ,*  vi.  1.)  The 
Christian  religion,  in  all  its  principles  of  faith  and 
practice,  is  so  beautiful,  so  lovely  and  glorious,  that 
when  it  is  received  by  the  believing  soul,  it  captivates 
and  assimilates  to  itself  all  the  affections,  produces  a 
deadness  to  sin,  a  detestation  of  it,  and  renders  im- 
possible the  desire  to  go  back  into  it  for  the  sake  of 
some  more  corrective  punishment.  And  thus  vanish- 


S6D  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

es  the  force  of  our  friend's  ingenious  argument  from 
the  hypothesis  of  punishment  being  corrective. 

"  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the 
law,"  He  could  not  have  redeemed  us  from  the  curse 
of  the  law  unless  we  had  been  under  that  curse.  All 
were  under  the  curse  of  the  law,  all  having  sinned, 
for  "  cursed  is  every  one  that  continueth  not  in  all 
things  which  are  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do 
them."  "  Being  made  a  curse  for  us."  How?  Is 
Christ  doomed  to  suffer  future  endless  punishment  for 
us  ?  Never.  And  that  is  not  "  the  curse  of  the  law." 
The  apostle  explains  the  sense  in  which  he  spoke  in 
this  instance  of  Christ's  being  made  a  curse  for  us. 
And  how  is  it?  ]f  he  was,  as  a  substitute  for  sinners, 
plunged  into  the  infernal  deep, 

The  land  of  horror  and  despair," — 


•H 


into  the  suffering  of 

"Eternal  plagoes  and  heavy  chains, 

Tormenting  racks  and  fiery  coals, 
And  darts  t'  inflict  immortal  pains, 

Dipt  in  the  blood  of  damned  souls," — 

if  this  is  the  curse  of  the  law,  borne  by  Christ  for  us, 
here  is  the  place  where  we  may  expect  to  find  it 
stated.  How  is  it?  Read— (GaL  Hi,  13,)  "Christ 
Lath  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being 
made  a  curse  for  us;  for  it  is  written,  Cursed  is  every 
one  llual  hangefli on  a  tree"  There  —  where  is  the 
Endless-miserian  argument  from  the  death,  of  Christ  ? 
Where  is  the  vicarious,  the  substitutions!  infliction  of 
"  future  endless  punishment"  upon  Jesus,  as  the  scape- 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  361 

goat  for  sinners  ?     Not  in  the  Bible  —  nowhere  but 
in  human  creeds. 

"  Cursed  is  every  one  that  hangeth  on  a  tree." 
The  extreme  curse  of  the  Mosaic  law  was  an  igno- 
minious death.  And  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous,  by 
submitting  to  this  death  in  the  prosecution  of  a  work 
of  infinite  love  in  our  behalf,  was  made  a  curse,  not 
in  our  stead,  but  for  us  ;  and  as  a  ritual  sacrifice,  the 
antitype  of  the  legal  types,  terminated  the  necessity 
of  our  subjection  to  the  legal  rites ;  but,  above  all, 
attesting  with  his  blood  the  indissolubility  of  Heaven's 
love  to  man,  gives  us  a  strong  filial  faith  which  works 
by  love  and  purifies  the  heart,  and  thus  redeems  us 
from  the  greater  curse,  that  of  the  moral  law,  by  de- 
livering us  from  the  love  and  power  of  sin.  For, 
"  there  is  now  no  condemnation  to  them  which  are  in 
Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh  but  after" 
the  spirit.  For  the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life  in  Christ 
Jesus  hath  made  me  free  from  the  law  of  sin  and 
death."  Ah,  this  is  the  manner  of  Christ's  redeeming 
us  from  the  curse  or  condemnation  of  the  moral  law, 
not  by  a  commercial  substitution,  satiating  God's  ven- 
geance by  receiving  punishment  from  his  hand  in  our 
stead  !  but  by  making  us  free  from  the  law  (the  power) 
of  sin  and  death,  by  the  law  (the  power)  of  the  spirit 
of  life  in  Christ  Jesus. 

2d.  SCRIPTURALLY.  It  is  but  an  easy  and  brief 
work  to  show  the  unsoundness  of  our  opponent's 
argument  from  "  the  curse  of  the  law,"  Scripturally. 
Indeed  we  know  not  how  to  account  for  his  position 
in  this  case,  but  by  supposing  that  his  life-long  famili- 
31 


362  THEOLOGJCAL  DISCUSSION. 

/ 

iarity  with  the  terms  of  his  theology  on  the  mattei 
here  in  question;  produced  such  an  unquestioning  as- 
surance of  his  being  right,  that  he  did  not  deem  it 
needful  to  consult  the  Scriptures  in  relation  to  the 
question.  The  book  of  the  law  itself  variously  and 
conclusively  decides  the  question,  whether  its  curses 
are  future,  revengeful,  and  endless  punishments,  or 
whether  they  are  temporary,  and  designed  for  re- 
straint and  correction. 

Read  the  28th  and  29th  chapters  of  Deuteronomy, 
from  which  we  will  here  transcribe  a  few  brief  sen- 
tences. "  But  it  shall  come  to  pass,  if  thou  wilt  not 
hearken  to  the  voice  of  the  Lord  thy  God,  to  observe 
to  do  all  his  commandments  and  his  statutes  which  I 
command  thee  this  day ;  that  all  these  curses  shall 
come  upon  thee,  and  overtake  thee ;  cursed  shalt 
thou  be  in  the  city,  and  cursed  shalt  thou  be  in  the 
field."  "  And  the  heaven  that  is  over  thy  head  shall 
be  brass,  and  the  earth  that  is  under  thee  shall  be 
iron."  "  Thy  sons  and  thy  daughters  shall  be  given 
unto  another  people."  "  And  thou  shalt  become  an 
astonishment,  a  proverb,  and  a  by-word,  among  all  the 
nations  whither  the  Lord  shall  lead  thee."  "  So  that 
the  generation  to  come  of  your  children  that  shall 
rise  up  after  you,  and  the  stranger  that  shall  come 
from  a  far  land,  shall  say,  when  they  see  the  plagues 
of  that  land,  and  the  sickness  which  the  Lord  hath 
laid  upon  it ;  ....  even  all  nations  shall  say, 
Wherefore  hath  the  Lord  done  thus  unto  this  land  ? 
What  rneaneth  the  heat  of  this  great  anger  ?  Then 
men  shall  say,  Because  they  have  forsaken  the  cove- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  363 

nant  of  the  Lord  God  of  their  fathers,  —  and  the 
anger  of  the  Lord  was  kindled  against  this  land,  to 
bring  upon  it  all  the  curses  that  are  written  in  this 
book." 

Here  you  have  no  assertion  of  mine,  no  explanation 
of  mine,  but  the  direct  asseveration  of  the  book  of  the 
law  itself,  that  all  its  curses  should  be  suffered  by  the 
transgressors  in  the  land  of  their  transgression,  and 
in  their  dispersion  among  other  nations.  And  now, 
what  will  you  ask  of  me,  who  know  nothing  on  these 
subjects  but  what  I  can  learn  from  the  sacred  record  ? 
Will  you  ask  of  me  that  I  keep  back  such  Bible  testi- 
monies as  these,  and  manufacture  a  theory,  or  sell 
myself  a  minister  to  a  theory  of  other  manufacturers, 
which  shall  be  better  for  the  morals  of  the  people? 
Ah,  we  have  seen  the  injuries  which  have  accrued  to 
poor  humanity  from  religious  leaders  presuming  to  do 
better  for  the  people  than  to  study  and  preach  God's 
plain,  simple  truth.  Ours  be  the  motto  of  the  pro- 
phet : — "  To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony  ;  if  they 
speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because  there 
is  no  light  in  them." 

But  there  is  another  question.  Notwithstanding 
all  the  curses  of  the  law  are  fulfilled  in  temporal  evils, 
are  they  not  purely  revengeful,  and  never  intended  to 
be  corrective  ?  Dr.  Adams  thinks  they  must  be  so, 
whether  in  this  world  or  the  next.  See  the  closing 
words  of  this  division  of  his  "  Argument ;" — "  But 
we  cannot  find  that  curse,  neither  here  nor  hereafter, 
unless  there  be  punishment  which  is  not  intended  for 
the  recovery  of  the  sinner." 


364  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Now  turn  to  Lev.  xxvi.,  and  there  you  will  find  a 
discriminative  specification  of  the  series  of  evils,  or 
judgments,  which  are  recorded  in  Deut.  xxviii.  and 
xxix.  and  generally   in  the   same   language.     There 
they  are  called  curses,  and  here,  punishments.     And 
all  through  the  chapter  you  will  find  interspersed  the 
explanation,  that  the  purpose  of  these  punishments  is 
corrective.     "  But  if  ye  will  not  hearken  unto  me, — 
and  if  ye  shall  despise  my  statutes, — I  will  do  this 
unto  you ;  I  will  set  my  face  against  you,  and  ye  shall 
be  slain  before  your  enemies  :  they  that  hate  you 
shall  reign  over  you,  and  ye  shall  flee  when  none 
pursueth.     And  if  ye  will  not  yet  for  all  this  hearken 
unto  me,  then  I  will  punish  you  seven  times  more  for 
your  sins."  (v.  18)    "  And  if  ye  walk  contrary  unto 
me,  and  will  not  hearken  unto  me,  I  will  bring  seven 
times   more   plagues   upon  you   according  to   your 
sins."     (v.  21.)  "  And  if  ye  will  not  be  reformed  by 
me  by  these  things,  but  will  walk  contrary  unto  me  ; 
then  will  I  also  walk  contrary  unto  you,  and  will 
punish  you  yet  seven  times  for  your  sins.7'  (vs.  23, 
24.)  "  And  if  ye  will  not  for  all  this  hearken  unto  me, 
but  walk  contrary  unto  me  ;  then  I  will  walk  contrary 
unto  you  also  in  fury ;  and  I,  even  I,  will  chastise  you 
seven  times  for  your  sins."    (vs.  27,  28.)    And  here 
Moses  proceeds  to  the   description  of  what   is    set 
down  in  the  other  place  for  the  last  and  greatest  of 
all  the  curses  of  the  law, — making  their  city  waste 
and  their  sanctuaries  desolate,  and  their  land  a  deso- 
lation,  and    their   people   to   be   scattered   in  their 
enemies'  lands,    becoming    an  astonishment    to   all 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  865 

nations.  And  yet,  after  all  this,  the  extreme  of  all 
the  curses  written  in  the  book  of  the  law,  which  are 
expressly  called,  (v.  28)  chastisements,  the  design  of 
which,  as  they  progressed  from  stage  to  stage,  is 
explained  to  be  that  the  people  should  be  "  reformed,'* 
after  all  this,  the  word  of  God  proceeds,  (vs.  40-46,) 
"  If  they  shall  confess  their  iniquity,  and  the  iniquity 
of  their  fathers, — if  then  their  uncircumcised  hearts 
be  humbled,  and  they  then  accept  of  the  punishment 
of  their  iniquity ;  then  will  I  remember  my  covenant 
with  Jacob,  and  also  my  covenant  with  Isaac,  and 
also  my  covenant  with  Abraham  will  I  remember; 
and  I  will  remember  the  land." 

Finally,  in  all  points  of  view,  philological  and 
Scriptural,  the  argument  of  our  learned  friend  from 
"  the  curse  of  the  law,"  is  what  Sawyer's  New  Trans- 
lation makes  Mark  iii.  29  to  read,  "  an  eternal 
mistake.'' 

31* 


CHAPTER  Y. 

TJie  Sentence  passed  upon  the   Wicked. 

THE  sixth  of  Dr.  Adams'  seven  great  positions,  in 
his  comprehensive  "  Argument  for  Future,  Endless 
Punishment,"  is  the  following: — 

VI.  THE  SENTENCE  PASSED  UPON  THE  WICKED  INDIS- 
CRIMINATELY, FORBIDS  THE  IDEA  OF  DISCIPLINE  IN  FU- 
TURE PUNISHMENT. 

By  way  of  argument  under  this  head,  speaking  of 
the  great  variety  of  character  among  the  impenitent 
at  death  and  in  eternity,  and  yet  the  same  indiscrimi- 
nate doom  which  shall  be  pronounced  upon  them,  the 
Doctor  says : — 

"  The  last  sentence  evidently  regards  none  of  them  as  probation- 
ers ;  there  is  no  forbearance  in  it  toward  the  more  hopeful ;  they 
are  all  addressed  as  "ye  cursed."  We  are  considering  the  testi- 
mony of  the  Scriptures.  What  evidence  do  they  afford  of  any 
discrimination  in  the  treatment  of  the  finally  impenitent,  notwith- 
standing the  vast  variety  which  must  exist  among  them  ?  I 
answer,  not  any.  But  the  following  passages  among  others,  teach 
plainly  that  the  doom  of  the  wicked  will  be  indiscriminate  without 
regard  to  hopeful  diversities  of  character.  (Rev.  xx.  12-15.) 

'  And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and  great,  stand  before  God ;  and 
the  books  were  opened,  and  another  book  was  opened  which  is  the 
book  of  life ;  and  the  dead  were  judged  out  of  the  things  which 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  367 

were  written  in  the  books,  according  to  their  works.  And  the  sea 
gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it,  and  death  and  hell  delivered  up 
the  dead  which  were  in  them ;  and  they  were  judged  every  man 
according  to  their  works.'  Then  follows  this  declaration  :  '  And 
death  and  hell  were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.  This  is  the  second 
death.'  Some  sav  death  and  hell  are  annihilated.  But  this  is 

• 

not  the  idea  intended,  unless  the  wicked  also  are  then  to  be  an- 
nihilated; for  the  next  verse  concluding  the  subject  says,  'And 
whosoever  was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  life  was  cast  into 
the  lake  of  fire.'  The  obvious  meaning  is,  Death  and  hell,  what- 
ever they  represent,  will  then  be  added  to  the  lake  of  fire,  whatever 
that  is,  as  new  ingredients,  and  to  constitute  '  the  second  death,' 
and  as  a  final  gathering  together  of  all  the  elements  of  sorrow  and 
pain,  with  all  the  wicked,  into  one  place.  With  this  passage  agree 
the  words  of  Daniel :  '  And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust 
of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some  to 
shime  and  everlasting  contempt.'  The  parables  of  Christ  relating 
to  the  end  of  the  world  recognize  only  two  great  divisions  of  men 
at  the  last  day.  Wheat  and  tares  only  are  to  be  in  the  '  field ;' 
good  and  bad,  only,  in  the  *  net.'  The  wheat  is  saved,  the  tares 
are  burned;  '  the  good'  in  the  net  arc  gathered  into  vessels,  'the 
bad '  are  none  of  them  dismissed  for  amendment,  or  growth,  but 
are  '  cast  away.'  And  Christ  tells  us  that  every  human  being 

*  * 

will  stand  at  his  right  hand  or  left  hand,  '  blessed  '  or  '  cursed.' ' 

For  the  sake  of  convenience  we  have  here  reprinted 
the  entire  argument  of  the  Doctor's  sixth  proposition. 
Several  of  the  passages  which  he  summons  for  the 
third,  fourth  or  fifth  time  to  his  aid,  we  have  suffi- 
ciently explained  before. 

1st.  The  awaking  of  many  of  them  that  slept  in 
the  dust  of  the  earth,  some  to  shame  and  everlasting 
contempt,  spoken  of  in  Dan.  xii.,  we  showed  in  Chap- 
ter iii.,  page  831,  to  be  explained  by  Daniel  and 
Jesus  in  connection,  to  be  an  incident  in  the  judg- 


368  THEOLOGICAL    DISCUSSION. 

ment  which  should  be  more  severe  than  any  before 
or  after  it,  which  took  place  in  the  generation  in 
which  Jesus  was  on  earth.  The  reader,  if  he  opens 
to  this  place  casually,  or  does  not  distinctly  remember 
that  exposition,  will  please  turn  back  to  the  page 
referred  to. 

2d.  The  "  wheat  and  tares,"  and  the  "  net,'7  we 
have  seen  to  be  prominent  metaphors  in  parables,  the 
fulfilment  of  which  our  Lord  expressly  assigned  to 
the  end  of  the  then  present  or  Jewish  age.  (See  pp. 
193-203. 

3d.  The  assertion  that  "  Christ  tells  us  that  every 
human  being  will  stand  at  his  right  hand  or  left  hand, 
'  blessed'  or  '  cursed',"  spoken  as  the  Doctor  has  here 
spoken  it,  with  reference  to  any  simultaneous  arraign- 
ment, or  single  dispensation  of  judgment,  is  an  entire 
mistake.  This  we  shall  have  occasion  to  show  in  our 
next  Chapter,  when  we  shall  have  under  consideration 
Matt,  xxv.,  which  is  the  Scripture  to  which  he  makes 
allusion. 

4th.  The  phraseology  employed  in  the  foregoing 
extract,  and  elsewhere  throughout  our  opponent's 
argument,  such  as  "  the  last  sentence/'  "  the  finally 
impenitent,"  etc.,  is  without  the  least  Scripture  war- 
rant. The  phrase  "  finally  impenitent"  we  disposed 
of  in  the  opening  of  Chapter  I.  of  our  Reply ;  and 
with  regard  to  "the  last  sentence/'  implying  a  final 
retributive  doom  as  the  ultimate  disposal  of  man,  the 
Scriptures  will  show  us,  as  we  shall  call  in  their  tes- 
timonies in  the  remaining  two  chapters  of  this  Reply, 
that  the  idea  is  not  only  without  Scripture  warrant, 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  369 

but  is  utterly  subversive  of  the  fundamental  princi- 
ples and  purposes  of  the  government  of  God,  as 
revealed  in  his  word.  The  appellation,  "  Ye  cursed/' 
which  our  opponent  reiterates  so  often  and  with  such 
significant  emphasis,  is  easy  to  be  understood  by  the 
light  developed  in  our  preceding  Chapter,  on  "  the 
curse  of  the  law."  Surely  they  who  were  made  the 
subjects  of  "  all  the  curses  written  in  the  book  of  the 
law,"  were  the  "  cursed  ;"  but  these  curses  were  not 
a  final  doom,  were  not  an  ultimate  end,  but  disciplin- 
ary means.  See  Chapter  IV.  of  this  Reply ;  and  the 
Scripture  records  appealed  to,  Deut.  xxviii.  and  xxix  ; 
and  Lev.  xxvi. 

5th.  The  lake  of  fire,  which  Dr.  A.  calls  up  again 
in  this  place,  we  have  already  seen  explained  by  the 
Revelator's  guiding  angel  himself,  to  be  a  metaphor 
of  certain  national  calamities  in  the  earth.  For  the 
record  informs  us  that  the  great  beast,  with  seven 
heads  and  ten  horns,  representing  certain  kings  and 
kingdoms  of  the  earth,  ivas  in  the  lake  of  fire.  Of 
course  the  lake  of  fire  was  in  the  earth.  (See  Chap- 
ter I.  of  this  Reply,  pp.  204-208,)  We  also  exposed, 
in  the  same  connection,  the  misgiving  of  the  learned 
Doctor's  mind,  as  betrayed  in  the  paragraph  quoted 
above,  in  respect  to  his  own  interpretation  of  Scrip- 
ture phraseology  which  he  here  again  has  called  into 
use.  Like  the  victim  of  an  enchantment  he  is  drawn 
into  a  predicament  of  great  discomfort.  He  had 
assumed  that  the  "  lake  of  fire"  is  a  place  of  endless 
punishment,  and  that  "  hell"  is  a  place  of  endless  pun- 
ishment; and  now  he  rushes  upon  the  Scripture 


370  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

declaration  that  "  hell"  is  "  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire." 
What  can  it  mean  ?  One  place  of  endless  punishment 
cast  into  another  place  of  endless  punishment !  He 
starts  back  from  this  crash  of  his  infernal  worlds,  and 
becomes  doubtful  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  terms 
which  he  had  delighted  to  employ  in  a  sense  assumed 
to  be  unquestionable.  In  his  dilemma  he  says,  "  The 
obvious  meaning  is,  Death  and  hell,  whatever  they 
represent,  will  then  be  added  to  the  lake  of  fire, 
whatever  that  is."  Well,  so  much  we  think  is  indeed 
"  obvious."  And  whatever  the  lake  of  fire  may  repre- 
sent, we  have  seen  it  to  figure  forth  extensive  national 
calamities  in  the  earth.  (See  p.  206.)  But,  in  treat- 
ing these  metaphors  as  far  as  the  point  then  under 
consideration  required,  we  put  over  the  full  explana- 
tion of  the  saying,  that  "  Death  and  hades  were  cast 
into  the  lake  of  fire/'  to  the  stage  of  the  discussion 
at  which  we  have  now  arrived,  where  the  Doctor 
attempts  his  principal  argument  from  this  portion  of 
the  book  of  Revelation.  Preparatory  to  this  work, 
we  will  inquire  into  the  general  subject  of  this  por- 
tion of  Scripture,  Rev.  xx.  11-15. 

The  Dead,  Small  and  Great  in  the  Judgment. 

The  Revelator  narrates  a  vision  of  a  notable  and 
widely  effective  judgment.  Let  us  come  to  this  sub- 
ject as  worthy  Christian  scholars,  seeking  truth  only. 

What  is  the  judgment  seen  by  the  Revelator  in  this 
vision  ?  A  candid  notice  of  the  general  terms  of  the 
narrative  shows  us  that  the  subject  of  this  vision  is 
not  the  immortal  resurrection,  and  a  subsequent 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  371 

judgment  In  the  spiritual  state  of  being.  There  is  no 
mention  here  of  a  resurrection ;  and  we  have  seen  that 
"  the  lake  of  fire,"  which  is  introduced  into  the  vision 
of  this  judgment,  is  a  metaphorical  representation  of 
temporal  and  national  calamities.  This  fact  notifies 
us  that  the  judgment  which  is  the  subject  of  this  vis- 
ion is  a  temporal  judgment.  And  we  are  confident 
that  a  fair  exegetical  study  of  this  vision  with  its 
explanatory  correlatives  will  reveal  to  our  understand- 
ings the  particular  temporal  judgment  to  which  it 
relates. 

And  here,  in  entering  upon  this  investigation,  let 
it  be  duly  noted,  that  the  visions  of  the  book  of  Rev- 
elation are,  to  a  considerable  extent,  repetitions  of 
those  of  some  of  the  prophets,  especially  Daniel.  By 
repetitions  I  do  not  mean  plagiaristic  copyings  on  the 
part  of  John,  but  repeated  developments  by  the  holy 
Spirit,  when  the  time  of  their  fulfilment  drew  near. 

Take,  for  instance,  the  12th  of  Daniel,  denoting  a 
judgment  in  which  many  of  them  that  slept  in  the 
dust  of  the  earth  should  awake,  to  which  Dr.  Adams 
has  repeatedly  called  our  attention  in  this  discussion. 
We  have  shown  that  Jesus,  in  his  last  discourse  deliv- 
ered to  his  diciples  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  refers  to 
the  prophecy  of  this  chapter  of  Daniel,  and  shows 
that  the  fulfilment  was  to  take  place  within  the  com- 
pass of  that  generation.  And  now  we  are  to  see  the 
same  thing  appear  through  another  course  of  inquiry 
which  has  just  opened  up  before  us,  in  this  resem- 
blance of  a  portion  of  John's  visions  to  those  of  Dan- 
iel. So  beautifully  true  it  is,  that  when  we  have 


372  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

obtained  to  the  true  principle  of  Scripture  interpre- 
tation, and  to  the  right  application  of  any  given  pas- 
sage, harmonious  confirmations  come  in  from  all 
directions  whither  we  explore. 

At  the  close  of  this  vision  of  Daniel,  concluding 
with  his  12th  and  last  chapter,  his  guiding  angel  said, 
"  Go  thy  way,  Daniel  j  for  the  words  are  closed  up 
and  sealed  till  the  time  of  the  end."  "  But  go  thy  way 
till  the  end  be  ;  for  thou  shalt  rest,  and  stand  in  thy  lot 
at  the  end  of  the  days."  If  it  would  not  carry  us  too 
far  out  of  the  direct  course  before  us  here,  we  would 
show  that  St.  John,  in  his  Revelation,  personated  Dan- 
iel, just  as  John  the  Baptist  personated  Elias  ;  that  as 
the  essential  subject-matters  of  Daniel's  visions  were 
caused  to  pass  before  the  mind  of  John  in  vision,  and 
he  developed  them  when  the  time  of  their  fulfilment 
drew  near,  in  this  was  fulfilled  what  the  angel  said  to 
Daniel,  "  for  thou  shalt  rest,  and  stand  in  thy  lot  at 
the  end  of  the  days." 

But  here  is  the  matter  we  would  bring  to  notice. 
While  to  Daniel,  at  the  close  of  his  series  of  visions, 
it  was  said,  "  the  words  are  closed  up  and  the  book  is 
sealed  till  the  time  of  the  end/'  to  John,  at  the  close 
of  his  series  of  visions,  the  guiding  angel  says,  "  Seal 
not  the  sayings  of  the  prophecy  of  this  book ;  for 
the  time  is  at  hand." 

Now  all  this  is  turned  into  nonsense  by  the  popular 
assumption  in  respect  to  the  time  and  nature  of  the 
principal  judgment  which  is  the  burden  of  both  Dan- 
iel's and  John's  visions.  "  Orthodoxy"  has  neither 
eyes  nor  ears  ; — it  must  stop  both  and  reiterate  bold 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  373 

assumptions.  On  the  hypothesis  that  this  judgment 
is  an  adjudication  to  take  place  at  the  end  of  this 
mundane  system,  in  the  yet  unknown  distant  future, 
what  sense  is  there  in  the  instruction  to  Daniel,  that 
the  wrords  of  his  prophecy  of  this  judgment  were 
sealed  and  closed  up  till  the  time  of  the  end*,- — and 
the  charge  to  John,  to  seal  not  the  sayings  of  the 
prophecy  of  his  book,  because  the  time  was  at  hand  ? 
It  was  only  about  six  hundred  years  from  Daniel  to 
John,  and  it  has  now  been  nearly  two  thousand  years 
since  John ;  and  if  the  prominent  event  of  their 
respective  visions  is  yet  in  the  distant  future,  why 
should  DaniePs  be  represented  as  being  sealed,  to 
imply  a  lying  over  for  sometime  to  its  fulfilment,  and 
John's  be  forbidden  to  be  sealed,  because  the  time 
was  at  hand?  "  Orthodoxy"  must  shut  her  eyes  to 
this  question  ;  but  the  truth  is  clear.  Jesus,  as  we 
have  seen,  referred  to  the  12th  of  Daniel,  and  identi- 
fied its  leading  subject  with  the  events  of  the  judgment 
which  should  take  place  within  the  compass  of  that 
generation.  John,  in  the  place  of  Daniel,  stood  in 
his  lot  at  the  end  of  the  days,  and  the  same  things 
wrere  passed  before  his  mind  in  vision  as  they  were 
about  to  be  fulfilled.  Therefore  his  vision  was  not  to 
be  sealed  over  to  a  distant  future  fulfilment,  because 
the  events  of  its  forshadowings  were  about  being 
practically  developed.  How  beautifully  clear  is  the 
light  and  harmony  of  the  Scriptures  to  the  free,  rev- 
erent Bible  student. 

Let   us   take    another  lesson,  from  John,  through 

Daniel,  back  to  John,  starting  from  the  leading  por- 
32 


374  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

tion  of  the  passage  now  before  us.  "  And  I  saw  the 
dead,  small  and  great,  stand  before  God;  and  the 
books  were  opened,  and  another  book  was  opened, 
which  is  the  book  of  life  ;  and  the  dead  were  judged 
out  of  the  things  which  were  written  in  the  books 
according  to  their  works."  Now  turn  to  the  first 
edition  of  the  same  vision,  Dan.  vii.  9.  10.  "  And  I 
beheld  till  the  thrones  were  cast  down,  and  the  An- 
cient of  days  did  sit,  whose  garment  was  white  as 
snow,  and  the  hair  of  his  head  like  the  pure  wool ; 
his  throne  was  like  the  fiery  flame,  and  his  wheels 
burning  fire.  A  fiery  stream  issued  and  came  forth 
from  before  him ;  thousand  thousands  ministered 
unto  him,  and  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand 
stood  before  him :  the  judgment  was  set,  and  the 
books  were  opened."  This  appears  to  be  a  vision  of 
the  same  judgment  as  this  in  Rev.  xx.  And  we  will 
read  Daniel  further,  for  information  on  the  time  of 
this  judgment  "  I  saw  in  the  night  visions,  and  be- 
hold, one  like  the  Son  of  man  came  with  the  clouds 
of  heaven,  and  came  to  the  Ancient  of  days,  and  they 
brought  him  near  before  him.  And  there  was  given 
him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom  that  all  peo- 
ple, nations  and  languages  should  serve  him ;  his 
dominion  is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not 
pass  away,  and  his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be 
destroyed," 

This  is  a  prophecy  of  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  the 
setting  up  of  his  kingdom  in  the  world.  The  judg- 
ment, therefore,  which  should  sit,  when  the  books 
should  be  opened,  and  as  it  is  added  in  the  repetition 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  375 

of  the  vision  to  John,  the  dead  be  judged  out  of  the 
things  written  in  the  books,  is  a  judgment  that  was 
to  take  place,  not  at  the  end  of  Christ's  Mediatorial 
reign,  but  at  its  beginning.  It  was  at  the  time  when 
this  judgment  should  sit,  and  the  books  be  opened, 
that  the  one  like  the  Son  of  man,  coming  with  the 
clouds  of  heaven,  should  have  given  him  a  kingdom, 
that  all  people  should  be  brought  to  serve  him.  And 
this  is  the  idea  presented  all  through  the  Scriptures, 
that  the  most  notable  judgment  of  prophecy  was  to 
take  place,  not  at  the  end  of  the  Messianic  reign,  but 
at  the  end  of  the  old  covenant  dispensation,  and  the 
setting  up  of  the  reign  of  Christ.  And  the  capital 
mistake  of  popular  theologians  has  been,  in  the  taking 
of  the  end  of  the  old  dispensation  to  be  the  end  of 
the  material  world,  and  the  accompanying  judgment 
to  be  a  final  disposition  of  human  destiny,  at  the  end 
of  the  gospel  dispensation.  The  mistake  is  of  infinite 
consequence,  and  could  never  have  been  committed 
but  by  the  clamorous  demands  of  an  invented  and 
petted  theology.  This  matter  will  be  fully  exhibited 
in  our  seventh,  or  closing  Chapter.  But  we  will 
make  one  quotation  from  the  teachings  of  our  Lord, 
parallel  with  those  in  Rev.  xx.  and  Dan.  vii.  See 
Matt.  xvi.  27,  28.  "  For  the  Son  of  man  shall  come 
in  the  glory  of  his  Father  with  his  angels  ;  and  then 
he  shall  reward  every  man  according  to  his  works. 
Verily  I  say  unto  you,  There  be  some  standing  here 
which  shall  not  taste  of  death,  till  they  see  the  Son 
of  man  coming  in  his  kingdom." 

This,  like  Dan.  vii.  9-14,  describes  a  notable  judg- 


376  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

ment  as  associated  with  the  event  of  the  Son  of  man's 
coming  to  set  up  his  kingdom ;  and  this  was  to  come 
to  pass  during  the  life-time  of  some  who  were  the 
attendants  on  Christ's  personal  ministry.  And  so 
the  Revelator  puts  in  the  same  judgment  with  the 
things  which  must  then  shortly  come  to  pass. 

In  the  present  light  of  the  subject,  we  perceive 
that  the  dead,  small  and  great,  seen  in  vision  as 
standing  before  God,  were  the  enemies  of  Christ,  of 
high  and  low  degree,  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins. 
"  The  books"  were  the  various  corrupt  theories  of 
faith  and  practice  in  which  the  enemies  of  Christianity 
were  involved,  (for  there  are  various  schemes  of 
wrong,)  and  they  were  judged  according  to  their 
errors,  which  were  all  open  before  God.  But  there  is 
only  one  right  way,  one  book  of  life,  and  happy  were 
they  whose  names  were  there. 

"  And  the  sea  gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it ; 
and  death  and  hell  gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in 
them ;  and  they  were  judged  every  man  according  to 
their  works."  This  is  a  positive  form  of  expressing 
what  the  prophets  expressed  hypothetically,  in  vari- 
ous places  which  we  noticed  in  earlier  parts  of  this 
discussion.  Amos,  for  instance,  describing  the  se- 
verity and  uuescapable  prevalence  of  a  judgment 
which  should  come  upon  Israel,  said,  (ix.  2-4,) 
"  Though  they  dig  into  hell,  thence  shall  mine  hand  take 
them  ;  —  and  though  they  be  hid  from  my  sight  in  the 
bottom  of  the  sea,  thence  will  I  command  the  serpent, 
and  he  shall  bite  them."  And  Isaiah  j  (xxviii.  17, 
18  ;)  "  Judgment  also  will  I  lay  to  the  line,  and  right- 


REPLY   TO    DR.    ADA31S,  STT 

eousness  to  the  plummet ;  and  the  hail  shall  sweep 
away  the  refnge  of  lies,  and  the  waters  shall  overflow 
the  hiding  place.  And  your  covenant  with  death 
shall  be  disannulled,  and  your  agreement  with  hell 
shall  not  stand  :  when  the  overflowing  scourge  shall 
pass  through^  then  ye  shall  be  trodden  down  by  it.'7 

Xow  the  view  of  any  people  which  regards  them 
as  inhabiting  "  deat?i  and  hades/7  regards  them  as 
"  the  dead."  And  the  vision  of  John,  which  views 
the  scene  as  actually  passing  before  him,  so  that  the 
record  of  it  emphatically  declares,  "and  death  and 
hades  delivered  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them.'7 
represents  no  other  than  the  same  idea  expressed  by 
Isaiah  in  the  saving,  li  Your  covenant  with  death  and 

•/ 

agreement  with  hell  shall  be  disannulled."  The  idea 
is,  that  no  secret  hiding  place,  no  scheme  of  hypocri- 
sy, no  deep  counsel  of  darkness,  should  avail  them  as 
a  screen  from  the  terrible  and  protracted  calamities 
that  were  impending.  The  refuge  of  lies,  as  Isaiah 
expresses  it,  should  be  swept  away :  or  death  and 
hades,  as  John  has  it,  should  be  cast  into  the  lake  of 
fire, — 'all  together,  they  and  their  vain  machinations, 
should  be  found  powerless  in  those  raging  judgments, 
represented  by  the  lake  of  fire. 

-"  And  whosoever  was  not  found  written  in  the  book 
of  life,7'  that  is  the  dead,  small  and  great,  the  enemies 
of  the  gospel  of  all  ranks,  "  were  cast  into  the  lake 
of  fire,"  were  made  sufferers  in  those  calamities. 

"  This  is  the  second  death."  The  second,  in  suc- 
cessive order,  implies  a  first  bearing  a  relation  to  it. 
To  call  the  natural  death  of  the  bodv  the  first  death, 

v  f 

32* 


378  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

and  endless  punishment  the  second  death,  would  be 
talking  like  one  insane.  Moral  death,  or  that  of  sin, 
is  first.  And  if  one  raised  from  that  moral  death  by 
faith  in  Christ  were  to  relapse  into  unbelief  and  sin, 
that  would  be  a  second  death.  But  that  were  not 
eternal  death,  for  the  work  of  the  Saviour's  mission 
will  ultimately  destroy  all  death,  so  that  there  shall 
be  no  more  death,  neither  sorrow  nor  crying.  But 
"  the  second  death/'  mentioned  in  the  passage  before 
us,  we  take  to  be  the  second  national  destruction  of 
God's  chosen  people,  Israel.  Their  first  national 
desolation  was  in  the  Babylonish  captivity.  And  that 
was  figuratively  denominated  death,  and  burial. 
Ezekiel's  vision,  which  shadowed  their  restoration, 
recognised  them  as  in  their  graves,  and  promised 
their  resurrection  from  their  graves,  to  the  inheri- 
tance of  their  own  land.  This  prophecy  was  fulfilled 
and  Israel  lived,  and  prospered  again,  as  a  people. 
But  the  prophecy  of  the  book  of  Revelation,  which 
we  have  before  us,  recognized  as  near  at  hand  the 
second  national  dissolution  of  Israel ;  —  and  this  was 
"  the  second  death." 

But  they  who  had  part  in  the  first  resurrection 
should  not  be  hurt  by  the  second  death.  These  were 
the  true  disciples  of  Jesus,  who  had  spiritually  passed 
from  death  into  life,  and,  according  to  both  propheti- 
cal and  historical  testimony,  were  preserved  frcm  the 
desolation  that  came  upon  the  unbelieving  of  their 
nation."'  "  "Whoso  readeth,  let  him  understand." 

*See  Matt.  xxiv.  13,  16.  Luke  xxi.  18,  28,  and  our  exposition,  and 
that  of  Newcomb  Cappe,  of  John  v.  £8,  29;  particularly  on  pp.  331-342 
of  this  Discussion: 


CHAPTER   VI. 

Terms  of  Duration. 

We  come  now  to  Dr.  Adams'  last  great  proposi- 
tion, to  wit : 

VII.  THE  DURATION  OF  FUTURE  PUNISHMENT  IS  EX- 
PRESSED IN  THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  BY  THE  TERMS  EMPLOYED 
TO  DENOTE  ABSOLUTE  ETERNITY. 

Here,  again,  before  entering  upon  the  discussion 
of  this  proposition,  we  must,  as  in  the  preceding 
division,  strike  out  the  word  future  prefixed  to  pun- 
ishment, because  it  has  no  Scripture  grant  for  being 
there.  We  shall  not  discuss  with  our  friend  the 
duration  of  future  punishment,  in  the  popular  sense 
of  the  phrase,  until  he  furnishes  some  sort  of  Scrip- 
ture warrant  for  its  use.  But  the  question  before  us 
is  the  duration  of  punishment.  And  now,  in  the 
outset,  against  the  Doctor's  assumption,  we  file  our 
own,  viz : — That  the  terms  employed  to  express  the 
duration  of  punishment,  are  never  employed  to 
denote,  of  their  own  force,  absolute  eternity.  The 
Doctor  continues  : — 

"  There  is,  we  all  admit,  such  a  thing  as  forever.  If  the  Bible 
speaks  of  the  natural  attributes  of  God,  his  eternity  is  of  course 
brought  to  view,  and  there  must  be  a  term  or  terms  to  convey 
the  idea." 


880  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

On  this  we  have  to  remark,  that  the  fact  of  God's 
eternity  being  associated  with  the  considerate  thought 
of  his  being,  does  not  involve  the  certainty  that  the 
ancient  languages  had  any  one  term  literally  to 
express  the  idea.  And  we  shall  find  that  the  Greeks 
had  not  any  one  word  in  familiar  usage  which  ex- 
pressed this  idea  of  its  own  single  force.  The  word 
akatcdutos  comes  nearer  to  that  import  than  any 
other;  but  that  denotes  quality  rather  than  duration, 
literally  signifying  indissoluble,  or  that  which  cannot  be 
dissolved.  It  occurs  but  once  in  the  Scriptures,  (Heb. 
vii.  16,)  and  is  rendered  endless.  Speaking  of  Christ 
in  his  spiritual  priesthood,  it  is  said,  he  is  "  made,  not 
after  the  law  of  a  carnal  commandment,  but  after  the 
power  of  an  endless  (properly,  indissoluble)  life." 

But  aion  and  aionios,  rendered  forever,  everlasting 
and  eternal  in  the  Scriptures,  do  not,  of  their  own 
force,  when  applied  to  any  subject,  "  denote  absolute 
eternity."  And  if  it  were  not  that  many  great  and 
good  men  have  overpowering  foreign  motives  for 
repeating  and  perpetuating  the  counter  assumption, 
this  question  could  riot  be  considered  debatable.  It 
is  not  a  question  of  opinion,  but  of  literal,  tangible 
fact. 

And  now,  what  are  the  facts  ?  What  is  the  natural 
and  proper  meaning  of  aion  and  its  derivatives  ? 
Some,  in  order  to  throw  the  burden  of  proof  upon 
those  who  believe  the  punishment  to  be  limited  to 
which  this  word  is  applied,  assert  that  it  primarily 
and  properly  signifies  unlimited  duration.  We  are 
willing  always  to  bear  the  burden  of  proof,  by  argu- 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  381 

ment  from  the  nature  of  the  subject,  that  aionion 
punishment  is  of  limited  duration ;  but  we  do  not 
admit  this  definition  of  the  word  in  question,  because 
it  is  not  true. 

Though  Professor  Stuart,  in  his  Exegetical  Essays, 
assumes  that  the  proper  signification  of  aion  and 
aionios,  as  used  by  the  Greek  writers  of  the  Septua- 
gint  and  New  Testament,  is  eternity  and  eternal,  and 
that  when  they  are  used  in  a  limited  sense  it  is  a 
catachrestic,  or  forced  and  unnatural  use,  yet  he  has 
presented  no  facts  to  support  such  an  assumption. 
He  has  given  us  no  authority  for  departing  from  the 
following  definition  of  aion,  by  the  learned  Orthodox 
lexicographer,  Parkhurst.  "  Aion,  from  aei,  always, 
and  on,  being,  always  being.  It  denotes  duration,  or 
continuance  of  time,  but  with  great  variety."  This 
he  gives  as  the  proper  and  radical  meaning  of  the 
word,  "  duration,  or  continuance  of  time ;"  and  then 
adds,  "  but  with  great  variety."  He  then  gives  ex- 
amples of  different  uses  of  the  word,  by  reference  to 
certain  places  of  Scripture,  of  which  places  every 
reader  of  the  Bible  is  to  judge  for  himself. 

DONEGAN,  defining  the  word  in  its  classical  usage, 
gives  it  thus  : — "  Aion — time  ;  a  space  of  time  ;  life- 
time." Such  is  its  proper  meaning. 

But  you  will  say  that  if  aion  is  compounded  of  aei, 
always,  and  on,  being,  the  radical  meaning  of  the 
word  is  endless  duration,  or  eternity.  Let  us  look 
then  at  the  signification  of  the  word  aei,  which  is  the 
component  part  of  aion  that  applies  to  duration,  and 
is  rendered  always.  "  Aei,  from  a,  intensive,  and  eo, 


382  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

to  be.  1.  Always,  ever.  Acts  ii.  51 :  "  Ye  do  always 
resist  the  Holy  Ghost;  as  your  fathers  did,  so  do 
ye."  2  Cor.  vi.  10  :  "  As  sorrowful,  .yet  always  rejoic- 
ing." These  are  the  only  cases  which  Parkhurst 
brings  to  support  his  strongest  sense  of  the  Greek 
o.ei ;  and  in  these,  the  reader  perceives  that  the  word 
means  no  more  than  continual.  His  second  definition 
is  "  Always,  ever,  in  a  restrained  sense,  i.  e.  at  some 
stated  times."  And  third,  "  Very  frequently,  con- 
tinually.''1 And  to  these  definitions  he  quotes  Mark 
xv.  8 — "  And  the  multitude,  crying  aloud,  began  to 
desire  him  (Pilate)  to  do  as  he  had  ever  done  unto 
them."  And  2  Cor.  iv.  11 — a  For  we  which  live  are 
always  delivered  unto  death  for  Jesus'  sake."  And 
2  Peter  i.  12 — "Wherefore  I  will  not  be  negligent  to 
put  you  always  in  remembrance  of  these  things." 
Such  is  the  signification,  and  such  the  Scripture  use, 
of  the  word  aei,  which  with  the  word  on,  being, 
makes  aion,  the  Greek  term  under  consideration.  It 
is  plain,  therefore,  that  the  proper  and  radical  meaning 
of  this  word  is,  as  Parkhurst  has  defined  it,  simply 
duration,  or  continuance  of  time;  indefinite  duration. 
When  therefore  we  undertake  to  define  the  duration 
expressed  by  it,  we  must  do  this  by  arguing  from  the 
nature  of  the  subject  to  which  it  is  applied.  The 
same  remarks  will  apply  to  the  adjective  aionios, 
which,  as  Professor  Stuart  remarks  in  his  Essays,  p. 
39,  corresponds  in  meaning  with  aion,  the  substantive. 
Thus  much  I  have  thought  proper  to  present  with 
regard  to  aion  and  aionios,  to  show  that  when  my 
opponent  assumes  that  the  proper  signification  of 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  383 

these  words  is  eternity  and  eternal,  he  assumes  a  false 
position ;  that  the  proper  signification  of  these  words 
is  duration  indefinite;  and  that  consequently  whoever 
asserts  that  either  aion  or  aionios  does  in  any  given 
case  apply  to  endless  duration,  is  bound  to  support 
his  assertion  by  argument  from  the  connection,  or 
the  nature  of  the  subject. 

I  admit,  however,  that  a  word  may  become  gradu- 
ally changed  by  use,  until  it  comes  to  be  commonly 
employed  in  a  sense  quite  different  from  its  radical 
meaning.  If  any  assert  that  this  was  the  case  with 
aion  in  the  time  of  the  Greek  writers  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, that  it  had  then  come  into  use  to  signify  ? 
properly,  or  by  its  own  force,  eternity,  or  endless 
duration,  let  the  assertion  be  judged  by  the  fact 
which  appears  in  the  Scripture  use  of  this  word.  I 
have  taken  time  to  examine,  for  myself,  351  cases  of 
the  use  of  aion  and  aionios  in  the  Septuagint,  which 
are  nearly  all  the  cases  of  their  occurrence  in  the 
Old  Testament.  In  those  cases  which  I  have  exam- 
ined, they  are  rendered  by  the  English  words  ever, 
forever,  everlasting,  and  eternal.  In  220  of  these 
cases  the  words  are  applied  to  the  duration  of  times, 
things,  and  events,  unquestionably  of  a  temporal 
nature,  in  the  earth.  In  the  remaining  131  cases,  the 
words  are  applied  to  God,  his  attributes,  Ms  praise, 
the  kingdom  of  the  Messiah,  and  of  the  Saints,  &c. 
Thus  in  nearly  two-thirds  of  the  instances  of  the  use 
of  aion  and  aionios  in  the  Greek  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, they  are  used  in  application  to  the  duration 
of  transient  times  and  things  on  earth.  Does  this 


384  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

look  like  these  words  having  come  into  use  to 
signify,  by  their  own  force,  eternity  and  eternal? 
Far  from  it.  Their  Scripture  use  is  according  to 
their  radical  meaning,  duration,  or  continuance  of 
time,  the  extent  of  which  is  to  be  determined  in  each 
case  from  the  subject.  And  in  many  of  the  remain- 
ing 131  cases  of  the  use  of  aion  and  aionios  in  the 
Old  Testament,  it  does  not  appear  that  the  sacred 
writers  in  using  them  grasped  the  idea  of  eternity. 
When  applied  to  the  praise  of  God,  and  the  displays 
of  his  goodness,  though  these  will  continue  eternally, 
it  does  not  appear  that  the  sacred  writers  by  the  use 
of  aion  meant  to  express  any  thing  more  than  continu- 
al, perpetual,  or  from  age  to  age.  The  phrase,  from 
generation  to  generation,  is  sometimes  used  as  a  repe- 
tition of  the  same  idea  that  had  just  been  expressed 
by  aion,  forever.  As  in  Lam.  v.  19 — "  Thou,  0  Lord, 
remainest  forever;  thy  throne  from  generation  to 
generation."  Now  we  may  as  well  argue  that  the 
phrase,  from  generation  to  generation,  expresses  by  its 
own  proper  force  eternal  duration,  because  it  is 
applied  to  the  continuance  of  God's  throne,  as  that 
aion  expresses  by  its  own  proper  force  eternal  dura- 
tion, because  it  is  applied  to  the  continuance  of  God's 
existence.  And  with  as  much  propriety  might  it  be 
said  that  the  proper  signification  of  the  adjective 
great,  is  infinite,  because  it  is  so  often  applied  to  the 
divine  being.  Indeed,  it  has  often,  and  with  perfect 
truth,  been  said  by  the  learned,  that  aionios  in  refer- 
ence to  time,  exactly  corresponds  with  great  in 
respect  to  magnitude.  So  that  the  adjective  aionios 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  385 

applied  to  God,  no  more  proves  his  eternity,  than  the 
adjective  great  proves  his  infinity.  Both  these 
properties  belong  to  the  very  idea  of  his  self-existent 
and  independent  being ;  and  when  expressed,  they 
are  expressed  by  circumlocution. 

And  because  the  word  aion  did  not,  with  the 
Greek  writers  of  the  Scriptures,  properly  signify 
eternity,  they  would  frequently  repeat  the  word, 
when  they  would  express  great  extent  of  duration, 
and  sometimes  in  the  plural  number,  and  add  in  some 
cases  the  adverb  eti,  which  signifies  yet,  still,  or 
farther.  As  in  Exo.  xiv.  18,  "  The  Lord  shall  reign 
(ton  aiona,  kai  ep  aiona,  kai  eti)  age  upon  age,  or 
forever  and  ever,  and  farther.'*  And  Dan.  xii.  3  : 
"  They  shall  shine  as  the  stars,  (els  ton  aiona,  kai  eti) 
to  the  age,  or  forever,  and  farther."  And  Micah  iv. 
o — "  We  will  walk  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  our  God, 
(eis  ton  aion,  kai  epekeinaj)  forever,  and  beyond  it" 
Now  to  substitute  the  word  eternity  for  aion  in  such 
cases,  reading,  from  eternity  to  eternity,  and  farther , 
would  make  perfect  nonsense.  The  Scripture  writers 
expressed  the  idea  of  Gods  eternity  by  different 
methods,  speaking  of  him  as  self  existent,  immortal, 
unchangeable,  of  whose  years  there  shall  be  no  end. 
And  so  is  the  endless  continuance  of  the  future  state 
of  human  existence  in  purity  and  happiness  expressed, 
by  its  immortality,  incorruptibility,  spirituality,  heav- 
enliness,  1  Cor.  xv.  42-49  ;  the  saying  that  they  shall 
not  die  any  more;  Luke  xx.  36;  and  shall  be  made 
alive  in  and  with  him  who  is  made  after  the  power 
of  akatalutou,  endless  or  indissoluble  life.  Heb.  vii. 
33 


386  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

16.  But  is  has  been  sufficiently  shown  that  this  ide« 
of  God's  eternity,  and  the  endless  continuance  of  the 
future  happy  existence  of  men,  is  not  expressed  by 
the  natural  force  of  the  words  aion  and  aionios.  The 
word  aionios,  therefore,  connected  with  the  punish- 
ment of  the  wicked,  is  not  the  least  proof  of  its  endless 
duration.  Neither  in  the  nature  and  design  of  pun- 
ishment, is  there  any  thing  from  which  you  can 
argue  its  unlimited  duration.  There  are  frequent 
mentions  made  in  the  Scriptures  of  cases  in  which 
God  had  then,  already,  judged  and  punished  the 
wicked  according  to  their  doings,  even  according-  to 
all  their  abominations.  Psl.  ix.  4 ;  Ixxvi.  8,  9.  Isa. 
xl.  2.  Ezek.  vii.  9  ;  xxxvi.  19.  It  is  manifest,  there- 
fore, that  the  punishing  of  the  wicked  according  to 
their  doings  is  not  an  endless,  an  unlimited  work ;  and 
the  word  aionios  cannot  make  it  so. 

Dr.  Adams  says  in  his  argument, — 

"  Now  it  is  apparent  to  all,  that  the  words  eternal,  everlasting 
forever,  never  of  themselves  signify  a  limited  Duration.  No  one 
ever  learns  from  these  words,  that  the  duration  to  which  they  refer 
is  less  than  infinite.  The  idea  of  limitation,  if  it  be  obtained, 
always  is  derived  from  the  context." 

This  sentence  is  quite  artfully  framed.  It  begins 
with  a  show  of  fairness,  but  is  designed  to  carry  over 
the  unwarv  mind  into  a  wrong  conclusion.  It  is 

*  o 

based  on  the  idea  that  the  word  or  words  in  question 
must  either  signify  definitely  a  limited,  or  definitely 
an  unlimited  duration,  insomuch  that,  if  it  were 
conceded  that  it  does  not  of  itself  signify  a  limited 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  387 

duration,  it  must  be  admitted  to  signify,  of  itself, 
unlimited  duration.  But  the  premises  on  which  this 
argument  is  based  are  inadmissible.  It  is  not  true 
that  the  word  under  consideration  signifies,  of  itself, 
duration  either  definitively  limited,  or  definitively 
unlimited.  •  It  denotes  "  duration,  or  continuance  of 
time,  indefinite."  But  because  it  is  most  commonly 
applied  to  ages  and  periodical  dispensations  of  provi- 
dence, it  would  make  a  sentence  more  strictly  true, 
to  amend  that  of  our  opponent  by  striking  out  the 
words  less  than,  and  for  the  word  limited  substitute 
twlimited, — and  read  thus  :  "  Now  it  is  apparent  to 
all,  that  the  words  eternal,  everlasting,  forever,  (as 
synonymes  of  aion  and  aionios)  never  of  themselves 
signify  an  unlimited  duration.  Xo  one  ever  learns 
from  these  icords  that  the  duration  to  which  they 
refer  is  infinite.  The  idea  of  infinite,  if  it  be  obtain- 
ed, always  is  derived  from  the  context." 

Dr.  A.  continues, — 

"  It  Is  moreover  true  beyond  the  possibility  of  dispute  that  the 
words  eternal,  everlasting  and  forever,  always  mean  Hie  whole  of 
something.  There  is  no  instance  in  which  they  are  used  to  denote 
a  part  of  a  thing's  duration.  It  is  always  the  entire  period  for 
which  that  thing  is  to  last.  This  no  one  will  call  in  question." 

It  is  really  gratifying  to  find  our  esteemed  friend 
right,  for  once,  on  so  important  a  matter.  As  the 
original  term  denotes  "  duration  or  continuance  of 
time,"  (see  Parkhurst),  and  is  often  used  in  the  sense  of 
continual  or  unceasing,  it  is  fair  to  regard  it  as  usually 
implying  a  continuity  through  the  whole  of  the  day, 
age  or  sphere  which  naturally  belongs  to  the  subject. 


388  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Our  friend,  then,  in  order  to  maintain  his  position, 
must  show  that  the  sphere  of  sin  and  misery  is,' in  its 
nature  and  mission,  as  immortal  an.d  abiding  as  the 
sphere  of  truth  and  holiness  j  that  the  kingdom  of 
Satan  is  co-equal  and  co-eternal  with  the  kingdom  of 
God.  While  the  old  prophet  honored  God  as  the 
high  and  lofty  One  that  inhabiteth  eternity , — Dr.  A. 
must  exalt  satan,  also,  as  the  high  and  lofty  one  that 
inhabiteth  eternity.  Can  he  do  this?  We  trow  not. 
But  here  our  friend  will  rally  with  his  argument 
from  the  word  everlasting,  as  being  alike  applied  to 
the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  kingdom  of  evil.  Ah 
but  he  has  cut  himself  off  from  this  argument  He 
has  settled  down  upon  the  concession  that  everlasting 
always  means  the  ivhole  of  something,  whether  it  be 
of  short  or  long  duration,  and  that  whether  short  or 
long  we  must  determine  from  "  the  nature  of  the  thing 
spoken  of."  And  now  for  him  to  run  back  again 
with  this  word  to  prove  the  unlimited  nature  of  the 
thing  spoken  of,  in  reference  to  punishment,  or  sin  and 
suffering,  is  perpetrating  what  logicians  call  "  an  argu- 
ment in  a  circle."  Dr.  Watts,  in  his  work  on  the 
mind,  illustrates  this  worthless  form  of  argument,  by 
reference  to  the  Papal  method  of  proving  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Papal  church.  They  prove  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  church  by  their  authorized  construction 
of  the  Bible, — and  they  prove  their  authorized  con- 
struction of  the  Bible  by  the  infallible  church.  (We 
do  not  here  quote  from  Watts  verbally,  but  give  the 
idea  from  memory.)  And  so  our  learned  Doctor 
proves  the  unlimited  signification  of  aionios  applied 
to  punishment  by  the  eternity  of  the  subject  in  its 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  889 

own  nature, — and  then  he  proves  the  eternity  of  the 
subject  by  the  word  aionios.  This  logic  is,  by  the 
unanimous  judgment  of  scholars,  null  and  void. 

No ;  our  friend  must,  if  he  will  get  on  another 
step  with  his  cause,  before  determining  the  sense  of 
aionios  in  that  way,  show  the  natural  eternity  of  false- 
hood and  evil,  sin  and  punishment.  What  an  under- 
taking !  The  word  of  God  declares  that  the  Seed  of 
the  woman  shall  bruise  the  serpent's  head.  The  bruis- 
ing of  the  head  denotes  complete  destruction.  As 
the  serpent  here  emblemizes  the  reign  of  evil  which 
had  just  entered  the  moral  system,  this  declaration 
pronounces  the  utter  extermination,  in  due  time  of 
the  reign  of  evil.  But  our  friend  must  try  the  task 
of  making  evil  co-eternal  with  His  existence  who 
pledged  its  destruction.  The  word  of  God  says, 
"  For  this  purpose  was  the  Son  of  God  manifested, 
that  he  might  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil/'  which 
are  sin  and  evil.  But  it  is  the  undertaking  of  our 
friend  to  perpetuate  the  works  of  the  Devil  through 
God's  eternity.  We  admonish  him  that  his  undertak- 
ing must  prove  a  failure.  This  of  course  ;  because, 
satan  shall  fail,  and  Christ  "  shall  see  of  the  travail  of 
his  soul  and  be  satisfied." 

But  Dr.  A.,  with  his  accustomed  ingenuity,  attempts 
to  establish  the  eternity  of  punishment  by  the  follow- 
ing process. 

Two  things  are  beyond  dispute.  1,  Forever  and  everlasting  are 
applied  to  future  retributions.  2,  These  terms  always  mean  the 
whole,  as  to  duration,  of  that  with  which  they  stand  connected. 

33* 


390  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Well,  we  will  look  at  this.  But  the  first  position, 
the  main  premise  assumed  in  this  case,  is  not  true. 
Forever  and  everlasting  are  not,  in  the  Scriptures 
applied  to  future  retribution.  Our  opponent  has  all 
along  labored  to  thrust  himself  upon  this  position,  as 
a  stand-point  from  which  to  view  and  debate  the  sub- 
ject of  retribution.  But  he  has  failed  to  adduce  a 
single  Scripture  expression  which  warrants  or  per- 
mits him  that  stand-point.  But  let  this  pass  for  a 
moment.  Suppose  the  word  everlasting  were  applied 
to  future  retribution.  What  then  is  the  argument  ? 
Why.  "  2.  This  term  always  means  the  iv/iole,  as  to 
duration,  of  that  with  which  it  stands  connected.'7 
What  then?  With  what  does  it  stand  connected, 
even  if  such  a  passage  as  Matt.  xxv.  40  were  trans- 
ported to  the  future  world  ?  With  the  term  of  future 
existence  ?  No,  for  that  is  not  the  subject  of  dis- 
course. The  word  is  connected  with  a  dispensation 
of  punishment.  So  the  question  returns  upon  the 
nature  and  design  of  punishment,  which  we  have 
sufficiently  proved  to  be  a  corrective  dispensation, 
limited  of  course.  And,  as  we  have  shown  before, 
the  very  word  kolasin,  rendered  punishment  in  the 
passage  last  referred  to,  signifying  discipline,  as  the 
pruning  of  trees,  shows  that  the  punishment  is  a 
limited  dispensation,  to  be  succeeded  by  good. 

But  neither  this  passage,  nor  any  other  denouncing 
punishment,  belongs  to  the  future  world.  Dr.  A.  dis- 
covers a  wise  degree  of  caution  in  confining  his 
argument  in  this  division  to  abstract  propositions 
without  committing  himself  to  any  particular  passage 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  391 

of  Scripture  as  connecting  aionios  with  rewards  and 
punishments  in  the  future  world.  But  his  phraseology 
evinces  that  he  had  in  his  mind  Matt.  xxv.  46  ;  and 
he  quotes  from  that  connection  the  phrase,  "  ye 
cursed,'-  as  if  it  were  addressed  to  immortals  beyond 
the  resurrection.  Therefore,  that  we  may  not  leave 
the  discussion  of  this  branch  of  the  "  Argument" 
incomplete,  we  will  faithfully  consult  the  record  for 
the  correct  application  of  the  passage  just  referred 
to  ;  "  And  these  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punish- 
ment, but  the  righteous  into  UfeeternoL" 

WHEN  AND  WHERE  WAS  THIS  JUDGMENT  TO  BE  EFFEC- 
TUATED? Answer.  When  the  Son  of  man  should  come 

/  •/ 

in  his  glory,  (v.  36.)  And  when  should  the  event 
occur  denoted  by  this  language  ?  For  information 
on  this  question,  we  will  reverently  attend  to  the 
great  Teacher  himself.  Can  the  reader  throw  aside 
all  mean  and  irreverent  sectarian  will,  and  come,  sit 

'  / 

and  learn  at  Jesus'  feet  ? 

The  words  above  quoted,  li  These  shall  go  away 
into  aionion  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into  life 
aionion"  are  the  conclusion  of  a  discourse  of  our 
Lord,  which  commences  with  the  preceding  chapter. 
Jesus  and  his  disciples  were  on  the  Mount  of  Olives, 
which  commanded  a  full  view  of  the  temple  in  Jeru- 
salem. The  disciples  spoke  with  admiration  of  the 
magnificent  buildings  of  the  temple  ;  "  And  Jesus  said 
unto  them,  See  ye  not  all  these  things  ?  Verily  I 
say  unto  you,  there  shall  not  be  left  here  one  stone 
upon  another  that  shall  not  be  thrown  down."  This 
excited  in  the  disciples  a  desire  to  receive  more  full 


392  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

information  concerning  that  judgment  to  which  this 
declaration  of  their  Lord  referred,  and  to  know  the 
signs  on  which  they  might  rely  as  monitors  of  its 
approach.  Accordingly  they  inquired,  "  When  shall 
these  things  be  ?  and  what  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy 
coming,  and  of  the  end  of  the  world  ?"  Some  have  sup- 
posed that,  though  the  disciples  in  asking,  "  When 
shall  these  things  be  ?"  had  reference  to  the  subject 
then  before  them,  yet  in  concluding  their  inquiry 
with  the  same  breath,  "  And  what  shall  be  the  sign 
of  thy  coming,"  <tc.,  they  had  flown  off  to  a 
totally  different  and  distant  subject,  inquiring  for  the 
signs  of  the  literal  dissolution  of  the  material  world, 
and  events  subsequent  to  that.  But  this  is  forcing  a 
construction  on  the  disciples,  inquiries,  which  does 
them  injustice.  Their  conversation  with  their  Master 
was  on  the  subject  of  that  judgment  which  should 
raze  to  the  ground  the  temple  of  Jerusalem.  It 
appears  that  they  had  associated  in  their  minds  with 
this  event  a  certain  coming  of  Christ,  and  the  end  of 
that  aion  or  age.  Accordingly,  when  they  inquired, 
with  reference  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
"  When  shall  these  things  be  ?"  and  then  asked,  And 
what  shall  be  the  sign  of  thy  coming,  (that  is  to 
execute  these  things),  and  of  the  end  of  the  world, 
aionos,  or  age  ?  they  had  not  run  off  from  their  sub- 
ject, but  inquired  after  the  sign  of  the  coming  of  the 
same  event  which  was  the  subject  of  their  conver- 
sation. 

That  1  am  right  here  is  certain,  from  the  record  of 
the   same   inquiries  of  the  disciples  given  by  Mark 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  393 

and  Luke.  See  Mark  xiii.  4 ;  "  Tell  us,  when  shall 
these  things  be  ?  and  what  shall  be  the  sign  when  all 
these,  things  shall  be  fulfilled  ?"  And  Luke  xxi.  7  ;  "  And 
they  asked  him,  saying,  Master,  but  tell  us,  when 
shall  these  things  be  ?  and  what  sign  will  there  be 
when  these  things  shall  come  to  pass  ?"  Hence  it  is 
certain  that  the  disciples'  inquiries  in  this  case  aimed 
at  nothing  else,  but  1st,  to  know  the  time  of  these 
things  which  their  Lord  referred  to  in  speaking  of 
the  destruction  of  the  temple  ;  and  2d,  to  know  the 
signs,  not  of  an  infinitely  different  affair,  but  of  these 
same  things  of  which  they  had  just  asked  for  the  time. 

This  clear  understanding  of  the  disciples'  questions, 
will  aid  us  much  in  understanding  our  Lord's  answer, 
which  runs  to  the  end  of  the  25th  chapter.  For  we 
may  safely  calculate  that  his  answer  is  appropriate,  and 
treats  on  the  subject  of  their  inquiries,  which  were 
elicited  by  his  own  preceding  declaration. 

We  will  attend  now  to  Jesus'  answer.  After  nam- 
ing many  signs  and  circumstances,  and  giving  the 
disciples  directions  concerning  their  escape,  which, 
as  you  will  see  by  reading  on  in  chapter  24th,  from 
the  4th  verse,  would  be  without  meaning  if  applied 
to  the  destruction  of  the  material  world,  but  are 
appropriate  as  applied  to  the  end  of  the  Jewish  age, — 
he  thus  proceeds  ;  "  Immediately  after  the  tribulation 
of  those  days,  shall  the  sun  be  darkened,  and  the 
moon  shall  not  give  her  light,"  <fcc.  This  language  is 
very  eastern,  and  highly  figurative.  The  Jews  well 
understood  it,  as  the  prophetic  description  of  the 
fall  and  ruin  of  some  city  or  nation.  For  instances 


394  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

of  such  use  of  similar  language,  see  Isa.  xiii.  9-13. 
Ezek.  xxxii.  7,  8.  Now  it  is  as  evident  that  this  lan- 
guage of  our  Lord  is  applied  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  as  it  is  that  the  language  referred  to  in 
Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  is  applied  to  the  fall  of  Babylon, 
and  the  destruction  of  Pharaoh  and  Egypt. 

Jesus  proceeds,  "  And  then  shall  appear  the  sign 
of  the  Son  of  man  in  heaven  ;  and  then  shall  all  the 
tribes  of  the  earth  mourn,  and  they  shall  see  the  Son 
of  man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  with  power 
and  great  glory.  And  he  shall  send  forth  his  angels," 
<fcc.  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  this  generation  shall 
not  pass,  till  all  these  things  be  fulfilled." 

Now  we  inquire,  what  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  in 
glory  is  here  meant?  Most  certainly  it  is  that  coming 
after  which  the  disciples  inquired  j  for  Christ  is  here 
engaged  in  answering  their  inquiries.  They  asked 
for  the  time  and  the  signs  of  his  coming,  to  execute 
that  judgment  which  should  destroy  Jerusalem  and 
terminate  the  Jewish  age.  And  now,  when  Jesus,  in 
answer  to  their  questions,  after  pointing  out  the  signs 
of  his  coming,  says,  "  Then  shall  they  see  the  Son  of 
man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,"  he  of  course 
speaks  of  the  same  coming  concerning  which  they 
inquired,  and  of  which  he  had  just  given  them  the 
signs.  And  in  answer  to  the  question,  "  When  shall 
these  things  be  ?"  he  expressly  limits  the  whole  to 
that  generation. 

Dr.  Scott,  whom  Dr.  Adams  no  doubt  accredits  as 
soundly  Orthodox,  in  his  Commentary,  gives  the  same 
view  of  this  subject,  so  far,  as  I  have  here  given.  In 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  395 

remarking  on  verse  29,  Dr.  Scott  says,  "  The  expres- 
sion, '  immediately  after  the  tribulation  of  those  days/ 
must  restrict  the  primary  sense  of  these  words  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  and  the  events  consequent 
on  it.  The  darkening  of  the  sun  and  moon,  the  falling 
of  the  stars,  and  the  shaking  of  the  powers  of  the 
heavens,  denote  the  utter  extinction  of  the  light  of 
prosperity  and  privilege  to  the  Jewish  nation,  the  un- 
hinging of  the  whole  constitution  of  their  church  and 
state."  Dr.  Scott  also  understands  that  the  Son  of 
man's  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  and  sending 
forth  his  angels,  in  verses  80,  31,  was  fulfilled  in  the 
display  of  divine  power  at  that  time,  in  preserving 
the  disciples,  and  destroying  the  enemies  of  Jesus. 
And  how  could  he  avoid  seeing  this,  since  the  lan- 
guage of  the  three  succeeding  verses  is  so  plain  that 
it  obliged  him  to  say,  "  This  absolutely  restricts  our 
primary  interpretation  of  the  prophecy  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem,  which  took  place  within  forty 
years."  Nor  has  Dr.  Scott  courage  enough  to  deny, 
and  so  he  admits,  that  the  saying  in  verse  36,  "  But 
of  that  day  and  hour  knoweth  no  man" —  refers  "  to 
the  precise  day  and  hour  of  Jerusalem's  destruction." 
He  tells  occasionally  of  another  judgment  to  which 
he  thinks  some  of  this  language  applicable,  but  is 
forced  to  admit  that  the  "  primary  '  application,  i,  e. 
the  original  application  intended  by  the  speaker  of 
these  prophecies,  is  to  the  judgment  of  that  generation. 
To  proceed  with  the  examination  of  our  Lord's 
discourse.  As  he  could  not  tell  the  precise  day  and 
hour  when  it  would  be  necessary  for  "  the  elect  "  to 


396  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

lee  from  the  city  to  escape  the  destruction  which 
was  the  subject  of  his  discourse,  he  charged  them  to 
watch  for  the  signs.  And  he  assured  them  that  if  any 
of  his  professed  servants  should  abandon  his  cause, 
and  eat  and  drink  with  the  drunken,  they  should  be 
*'  cut  asunder,  and  have  their  portion  with  the  hypo- 
crites," or  unbelieving  Jews. 

To  illustrate  this  last  saying,  he  speaks  the  follow- 
ing parable  :  "  Then  shall  the  kingdom  of  heaven  be 
likened  unto  ten  virgins: — five  wise,  and  five  foolish.'7 
When  was  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  be  thus  likened  ? 
Suppose  you  write  a  letter  to  your  absent  son,  and 
say,  "  I  will  visit  you  before  this  month  passes  away  ; 
and  then  will  we  adjust  our  unsettled  concerns.'7 
Wlien  would  your  son  understand  you  to  propose 
adjusting  said  concerns  ?  Some  time  after  the  general 
resurrection  ?  No.  Before  this  month  passes  away. 
He  could  not  misunderstand  you  if  he  should  try. 
The  subject  before  us  is  equally  plain.  Jesus  has  just 
been  describing  events,  all  of  which  he  has  limited  to 
that  generation.  And  now,  continuing  his  discourse 
unbroken,  he  says,  "  Then  shall  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  be  likened  unto  ten  virgins,"  &c.  AVhen  ? 
At  the  time  just  designated,  which  was  to  be  before 
that  generation  passed  away.  The  kingdom  of  heaven 
in  this  place  cannot  mean  the  heaven  of  immortal 
glory,  for  that  is  never  half  foolish.  But  it  evidently 
means  the  visible  church  of  that  age,  some  of  whom 
would  be  foolish  enough  to  abandon  Christ's  cause, 
and  would  suffer  as  mentioned  in  the  last  verse  of 
chapter  24th.* 

*See  pp,  196-202  of  this  Discussion. 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  397 

After  finishing  this  parable,  and  speaking  the  para- 
ble of  the  talents,  further  to  illustrate  and  justify  the 
dealings  of  God  with  the  people  of  that  age,  our  Lord 
closes  his  discourse  with  the  paragraph  which  begins 
as  follows: — •"  When  the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  his 
glory,  and  all  the  holy  angels  with  him,  then  shall  he 
sit  upon  the  throne  of  his  glory  ;  and  before  him 
shall  be  gathered  all  nations  ;  and  he  shall  separate 
them/7  <fcc.  And  the  concluding  section  is,  "  Tliese 
shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment ;  but  the 
righteous  into  life  eternal" 

When  was  this  to  be  ?  Ans.  When  the  Son  of  man 
should  come  in  his  glory.  And  when  was  this  to  take 
place  ?  Jesus  did  not  repeat  the  time  here;  for  he 
had  just  spoken  to  them  in  the  same  discourse  of  his 
coming  in  his  glory,  with  his  angels,  and  plainly  told 
them  when  it  should  be.  And  he  knew  that  he  was 
addressing  people  who  were  willing  to  keep  the 
connections  of  his  discourse;  and  to  remember  one 
minute  what  he  had  spoken  the  minute  before.  Con- 
sequently, without  repeating  the  time  over  and  over 
again,  he  proceeded  to  illustrate  further  the  events 
connected  with  that  coming  of  his7  which  he  bad  just 
timed  to  that  generation ; — and  of  which  he  had 
spoken  in  Matt.  xvi.  27,  28  :  "  For  the  Son  of  man 
shall  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  with  his  angels; 
and  then  shall  he  reward  every  man  according  to  his 
works.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  there  be  some  stand- 
ing here,  which  shall  not  taste  of  death,  till  they  see 
the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  kingdom,7' 

Finally,  I  can  find  no  more  reason  for  applying  this 
34 


398  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

last  paragraph  of  the  25th  of  Matthew,  as  my  oppo- 
nent's theory  of  interpretation  applies  it,  to  a  judg- 
ment in  the  future  world,  than  I  can  for  applying  the 
history  of  the  American  Revolution  to  such  a  judg- 
ment. And  there  is  another  circumstance,  which  I 
think  sufficient  to  satisfy  any  person  who  will  duly 
consider  it,  that  Jesus  did  not  introduce  any  such 
new  subject  in  the  last  part  of  his  discourse,  which  is 
recorded  in  Matt.  25th,  as  common  opinion  has 
alleged.  The  circumstance  I  refer  to  is  this  : — Mark 
and  Luke  have  made  a  record  of  a  part  of  the  same 
discourse  of  Christ,  which  stands  recorded  in  Matt. 
21th  and  25th.  They  have  written  as  much  as  they 
deemed  essential  to  hand  down  to  after  ages.  But 
they  have  not  written  that  portion  of  it  which  is  in- 
cluded in  Matt.  25th.  I  presume  that  no  person  of  com- 
mon understanding  in  the  present  day  would  attempt 
to  prove  the  doctrine  of  endless  torments  from  Matt. 
24th  ;  and  this  is  all  of  the  discourse  of  Christ  on  the 
mount  of  Olives  which  Mark  and  Luke  have  recorded. 
See  Mark  xiii.  and  Luke  xxi.  It  appears  evident 
from  this,  that  they  understood  the  last  part  of  their 
Lord's  discourse  to  be  only  a  further  illustration  of 
the  subject  of  the  first  part,  and  not  necessary  to  be 
recorded  for  posterity. 

If  Mark  and  Luke  understood  that  the  last  part 
of  their  Master's  discourse  introduced  a  new  subject, 
and  gave  an  account  of  a  judgment  in  the  resurrec- 
tion state,  at  which  all  men  of  all  ages,  as  well  as 
those  of  that  generation,  are  to  be  arraigned  and  have 
their  final  states  fixed  according  to  their  works  on 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  399 

earth,  they  could  not,  without  a  culpable  breach  of 
faithfulness,  have  neglected  to  record  it.  They 
would  not  have  merely  recorded  that  which  related 
to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  to  be  handed  down 
to  posterity,  and  withheld  that  part  which  they  con- 
sidered of  infinite  concern  to  all  men  of  all  ages.  And 
Matthew,  instead  of  applying  it  all  to  the  time  of 
Christ's  coming  in  that  generation,  as  he  has  done, 
would  have  enabled  his  readers  to  find  out  where  the 
supposed  new  subject  should  be  understood  as  com- 
mencing. 

But  so  it  is,  that  no  man  has  ever  succeeded,  and  I 
have  given  up  all  expectation  of  any  man's  ever 
succeeding,  or  even  attempting,  to  produce  any 
reason  for  applying  any  part  of  this  discourse  of 
Christ  to  a  judgment  in  the  future  world.  Theolo- 
gians and  commentators,  commencing  with  the  dis- 
course of  Jesus  at  the  beginning  of  Matt.  24th,  and 
being  imperiously  commanded  by  their  mother, 
"  Orthodoxy,"  to  get  away  from  his  subject  some- 
where before  reaching  the  last  paragraph  of  chapter 
25th,  are  at  a  loss  to  select  at  what  point  to  make 
the  transition.  Dr.  Scott,  as  we  have  seen,  makes 
his  opportunity  at  the  beginning  of  chapter  25th, — 
very  rudely,  however,  since  our  Lord,  by  the  adverb 
then,  connects  what  follows  with  the  preceding.  Dr. 
Clarke  follows  the  example  of  Scott.  Others  go 
farther  over  before  they  abandon  the  connection 
of  Christ's  discourse.  The  learned  Professor  Stuart, 
in  maturity  of  age  and  Biblical  study,  in  a  long  article 
in  the  Bibliothica  Sacra  for  April  and  July,  1852, 


400  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

shows  by  an  extensive  and  masterly  argument,  that 
the  whole  of  the  24th  chapter  of  Matthew  refers  to 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and  connected  events. 
Nor  has  he  the  tennity  to  break  away  from  the 
subject  until  he  gets  quite  up  to  xxv.  31.  The  fol- 
lowing is  the  language  of  the  venerable  Professor,  in 
his  application  of  the  parable  of  the  ten  virgins,  in 
the  25th  chapter: 

"At  the  close  of  the  parable  of  the  ten  virgins,  (Matt.  xxv.  23,) 
Christ  says  to  his  disciples,  'Watch,  therefore,  for  ye  know 
neither  the  day  nor  the  hour  wherein  the  Son  of  man  cometh.'  If 
now  this  exhortation  was  addressed  to  the  disciples  as  having 
respect  to  practical  duty,  and  was  uttered  for  the  reason  assigned, 
then  it  follows,  that  the  coming  of  Christ  here  must  be  sorn^  other 
coming  than  the  final  one  to  the  general  judgment.  If  not,  then 
Christ,  as  it  would  seem,  was  himself  mistaken,  and  also  led  his 
disciples  into  error.  How  could  he  speak  of  their  living  on  the 
watch  and  in  constant  expectation  of  his  coming,  when  that  coming 
Was  to  take  place  some  thousands  of  years  at  least,  and  perhaps 
thousands  of  ages,  after  they  were  all  dead  ?  There  is  no  other 
alternative  here.  Either  the  Saviour  was  mistaken,  and  led  his 
disciples  into  error,  or  else  the  coming  in  question  was  different 
from  the  final  one.  A  pious  fraud,  for  the  sake  of  making  his 
disciples  watchful,  is  inadmissible,  and  utterly  incompatible  with 
the  character  of  him  '  who  knew  no  guile.' ' 

In  respect  to  the  abrupt  and  unauthorized  change 
of  subject  in  this  case,  Professor  Stuart,  in  the  able 
article  before  referred  to,  has  some  most  apt  and 
pointed  remarks,  which  are  equally  as  applicable  to 
his  and  your  change  of  the  subject  at  Matt.  xxv.  31, 
as  to  the  change  made  by  others  at  xxiv.  29.  In 
respect  to  the  application  of  that  and  the  80th  and 
31st  verses,  to  a  future  final  judgment,  he  says :- 


REPLY   TO  DR.   ADAMS.  401 

"  It  seems  difficult  of  supposition  that  any  attentive  and  weS 
informed  reader  should  not  be  impressed  with  such  palpable 
defects  and  lack  of  congruity  and  symmetry  as  the  verses  before 
us  exhibit,  in  case  the  general  judgment  be  the  subject  of  them. 
It  would  be  like  breaking  off  the  Illiad  before  the  slaying  of 
Hector,  and  the  subjugation  of  Troy.  In  what  other  part  of  the 
New  Testament  can  be  found  such  an  abruption,  and  transition  to 
another  subject  before  the  main  object  of  any  passage  is  developed, 
as  takes  place  in  the  passage  now  under  consideration,  in  cise  it 
relates  to  the  general  judgment." 

Again,  on  the  same  changing  of  the  subject  by 
theologians,  he  says  : — 

"  This  whole  scheme,  then,  is  full  of  crudities  and  incongruities. 
It  maintains  impossibilities.  It  insists  on  having  pictures  half 
made,  or  an  abrupt  desertion  of  them  in  that  state.  It  introduces 
matter  which  the  subject  urged  on  the  attention  of  our  Lord,  by  the 
questions  of  the  disciples,  did  not  comprise.  And  if  there  were  no 
other  reasons,  these  are  enough  of  themselves  to  justify  the  aban- 
donment of  such  a  scheme  of  exegesis. 

"  But  there  are  other  reasons,  and  if  possible  weightier  ones 
still,  for  abandoning  it.  These  are  comprised  in  the  limitations 
of  time  which  precede  and  follow  verses  29,  31." 

The  learned  Professor  then  takes  into  consideration 
the  sayings,  "  immediately  after  the  tribulation  of 
those  days,"  and  "  this  generation  shall  not  pass 
away, '  <fcc.,  and  by  the  most  conclusive  argument  an- 
nihilates all  the  labors  and  assumptions  that  have  been 
devoted  to  making  the  intervening  line  between  the 
u  tribulation  of  those  clays,"  and  the  u  coming  of  the 
Son  of  man,"  extend  through  the  indefinite  coming 
ages. 

Yet  the    Professor  applies   the  last  paragraph  of 
Matt,  xxv.,  to  the  popular  doctrine  of  a  future  simul- 
84* 


402  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

taneous  judgment  of  the  whole  race,  and  a  final  sepa- 
ration and  endless  retribution.  It  is  a  remarkable  in- 
stance of  the  power  of  name  and  place,  over  even 
great  and  ingenuous  minds.  The  Professor  walked 
fearlessly  along,  gathering  the  rich  treasures  of  truth 
from  the  ingenuous  Scripture  exegeses,  until  he  saw 
himself  so  near  the  verge  of  the  "  Orthodox'7  sphere, 
that  another  step  onward  would  bear  him  out  of  the 
"  Orthodox"  name,  relation,  and  sympathy, — and  he 
took  a  sudden  leap  from  his  exploration,  into  the  old 
family  cradle. 

And  here  I  will  address  to  Dr.  Adams  the  appeal  I 
addressed  to  Rev.  Edward  Beecher,  D.  D.,  on  the 
same  point,  in  my  Review  of  his  "  Conflict  of  Ages." 
"  Where  is  the  reason  for  changing  the  subject  of  our 
Lord's  discourse  at  Matt.  xxv.  31?  You  are  bound 
by  your  professions  of  reverence  for  the  Scriptures, 
by  your  injunctions  upon  your  brethren  to  study 

them  with  the  eye  of  reason,  and  to  take  care   not  to 

j 

force  upon  them,  or  continue  to  sanction,  any  unnec- 
essary interpretation  which  shall  set  them  in  conflict 
with  the  principles  of  honor  and  right,  —  you  are 
bound  to  give  a  reason,  or  abandon  the  habit  as  a 
sinful  perversion.  You  cannot  innocently  trifle  with 
this  subject,  nor  treat  it  with  indifference." 

Since  Jesus  applies  the  whole  of  this  discourse  to 
the  events  of  the  then  present  generation,  we  are 
obliged  to  understand  the  gather ing  of  all  nations  \\QVQ 
spoken  of,  to  denote  the  widely  prevailing  effect  of 
this  judgment  on  the  earth.  See  similar  language 
used  in  this  sense,  the  gathering  of  the  nations,  and  as- 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  403 

sembling  of  the  kingdoms  of  the  earth  being  spoken  of 
to  denote  the  means  and  extent  of  some  temporal 
judgment,  in  Zeph.  iii.  8.  Joel  iii.  9-16.  Micah  iv. 
11.  Zecli.  xiv.  1-3. 

The  life  eternal  in  this  case,  being  mentioned  as  the 
blessing  which  the  believers  should  enjoy  in  that  gen- 
oration,  is  the  renewed  and  confirmed  enjoyment  of 
the  life  of  the  gospel,  into  'which  the  faithful  disciples 
entered  when  they  found  themselves  preserved  from 
the  destruction  of  the  wicked,  and  saw  so  exact  a  ful- 
fillment of  all  their  Lord  had  spoken  on  this  subject.* 
The  enjoyment  of  the  gospel  in  this  world  is  often 
denominated  in  the  Scriptures,  *•  life/'  and  "  everlast- 
ing life." —  See  John  iii.  16;  and  v.  24 ;  and  vi.  47, 
54  :  1  John  iii.  14,  15  ;  and  many  other  places. 

The  "  everlasting  punishment"  here  declared  to  be 
the  portion  of  the  enemies  of  Christ  in  that  genera- 
tion, is  of  course  that  temporal  calamity  which  history 
shows'  us  did  come  as  Christ  had  predicted.  Jeremiah, 
speaking  of  the  same  punishment,  calls  it  "  an  ever- 
lasting reproach  and  perpetual  shame."  See  Jer.  xxiii. 
40.  And  the  same  prophet.  (Jer.  vii.  20,  and  xvii.  27,) 
also  calls  it  "  afire  that  shall  not  be  quenched"  kindled, 
not  in  the  resurrection  world,  but  "  in  the  gates  of 
Jerusalem."  The  same  figure  of  fire  is  used  in  this 
discourse  of  Christ ;  "  Depart  from  me  ye  cursed  into 
everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels." 
That  is,  the  calamities  here  represented  \>y  Jirej  were 
particularly  designed  for  the  diabolos,  or  impostor,  re- 
ferring to  the  Jewish  hierarchy,  and  his  emissaries. 

*See  pp.  338—341  of  this  Discussion. 


404  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

But  this  subject,  we  find,  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  future  world,  where  all  who  die  in  Adam  shall  be 
made  alive  in  Christ,  death  shall  be  swallowed  up  in  vic- 
tory, and  tears  be  wiped  away  from  off  all  faces. 

The  subject  of  Matt.  24th  and  25th  throughout,  is 
now  perfectly  obvious ;  and  we  hardly  know  how  to 
exonerate  any  educated  man  from  the  charge  of  dis- 
respect to  the  Master,  who  will,  in  this  age  of  Biblical 
criticism,  wrench  off  the  last  part  of  this  continuous  dis- 
course of  his,  and  apply  it  to  a  foreign,  and  an  unscrip- 
tural  subject.  And  we  suppose  it  to  be  the  common 
sense  even  of  Endless-miserians,  that  if  they  must  drop 
Matt.  xxv.  46,  from  their  catalogue  of  proofs  for  a 
great  day  of  judgment  in  the  morn  of  eternity,  which 
shall  adjudicate  and  execute  final  and  endless  retribu- 
tions, they  have  no  reliable  proof  of  this  Augustinian 
theory  in  the  inspired  word.  And  sure  enough  they 
have  not.  God  be  praised !  his  holy  Word  be  revered. 

IMPROMPTU.  Every  body  knows  that  derivative  ad- 
jectives and  the  nouns  from  which  they  are  derived 
bear  a  relation  to  each  other  in  signification.  For  ex- 
ample,—  day  and  daily,  week  and  iveekly,  year  and 
yearly,  exhibit  the  relation  we  refer  to  between  the 
substantive  and  the  adjective  derived  from  it. 
Whether  you  say  your  workmen  receive  wages  by  the 
day,  or  daily  wages,  you  mean  the  same  thing.  Now 
aionios  or  aionion,  is  an  adjective  from  the  substantive 
aion  or  aionos.  Therefore,  if  aionos,  Matt.  xxiv.  3 
means  icorld,  then  aionion,  Matt.  xxv.  46,  means  world- 
ly. There  is  no  escaping  this  conclusion.  So  the 
very  ingenious  argument  of  my  opponent  for  the  end- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  405 

lessness  of  punishment  from  tins  adjective,  winch  I 
have  shown  to  be  in  fault  by  other  ample  evidence,  is 
exploded  by  his  own  use  of  words,  and  the  eternal 
punishment  is  only  a  ivorldly  punishment. 

Again,  vice  versa,  if  aionion,  the  adjective,  in  the 
latter  instance  means  strictly  eternal,  then  the  sub- 
stantive, in  the  former  instance,  means  eternity.  So 
we  stultify  the  disciples  by  making  them  ask  their 
Master  when  shall  be  the  end  of  eternity  I 

I  repeat  what  I  have  said  in  substance  before. 
Error,  if  it  will  stand,  must  shut  its  eyes  and  ears,  and 
hold  still.  Every  effort  it  makes  to  escape  its  difficul- 
ties multiplies  them.  But,  with  regard  to  truth,  in 
every  new  channel  by  which  you  trace  her  bearings, 
you  find  multiplying  developments  of  richness,  har- 
mony and  beauty.  The  end  of  that  aionos,  was  the 
end  of  an  age  or  periodical  dispensation  of  provi- 
dence, which  was  then  approaching.  The  aionion 
kolasin,  or  chastisement,  is  an  age  or  periodical  dis- 
pensation to  the  enemies  of  the  gospel,  which  was 
then  to  follow.  In  this  clear  light  of  the  subject  we 
can  see  that  there  is  good  sense  in  St.  Paul's  words, 
Heb.  ix.  26  ;  "  but  now,  once,  in  the  end  of  the  world, 
(aionos)  hath  he  appeared,  to  put  away  sin  by  the 
sacrifice  of  himself." 

Presuming  that  he  had  proved  the  eternity  of  pun- 
ishment by  the  word  aionios,  Dr.  A.  proceeds  to 
strengthen  himself  by  reference  to  the  prevalent 
opinion  on  the  subject.  He  says,  p.  68 : — 

"  Such  multitudes  of  the  best  of  men  and  women  are  still  firmly 
persuaded  of  its  truth,  that  we  are  led  to  say,  There  must  be  a 


406  THEOLOGICAL    DISCUSSION. 

foundation  for  it  in  the  word  of  God, — and  for  this  reason :  If 
mankind  could  have  divested  themselves  of  the  conviction  that  it 
is  not  found  in  the  word  of  God,  it  is  reasonable  to  think  that  it 
would  long  since  have  been  discarded.  Nay,  rather  who  would 
have  invented  such  a  doctrine  ?  Good  men  would  not  have  palm- 
ed it  upon  the  world,  for  more  reasons  than  one.  Besides,  many 
an  error  has  been  exploded  ;  it  is  unaccountable,  if  this  be  error, 
that  it  should  have  kept  its  hold  upon  the  human  mind.  No 
Protestant,  it  would  seem,  would  quote  a  belief  in  purgatory  as  a 
parallel  case.  We  have  no  coercion,  nor  any  kind  of  motive  to 
bias  our  minds  towards  this  article  of  faith." 

On  the  question,  u  Who  would  have  invented  such 
a  doctrine  ?"  there  is  no  difficulty  whatever,  no  more 
than*  there  is  in  relation  to  all  the  other  ten  thousand 
monstrous  fabrications  of  error  in  the  world.  Will 
the  Doctor  admit  the  validity  of  this  interrogatory 
argument  in  relation  to  every  false  doctrine  that  is  put 
forth, — "Who  could  have  invented  it?"  But  he 
probably  means  to  imply  that  this  doctrine  is  of  such 
a  nature  that  it  is  incredible  that  it  should  have  been 
invented  by  man.  No,  indeed ;  it  is  just  the  scheme 
which,  of  all  others  imaginable,  would  be,  as  a  matter 
of  course,  invented  of  men.  Man,  universally,  has  a 
religious  nature,  and  constitutional  wants,  which  in- 
spire visions  of  a  future  life.  But  this  want  is  blind, 
and  its  visions  partake  of  the  complexion  of  the 
minds  indulging  them,  until  they  come  to  see  that  life 
and  immortality  which  is  brought  to  light  through 
the  gospel.  And  who  does  not  know  that  poetic 
fancy  and  genius,  in  all  ages,  has  been  fruitful  of 
romance,  creating  and  peopling  worlds  and  institutions 
in  every  conceivable  locality  and  condition?  It  was 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  407 

a  matter  of  course  that  this  genius  should  erect 
despotisms,  and  judgments,  and  prisons,  in  the  spirit 
land,  and  that,  too,  in  the  spirit  of  the  despotisms  in 
the  atmosphere  of  which  it  was  nourished.*  It  was 
so.  All  the  learned  know  it ;  and  they  know,  also, 
that  the  doctrine  of  future  endless  punishment  origi- 
nated from  that  source.  The  learned  Orthodox  Camp- 
bell, as  we  had  occasion  to  note  before,  in  his  u  Pre- 
liminary Dissertations/'  shows  that  this  doctrine  was 
borrowed  by  the  Jews  from  the  heathen,  in  their 
captivity  among  them  and  intercourse  with  them, 
between  the  time  of  their  prophets  and  the  coming 
of  Christ,  finding  it  not  in  their  Scriptures.  And  it 
came  into  the  Christian  church,  some  time  after  the 
apostolic  age,  by  the  adulteration  of  the  Christian 
doctrines  with  the  Oriental  philosophies.  And  it  is  a 
fact  worthy  of  grave  consideration,  that  in  the  con- 
flicts which  at  length  prevailed,  by  the  strivings 
of  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment  to  establish 
itself  in  the  church,  this  effort  came  from  the  western 
churches,  characterized  extensively  by  barbarism  and 
despotism,  while  the  eastern  Bishops  and  churches, 
occupying  the  field  of  the  more  general  apostolic 
labors,  were  on  the  side  of  Universalism. 

In  respect  to  the  character  of  the  influence,  and 
the  satanic  force,  by  which  Augustinianism,  including 
the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  was  at  length 
established  as  the  Orthodoxy  of  the  church  universal, 

*  Le  Clerc,  in  his  Religion  of  the  Ancients,   says  that  the  doctrine  of 
future  punishment  was  invented  by  heathen  rulers,  as  a  restraint  upon 
the  multitude.    That  it  was  adopted  by  the  rulers  for  this  purpose,  is 
unquestionable;  but  we  think  it  more  reasonable  to  suppose  that  its  in 
vention  came  of  irere  poetic  romance,  as  here  remarked. 


THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION 


.iarine  Beecher  is  full  and  to  the  point,  as  we 
n  O'Ur  "  Preliminary  Observations."     But  Dr. 
.ers  how  th-o  doctrine  could  have  continued 
lurch  as  it  has,  if  it  were  false.     He  bethinks 
however,  that  the  Catholics,  who  are  a  nutneri- 
rity,  and  number  man}7  learned  and  good  men, 
th?!s   day  some  monstrous  errors,  and  so  he 
,  plea  ibr   Protestant   £ndl«ess-*niserians,  thus, 
have  nc  coercion  nor  any  kind  of  motive  to 
'  minds  towards  this  article  of  faith."     A  sur- 
staternefct.    In  hundreds  and  hundreds  of  cases, 
e  have  conversed  with  unembers  of  his  school, 
.  and  unlearned,  and  they  have  seen  that  their 
argument   was  insufficient,  they  have   turned 
acks  upon  the  argument,  and  set  up  their  own 
,  to  what  is  needed  for  the  nwrals  of  the  com- 
r^  -as  a  sufficient  reason  for   persisting  in  the 
:oance    of  this   dogma.       But  of  the  influence 
Protestant   sectarians^  oia   a  wider    scale,  Miss 
rine    Beecher,  who   has   had  great  observation 
xperience    of  it,  speaks   in  language  so  much 
eloquent,  and  direct  to  the  point,  than  we  could 
and,  that  we  adopt   her   description.       She   is 
'rag  of    another  dogma,   but   the   remarks  are 
applicable  to  this.     After  describing  the  various 
ii&ery  of  influence,  but  little   less   potent  than 
and  flames,  she  says  : 


"  Now  it  is  a  fact  that  this  vast  array  of  wealth,  position,  influ- 
ence, and  ecclesiastical  power  is  actually  combined  to  sustain 
these  theological  theories.  So  much  so  is  this  the  case,  that  a 
minister,  theological  professor,  president  <of  a  college,  secretary  of 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  409 

a  benevolent  society,  or  editor  of  a  periodical  or  newspaper,  could 
not  openly  deny  the  Augustinian  tenet  but  under  the  penalty  of 
the  loss  of  reputation,  position,  influence,  and  the  income  that 
sustains  himself  and  family.  Our  largest  and  best  theological 
seminaries  demand  an  avowal  of  belief  in  this  dogma  as  a  condi- 
tion of  holding  any  professorship,  and  in  some  of  them  it  must  be 
renewed  by  all  the  professors  every  few  years.  At  the  same  time, 
this  dogma  of  a  depraved  mental  constitution  transmitted  from 
Adam,  [much  more  this  of  endless  punishment,]  is  inwrought  into 
all  the  standard  works  of  theology,  the  sermons,  the  prayers,  the 
sacred  poetry,  the  popular  literature,  and  even  the  Sunday  School 
and  family  literature  of  childhood."  {Common  Sense  and  Religion, 
p.  312.] 

As  it  respects  our  learned  friend,  good  man  as  he  is, 
and  we  say  it  with  great  personal  respect,  the 
manner  of  his  using  Scripture  throughout  his  lengthy 
"  Argument,"  clearly  evinces  to  the  careful  reader 
that  he  comes  to  the  Bible  with  the  dogma  he  advo- 
cates all  in  his  mind,  imbibed  from  these  other  sources 
described  by  Miss  Beecher. 

TJie  New  Witness. 

We  come  now  in  course  to  our  friend's  call  to  the 
witness  stand  of  Rev.  Theodore  Parker,  whose  wit- 
ness is  in  these  words : — 

"  To  me  it  is  quite  clear  that  Jesus  taught  the  doctrine  of  eternal 
damnation,  if  the  Evangelists — the  first  three  I  mean — are  to  be 
treated  as  inspired." 

We  have    commented  already,  somewhat,  on  this 

expression   of    opinion     by   Mr.     Parker,     and    Dr. 

Adams'  use  of  it.     We  do  not  think  the  latter  evinces 

his  accustomed  wisdom  in  this  device.      He  acknow- 

35 


410  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

edges  that  Mr.  Parker  was  driven  to  reject  the  Bible 
partly  for  the  very  reason  that  he  supposed  it  con- 
tained the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment.  Here 
then  is  a  good  man,  with  large  benevolence,  but  not 
much  reverence,  accustomed  from  childhood  to  a 
jingle  of  certain  Bible  phraseology  in  connection 
with  the  notion  of  an  after  death  judgment,  and  end- 
less punishment,  and  the  doctrine  outrages  all  his 
rational  and  moral  conceptions  of  honor  and  right  in 
God,  and  represents  him  as  a  Being  unworthy  of  con- 
fidence, reverence  or  love.  He  concludes  that  a 
book  fraught  with  such  doctrines  cannot  have  come 
from  the  teachings  of  God's  spirit ;  and  having  not 
much  reverence  for  mere  antiquity  and  old  authority, 
he  spares  himself  the  labor  of  a  de  novo  study  of  the 
Bible  to  disentangle  it  of  that  horrible  doctrine,  by 
the  short  cut  of  throwing  it  all  away  together.  And 
now  our  friend  calls  in  the  false  educational  opinion 
of  this  wronged  and  injured  man,  in  proof  of  the 
truth  of  that  very  oppugnant  theory. 

But  where,  my  esteemed  friend,  will  the  testimony 
of  your  chosen  witness  carry  you  ?  If  his  mere 
uncriticised  educational  opinion  on  the  meaning  of 
certain  Scripture  phraseology,  with  the  prevalent 
usage  of  which  he  has  floated  along,  is  evidence  of 
the  correctness  of  that  usage,  much  more  is  his  delib- 
erate moral  judgment,  formed  against  the  prejudices 
of  his  education,  of  the  moral  corruptness  and  false- 
hood of  the  sentiment  which  such  usage  palms  upon 
that  phraseology,  and  of  the  book  which  contains  it, 
to  be  accredited  by  you  as  having  the  weight  of  evi- 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  411 

dence.  Will  you  put  in  the  testimony  of  your  wit- 
ness on  these  points?  If  not,  then  permit  him  to 
leave  the  stand  altogether. 

But  you  will  say  that,  while  human  judgment  may 
be  legitimately  exercised  on  the  meaning  of  language, 
it  has  nothing  to  do  in  the  way  of  judging  on  the 
principles  of  honor  and  right  in  God,  or  with  what 
purpose  it  is  proper  for  him  to  govern.  How  then 
are  we  to  appreciate  and  adore  the  moral  piinciples 
of  Jehovah's  government,  if  we  are  to  excercise  no 
moral  judgment  as  to  the  rectitude  of  his  ways  and 
works  ?  But  it  is  within  the  province  of  our  man- 
hood, and  our  relations  to  God  as  his  moral  creatures, 
to  exercise  such  judgment,  and  this  according  to 
your  own  showing.  You  present  yourself  as  an 
example  of  it.  Supposing  that  certain  Bible  language 
which  you  had  quoted  means  future  endless  punish- 
ment, and  objecting  to  the  more  comfortable  hypo- 
thesis of  some  Christian  divines  whom  the  moral 
aspect  of  the  affair  had  repelled  from  the  belief  of  it 
as  a  reality,  and  who  have  suggested  the  thought 
that  though  God  had  threatened  it  for  a  present 
wholesome  influence,  he  will  contrive  some  way 
hereafter  to  deliver  all  his  children  from  it,  you  speak 
thus  freely  : — 

"But  I  now  respectfully  ask  the  attention  of  the  reader  when  I 
say,  that  if  I  did  not  believe  in  there  being  a  state  of  future  punish- 
ment which  justifies  such  language,  I  fear  that  I  could  not  stop 
short  of  the  boldest  infidelity.  I  might  even  assail  the  Bible  as 

v  *— ' 

unfit  to  be  read.     It  is  no  relief  to  tell  me  that  the  language  does 
not  mean  aS  which  it  would  seem  to  convey.    I  should  reply, 


412  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

this  is  bad  language,  unless  there  be  something  which  language 
of  this  sort  only  can  express.  But  if  it  be  an  exaggeration  of  a 
truth,  or  if,  for  the  sake  of  impression,  an  idea  is  conveyed  which 
is  false,  a  man  may  as  well  apologize  to  me  for  a  profane  blas- 
phemer, saying  that  his  oaths  do  not  really  mean  all  which  they 
express,  as  try  to  reconcile  me  to  the  belief  that  such  words  aa 
these  are  inspired.  It  is  not  the  truth  which  offends  me,  but  the 
untruthfulness  of  the  language.  The  words  are  not  decorous,  my 
moral  sense  is  abused,  when  I  read  such  expressions,  unless  sub- 
stantial truth  requires  them.  The  sin  is  not  against  my  faith,  but 
against  my  understanding." — Argument,  pp.  29,  30. 

Here,  dear  Sir,  you  assume  for  your  own  practice 
Mr.  Parker's  position  in  full.  You  state  certain  con- 
ditions affecting  the  character  of  the  Bible  teach- 
ings in  their  relation  to  God's  government,  which 
should  lead  yon  to  reject  the  Bible  as  Infidels  do,  for 
the  reason  that  it  would  abuse  your  moral  sense,  and 
do  violence  to  your  understanding. 

Well,  Sir,  your  theological  system,  from  beginning 
to  end,  presents  the  threatenings  of  the  Bible,  in 
relation  to  actual  intentions  and  facts  of  the  Divine 
government,  in  the  same  farcical  attitude  which  you 
allege,  in  the  foregoing  extract,  should  be  cause  for 
your  rejecting  the  Bible.  It  represents  that  God 
published  his  law  to  man,  with  the  penalty  or  threat 
of  endless  punishment  for  all  or  any  sin;  and  that  yet 
he  meant  no  such  thing  in  relation  to  an  elect 
portion,  designing  to  punish  himself  as  their  substi- 
tute, and  thus  nullify  the  threat  as  it  applies  to  them. 
Again,  in  relation  to  the  other  and  major  portion  of 
his  offspring,  it  construes  the  Bible  as  pretending 
that  God  has  made  provision  for  their  salvation,  and 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  413 

calls  and  desires  them  all  to  come  and  be  saved,  while 
it  also  represents  that  there  is  no  way  of  salvation 
but  through  a  preternatural  conversion  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  which  shall  never  be  wrought  on  this  non- 
elect  mass  of  humanity,  for  whom,  of  course,  there  is 
no  possible  way  of  salvation  provided.  And  it 
furthermore  represents  that  God  will  not  judge  and 
punish  his  children  during  the  day  of  grace,  or  time 
when  reformation  is  possible,  but  puts  retribution  off 
until  the  door  of  reformation  shall  be  barred  forever, 
when  punishment  shall  be  made  the  means  of  increas- 
ing wickedness  and  woe  to  all  eternity.  And  so, 
throughout,  your  theory  makes  the  teachings  of  the 
Bible  delusive  and  farcical,  and  the  spirit  of  the 
Divine  government  to  be  fiendish.  Thus  your  theory 
presents  a  vastly  stronger  case  of  indecorum  of  sen- 
timent and  untruthfulness  of  language,  than  the 
hypothesis  on  which  you  presume  to  justify  a  rejec- 
tion of  the  Scriptures. 

But  our  case  is  a  happy  one  ;  for  it  is  only  your 
untruthful  and  farcical  theology,  and  not  the  Bible, 
by  which  "our  moral  sense  is  abused,"  and  the  sin 
perpetrated  "  against  our  understanding."  We  reject 
the  corrupt  theology,  and  hold,  and  love,  and  revere 
the  Scriptures. 

"  O  may  these  heavenly  pages  be 

My  study  and  delight ; 
And  still  new  beauties  may  I  see, 
And  still  increasing  light." 

Dr.  Adams  quotes  the  words  of  John  Foster,  the 
celebrated  English  Baptist  divine  who  embraced  Uni- 
35* 


414  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

• 

versalism  late  in  life,  saying  that  "  the  language  of 
Scripture  is  formidably  strong,  (on  the  duration  of 
punishment,)  so  strong  that  it  must  be  an  argument 
of  extreme  cogency  that  would  authorize  a  limitation 
of  it."  But  he  knows  that  Mr.  Foster  uttered  merely 
his  long  life  impressions  from  common  usage  in 
respect  to  the  strength  of  the  language  of  Scripture 
referred  to,  and  that,  after  all,  he  found  to  his  satis- 
faction, arguments  of  sufficient  cogency  to  limit 
them. 

The  association  of  Rev.  T.  S.  King  with  Rev.  T. 
Parker,  (Argument,  p.  82,)  as  "  seeing  the  doctrine 
of  endless  punishment  in  the  literal  speech  of  the 
Bible,"  and  hence  "  rejecting  its  inspiration/'  is,  as 
we  said  before,  unwarranted  and  unjust. 

In  respect  to  Mr.  King's  admission  that  he  did 
"  not  find  the  doctrine  of  the  ultimate  salvation  of  all 
souls  clearly  stated  in  any  text"  in  the  four  Gospels, 
great  injustice  has  been  done  him  by  the  partial 
manner  in  which  it  has  been  presented.  The  con- 
nection in  his  sermons,  (pp.  5-7,)  explains  clearly 
that  he  referred  only  to  the  idea  of  an  argumentative 
and  verbal  statement  of  result.  He  says  explicitly, 
"  but  all  the  principles  glow  there,  vivid  as  the  sunlight, 
that  are  required  to  give  us  the  most  consoling  trust 
in  God  through  eternity,  and  the  most  cheering  hope 
for  man."  He  barely  raises  the  question,  whether 
our  hope  of  the  final  universal  triumph  of  good  is 
mainly  based  on  direct  textual  statements  of  the 
result,  or  on  the  vivid  sunlight  glow  of  principles  which 
insure  the  result.  For  ourself,  while  we  differ  with 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  415 

Mr.  King  in  our  estimate  of  the  former,  we  fully  and 
joyfully  agree  with  him  in  giving  the  greater  promi- 
nence to  the  latter.  And  we  insist  that  Dr.  Adams, 
having  called  this  witness  upon  the  stand,  is  bound 
in  justice  to  hear  and  accredit  his  whole  testimony. 
TJie  principles  of  Universalism  gloiu  in  the  four  Gos- 
pels, vivid  as  the  sunlight.  My  dear  Doctor,  please 
pass  this  along  from  your  chosen  witness. 

And  now,  as  my  opponent  has  seen  fit  to  call  in  a 
human  witness  to  his  interpretation  of  the  lan- 
guage of  the  Scriptures,  I  will  do  a  little  in  that  line, 
and  of  a  character  which  has  valid  weight.  Hundreds 
of  thousands  who  were  educated  in  the  habit  of 
using  the  Scripture  texts  which  he  has  adduced  as 
teaching  endless  punishment,  have,  by  a  careful  study 
of  the  sacred  volume,  corrected  and  renounced  that 
error.  A  gentleman  of  our  former  acquaintance  by 
the  name  of  Whitmore,  a  layman  of  strong  intellect 
and  eminent  Christian  character,  has  often  told  us  of 
his  conversion  to  Universalism.  He  was  a  member 
of  an  Orthodox  church.  A  brother  church  member 
who  had  moved  into  another  State  became,  a  Univer- 
salist,  and  the  circumstance  was  a  great  grief  to  Mr. 
Whitmore.  He  resolved  to  write  his  friend  a  letter. 

f 

filled  with  such  passages  of  Scripture  as  would  bring 
him  back  to  Orthodoxy.  He  took  pen,  and  paper, 
and  Bible,  selected  a  leading  passage  for  his  pur- 
pose,— but  bethought  himself  that  he  would  look 
carefully  into  the  connections  to  see  whether  there 
was  any  way  for  his  honorable  friend  fairly  to  explain 
it  consistently  with  his  new  faith.  This  put  him 


416  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

upon  a  new  method  of  studying  the  Bible.  And  he 
readily  saw  not  only  how  his  friend  might  explain  it, 
but  how  he  must  explain  it  if  he  were  to  study  it  as 
lie  was  then  doing.  He  saw  that  it  would,  not  answer 
his  purpose.  "  But  there  are  enough  that  will,"  he 
said  to  himself  5  and  at  his  next  leisure  he  selected 
another  strong  passage,  and  went  at  studying  it  in 
the  same  way,  and  with  the  same  result ;  and  so  on, 
until  he  found  it  to  be  his  business  to  write  his 
friend,  informing  him  of  his  happy  conversion,  by  the 
study  of  the  Scriptures  for  the  opposite  purpose,  to 
his  own  blessed  faith  in  Christ,  as  the  impartial  and 
efficient  Saviour  of  the  world. 

Rev.  A.  St.  John  Chambre,  the  talented  and  worthy 
pastor  of  the  First  Universalist  Church  in  Newark, 
N.  J.,  was  educated  in  a  Presbyterian  College  in  the 
"West,  and  commenced  preaching  in  that  order.  He 
conceived  the  purpose  of  a  course  of  revival  lectures, 
in  the  Presbyterian  sense  of  a  revival,  and  for  this 
purpose  designed  to  season  his  discourses  thoroughly 
with  the  terrific  in  his  theology.  He  took  his 
Septuagint  and  Greek  Testament,  and  went  at  the 
work  of  making  selections  of  the  desired  class  of  pas- 
sages, but  soon  found  that  they  were  not  there.  He 
perceived  that  the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment  is 
alone  sustained  by  a  perversion  of  certain  English 
phraseology.  Thus  his  search  of  the  Scriptures  for 
the  express  purpose  of  finding  support  for  this  doc- 
trine, revealed  to  him  the  fact  that  it  was  not  there. 

There  is  an  instructive  case  to  this  point  related, 
of  his  own  experience,  by  the  able  and  learned  Rev. 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  417 

Theodore  Clapp,  in  his  Auto-Biography,  pp.  157-160. 
Dr.  Clapp  had  been  preaching  on  a  Sabbath,  in  his 
pulpit  at  New  Orleans,  a  zealous  sermon  for  endless 
punishment.  Among  his  hearers  was  Judge  W.,  an 
eminent  scholar,  who  studied  for  the  Episcopal  min- 
istry, but  relinquished  his  purpose  because  he  could 
not  find  in  the  Scriptures  the  doctrine  of  endless 
punishment  and  kindred  dogmas,  required  by  the 
Episcopal  church.  The  Judge  lingered  after  the 
benediction,  and  walked  a  little  way  with  Dr.  Clapp 
in  familiar  conversation.  Dr.  Clapp  thus  narrates 
what  followed  from  this  interview : — 

"  When  parting  with  me  that  morning,  he  said  '  Mr.  Clapp,  I 
have  a  particular  favor  to  ask.  You  told  us  in  the  sermon  just 
delivered  that  there  are  hundreds  of  texts  in  the  Bible  which 
affirm,  in  the  most  unqualified  terms,  that  all  those  who  die  in 
their  sins  will  remain  impenitent  and  unholy  through  the  ages 
of  eternity.  I  will  thank  you  to  make  me  out  a  list  of  those  texts 
in  the  original  Hebrew  and  Greek.  That  some  of  such  an  import 
occur  in  our  English  version  is  undeniable ;  but  I  think  they  are 
mistranslations.  I  do  not  wish  to  put  you  to  the  trouble  of  multi- 
plying Scripture  proofs  touching  this  point.  Two,  five  or  ten,  will 
be  amply  sufficient.'  I  replied,  '  Judge,  it  will  give  me  great 
pleasure  to  grant  your  request.  I  can  furnish  you  with  scores  of 
them  before  next  Sunday.'  He  smiled,  saying,  '  I  do  not  deny  it,' 
and  politely  bade  me  good  morning.  I  was  perfectly  confident 
that  the  judge  would  be  convinced  that  he  had  most  egregiously 
misunderstood  and  misinterpreted  the  word  of  God.  I  rejoiced  in 
the  thought  of  his  speedy  discomfiture. 

**  For  fools  rush  in  where  angels  fear  to  tread; 
Distrustful  sense  with  modest  caution  speaks ; 
It  still  looks  home,  and  short  excursions  makes; 
But  rattling  nonsense  in  full  volleys  breaks, 
And  never  shocked,  and  never  turned  aside, 
Bursts  out,  resistless,  with  a  thundering  tide." 


418  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

"  The  very  next  day,  Monday,  before  going  out,  I  made,  as  I 
thought,  the  best  arrangements  for  collecting  the  proof  texts  which 
had  been  solicited.  A  table  -was  set  in.  one  corner  of  my  study, 
well  furnished  with  the  appropriate  books — lexicons,  Hebrew  and 
Greek,  concordances,  commentaries,  English,  Latin,  and  German, 
with  standard  works  on  the  Pentateuch,  the  history  and  antiquities 
of  the  Jewish  nation.  I  had  no  authorities  in  my  library  but 
those  which  were  of  the  highest  repute  among  Trinitarians  of  every 
denomination.  With  the  help  of  Gaston's  Collections  and  the 
references  in  the  Larger  Catechism  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
the  access  was  easy  to  all  the  passages  of  Scripture  which  are 
relied  on  to  prove  the  doctrine  of  endless  sin  and  sorrow. 

"  I  began  with  the  Old  Testament  in  Hebrew,  comparing  it  as  I 
went  along  with  the  Septuagint  and  English  version.  I  hardly 
ever  devoted  less  than  an  hour  each  day  to  this  branch  of  my 
studies,  and  often  I  gave  a  whole  morning  to  it.  Having  been 
elected  to  the  presidency  of  the  New  Orleans  college,  I  was  in  the 
enjoyment  of  constant  intercourse  with  Judge  W.  Almost  every 
week  he  inquired,  '  Have  you  discovered  yet  the  proof  texts  which 
you  promised  to  give  me  ?'  I  replied,  '  No,  judge,  I  am  doing  my 
best  to  find  them,  and  will  accommodate  you  at  as  early  a  period 
as  possible.'  During  that  and  the  succeeding  year  I  read  critically 
every  chapter  'and  verse  of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures,  from  Genesis 
to  Malachi.  My  investigations  were  as  thorough  and  complete  as 
I  could  possibly  make  them.  Yet  I  was  unable  to  find  therein  so 
much  as  an  allusion  to  any  sufferings  at  all  after  death.  In  the 
dictionary  of  the  Hebrew  language  I  could  not  discover  a  word 
signifying  hell,  or  a  place  of  punishment  for  the  wicked  in  a  future 
state.  In  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  there  is  not,  as  I  believe, 
a  single  text,  in  any  form  of  phraseology,  which  holds  out  to  the 
finally  impenitent  threats  of  retribution  beyond  the  grave.  To  my 
utter  astonishment,  it  turned  out  that  Orthodox  critics  of  the 
greatest  celebrity  were  perfectly  familiar  with  these  facts.  I  was 
compelled  to  confess  to  my  friend  that  I  could  not  adduce  any 
Hebrew  exegesis  in  support  of  the  sentiment  that  evil  is  eternal. 

"  Still,  I  was  sanguine  in  my  expectations  that  the  New  Testa- 
ment would  furnish  me  with  the  argument  which  I  had  sought  for 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  419 

without  success  in  the  writings  of  Moses  and  the  prophets.  I 
scrutinized,  time  and  again,  whatever  in  the  Gospels,  the  Acts, 
and  the  Epistles,  are  supposed  to  have  any  bearings  upon  the 
topic,  for  the  space  of  eight  years.  The  result  was,  that  I  could 
not  name  a  portion  of  New  Testament  Scripture,  from  the  first 
verse  of  Matthew  to  the  last  of  the  Apocalypse,  which,  fairly  inter- 
preted, affirms  that  a  part  of  mankind  will  be  eternally  miserable. 
But  the  opposite  doctrine,  that  all  men  will  be  ultimately  saved,  is 
taught  in  scores  of  texts,  which  no  art  of  disingenuous  interpreta- 
tion can  explain  away.  Here  I  should  say  that  at  the  time  above 
mentioned  I  had  never  seen  or  read  any  of  the  writings  of  the 
Unitarian  or  Universalist  divines,  not  even  those  of  Dr.  Channing, 
with  the  exception,  perhaps,  of  one  or  two  occasional  discourses 
that  had  been  sent  to  me  through  the  post  office.  During  the 
whole  ten  years  my  studies  were  confined  to  the  original  Hebrew 
and  Gr3ek  Scriptures,  and  the  various  subsidiary  works  which  are 
required  for  their  elucidation.  My  simple,  only  object,  was  to 
ascertain  what  " saith  the  Lord"  concerning  the  final  destination 
of  the  wicked.  It  is  an  important,  most  instructive  fact,  that  I 
was  brought  into  my  present  state  of  mind  by  the  instrumentality 
of  the  Bible  only — a  state  of  mind  running  counter  to  all  the 
prejudices  of  early  life,  of  parental  precept,  of  school,  college,  theo- 
logical seminary,  and  professional  caste." 

There,  this  witness,  in  all  its  bearings,  is  worth 
more  than  a  million  such  as  Eev.  Theodore  Parker, 
whom  Dr.  Adams  calls  to  his  aid.  And  this  we  say 
with  all  due  respect  to  that  benevolent  man. 

But  our  ultimate  appeal  is  the  Bible  direct.  Thith- 
er have  we  gone,  and  thither  will  we  go  in  our  next 
and  closing  Chapter  of  this  Discussion. 


CHAPTER.  TIL 

Argument  from  the  Scheme  of  Redemption. 

WE  passed  over  Dr.  Adams'  second  proposition, 
reserving  it  to  our  concluding  Chapter,  because  the 
subject  of  it,  appropriately  treated,  will  make  a  grand 
climax  to  this  protracted  labor.  The  proposition  is 
as  follows  : — 

II.  KEDEMPTION  BY  CHRIST  IS  REPRESENTED  AS  HAVING 
FOR  ITS  OBJECT  SALVATION  FROM  FINAL  PERDITION. 

In  replying  to  this  position,  we  must  receive  the 
terms  in  the  sense  in  which  he  employs  them.  In  the 
Scriptural  sense,  a  state  of  sin  is  a  state  of  perdition. 
And  it  follows  of  course  that  if  sin  were  the  final 
state  of  man,  or,  in  other  words,  if  man  were  to  con- 
tinue eternally  in  the  love  and  practice  of  sin,  his 
perdition  would  be  final.  And  as  the  plan  of  grace 
revealed  in  the  gospel  is  a  scheme  of  salvation  from 
sin,  in  this  sense  it  "  has  for  its  object  salvation  from 
final  perdition,"  it  being  salvation  from  continued 
sin.  In  this  view  of  the  subject,  however,  the  Scrip- 
ture phraseology  is  to  be  preferred  : — "  He  shall  save 
his  people  from  their  sins.''  And  saving  from  sin 
saves  from  all  the  concomitant  evils  of  sin,  just  as 
healing  of  sickness  saves  from  the  concomitant  evils 
of  a  state  of  disease. 


EEPLY  TO  DK.   ADAMS.  421 

But  Dr.  A.  means  by  "  final  perdition/'  an  irrevoca- 
ble doom  to  hell  for  the  sins  on  earth.  In  this  sense 
of  the  phrase  there  is  no  intimation  in  the  Scriptures 
of  its  being  the  object  of  Christ's  mission  to  save 
men  from  final  perdition,  even  as  there  is  no  revela- 
tion of  any  such  fact  in  the  economy  of  the  Divine 
government,  which  should  constitute  an  occasion  for 
such  an  interposition. 

It  is  no  part  of  the  mission  of  Jesus,  as  it  is  repre- 
sented in  the  Scriptures,  to  remedy  any  former  mis- 
take of  the  Creator  and  Law-Giver,  or  to  relieve  him 
of  any  embarrassment.  The  semi-barbarians  who 
framed  the  Augustinian  creed,  have  not  in  that  creed 
reflected  the  wisdom  of  Heaven.  It  represents  the 
great  Father  of  mankind,  when  he  gave  a  law  to  his 
children,  as  attaching  to  it,  like  a  rash,  inconsiderate 
parent,  a  threat  of  utter  and  endless  misery  as  the 
penalty  of  all  and  any  transgression.  But  his  weak 
and  feeble  children  are  overcome  by  temptation,  and 
disobey.  Then  the  great  Father  relents,  he  sees 
that  it  is  too  bad  that,  of  his  rational  children,  none1 
should  ever  love  and  enjoy  him,  but  all  should  wear 
eternity  away  in  cursing  him,  their  Maker,  and  in 
howlings  of  infinite  torments  !  —  and  what  shall  be 
done  ?  The  threat  has  gone  out,  and  he  must  not 
stand  before  his  family  as  false  to  his  word  ;—  and 
yet  it  is  too  bad, — and  what  shall  be  done  ?  Why 
this.  The  Father  inflicts  the  punishment  upon  him- 
self as  a  substitute,  (for  the  creed  makes  Christ  to 
be  the  essential  God)  and  so  he  takes  out  from  the 
mass  a  chosen  number,  regenerates  them  by  his  spirit; 
36 


422  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

and  exonerates  them  from  the  punishment  he  had 
threatened,  telling  them  that  he  had  verified  the  word 
of  his  threat  by  inflicting  the  punishment  on  himself. 
(Everybody  knows  that  this  would  not  be  verifying 
the  threat,  but  those  scions  of  heathenism  could  think 
of  no  better  way  to  word  it ;  and  they  apprehended 
no  difficulty  with  the  minds  of  the  people  as  to  their 
reception  of  this  fabrication,  because  religion  with 
the  heathen  was  all  mysticism,  and  the  expedient  of 
substitution  was  in  vogue  among  them,  even  in  cases 
of  capital  punishment  and  deadly  revenge.  Nor 
whether  Christ  actually  suffered  endless  punishment 
instead  of  men,  none  could  have  the  temerity  to  ask, 
when  the  scheme  was  actually  inaugurated  as  canoni- 
cal.) But  then  there  must  be  human  samples,  after 
all,  of  the  terrible  truth  of  the  original  threat  of  end- 
less vengeance.  And  when  the  chosen  ones  shall 
look  down  upon  their  hopelessly  suffering  kindred, 


"  Struggling  with  vengeance  and  rolling  in  their  pain," 

they  will  see  the  "  final  perdition"  from  which  they 
were  redeemed  by  Christ. 

It  is  in  the  shadow  of  this  theological  fabrication 
that  our  esteemed  friend  makes  it  his  great  position, 
that  Redemption  by  Christ  is  represented  as  having  for 
its  object  salvation  from  final  perdition.  Such  is  the 
wisdom  of  the  world  as  it  was. 

But  the  wisdom  of  God  is  rich  in  harmony  and 
beauty.  It  represents  the  great  Father  as  giving  to 
his  children  laws  adapted  to  their  dearest  interests, 
and  incorporating  penalties,  such  only  as  are  suitable 


REPLY  TO   DK.    ADAMS.  428 

for  a  wise  and  good  father  to  execute  when  incurred. 
So  it  was  not  necessary  for  God  to  provide  a  Saviour 
to  intercept  the  regular  administration  of  his  moral 
government,  and  screen  men  from  incurred  punish- 
ment,-— but  to  save  them  from  ignorance  and  sin,  and 
conform  them  to  the  spirit  .of  holiness  and  heaven. 
And  in  this  light  the  whole  Scripture,  Old  Testament 
and  New,  represents  the  purpose  of  Christ's  mission. 
It  is  the  mission  of  the  woman's  Seed  to  bruise  the 
serpent's  head ; — -not  to  kill  off  the  principles  of  the 
Divine  law,  but  to  exterminate  the  reign  of  evil,  by 
conforming  all  men  to  the  law.  Thus  is  the  law  not 
destroyed,  but  fulfilled.  In  him  shall  all  kindreds  and 
families  of  the  earth  be  blessed.  This  blessing  in 
Christ  is  not  a  mere  dodge  from  a  future  pit  of  fire 
but  a  spiritual  good  permeating  the  whole  being.  "  I, 
the  Lord,  have  called  thee  in  righteousness,  and  will 
give  thee  for  a  covenant  of  the  people,  and  a  light  to 
lighten  the  Gentiles, — to  open  the  blind  eyes,  to 
bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the  prison,  and  them  that 
sit  in  darkness  out  of  the  prison  house."  It  is  not 
to  appease  his  own  wrath  by  punishing  himself,  thus 
to  make  it  consistent  with  his  justice  to  refrain  from 
casting  his  children  into  an  endless  prison  of  torture 
at  his  own  hand.  It  is  to  bring  out  the  prisoners  of 
darkness  and  sin,  from  their  own  state  of  spiritual 
bondage.  He  is  the  good  Shepherd  who,  not  need- 
ing self-punishment  to  cure  him  of  a  disposition  to 
cast  his  sheep  into  the  lion's  den,  goes  after  the  lost 
sheep  even  until  the  last  wanderer  is  brought  home 
with  joy,  into  the  fold  of  righteousness  and  peace. 


424  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

For  this  purpose  was  the  Son  of  God  manifested, 
not  that  he  might  nullify  the  just  demands  of  the  law, 
but  that  he  might  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil, 
sin  and  its  evils.  He  hath  committed  unto  us  the 
ministry  of  reconciliation,  to  wit,  that  God  was  in 
Christ,  not  pacifying  his  own  wrath,  and  reconciling 
himself  to  men,  but  reconciling  the  world  unto  himself. 
(2  Cor.  v.  19.)  And  of  this  character  is  the  Scrip- 
ture representation  of  the  Saviour's  mission,  from 
beginning  to  end.  Our  friend  finds  one  passage 
which  speaks  of  being  saved  from  wrath  through 
Christ.  This  relates  to  individual  experience,  through 
the  efficacy  of  a  living  faith  in  the  blood  of  Christ, 
or  in  his  love  which  is  attested  by  his  blood.  The 
whole  passage  reads  thus,  (  Rom.  v.  8,  9,)  "  But  God 
commendeth  his  love  towards  us  in  that  while  we 
were  yet  sinners  Christ  died  for  us,  Much  more  now 
being  justified  by  his  blood,  (that  is  by  his  love,)  we 
shall  be  saved  from  wrath  through  him."  "We  have 
shown  before,  that  the  word  wrath  applied  to  the 
Deity  does  not  signify  madness,  but  sometimes 
denotes  a  visible  afflictive  providence,  and  sometimes 
the  condemnatory  operation  of  the  divine  law  against 
transgressors,  In  the  former  sense  the  apostle, 
speaking  of  a  calamity  which  had  even  then  been 
suffered  by  a  certain  persecuting  community  of  Jews 
says,  (1  Thess.  ii.  16,)  "  For  the  wrath  is  come  upon 
them  to  the  uttermost."  In  the  latter  sense  of  wrath, 
the  same  apostle  speaks  of  himself  and  the  brethren 
whom  he  addressed,  (Eph.  ii.  3,)  as  having  been 
"  children  of  wrath,  even  as  others, "  Salvation  from 


REPLY  TO   DR.  ADAMS* 

this  wrath,  this  condemnatory  operations  of  tfoe  law, 
the  apostle  would  have  understood  to  be  a  concomi- 
tant of  justification  by  that  faith  which  works  by 
lo.ve.  Hence  he  says  in  another  place  ia  the  same- 
epistle,  which  we  have  repeatedly  quoted,  "  There  is, 
therefore,  now  no  condensation  to  them  that  are  irs 
Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  bat  after 
the  spirit."  Of  the  same  salvatioD  of  Christian  faith 
our  apostle  writes  to  his  Corinthian  brethren,  (1  Cor. 
xv.  1,  2.)  "Moreover,  brethren,  I  declare  unto  you 
the  gospel  which  I  preached  unto  you,  which  also  ye 
have  received,  and  wherein  ye  stand  ;  by  which  also 
ye  are  saved,  if  ye  keep  in  memory  what  I  preached 
unto  you,  unless  ye  have  believed  in  vain."  This  is 
an  example  witnessing  to  the  verity  of  Christ's  words 
to  the  disciples  just  before  his  ascension,  (Mark  xvi. 
16,)  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be 
saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned/' 
Dr.  A.  quotes  this  passage  in  proof  of  final  perdition. 
But  the  reader  perceives  it  to  refer  solely  to  tho 
fruits  or  effects  of  belief  and  unbelief.  The  disciples 
had  been  with  Jesus  three  years,  and  he  had  instruct- 
ed them  into  the  principles  of  his  gospel.  But  he 
had  bidden  them  not  to  go,  with  the  ministry  of  that 
gospel,  in  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  but  only  to  the 
lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.  (Matt.  x.  16.)  But 
now  he  had  been  put  to  death,  and  was  raised  from 
the  dead,  and  had  broken  down  the  middle  wall 
between  Jews  and  Gentiles ;  and  he  enlarged  the 
field  of  ministerial  labor  for  his  disciples,  saying, 
"  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to 


426  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

every  creature/'  Then  lie  proceeded  to  describe, 
not  what  the  gospel  was,  for  that  he  had  committed 
to  them  through  three  years  schooling,  but  what  the 
effects  should  be  of  the  different  treatments  which 
their  message  should  receive.  He  that  should  be- 
lieve the  gospel  should  be  saved  by  that  faith ;  just 
as  St.  Paul  testified  to  his  brethren,  "  I  declare  unto 
you  the  gospel,  which  I  preached  unto  you,  .  .  .  and 
which  ye  have  received ; — by  which  also  ye  are 
saved,  unless  ve  have  believed  in  vain."  And  so 

1  +/ 

of  the  jailor's  family;  when  the  gospel  was  received 
by  them,  salvation  h?d  come  into  that  house.  But 
he  that  should  reject  the  gospel,  should  be  damned, 
or  condemned  ;  (for  Dr.  A.  knows  that  both  these 
words  are  from  the  same  original,)  that  is,  he  would 
remain  under  the  darkness  and  condemnation  of  the 
heathen  state.  Jesus  uttered  the  same  sentiment 
when  he  said,  (John  iii.  18,  19,)  '•'  He  that  belie  vetli 
on  him  is  not  condemned;  but  he  that  believeth  not 
is  condemned  already,  because  he  hath  not  believed 
in  the  name  of  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God.  And 
this  is  the  condemnation,  (or,  to  follow  the  other 
translation,  this  is  the  damnation,)  that  light  is 
come  into  the  world,  and  men  loved  darkness  rather 
than  light,  because  their  deeds  were  evil." 

And  so  we  may  go  through  the  whole  Bible,  and 
we  shall  find,  ever}Twhere,  that  the  life,  the  blessed- 
ness, the  salvation,  which  is  the  fruit  or  reward 
of  faith  and  virtue,  is  possessed  when  and  where  faith 
and  virtue  are  exercised.  And  the  death,  condemna- 
tion, or  wrath,  which  is  the  fruit  or  reward  of  unbe- 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  427 

lief  and  sin,  is  suffered  when  and  where  unbelief  and 
sin  prevail.  Just  as  it  is  said  in  another  passage 
which  our  opponent  adduces ;  "  He  that  beheveth  on 
the  Son  HATH  aionion  life ;  but  he  that  believeth 
not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God 
abideth  on  him."  Of  course  as  all  this  light  and  life 
is  in  Christ,  or  in  his  gospel,  while  any  remain  in 
unbelief  they  cannot  see  it.  And  at  the  same  time 
the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  them,  even  as  it  did  on 
Paul  and  his  brethren,  when,  in  their  unbelief,  they 
were  "children  of  wrath,  even  as  others." 

But  unbelief  is  not  eternal,  for  that  is  falsehood. 
Falsehood  is  not  eternal,  even  as  clouds  are  not 
eternal.  Truth  is  eternal ;  and  in  the  consummation 
of  the  truth  of  the  gospel,  all  unbelief  will  be  destroy- 
ed by  the  fruition  of  the  fact. 

TJie  Infinite  Mistake. 

Having  shown  that  there  is  no  Scripture  warrant 
for  the  assumption  that  redemption  by  Christ  has  for 
its  object  salvation  from  final  perdition,  in  the  sense 
of  our  opponent's  proposition,  we  will  proceed  to 
expose  the  utter  and  radical  mistake  which  he  has 
committed  in  his  estimate  of  the  spirit  and  purpose 
of  the  Messiah's  mission  compared  with  that  of 
Moses,  or  of  the  gospel  compared  with  the  law.  In 
this  second  proposition,  Dr.  Adams  labors  at  consid- 
erable length  to  exhibit  the  Messiah,  in  his  work  as 
a  whole,  as  more  terribly  severe  than  the  God  of  the 
Old  Testament ;  more  unrelenting, — nay,  even  merci- 
lessly deaf  to  the  pleadings  of  weakness,  suffering 
and  want.  He  makes  the  gospel  an  infinitely  more 


428  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

fearful  ministration  of  wrath  than  the  law.  The 
following  are  striking  specimens  of  his  sentiment  on 
the  subject : — 

"If  upon  the  failure  of  all  which  is  done  in  redemption  to  save 
men,  they  are  to  be  subjected  to  another  probation  after  death, 
there  are  powerful  reasons  to  think  that  the  surest  way  to  effect 
their  recovery,  is,  to  let  them  know  beforehand  that  God  will  give 
them  a  second  trial. 

"  For  this  is  manifestly  the  way  in  which  God  proceeded  with 
the  Hebrew  people  whose  reformation  in  this  world,  and  whose 
allegiance  he  was  seeking  to  secure.  In  foresight  of  their  apostacy 
and  punishment,  they  were  told  beforehand  that  they  should  have 

a  second  probation It  might  have  been  argued  with  much 

plausibleness,  that  such  an  announcement  would  be  inexpedient ; 
that  it  would  have  a  direct  effect  to  make  men  careless  and 
presumptuous.  But  infinite  wisdom  judged  otherwise,  and  pro- 
ceeded at  different  times  to  say ;  '  If  his  children  forsake  my  law, 
then  will  I  visit  their  transgression  with  the  rod  ;  nevertheless  my 

loving  kindness  will  I  not  take  utterly  from  him.' "What 

principle  in  moral  natures  is  there  which  makes  this  announce- 
ment, to  sinners,  of  future  clemency  and  restoration,  wise  and 
expedient  ?  The  obvious  answer  is,  Hope.  Whether  or  not  there 
can  ever  be  repentance  without  hope,  it  is  certain  that  hope  is  a 

powerful  means  of  repentance We  therefore  say,  that  if  no 

such  foretokens  of  far  distant  mercy  and  forgiveness  are  now  made 
to  those  who  reject  Christ,  it  cannot  properly  be  argued  that  it 
would  be  unsuitable,  and  that  wisdom  and  prudence  forbid.  On 
the  contrary,  such  promises  would  be  in  accordance  with  those 
former  dealings  of  God  with  men  in  which  he  has  manifested  the 
most  peculiar  love  for  transgressors. 

"  We  can  imagine  how  Christ  would  have  drawn  the  picture  of 
retribution  had  he  followed  the  Old  Testament,  in  doing  so,  in  its 
hopeful  and  prophetic  intermingling  of  light  with  the  darkness. 
Making  the  prospect  terrific,  at  first,  beyond  all  human  power  of 
description,  to  enforce  the  duty  of  immediate  repentance,  and  to 


REPLY  TO  DR.  ADAMS.  429 

deter  from  sin,  then,  appealing  to  our  sense  of  propriety,  our 
magnanimity,  our  shame,  he  would  have  told  us  how  in  the  future, 
more  or  less  remote,  God  would  visit  his  erring  and  perverse 
children  with  his  remonstrances  ;  how  he  himself  would  weep  over 
them  and  repeat  the  offers  of  pardon ;  and  in  view  of  all  this  we 
can  imagine  how  he  would  expostulate.  Such  a  procedure  would 
accord  with  the  principles  of  human  nature  and  of  the  divine  gov- 
ernment as  illustrated  in  the  history  of  Israel.  Is  the  Saviour  less 
compassionate  and  ready  to  forgive  than  the  God  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament? for  we  see  God  listening  to  catch  the  first  sigh  of  repen- 
tance  Is  that  Old  Testament,  which  is  represented  by 

scoffers  as  '  cruel,'  *  sanguinary,'  '  vindictive,'  actually  more  merci- 
ful in  its  expressions  toward  rebellious  Israel  than  the  New  Testa- 
ment is  toward  men  who  died  in  their  sins." 

And  the  Doctor  assumes  that  it  is  so ;  that  the  last 
and  final  act  of  the  Mediator  of  the  new  covenant 
will  be,  to  doom  countless  millions  of  the  human  race 
to  an  eternal  necessity  of  sinning  and  suffering,  to  bar 
the  door  of  mercy  and  of  reformation  against  them 
forever,  and  make  their  endless  being  an  infinite 
calamity. 

Now  this  is  what  we  denominate  an  infinite  mistake. 
In  the  first  place,  it  reverses  the  contrast  presented 
in  the  Scriptures  between  the  two  covenants  ;  and  in 
the  second  place,  it  ascribes  to  the  second  covenant  a 
spirit  and  a  work  which  belongs  to  neither.  The 
prophecies,  as  we  have  seen,  in  describing  the  work 
of  Messiah's  mission,  even  in  his  judgment,  represent 
it  to  be,  not  to  seal  forever  the  eyes  found  blind,  but 
to  open  the  blind  eyes ;  not  to  bar  forever  the  doors 
of  the  poor  prisoners  found  in  prison,  but  to  break 
open  the  prison  doors,  and  to  bring  out  the  prisoners 
from  the  prison,  and  them  that  sit  in  darkness  out  of 


430  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

the  prison  house.  And  the  New  Testament  every- 
where represents  the  mission  of  Christ  to  be  one  of 
love,  unconquerable  love,  love  which  never  faileth. 
"  The  law  was  given  by  Moses,  but  grace  and  truth 
came  by  Jesus  Christ,"  (John  i.  17.)  "  For  God  hath 
not  given  us  the  spirit  of  fear  ;  but  of  power,  and  of 
love,  and  of  a  sound  mind."  (2  Tim.  i.  17.)  "  For  ye 
have  not  received  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear  ; 
but  ye  have  received  the  spirit  of  adoption,  whereby 
we  cry,  Abba,  Father."  (Rom.  viii.  15.)  "  For  ye  are 
not  come  unto  the  mount  that  might  be  touched,  and 
that  burned  with  fire,  nor  unto  blackness,  and  dark- 
ness, and  tempest,  ....  but  ye  are  come  unto 
mount  Zion,  and  unto  the  city  of  the  living  God,  the 
heavenly  Jerusalem."  (Heb.  xii.  18-24.)  But  if  our 
opponent's  doctrine  is  to  be  accredited  as  gospel,  the 
contrast  is  reversed.  For  I  would  leave  this  moun- 
tain of  "  Orthodox"  divinity,  and  go  and  cast  myself 
down  at  the  foot  of  mount  Sinai  with  pleasure.  And 
Sinai's  cloud,  which,  compared  with  Paul's  gospel, 
was  so  black  and  portentous,  should,  in  comparison 
with  this  other  gospel,  appear  as  the  soft  cloud  of 
spring  which  sails  along  the  blue  sky ;  and  Sinai's 
thunder,  which,  compared  with  Paul's  gospel,  was  so 
fearfully  terrific,  should,  in  comparison  with  this  other 
gospel,  be  as  the  gentle  zephyrs  which  play  along  the 
green  meadows.  For  there  was  no  thunder  on  Sinai's 
summit,  our  opposers  themselves  being  judges,  by  a 
million  times  multiplied  without  end  so  terrible,  as  the 
doctrine  of  entire  and  endless  torments. 
"  The  law  was  given  by  Moses."  The  Mosaic  cove- 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  4S1 

nant  was  one  of  statutes  and  rewards  and  punish- 
ments. Here,  then,  if  endless  retributions  were  true, 
we  should  have  found  them.  But  no  man  of  respect- 
able information  and  candor  will  assert  that  such  ret- 
ributions are  among  the  provisions  of  that  covenant. 
"  Grace  and  truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ."  It  is  the 
revelation  of  a  purpose  of  grace,  according  to  God's 
own  good  pleasure  which  he  hath  purposed  in  him- 
self, that  in  the  dispensation  of  the  fulness  of  times 
he  might  gather  together  in  one  all  things  in  Christ. 
(Eph.  i.  9,  10.)  And  my  learned  friend  is  inspired 
with  the  wisdom  of  heaven  when  he  so  ably  argues, 
that,  on  the  supposition  that  this  "  grace77  is  "  truth/' 
it  is  morally  good  and  profitable  to  preach  it.  This 
is  a  valuable  and  unreserved  testimony  to  the  moral 
virtue  and  superior  spiritual  influence  of  the  full  and 
affectionate  ministry  of  Universalism,  if  it  be  true. 
He  shows  that  it  is  adapted,  as  a  wholesome  moral 
influence,  to  an  essential  principle  in  our  moral  na- 
ture. Herein  he  harmonizes  with  the  wisdom  of 
God.  For  Paul  says  that  God  hath  abounded  toward 
us  in  all  wisdom  and  prudence  in  making  known  this 
benignant  purpose  of  his  grace.  (Eph  i.  8.) 

He,  indeed,  who  apprehends  moral  harm  from  the 
affectionate  and  faithful  ministry  to  mankind  of  the 
universal  and  never-failing  love  of  God  to  the  chil- 
dren of  men,  impeaches  the  wisdom  of  God  in  the 
Gospel.  For  it  is  the  first  aim  and  effort  of  the 
Christian  ministry  and  mission,  to  commend  the  love 
of  God  to  men.  "  Herein  is  love  ;  not  that  we  loved 
God,  but  that  he  loved  us,  and  sent  his  Son  to  be  the 


432  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION, 

propitiation  for  oor  sins."  And  every  Christian 
knows  that  this  love  is  a  spirit  which  can  never  fail 
to  desire  and  seek  the  ultimate  best  .good  of  its  ob- 
jects. For  God's  love  is  the  same  spirit  which  glows 
in  the  Christian's  heart,  when  he  prays  for  the  re- 
demption, happiness  and  glory  of  the  great  intelligent 
family  of  which  be  is  a  member.  We  know  that  it  is 
so,  for  "he  that  •dwelleth  in  love  dwelleth  in  God,  and 
God  m  him,  for  God  is  love."  He,  therefore,  who 
•calculates  about  being  happy  in  view  of  the  endless 
sufferings  of  his  neighbors  hereafter,  because  he  will 
then  be  like  God,  is  mistaking  the  satanic  for  the 
godly  spirit,  God  Is  love  ;  and  the  more  of  his  spirit 
we  have  in  our  souls,  the  more  tenderly  aflectioned 
we  are  towards  one  anotfeer. 

Another  Infinite  Mistake, 

Associated  with  the  capital  error  noticed  in  the 
foregoing  section,  as  that  of  mistaking  the  end  of  the 
Mosaic  or  Jewish  -age,  and  the  setting  up  of  the  Mes- 
siah's reign,  for  the  end  of  the  material  world,  and  the 
close  of  the  reign  of  Christ.  To  take  those  descrip- 
tions -of  events  which  are  -associated  in  the  Scriptures 
with  the  opening  of  Christ's  mediatorial  kingdom, 
and  apply  them  to  its  close,  is  surely  an  infinite  mis- 
take. And  this  is  tiie  mistake  of  our  opponent  and 
his  school. 

This  matter  is  presented  in  so  clear  a  light  in  the 
Scriptures,  that  men  must  read  with  averted  eyes  not 
to  see  it.  The  dissolution  of  the  Jewish  economy 
and  the  introduction  of  the  Christian  economy  or 


REPLY   TO   DR.    ADAMS.  433 

Messianic  age,  is  the  subject  of  much  prophecy,  and 
prophecy  associating  with  it  great  convulsions,  and  a 
notable  judgment.  .  We  have  had  occasion  to  bring 
out  much  of  the  evidence  of  this  fact  in  former  parts 
of  this  discussion.  Daniel  describes  the  books  open- 
ed, and  the  judgment  set,  and  one  like  the  Son  of 
man  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  when  there  was 
given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that 
all  people,  nations  and  languages  should  serve  him. 
Of  this  coming  to  set  up  his  kingdom,  and  the  termi- 
nation of  the  old  economy  in  judgment,  Jesus  him- 
selt  speaks  emphatically,  (Matt.  xvi.  27,  28 ;)  "  For 
the  Son  of  man  shall  come  in  the  glor}r  of  his  Father, 
with  his  angels ;  and  then  he  shall  reward  every  man 
according  to  his  works.  Verily  I  say  unto  you, 
There  be  some  standing  here  which  shall  not  taste  of 
death  till  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  king- 
dom.'' Then,  in  Matt.  24th  and  25th,  so  extensively 
considered  in  our  preceding  chapter,  when  Jesus 
spoke  to  the  disciples  of  the  utter  dissolution  of  the 
magnificent  temple  which  towered  up  before  them, 
suggesting  to  them,  of  course,  a  most  terrible  con- 
vulsion terminating  the  Jewish  state  and  polity,  and 
more  perfectly  opening  the  Christian  dispensation, — 
and  they  asked  him  when  these  things  should  be,  and 
what  signs  they  should  look  for  as  betokening  his 
corning  and  the  end  of  that  age,  he  told  them  that  all 
these  things  should  be  in  that  generation.  And  to 
silence  all  cavil  on  the  meaning  of  the  word  genera- 
tion in  this  case,  we  only  need  recall  the  terms  of  the 
last  quotation  above,  where  the  same  time  is  describ- 


434  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

ed  by  the  saying  that  some  present  should  live  to  see 
it.  And  so  in  the  application  of  the  parable  of  the 
tares,  Jesus  said;  so  shall  it  be  at  the  end  of  this 
aionoSj  or  age. 

True,  the  translators,  who,  working  for  the  church, 
thought  it  more  likely  that  the  Evangelists  used  the 
word  aionos  in  a  strange  latitude  of  meaning,  than 
that  the  church  was  radically  wrong  in  its  fundamen- 
tal doctrines,  and  so  rendered  it  ivorld, — and,  to  pre- 
serve consistency  rendered  it  world  in  Heb.  ix.  26, 
"  But  now  once  in  the  end  of  the  world,  (ton  aionon) 
nath  he  appeared  to  put  away  sin  by  the  sacrifice  of 
himself," — where  everybody  knows  that  the  end  of 
the  Mosaic  age  is  meant.  And  so  in  1  Cor.  x.  11 ; 
"  These  things  are  written  for  our  admonition,  upon 
whom  the  ends  of  the  world,  (ton  aionon,  the  ages) 
are  come.7'  But  in  this  time  of  general  religious 
study  and  Biblical  criticism,  I  am  unable  to  find  an 
excuse  for  the  conduct  of  learned  divines  in  quoting 
those  passages  which  speak  of  the  end  of  aionos,  with 
the  cool  unquestioning  presumption  that  they  refer 
to  the  end  of  this  mundane  system. 

With  regard  to  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  in 
connection  with  that  judgment  and  the  change  of  dis- 
pensations, bearing  in  mind  that  we  are  listening  to 
eastern  style,  this  description  of  it  is  beautifully 
truthful  and  expressive.  Just  remember  that  the 
kingdom  of  Christ  "  cometh  not  with  observation," 
that  is,  with  outward  pomp  and  show,  but  that  it  is  a 
spiritual  kingdom,  —  and  then  contemplate  the  more 
visible  and  practical  establishment  of  his  kingdom  in 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  435 

the  world  through  the  operation  of  those  convulsions 
and  revolutions  which  attended  the  dissolution  of  the 
Old  dispensation  and  the  inauguration  of  the  New,  and 
you  will  see  the  perfect  fulfilment  of  what  those  pas- 
sages declare  of  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  man,  not 
in  bodily  person,  but  in  his  kingdom,  and  in  power  and 
great  glory. 

In  respect  to  this  coming  of  the  Son  of  man,  Pro- 
fessor Stuart,  in  his  able  article  on  Matt.  24th  and 
part  of  25th,  referred  to  in  our  preceding  Chapter, 
presents  a  clear  and  unquestionable  exposition  of  it. 
He  says,  "  The  language  of  the  Bible  respecting  the 
coming1  of  God  or  of  Christ,  is  sufficiently  frequent 
and  intelligible  to  enable  us  rightly  to  understand  it. 
In  Scripture  language,  God  comes,  whenever  he  pro- 
ceeds to  do  or  execute  any  purpose  of  his  will  in  re- 
spect to  men."  And  this  general  statement  of  fact 
the  Professor  sustains  and  elucidates  by  ample  quota- 
tions from  Old  Testament  and  New.  Among  his  quo- 
tations is  one  from  Jesus  to  this  same  coming  which 
is  our  present  subject  of  remark.  When  Peter  asked 
him  concerning  John,  Jesus  answered,  "  if  I  will  that 
he  tarry  till  I  come,  what  is  that  to  thee?"  John  was 

v 

one  of  those  who  should  not  taste  of  death  until  they 
should  see  the  coming  in  his  kingdom  of  which  he 
spoke. 

And  here  I  wish  to  call  particular  attention  to  the 
occasion  there  was  for  Jesus  and  his  apostles  to  speak 
often  and  emphatically  of  these  things,  this  coming 
of  the  Son  of  man,  and  the  attendant  judgment,  con- 
vulsions, and  change  of  dispensations.  It  was  here 


436  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

that  an  important  portion  of  the  Old  Testament 
prophecies  were  to  have  their  fulfilment,  and  also  a 
great  deal  of  the  minute  prophetic  description  by 
Jesus  Christ ;  and  it  was  out  of  these  convulsions 
that  the  church  of  Christ  was  to  emerge,  tried, 
schooled,  cemented,  and  qualified  for  the  work  in  the 
world,  which  has  rolled  down  to  us  these  Christian 
privileges  and  blessings.  But  they  must  needs  have 
been  instructed  over  and  over  in  relation  to  these 
things,  and  encouraged,  and  strengthened,  or  they 
could  not  have  kept  together,  and  borne  themselves 
through  all  these  trials  and  convulsions.  In  this  light 
of  the  circumstances,  how  natural  was  the  earnest  ad- 
monition and  vivid  description  of  Peter,  which  our 
opponent  quotes  to  his  contrary  purpose  in  this  di- 
vision. Having  spoken  of  the  perishing  of  the  old 
world,  i.  e.  its  inhabitants,  by  the  flood  of  water,  he 
says,  (2  Peter  iii.  7,)  "  But  the  heavens  and  the  earth 
which  are  now,  by  the  same  word  are  kept  in  store, 
reserved  unto  fire  against  the  (a*)  day  of  judgment, 
and  perdition  (destruction)  of  ungodly  men."  And 
further  this  apostle  proceeds  to  describe  the  approach- 
ing convulsions  as  a  dissolution  of  the  heavens,  <fcc., 
the  same  figurative  style  in  which  our  Lord  had  de- 
scribed them,  and  the  prophets  also  these  and  other 
civil  commotions,  as  abundantly  shown  by  Prof.  Stuart 
in  his  work  before  quoted.  And  that  Peter  did  here 
refer  to  the  convulsions  of  that  age  is  evident,  from 
the  use  which  he  made  of  the  subject  in  admonishing 

*Here  the  article  is  omitted  in  the  Greek,  in  Tvhich  case  the  indefinite 
article,  a,  is  implied.  It  is  so  in  numbers  of  other  cases  where  a  judg- 
ment is  spoken  of,  and  our  common  version  uses  the. 


F^PLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  437 

the  Christians  of  the  imperious  necessity  of  watchful- 
ness which  the  consideration  of  it  imposed  upon  them. 
"  Seeing,  then,  that  all  these  things  shall  be  dissolved, 
what  manner  of  persons  ought  ye  to  be  in  all  holy 
conversation  and  godliness,  looking  for  and  hasting 
unto  the  coming  of  the  day  of  God/'  <£c.  To  assume 
that  Peter  had  reference  to  a  literal  dissolution  of  the 
material  world,  even  yet,  after  nearly  two  thousand 
years,  in  the  distant  future,  (an  event  of  which  the 
Bible  testifies  not,)  is  to  make  Peter  a  mere  trifler. 
The  reading  of  this  Scripture  with  care,  must  impress 
every  mind  with  the  conviction  that  the  apostle  was 
treating  on  judgments  and  convulsions  then  ap- 
proaching, to  pass  through  which  in  safety  the  Chris- 
tians must  needs  be  ever  on  their  guard,  and  exercise 
great  circumspection.  And  the  circumstances  brought 
into  consideration  are  all  visible  to  our  perception  in 
our  present  understanding  of  the  'general  subject. 

So  with  regard  to  another  passage  which  our  op- 
ponent quotes  in  this  connection : 

"  The  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with  his  mighty 
angels  in  flaming  fire,  taking  vengeance  on  them  that  know  not 
God,  and  obey  not  the  Gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  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,  and  admired  in  all  them  that  believe,  for  our 
testimony  among  you  was  believed,  in  that  day." 

Dr.  A.  adds  : 

That  mis  does  not  appiy  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  as  the 
Papists  and  some  Protestants  would  have  us  think,  appears  from 
the  next  chapter,  in  which  the  Thessalonians  are  told  that  "that 
day"  is  not  "  at  hand,"  because  "  the  man  of  sin"  was  first  to  be 
revealed. 


438  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Our  friend  puts  in  this  argument  against  the  appli- 
cation of  the  passage  to  the  judgment  which  involved 
the  destruction  of  Jerusalem,  with  unsuitable  haste. 
The  apostle  still  treats  the  subject  in  a  manner  imply- 
ing that  the  day  spoken  of  was  to  come  in  their  life- 
time. But,  from  what  he  says  of  the  church  of 
Thessalonica  being  troubled  by  epistle,  as  from  him, 
it  appears  that  there  had  a  letter  been  sent  them  pur- 
porting to  be  apostolical,  asserting  that  the  day  of  the 
Son  of  man,  of  which  there  had  been  so  much  said 
as  being  an  event  to  transpire  in  that  generation,  was 
then  instantly  coming.  If  this  false  report  were  suf- 
fered to  exert  its  influence,  causing  the  church  to 
neglect  their  necessary  avocations,  and  to  suffer  dis- 
appointment and  derision,  it  would  conduce  to  much 
harm.  St.  Paul  therefore  informed  them  that  all  the 
preparatory  signs  were  not  yet  fulfilled,  and  they 
must  not  be  thrown  out  of  their  propriety  by  unau- 
thorized predictions.  It  proved,  indeed,  to  be  about 
fourteen  years  after  the  writing  of  this  epistle  to  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem. 

But  that  the  passage  quoted  by  Dr.  A.,  from  the 
first  chapter  of  this  Epistle,  refers  to  the  judgment  of 
that  generation,  is  made  obvious  by  the  whole  con- 
nection. The  experience  of  Paul  in  Thessalonica, 
recorded  in  Acts  xvii.,  acquainted  him  with  the  fact 
that  there  was  a  powerful  synagogue  of  the  Jews  in 
that  city  who  were  violent  enemies  of  the  Christian 
church,  and  stirred  up  the  baser  sort  of  people  as 
instruments  of  persecution.  Referring  to  this,  he 
says  to  this  church,  "  We  ourselves  glory  in  you  in 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  439 

the  churches  of  God,  for  your  patience  and  faith  in 
all  your  persecutions  and  tribulations  that  ye  endure  ; 
which  is  a  manifest  token  of  the  righteous  judgment 
of  God;  ....  seeing  it  is  a  righteous  thing  with 
God,  to  recompense  tribulation  to  them  that  trouble 
you  ;  and  to  you  who  are  troubled  rest  with  us,  when 
the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven  with 
his  mighty  angels,"  <fcc.  How  directly  and  certainly 
does  this  relate  to  the  judgment  which  was  soon  to 
recompense  tribulation  to  the  Jews  who  were  the  in- 
stigators of  all  the  persecutions  of  that  church,  and 
which  should  give  rest  to  the  church  :  the  judgment 
of  the  approach  of  which  the  very  persecutions 
they  were  then  suffering  were  manifestly  the  tokens 
which  their  Lord  had  described.  The  punishment 
of  that  persecuting  people  with  aionion  destruction 
from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  is  paralleled  and  ex- 
plained by  Jer.  xxiii.  39,  40.  "  Therefore,  behold, 
I,  even  I,  will  utterly  forget  you,  and  will  forsake 
you,  and  the  city  that  I  gave  you  and  your  fathers, 
and  cast  you  out  of  my  presence  ;  and  I  will  bring 
an  everlasting  reproach  upon  you,  and  a  perpetual 
shame  which  shall  not  be  forgotten."  As  the  temple 
where  dwelt  the  symbols  of  the  Divine  presence  was 
in  Jerusalem,  and  God  promised  to  meet  them  and 
manifest  his  presence  to  them  there,  this  place  became, 
by  way  of  eminence,  to  be  called  the  presence  of 
the  Lord.  Accordingly,  by  the  same  metonomy  of 
speech,  the  dispersion  of  the  people  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  temple  is  represented  as  casting  them  out 
from  his  presence.  And  so  tho  apostle  represents  it 


440  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

as  "  aionion  destruction  from  the  presence  of  the 
Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power." 

Jesus,  (Matt.  xxii.  32,  and  Mark  iii.  29,)  repre- 
sents this  age  of  desolation  to  that  people  as  a  state 
of  non-forgiveness.  This,  too,  Dr.  Adams  includes  in 
his  collect  of  passages  in  this  division.  "  Whosoever 
speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost  it  shall  not  be  for- 
given him,  neither  in  this  world,  (aionos),  nor  in  the 
aionos  to  come."  "  This  aionos,'7  as  we  have  seen, 
was  the  then  present  Jewish  age.  But  what  was  the 
next  coming  age?  It  was  the  periodical  dispensation 
of  the  gospel  to  the  Gentiles.  When  the  Jews  resisted 
the  word,  contradicting  and  blaspheming,  "Paul  and 
Barnabas  waxed  bold,  and  said,  It  was  necessary  that 
the  word  of  God  should  first  have  been  spoken  to 
you ;  but  seeing  ye  put  it  from  you,  and  judge  your- 
selves unworthy  of  aionion  life,  lo,  we  turn  to  the 
Gentiles."  So,  then,  the  Jews  as  a  people,  having 
contemptuously  treated  the  strongest  Christian  evi- 
dence which  God  designed  to  give  them  in  that  and 
the  next  succeeding  age,  even  ascribing  the  works  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  to  demoniacal  agency,  which  is  what 
is  meant  by  the  blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Spirit,  as 
explained  Mark  iii.  30,  they  were  to  remain  in  their 
dark  unbelieving  state  as  above  described.  Forgive- 
ness, in  the  gospel  sense,  is  deliverance  from.  The 
idea  is  that  the  people  spoken  of  would  not  be  fa- 
vored with  deliverance  from  unbelief  and  sin,  during 
the  ages  specified. 

The  same  idea  is  expressed  by  Mark's  record  of 
the  same  saying  of  Jesus.  Our  translators  make  it 


f 

REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  441 

read,  "  hath  never  forgiveness ;  but  is  in  danger 
of  eternal  damnation."  But  the  original  reads,  hath 
not  forgiveness  eis  ton  aiona^  (to  the  age)  but  is  in 
danger  of  cdonion  kriseos,  age-lasting  condemnation. 
Thus  the  records  made  by  Matthew  and  Mark  agree. 
Matthew  uses  the  noun,  hath  not  forgiveness  in  this 
nor  the  coming*  aionos ;  and  Mark  employs  the  noun 
and  adjective  both  ;  hath  not  forgiveness  to  the  age, 
(eis  ton  aiona)  but  is  in  danger  of  aionion  condemna- 
tion. 

This  unforgiven,  unliberated  state  of  darkness  to 
that  people,  during  the  age  next  succeeding  the  Mo- 
saic, the  particular  dispensation  of  the  gospel  to  the 
Gentiles,  is  definitely  treated  by  St.  Paul,  Rom.  xi., 
"  What  then  ?  Israel  hath  not  obtained  that  which 
he  seeketh  for  ;  but  the  election  hath  obtained  it,  and 
the  rest  were  blinded," — to  "  bow  down  their  back 
alway.  I  say  then,  have  they  stumbled  that  they 
should  fall?"  or  that  they  should  be  ultimately  lost? 
"  God  forbid."  "  Blindness  in  part  is  happened  to 
Israel,  until  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in. 
And  so  all  Israel  shall  be  saved." 

We  are  here  brought  to  the  point  where  we  can 
profitably  criticise  the  assumption  of  our  opponent, 
that  there  is  no  mingling  of  merciful  consideration,  as 
in  the  threatenings  of  the  Old  Testament  dispensation, 
no  gleaming  of  light  and  hope  from  beyond,  in  con- 
nection with  the  judgment  of  the  Son  of  man,  as 
propounded  by  him  and  his  apostles.  What  an  enor- 
mous mistake. 


442  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

In  the  first  place,  we  find  these  very  denunciations 
of  judgment  in  the  New  Testament,  which  our  oppo- 
nent miscalls  the  final  sentence  upon  the  wicked,  to 
be  the  announcements  of  the  near  approach  of  the 
very  threatenings  of  the  law  and  the  prophets.  When 
Jesus  spoke  of  the  severest  judgment  that  ever  was 
or  ever  should  be,  he  referred  to  the  prophet  Daniel's 
testimony  of  the  same  judgment.  On  the  same  judg- 
ment he  says,  (Luke  xxi.  20-22,)  "  And  when  ye 
shall  see  Jerusalem  compassed  with  armies,  then 
know  that  the  desolation  thereof  is  nigh.  Then  let 
them  which  are  in  Judea  flee  into  the  mountains ; — 
for  these  be  the  da}rs  of  vengeance,  that  all  things 
which  are  written  may  be  fulfilled."  This  is  a  plain 
and  comprehensive  statement  of  the  fact,  that  all  the 
denunciations  of  the  law  and  the  prophets  against  that 
people  for  their  manifold  sins,  were  to  have  their 
fulfilment  in  this  train  of  calamities.  There  are  great 
principles  of  duty,  and  of  responsibility  to  the  same 
perfect  government  of  God,  laid  down  in  the  Scrip- 
tures, alike  for  all  men  and  all  ages.  But  the  distinct 
denunciations  of  special  and  specific  judgments  in 
the  Scriptures  do  not  extend  beyond  this,  which 
should  terminate  the  old,  and  initiate  the  new  econo- 
my. These  were  the  days  of  vengeance,  when  all 
things  which  were  written  should  be  fulfilled.  But, 
as  St.  Paul  said  of  earlier  records  of  judgments  on  the 
wicked,  "  These  things  happened  unto  them  for 
ensamples,  and  they  are  written  for  our  admonition, 
on  whom  the  ends  of  the  ages  are  come." 

And   here,   entirely   against   the  assertion  of  our 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  443 

opponent,  with  regard  to  this  sorest  of  all  judgments 
denounced  in  both  Testaments,  there  is  a  gleam 
of  light,  and  love,  and  hope  from  beyond.  In  an- 
nouncing this  judgment  to  Israel,  Matt,  xxiii.  37-39, 
which  closed  the  last  discourse  Jesus  ever  delivered 
to  that  people,  this  hope  is  brought  to  view.  "  0 
Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  ....  Your  house  is  left  unto 
you  desolate  ;  for  I  say  unto  you,  Ye  shall  not  see 
me  henceforth,  till  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is  he  that 
cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord."  This  is  the  ascrip- 
tion of  praise  which  the  lovers  of  Jesus  rendered  him 
when  he  rode  into  Jerusalem,  "  Hosanna  to  the  Son 
of  David  !  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of 
the  Lord."  And  this  blessed  Jesus,  who  proved  him- 
self the  friend  of  universal  man,  and  is  the  same, 
yesterday,  to-day,  and  forever,  though  the  law  which 
he  honored  pronounced  a  curse  upon  this  corrupt 
people,  and  he  wept  in  consideration  of  the  stage  of 
suffering  through  which  they  must  pass,  looked  over 
with  serene  pleasure  to  that  turn  of  affairs  which  was 
in  the  future,  when  these  very  enemies  of  his  gospel 
should  bless  and  praise  him,  as  the  Sent  of  the  Lord. 
And,  as  we  have  shown  before,  the  very  everlasting 
punishment  for  the  same  people,  announced  by  Jesus 
in  his  last  discourse  to  his  disciples  before  his  cruci- 
fixion, is  an  aionion  kolosin,  a  process  of  correction 
which  suggests  the  hope  of  ultimate  good.  And  in 
St.  Paul's  description  of  the  same  age-lasting  blind- 
ness and  condemnation  of  Israel,  he  does  not  admit 
that  they  have  stumbled  to  a  final  fall,  but  proclaims 
the  gospel  tidings,  that  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles 
shall  be  brought  in  and  all  Israel  be  saved. 


444  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Dr.  Adams  says,  under  his  seventh  proposition, 
and  we  reserved  the  saying  for  this  appropriate 
connection : — - 

"I  have  always  been  struck  by  the  consideration  that  the  pas- 
sages from  which  Universalists  infer  the  final  happiness  of  all  men, 
do  not  occur  in  the  Bible  in  connection  with  the  punishment  of 
the  wicked.  This  is  of  the  utmost  importance.  It  is  one  pre- 
sumptive proof  that,  occurring  as  they  do  apart  from  any  mention 
of  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,  they  belong  to  other  subjects. 
And  so  we  find  them,  in  connection  with  the  blessedness  of  the 
righteous,  the  ultimate  victories  of  Christ  over  his  enemies,  his 
final  reign,  and  the  happiness  of  heaven.  But  we  look  in  vain  for 
passages  where  promises,  prophecies,  hints,  of  ultimate  restoration 
occur  in  connection  with  the  subject  of  future  punishment." 

We  are  happy  to  agree  with  our  friend  in  the 
position  that  we  do  not  find  the  promises  of  the 
gospel  in  connection  with  the  subject  of  future  pun- 
ishment, there  being  no  such  subject,  in  his  sense 
of  the  language,  in  the  Bible.  And  we  regard  it  also 
as  a  true  saying  that,  as  a  general  rule,  the  passages 
on  which  we  ground  our  faith  in  the  victory  of  Christ 
over  all  evil,  do  not  occur  in  connection  with  the 
punishment  of  the  wicked. 

This  remark,  however,  is  not  true  in  the  unqualified 
language  in  which  he  has  couched  it.  We  have  seen 
that,  in  various  cases,  the  good  design  of  a  favorable 
issue  is  declared  in  connection  with  the  assurances 
and  descriptions  of  punishment.  And  in  all  cases, 
where  the  design  of  punishment  is  explained,  it  is 
shown  to  be  in  the  spirit  of  God's  universal  father- 
hood, and  his  desire  for  the  best  ultimate  good  of  his 
children.  But  it  is  gloriously  true,  that  the  broad 
gospel  testimonies  of  the  work  and  the  purpose  of  the 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  445 

Saviour's  mission,  are  not  associated  with  the  subject 
of  punishment ;  and  that  for  the  plain  reason,  that  it 
is  not  the  design  of  his  mission  to  save  men  from 
deserved  punishment.  The  church  in  its  defection 
from  the  purity  of  the  gospel,  has  been  chiefly  con- 
cerned, not  for  purification  from  sin,  but  for  dodging 
its  consequences.  Salvation  from  punishment  is  the 
leading  thought ;  and  they  have  shaped  a  theory 
of  gospel  redemption  in  accordance  with  this  thought. 
In  the  Catholic  Church  there  are  convenient  devices 
to  this  end,  of  penances,  auricular  confessions,  abso- 
lution, <fec.,  all  to  facilitate  the  enjoyment  (!)  of  sin 
and  the  shirking  of  the  punishment.  There  is,  how- 
ever, some  little  expense  attached  to  these  expe- 
dients, and  the  Protestants  who  retain  the  substance 
ot"  Romanism  while  changing  the  form,  calculate  upon 
the  substitution  of  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  made 
available  to  them  by  their  faith  in  the  same,  as  exon- 
erating them  from  the  punishment  of  their  sins.  And  it 
is  because  the  mind  of  our  learned  friend  has  been  so 
habitually  occupied  with  this  theory  of  salvation  from 
our  just  deserts,  that  it  appears  to  him  so  note-worthy 
that  the  passages  which  Univer^idists  look  to  as 
proofs  of  their  faith  do  not  treat  of  salvation  from 
punishment. 

But  the  question  will  be  pressed,  and,  Dr.  A.  has 
so  frequently  made  reference  to  it  in  his  "  Argument,'7 
we  deem  it  expedient  to  give  it  a  passing  notice7 
whether  the  vicarious  atonement,  or  substitutional 
suffering  of  Christ,  is  not  a  Scriptural  doctrine.  If 
not,  what  mean  such  Scripture  testimonies  as  these  ? 


44G  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

"  All  we,  like  sheep,  have  gone  astray,  but  the 
Lord  hath  laid  on  him  the  iniquities  of  us  all ;"  "  He 
died  for  us,  the  just  for  the  unjust,  that  he  might 
bring  us  to  God  ;"  "  He  bore  our  sins  in  his  own 
body  on  the  tree."  What  mean  these  Scriptures  ?  I 
answer,  they  mean  what  they  say.  Christ  bore  our 
sins,  he  suffered  and  died  for  us.  But  there  is  an 
utter  difference  in  principle  between  one's  suffering 
for  another  in  the  prosecution  of  a  work  for  the 
other's  good,  and  being  punished  instead  of  another 
as  a  vicar  or  substitute.  Washington  suffered  for 
his  country.  He  bore  his  country's  sufferings  and 
sorrows.  And  if  he  had  died  in  battle  at  the  hand 
of  the  enemy  in  prosecuting  his  country's  cause,  he 
would  have  died  for  his  country.  But  this  would 
have  been  utterly  different  in  principle  from  what  it 
would  have  been  for  Washington  to  have  been  taken 
by  his  own  government,  the  American  Congress,  and 
hanged  as  a  spy  instead  of  Major  Andre,  to  let  the 
guilty  one  go  clear.  (Such  a  transaction  would 
have  honored  no  law,  human  or  Divine.  It  would 
have  been  a  supreme  violation  and  contempt  of  all 
true  law.)  And  there  is  the  same  difference  in  prin- 
ciple between  the  sense  in  which  Christ  suffered  for 
us  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  that  assumed  by 
the  vicarious  theology.  "  He  suffered  for  us,"  not 
that  he  might  purchase  for  us  impunity  for  sin,  but 
"  that  he  might  bring  us  to  God."  It  was  the  pur- 
pose of  his  mission  to  draw,  or  reconcile,  all  men  to 
God  ;  to  raise  them  out  of  ignorance,  darkness,  un- 
reconciliation,  sin  and  death,  and  elevate  them  in 


REPLY  TO   DR.  ADAMS.  447 

spirit  to  the  communion  and  likeness  of  God.  And 
that  love  which  is  attested  and  sealed  by  his  suffer- 
ings and  death,  is  the  attracting  and  assimilating 
power  by  which  this  recovery  and  spiritual  elevation 
shall  be  effected.  So  it  is  every  where  represented 
in  the  Scriptures. 

But  there  is  a  key  text  at  hand,  which  opens  to 
view  the  sense  in  which  Jesus  bore  our  sins.  See 
Matt,  viii,  16,  17.  "  When  the  even  was  come,  they 
brought  unto  him  many  that  were  possessed  of 
demons ;  and  he  cast  out  the  spirits  with  his  word, 
and  healed  all  that  were  sick ;  that  it  might  be  ful- 
filled which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the  prophet,  say- 
ing, Himself  took  our  infirmities  and  bare  our  sick- 
nesses." How  did  Jesus  fulfil  the  saying,  "  Himself 
bare  our  sicknesses?"  Was  it  by  becoming  sick  in 
their  stead  ?  When  he  met  persons  sick  of  a  fever, 
did  he  have  the  fever  transferred  to  his  own  bod}', 
and  become  sick  of  a  fever  as  a  substitute  ?  When 
he  found  the  blind,  deaf,  dumb,  lame,  epileptic  and 
insane,  did  he  become  blind,  deaf,  dumb,  lame,  epilep- 
tic and  insane  in  their  stead  ?  Is  this  the  manner  in 
which  he  fulfilled  the  saying,  "  Himself  bare  our 
sicknesses  ?"  Never.  How  then  ?  Our  key  text 
explains  it,  "  He  healed  all  that  were  sick,  that  it 
might  be  fulfilled  which  was  spoken  by  Esaias  the 
prophet,  saying,  Himself  took  our  infirmities  and 
bare  our  sicknesses,"  He  bore  their  sicknesses  by 
love  and  sympathy,  and  taking  on  himself  the  charge 
of  the  case,  and  the  mission  of  healing.  The  mother 
bears  the  sickness  of  her  child;— not  by  becoming 


448  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

sick  in  the  child's  stead.  That  would  do  the  child 
no  good.  She  would  not  be  able  to  bear  the  sickness 
of  the  child  if  she  were  not  well  herself.  She  bears 
the  child's  sickness  in  sympathy ,  and  care,  and  the 
appliance  of  means  for  its  restoration. 

Now  as  the  saying  was  fulfilled,  "  Himself  bare  our 
sicknesses,"  by  healing  their  sicknesses,  so  he  fulfils 
the  saying,  "  He  bore  our  sins/'  or  our  spiritual  dis- 
orders, by  healing  us  of  sin.  "  Thou  shalt  call  his 
name  Jesus,  for  he  shall  save  his  people  from  their 
sins."  And  all  his  labors  and  sufferings,  even  unto 
death,  in  the  prosecution  of  this  great  work,  are  for 
us,  performed  and  borne  on  our  account.  But  he 
gives  us  no  impunity  for  sin.  We  must  ourselves 
bear  the  condemnation  and  all  the  evils  of  sin  while 
we  continue  in  sin.  And  Jesus  saves  us  from  con- 
tinued condemnation,  only  by  leading  us  out  of  the 
moral  condition  which  involves  condemnation.  "  He 
shall  save  his  people  from  their  sins."  "  There  is, 
therefore,  now  no  condemnation  to  them  that  are  in 
Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after 
the  spirit."  And,  speculate  ever  so  much  about  sub- 
stitutions, there  is  no  way  to  become  free  from  con- 
demnation, but  to  be  made  free  from  the  law  or  power 
of  sin  and  death,  by  the  law  or  power  of  the  spirit  of 
life  in  Christ  Jesus.  And  when  this  conformity  to 
the  law  of  the  spirit  of  life  takes  place,  there  is  no 
law  that  can  condemn  us.  The  law  is  then  honored 
and  fulfilled  in  and  by  us,  and  there  is  no  demand  for 
a  substitute  to  receive  the  strokes  of  vengeance  in 
our  stead  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  law. 


EEPLY   TO  DR.   ADAMS.  449 

But  when  our  opponent  represents  this  theory, 
which  shows  all  the  perfections  of  God  in  beautiful 
harmony,  and  the  scheme  of  Christian  salvation  in 
harmony  with  all,  as  involving-  the  idea  that  we  pro- 
cure salvation  by  our  own  merits  or  sufferings,  he 
speaks  without  clear  perceptions  of  the  subject.  And 
this  he  does  allege.  He  saysr 

There  is  no  adequate  necessity  for  a  divine  Saviour  with  his 
vicarious  sacrifice,  if  there  he  no  penalty  annexed  to  the  law  of 
God.  Every  man  is  then  his  own  redeemer,  either  by  obedience- 
or  by  suffering. 

By  penalty  he  means  endless  punishment ;  but  h© 
should  not  seek  covertly  to  give  the  impression  to 
his  readers,  that  by  denying  endless  punishment,  we 
deny  all  punishment,  and  thus  annul  the  penalty  of 
the  law.  But  it  is  true  that  our  view  of  the  Divine 
government  as  prosecuting  a  wise  and  benevolent 
system  of  law  and  judgment,  and  promise  and  grace, 
does  not  present  a  necessity  for  a  vicarious  sacrifice, 
in  the  trinitarian  sense  of  the  word.  Nevertheless, 
the  Doctor's  inference  is  not  correct,  that  "  every 
man  is  then  his  own  redeemer,  either  by  obedience 
or  by  suffering."  We  often  hear  substantially  the 
same  objection  flippantly  urged  to  our  theory  of 
God's  perfect  retributive  government  rendering  to 
every  man  according  to  his  deserts, — in  words  liko 
these, — "Then  salvation  is  not  of  grace;  the 'sinner 
will  demand  admittance  to  heaven  as  a  right,  having- 
served  out  his  term  of  punishment."  These  argu- 
ments appear  exceedingly  puerile  to  one  who  is  well 
read  in  the  Scripture  teachings  of  the  work  and 
38* 


450  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

purpose  of  grace  in  Christ  Jesus.  The  mistake  all 
proceeds  from  the  fabricated  theory  above  exploded, 
that  Christian  salvation  is  salvation  from  incurred 
punishment.  When  the  mind  is  saturated  with  this 
error,  knowing  nothing  of  the  scheme  of  grace  but 
salvation  from  punishment,  it  appears  to  be  a  matter 
of  course  that  if  sinners  are  made  to  suffer  the 
punishment  of  their  sins,  there  is  nothing  for  them  to 
be  saved  from,  they  work  out  their  claim  to  heaven 
by  punishment. 

In  the  same  false  view  of  the  Divine  administration, 
the  question  is  emphatically  propounded,  "  If  men 
must  suffer  the  punishment  of  their  own  sins,  of  what 
use  is  a  Saviour?"  Permit  me  to  reflect  the  wisdom 
of  this  question  in  another  application.  If  the  sick 
man  must  suffer  the  pain  and  inconvenience  of  his 
own  sickness,  of  what  use  is  a  physician  ?  Why,  you 
will  answer,  this  circumstance  renders  the  service 
of  the  physician,  or  some  means  of  healing,  of  the 
greater  importance  to  the  patient.  If  he  could  be 
sick,  and  some  other  person  suffer  all  the  pain  in  his 
stead,  being  selfish,  he  might  be  indifferent  about 
being  healed.  But  the  fact  that  he  must  suffer  the 
evil  of  his  own  sickness,  renders  it  the  more  impor- 
tant to  him  to  have  his  disease  removed,  that  he  may 
be  freed  from  his  sufferings.  So  the  fact  that  men 
must  suffer  the  punishment  of  their  own  sins,  renders 
it  a  matter  of  peculiar  personal  interest  to  them  to  be 
healed.  And  every  religious  teacher  ought  to  under- 
stand that  sin  is  the  curse  of  human  life  ;  that  it  is  a 
lost  estate,  a  state  of  poverty,  perishing,  famine, 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  451 

drought,  disease,  death.  And  he  who  is  raised  from 
this  degradation,  and  delivered  from  this  curse,  by 
the  spirit  of  truth  and  love  through  Jesus  Christ, 
feels  even  more  deeply  impressed  with  the  merits 
of  that  grace  which  has  saved  him,  for  the  realization 
of  the  fact  that  when  he  was  in  unbelief  and  sin  he 
suffered  its  evils. 

But  they  who  ignore  the  perfection  of  God's  moral 
government  to  the  rendering  of  every  man  according 
to  his  work,  in  order  to  find  place  for  their  artificial 
scheme  of  salvation  by  grace,  making  it  to  be  absolu- 
tion from  punishment,  must  strike  out  a  large 
portion  of  the  sacred  record.  This  doctrine  of  strict 
moral  accountability  is  prominent  in  the  Bible  from 
beginning  to  end,  and  it  is  in  perfect  harmony  with 
the  gospel  doctrine  of  grace.  For  the  things  which 
are  inflicted  or  bestowed  as  the  reward  of  our  works, 
are  not  the  things  which  are  "  not  according  to  our 
works,  but  according  to  the  purpose  and  grace  of  God 
given  us  in  Christ  Jesus  before  the  world  began," 
and  "  brought  to  light  through  the  gospel.*'  The 
subject  is  a  simple  one.  If  a  father  governs  his 
children  in  part  by  means  of  rewards  and  chastise- 
ments, and  in  due  time  puts  them  in  possession  of  the 
gift  of  a  life  estate,  will  they  say  that  this  estate  is 
not  a  gift,  because  they  received  chastisements  in 
their  childhood?  Verily,  "  the  wisdom  of  the  world 
is  foolishness  with  God." 

In  further  proof  of  the  doctrine  that  judgment 
is  put  off  to  the  end  of  Messiah's  reign,  and  that 
its  decisions  shall  bind  sinners  to  an  eternal  neces- 


452  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 


sity    nf    sinning,   Dr.    A.   quotes   and   comments   as 
follows  :  — 

At  the  very  close  of  the  Bible,  we  read,  "He  .that  is  unjust  let 
him  be  unjust  still,  and  he  that  is  filthy  let  him  be  filthy  still  ;  and 
he  that  is  righteous  let  him  be  righteous  still,  and  he  that  is  holy 
let  him  be  holy  still."  As  the  "unjust"  and  "filthy"  never  could 
be  directed  to  refrain,  in  this  world,  from  efforts  to  become  good, 
(unless  their  day  of  grace  were  past)  these  words  are  obviously  a 
declaration  that  character  is  unchangeable  after  death. 

The  Doctor  goes  on,  not  to  explain,  but  to  declaim, 
on  the  absence  of  all  intimation  of  mercy  and  salva- 
tion beyond  the  judgment  announced  by  these  "  clos- 
ing words  of  the  Bible." 

Now  this  is  an  instance  in  which  duty  requires  us 
to  be  fraternally  faithful,  and  "  reprove  and  rebuke 
with  long-suffering  and  doctrine."  When  we  shall 
have  acquainted  our  readers  with  all  the  circum- 
stances connected  with  the  introduction  of  this  pas- 
sage here,  and  the  manner  of  it,  they  will  see  it.  to  be 
a  remarkable  specimen  of  forensic  sang  froid.  The 
circumstances  to  which  we  refer  are  the  following  :  — 
Dr.  Adams,  last  spring,  delivered  and  published  a  ser- 
mon on  the  "  Reasonableness  of  Future,  Endless 
Punishment."  We  reviewed  that  sermon  in  our  col- 
umns, and  at  the  close  addressed  a  note  to  the  Doctor 
which  originated  this  discussion  of  the  "  Scriptural- 
ness  of  Future,  Endless  Punishment."  In  that  sermon 
he  brought  forward  this  passage  from  the  last  chapter 
of  Revelation,  in  the  same  manner  and  application  as 
above.  In  our  review  of  the  sermon,  which  he  of 
course  read,  we  treated  his  use  of  this  passage  in  the 
following  manner  : 


3EPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  453 

"  We  have  seen  how  extremely  reckless  he  is  in  his 
use  of  the  other  passage,  Eccl.  ix.  10,  making  it  deny 
all  human  immortality ;  and  now  we  shall  see  that  his 
use  of  Rev.  xxii.  11,  is  no  less  faulty.  And  it  is  hard- 
ly enough  to  say  that  it  is  faulty.  It  is  reprehensible. 
In  some  men  such  a  use  of  this  passage  would  be  no 
more  than  faulty.  But  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  that 
a  gentleman  of  the  talent,  education,  and  theological 
enterprise  of  Dr.  Adams,  could  innocently,  and  with- 
out guile,  make  the  use  he  does  of  this  and  the  other 
passage  of  the  sacred  record.  In  the  case  now  before 
us  he  attempts,  in  the  outset,  to  impose  on  his  hear- 
ers the  impression  that  the  idea  of  its  announcing  a 
finality  is  involved  in  the  place  which  this  passage 
occupies  in  the  Bible,  it  being  among  its  "  closing 
words."  There  is  not,  in  any  point  of  view,  any 
weight  in  this  argument,  if  argument  it  may  be  call- 
ed. The  sense  of  the  passage  is  to  be  gathered,  not 
from  its  locality  in  the  compilation  of  sacred  books, 
but  from  its  expression,  and  the  subject  to  which  it 
refers.  But  as  a  matter  of  fact  we  will  say,  that  it  is 
not  a  settled  point  among  the  learned,  that  the  book 
of  Revelation  was  the  latest  written  of  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament.  Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  who  is  second 
to  no  one  in  profundity  of  Biblical  lore,  assures  us 
that  "  the  most  respectable"  external  evidence  assigns 
the  date  of  Revelation  to  a  time  before  the  destruction 
of  Jerusalem  ;  that  is,  before  the  year  70.  Whereas 
some  of  the  Christian  critics  of  the  early  ages  assign 
to  the  Gospel  of  John  as  late  a  date  as  A.  D.  98.  But 
we  will  not  multiply  words  on  this  point.  The  fact 


454  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

that  the  Council  which  compiled  tho  books  of  the 
New  Testament  placed  revelation  at  the  last  end  of 
the  volume  affects  not  the  meaning  of  any  passage  in 
it.  We  will  look  at  the  passage  in  its  expression,  and 
its  connections. 

Dr.  Adams  gives  out  the  words  of  the  passage  in 
question,  as  the  words  which  shall  announce  the  final 
decision  of  the  final  judgment,  announcing  the  ulti- 
mate doom  of  mankind.  Is  it  so  ?  It  seems  almost 
like  children's  play  to  be  in  a  colloquy  which  requires 
the  starting  of  such  a  question.  The  passage  does 
not  admit  of  any  such  construction.  It  is  an  outright 
wresting-  of  the  Scripture  to  drag  it  into  such  an  ap- 
plication. The  following  is  the  passage  entire  : — 
"  And  he  saith  unto  me,  Seal  not  the  sayings  of  the 
prophecy  of  this  book ;  for  the  time  is  at  hand.  He 
that  is  unjust  let  him  be  unjust  still ;  and  he  which  is 
filthy  let  him  be  filthy  still ;  and  he  that  is  righteous 
let  him  be  righteous  still ;  and  he  that  is  holy  let  him 
be  holy  still.  And  behold,  I  come  quickly,  and  my 
reward  is  with  me,  to  give  every  man  according  as  his 
work  shall  be." 

Now,  whatever  may  be  the  time  and  occasion  of 
this  coming  of  the  Son  of  man  to  judgment,  it  is  seen 
that  the  words,  "  He  that  is  unjust  let  him  be  unjust 
still,"  are  not  here  written  as  the  award  of  that  judg- 
ment, but  as  descriptive  of  a  state  of  things  to  pre- 
cede it.  "  Seal  not  the  sayings  of  the  prophecy  of 
this  book  ;  for  the  time  is  at  hand. — He  that  is  unjust 
let  him  be  unjust  still,  and  behold  I  come  quickly,  and 
my  reward  is  with  me."  What  that  reward  should  be 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  455 

is  not  here  defined.  But  the  fact  described  by  the 
saying,  "he  that  is  unjust  let  him  be  unjust  still/'  is 
the  continuance  of  things  as  they  were  until  he 
should  come  in  the  judgment  referred  to. 

Suppose  a  father  has  been  sometime  absent  from 
his  family  in  a  distant  land,  having  left  the  children 
with  certain  rules  of  order.  He  hears  that  there  is 
insubordination  and  evil  in  the  family,  and  he  writes 
to  his  son  whom  he  has  appointed  supervisor,  enjoin- 
ing upon  him  not  to  employ  undue  rashness  in  his 
efforts  to  subdue  the  unruly.  "  If,"  he  says,  "  any 
will  be  unruly,  in  spite  of  your  reasonable  efforts,  you 
should  let  it  be  so  ;  and  let  the  obedient  be  obedient  j 
and  I  shall  come  home  quickly  and  discipline  the  of- 
fenders, and  establish  order."  Then  suppose  one  of 
the  would  be  leaders  among  the  children  should  get 
hold  of  that  letter,  and  of  this  clause  in  particular, 
and  thus  harrangue  the  family  :  — "  Our  father  is  com- 
ing home  shortly,  and  he  says  that  it  will  be  his  judg- 
ment that  the  children  who  have  been  disorderly  shall 
be  always  disorderly,  shall  never  love  or  obey  him,  but 
shall  make  disorder  and  crime  their  life-employment." 
This  interpretation  of  the  father's  letter  does  not  set 
the  father  before  the  family  in  a  very  honorable  light, 
and  they  demand  to  read  the  letter  for  themselves. 
With  what  a  look  of  contempt  would  they  frown  upon 
the  arrant  expounder  on  perusing  the  document ;  and 
if  he  had  a  sense  of  propriety  left,  with  what  shame 
would  he  shrink  away."  (See  Christian  Freeman  of 
June  25th,  1858.) 

And  now,  after  all  this7  our  friend  comes  to  us  with 


458  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

an  article  written  expressly  for  our  paper,  thmsting 
forward  this  passage  in.  the  same  way  and  manner, 
without  deigning  to  attempt  any  sort  of  argument, 
just  as  if  his  use  of  it  were  unquestionably  correct. 
He  pays  iio  attention  to  the  fact  which  we  adduced, 
that  John  was  directed,  and  that  over  again  here  at 
the  clos«  of  his  series  of  visions,  not  to  seal  the  say- 
ings of  die  prophecies  of  this  book,  because  the  time 
of  tlseir  fulfilment  was  at  hand  —  the  scenes  repre- 
sented in  the  visions  being  about  to  -open  m  the  line 
•of  fulfilment;  and  that  the  say  ing,  "  He  that  is  unjust 
let  him  be  urajust  still,"  related  to  a  suspension  of  ef- 
fective gospel  operations  for  a  tim<e  before  the  coming 
of  Christ  in  th<3  judgment  referred  to  in.  verse  12, 
His  coarse  reminds  us  of  what  the  sacred  historian 
says  of  {jrallio  on  a  different  occasion,  that  he  "  cared 
for  none  of  these  things."  Does  he  presume  that  his 
hearers  and  readers,  generally,  "  care  for  none  of 
these  things  ?77 

But,  in  respect  to  our  former  reply  to  our  worthy 
friend's  use  of  this  passage,  we  do  not  ascribe  his 
utter  inattention  to  its  facts  and  reasonings  to  inten- 
tional discourtesy  toward  us,  or  disrespect  to  ward  the 
Scriptures,  but  rather  to  a  consciousness  of  danger  to 
his  argument  in.  case  of  his  turning  asido  from  his 
accustomed  way,  to  attend  to  new  considerations. 

With  regard  to  the  announcement  in  this  place, 
that  the  Lord  had  "  sent  his  angel  to  show  unto  his 
servants  the  things  that  must  shortly  be  done;''  that 
the  prophecies  of  this  book  were  not  to  be  sealed 
because  "  tke  time  was  at  hand ;"  and  that  he  that  was 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  457 

unjust  should  be  unjust  still,  and  the  Lord  would 
come  quickly ;  we  see  not  how  any  attentive  Bible 
student  can  fail  to  perceive  that  it  all  refers  to  the 
coming  of  Christ,  and  the  concomitant  judgment,  at 
the  end  of  the  Jewish  age,  of  which  the  Scriptures 
have  so  fully  informed  us.  With  regard  to  the  unjust, 
and  the  righteous  also,  remaining  for  the  time  being 
as  they  were,  it  is  a  very  impressive  description  of 
the  facts  of  that  period  of  time.  On  pages  208-211 
•  of  this  Discussion,  we  have  adduced  the  "  most 
respectable  testimony'  of  ecclesiastical  historians 
and  Biblical  critics  for  this  book's  having  been  writ- 
ten just  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  ;  and  we 
have  brought  to  view  the  internal  evidence  of  the 
book  itself  to  concur  with  the  external  evidence  in 
making  it  a  settled  question.  And  with  regard  to 
the  continuance  of  the  determined  enemies  of  the 
gospel,  as  a  general  rule,  in  their  blindness  and 
perversity,  through  the  events  of  that  period,  the 
inspired  teachers  repeatedly  mentioned  it,  earlier 
than  the  date  of  the  book  of  Revelation.  Jesus  said 
to  the  Jews,  "  0  that  thou  hadst  known,  even  thou 
at  least  in  this  thy  day,  the  things  that  belong  to  thy 
peace  ;  but  now  they  are  hid  from  thine  eyes."  And 
St.  Paul  said,  "Blindness  in  part  is  happened  unto 
Israel,  until  the  fulness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in." 
And  especially  when  the  Revelator  had  his  visions, 
as  the  dissolution  of  their  church  and  polity  was  just 
at  hand,  the  prevalence  of  war,  persecution,  and  ten 
thousand  evils,  was  such,  that  the  most  which  could 
be  expected  was  to  hold  the  true  servants  of  Jesus  in 


458  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

their  fidelity;  there  could  not  be  any  new  conver- 
sions made  to  the  Christian  cause  from  the  banded 
foes  of  the  truth.  This  is  clearly  the  fact  signified  by 
the  words  of  the  angel,  "the  time  is  at  hand: — he 
that  is  unjust  let  him  be  unjust  still ;  and  he  that  is 
righteous  let  him  be  righteous  still ;  and  behold  I 
come  quickly ;  and  my  reward  is  with  me  to  give 
every  man  according  as  his  work  shall  be."  (See 
again  Matt.  xvi.  27,  28 ;  xxiv.  29-34 ;  Luke  xxi. 
20-32.)  But  it  is  not  the  purpose  of  Messiah's  judg- 
ment, to  sanctify,  immortalize,  and  eternize  the  reign 
of  darkness  and  sin.  To  "  make  an  end  of  sin  "  is  the 
purpose  of  his  mission. 

Dr.  A.  proceeds  to  another  collect  of  fragmentary 
Scripture  quotations  with  the  view  to  favor  his  posi- 
tion. Most  of  these  scraps  of  texts  we  have  had  in 
other  parts  of  his  "  Argument/'  and  have  explained 
them  by  their  connections.  This  collect  of  isolated 
phrases  he  introduces  in  these  words  ; — "  Mark  the 
altered  language,  and  different  tone  and  manner,  of 
the  Saviour  toward  the  wicked  in  the  other  world.'' 
The  new  selections  are  these :  "  Shut  to  the  door ;" 
"Depart  from  me  ;"  "  Bind  him  hand  and  foot ;" 
"  Thrust  out ;"  "  Be  cast  away  ;"  "  Salted  with  fire," 
which  is  a  part  of  a  passage  before  explained,  refer- 
ring to  the  fire  of  the  valley  of  Hinnom ;  "  Grind  him 
to  powder  ;"  "  Slay  them  before  me."  Of  course  the 
Doctor  might  as  well  have  quoted  any  other  isolated 
phrases  and  parts  of  phrases  as  spoken  of  the  wicked 
in  the  other  world ; — such  as,  "  Let  him  that  is  on 
the  house  top  not  come  down ;"  "  Cast  him  forth  into 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS. 


the  sea  ;"  "  We  are  cut  off  for  our  parts  ;"  "  Hide 
thy  face  from  us  ;"  "  Much  more  the  wicked  and  the 
sinner  "  "  shall  be  recompensed  in  the  earth  ;"  "  They 
have  rebelled  against  me  ;"  "  Go  and  do  thou  like- 
wise;" "  These  (when  ye  shall  see  Jerusalem  com- 
passed with  armies,  Luke  xxi.  22,)  be  the  days 
of  vengeance,"  Acres  of  paper  might  be  covered 
with  this  sort  of  promiscuous  reprint  of  detached 
Scripture  phraseology  to  no  edification.  These  quo- 
tations transcribed  above  from  the  Doctor's  "Argu- 
ment," the  reader  will  find  by  perusing  them  in  their 
connections,  are  abstracted  from  parables  which 
relate  to  the  coming  of  the  Gentiles  into  the  gospel 
kingdom  while  the  Jews,  as  a  people,  would  be  out- 
casts ;  and  in  general  to  the  same  vengeance  spoken 
of  in  the  last  quoted  passage,  "  These  be  the  days  of 


vengeance." 


And  here  are  the  rest  of  the  Doctor's  new  selec- 
tions in  this  department : — "  Wrath  to  come.'*  This 
was  spoken  to  the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  by  John 
the  Baptist,  when  he  saw  them  coming  to  his  bap- 
tism ;  "Who  hath  warned  you  to  flee  from  the  wrath 
to  come?"  Dr.  Clarke  justly  explains  this  wrath 
to  come,  or  about  to  come,  as  follows ;  "  The  deso- 
lation which  was  about  to  fall  on  the  Jewish  nation 
for  their  wickedness,  arid  threatened  in  the  last  words 
of  their  own  Scriptures."  It  is  described  more 
definitely  by  our  Lord,  in  the  passage  which  we 
quoted  above  in  part ;  "  For  these  be  the  days  of  ven- 
geance, that  all  things  which  are  written  may  be 
fulfilled.  But  wo  unto  them  that  are  with  child,  and 


460  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

to  them  that  give  suck  in  those  days ;  for  there  shall 
be  great  distress  in  that  land,  and  ivratli  upon  this 
people"  But  our  friend  finds  the  words,  "  wrath  to 
come/?  and  he  cares  not  to  look  farther.  And  his 
next  fragment  is,  "  Torment  us  before  the  time  ;"  a 
part  of  the  words  used  by  the  maniac  among  the 
tombs,  speaking  for  the  demons  that  he  imagined 
dwelt  in  him,  saying  to  Jesus,  "Art  thon  come  to 
torment  us  before  the  time  ?'7  obviously  referring  to 
periodical  turns  of  severer  paroxysms  of  mania  and 
suffering,  which  he  was  fearful  that  the  presence 
of  Jesus  would  hasten  before  the  usual  time.  Next, 
•'  Reap  corruption."  This  is  a  part  of  a  sentence 
from  Paul,  "  He  that  soweth  to  the  flesh  shall  of  the 
flesh  reap  corruption  f  proving  that  men,  while  in 
the  flesh,  reap  the  bitter  fruits  of  their  service  of 
fleshly  lusts, — as  the  same  apostle  describes  it  in  Bom, 
i.  27,  "  receiving  in  themselves  that  recompense  of 
their  error  which  was  meet/'7  But  our  friend  wanted 
this  testimony  for  the  next  world  j  and  what  law 
of  Scripture  exegesis  does  he  recognize  which  should 
restrain  him  from  so  using  it  ?  Again,  the  Doctor  7— 
"  The  wages  of  sin  is  death/7  Indeed,  but  there  is 
deliverance  from  this  death  '7  for  John  says,  "  We 
know  that  we  have  passed  from  death  (in  sin)  unto 
life,  because  we  love  the  brethren.'7  "  You  hath  he 
quickened,  who  were  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins." 
Yet  again ;  "  More  tolerable  for  Sodom  in  the  day  of 
judgment."  This  phraseology  was  spoken  by  our 
Lord,  {Matt.  x.  15,  and  other  places,}  of  those  cities 
of  Israel  which  should  reject  his  gospel  and  persecute 


REPLY  TO  DR.  ADAMS.  461 

his  disciples.  It  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  the  land 
of  Sodom  than  for  that  city.  Of  course  temporal 
judgments  were  referred  to,  for  lands  and  cities  are 
not  to  be  raised  in  the  resurrection.  Both  in  prophecy 
and  history  the  calamities  on  Jerusalem  and  the 
cities  of  Judea,  are  represented  as  exceeding  in 
severity  all  that  had  befallen  any  other  city,  or 
nation.  This  appears  to  be  the  sentiment  of  our 
Lord's  words  before  us.  Dr.  Clarke  on  this  passage, 
notwithstanding  he  needed  Dr.  Adams'  use  of  it  for 
his  creed's  sake,  could  not  shut  his  eyes  to  the  plain 
truth  in  the  case,  and  he  comments  thus : — "  In  the 
day  of  judgment,  or  pwmskmeni,  kriseos.  Perhaps 
not  meaning  the  day  of  general  judgment,  nor  the  day 
of  the  destruction  of  the  Jewish  state  by  tJie  fiomanSj 
but  a  day  on  which  God  should  send  punishment  on 
that  particular  city,  or  on  the  person,  for  their  crimes. 
So  the  day  of  judgment  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  was 
the  time  when  the  Lord  destroyed  them  by  fire  and 
brimstone  from  the  Lord  out  of  heaven."  The  future 
tense  employed  by  our  Lord,  "  it  shall  be  more  toler- 
able for  the  land  of  Sodom  in  the  day  of  judgment 
than  for  that  city,"  was  the  most  convenient  method 
of  throwing  the  calamities  of  Sodom  into  contrast 
with  those  which  were  to  come  on  the  other  cities 
spoken  of;  as  if  he  had  said,  so  much  more  terrible 
shall  be  the  judgment  from  God  upon  the  cities  of 
Israel,  that  the  judgment  which  desolated  Sodom 
shall  appear  more  tolerable  in  comparison. 

And  yet    another   Scripture   fragment   from    Dr. 
A. — "  I   will  laugh   at  your   calamity  ;  I   will  mock 
39* 


462  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

• 

when  your  fear  cometh."  This  is  the  address  of 
wisdom  personified,  to  the  foolish,  written  in  Prov.  i. 
How  true  is  it  that  when  a  young  man  disregards  the 
counsels  of  wisdom,  and  gives  himself  up  to  vice  and 
folly,  or  to  the  indulgence  of  any  appetite  or  passion 
in  a  hurtful  manner,  until  he  finds  himself  experimen- 
tally a  victim  of  suffering,  he  can  not  at  his  own 
pleasure  will  himself  into  a  state  of  freedom  from  the 
long  accumulating  evils.  His  desires  for  the  serene 
comforts  and  enjoyments  which  habitual  temperance 
and  virtue  should  have  yielded  are  for  a  time  unavail- 
ing, which  fact  is  expressed  by  the  saying  of  the 
slighted  wisdom  personified,  "  I  will  laugh  at  your 
calamity."  The  idea  is  further  developed  in  verses 
30,  31 ; — "  They  would  none  of  my  counsel ;  they 
despised  all  my  reproof.  Therefore  shall  they  eat  of 
the  fruit  of  their  own  way,  and  be  filled  with  their  own 
devices."  This  is  a  principle  of  common  observation 
and  experience  under  the  Divine  administration. 
Nevertheless,  a  long  and  faithful  course  of  reform 
will  gradually  extirpate  the  evil,  and  supplant  it  with 
good.  But  they  must  experience  the  painful  neces- 
sity of  eating  the  fruit  of  their  own  devices. 

It  is  far  from  a  harmless  error,  to  give  such  a 
passage  as  this,  "  I  will  laugh  at  your  calamity,"  a 
literal  construction,  with  a  personal  application  to 
our  heavenly  Father,  as  expressing  his  spirit  and 
conduct  towards  his  children  in  distress,  and  that 
even  through  eternity.  And  the  same  irreverence 
and  dishonor  towards  God  is  involved  in  the  use 
made  by  our  friend  of  the  words  of  Paul,  "  It  is  a 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  463 

fearful  thing  to  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  living 
God  j" — «  For  our  God  is  a  consuming  fire."  The 
application  of  this  to  the  event  of  falling  into  God's 
more  immediate  presence  beyond  death,  to  make  that 
a  dreadful  and  fearful  thing,  has  been  a  cruel  source 
of  agony  to  millions  of  sick  and  dying  men,  women 
and  children,  even  of  the  best  characters,  when 
Christian  truth  would  have  enabled  them  to  cast 
themselves  confidingly  upon  the  bosom  of  the  Fath- 
er's love.  Literally,  we  are  in  the  hand  of  God 
always.  "  In  him  we  live,  and  move,  and  have  our 
being."  St.  Paul,  in  the  chapter  in  which  those 
words  occur,  Heb.  x.,  was  treating  on  a  temporal 
calamity,  which  was  seen  to  be  then  "  approaching.'7 
(Verse  25.)  The  obvious  meaning  is,  that  it  was  a 
fearful  thing  to  fall  under  the  retributive  judgment 
of  God.  The  chapter  explains  itself. 

Two  passages  more  complete  the  list  of  Dr.  A.'s 
proof  texts  adduced  in  this  division ;  two  more,  we 
mean,  which  have  not  been  found  and  explained  in 
other  parts  of  the  discussion.  "Who  have  fled  for 
refuge  to  lay  hold  on  the  hope  set  before  us."  (Heb. 
vi.  18.)  The  saints  of  old  familiarily  spoke  of  God  as 
their  "  refuge  and  strength,  a  very  present  help  in 
trouble."  And  the  soul  of  every  enlightened  believer 
in  the  gospel  now,  thrills  to  the  description  given  by 
St.  Paul  in  connection  with  the  above  quoted  frag- 
ment, of  the  permanency  of  the  Christian  faith, 
resting  on  "  two  immutable  things,"  the  promise  and 
oath,  "  in  which  it  was  impossible  for  God  to  lie,"  so 
that  "  we  might  have  strong  consolation  who  have 


464  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

fled  for  refuge  to  lay  hold  upon  the  hope  set  before 
us;  which  hope  we  have  as  an  anchor  of  the  soul, 
both  sure  and  steadfast."  But  neither  through  this 
promise,  nor  oath,  nor  steadfast  hope,  does  the  en- 
lightened Christian  see  anything  of  Future,  Endless 
Punishment." 

One  text  more  : — "  What  shall  it  profit  a  man,  if  he 
should  gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  his  own  soul  ? 
or  what  shall  a  man  give  in  exchange  for  his  soul?" 
(Matt.  xvi.  26  ;  Mark  viii.  3G.  37.)  We  have  long  en- 
tertained  and  expressed  the  conviction,  that  no  edu- 
cated man  can,  in  this  time  of  extensive  Biblical  dis- 
cussion and  criticism,  innocently  use  this  text  as  a 
proof  of  future  endless  punishment.  And  now  what 
shall  we  say  ?  We  feel  grieved.  We  are  sorry  that 
the  Doctor  has  used  the  passage  in  this  manner,  for 
we  are  pained  to  think  of  a  Christian  teacher  whom 
we  respect  so  sincerely,  as  trifling  with  the  Scrip- 
tures, and  with  the  understandings  of  men.  He 
knows  that  the  same  original  word  is  twice  used  iu 
the  preceding  verse,  with  which  this  is  expressly  or 
grammatically  connected  by  the  conjunction  for, 
where  it  is  rendered  life,  and  cannot  be  taken  to  mean 
anything  but  the  animal  life  ; — thus  : — "  For  whoso- 
ever will  save  his  life  shall  lose  it ;  but  whosoever 
shall  lose  his  life  (psuke)  for  my  sake  and  the  gospels', 
shall  save  it.  For  what  shall  it  profit  a  man,  if  he 
should  gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  his  own  (psuke) 
life?"  None  will  assume  that  the  word  psuke  in  the 
26th  verse  means  the  immortal  resurrection  state  of 
man, — that  whosoever  will  seek  to  save  his  immortal 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  465 

existence  shall  lose  it.  All  will  agree  that  Jesus  de- 
signed to  teach  his  disciples  that  if,  in  the  approach- 
ing critical  times,  any  of  them  should  seek  to  save 
their  lives,  or  escape  temporal  dangers,  by  apostacy, 
they  would  by  this  very  means  be  thrown  into  the 
greatest  dangers,  and  expose  themselves  to  the  loss 
even  of  life.  And  then  this  verse  quoted  by  the  Doc- 
tor is  simply  a  quotation  made  by  Jesus  of  a  common 
Jewish  maxim,  for  illustrating  the  importance  of  the 
admonition  of  the  preceding  verse.  It  was  a  common 
saying  among  the  Jews,  against  the  folly  of  rashness, 
"  What  is  a  man  profited  if  he  gain  the  whole  world, 
and  lose  his  own  life  ?"  The  idea  is,  that  as  it  is  the 
leading  object  of  men's  labors  to  provide  for  the  sup- 
port and  comfort  of  life,  to  throw  away  their  lives  by 
rash  exposure  is  extremely  unwise.  And  surely,  by 
quoting  this  Jewish  saying  to  illustrate  the  point  of 
his  own  admonition  to  his  disciples  against  an  expedi- 
ent for  saving  their  life  which  would  more  likely  ex- 
pose them  to  the  loss  of  it,  Jesus  did  not  change  the- 
sense  of  the  maxim. 

There  is  no  need  of  our  referring  to  any  learned 
authority  to  confirm  our  position  here,  for  it  rests  on 
the  simple  facts  of  the  record,  which  every  educated 
man  knows,  and  almost  every  uneducated  man  also, 
so  familiarly  have  these  facts  been  brought  out  in  re- 
ligious discussion.  But  we  will,  nevertheless,  quote 
the  words  of  comment  on  Matt.  xvi.  26,  by  that  Bibli- 
cal critic  of  eminent  learning,  Dr.  Adam  Clarke.  He 
says,  "  On  what  authority  many  have  translated  the 
word  yw  in  the  25th  verse,  life,  and  in  this  verse, 


466  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

soul,  I  know  not ;  but  am  certain  it  means  life  in  both 
places.  If  a  man  should  gain  the  whole  world,  its 
riches,  honors  and  pleasures,  and  lose  his  life,  what 
would  all  these  things  profit  him,  seeing  that  they 
can  only  be  enjoyed  during  life  ?" 

Dr.  Adams,  in  a  place  responded  to  by  us  on  pages 
405-8  of  this  discussion,  expresses  wonder  that,  if  the 
doctrine  of  endless  punishment  is  not  taught  in  the 
Scriptures,  it  should  have  got  into  the  church,  and 
especially  that  it  should  be  retained  by  so  many  good 
and  learned  men  to  this  day.  But  I  think  that  most  of 
our  readers  will  agree  in  the  remark,  that  when  one 
good  and  learned  man  has  seriously  advanced  such 
Scripture  texts  in  proof  of  "  Future,  Endless  Punish- 
ment/' there  is  no  longer  any  wonder  that  thousands 
of  others  should  do  likewise. 

"After  this  the  Judgment" 

There  is  one  passage  which  Dr.  Adams  has  not 
quoted,  but  which,  nevertheless,  we  will  briefly  notice 
here,  because,  by  force  of  popular  usage,  it  has  ob- 
tained a  place  in  many  minds  as  a  proof  of  a  post  mor- 
tem day  of  judgment.  By  this  means  we  shall  also 
accommodate  a  friend  who  has  written  us  a  request 
that  we  explain  this  text.  The  passage  referred  to  is 
Heb.  ix.  27.  '  "And  as  it  is  appointed  unto  men  once 
to  die,  but  after  this  the  judgment."  But  this  is  only 
a  part  of  the  sentence,  and  makes  no  sense  of  itself. 
It  is  only  the  first  factor  of  a  comparison.  "And,  as 
it  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  bnt  after  this 


REPLY  TO   DR.    ADAMS.  467 

the  judgment  " —  well,  what  is  as  it  is  appointed  unto 
men  once  to  die,  and  after  this  the  judgment  ?  It  is 
this,  viz :  "  so  Christ  was  once  offered  to  bear  the  sins 
of  many."  What  death,  and  the  death  of  what  men, 
has  Paul  been  speaking  of  in  this  connection,  and 
what  entering  into  judgment  after  this, —  as  figurative 
of  Christ's  being  once  offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many, 
and  then  entering  into  heaven  itself,  and  thence  ap- 
pearing without  a  sin-offering  unto  salvation  ?  Read 
the  whole  chapter  with  care,  and  you  will  see  that 
the  subject  of  the  apostle  throughout  is  the  Mosaic 
sacrifices,  particularly  the  high  priest  entering  once  a 
year  into  the  holy  of  holies  with  the  blood  of  sprink- 
ling, as  prefiguring  Christ's  offering  himself  once  for 
all,  and  with  his  own  blood  entering  into  heaven  itself, 
there  to  appear  in  the  presence  of  God  for  us.  And 
the  holy  of  holies  into  which  those  men  officiat- 
ing in  the  priestly  office  entered  after  the  sacrifice 
in  the  outer  court,  is  what  is  here  meant  by  the  judg- 
ment. Turn  to  Exodus  xxviii.  29,  30.  '•  And  Aaron 
shall  bear  the  names  of  the  children  of  Israel  in  the 
breast-plate  of  judgment  upon  his  heart,  when  he 
goeth  in  unto  the  holy  place  ;  .  .  .  .  and  Aaron  shall 
bear  the  judgment  of  the  children  of  Israel  upon  his 
heart  before  the  Lord  continually."  Hence  it  is  seen 
that  the  men  unto  whom  it  was  appointed  once  to  die 
(that  is,  to  die  by  proxy  in  the  sacrifice  slain  in  the 
outer  court,  which  was  accepted  as  the  death  of  these 
men,  and  who  after  this  entered  into  the  place  of 
judgment,  bearing  the  judgment  of  the  children  of 
Israel,)  were  the  men  in  the  priestly  office,  And  in 


\     468  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

the  original  of  this  passage  in  Hebrews,  as  our  friend 
well  knows,  the  article  is  placed  before  men.  u  And 
as  it  is  appointed  (tois  anthropois)  unto  the  men,"  thus 
designating  the  particular  men  of  whom  he  had  been 
speaking  as  offering  the  blood  of  sprinkling  typ- 
ically,—  as  it  is  appointed  by  arrangement  of  the  cer- 
emonial law,  unto  these  men  to  die  once  every  time, 
which  was  once  a  year,  to  represent  their  own  death 
in  that  of  the  sacrifice,  and  after  this  go  for  the  people 
into  the  place  of  judgment,  and  thence  appear  again 
unto  the  people  with  the  announcement  of  their  cere- 
monial justification,  so  Christ  was  once  offered,  not  by 
the  proxies  of  bulls  and  goats  (v.  12,)  but  in  person, 
with  his  own  blood,  to  bear  the  sins  of  the  many,  and 
to  them  that  look  for  him,  to  them  who  seek  unto  him, 
will  he  appear  a  second  time,  spiritually,  without  a 
sin-offering,  (as  the  word  here  rendered  sin  often 
means)  unto  salvation.  This  is  the  privilege  of  the 
true  believer,  to  enjoy  communion  with  the  presence 
of  our,  high  Priest  above,  "  who  knows  how  to  be 
touched  with  the  feelings  of  our  infirmities." 

Such,  we  think,  every  candid  and  attentive  Bible 
student,  on  studying  this  chapter,  will  see  to  be  the 
sentiment  of  the  passage  in  question.  He  will  see 
that  the  natural  death  of  man  as  a  species,  and  a  judg- 
ment after  that  for  adjudication,  are  not  matters 
introduced  here  at  all,  as  they  are  never  denoted  as 
figures  of  Christ's  sacrificial  death,  and  subsequent 
exaltation. 


REPLY  TO   DR.   ADAMS.  469 


Extent  of  Gospel  Provision. 

In  an  ingenious  effort  to  give  a  quietus  to  the  ques- 
tion, "How,  allowing  endless  retribution  to  be  a 
Scriptural  doctrine,  can  you  have  peace  of  mind  in 
your  belief?"  Dr.  Adams  answers  as  follows  : 

We  believe  that  no  one  will  perish  who  does  not  reject  the  Sa- 
viour of  the  world ;  or,  if  he  be  a  heathen,  does  not  sin  against  light 
and  conviction  sufficient  to  save  him. 

It  has  an  effect  to  quiet  our  minds  when  we  reflect  that  our 
thoughts  and  feelings  at  the  loss  of  the  soul  were  surpassed  in 
Him  whose  soul  for  us  was  exceeding  sorrowful  even  unto  death. 
Tears  were. shed  by  him  over  sinners  :  "  God  hath  laid  on  him  the 
iniquity  of  us  all."  If  the  thought  of  endless  retribution  is  so 
terrible  to  us  who  know  so  little  about  it,  we  are  constrained  to 
think  that  there  was  never  any  sorrow  like  unto  the  sorrow  of  him 
who  loved  us  and  gave  himself  for  us,  when  he  sees  that  he  must, 
nevertheless,  pronounce  upon  any  for  whom  he  died,  the  sentence 
of  that  everlasting  punishment  from  which  he  became  incarnate 
and  died  to  save  us. 

In  an  earlier  part  of  the  "  Argument '  he  had 
said : 

"  If  God  does  not  use  all  proper  means  here  to  gave  men,  how 
is  he  infinitely  merciful  ?  " 

Here  we  pause  to  inquire,  What  does  our  learned 
friend  mean  by  all  this  ?  What,  in  his  view,  1*5  the 
Divine  method  of  salvation?  In  the  economy  of 
grace  through  Jesus  Christ,  which  is  the  only  reveal- 
ed economy  of  salvation,  what  are  "the  proper  means 
to  save  men  ?" 

On  this  question  the  Doctor  has  more  recently 
given  the  public  an  exposition  through  another 


470  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

medium,  more  full  and  explicit  than  he  deigned  to 
give  us  in  the  "  Argument"  for  our  columns.  On 
Tuesday  evening,  Feb.  8th,  1859,  he  delivered  in  the 
Vestry  of  his  own  Church  a  "  Doctrinal  Lecture,"  on 
"  The  Certain  Perseverance  of  the  Regenerate."  In 
this  lecture,  as  reported  for  the  Boston  Daily  Tran- 
script, he  holds  the  following  sentiments  : — 

We  read  in  the  Bible  of  a  book  which  is  older  than  the  Bible 
itself.  It  is  mentioned  seven  times  in  Revelation,  and  once  in 
Philippians.  It  is  called  "  The  Lamb's  Book  of  Life."  It  is  said 
to  have  been  "written  from  the  foundation  of  the  world."  When 
it  is  called  "  The  LamUs  book,"  the  meaning  is,  it  contains  the  re- 
sults of  the  work  of  redemption.  The  Lamb  is  said  to  be  "  slain 
from  the  foundation  of  the  world ;"  that  is,  the  government  of  the 
world  began  with  the  atonement  in  view.  It  was  the  same  as 
though  Christ  had  been  crucified  from  the  beginning  ;  sins  were 
forgiven,  from  the  first,  on  the  ground  of  his  sufferings  and  death. 

Some  of  the  passages  which  speak  of  this  Book  of  Life  distinct- 
ly assert  that  all  will  not  be  saved.  Now,  is  this  record  of  those 
who  will  be  saved  a  mere  historical  record,  or  is  it  a  decretive 
enactment  ?  Plainly  the  latter.  The  mere  record  of  those  who 
were,  of  their  own  unassisted  choice,  to  be  saved,  would  not 
amount  to  anything.  The  book  might  as  well  be  written  the  day 
after  the  judgment  as  from  the  beginning  of  time,  if  it  were  a 
mere  historical  account. 

In  the  universal  aberrance  of  man  from  God,  he  has  proposed 
to  make  many  willing — a  multitude  which  no  man  can  number. 
He  will  effect  their  salvation.  But  how?  First — Through  re- 
generation ;  and  secondly — By  warnings,  promises,  threatenings — 
treating  them  as  subjects  of  motives,  not  of  force.  Though 
"  another  book  was  opened"  at  the  judgment,  before  the  seer's  eye, 
"  which  is  the  book  of  life,"  yet  he  says,  "  the  dead  were  judged 
out  of  the  things  which  were  written  in  the  books  according  to  their 
works"  The  book  of  life,  tliougli  written  first,  will  correspond 


HEPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  471 

exactly  to  the  reports  of  the  historical  records  of  men's  lives,  as  a 
ledger  contains  the  exact  summing  up  of  entries  made  in  a  day- 
book through  years. 

This  is  explicit,  The  method,  and  the  only  method 
of  salvation  is,  God's  regenerating  men  by  his  spirit, 
and  making  them  willing,  and  holding  them  by  his 
power  within  the  circle  of  such  influences  as  shall  in- 
fallibly carry  them  through  to  the  final  heaven.  All 
whom,  before  the  world  was,  he  wrote  in  the  book  of 
life,  he  will  thus  save.  For  the  others,  of  course, 
there  is  no  way  of  salvation.  Consequently  the  Doc- 
tor accuses  God,  by  his  own  showing,  of  unmerciful 
dealing  with  his  children.  For  he  says,  "  If  God 
does  not  use  all  proper  means  here  to  save  men," 
speaking  of  the  class  of  men  who,  he  supposes,  are 
to  be  ultimately  cast  off,  "  how  is  he  infinitely  merci- 
ful?" The  only  "proper  means  to  save  men/'  ac- 
cording to  his  showing,  is  the  exertion  upon  them  of 
God's  regenerating  spirit  as  above  described.  There 
is  no  such  means  employed  in  relation  to  the  non- 
elect,  and  of,  course  no  proper  means  at  all.  Nor  has 
our  friend,  in  point  of  fact,  any  such  expedient  as  he 
has  "propounded,  for  molifying  his  own  grief  for  the 
finally  lost,  viz :  the  contrast  of  it  with  the  greater 
grief  of  the  Son  of  God  for  their  rejection  of  his 
provisions  of  grace  for  them, — -seeing  that  there 
never  was  any  provision  of  grace  in  him  for  those 
whose  names  were  not  written  before  the  world  was, 
in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life.  And  this  same  theory  of 
salvation,  though  seldom  propounded  of  late  with  the 
boldness  of  Dr.  Adams,  is  necessarily  involved  in  the 


472  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

Confession  of  Faith  of  all  the  reputed  Orthodox 
churches.  Consequently  the  honied  words  which  we 
hear  from  the  ministers  of  those  churches,  of  God's 
love  to  all  men  as  manifested  in  Christ  Jesus,  and  the 
provisions  of  grace  in  him  for  the  salvation  of  all,  and 
his  yearning  over  them  with  a  Father's  solicitude  for 
their  ultimate  good,— these  loving  words,  I  say,  while 
they  indicate  what  these  teachers  think  the  gospel 
should  be,  yet  come  from  the  bosom  of  the  creed  as 
incongruously  as  tropical  breezes  from  the  frigid  zone. 
What  does  our  esteemed  friend  mean  by  saying, 
that  no  one  will  perish,  that  is,  finally,  even  if  he  be 
a  heathen,  "  who  does  not  sin  against  light  and  con- 
viction sufficient  to  save  him?"  Does  he  believe 
that  any  person  will  attain  to  the  inheritance  of 
heaven  by  the  cultivation  and  improvement  merely 
of  his  own  natural  and  moral  faculties  ?  Not  he.  He 
says  in  his  lecture  as  quoted  above,  "  The  mere 
recording  of  those  who  were,  of  their  own  unassisted 
choice,  to.be  saved,  would  not  amount  to  any  thing." 
Suppose  that  a  company  of  heathens  sJiould  present 
themselves  at  the  gate  of  heaven,  asking  admission 
on  the  ground  that  they  had  done  respectably  well  in 
the  way  of  observing  the  laws  of  their  physical 
nature,  and  as  far  as  they  understood  them,  the  laws 
of  their  social  relations, — and  that  the  Judge  should 
refer  the  case  to  a  council  of  Augustinian  or  Calvin- 
istic  Doctors  of  Divinity.  Would  they  decide  that 
these  temperate  and  virtuous  heathen  were  proper 
subjects,  according  to  the  accepted  Canons,  for  ad- 
mission to  the  blessed  abode?  Not  they.  They 


KEPLY   TO   DR.  ADAMS.  473 

would  as  certainly  decide  that  those  heathen  moral- 
ists should  be  excluded  from  the  company  of  the 
redeemed  in  heaven,  as  the  council  of  "  The  World's 
Evangelical  Alliance  '  decided  to  exclude  from  their 
conclave  Unitarians  and  Universalists.  No  ;  accord- 
ing to  our  opponent's  theory,  there  is  no  way  pro- 
vided for  the  salvation  of  those  whom  God  shall  not 
be  pleased  to  regenerate  and  save.  We  can  see 
exposed  here  and  there,  all  through  his  protracted 
"  Argument/'  the  contortions  and  writhings  of  our 
benevolent  friend's  sensitive  soul,  at  the  grating- 
contact  with  his  moral  nature  of  this  iron  theory. 
The  idea  that  God  lias  created  countless  millions 
of  immortals  with  helpless  moral  natures,  and  a  de- 
termination not  to  help  them, — and  with  a  hereditary 
disease  which  shall  be  an  endless  protracted  agony, — 
this  idea,  I  say,  manifestly  troubles  him.  But  he 
labors  to  bend  his  "  natural  feelings  r  to  it,  and  he 
hopes  that,  when  he  comes  to  be  like  God,  and  see  as 
lie  sees,  his  moral  nature  will  be  toned  to  the  spirit 
of  the  terrible  economy.  But  it  will  be  unto  him  and 
his  kindred  theologians  a  joy  unspeakable  and  full 
of  glorv,  to  see  and  know  as  there  thev  will,  that  as 

v    /  *• 

the  heavens  are  higher  than  the  earth,  so  are  God's 
ways  higher  than  their  ways,  and  his  thoughts  than 
their  thoughts. 

Method  and  Consummation  of  Messiah's  Mission. 

We  spoke,  in  the  early  part  of  this  Chapter,  of  the 
INFINITE  MISTAKE,  of  taking  the  end  of  the 
Jewish  age,  in  the  numeroiis  and  explicit  Bible 


474  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION. 

descriptions  of  that  event,  to  be  the  end  of  the 
material  world ;  and  the  events  associated  with  the 
simultaneous  setting  up  of  Messiah's  kingdom,  to  be 
concomitants  of  the  end  of  his  reign.  The  first 
branch  of  this  hideous  mistake,  relating  to  the  end 
of  the  Jewish  age,  we  then  proceeded  to  correct  by 
authority  of  the  record ;  and  now,  in  bringing  this 
protracted  discussion  to  a  close,  we  will  correct,  by 
the  same  authority,  the  other  branch  of  the  mistake. 
The  two  branches,  however,  are  really  one  mistake  ; 
for  as  the  end  of  the  material  world  and  that  of  the 
mediatorial  reign  have  been  taken  to  be  simultaneous 
events,  the  transfer  to  the  end  of  the  material  world 
of  the  judgments  and  commotions  associated  in  the 
Scriptures  with  the  termination  of  the  Jewish  church 
and  polity,  and  the  connection  of  the  same  events 
with  the  termination  of  the  Messianic  age,  are  one 
and  the  same  error. 

We  have  shown  that  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and 
New  Testaments  abundantly  testify  of  a  notable  judg- 
ment, and  of  great  convulsions  affecting  the  world, 
and  especially  the  Jewish  people,  in  connection  with 
the  change  of  dispensations  ;  the  termination  of  the 
Old  and  the  inauguration  of  the  New ;  the  dissolution 
of  the  Mosaic  and  the  setting  up  of  the  Messianic 
reign.  We  will  now  call  attention  to  the  fact,  that 
there  is  nowhere  in  the  Scriptures  any  retributive  judg- 
ment, and  dispensation  of  rewards  and  punishments, 
associated  with  the  closing  up  of  the  work  of  Christ's 
mission,  or  the  consummation  of  the  Messianic  age. 
In  all  cases  where  the  Saviour's  mission  is  spoken  of 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  475 

as  a  whole,  in  its  specific  purpose  and  its  full  consum- 
mation, it  is  described,  not  as  tearing  dear  friends 
asunder  and  thrusting  them  apart  forever,  some  to 
endless  wickedness  and  woe, — but  as  terminating  all 
divisions,  all  alienations,  all  unreconciliation  and  sin, 
and  uniting,  harmonizing,  beatifying,  gathering  to- 
gether in  one,  and  in  harmony  with  the  spirit  of  God, 
all  rational  beings.  As  we  have  seen,  he  was  to 
bruise  the  serpent's  head.  (Gen.  iii.  15.)  The  con- 
summation of  this  work  will  exterminate  the  reign  of 
moral  evil,  and  leave  universal  good  in  harmony.  In 
the  covenant  of  his  grace,  the  Lord  God  purposed  to 
swallow  up  death  in  victory,  and  wipe  away  tears 
from  off  all  faces.  (Isa.  xxv.  8  ;  1  Cor.  xv.  54.)  Then 
there  will  be  no  more  death,  nor  sorrow,  nor  crying; 
no  more  wailing  and  gnashing  of  teeth.  Of  him  who 
gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all,  it  is  written  that  he 
shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied.  (1 
Tim.  ii.  6  ;  Isa.  liii.  41.)  And  to  see  of  the  travail  of 
one's  soul  to  entire  satisfaction,  is  to  accomplish  his 
purpose  and  realize  his  wishes.  Jesus  declared  that 
he  came  to  seek  and  to  save  that  wjiich  was  lost,  and 
represents  his  faithfulness  to  be  as  that  of  the  shep- 
herd who  will  never  abandon  his  pursuit  until  the  last 
lost  sheep  is  brought  home.  (Luke  xix.  10:  xv.  3-6.) 
St.  John  declares,  (1  John  iii.  8,)  "  For  this  purpose 
the  Son  of  God  was  manifested,  that  he  might  destroy 
the  works  of  the  devil. "  On  the  consummation  of 
this  purpose  sin  will  cease  to  be,  to  alienate  men 
from  God  or  from  one  another.  St.  Paul  says,  (Eph. 
i.  9,  10,)  that  God  hath  "  made  known  unto  us  the 


476  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

mystery  of  his  will,  according  to  his  good  pleasure 
which  he  hath  purposed  in  himself,  that  in  the  dispen- 
sation of  the  fulness  of  times  he  might  gather  to- 
.  gether  in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are  in 
heaven  and  which  are  on  earth,  even  in  him."  Here 
is  the  revelation  of  a  purpose  of  God,  which  he  hath 
purposed,  not  in  any  fallible  agency  which  should 
leave  it  at  loose  ends,  but  in  himself;  that  is,  in  a 
reliance  on  his  own  efficiency  for  its  consummation. 
And  this  purpose  is,  the  gathering  together  in  one  in 
due  time,  of  all  things,  or  moral  beings,  in  the  light 
and  spirit  of  Christ. 

But  not  unduly  to  protract  this  labor  by  the  multi- 
plication of  Scripture  testimonies  to  this  point,  we 
will  make  it  suffice  to  adduce  one  other  which  was 
of  course  brought  to  notice  in  our  Chapter  on  the 
resurrection,  pages  323-4.  When  all  who  die  in 
Adam  shall  be  made  alive  in  Christ,  in  spiritual 
bodies,  in  incorruption,  in  power,  in  glory,  "  Then 
cometh  the  end/'  not  the  end  of  the  Jewish  age,  but 
of  the  Messianic  age,  the  ultimatum  of  the  Saviour's 
mission, — "  when>  he  shall  have  delivered  up  the  king- 
dom to  God,  even  the  Father ;  when  he  shall  have 
put  down  all  rule,  and  all  authority  and  power."  No 
Satan's  kingdom  then,  holding  rule,  authority  and 
power,  over  a  full  moiety  of  the  moral  universe. 
When  Christ  resigns  the  mediatorial  reign,  he  will 
have  accomplished  its  purpose,  and  put  down,  de- 
stroyed, all  rule  but  his  own,  and  all  authority  and 
power,  leaving  no  vestige  of  truth  in  Dr.  A.'s  assump- 
tion, "  that  some  proportion  of  pain  and  misery  will 


REPLY   TO   DR.   ADAMS.  477 

forever  exist  under  the  government  of  God."  Bless- 
ed be  God,  no :  Christ  will  make  no  compromise 
with  evil.  He  will  not  share  with  Satan  the  throne 
of  eternity ;  but  he  will  resign  to  the  Father  a  vic- 
torious reign,  and  he  himself,  as  the  Head  of  every 
man,  be  subject  to  him  who  put  all  things  under  him, 
that  God  may  be  all  in  all.  (1  Cor.  xv.) 

Dr.  Adams,  having  enumerated  certain  descriptions 
of  vile  persons,  says  under  his  first  proposition,  "  He 
who  will  say  that  such  persons  as  are  here  described 
meet  in  death  with  a  change  of  character  which  pre- 
pares them  at  once  for  happiness,  may  as  well  assert, 
once  for  all,  that  delusion  is  practised  upon  us  by 
the  representations  of  the  Bible."  My  dear  friend  ; 
we  do  not  ascribe  to  death  the  power  to  work  this 
glorious  moral  regeneration.  Death  dissolves  the 
"  earthly  house  of  this  tabernacle,"  with  its  appetites 
and  acquired  habits.  It  is  "  by  the  power  of  God," 
(Mark  xii.  24,)  through  him  who  is  "  the  resurrection 
and  the  life,"  that  we  shall  be  raised  into  a  higher 
life,  in  spiritual  bodies,  all  whose  passions  and  affec- 
tions shall  be  pure.  And  it  shall  be  by  the  knowledge 
of  God's  glorious  power,  which  will  have  been  effec- 
tively realized  in  the  process  of  our  translation,  and 
of  his  love,  which  shall  shine  to  our  clearer  spiritual 
vision  with  effulgence  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ, 
and  with  which  the  atmosphere  of  that  spirit-world 
shall  be  fragrant,  that  our  hearts  will  be  so  filled  with 
reverence  and  love  as  to  yield  no  room  for  unrecon- 
ciliation  and  sin,  but  glow. and  expand  in  adoration 
and  praise. 


478  THEOLOGICAL   DISCUSSION. 

If  our  friend  wishes  to  philosophize  on  this  subject, 

and  raise  difficulties  from  the  nature  and  relations  of 

• 

things  in  the  moral  system,  we  are  prepared  to  meet 
him.  If  he  will  explain  to  us  how,  on  principles  of 
moral  philosophy,  the  different  wings  of  the  "  Ortho- 
dox" church,  whose  religious  journals  are  bitterly 
accusing  each  other  of  "  falsehood/'  "  treachery," 
"  spite,"  "  malice/'  and  all  the  nameable  moral  obliqui- 
ties, can  be  prepared,  through  death  and  the  resur- 
rection, and  the  light  and  spirit  of  the  better  world, 
to  constitute  a  harmonious  and  happy  society  there, 
we  will  undertake  to  explain  for  all  the  rest  on  the 
same  principles.  For  it  will  require  a  greater  effort 
of  grace  to  eradicate  those  intellectual  and  religious 
animosities  which  are  ingrained  in  the  soul,  than  to 
remove  the  vicious  propensities  of  the  vulgar  herd, 
who  are  miserable  slaves  to  sensual  and  fleshly  appe- 
tites and  passions  which  they  unceasingly  deplore,  and 
which  cannot  obtain  in  the  new  man  in  Christ  through 
the  resurrection  of  the  dead. 

But  while  we  are  always  willing  to  subject  every 
principle  of  our  faith  to  the  strictest  scrutiny  of  phi- 
losophy, our  main  reliance  is  on  the  "  Scriptures  and 
the  power  of  God,"  leaning  upon  the  staff  of  him  who 
"  Believed  God,  and  it  ivas  accounted  unto  him  for 
righteousness."  And,  in  respect  to  its  regenerating 
and  practical  moral  influence,  we  will  trust  and  glory 
in  this  faith  of  God's  universal  Fatherhood,  and  of  a 
pure  immortality  for  our  race  through  Christ,  in  con- 
nection with  the  harmonious  and  beautiful  system  of 
Divine  moral  government  and  human  accountability, 
which  we  have  exhibited  in  this  discussion. 


REPLY  TO  DR.   ADAMS.  479 


Recapitulation. 

It  is  unnecessary  for  us  to  burden  our  book  or  the 
patience  of  our  readers  with  a  reprint  of  the  recapit- 
ulation which  Dr.  Adams  appends  to  his  "Argument/' 
and  a  repetition  of  comments  on  each  item,  inasmuch 
as  it  is  but  a  catalogue  of  "  the  principal  topics ' 
which  he  had  introduced,  all  of  which  we  have  pre- 
sented and  thoroughly  disposed  of  in  consecutive 
order  —  all  but  one.  This  one,  which  he  recapitulates 
here,  was  comprised  in  the  closing  paragraph  of  his 
fourth  proposition,  and  stands  there  in  these  words  : — 

It  being  frequently  argued  that  the  sins  of  a  finite  creature  can- 
not be  punished  forever,  because  a  finite  creature  cannot  merit 
infinite  punishment,  it  will  be  enough  to  meet  this,  in  passing, 
with  a  single  remark,  viz  :  That  if  this  be  so,  then,  even  if  the 
whole  universe  should  sin  forever,  the  whole  universe  cannot  be 
punished  forever,  because  the  whole  universe,  after  all,  is  but 
finite." 

In  putting  forth  this  argument,  our  friend  must 
have  had  some  confused  thought  in  his  mind  which 
was  without  form  and  void.  "We  can  discover  no 
point  to  it.  It  was  never  argued  that  if  a  finite  crea- 
ture should  sin  forever,  he  could  not  be  punished 
forever.  The  position  which  he  aimed  to  strike  but 
failed  to  conceive,  is  this, —  That  a  finite  creature,  for 
an  act  of  disobedience  in  the  infancy  of  his  being, 
does  not  justly  merit  endless  punishment.  And  this 
Dr.  A.,  and  his  fraternity  generally,  now  concede,  in 
that  they  assume  endless  sinning  as  the  ground  of 
endless  punishment.  The  argument,  therefore,  from 


480  THEOLOGICAL  DISCUSSION* 

\ 

the  consideration  of  disproportion  and  injustice, 
against  perpetuating  punishment  endlessly  in  the 
future  for  a  present  misdeed  of  a  finite  creature,  is 
not  touched  at  all  by  the  remark  which  our  friend 
thinks  is  "  enough  to  meet  it,"  viz  :  "  That  if  this  be 
so,  then,  even  if  the  whole  universe  should  sin  for- 
ever, the  whole  universe  cannot  be  punished  for- 
ever, because  the  whole  universe  after  all  is  but 
finite,"  Nothing  in  all  this  discussion  has  affected 
us  so  unpleasantly,  as  this  strange  lack  of  perception, 
on  the  part  of  our  learned  friend,  of  the  relation  of 
ideas.  Because  sin,  being  a  moral  disease  and  death, 
must  involve  the  misery  of  its  subject  as  long  as  he 
continues  in  it,  even  if  it  were  eternally,  it  does  not 
follow  as  a  legitimate  inference  that  for  the  mere  fact 
of  being  in  sin  to-day,  an  eternity  of  inflicted  misery 
is  incurred.  And  this  very  improvement  in  "  Ortho- 
doxy '  of  which  we  have  spoken,  making  endless 
sinning  the  plea  for  endless  punishment,  virtually  ex- 
plodes the  theory  of  a  day  of  judgment  at  the  end  of 
time,  to  adjudicate  endless  punishment  on  men  for 
the  sins  of  this  life*  Light  is  breaking  in  upon  the 
minds  of  those  whom  ecclesiastical  authority  has  long 
imprisoned,  and  is  verifying  the  beautiful  language 
of  prophecy  ;  "  The  people  which  sat  in  darkness  saw 
great  light;  and  to  them  which  sat  in  the  region  and 
shadow  of  death,  light  is  sprung  up." 


APPENDIX. 


SINCE  the  closing  up  of  the  "  Discussion,"  which 
occupies  the  foregoing  pages,  the  conduct  of  Dr. 
Adams  has  been  such  in  relation  to  it  as  subjects  our 
deep  seated  respect  for  his  motives,  and  confidence  in 
his  religious  integrity,  to  a  severe  and  unpleasant 
test.  He  declined  making  any  rejoinder  to  our  Reply. 
He  would  not  attempt  to  prove  in  fault  any  of  our 
argumentative  disproofs  of  his  uses  of  the  sacred 
Word,  —  expositions  and  arguments  which  are  judged 
by  great  numbers  of  the  most  learned  and  pious 
theologians  in  our  country  to  show  conclusively  that 
the  doctrine  of  endless  punishment  is  not  taught  in 
the  Bible.  Though  his  Argument  for  Endless  Punish- 
ment was  written  expressly  at  our  request,  for  our 
columns  as  a  part  of  a  discussion  with  us,  and  he  was 
not  ignorant  that  the  publication  of  the  whole  to- 
gether in  book  form  would  furnish  the  reading  public 
in  all  future  time  with  more  ample  means  for  judging 
understandingly  of  the  relative  merits  of  our  labors 
and  our  theories,  and  the  evidence  and  nature  of 
Christian  truth, — yet  he  employed  the  menaces  of  a 
worthless  ex-post  facto  copy-right,  and  his  earnest 
personal  remonstrances,  to  deter  us  from  binding  up 
the  two  parts  of  the  Discussion  together,  to  the  latter 
of  which  in  our  delicate  regard  for  his  feelings,  we 
wrongly  yielded  in  the  publication  of  our  own  edition 
of  the  book  ;  yet  he  forthwith  published  his  part  in 


482  APPENDIX. 

a  separate  tract,  and  has  since  procured  it,  with  others 
of  his  tracts,  to  be  published  by  Gould  and  Lincoln 
in  book  form,  just  as  if  he  regarded  it  unquestionably 
true,  when  he  knows  that  he  has  not  the  power  to 
vindicate  a  single  position  in  it  from  the  annulling 
force  of  the  arguments  in  reply. 

We  are  aware  that  this  style  of  expression,  to  one 
who  will  take  no  pains  to  acquaint  himself  with  the 
facts  in  the  case,  may  appear  egotistical ;  but  we  ap- 
peal to  all  men  who  care  sufficiently  for  the  truth  to 
examine  this  Discussion  with  care,  that  we  speak  only 
in  the  modesty  of  reverence  for  God's  word.  We 
put  in  no  claim  of  self-ability ;  but  we  do  know  that 
holy  men  of  old,  who  spake  as  they  were  moved  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  have  used  language  which  is  suscep- 
tible of  being  understood,  and  we  speak  for  the  sim- 
plicity and  force  of  truth. 

Turn,  for  instance,  to  Dr.  A's  fifth  Proposition,  on 
the  Curse  of  the  Law,  and  then  to  Chap.  iv.  of  the 
Reply.  When  we  read  his  proposition  and  argument 
on  this  point,  we  were  confident  that  he  had  entirely 
overlooked  the  language  of  Moses  in  Deut.  xxix.,  and 
Lev.  xxvi.,  describing  certain  temporal  calamities 
and  declaring  them  to  comprise  all  the  curses  written 
in  the  book  of  the  Laiu,  and  to  be  reformatory  in  their 
designs  ;  and  we  believed,  in  our  charity,  that,  on 
having  his  attention  called  to  these  Scriptures,  and 
to  the  philological  argument,  he  would  withdraw  that 
proposition  from  any  subsequent  edition  of  his  docu- 
ment. But  he  cares  for  none  of  these  things.  He 
republishes,  in  different  forms,  and  sends  abroad  as 
widely  as  possible,  his  bold  position,  knowing  that  it 


APPENDIX.  483 

directly  gives  the  lie  to  the  explicit  declarations  of 
God's  word.  It  pains  us  to  make  these  statements  ; 
but  duty  to  our  opponent,  respect  for  the  Bible,  and  a 
sincere  regard  for  the  religious  interests  of  the  com- 
munity, compel  us  to  do  so.  It  is  a  plain  case,  and 
we  challenge  the  severest  scrutiny. 

Besides  this  persistent  disregard  of  the  facts  and 
arguments  of  the  negative  part  of  the  Discussion,  in 
the  republication  of  his  decisively  revealed  errors 
without  correction,  the  same  willingness  to  mislead 
the  public  in  respect  to  these  matters  is  clearly 
evinced  in  the  following,  which  we  transfer  from  the 
columnvS  ot  the  Christian  Freeman  of  April  8th,  1859. 

DR.  ADAMS   AT  HOME. 

OUR  respected  friend,  Rev.  Dr.  Adams,  as  our  read- 
ers have  seen,  chooses  not  to  make,  in  our  columns, 
any  rejoinder  to  our  part  of  the  late  discussion 
between  him  and  us,  —  that  is,  our  "  Review"  of  his 
"  Argument  for  the  Scripturalness  of  Future,  Endless 
Punishment."  But  it  will  be  interesting  to  the  public 
to  be  posted  up  in  his  outside  movements  in  relation 
to  this  matter. 

Well,  on  Tuesday  evening.  March  8th,  Dr.  Adams 
delivered  in  his  Vestry  a  "  Doctrinal  Lecture,"  which, 
throughout,  had  reference  to  this  discussion,  though 
it  does  not  appear  from  the  report  of  it  in  the  papers 
that  he  made  direct  quotation  from  us  bat  in  one 
instance.  The  report  in  the  Boston  Evening  Tran- 
script, of  March  10th,  represents  him  as  thus  opening 
and  proceeding  to  prosecute  the  business  of  his 
lecture : 


484  APPENDIX. 

"  Coming  now,  in  course,  to  the  subject  of  Future  Retribution, 
the  lecturer  said  that,  instead  of  repeating  the  familiar  arguments 
on  the  subject,  he  would  show  the  manner  in  which  those  argu- 
ments are  sometimes  answered.  Using  many  of  the  common 
replies  against  endless  retribution,  he  would  undertake  to  show 
that  there  could  not  be,  and  that  there  was  not,  a  Deluge,  such  as 
we  find  described  in  Genesis. 

First,  he  quoted  the  express  declarations  of  Scripture,  predicting, 
and  then  describing,  Noah's  deluge ;  then,  the  Saviour's  allusion 
to  it,  and  two  express  declarations  of  it  by  Peter.  Quoting  John 
Foster's  words  about  the  proof  texts  of  endless  punishment,  he 
said,  "it  must  be  admitted  that  these  passages  are  formidably 
strong, — so  strong  that  it  must  be  an  argument  of  extreme  cogency 
that  would  authorize  a  limited  interpretation."  But  adopting  the 
Universalist's  argument  against  endless  punishment,  he  would 
show  that  the  paternal  character  of  God  made  it  impossible  that  he 
should  destroy  the  whole  human  family,  (except  eight.)  Would  a 
human  father  do  so  ? 

Think  of  pictures  in  our  shop  windows  of  a  father  destroying 
his  whole  family,  except  two  or  three,  whom  with  partiality  he 
saves.  People  could  not  endure  such  a  sight. 

It  will  be  seen  by  this  that  Dr.  A.  has  been  goaded 
up,  by  what  has  recently  transpired,  into  a  state  of 
feeling  which  seeks  relief  to  itself  in  an  effort  at 
irony.  We  think  that  we  know  how  to  appreciate 
and  enjoy  a  fitting  and  well  directed  stroke  of  irony, 
even  if  we  be  made  the  butt  of  it.  But  when  one,  in 
such  an  effort,  must  begin  by  misrepresenting  the 
position  of  his  opponent,  and  proceed  by  utterly 
changing  the  issue,  his  satire  degenerates  into  mock- 
ery. And  such  is  decidedly  the  character  of  our 
friend's  home-effort  before  us. 

1 .  That  his  parallelism  affected  to  be  drawn  from 
the  account  of  the  deluge,  may  have  any  applicability 
to  our  theory  of  Moral  and  Scriptural  argument  ex- 


APPENDIX.  485 

hibited  in  the  "Discussion,"  it  must  be  shown  that  we 
have  adopted  a  position  which  assumes  or  implies  that 
men  are  competent  judges  of  the  best  means  to  be 
employed  by  the  great  and  good  Father  for  the  high- 
est ultimate  good  of  his  children,  —  that  if  God  is  a 
father,  he  must  employ  just  such  a  manner  of  govern- 
ment, just  such  incidents  of  providence,  just  such 
forms  of  discipline,  as  an  earthly  parent  would  employ 
in  his  dealings  with  his  children.  And  Dr.  Adams, 
in  imposing  upon  his  people  this  affected  argumentum 
ad  absurdum,  this  pretended  parallel  of  our  theory 
of  Scripture  exposition,  virtually  ascribes  to  us  such 
a  position,  and  thus  raises,  in  toto,  a  false  issue.  And 
this  he  does  knowingly.  We  convicted  him  of  this 
ruse  in  our  "  Discussion,"  and  set  forth  in  a  distinct 
and  comprehensible  manner  what  is  the  real  point  at 
issue  between  him  and  us  ;  that  it  is  not  a  question 
of  means,  but  of  ends  : — that  we  assume  not  to  judge, 
and  hold  no  sentiment  which  involves  so  absurd  an 
assumption  as  to  judge,  what  means  infinite  wisdom 
may  choose  for  the  promotion  and  ultimate  accomplish- 
ment of  his  good  purposes.  But  of  moral  principles, 
involving  the  nature  of  final  results,  we  do  assume  to 
be  judges.  And  without  such  judgment  we  are  utter- 
ly incapable  of  forming  a  true  moral  character,  or  of 
praising  and  worshipping  God  in  spirit,  for  his  moral 
perfections. 

And  it  seems  that  our  Doctor  has  got  himself  into 
so  desperate  a  fervor  for  his  favorite  theology,  that  he 
boldly  enforces  love  and  worship  without  moral  appro- 
bation. He  says  in  the  "  Discussion,"  after  present- 
ing the  character  of  God  in  the  most  odious  light, 
not  as  he  is  represented  by  the  Scriptures,  but  by  the 


486  APPENDIX. 

Doctor's  misinterpretation  of  Scripture,  he  says; 
"  And  we  have  our  choice  to  love  and  serve  such  a 
God  as  this,  or  to  reject  him  and  take  the  consequen- 
ces/' This  love  and  worship  which  the  Doctor 
would  thus  enforce,  is  just  as  good  as  that  which  the 
Hindoos  devoted  to  their  Sivctj  or  the  Mexicans  to 
their  idols,  which  are  thus  described  by  the  historian  : 
"  They  represented  their  gods  under  the  most  de- 
testable forms  which  create  horror.  Serpents,  croco- 
diles and  tigers  decorate  their  temples."  The  devo- 
tions of  such  religionists  are  the  worship  of  power 
from  the  impulse  of  dread.  No,  dear  Doctor,  we  will 
ever  hate  the  satanic  spirit,  in  whatever  form  you 
may  present  it,  and  with  whatever  power  you  may 
clothe  it,  and  love  only  the  justice  of  wisdom  and 
goodness  ;  —  and  we  will  "  take  the  consequences," 
which  are  the  sweet  approval  and  rich  communion  of 
the  spirit  of  Jesus,  who  teaches  us  that  "  the  hour  is 
coming,  and  now  is,  when  the  true  worshippers  shall 
worship  the  Father  in  spirit  and  in  truth." 

"We  repeat,  the  controversy  between  us  is  not  on 
means,  but  ends ;  not  on  the  specific  and  preparatory 
forms  of  the  Divine  administration,  but  on  the  princi- 
ples and  purposes  of  the  Divine  government.  And 
these,  God  has  made  it  our  duty  to  study  and  judge, 
that  we  may  be  reconciled  to  him,  and  love  and  praise 
him  in  the  spirit  and  understanding. 

Of  the  nature  of  moral  qualities  we  must  judge,  or 
we  cannot  live  and  act  as  moral  beings.  Love,  as  a 
moral  principle  and  affection,  necessarily  involves  an 
interest  and  desire  for  the  good  of  its  objects.  This 
we  know.  And  this  moral  affection  of  love  is  the 


APPENDIX,  487 

same  moral  quality  in  God  and  man.  So  says  the 
apostle.  "  He  that  loveth  is  born  of  God,  and  know- 
eth  God,  for  God  is  love."  "He  that  dwelleth  in 
love  dwelleth  in  God  and  God  in  him."  Therefore, 
knowing  that  our  love  to  our  children,  and  to  others, 
involves  a  desire  and  insures  a  purpose  and  work  on 
our  part,  to  the  extent  of  our  wisdom  and  power,  for 
their  good,  we  know  that  the  infinite  love  of  God,  by 
the  fellowship  of  which  our  love  is  inspired  and  en- 
larged, involves  a  desire,  and  a  purpose,  and  work,  to 
the  extent  of  his  infinite  wisdom  and  power,  for  the 
highest  good  of  all  its  objects,  which  are  all  his  off- 
spring. We  do  not  say  that  this  infinite  love  of  the 
Father  must  confer  the  highest  enjoyment  on  all  men, 
or  any  man,  at  the  present  moment,  which  might  be 
now  conferred  as  a  single  and  independent  aim, — but 
the  greatest  ultimate  good,  comprehending  the  whole 
sphere  of  existence  which  he  controls.  The  earthly 
father,  in  the  fulness  of  his  love,  sometimes  subjects 
his  children  to  trial,  discipline  and  pupilage,  with  ref- 
erence to  the  best  good  of  their  whole  life,  which 
does  not  contribute  to  their  immediate  happiness  ;  and 
which  even  the  children  at  the  time  regard  as  a  hard 
lot.  It  is  only  a  narrow  sphere  of  the  life  of  his 
children,  however,  that  the  earthly  parent  has  within 
his  disposing  power.  But  God  holds  all  nature  in  his 
hand,  and  all  the  forces  of  the  universe,  and  the 
whole  sphere  of  human  existence  for  time  and  eterni- 
ty. "  With  him  are  the  issues  of  life,"  and  he  "  has 
the  keys  of  death  and  hades."  It  is  the  choice  of  his 
infinite  goodness  and  the  plan  of  his  infinite  wisdom, 


488  APPENDIX. 

that  his  human  family  should  have  their  infantile  and 
initiatory  being  in  a  rudimental  state  like  this,  in  a 
compound  existence,  comprising  the  animal  and  spir- 
itual, the  lower  and  higher  natures.  And  for  Dr. 
Adams  to  daguerreotype  any  event  or  class  of  events 
in  this  rudimental  state,  such  for  instance  as  the  del- 
uge, and  to  assume  that  a  "father"  if  he  had  all  the 
wisdom  and  power  of  God  to  comprehend  and  control 
time  and  eternity,  would  not  "  do  so" — that  he  would 
not,  in  his  love,  subject  his  children  to  such  dispen- 
sations of  his  providence,  is  a  piece  of  presumption 
disrespectful  to  God,  and  without  authority  of  truth 
or  reason.  But  to  say  that  a  father  would  not  "  do 
so"  with  his  limited  capacities  and  powers,  is  to  say 
nothing  that  has  the  most  distant  or  feeble  bearing 
upon  the  real  question  at  issue  between  us  and  the 
Doctor,  which  is  the  benevolent  purpose  of  God  in 
these  and  all  the  dispensations  of  his  government. 

Dr.  Adams  derives  no  help  to  his  attempted  bur- 
lesque by  his  use  of  the  deluge,  more  than  he  may 
find  in  any  and  all  physical  death.  By  the  constitu- 
tion of  things  established  of  God,  all  men  must  die, 
the  virtuous  and  vicious.  But  an  earthly  father  will 
not  kill  his  children.  "  Therefore,"  this  is  the  rule 
of  our  opponent's  logic,  "  no  person  can  draw  any 
assurance  from  the  parental  character  of  God,  that 
his  government  aims  at  the  ultimate  good  of  any  soul 
he  has  made.7'  This  single  sentence  comprises  the 
sum  and  substance  of  the  whole  of  this  scheme  of 
nullifying  the  Universalist  moral  argument  against 
the  doctrine  of  endless  and  malignant  punishment,  by 


APPENDIX.  489 

offsetting  it  with  a  like  argument  against  the  fact  of 
the  deluge.  In  the  first  place,  as  we  have  shown,  it 
raises  a  false  issue,  by  substituting  means  for  ends  ; 
and  in  the  second  place  it  assumes  what  neither  he 
nor  any  other  man  can  shew  to  be  otherwise  than 
false  and  impious,  in  respect  to  the  character  and 
design  of  those  means.  It  assumes  that  the  drowning 
of  the  antediluvians  was  not  consistent  with  the 
goodness  of  God  toward  the  same  individuals, —  that 
is,  with  his  purpose  of  ultimate  good  for  them  with 
regard  to  the  whole  sphere  of  existence  allotted 
them. 

Dr.  Adams  says,  as  quoted  above,  "  Think  of  pic- 
tures in  our  shop  windows,  of  a  father  destroying 
his  whole  family  except  two  or  three,  whom  with  par- 
tiality he  saves.  People  could  not  endure  such  a 
sight."  Such  is  the  effort  of  tearing  down  faith  in 
God,  by  one  to  whose  office  it  belongs  to  "  vindicate 
the  ways  of  God  to  man.''7  Let  us  imagine  our  learned 
opponent  in  the  sick  room  of  a  lovely  child,  who  is 
looking  for  the  approach  of  death  with  a  peaceful 
trust  in  God.  The  dying  child  says  to  the  Doctor, 
"  I  know  I  shall  soon  die.  But  I  regard  this  event  as 
the  order  of  God's  wise  providence.  God  is  my 
Father ;  it  is  all  right ;  and  I  trust  in  his  fatherly 
love."  "  Ah,"  responds  the  grave  Doctor  to  the 
dying  child,  "  you  say  the  event  of  death  for  which 
you  are  looking,  is  an  order  of  God's  providence,  and 
yet  you  draw  assurance  of  ultimate  good  from  your 
view  of  God  as  a  Father.  Would  a  father  kill  his 
child  ?  How  would  you  endure  to  see  in  a  shop  win- 


490  APPENDIX, 

dow  the  picture  of  a  father  killing  his  child?  A  fig 
for  your  trust  in  God  as  a  father."  And  with  these 
words  the  Doctor  turns  upon  his  heels  and  leaves  the 
dying  child  to  himself,  or  to  better  comforters,  Let 
him  then  retire. 

But  our  opponent  has  no  reason  for  saying  that  a 
wise  and  good  father  would  not  pass  his  child  into 
the  sleep  of  death,  provided  lie  held  the  keys  of  death 
and  hades,  including  of  course  the  power  of  giving 
him  life  again,  and  that  in  a  better  state  and  constitu- 
tion. But  men  cannot  wisely  or  innocently  employ 
any  remedial  agents  but  what  are  within  their  own 
limited  sphere  of  control.  God,  within  the  compass 
of  whose  knowledge  and  control  are  all  means  and 
all  ends  for  time  and  eternity,  can  and  does  rightly 
and  benevolently  employ  means  in  the  administration 
of  his  government  the  wisdom  of  which  we  compre- 
hend not.  But  to  say  that  the  issue  shall  not  be 
such  as  to  attest  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of  Godf 
is  to  "  charge  God  foolishly." 

The  report  of  the  Doctor's  Lecture  proceeds  to 
say,— 

The  allowed  disproportionateness  of  sin  to  the  punishment,  Was 
next  used  as  an  argument  against  the  flood.  A  youth,  twenty 
years  old,  who  might  have  lived  as  long  as  Methuselah,  is,  for 
sins  committed  in  his  most  thoughtless  moments,  deprived  of  his 
eight  or  nine  hundred  years  of  life.  Is  this  just  ? 

The  lecturer  might  have  added,  that  thousands  of 
innocent  infants  and  children  were  also  drowned  in 
that  flood ;  and  that  generally,  in  the  destruction  of 


APPENDIX.  491 

cities  and  communities  in  consequence  of  the  general 
corruptness  of  the  people,  innocent  children  and 
some  virtuous  people  share  in  the  common  physical 
calamity.  What  then  ?  Are  we  to  adopt  it  as  good 
argument,  that  because,  owing  to  the  mutual  rela- 
tions and  dependencies  among  the  members  of  a  com- 
munity in  this  rudimental  state,  it  must  needs  be  that 
the  virtuous  minority  and  irresponsible  children 
share  in  the  general  calamity  induced  by  the  vicious 
majority,  therefore  they  may  all  be  eternally  pun- 
ished together? 

II  But  all  this  labored  and  ingenious  device  of 
parallels — parallels,  we  mean,  between  the  Univer- 
salist  argument  against  endless  punishment,  and  Dr. 
A.'s  hypothetical  argument  against  the  literal  truth  of 
the  history  of  the  deluge,  is  built  upon  an  utter  mis- 
representation of  the  Universalist's  position.  It  is 
on  the  ground  that  we  admit  that  the  Scriptures, 
taken  in  the  literal  and  natural  force  of  their  lan- 
guage, assert  future  endless  punishment ;  and  that 
then  we  go  at  work,  upon  the  plea  that  such  doctrine 
is  inconsistent  with  the  parental  character  of  God, 
and,  by  unnatural  and  illegitimate  constructions  and 
far  fetched  definitions,  resolve  all  these  Bible  testi- 
monies into  "  flame  pictures"  and  "  figures."  Noth- 
ing can  be  farther  from  the  truth  than  this  represen- 
tation. Yet,  as  we  have  said,  it  is  upon  this  mis- 
statement  of  our  position  that  he  has  reared  the  cun- 
ning workmanship  of  all  this  would-be  scathing  ser- 
mon. And  whence  does  he  draw  his  authority  for 


492  APPENDIX. 

placing  us  in  such  a  position  ?  In  this  instance  he 
passes  over  even  his  brother  Theodore  Parker,  whom 
he  foisted  as  a  witness  into  his  part  of  the  "  Discus- 
sion/7 and  imports  John  Foster  again,  whom  also  he 
there  introduced  to  the  same  point,  and  whose  tes- 
timony we  showed  has  no  weight  in  the  case.  His 
reporter  gives  us  his  effort  in  this  direction  thus  : — 

"  Quoting  John  Foster's  words  about  the  proof  texts  of  endless 
punishment,  he  said,  "  it  must  be  admitted  that  these  passages 
are  formidably  strong, — so  strong  that  it  must  be  an  argument  of 
extreme  cogency  that  would  authorize  a  limited  interpretation.' " 

* 

Look  at  this  management  of  the  case.     Here  is  a 

denomination  of  Christians  ranking  in  numbers  as 
the  fifth  or  sixth  denomination  in  the  United  States. 
The  land  is  full  of  publications,  doctrinal  and  practi- 
cal, and  extensively  expository  of  their  theory  of 
Scripture  interpretation.  And  the  writer  of  this  has 
just  closed  a  labor  covering  more  than  four  hundred 
duodecimo  pages,  as  his  part  of  a  mutual  discussion 
with  this  Doctor,  comprising  expositions  of  the  whole 
extensive  collection,  made  by  him,  of  Scripture  pas- 
sages in  proof  of  endless  punishment ;  and  now  he 
wants  to  place  us  before  his  people  as  engaged  in  the 
work  of  proving  unscriptural,  a  doctrine  which  we 
are  conscious  that  the  Scriptures  literally  declare. 
And  what  does  he  do  ?  What !  why,  he  quotes  from 
John  Foster  a  concession  that  certain  passages  of 
Scripture  are  formidably  strong  in  the  way  of  indi- 
cating endless  punishment.  And  who  was  this  John 


APPENDIX.  498 

Foster  ?  Not  a  professed,  studied,  and  systematized 
Universalist,  but  a  learned  and  eminent  Baptist 
divine  of  England.  In  an  advanced  stage  of  life  he 
was  forced  by  the  moral  argument  to  question  the 
endlessness  of  punishment,  but  the  language  of  cer- 
tain Scripture  phrases  lay  in  his  mind  as  it  was 
rooted  there  by  false  education  in  childhood,  and  as 
it  had  engrained  itself  there  by  life-long  usage.  Such 
were  the  circumstances  under  which  he  made  the 
remark  which  Dr.  Adams  used  in  our  "  Discussion,'7 
and  persists  in  using,  notwithstanding  our  faithful 
exposure  of  its  unfairness.  But  the  moral  consider- 
ations inspired  by  the  spirit  of  the  gospel  in  his  soul, 
urged  upon  Foster's  attention  a  train  of  Scripture 
testimonies,  which  were  in  his  mature  judgment  of 
such  extreme  cogency  as  to  limit  the  interpretation  of 
those  formidably  strong  expressions  on  the  duration 
of  punishment.  But  he  was  placed  in  no  circum- 
stances, and  had  no  opportunity  to  get  his  mind 
entirely  righted  from  that  old  crook  received  in  the 
twig  from  false  education,  with  regard  to  the  seeming 
force  of  certain  Scripture  phraseology  in  an  isolated 
position.  He  did  not  even  make  an  open  announce- 
ment of  his  late  happy  discoveries, — such  were  the 
strong  denominational  ties  by  which  lie  was  bound. 
His  enlarged  knowledge  and  faith  was  only  divulged 
in  some  private  letters  ;  and  these  it  was  the  inten- 
tion and  effort  of  his  denominational  guardians  to 
suppress,  and  they  would  have  been  suppressed  after 
his  decease,  if  it  were  not  for  the  integrity  of  the 
American  publisher  of  his  life  and  writings, 


494  APPENDIX. 

We  repeat,  this  use  which  our  opponent  persists 
in  making  of  a  few  detached  words  of  that  great 
man,  circumstanced  as  he  was,  with  the  intent  to  pass 
off  the  impression  that  Universalists  are  conscious 
that  the  literal  import  of  the  Scriptures  is  the  end- 
lessness of  punishment,  is  unjust  to  Mr.  Foster  him- 
self, and  inexcusably  unjust  to  the  Universalist 
denomination. 

Why,  what  are  the  present  facts  ?  Here  Dr.  A. 
lias,  directly  before  his  eyes,  an  examination  by  our 
humble  self,  in  a  manner  which  meets  the  hearty  ap- 
proval of  our  Denomination  in  general,  of  the  whole 
Bible  in-so-far  as  he  has  arrayed  it  on  his  side  in  sup- 
port of  his  theory  of  punishment ;  and  he  knows  that, 
in  every  case,  our  course  has  been  to  seek  out  the 
natural  and  obvious  meaning  of  the  passage,  by  the 
same  rule  of  exegesis  as  we  would  employ  in  the 
study  and  interpretation  of  any  other  book.  In  no 
case,  that  we  recollect,  have  we  resorted  to  the  moral 
argument  to  bend  any  passage  of  Scripture  from  its 
natural  meaning,  as  evinced  by  the  force  of  the  lan- 
guage, in  consideration  of  the  occasion  and  subject 
of  discourse.  The  extract  which  we  gave  from  Rev. 
Dr,  Clapp,  of  the  thoroughness  with  which  his  mind 
became  disabused  of  the  doctrine  of  endless  punish- 
ment by  a  critical  study  of  the  language  of  the  Bible, 
which  he  had  misused  in  support  of  it,  presents  a  fac 
simile  of  our  manner  of  treating  the  discussion  with 
Dr,  A.,  and  of  the  Universalist  manner  of  Scripture 
argument  always. 

How  utterly  unworthy  of  himself,  then,  and  of  his 


APPENDIX,  495 

responsibility  before  God  to  his  people  to  deal  with 
them  honestly  and  without  guile,  to  impose  upon 
them  the  representation  that  We  pursue  a  course  of 
frittering  away  the  obvious  sense  of  the  Scripture 
records,  by  resolving  them  into  figures,  by  the  like 
of  which  "  he  would  undertake  to  show  that  there 
could  not  be,  and  that  there  was  not,  a  deluge. 
Figurative? !!  Why,  dear  Doctor,  take  our  respective 
parts  of  the  protracted  discussion  just  closed,  lay 
them  side  by  side,  and  go  through  with  them  step  by 
step,  and  I  challenge  you  to  point  out  in  my  part  one 
half  the  latitude  of  figurative  construction  which  I 
will  show  in  yours.  Why,  sir,  the  whole  superstruc- 
ture of  doctrine  which  mainly  distinguishes  your 
theory,  the  post  mortem  hell  of  endless  torment,  is, 
by  your  own  showing,  a  figure  in  toto.  You  know 
and  acknowledge  that  neither  the  word  hades  nor 
yehenna  literally  signifies  any  such  place  or  state. 
To  be  sure,  in  your  part  of  our  "  Discussion/'  you  in 
a  few*  cases  quote  the  word  hell  where  the  original  is 
hades,  without  explanation,  as  if  the  mere  occurrence 
of  the  word  in  the  Bible  were  proof  of  such  post 
mortem  torment ;  and  there  also  you  call  it  a  place. 
But  in  your  Lecture  on  the  intermediate  state,  as  re- 
ported in  the  Transcript  a  few  weeks  before  this 
which  I  am  reviewing,  you  show  that  you  have  learn- 
ed something  from  some  source  since  the  Discussion 
was  commenced.  You  are  reported  to  have  said, — 

Hades  is  not,  in  its  original  acceptation,  a  place,  but  a  state.  It 
is  derived  from  the  primitive  Alpha  (Greek,)  corresponding  to  non 
in  Latin,  and  ado,  to  see  j  i.  e,  invisibility.  The  state  of  being 


496  APPENDIX. 

dead,  therefore,  was  called  Hades.  The  word  is  applied  to  the 
state  of  all  the  dead,  good  and  bad.  Then,  it  is  applied  to  the 
grave  and  to  deep  places ,'  then,  to  a  state  of  punishment. 

Thus  you  show  that  hades  does  not  in  its  original 
acceptation,  and  of  its  own  force,  express  the  idea  of 
punishment,  and  of  course,  when  you  apply  it  to 
punishment,  you  give  it  a  secondary  or  figurative 
sense.  So  Professor  Stuart  explains.  And  then,  ge» 
henna,  you  concede  in  your  "  Argument"  written  for 
my  columns,  is  literally  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  and 
by  a  figurative  use  denotes  punishment  or  suffering. 

So,  then,  you  manufacture  your  entire  world  of 
hopeless  woe  out  of  "  figure"  and  "  flame  picture  ;" 
and  nearly  all  the  passages  you  force  into  application 
to  it,  you  do  so  by  the  figurative  construction  of 
such  words  as  "  wrath/'  "  fire,"  "  destruction,"  "  fur- 
nace of  fire,"  and  so  on  without  limit.  And  you,  who 
assume  figurative  constructions  of  Scripture  every- 
where, and  strain  the  figures  all  out  of  place  and  pro- 
portion and  make  them  monstrous,  are  the  man  to  at- 
tempt a  burlesque  upon  me  for  my  sometimes  finding 
a  metaphor  in  the  Bible.  And  yet  you  dared  not 
present  my  own  position  as  the  basis  of  the  burlesque, 
but  went  to  England  and  got  it  from  an  isolated  ex- 
pression of  an  eminent  Baptist. 

I  agree  with  you,  however,  that  the  words  hades, 
gehenna,  furnace  of  fire,  &c.,  are  sometimes  used  figu- 
ratively to  denote  punishment.  And  you  must  agree 
with  me,  that,  these  words  not  expressing  the  idea  of 
punishment  of  their  own  literal  sense,  but  only  by  a 
figurative  use,  we  can  assume  nothing,  by  the  mere 


APPENDIX.  497 

force  of  the  words,  as  to  when  and  where  and  what 
this  punishment  is.  These  points  must  in  every  case 
be  ascertained  by  studying  the  occasion r  connection, 
and  subject  of  discourse.  And  this  is  the  method  of 
Scripture  exegesis  to  which  I  have  adhered  in  all  my 
part  of  our  controversy,  and  to  which  I  have  striven 
in  vain  to  draw  your  respectful  consideration. 

But  you  do  attempt,  by  one  direct  quotation  from 
my  Reply  to  your  Argument,  to  justify  your  parallel 
of  the  Universalist  theory  of  Scripture  exposition 
with  an  ironical  play  upon  the  history  of  the  deluge. 
Your  reporter  says  : 

Thus,  said  the  Lecturer,  let  any  man  form  a  theory,  and  he  can 
bend  the  Scriptures  to  support  it ;  and  here  and  there  some  "  Or- 
thodox" divine  can  be  quoted  in  its  favor.  He  would  now  read  a 
piece  of  Biblical  criticism  from  a  religious  paper  in  Massachusetts, 
a  few  weeks  since,  which  was  equal  to  anything  which  he  had  said 
about  the  deluge. 

"  Judas  uttered  the  strongest  dying  testimony  of  the  purity  of 
J  esus,  and  gave  practical  proof  of  the  sincerity  of  his  repentance, 
by  throwing  down  the  price  of  his  perfidy  at  the  feet  of  his  se- 
ducers ;  and  either  they  or  he  purchased  with  it  a  field :  and  so  se- 
vere was  his  anguish,  that  he  burst  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all 
his  bowels  gushed  out — or  his  heart  broke,  as  the  word  bowels  is 
sometimes  used  in  the  Scriptures  for  heart.  With  this  agrees  a  fair 
rendering  of  Matt,  xxvii.  o  ;  reading,  instead  of  "  hanged  himself," 
choked  of  anguish.  Thus  are  the  records  of  Matthew  and  Luke, 
which  in  the  Common  Version  are  contradictory,  seen  to  be  in 
harmony, — both  implying  the  death  of  Judas  by  internal  rupture 
from  excessive  anguish  on  account  of  his  sin.  His  repentance  was 
as  real  as  that  of  the  thief  on  the  cross — '  Good  for  that  man  if  he 
had  not  been  born' — i.  c.,  living  to  manhood  would  hardly  be  de- 
sirable." 

Adam  Clarke  (who  also  taught  that  the  serpent  in  Paradise  was 


498  APPENDIX. 

probably  an  ape,)  and  others,  are  quoted  to  sustain  this  interpreta- 
tion. Any  thing  which  God  ever  said  or  wrote  can  be  confuted,  in 
this  way. 

This,  then,  is  the  fittest  case  in  all  my  continuous 
Scripture  warfare  against  the  doctrine  of  endless 
punishment,  extending  through  more  than  four  hun- 
dred pages,  following  you  in  your  whole  catalogue  of 
textual  quotations,  —  this  is  the  fittest  case  which 
your  keen  discerning  eye  can  discover  as  a  justifica- 
tion of  your  pleasant  feat  of  satire.  And  what  is 
there  here  which  you  will  dispute  ?  Criticise  every 
sentence. 

But  first  take  note  of  the  fact,  that  you  do  me  in- 
justice by  quoting  me  as  you  quote  Scripture,  in  a 
disjointed  form,  not  giving  your  hearers  any  idea  of 
the  point  to  which  I  applied  the  language  quoted. 
You  present  the  extract  as  if  it  were  designed  to  ex- 
press my  own  ground  of  hope  for  the  final  salvation 
of  Judas.  Whereas  in  my  "  Reply7'  it  was  designed 
to  show  that  your  own  ground  of  hope  for  man's  final 
salvation,  that  for  instance  which  you  assign  for  your 
hope  for  the  thief  on  the  cross,  to  wit,  his  repentance 
before  death,  utterly  forbids  your  bold  assumption 
that  Judas' place  '"'was  not  heaven."  To  this  point 
was  the  language  addressed  which  you  have  partially 
quoted. 

And  now,  as  I  said,  let  us  criticise  every  sentence. 
1.  Judas  "  uttered  the  strongest  dying  testimony  of 
the  purity  of  Jesus."  Do  you  deny  this,  Rev.  Sir? 
Did  he  not  say,  (Matt,  xxvii.  4,)  "  I  have  sinned,  in 
that  I  have  betrayed  innocent  blood."?  2.  "And 


APPENDIX.  499 

gave  practical  proof  of  the  sincerity  of  his  penitence 
by  throwing  down  the  price  of  his  perfidy  at  the  feet 
of  his  seducers."  Do  you  contradict  this  statement? 

The  record   is,   verses  3-5, — "  Then  Judas, 

when  he  saw  that  he  (Jesus)  was  condemned,  repented 
himself,  and  brought  again  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver 
to  the  chief  priests  and  elders/'  &c.  3.  "  And  either 
he  or  they  purchased  with  it  a  field."  Is  not  this  liter- 
ally accurate.  Matthew  says,  (xxvii.  7,)  "  And  they 
(the  chief  priests)  took  counsel,  and  bought  with  them 
(the  pieces  of  silver)  the  Potter's  field."  Luke  says, 
(Acts  i.  18,)  "  Now  this  man  (Judas)  purchased  a  field 
with  the  reward  of  iniquity.'7  So  it  is  as  we  said, 
"  either  he  or  they  purchased  with  it  a  field.'7  4. 
"  He  burst  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all  his  bowels 
gushed  out."  Such,  as  you  will  not  deny,  is  the 
record.  5.  "  Or  his  heart  broke,  as  the  word  bowels 
is  sometimes  used  in  the  Scriptures  for  heart." 
It  is  so  that  the  word  bowels  is  often  used  in  the 
Scriptures,  not  for  the  intestines,  but  for  the  heart, 
or  the  seat  of  the  affections.  Accordingly  we  read 
of  the  bowels  of  compassion,  and  the  yearning  of  the 
boivels  over  the  objects  of  love.  Our  English  Diction- 
aries also  define  the  word  bowels  as  sometimes  mean- 
ing "  the  heart,'7  "  the  seat  of  pity  and  kindness.7' 
But  this  criticism  is  of  no  consequence  as  affecting 
the  manner  of  Judas'  death.  The  record  of  Luke, 
"  he  burst  asunder  in  the  midst,  and  all  his  bowels 
gushed  out,"  literally  describes  a  death  by  rupture, 
occasioned  by  the  violent  commotion  of  exces- 
sive grief  and  anguish  of  heart.  And  such  was 


500  APPENDIX. 

Judas'  case.  6.  "  With  this  agrees  a  fair  rendering 
of  Matt,  xxvii.  5,  reading,  instead  of  f  hanged  himself' 
1  choked  of  anguish*  This,  dear  Sir,  is  no  attempt  to 
dodge  into  a  figure.  It  treats  ingenuously  and  fairly 
a  fair  question  of  the  true  rendering  of  a  Greek  word 
in  a  given  case.  I  offer  the  judgment  of  such  emi- 
nent scholars  and  Biblical  critics  of  the  Orthodox 
school,  as  Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  Rev.  John  Jones,  Mr. 
Wakefield,  and  "  the  very  best  critics"  referred  to  by 
Clarke.  When  the  learning  of  such  Greek  scholars 
renders  the  account  of  Matthew  so  as  to  make  it  per- 
fectly agree  with  that  of  Luke,  it  might  do  for  a  small 
man,  but  it  does  not  become  one  of  your  talent  and 
position,  to  attempt  the  disposal  of  the  matter  by  a 
sneer.  7.  You  close  this  quotation  from  me  with 
these' words  :  "  good  were  it  for  that  man  if  he  had 
not  been  born,  that  is,  living  to  manhood."  This  is 
another  jerk  of  a  few  words  out  of  their  connection, 
for  snatching  which  you  skip  over; 'five  pages,  and 
bring  it  into  a  connection  denoting  that  it  was  my 
argument,  when  the  words  occur  in  my  statement 
of  the  construction  which  Dr.  Clarke  gives  the 
words,  "  good  were  it  for  that  man  if  he  had  not  been 
born.'7  Neither  Dr.  Clarke,  nor  your  humble  servant, 
alleges  that  this  language  is  figurative.  We  regard 
it,  as  it  most  surely  is,  a  Jewish  proverbial  form  of 
speech,  concerning  which  it  is  proper  to  inquire  what 
idea  was  imported  by  its  usage.  Dr.  Clarke  shows 
from  Rabbinical  writings,  and  we  might  add  largely  to 
his  proofs  from  Scripture  examples,  that  it  was  used, 
not  with  reference  to  man's  immortal  existence,  but 


APPENDIX.  501 

with  reference  to  some  signal  disgrace  or  calamity 
attached  to  the  earthly  life.  This  argument,  respected 
Sir,  you  can  never  invalidate. 

And  this,  then,  out  of  all  my  protracted  Review  of 
your  Argument,  is  the  case  yon  have  seized  upon  as 
justifying  your  burlesque  of  the  Universalist  theory 
of  Scripture  interpretation,  by  affecting  to  show  by 
the  same  method  of  argument  that  there  could  not 
have  been  a  deluge, 

But  you  attempt  to  belittle  Dr.  Clarke  by  the  say- 
ing, that  he  thought  the  serpent  that  tempted  Eve 
was  an  ape  !  I  quoted  Clarke,  not  for  his  philosophy, 
but  for  his  acknowledged  learning,  and  world  of  fact. 
But  his  suggestion  that  the  serpent  referred  to  may 
have  been  an  ape,  was  a  judicious  effort  to  save  the 
Bible  account  of  the  temptation  from  the  ridicule  to 
which  the  popular  construction  subjects  it.  He  did 
not  like  the  idea  that  our  mother  Eve  was  persuaded 
to  transgression  by  the  conversation  of  a  snake. 
Taking  that  account  as  a  divine  allegory,  the  repre- 
sentation is  neat  and  beautiful.  But  to  suppose  that, 
while  Adam  knew  enough  to  name  all  the  beasts  of 
the  earth  according  to  their  natures,  Eve  was  so 
idiotic  as  to  believe  that  a  snake  was  capable  of  giv- 
ing her  instruction,  is  a  little  worse  than  a  touch  of 
the  figurative.  I  suppose  you  do  understand  some 
things  in  the  Bible  to  be  figurative.  Jotham's 
account  of  the  trees  meeting  to  choose  a  king,  you 
probably  regard  as  parabolical.  Whether  you  still 
believe  that  the  devil  and  satan,  with  seven  heads 
and  ten  horns,  and  a  tail  sweeping  a  third  part  of  the 


502  APPENDIX. 

stars  of  heaven,  is  a  literal  person,  you  do  not  inform 
me  ; —  nor  whether  yon  have  espoused  the  Papal  use 
of  the  phrase,  "  This  is  my  body,"  as  proof  of  tran- 
substantiation.  But  you  do  construe  some,  aye 
much  Scripture  as  figurative  ;  indeed,  as  I  have 
shown,  nearly  all  which  you  apply  as  descriptive  of 
endless  punishment.  I  agree  with  you  that  most  of 
the  passages  which  you  so  misuse  are  figurative,  and 
I  have  solicited  you  in  vain,  that  you  do  try  to  show 
some  reason  why  you  apply  them  as  you  do. 

III.  The  last  argument?  which  you  are  reported  to 
have  employed  in  your  Lecture  in  support  of  your 
theory,  and  one  which  I  should  think  might  be  your 
last,  is  in  these  words  : — 

But  this  doctrine  of  futufe  punishment  is  written  on  the  human 
heart  and  conscience.  Profane  swearing  illustrates  this.  Passion 
seeks  for  something  infinite  to  help  it  vent  itself.  The  names  of 
God,  Christ,  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  employed.  If  "  go  to  hell,"  and 
"  damn  you,"  were  not  derived  from  a  deep,  native  conviction  of 
some  infinite  thing  conveyed  by  the  words,  would  they  be  used  ? 
You  never  hear  one,  in  his  wrath,  say,  "  go  to  jail,"  "  you  be 
dead." 

This,  my  dear  Sir,  is  coming  to  the  point.  I  am 
glad  that  you  have  said  it ;  for  if  I  had  alleged  this 
as  the  moral  character  of  }Tour  doctrine  I  should 
have  been  censured  for  incivility.  But  it  is  nearly 
so.  I  have  long  understood  that  the  doctrine  of 
endless  revengeful  punishment  finds  its  affinity  only 
in  the  lowest  and  most  brutish  passions  of  the  human 


APPENDIX.  503 

heart;  and  then  only  when  these  passions  are  so  ex- 
cited as  to  quench,  for  the  time  being,  all  the  better 
feelings  of  the  moral  and  affectional  nature.  It  is 
indeed  true,  that  a  burst  of  malignant  passion  seeks 
for  some  great  swelling  words  of  terrible  import  by 
which  to  vent  and  display  itself.  But  it  is  not  true 
that  the  mind  naturally  conceives  the  idea  of  future 
endless  torment.  It  learns  this  from  the  schools. 
You  will  recollect  the  anecdote  published  in  some  of 
your  religious  papers  lately,  of  a  missionary  return- 
ing home  with  a  son  in  his  teens  who  was  born  in 
India,  who,  on  hearing  a  sailor  G — d  d — n  some- 
thing, reproved  him,  saying,  "  This,  my  son,  was 
born  and  reared  in  a  heathen  Irtnd,  and  this  is  the 
first  profane  oath  he  ever  heard."  So,  it  seems,  that 
though  the  heathen  have  some  sort  of  speculations 
about  future  punishment  of  some  sort  and  duration, 
they  have  no  such  machinery  for  damning  one 
another  to  hell  as  has  been  sublimated  by  Christian 
creed  makers  out  of  the  old  heathen  Tartarus.  Ac- 
cordingly your  worthy  brother  M'Clure  is  right  in 
his  claim  that  these  profane  belchings  are  "  Orthodox 
oaths,"  and  that  Universalists  are  shamefully  "  insin- 
cere" and  "  inconsistent"  if  they  ever  employ  them. 
But  then  these  profane  swearers,  even  in  their 
wrath,  do  not  conceive  in  their  hearts  the  wish  for 
all  which  the  language  theologically  imports,  to  be 
executed  upon  any  one.  They  imprecate  the  same 
vengeance  upon  their  ox,  or  horse,  or  broken  wagon, 
or  unwieldy  stick  of  timber.  It  is  a  mere  straining 
for  the  most  terrible  expression  of  a  bad  passion.  I 


504  APPENDIX, 

could  hope  that  my  learned  friend  might  ere  long 
read  himself  into  that  blessed  Christian  theology, 
which  should  find  its  spiritual  affinities,  not  in  the 
basest  passions,  but  in.  those  refined  Christian  affec- 
tions which  "  bless  and  curse  not" 

In  conclusion  of  this  brotherly  review,  permit  me 
to  express  sincere  regret  that  you  should,  in  your 
labored  and  ingenious  lecture  to  your  own  Christian 
people,  commit  these  three  essential  errors : — 

1st,  Representing  me  and  my  religious  fraternity 
in  a  false  light,  in  regard  to  our  estimate  of  the 
language  of  the  Bible, 

2d,  Changing  the  issue  from  principles  and  ends 
to  instrumentalities  and  means. 

3d,  Quoting  me  in  a  snatch  manner,  to  give  a 
wrong  impression  as  to  the  point  to  which  my  re- 
marks partially  quoted  were  addressed,  I  believe 
that,  in  my  extended  review  of  your  Argument,  I 
have,  in  all  cases,  presented  fairly  the  points  to 
which  you  quoted  Scripture,  and  the  issue  to  which 
you  argued.  If  I  have  failed  to  do  this  IR  any  case 
it  will  afford  me  the  greatest  pleasure  to  make  cor- 
rection on  being  shown  the  error. 

And  now,  Rev,  Sir,  you  and  I  occupy  positions  of 
great  responsibility.  Old  human  authorities  are 
breaking  up,  and  many  people  are  as  scattered  sheep. 
They  need  to  be  made  acquainted  with  the  richness, 
and  beauty,  and  Divine  authority  of  the  Christian 
religion.  They  are  looking  toward  the  Christian 
teachers,  and  when  they  see  in  them  a  disposition  to 
trifle  with  the  Scriptures,  and  with  the  Divine  char- 


APPENDIX.  505 

acter, — and  to  treat  unfairly  the  arguments  of  each 
other, — they  are  driven  farther  into  their  scepticism. 
You  are  possessed  of  principles  and  culture  too  high 
to  design  such  things.  But  the  strength  of  your 
denominational  ties,  and  the  largeness  of  your  con- 
stitutional sarcasm,  are  a  force  impelling  you.  Will 
the  great  Father  help  us,  that  we  win  sinners,  in 
Christ's  stead,  to  be  reconciled  to  God. 


INDEX    OF    TEXTS. 


FOR  the  convenience  of  the  biblical  student,  we  frame  this  Index  in 
double  columns.  The  left-hand  column,  under  the  head  of  ARGUMENT, 
refers  to  the  texts  quoted  by  Dr.  Adams  in  proof  of  "  Future  Endless 
Punishment."  The  right-hand  column,  under  the  head  of  REPLY,  di- 
rects to  the  pages  where  the  same  texts  are  explained  by  Mr.  Cobb. 


ARGUMENT. 

Finally  impenitent,  . 
Penalty  for  the   disobedient. 

ii.  5-12, 16.     . 
Matt.  x.  28.  (Gehenna.) 
Luke,  xii.  5. 


Page 
.       17 

Horn. 

17 

.    20 
21 


Ps.  xi.  6.  ("  On  the  wicked,  snares.")  .    25 
On  same  page,  as  relating  to  special 
judgments,  anger  of  God,   punish- 
ment from   the  hand   of  God,  etc. 
Ps.  1.  22;  vii.  11;  Isa.  iii.  11;  Hos. 

ix.  12 

"Bed  in  hell."  Ps.  cxxxix.  8.  .  26 
The  tares.  Matt.  xiii.  24-50.  .  .  27 
Smoke  of  torment  forever.  Lake  of 

fire.    Rev.  xiv.  9,  10,  11.        .        .    27 
The  angels  as  agents  of  judgment,    .        28 
The  angel  and  Assyrians,     .        .        .28 
Would  reject  the  Bible  on  given  con- 
ditions,     ....  .29 
The  revengeful  spirit,        ...        29 
Rich  Man  and  Lazarus.    Luke,  xri. 
19-31.  31 


Judas  —  his  place.  Acts,  i.  24,  25.  -  31 
Shall  die  in  your  sins,  ...  31 
Ps.  xiv.  32;  i.  4;  Gen.  xiii.  13;  xix.  24. 

Fall  of  angels.  2  Pet.  ii.  4;  Jude,  6.    49-50 

The  resurrection.  Luke,  xx.  36 ;  Acts, 
xxiv.  15 53-56 

Phil.  iii.  8-11.  .  55 

Resurrection  to  damnation.  John,  v. 
28,29 57 

The  idea  that  all  shall  be  children  of 
God  in  the  resurrection,  unaccount- 
able,   57 


REPLY 


Page. 
The  same,    .        .  ...    Ill 

Explained,         ....  113-147 

Do. 147-181 

Do 147-181 

Do 184 


Ps.  1.22;  Tii.  11, 12.      ...  185 

Isa.  iii.  11.    Hos.  ix.  12.    .        .  .    186 

Ps.  cxxxix.  8.          .  .        189 
Tares.    End  of  the  World.    Matt. 

xiii 193-204 

Explained,    .       ".        .        .        .  204-210 

The  same  reviewed,          .        .  .        211 

2  Kings,  xix.  35.  .    214 

1  Chron.  xxi 215 

Considered,          .                .  '  .    216 

Exposition,        .                .        .  218-250 
This  includes  expositions  of  Deut. 

xxxii.  22;  Ps.  ix.  17;  Isa.  xiv.; 

Job,  xiv.  13;  Jonah,  ii.  2;  Ps. 

Ixxxvi.  13;   Matt.  xi.  23;  xvi. 

18;  Acts,  ii.  27,  31;  Rev.  vi.  8; 

xx.  13, 14;  1  Cor.  xv.  55. 
The  same,  and  Matt.  xxvi.  24.     .  250-259 
Exposition,       .        .  259-271 
Explained  by  other  similar  pas- 
sages,    .        .        .  140-143 
The  same,  including  a  discussion 

of  the  terms  Devil  and  Satan,  272-299 

Extensively  treated,     .        .        .  301-326 

Considered,        ....  326-331 

The  same,    ...                .  331-341 

And  Luke,  xiv.  15.    .        .        .  341 


Noticed, 344 


INDEX    OP   TEXTS. 


507 


If  punishment  is  disciplinary,  God  will        , 

release  the  sinner  on  repentance,  59 ; 
Spirits  in  prison.    1  Pet.  iii.  19. 

The  curse  of  the  law,  .        .  61 

The  sentence  upon  the  wicked.     Rev. 

xx.  12-15 63 

Lake  of  fire  again,   .  63 

The  dead,  small  and  great,  .  63 

Second  death, 63 

Terms  of  duration 63  j 


Definitions, 


65-63 


Foster,  and  Burnett,  and  King,         .  69 

Theodore  Parker 70 

Scheme  of  redemption,        .        .  34  i 
Deut.  iv.  30;  Ps.  xxxix.  30-33;  Jer. 

xxxiii.  25.  26;  1  Kings,  xi.  39.        .  35 

Rev.  xxii.  12 39 

Matt.  xxv.  41 ;  and  a  long  list  of  frag- 
ments of  similar  passages,        .        42-44 


Particularly  2  Thess.  i.  6,  7. 
Sin  against  the  Holy  Ghost, 
xii.  32.     Mark,  iii."28-30. 


Matt. 


44 
46-47 


Salvation  not  associated  with  punish- 
ment,   . 
Vicarious  sacrifice 


74 
44 

Unjust  still.     Rev.  xxii.  11.     .  39 

Laugh  afc  calamity;  fearful  to  fall  in- 
to the  hand  of  God ;  fled  for  refuge,  42-44 
Lose  his  soul, 43 


Quiet  of  mind  in  his  belief,  .  .  71 
About  death's  changing  character,  31 
Recapitulation,  ...  78 


Indeed  he  will,        ....        345 

Exposition, 348-352 

The  same,  353-365 

Exposition 866-378 

Also,          .'....  369 

Also, 370 

Also,          .                ...  377 

Criticism  of  definitions,       .        .  379-390 

Matt.  xxiv.  and  xxv.                .  391-499 

These  and  the  better  witnesses,   .  409-419 

The  same,                          .  420 

General  view,        ....  420-427 

The  infinite  mistake,        .        .  427 

Another  infinite  mistake,     .        .  432 
All  noted  in  the  line  of  Scripture 

exegesis,         ....  433-466 

Explained,    .  437 

Explained,         ....  440-443 

Responded  to,       ....  444 

The  same  considered,        .        .  449 
And  in  the  whole  chap.  vii. 

The  same,          ....  452-458 

Noted,  .                         ...  462-463 

The  same.    Matt.  xvi.  26.        .  464 
"  After  this  the  judgment."  Heb. 

ix.  27 466 

Examined,         ....  469-473 

The  same,     .....  477 

Recapitulation,         .                .  479 


APPENDIX,       ....  

Dr.  Adams  at  home, 

I.  The  issue  changed  —  means  for  ends, 

II.  Misrepresentation  of  the  Universalist  estimate  of  Scripture  language, 
III    Affinity  between  endless-miserianism  and  vile  passions, 


481 
483 

484 
491 
502