vsm
mm
filii
mm
WSBX
vsm
..ViA/'
THE
W
mm m ,..; . filiation.
SEEMONS.
T.02JD0X: PRrNTED BT
SrOTTISWOODK ANJ1 CO., NEW-STKEET SQCARK
i.ND PARLIAMENT STREET
xy-
THE
GLOEY OF CHRIST
IN THE
CREATION AND RECONCILIATION OF ALL THINGS.
WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO
THE DOCTRINE OF ETERNAL EVIL.
A COURSE OF SERMONS
PREACHED AT EATON CHAPEL, EATON SQTJAEE.
LONDON, j
BY
SAMUEL MINTON, M.A.
OF WORCESTER COLLEGE, OXFORD. ,
L
<
THIRD EDITION, c *v+\ ^
LONDON :
LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
1871.
' Search the Scriptures ; for in them ye think ye have
eternal life : and they are they which testify of Me.'
John v. 89.
' These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of
mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those
Acts xvii. 11.
tinners were so.'
' Prove all things.'
1 Thess. v. 21.
' Jpolloto on, to tmofo tljc "Eofo*
Hosea, vi. 3.
' It is owned that the whole scheme of Scripture is not yet under-
stood ; so, if it ever come to be understood before the restitution of all
things, and without miraculous interpositions, it must be in the same
way that natural knowledge is come at, by the continuance and progress
of learning and liberty, and by particular persons attending to, com-
paring, and pursuing intimations scattered up and down it, which are
overlooked and disi'egarded by the generality of the world. For this is
the way in which all improvements are made, by thoughtful men tracing
out obscure hints, as it were dropped us by nature accidentally, or
which seem to come into our minds by chance. Nor is it at all in-
credible that a book which has been so long in the possession of man-
kind should contain many truths as yet undiscovered.' — Bishop Butler.
' If God reveal anything to you by any other instrument of His, be
as ready to receive it as ever you were to receive any truth by my
ministry ; for I am verily persuaded — I am very confident — the Lord
has more truth yet to break forth out of His holy word. For my part,
I cannot sufficiently bewail the condition of the Reformed Churches,
who are come to a period in religion, and will go at present no further
than the instruments of the first Reformation. The Lutherans cannot
be drawn to go beyond what Luther saw ; whatever part of His will
our good God has imparted and revealed unto Calvin, they will rather
die than embrace it. And the Calvinists, you see, stick fast where they
were left by that great man of God, who yet saw not all things. This
is a misery much to be lamented.' — Robinson's Last Charge, a.d. 1620.
' The Christian Church is even yet but very imperfectly freed from the
uaholy influence and the mischievous operation of human authority. The
house requires to be more carefully swept than it was at the Reformation
trom Popery, and a more thorough search must be made for the old
lsaven, that it may be more completely cast out.' — Dr. Brown.
' Is God's purpose, though declared in Scripture, to be damned as
false doctrine simply because the Church is blind to it? Is Israel's
path to teach us nothing ? Are men's traditions as to God's purpose to
be preferred to His own unerring Word? When I see the Church's
blindness at this day, almost unconscious of the judgment -which is
coming on it — when I see that if I bow to the decisions of its widest
branch, I must receive not Transubstantiation only, but the Immaculate
Conception also, I can only fall back upon that Word which, in prospect
of coming apostasy, is commanded to the man of God, as the guide of
his steps, and the means to perfect him. It is indeed a solemn thing to
VI
differ with the Church, or, like Paul, to find oneself in a "way which
they call heresy," simply by "believing," not some, but " all the things
which are written in the law and in the prophets." But the path is not
a new one for the sons of God. All the prophets perished in Jerusalem.
And, above all, the Lord of prophets was judged as a deceiver by those
whom God had called to be His witnesses. The Church's judgment,
therefore, cannot decide a point like this, especially if it be in opposition
to Holy Scripture.' — Andrew Jukes.
' How important to the cause of our heavenly Master is the free dis-
cussion of religious topics, which we are naturally so anxious to repress
when it goes against our faith. Yet we need not. We dislike being
called to account for our more sacred opinions, especially those which
we hold with an uncertain grasp; and we equally dislike to study the
reasons advanced by our opponents, without which it must needs be im-
possible either to persuade or to be persuaded. " Prove all things " is
a coimsel of Christian perfection beyond most men's observance, though
it is the only way to " holding fast that which is good." ' — J. P. Gell.
' The hope of the millennial kingdom of Christ [and, we may add,
the hope of " life and immortality " in Christ alone, with the ultimate
" reconciliation of all things "] has naturally encountered the suspicions
of those Christians whose faith has been crystallised and frozen down
in artificial systems of theology. When the doctrines of the gospel have
once been compacted together by a logical process, and the result is con-
ceived to embody the whole counsel of God, every new truth drawn
fresh from the Scriptures is an unwelcome guest or even a suspected
enemy. It wears a strange and foreign aspect, and disturbs the sym-
metry of a laboriously-constructed system.' — T. B. Birks.
' It is not all truth that triumphs in the world, nor all good ; but only
truth and good up to a certain point. Let them once pass this point,
and their progress pauses. Their followers in the main cannot keep up
with them thus far. Fewer and fewer are those who still press on in
their company ; until at last even these fail, and there is a perfection at
which they are deserted by all men, and are in the presence of God and
of Christ alone.' — Dr. Arnold.
' Deliver me from the narrowing influence of human lessons, from
human systems of theology ; teach me directly out of the fulness and
freeness of Thine own word. Hasten the time when, unfettered by
sectarian intolerance, and unawed by the authority of men, the Bible
shall make its rightful impression upon all ; the simple and obedient
readers thereof, calling no man Master, but Christ only.' — Br. Chalmers.
' The truth has a vitality in it still ; and many dry rudiments of it,
which at present lie dull and uninteresting in our minds, are yet des-
tined to expand and acquire a new significance. Let the mind be
frankly open to any and every Truth, however unfamiliar to us the first
view of it, which may turn out to be in accordance with the teaching oi
the Apostles.' — Br. Goidbum, Bean of Norwich.
TRUTH AND LOVE.
Letter to a Clergyman.
I should not have troubled you with another letter, but for the avowal
with which you conclude, that you feel bound to withdraw from Christian
intercourse with any who ' cause to err ' — i.e. who differ from you in any
religious opinion, and venture to express their opinion ; including, of
course, all Baptists, Arminians, anti-Millennarians, and others, whom
you must necessarily consider amongst those who 'cause to err.' This
spirit, or principle if you prefer it, has been the bane of the Church in
all ages ; it was the life and soul of the Inquisition, it is the essential
virus of the worst kind of schism, and is that which enables the world
to say, ' See how these Christians hate one another.'
In this question of eternal suffering you have not even the excuse of
its being a matter of faith; it is simply a matter of opinion. I do not
say merely of interpretation, because a matter of faith, such as the Deity
of Christ or the Atonement, may depend on interpretation ; but this
doctrine, however important in its practical bearings, and therefore
however worthy of earnest discussion, is purely a matter of opinion.
I might have some excuse for elevating it into a matter of faith. For
my enjoyment in looking forward to eternity depends in great measure
on the assurance that God will be ' all in all ; ' that sin and misery will
come to an end.
I can rejoice even now, notwithstanding the existence of present evil,
' in hope of the glory of God ; ' in the prospect not merely of being
myself delivered from the power of evil, but of forming part of God's
glorious Universe, when evil has been banished from it for ever.
I should bo sorry to be able to rejoice in the prospect of an eternity,
throughout which the wailings of despair would be continually ringing
in my ears, and the writhings of agony be ever before my eyes ; and
equally sorry to think that I could ever sink to such an unutterable
depth of selfishness as to be able to spend an eternity of happiness in
forgetfulness of the fact that such thiugs were going on, even though
they were put far away out of sight and out of sound.
Furthermore, my hope of personal immortality depends upon the plain
natural meaning of those innumerable texts, which you are obliged to
rationalise upon, and interpret in a non-natural sense, in order to main-
tain the traditional philosophy about man's inherent immortality.
But you have no such pretext. Your faith and hope cannot in the
slightest degree depend upon your interpretation of those passages being
correct. They centre in the salvation which Christ offers from sin and
all its consequences. What those consequences will ultimately be to
such as are not saved is a matter of opinion, and cannot possibly, in
your view of it, touch the foundation at all. The eternal life, which we
have in Him, is precisely the same thing, whatever be the alternative
Vlll TRUTH AND LOVE.
to those who refuse it. So too are the means by which He obtained it
for us, and communicates it to us.
If, indeed, we believed your view to be taught in Scripture, and still
denied its truth, the case would be different ; for we should then be
shaking the foundation of all faith. But you know that this is not the
case. You may think that our judgment is biassed by our feelings, as we
may think that yours is biassed by traditional opinion and party dis-
cipline. But when Christians of approved character and undoubted
credibility on both sides solemnly declare their belief, that the view they
hold is in accordance with the teaching of Scripture as a whole, then
for either party to break fellowship with the other on such a matter
as this, because they refuse to do violence to their own convictions, and
to accept the dictum of those who take another view, is in the last
degree unchristian in principle, and disastrous in its effects upon the
Church and the world. 'Whereto we have already attained let us walk
by the same rule, let us mind the same thing ; and if in anything ye be
otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you.'
That the difference of opinion is a very serious and important one, as
bearing upon the success of the Gospel, from a human point of view, I
not only admit but strenuously maintain. I believe that your doctrine
is the fruitful parent both of infidelity and of indifference ; that it
weakens the Gospel message, and in a variety of ways does incalculable
mischief. You, on the other hand, think that my doctrine will make
sinners less anxious to be converted, because less afraid of the ultimate
consequences of sin. No doubt this difference of opinion, like every
difference in a greater or less degree, must interpose some difficulty in
our working together, and detract somewhat from the pleasure of mutual
intercourse. But to refuse to hold communion with one another, to de-
nounce one another, or to change countenance towards one another on
that account would be a grievous sin — a sin of ignorance perhaps, but
still a sin.
Do not they who are looking for the Lord's speedy coming believe
that those who expect the world, to be converted by missionary agency
' cause to err,' and weaken the force of the cry, ' Prepare to meet thy
God ? ' And, on the other hand, do not they who believe that expecta-
tion to be scriptural, consider that you and other Millennarians ' cause
to err ? ' Do they not believe that you will probably be the cause of
many heathens spending an eternity in torment, by damping the mis-
sionary zeal of those whose enthusiasm would otherwise have been
kindled at the prospect of converting the world ? It is no doubt the
duty of both, according to the strength of their convictions, to endeavour
to spread their own opinions. But are they to excommunicate one an-
other, or look coldly upon one another, on account of this difference ? Is
it to embitter their intercourse, or to debar them from all intercourse?
Is the one to call the other ' heretic,' ' infidel,' and so forth, because he
' perverts ' or ' corrupts ' what appears to his opponent's eyes so ' plainly
revealed,' so ' explicitly declared ' in Scripture ? Alas for our Master's
seamless robe ! Alas for the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace !
How long, Lord, how long?
PKEFACE
TO
THE SECOND EDITION".
It was easy to foresee that this book would receive little
favour from the Eeligious Press.* The amount of hostile
criticism that it has received is neither more nor less
than I expected. The ' orthodox ' have attacked it for
its ' heresy ' on one point ; the ' Liberals ' for its ortho-
doxy on other points. Besides, nearly all the organs
of theological thought in this country are Platonist
* Since writing the above, I have received a letter from the editor
of a religions newspaper in America, in which he says : ' I see by the
Bock that yon are making a brave fight for the truth, and have to
endure some hardness ; therefore may the Lord of Love sustain you in
your efforts to vindicate His character from the aspersions of centuries of
false theology. It is positively astounding that the dogma of the eternal
torment of the wicked should have ever obtained in the Christian
Church. I wonder at, myself, when I think I once believed or accepted it.
Most fatal consequences to the Churches are following in this country.
The Spiritualists and other infidels make this doctrine their main fulcrum
in their attacks upon Christianity; and a mighty power it gives them.
Probably no other gives them so much success in their attacks upon
Christianity and the Bible.'
X PREFACE TO
in their belief that the human soul is indestructible.
They differ widely amongst themselves as to the
conditions of eternal life hereafter in certain cases ;
some following Origen in the belief that all will ulti-
mately be restored to the favour of Grod,* others hold-
ing with Augustine that those who die impenitent will
live for ever in a state of sin and misery. But they
agree in rejecting the revealed truth, so humbling
to human pride, namely, that man is mortal and
fieeth away like a shadow, that the Creator Himself
6 only hath immortality,' that in Christ alone can
anything permanently consist, that only they who eat
of the bread which He gives will live for ever, and
that all moral creatures, on whom the wrath of Grod
* 'I entirely agree with your correspondent in regarding Universalism
as unscriptural. But he is perhaps not so well aware as I am now be-
ginning to be, how many Christians have been driven to adopt that view,
as the only way of escape that presented itself to their minds from the
popular doctrine of eternal torture. Your readers would be astonished
if I were to mention the names of some revered fathers of the Evan-
gelical party, living and dead, who have hoped against hope that all
would eventually be saved, from feeling it utterly impossible that they
could be kept alive for ever for the sole purpose of being tortured.
And, in addition to the hundreds of believers, in and out of my own
congregation, who are rejoicing, either in having their own previous
views confirmed, or in being delivered from the dismal shadow of the
popular delusion, I know of several Universalists who have abandoned
that theory, on having the truth of God's Word put plainly before them.
An aged Christian, who has spent a long life in his Master's service, and
has been a Universalist for thirty-five years, said to me, after reading
The Glory of Christ, " It is as clear as daylight." ' — Letter to the Bock.
THE SECOND EDITION. XI
abidetb with its whole force, must sooner or later ' fail
before Him,' be crushed out of existence, and ' perish
everlastingly.' Naturally, therefore, they join in con-
demning the doctrine here advocated.
It would be uncandid in me, however, not to say,
that while agreeing with the Augustinians in almost all
their other points of controversy with the Origenists, I
feel infinitely greater sympathy with their opponents
than with them, on this particular subject. The heart
and soul of the whole matter is the question, whether
Evil will ever cease, or not. Are sin and suffering to
last for ever, or is the whole Universe to be reconciled
to Grod ? The Universalists accept the revealed truth,
that every enemy shall be destroyed, and God be all in all.
I firmly believe them to be partially mistaken as to the
way in which this will be brought about. The recon-
ciliation of all thing's does not necessitate the restoration
o
of every individual form of life that has ever appeared ;
and, to my mind, Scripture plainly teaches that it will
only be accomplished after the destruction of multi-
tudes of creatures who were made capable of immortal-
ity.* And, believing this, I cannot, of course, doubt
* Hence the title of this book, which has been superficially criticised.
'Is destruction reconciliation?' No; but it may be a necessary pre-
liminary to it. Individuals will be destroye 1, that the universe may
be reconciled. ' In no possible sense of the word,' says the editor of
xii PREFACE TO
that the denial of it, like every other error, must be to a
certain extent injurious. But, compared with the error
of believing that sentient creatures will be kept alive
to all eternity, for the sole purpose of being tortured,
and that without the slightest hope of their deriving one
particle of good from it, in order to enhance the glory
of (xod and the happiness of their fellow-creatures, the
strongest objections that can possibly attach to the
Universalist's creed sink into insignificance. That creed
casts no dark shadow upon the justice and the love of
God, it drives no thoughtful persons into infidelity, nor
is it chargeable with any of the numerous evils that
hang about the neck of the popular doctrine. This
explains why it is so lightly touched upon in the fol-
lowing sermons. My war is against the belief in
Eternal Evil: and that belief is not entertained by
the disciples of Origen — it is entertained by those of
Augustine.
Most of what had previously been written in defence
the Christian Advocate, ' can the destruction of personal existence be
regarded as a reconciliation or restoration. Mr. Minton is compelled
to exempt Hell from the range of things restored as much as we
are.' Yes ; biit my argument is, that the reconciliation of the universe
will be effected by some things being blotted out of it, and not ' restored '
at all. ' Death and Hell ' will be ' cast into the lake of fire,' to be de-
stroyed for ever ; and then ' God will be all in all.' With this argument,
as far as I am aware, no one has attempted to grapple.
THE SECOND EDITION. xiii
of endless torment being directed against Universalism,
I felt some anxiety to see what could be said against
the direct evidence from Scripture in favour of De-
structionism. That anxiety has now been entirely
removed. Several writers have applied their whole
strength to the task, and they have all utterly failed
to shake the evidence in any material point. They
have detected a few mistakes in my conduct of the
aimuuent: but the chief result of their efforts has
been to prove how impregnable is its main position.
Some notice of these replies will be found in the
Appendix. A few preliminary points may be con-
sidered here.
In the first place, as to the tone and spirit in which
such a subject should be treated.
Mr. Grant rebukes me for using 'irony' in the dis-
cussion. But his rebuke falls quite as heavily upon
Elijah, Isaiah, and Paul, not to add upon our Master
Himself. Elijah was fully aware of the importance of
his controversy with the priests of Baal, when he said,
' Peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.'
Isaiah was not forgetting the sinfulness of idolatry,
when he showed its absurdity also. Paul was far
from meaning to use lightness, when he asked the
Corinthians to forgive him the wrong of ministering to
X iv PKEFACE TO
them gratuitously. Nor did Jesus intend to represent
unbelief and persecution as trifling matters, when, at
one time, he likened his opponents to peevish children
quarrelling over their games, and, at another time, told
them that they were the children of their father in more
ways than they thought of. Mr. Grant evidently mis-
takes irony for jesting or levity, and thereupon breaks
forth into an exclamation about there being 'no subject
in the illimitable universe of God ' less suitable for it.
Other remarks, however, have been made, which
are entitled to more serious consideration. And, in
addition to what will be found in my letter to the
Christian Advocate, at the end of this Preface, I would
submit— 1st, That in controversy it is not always easy
to determine whether the probable advantage of
answering a fool according to his folly, ( lest he be
wise in his own conceit,' is great enough to counter-
balance the danger of ' becoming like unto him ;' and,
2ndly, That it is often quite as difficult to determine
how far the sacredness or solemnity of any truth should
be allowed to shield a grievous perversion of it from the
treatment it deserves. Few Protestant controversialists
scruple to handle the doctrine of Transubstantiation
with the utmost freedom, and to describe it as a
monstrous and absurd superstition. Yet the question
THE SECOND EDITION. XV
relates to the bodily presence of the incarnate Son of
God ; and the fact of that presence, under the form of
bread and wine, has been regarded by countless rail-
lions of Christians for many centuries as the central
truth of their religion. So the doctrine of eternal
torment is connected with the solemn subject of final
judgment ; and a still larger proportion of Christians
firmly believe it to be a revealed truth. Yet, while
earnestly desiring to approach it with all ' seriousness
of mind,' I cannot feign ' more modesty of opinion,'
or use ' more deference of language,' with respect to it ;
for nothing can exceed the clearness with which, to my
own mind, the destruction of evildoers, and the recon-
ciliation of all things, are revealed in Scripture; and no
language can express my horror of the popular doc-
trine, or my amazement that any thoughtful person
could ever heartily believe it. It may no doubt be
' more probable ' in the abstract, that the majority
should be right ; but it has so often proved otherwise,
that the test of numbers becomes very precarious in-
deed.* One of our Homilies, not content with express-
* There once sprang up within the Church of God a ' sect ' which was
'everywhere spoken against,' and that not by the heathen, but by the
Church itself. It appealed to ' the oracles of God ; ' but the people, to
whom those oracles were ' committed,' and especially those who ' sat in
Moses' seat' as its authorised expounders, rejected the appeal, and pro-
fe
a
XVI PREFACE TO
ing a modest opinion that the Eeformed Faith may
possibly be the true one, in spite of its being the
faith of a * minority,' boldly asserts that nearly all
Christendom was for ages sunk in idolatry and super-
stition ; and I verily believe that almost the last
remnant of that widespread error, which Evangelical
Christians have now to be delivered from, is the
doctrine of Eternal Evil.
Those who think that ' the words of the living God '
only convey ' general impressions of most just judg-
ment,' must, of course, be ' humbly content ' with such
general impressions ; they must be willing to * wait,'
and ' leave ' all explanations for another world. But
why should they blame others for speaking plainly
what they see distinctly ? Why should they charge
them with seeking to be ' wise above what is written,'
and ' yielding to the pride of intellect,' and not exer-
cising 'simple faith,' and so forth? Secret things —
namely, things not revealed — belong unto God ; but
those which are revealed, however obscurely, belong
nounced the appellants guilty of ' heresy.' Priests and Levites, Scribes
and Pharisees, Saddueees and Herodians, Doctors and Lawyers, though
differing on almost everything else, cordially agreed in condemning the
new sect, root and branch. It was a tremendous prima facie presumption
against it, no doubt ; but the sect was right, and the Church was wrong,
notwithstanding.
THE SECOND EDITION. XVII
to us and to our children. To cry after knowledge,
and lift up our voice for understanding, to seek it as
silver, and search for it as for hid treasure, so that we
may become wise up to what is written, affords no proof
of any desire to reach above it. * The humble Chris-
tian,' says one reviewer, * will believe as it is written.'
No doubt ; but the question remains, What is written ?
The position here maintained is, that the utter de-
struction of those who finally remain out of Christ is
positively revealed in God's word ; but that all its
details are purposely hidden from us. In some form or
other, we are assured, each of them will receive his
own separate desert, many or few stripes; but they
will all be alike in this, — that, not having life, they
must ultimately perish.
This position has been assailed both for its definite-
ness and its indefiniteness. The venerable Dean of
Carlisle warns us against ' daring to define with the
accuracy of critics, or the vain curiosity of philosophers,
what that awful thing may be.' Mr. Garbett, on the
other hand, pronounces that, 'if, indeed, Mr. Minton
deliberately holds that an undefined period is to be
spent by the wicked in torment before they cease to
exist as such, the case is yet stronger against his system
than we thought it to be.' And Mr. Grant adduces our
a 2
XV111 PREFACE TO
acknowledged ignorance as to the duration of future
suffering, supposing it to be temporary, as almost
amounting to proof, that its duration will be eternal.
' There is another consideration which I have not met
with in any books on the subject [very unlikely indeed
that he should], but which weighs much with me in
my belief of the eternity of future punishment. It is
this, that those who repudiate the idea of the never-
ending punishment of the ungodly cannot furnish us
with any information as to the period during which
future punishment will last. ... If their views
on this point are right, there is no resisting the con-
clusion that so far as regards the duration of future
punishment, the Bible, which we otherwise regard as
a revelation from God, is no revelation at all.' And
so on, through two or three pages of such reason-
ing, which he considers e almost amounts to proof,'
and which ' anyone whose mind is unbiassed by pre-
conceived opinions, and uninfluenced by particular
theories, must admit.' In other words, because God
has not thought it necessary to reveal how long or how
short will be the process of destruction in the case
of each lost soul, Mr. Grant refuses to believe what He
does reveal, that they all will be destroyed eventually.
He charges one of the views, against which he contends,
THE SECOND EDITION. XIX
with abolishing degrees of guilt and punishment. What
would he say if its advocates retorted that there can-
not possibly be degrees of punishment at all, or else
God would certainly have revealed ivJiat degree of
punishment each sinner was actually to receive ?
Surely, to borrow his own language, this is something
very like the ' awful presumption ' of ' setting up to be
the judge of God,' of ' dictating to Him,' of ' arrogating
to themselves the right of being wiser than God,' and,
in short, indicates ' a fearful frame of mind.'
If we are right in our belief, that everlasting
destruction is a clearly revealed truth, all objections
grounded on the supposed 'danger ' of promulgating it,
and on the probability of its being misunderstood or
abused, simply fall to the ground. A faithful ambas-
sador will ' not shun to declare all the counsel of God,'
so far as it has been made known to him. Whether men
will hear or whether they will forbear, whether his
message prove a savour of life or a savour of death, he
is bound to speak what he believes, knowing, that what-
ever the results, he must, so far as he is a true witness,
be ' a sweet savour of Christ.' But in this case I am
quite unable to feel that any special exercise of such
faith is required. I see so clearly the disastrous effects
of the popular doctrine and feel so strongly how incom-
XX PREFACE TO
parably more effective a weapon for arresting the atten-
tion of the careless is God's truth than man's attempt
to improve upon it, that no risk of weak believers
being disturbed, or of the truth being misunderstood
and turned into licentiousness, seems too great to incur
for the sake of helping to disseminate that truth.*
What doctrine has not been misunderstood and abused ?
Are the doctrines of justification by faith, and of elec-
tion, always rightly understood by those who hear them ?
Does the offer of free and full forgiveness for the vilest
sinner always produce its proper effect upon the minds
of those who theoretically believe in it ? Does it not
most certainly soothe multitudes into a fatal slumber ?
Yet who proposes to suppress it, or to promulgate it
only in books for the learned ? Who doubts that it is
to be proclaimed aloud to the men that sit on the wall?
Did not our Lord tell His apostles that what He spoke
to them in the ear they were to proclaim upon the
housetops ? And was not one of those sayings ' Fear
Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in
* Mr. Grant appeals to converted persons, and asks whether it was
not ' the conviction that punishments hereafter will be of endless dura-
tion that filled your souls with fear and trembling, and constrained
you to cry out mentally, if not with an audible voice, " What must I do
to be saved?'" Does he really suppose that any such conviction was
present to the mind of the Philippian jailor, when he asked that
question?
THE SECOND EDITION. XXI
hell'? Are we to be told that this truth, of all others,
is only to be confided to the initiated, or suggested in
learned language for the consideration of scholars?
Are we to be told, in the teeth of Christ's own words,
that if it is proclaimed upon the housetops, it will cause
men not to ' fear Him ' ? — that the love of life, long
ago attributed to man, and talked so much about in
every age, is all a delusion ? — that destruction has no
terrors for him, and that non-existence is the very thing
he covets ? What could have driven sensible men into
anything so preposterous, but the unnatural state of
mind engendered by the fiction of eternal torture ?
Destruction a 'boon' ! Yes, in comparison with eternal
torture. But that is comparing it with what has no
existence. The alternative, the only alternative, is an
endless life of perfect happiness. And what must be
the horror of awaking to the consciousness that this
magnificent inheritance is hopelessly lost !
There is a special reason, however, why this truth
should be spoken directly to the people, rather than
submitted to the consideration of them that sit in Moses'
seat ; namely, that in no other way will it ever reach
them at all. The strength of the opposition lies in the
teachers and their more devoted adherents. If this
gigantic error is ever to be overturned, it will be by a
XX11 PREFACE TO
popular movement amongst the religious portion of the
masses. They will not be deterred by the fear of man,
or by the fetters of tradition, from looking the ques-
tion full in the face. And when they have once got a
little help to set them on the right track, and prevent
them being led astray by misunderstanding one or two
familiar expressions, they will only wonder, as several
pious and intelligent persons told me they did on hear-
ing the following sermons, how anyone with the Bible
in his hands could ever have believed that the wicked
were to live for ever.
As to the deterrent effect of the common opinion
upon the irreligious masses, in restraining them from
ojoen wickedness, I believe it is hardly appreciable.
Whenever any fear of the future arises in their minds,
it is a vague indefinite apprehension of something very
terrible, which, however, can always be escaped by re-
penting, even at the last moment. Who can imagine
that it would make the smallest practical difference to
them, whether they understood the general belief of
religious people to be$ that the lost will live for ever in
misery, or be destroyed body and soul in hell ; — that
they will be able to endure the wrath of God to all
eternity, or be crushed to death by it ? At all events,
things could not be much worse than they are ; and
THE SECOND EDITION. XX111
if we might be in any degree guided by experience,
the disastrous failure of the common doctrine would
make us only too ready to try anything else that
coidd pretend to the slightest warrant from Holy
Scripture.
But after all, the Gospel alone is the power of God
unto salvation ; and it is, quite unconsciously in most
cases, a defective faith in its power that makes timid
Christians so alarmed at the rapidly-spreading disbelief
in endless suffering. Of the many astounding things
which this controversy has elicited, none can exceed
the statement of an excellent Evangelical clergyman,
that ' the hand which takes away the doctrine of
eternal punishment, takes the meaning, the object, the
force, the life out of the entire Gospel scheme.' So
that for the words, ' God so loved the world,' &c, to
have any meaning or force, it is necessary that we
should understand « perish ' to mean ' live for ever in
misery,' and ' everlasting life ' to mean ' everlasting-
happiness.' To say that the Gospel is the power of
God unto salvation from everlasting destruction unto
glory and honour and immortality ; that it offers to
guilty, perishing sinners, wisdom, righteousness, sanc-
tification, and redemption ; that, when received, it
gives them eternal life, makes them partakers of the
XXIV PREFACE TO
Divine nature, and exalts them to be heirs of God
and joint-heirs with Christ; to say that it is merely
this, is to ' take the meaning, the object, the force, the
life out of the entire Gospel scheme !' What must be
the force of truth, when the recoil from it can drive
a good and able man into such a position as that !
But he is not alone. A writer in the Bible Trea-
sury, whom the editor describes as ' a valued ser-
vant of God,' though not so sweeping, is even more
precise and dogmatic. ' Kesponsibility and the atone-
ment are lost, and must be so, wherever it is received.'
Therefore, if we believe that only they who eat of the
bread which Christ gives will live for ever, that he who
hath the Son of God hath life, while he who hath not
the Son of God hath not life, we ' must ' give up the
' atonement,' nay, the very belief in human s responsi-
bility ' ! Was ever such a stab given to a doctrine in
the house of its friends ? What an illustration of the
reckless way in which controversialists will sometimes
fling about f firebrands, arrows, and death,' when they
are plunging in a quagmire and endeavouring to beat
off an assailant who stands on firm ground ! *
* The same writer pronounces the Destructionist theory to be ' simply
a work of Satan ; it is infidelity even as to what man is, for in this case
we are beasts with a bigger brain.' So that if God creates a being in
THE SECOND EDITION. XXV
Another proof of the same rashness is afforded by
two contradictory representations that have been given
of the doctrine here maintained, — the one of which is
almost as great a caricature as the other. It has been
described, on the one hand, as reducing future punish-
ment to a mere trifle, and, on the other, as making it
something even more horrible than endless torment.
One person thinks the loss of a glorious immortality,
the being destroyed soul and body in hell, 'nothing
worth talking of,' and says that the ungodly ' will thank
me for my soothing words.' Another asks if ' virtual
annihilation' is not the very thing the wicked desire.
Another compares it to the ' hope of the infidel,' that
there is no hereafter. The above-mentioned writer in
the Bible Treasury considers that 'the passage which
illustrates this doctrine is, " Let us eat and drink, for
to-morrow we die." ' A correspondent of the Rock
regards it as ' making hell to be nothing so formidable
His own image, capable of immortality, capable of knowing and loving
Him for ever, and then, because this being defaces that image by sin and
refuses to have it renewed, destroys him utterly, we must infer that the
being so created was only ' a beast with a bigger brain ' ! Anything
above that must be absolutely indestructible, even by the Creator Him-
self!
And this is maintained, let it be observed, by the special champion
selected by the editor of a religious magazine to combat my arguments
— ' a valued servant of God, who has seen much of the workings of this
pernicious system.'
XXVI PREFACE TO
after all, little more than a painted fire.'* And the
Editor himself argues, that it 'reduces the Divine
threatenings to the extreme of absurdity,' for ' if Mr.
Minton will persist in interpreting future punishment as
non-existence, how could it have been better for Judas
that he should never have been born?'
Mr. Grant, on the other hand, regards my view as
' the most awful and repulsive of any form in which
the doctrine of Destruction has ever yet been presented
to the human mind,' creating in him ' a revulsion of
mind which no words that he could use would ade-
quately express.' f On reading the first of those ex-
* How differently the doctrine strikes other minds may be seen by
the following extract from a letter addressed by an Australian clergy-
man to the Kev. W. Ker : ' What a motive, too, to thrill through the
hearts of believers in Jesus — making them in deepest earnest to win
perishing souls for Him, and to communicate to all unsaved the know-
ledge of His blessed Gospel— is the fact that Life and Immortality only
come to men through His blood. Ever since the Lord called me, a
child of twelve years of age, now twenty-six years ago, I have always
yearned over unconverted souls, and fervently desired their salvation,
and been stirred up to speak, and write, and visit, and do anything I
could think of to reach hearts in His name. But I never felt so stirred
up as since getting this idea from your book — that if they do miss sal-
vation by Christ, they are all dead men, doomed to complete destruc-
tion. Life, life, eternal life by the blood of Jesus ! How can those
who have it be absorbed in anything else but how they may com-
municate it to others ? '
f Mr. Grant's horror of the Scripture doctrine of everlasting destruc-
tion knows no bounds. He tells us of one, who ' began his theological
career both as author and preacher as a Unitarian, and, as many others
holding the class of views indicated by that term have done since his
THE SECOND EDITION. XXV11
pressions I was quite at a loss to imagine what he
meant, being unconscious of any material point in
which my views differed from those of other Destruc-
tionists, and wondering greatly what there could be in
any view of limited suffering so to horrify a believer
in unlimited suffering. And what does the reader
suppose it is? Why, simply the length of time which
he imagines that I expect to elapse before the con-
demned are actually destroyed. 'Mr. Minton has
embraced the doctrine of the complete and eternal
destruction, both of body and soul, of the ungodly,
after they have endured torment immeasurably more
terrible than the mind can conceive, for, it may be,
countless ages.'
Now, in the first place, I have embraced no such
doctrine, and think it in the last degree unlikely. My
doctrine is, that nothing whatever has been revealed
with reference to the duration of future suffering,
day, he gradually descended in his religious belief, until he got to the
low deep — than which there is no lower — of embracing the doctrine of
Annihilation.' Therefore Mr. Grant regards the belief that ' the wages
of sin is death' as worse than denying the Incarnation or the Atone-
ment, and at least as bad as Atheism, Pantheism, Paganism, or any
form of unbelief or superstition to which the human mind is capable
of sinking ! There is ' no lower ' !
He also describes the doctrine as ' cold, cheerless, repulsive ; ' the in-
ference being that he regards his own doctrine as warm, cheerful, and
attractive.
XXV111 PREFACE TO
except that it will, sooner or later, end in the de-
struction of the condemned. It is somewhat remark-
able that a private correspondent wrote to me, 'You
have evidently made up your mind that the destruc-
tion of the wicked will be instantaneous.' This was
as far wrong on the other side. I hold that the pro-
cess of destruction may be more prolonged, and will
certainly be more terrible, in one case than another —
answering to the ' many ' or ' few stripes.' What will
be the nature or duration of it in any case, I cannot
guess.
But still, even supposing that had been my view,
how could it appear so dreadful to one who holds some-
thing infinitely — yes, infinitely, in the fullest sense of
the term — more 'awful' and 'appalling' (words which
he elsewhere applies to his own doctrine) than any
possible number of ages of ' the most appalling agonies
of body and anguish of soul,' even though indicated by
a line of figures reaching from this earth to the farthest
star ? Mr. Grant's ' revulsion of mind ' is solely caused
by this frightful torment coming to an end ! Only let
it go on for ever, and his mind can rest on it with entire
satisfaction.
He seems to have felt the inconsistency of this ; and
has recourse to a stratagem that is but too familiar
THE SECOND EDITION. XXIX
in controversy. He deliberately asserts, without a
word of proof, as if it were a self-evident proposition,
and that in two different parts of his book, that if
God inflicts any limited amount of suffering upon the
condemned, before destroying them, it must be done
' gratuitously,' without any moral necessity, because He
' is a vindictive Being,' ' actuated by a spirit of revenge,'
and ' luxuriating in the frightful misery of millions of
those whom He called into existence, without its being
necessary that He should do so, whereas ' — pray let the
reader observe the quietness of the assumption — ' the
doctrine of eternal punishment is based on the belief that
nothing less will satisfy the demand of Divine justice.'
I thought it was supposed to be based upon two or
three texts of Scripture. The doctrine of limited
suffering is certainly based upon some hundreds. And
those positive declarations of God's Word establish the
' belief,' which, from the moral nature that God has
given us, we might 'even of ourselves judge to be
right,'* that some penal suffering, how much or how
little we cannot tell, is necessary ' to satisfy the de-
* Even Mr. Grant says : ' Let me now very briefly invite attention
to what Reason says on the subject.' But when we invite attention to
it, even though we ' feel a thorough persuasion that it speaks the same
language as Inspiration,' we are stigmatised as ' Rationalists,' and are
sharply rebuked for setting up our own judgment against the Word of
God.
XXX PREFACE TO
mands of Divine justice,' but that endless suffering
would violently outrage that justice. The worst part of
the matter is, that Mr. Grant puts this 'gratuitous'
aspect of the case as if it were part of our doctrine.
No one would gather a hint from his remarks that we
could possibly believe in any necessity for limited
suffering. ' As I have said, in dealing with Mr. Min-
ton's arguments in his newly-published work, there is
something so utterly unlike the character of God, and
so awfulty dishonouring to Him, in the belief that He
will gratuitously subject His creatures,' &c. What is
this but to represent it as my ' belief,' in defence of
which I have adduced ' arguments,' that God will
'gratuitously ' inflict punishment upon His creatures?
The writer in the Bible Treasury adopts the same
subterfuge. ' Pure vengeance for a lengthened period
on what is to perish is gratuitous misery.' Then what
must the ' vengeance ' be that is inflicted for an endless
period on what is never to perish !
So also Mr. Waller, Tutor of St. John's Hall, High-
bury, thus represents my argument : —
( It is inconceivable that a God of love should keep
any of His creatures in everlasting tortures, though they
may still be of service in His dominion, as I shall pre-
sently show. But it is quite conceivable that for no
THE SECOND EDITION. XXXI
purpose whatever (I) except mere vengeance and retri-
bution, a God of love should keep some of His creatures
in prolonged torment, simply to annihilate them when
it is over. What should we think of a law which, having
condemned a criminal to death, sentenced him to he
first imprisoned and tortured to his utmost powers of
endurance, as long as he could possibly be kept alive ?
Is this more merciful or more just than the doctrine
which Mr. Minton condemns ? To my mind it is most
monstrous. It is like the old barbarous laws of disem-
bowelling, burning alive, boiling, crucifying, impaling,
starving, pressing to death those sentenced to die. The
ultimate annihilation makes the previous torture hard
indeed to justify ! '
Most certainly, as compared with his own view, that
the tortures will be continued for ever, and death never
be allowed to release the sufferer from them, even the
above monstrous caricature of the doctrine of Scripture
would be tender mercy itself.
Strangest of all, even Mr. Garbett has endorsed this
palpable fallacy.
' We most fully agree in the view so vividly expressed
by Mr. Grant in his book, that this belief appears to
the mind most horrible, and incalculably to exceed in
horror the ordinary orthodox doctrine. For, in this
XXXU PREFACE TO
case, God must be supposed to keep the wicked alive in
order that He may torment them, lingering over the
process of dissolution as if to crowd into it as much
agony as possible ; whereas, in the orthodox view the
eternity of existence is but a part of that mystery of
being with which God endowed His creatures at the be-
ginning, and the endless suffering but a perversion of
that lofty capacity of nature which was formed to be a
vehicle of everlasting joy, and which human sin alone
has changed into a vehicle of everlasting suffering.' *
Surely God can withdraiv any nature with which He
has ' endowed ' any of ' His creatures at the beginning/
Every creature is dependent upon God for existence
from one moment to another. ' In Him we live, and
* This is certainly not the view that was taken of ' endless suffering '
by that profound and learned divine, Jonathan Edwards, if we may
judge from the following passage in his writings, which describes some-
thing very much beyond ' a perversion ' of man's ' lofty capacity of
nature' : —
' The world will probably be converted into a great lake or liquid
globe of fire — a vast ocean of fire, in which the wicked shall be over-
whelmed, which will always be in tempest, in which they shall be tossed
to and fro, having no rest day or night, vast waves or billows of fire
continually rolling over their heads, of which they shall for ever be full
of a quick sense within and without; their heads, their eyes, their
tongues, their hands, their feet, their loins, and their vitals shall for
ever be full of a glowing, melting fire, enough to melt the very rocks
and elements. Also they shall be full of the most quick and lively
sense to feel the torments — not for one minute, not for one day, not for
one age, nor for two ages, nor for a thousand ages, nor for ten thousand
of millions of ages, one after another, but for ever and ever, without
any end at all, and never, never be delivered ! '
THE SECOND EDITION. XXX111
move, and have our being.' Therefore, when a moral
creature like man has turned his 'lofty capacity of
nature ' into a curse, God may either deprive him of life
altogether, or leave, him to endure the consequences of
his own sin. In the latter case, it is to all intents
and purposes 'keeping him alive.' No creature can
live an instant longer than God chooses. 'The
mystery of his being ' may affect the mode in which
Divine power is exerted for its sustenance ; but, prac-
tically, an Archangel is kept alive by God as much
as an insect.* It is, therefore, a purely gratuitous,
groundless assumption, to say that it may be necessary
to keep fallen creatures alive for ever under punish-
ment, but that it cannot be necessary to keep them alive
under it for a time. The argument that no limited
* Since writing the above, I have met with the same argument in
the Bainbow, March 1869 : —
' To our aspirations for eternity, Scripture answers by the promise of
eternal life through Christ Jesus ; but there it stops. An essential
immortality of the soul it denies as explicitly as it denies it to the body.
To one Being only — to God — does it allow to have 'Life in Himself: '
of one Being only — God — does it allow immortality, i.e. the absolute
incapacity of death (adavaaia), to be an attribute (John v. 26 ; 1 Tim.
vi. 16). And here, as in everything else, Scripture, is the book of the
highest reason. That which has had a beginning may have an end.
That on which God has bestowed life He may and can inflict death upon.
The highest intelligences, as much as the lowest, must depend on Him
for the continuance of their life. Let Him withdraw His sustaining
power, and the mighty archangel becomes a thing of naught as com-
pletely as the insect which dances in the sunbeams for an hour and then
passes away for ever.'
b2
XXXIV PREFACE TO
amount of punishment would be an adequate manifes-
tation of the Divine wrath, however it may make one
shudder, is at least based upon the exceeding sinful-
ness of sin. But to represent unlimited suffering as a
righteous necessity, while the infliction of any limited
number of stripes is represented as ' pure vengeance,'
that cruelly ' lingers over the process of dissolution, as
if to crowd into it as much agony as possible,' is simply
to assume, that if a moral creature forfeits his life by
sin, it must be taken away from him instantaneously
and painlessly, or he is treated cruelly.
Besides, even if God had endowed man's soul at the
beginning with an indestructible existence, his body
was certainly not thus endowed ; so that the raising of
the bodies of the wicked, and keeping them for ever in
torment, would be as much the direct act of God Him-
self, as Scripture represents their future temporary
sufferings to be. The gift of immortality would be be-
stowed upon their mortal bodies, for the express purpose
of aggravating the pain, which it is said that the soul,
being indestructible and impenitent, must necessarily
endure to all eternity.
Subjoined is a letter, which the Editor of the Chris-
tian Advocate was kind enough to insert after the
appearance of his first article on the subject of these
THE SECOND EDITION. XXXV
sermons, and which contains some remarks that would
otherwise have been made here.
Several expressions that were found in the first
edition of this volume have been withdrawn, as liable
to srive needless offence to honoured brethren who
differ from me. I wish that I could conscientiously
have withdrawn others.* But further reflection only
confirms me in the belief, that this question demands
the plainest possible dealing ; and I must therefore take
up the cross, which many of my friends will say that I
have made for myself, and continue to speak what I
believe. He Who has called me to this work knows
my heart, and will not make me an offender for a
word. There is no cause, I am confident, that any of
His servants could undertake, in which He would be
* It has been suggested to me, for instance, in no unfriendly spirit,
that the words ' God would suffer an eternal defeat ' (p. 26) ' savour
of irreverence.' But in what do they differ from the words, ' God is not
unrighteous to forget your work of faith ? ' or 'It was impossible
for God to lie ? ' or 'He cannot deny Himself ? ' The Apostle's
argument is — God cannot act unrighteously, tell a lie, or deny Himself;
under such and such circumstances He would be doing so ; therefore
such circumstances cannot possibly arise. My argument is — God can-
not suffer an eternal defeat; under such and such circumstances He
would be doing so ; therefore such circumstances cannot arise. Where
is the difference ? What is there more irreverent in saying that it is
impossible for God to suffer an eternal defeat than in saying that it is
impossible for Him to lie ? Does not our whole confidence in God, from
first to last, rest upon such postulates ? And St. Paul's example proves,
if any proof be required, that there is no irreverence in appealing to
them.
XXXVI PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
more ready to pardon any infirmities or imperfections,
than that of endeavouring to wipe off the most terrible
aspersion that has ever been cast upon His character.
In such a cause, 'It is a very small matter that I
should be judged of man's j udgment : yea, I judge not
mine own self; for I know nothing by myself, yet am
I not hereby justified, but he that judgeth me is the
Lord.'
May every reader join in the prayer, ' What I know
not, teach Thou me.'
S. M.
April 1869.
XXXV11
To the Editor of the ' Christian Advocate.' 1
Dear Sir,
I believe it is not customary for Magazines to admit
replies to their own articles; but, under the exceptional cir-
cumstances of my case, perhaps you will allow me a few
words.
First, let me thank you for the tone of brotherly kindness
with which you speak of myself personally, as well as for the
candour and moderation with which you express your dissent
from my views. The ' pain ' that has been caused by them
to yourself and others can be as nothing compared with that
which the knowledge of it inflicts upon me. It is not what
they may say or do that I care about, but what I know that they
think and feel. The bare thought of it would, but for Divine
grace, have utterly unnerved me in attempting the task to
which I feel imperatively called.
You complain of the 'temper' and 'spirit' of my book.
It is only too probable that there may be much to complain
of on that ground. But I must beg you to distinguish between
the tone in which I speak of the doctrine and the tone in
which I speak of its advocates. They are simply opposite
extremes. Right or wrong, I felt that the only way to deal
effectually with the doctrine was to smite it with all the
power that God might give me. In the mode of doing so
XXXV111 LETTER TO THE EDITOR OP
I doubtless may have erred. I am not conscious of anything
in the whole book that I ought not to have thought and felt,
but there may be things in it that would have been better not
said. It is the familiar difficulty in controversy — to know
how far Ave ought to restrain the full expression of our own
feelings out of deference to the feelings of our opponents. We
are aware, for instance, how deeply a devout Eomanist is
shocked by what appears to him the blasphemy with which
our Article speaks of the Mass. He regards the Mass as
a sacred mystery : we as a superstitious fiction. Are we to
pain him by giving full expression to our convictions ? or, are
we to say less than we feel, out of respect to his honest,
though mistaken, belief? If I have not acted sufficiently on
the latter principle, I exceedingly regret it; but as to the
substance of my book, I feel compelled to say, with the out-
spoken Eeformer whose change of views must have deeply
grieved many of his former friends, and whose headlong zeal
drew forth expostulations even from his sympathisers, ' Here
I stand : I can do no otherwise. God help me. Amen.'
With regard, however, to multitudes of eminent saints,
living and dead, who have held and defended that doctrine, I
have not a hard thought, and trust that I have not uttered a
hard word. That I could have no intention of doing so, must
be sufficiently evident both from what I have said of them in
several parts of my book, and from the fact that any censure of
them would in some measure at least have fallen upon myself
also. With reference to the injurious effects alleged to be pro-
duced upon Christian character by this doctrine, you adduce
the names of men who, through believing it, have excelled in
the very graces referred to. I fully admit it ; but still, if you
THE 'CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE.' XXXIX
will allow me to quote my own words, ' However good these
eminent saints may have been, they would have been better
still if they had been free from this theoretical error.' And
elsewhere I speak of them as ' far brighter saints, more
thoroughly furnished divines, and more zealous evangelists '
than myself. Indeed, were I to say all that I feel on this head,
no one would believe me. So I will content myself with as-
suring you, that the only doubt I ever feel for a single moment
arises entirely from thoughts about myself. The truth ap-
pears to me as clear as daylight : my sole difficulty is to believe
that it is I who see it.
This leads me to remark further, that the appearance of
presumption in denying the common doctrine is not nearly so
great now as it would have been some years since. It is
surely not correct to describe me in this matter as ' one
solitary clergyman.' Mr. Grant hJ m self admits that disbelief
in it has spread, and is spreading, with marvellous rapidity
even amongst Evangelical clergymen. He intimates that in
one diocese there is scarcely a clergyman who believes it ;
and though this is no doubt an exaggeration, yet the incident
he mentions proves that there must be a very wide-spread
defection. I have been perfectly astonished to find the
number, both of clergymen and laymen, who had previously
arrived at the same conviction with myself; several in my
own congregation, whom I never in the least suspected of
doubting the common doctrine. It is true that Universalism
is spreading still more rapidly than the belief in destruction,
but you will be greatly surprised before long to find how
many will openly range themselves on the side upon which I
take my humble stand.
xl LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF
The only other point that I should like to touch on is that
of ' Eationalism.' Here we are more unfairly treated than
on any other part of the controversy. Even your candour
has partially failed at this point, though, I am sure, quite
unconsciously.*
* To show how recklessly the word ' Eationalism ' is sometimes used
as a mere term of reproach, without the slightest reference to its
meaning, it may be worth mentioning that a leading article upon
this subject in the Bock was headed ' Eationalism in the Pulpit ; '
while its chief ground of complaint against me was that I insisted
upon a too literal interpretation of Scripture, without making sufficient
allowance for its metaphorical language ; in other words, that I would
not consent to rationalise away such plain terms as ' life,' ' death,' and
' destruction.'
The following remonstrance was addressed to the editor : —
' First, as to the application of the term " Eationalism " to a belief in
the " everlasting destruction " of the wicked. It is just as reasonable as
was the application of the term " Irringisni " some time ago to a belief
in the personal reign of Christ; when Dr. M'Neile and a few other
Evangelical men were thought to have " lost their senses," and " got out of
their depth," and been " led astray by the pride of intellect," and " fallen
into a snare of the devil," and so forth, in presumptuously opposing the
general opinion of the Evangelical world, and paralysing its missionary
zeal, by " relaxing the motives and obligations" to preach the Gospel to
the heathen. No ; I am wrong. It is not nearly so reasonable ; for
the Irvingites did believe in the personal reign, while Eationalists do
not in general believe in " everlasting destruction," but rather lean to
universal salvation. I agree with them in denying the eternity of evil;
but if that makes me a Eationalist, then to agree with Eomanists in
denying the claims of Mahomet must make us all Eomanists. What is
there in the doctrine of the nature of Eationalism ? Absolutely nothing.
I ground it entirely on the authority of Scripture, and maintain that it
is the plain, direct, positive teaching of the whole Bible : there being
only three or four expressions that are not manifestly and palpably in
harmony with it, and every one of those, on careful consideration, ad-
mitting of such an interpretation as, in the langunge of our article, does
not " so expound one place of Scripture, that it be contrary to another." '
It may be added, that although five leading articles, and several letters,
THE 'CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE.' xll
You speak of our agreeing with the Rationalists. We do
no such thing. They are almost to a man Universalists. Our
excellent friend Mr. Birks, who is still justly regarded as an
oracle by the Evangelical party, goes more than half way with
them in believing that all will ultimately be saved from gin,
though not from suffering. We, on the contrary, believe that
those who are sentenced to everlasting punishment will utterly
perish, and be destroyed body and soul in hell. But even if
we did agree with the Rationalists, why should that make us
doubt the soundness of our position any more than your
agreeing with the Sacerdotalists should make you doubt the
soundness of your position ? If on the merely negative
side of our position we stand by Francis Newman and Pro-
fessor Jowett, you stand, on the positive side of yours, by
John Henry Newman and Dr. Pusey.
But my chief ground of complaint lies in the assumption,
which nearly all the advocates on your side make, that we
are biassed in our views by semi-rationalistic principles.
Some may be so, but many are not. I entirely demur to
your inference from my remarks about the way in which a
practical unbeliever may be turned into a positive infidel by
this doctrine. I know Christians who were first led to doubt
it, not in the least by feeling its difficulty, but by being
struck with the unnatural meaning it assigns to life and death
had appeared in the Bock, all endeavouring to show my ' unspeakable,
folly' in believing that the finally impenitent will be 'destroyed soul
and body in hell,' or, as the Athanasian Creed expresses it, ' perish
everlastingly,' its readers were subsequently informed, in an article upon
the writings of Origen, that he held, ' like Mr. Minton of modern times,
that all men, however bad, though dying without repentance, and that
even devils, would be finally restored to God's favour.'
xlii LETTER TO THE ( CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE.'
in Holy Scripture. But, granting that some do begin by see-
ing that it is highly improbable, have not many converts from
Komanism begun by seeing the extreme difficulty of believing
in transnbstantiation ? "What matter is it how the investiga-
tion begins, if the enquirer becomes perfectly satisfied at last
that the doctrine in question is unscriptural ? We maintain
with reference to eternal evil just the three positions that you
maintain with reference to transubstantiation — that the texts
adduced to prove it wholly fail to do so, that other texts dis-
prove it, and that it is inherently impossible. You say that
the incredibility which Ave allege lies only in our own minds,
for that you do not feel it to be at all incredible. The
Eomanist would say the same to you. He would say that you
first conjure up a supposed impossibility, and then wrest the
plainest language of Scripture to make it fit your preconceived
ideas about the properties of matter. Yet you do not refrain,
for fear of being called a Rationalist, from pressing him with
the impossibility of his doctrine. Neither shall we. And my
firm conviction that, whatever may be made of my arguments,
you will entirely fail to prove your position by Scripture, arises
not only from twenty-three years' study of the subject, but
also from my perfect confidence that the Bible is the Word of
God, and therefore cannot possibly teach anything so utterly
inconsistent with the character of its Author.
I am, yours faithfully,
SAMUEL MINTON.
PREFACE
TO
THE FIRST EDITION.
The wide-spread belief in the Eternity of Evil is
perhaps the most astounding phenomenon that has ever
appeared in the history of the human mind. There is
nothing at all to be compared to it, except the belief
in Transubstantiation. No human ingenuity could
invent a more absolute physical impossibility than the
one, or a more absolute moral impossibility than the
other. But there is this great difference between them :
that the one only insults and degrades the human under-
standing ; the other casts a fearful aspersion upon the
moral character of God. And though it is no more
possible to degrade man's intellect than to degrade
his body, without demoralising him, yet the theory of
Transubstantiation does not so directly blaspheme the
Majesty of Heaven as the theory of Eternal Evil. The
xliv TKEFACE TO
one charges God with performing a stupendous piece of
jugglery, the other accuses Him of infinite cruelty.*
* In justification of this expression, let the language of St. Paul
be remembered : ' God is not unrighteous to forget your work and
labour of love.' Any doctrine, therefore, which taught that God did
forget our good works would charge Him with unrighteousness. Just
so, as God lias told us that the wages of sin is death, a doctrine which
teaches that He will inflict on sinners a punishment infinitely greater
than He has Himself declared to be the just desert of sin, charges Him
with infinite cruelty.
Same persons will doubtless be greatly shocked by the language in
which this doctrine is stated in the following pages, just as many others
are shocked by the abominations of the confessional being publicly ex-
posed. They ought to be shocked, not by such things being stated,
but by their being believed or practised. What kind of doctrine
must that be which will not bear being stated in plain terms ? And
what kind of practice must that be which will not bear being brought
to light ?
The following extract from a letter of the Eev. Dr. Leask, editor of
the Rainbow, to Mr. James Grant, will show that I am not alone in
feeling it right to use great plainness of speech upon this subject : —
• With the greatest respect for you. I must decline inserting your
letter, for which I hope you will pardon me, when I express my pro-
found sorrow that you hare written a book in vindication of the mon-
strous absurdity, the wicked blasphemy against the God of heaven, that
any human creature is to suffer unending torments, literally everlasting
agony. I am amazed how any man who has the slightest conception of
the Divine character can believe that frightful and utterly unscriptural
doo-ma. If there be one fact in the Word of God clearer than another,
it is His settled purpose to destroy sin and sorrow out of His universe,
and to make all things new. The " destruction " of every creature who
is not united to Christ, " who only hath immortality." is the revealed law
of action. It is settled that a time is coming when God will be all in
all. No being destitute of the Divine nature will exist in the universe
of God, when He shall have completed His most glorious purpose.
Man. by nature, is mortal. In the entire Bible you will not find im-
mortalitv predicated of man as such. Death is the wages of sin ; life
is the gift of God.
THE FIRST EDITION. xlv
But why use such strong language ? Because nothing
less will open men's eyes to see what a monstrous doc-
trine they are at least professing to hold. The subject
has generally been treated, except by infidels, far too
apologetically. Men have stood trembling before this
huge idol, and half apologising for venturing to express
a doubt whether it is really possessed of any actual life,
instead of taking the sword of the Spirit and hewing it
in pieces before the Lord. This has resulted from two
causes : First, from their not having sufficiently grappled
with the whole teaching of Scripture upon the ques-
tion to feel perfectly certain of its thorough con-
sistency ; and secondly, from the dread of party excom-
munication.*
The most wonderful thing connected with this doctrine
is the tenacity with which it is, or has been until very
recently, held almost universally by ' Evangelicals.' That
' Out of respect for you, I purposely avoided entering into particulars ;
otherwise I should have had to condemn the book toto ccelo. Sooner
than advocate the atrocious calumny against God, that He will keep
wretched beings in life for the purpose of tormenting them as long as
He himself exists, I would rather be broken on the wheel.'
* ' In a free country parties will always be found ; and party has its
ties, its friendships, its antipathies. Join it, and you are welcome ;
stand aloof from it, and you are watched ; desert it, and you are abused
—all the more bitterly, the more nearly you approach the party you
abandon.'— Life of Wilberforce. By J. C. Colquhoun.
xlvi PEEFACE TO
believers in the Grospel of the Grace of Grod, some of
the closest followers in the world of the Apostle Paul,
should consider it such an essential part of their system
as to call the denial of it heresy if not infidelity, is
surely passing strange. Why should they be so
devoted to a doctrine, which, if heartily believed and
realised, would break the stoutest heart, or drive the
strongest mind raving mad; which virtually robs the
Law of its terrors, by making it impossible to be-
lieve that such a threat will ever be executed ; which
weakens the power of the Gfospel, by enveloping the
Love, that it is its glory to proclaim, in a dense cloud
of hopeless darkness ; which damps the Christian's joy
and hope, by telling him that evil will never cease, but
that the most frightful discord will for ever mar crea-
tion's harmony; and which drives multitudes into
positive infidelity, by representing the Bible as abso-
lutely committed to the truth of something utterly
incredible ? It is partly because so few of them have
time and inclination for a searching investigation of what
appears at first a very difficult subject, and partly be-
cause, on great questions, they will move only together.
It is morally impossible for so large a number of persons
to rid themselves simultaneously of such a deeply-rooted
prejudice, and the force of party discipline prevents
THE FIRST EDITION. xlvii
anyone breaking the ranks, unless he is prepared either
to leave his party altogether or to be ostracised by it.*
Personally, I have no desire for either one or the
other. As to everything that concerns the Gospel,
I am still distinctively * Evangelical ; ' though I never
have been, and never will be, in bondage to the arbi-
trary bye-laws, narrow prejudices, and antiquated tra-
ditions, of any party whatever. But I see so clearly
how utterly unscriptural this doctrine is, and what
incalculable injury it is doing to the cause of Christ,
that no personal considerations can make me hesitate
for a moment to speak what I believe. For ' not the
truth which a man knows, but that which he says
and lives, becomes the soul's life ; truth cannot bless,
except when it is lived for, proclaimed, and suffered
for.' I well know my own powerlessness to influence
public opinion ; but, when a gun is ready loaded and
* I am sorry to be obliged to say, that the spirit and temper dis-
played by some persons who hare a great ' name to live,' since the
delivery of these sermons, only too painfully illustrates the following
observations of Mr. Spurgeon in 'Morning by Morning,' on the words
' Ephraim is a cake not turned ' (Hos. vii. 8). ' A cake not turned is
soon burnt on the side nearest the fire; and although no man can have
too much religion, there are some who seem burnt black with bigoted
zeal for that part of truth which they have received, or are charred to a
cinder with a vainglorious Pharisaic ostentation of those religious per-
formances which suit their humour. The assumed appearance of superior
sanctity frequently accompanies a total absence of all vital godliness.
The cake which is burned on one side is dough on the other.'
xlviii PREFACE TO
cocked, a child may pull the trigger; and that I
believe to be precisely the present state of this ques-
tion.* I have been astonished at the number of
persons who, since the delivery of these sermons, have
told me how long such thoughts have been working
in their minds, and how much relieved they have been
by finding expression given to them. The mine seems
ready to burst; and perhaps the only thing needed is
to let it be seen that this monstrous excrescence, which
Satan has contrived to fasten upon the Divine Eevela-
tion, can be cut away from it, without touching its foun-
dations, except vastly to strengthen them, and without
robbing it of one particle of its glory, but rather
* A list of some -works recently published in favour of the view
presented in these pages will be found at the close. To Mr. White's
book I am indebted for the first gleam of light that I ever received upon
this subject ; and I can heartily endorse the following remarks of Mr.
Davis : —
' The same truth had been enforced by the Kev. Edward White, one
among the earliest and best of the writers of this century on the subject ;
though his volume, as was almost inevitable at the period when he
engaged in the controversy, was not wholly free from error. The gist
of all recent arguments may be found there : and I acknowledge with
deep gratitude my own obligation to it. Although I only accepted con-
fidently, after long study, his general conclusion, I shall never forget
how much light his earnest pages threw upon my faith, and the great
relief that I derived from their perusal. The volume was written by
Mr. White in early life, and he would probably modify much of its
argumentation now; but, published with admirable moral courage, and
a noble disregard of temporal interests, it has done good service in the
cause of Truth.'
THE FIRST EDITION. xlix
enabling that glory to shine forth with greater bril-
liancy than ever. If the following pages should be
made use of by the Spirit of God to conduce ever so
slightly to that end, I shall feel that I have not run
in vain, neither laboured in vain. I am overwhelmed
with a sense of the favour that Grod has bestowed upon
me in awakening me out of a hideous dream. To be em-
ployed in awakening others out of it also would seem
too great an honour for me to believe possible, but that
He so constantly chooses the weak things of the world
to confound the mighty, and things which are not to
bring to nought things that are.
One word to those who put the subject aside, not
wishing to have their minds ' disturbed ' about it. Do
they love their neighbours as themselves ? If they
had believed themselves to be condemned to endless
suffering, would not their hearts bound at the bare
possibility that they might be ultimately released from
their misery, even at the expense of being blotted out of
creation ? But as the question relates only to others,
albeit including perhaps their own fathers or mothers,
husbands or wives, brothers or sisters, sons or daughters,
who may have died out of Christ, they do not wish to
be disturbed (!) with such a hope being suggested for
them, and refuse even to examine the grounds on which
c2
1 PREFACE TO
it is maintained. They object to being troubled with
* controversy ' ! What can account for this? Only
the palpable fact that the doctrine has no hold what-
ever on their real feeling, but is simply an abstract
theory, which they are compelled to admit on the
supposed authority of Scripture. A particular inter-
pretation of certain texts has been so drilled into them
from childhood, that they cannot conceive any other as
possible ; and therefore to throw doubt on the Eternity
of Evil, they regard as tantamount to throwing doubt
on the truth of Scripture.
But surely they ought to see the difference between
an infidel, who says, See what horrible doctrine Scrip-
ture teaches, and a believer, who says, See what horrible
doctrine the traditions of men have falsely attributed
to Scripture ; between one who uses the popular theory
as a weapon wherewith to attack the Bible, and one
who, instead of vainly attempting to parry the blow,
endeavours to wrest the weapon out of his hand. To
the former, ordinary Christians may well be excused
for turning a deaf ear. But to the latter, however weak
and insignificant he may be in himself, it might be
expected that they would strain their ears in listening,
if only in the faint hope that he might be able to
throw a gleam of light on the darkness, by sug-
THE FIRST EDITION. li
gesting at least the possibility of understanding the
testimony of Scripture in some less gloomy sense.
Why do they ever cease to examine and re-examine
the Bible for themselves, to see if there is not some
way of escape from the oppressive burden which their
traditional belief lays upon them ? Why are they not
perpetually asking everyone they know, who is com-
petent to give an opinion, whether the original words
necessarily convey the meaning commonly attached to
them ? Why do they not eagerly grasp at the veriest
straws, that offer the slightest hope of helping them out
of this slough of despond ? If it were a question that
could in any degree shake the foundation of their faith,
or interfere with their peace of mind, the case would
be very different.* But as it is, when the result of
shaking off their old tradition would be enormous gain
without a particle of loss, their resenting even the sug-
gestion of such a hope is intelligible only on the sup-
position that their theory has not enough effect upon
their feelings to make them willing to be troubled with
any thought about it. And here is just the root — one
root at least — of the dislike felt by many persons to
* The Eternity of Evil has lately been called a ' vital doctrine.' It
seems hard to understand how it can be essential, or in any way con-
ducive, to the life of a believer.
Hi PREFACE TO
have the subject broached. They cannot bear the
trouble of thinking ; to weigh evidence and judge for
themselves is too much for them. They have also an
uneasy feeling, that if they should find themselves to
have been wrong in one point they may likewise be
wrong in another, and where is it to stop ? So they
have a horror of anything being disturbed ; they want
just to think and feel, and believe, and act, as they
have always done. From the eternal torment of their
dearest friends, down to the chanting of a psalm or the
arrangement of a service, they love ' old ' things, and
dread anything 'new,' mistaking the 'old paths' of
habit for the old paths of truth.*
Much the same answer may be given to another
question, which, as a matter of feeling, I should like to
* The statements above have been abundantly justified by the tone
of numerous letters which have since reached me. One person ' was
happy to say ' that this book had not shaken his faith in the doctrine
of eternal evil ; another, who was rather staggered by it at first, after-
wards felt ' greatly relieved' 1 to find that he could still retain his old
opinions ; while a third promised to read it, but ' without even wishing
to agree with me.' In each of these cases, which are fair samples of
many others, the feeling of satisfaction was not at being able to believe
in endless suffering, supposing it to be revealed, but at finding, as they
thought, that it was revealed : they positively wished the doctrine to be
true. It disturbed them less, to think that millions of their fellow-
creatures will writhe in eternal agony, than it would have done to dis-
cover and acknowledge that they themselves had been in error. So
Jonah would rather that all Nineveh had perished, than that he should
have appeared to be a false prophet.
THE FIRST EDITION. lili
dispose of at once. If the doctrine, it may be asked, is
as bad as you represent, how can many of the believers
in it so excel in holiness ? Everyone becomes like
that which he worships. How, then, can any spark of
»love remain within the breast of one who worships a
God capable of inflicting endless suffering upon His own
creatures ? What kind of character must be formed in
the worshipper of a God, whose goodness will never
extend beyond causing eternal good to preponderate
over eternal evil ? The truth is, they do not worship
such a God. They have two distinct Gods, the ono to
argue about, the other to love and adore. When
Scripture has to be defended against the charge of
teaching an incredible doctrine, their own mistaken
view of its language compels them to assert that the
doctrine is perfectly credible. When sinners have to
be warned to flee from the wrath to come, no terrors are
thought too great to set before their eyes. But their
own God is a wholly different Being. When they enter
into their closet and pray to their Father which is in
secret, they see only the God and Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, the God whose name is Love, and whose
love has been begotten in themselves by the Word.
No thought of endless torment enters into their con-
ceptions of Him they worship ; or if Satan be able to
llV PREFACE TO
obtrude it for a moment, it is instantly repelled as a
hideous spectre. That they must receive some injury
from entertaining it even in theory is certain. All
moral truth sanctifies ; and therefore any error must to
a certain extent interfere with sanctification ; and the
various ways in which this error does so have been
pointed out in the eighth and ninth of the following
sermons. I am now only endeavouring to remove what
might be felt as a preliminary objection, by showing how
the almighty power of divine grace can diminish the evil
that would naturally flow from false doctrine. Faith
filters the adulterated draught which is taken by the in-
tellect, letting the pure truth contained in it sink down
into the heart, while the residuum lies floating on the
brain, clouding the mind no doubt, and producing a cer-
tain degree of unsteadiness in the walk and conversation,
but not poisoning the blood, as it would naturally do
if it were allowed to take its course. However good
these eminent saints may have been, they would have
been better still if they had been free from this theo-
retical error. Multitudes of saints, whom I never
dream of approaching in holiness, have believed both
in Eternal Evil and in Transubstantiation. I cannot
hope to overtake them in the Christian race; but I
hope to get nearer to them than would ever have been
THE FIRST EDITION. lv
possible if we had continued to be equally weighted.
How encouraging to know that in this race it is not
one only who receives the prize; that the superior
excellence of one is no loss to another; and that
without any reference to the rest, each one will receive
his own reward, have his own praise of God, and reap
to the full extent of that which he has sown. May we
all, in our several callings, and according to our
abilities and opportunities, so run that we may obtain.
S. M.
PS. — Since writing the above, I have received letters
from a number of persons, who consider my throwing
off this 'tradition of men ' to be a departure from the.
faith, and who express their intention of earnestly
praying that I may be brought back to the truth. As
regards some of them, I fear, from the very little effect
which their prayers seem to have upon their own spirit,
that they can be of little avail to others. But there are
many humble-minded Christians amongst my friends,
who are just as sure that the doctrine of Eternal Evil
is the truth of God, as the devoutest Eoman Catholic
can be with regard to Transubstantiation. Their
prayers will be heard. And I never more needed
them, than under the conflict, to which God has called
lvi PREFACE TO TIIE FIRST EDITION.
me, in assaulting this old stronghold of Satan. To
contend with enemies is nothing. To withstand friends
to the face is painful in the extreme. Let them pray
on, with all their might, and without ceasing. Every
one of their prayers will be answered, though not in
the way they expect. If offered in faith, and humility,
and love, they will bless not only me, but themselves
also. And I know no greater blessing with which God
could reward their intended kindness to me, than by
bringing them out of the dismal shadow of this strong
delusion, and enabling them to rejoice in the light,
which is now gladdening the hearts of multitudes of
their fellow Christians.
THE STUDY OF SCRIPTURE.
' If thou criest after knowledge, and liftest up thy voice for under-
standing ; if thou seekest her as silver, and searchest for her as for hid
treasures ; then shalt thou understand the fear of the Lord, and find the
knowledge of God.' — Prov. ii. 3-5.
' The theological student is often a student chiefly of some
human system of divinity, fortified by references to Scripture,
introduced from time to time as there is occasion. He pro-
ceeds — often unconsciously — by setting himself to ascertain,
not what is the information or instruction to be derived from
a certain narrative or discourse of one of the sacred writers,
but what aid can be derived from them towards establishing
or refuting this or that point of dogmatic theology. Such a
mode of study surely ought at least not to be exclusively pur-
sued. At any rate, it cannot properly be called a study of
Scripture.
' There is, in fact, a danger of its proving a great hindrance
to the profitable study of Scripture. For so strong an associa-
tion is apt to be established in the mind between certain
expressions and the technical sense to which they have been
confined in some theological system, that when the student
meets with them in Scripture, he at once understands them in
that sense, in passages where perhaps an unbiassed examination
of the context would plainly show that such was not the
author's meaning. And such a student one may often find
expressing the most unfeigned wonder at the blindness of
those who cannot find in Scripture such and such doctrines,
which appear to him to be as clearly set forth there as words
can express ; which perhaps they are, on the (often gratuitous)
supposition, that those words are everywhere to be understood
exactly in the sense which he has previously derived from
some human system — a system through which, as through a
discoloured medium, he views Scripture. But this is not to
take Scripture for one's guide, but rather to make one's self a
guide to Scripture.' — Essays on the Writings of the Apostle
Paul. By Archbishop Whately.
CONTENTS.
SERMON I.
PAGE
THE IMAGE OF THE INVISIBLE GOD .... 1
SERMON II.
THE OLD AND THE NEW CREATIONS .... 7
SERMON III.
THE FULNESS OF CHRIST AND THE RECONCILIATION OF ALL
THINGS 15
SERMON IV.
THE RECONCILIATION OF ALL THINGS NOT REQUIRING THE
RESTORATION OF EACH INDIVIDUAL CREATURE, BUT EX-
CLUDING ETERNAL EVIL ..... .23
SERMON V.
THE WAGES OF SIN 34
SERMON VI.
EVERLASTING DESTRUCTION 49
lx
CONTENTS.
IMMORTALITY
SERMON VII.
PAGE
68
SERMON VIII.
THE INJURY DONE TO THE CAUSE OF CHRISTIANITY BY THE
DOCTRINE OF ETERNAL EVIL 81
SERMON IX.
ITS INJURIOUS EFFECTS UPON CHRISTIAN CHARACTER
92
SERMON X.
THE LIGHT WHICH IS THROWN UPON THE DARKER FEATURES
OF PROVIDENCE AND REVELATION BY THE SCRIPTURE
DOCTRINE OF THE RECONCILIATION OF ALL THINGS, AFTER
THE EVERLASTING DESTRUCTION OF THE WICKED . 103
APPENDIX.
FIRST INTRODUCTION OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE
LIFE AND DEATH
IMMORTALITY ....
' IMMORTAL ' AND ' INCORRUPTIBLE '
' ETERNAL,' ' FOR EVER AND EVER '
ETERNITY
DESTRUCTION ....
ANNIHILATION ....
119
128
131
136
138
141
142
145
CONTENTS.
lxi
' UNQUENCHABLE FIRE '
' ETERNAL PUNISHMENT
CORRECTION AND RETRIBUTION
' THE SMOKE OF THEIR TORMENT
ETERNAL EVIL .
MORAL EFFECTS OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE .
THE DIVINE CHARACTER AND THE HUMAN CONSCIENCE
THE DESERT OF SIN
THE DOOM OF JUDAS .
PLATO AND THE NEW TESTAMENT
ARCHBISHOP WHATELY .
REV. ANDREW JUKES .
MR. JAMES GRANT
THE POWER OF PRATER
BE TRUE ....
PAGE
146
150
155
156
159
168
171
178
179
181
183
187
197
210
213
THE GLOEY OF CHRIST.
SEEMON I.
Who is the image of the invisible God. — Col. i. 15.
This is one of those passages with reference to which,
however confident we may feel as to their general mean-
ing, we soon become conscious that they point to some-
thing far beyond the grasp of our finite minds. How-
ever true may be the glimpses we are able to obtain of
what it reveals, they are but glimpses after all ; and
far beneath our deepest soundings there lies a fathomless
abyss, of which the ever-increasing knowledge of eter-
nity will only enable us to say with more intelligent
conviction, ' Oh the depth ! ' We have need to enter
upon the consideration of it with holy awe and deep
humility, veiling our faces before the unapproachable
light, taking the shoes from off our feet before we tread
on such holy ground, and saying, ' Open Thou mine
eyes,' — ' I beseech Thee, show me Thy glory,' — so far
as I may be able to bear it.
B
2 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
What is meant by ' the invisible God ' ? Certainly not,
invisible to the bodily eye. For that would imply that
God had some shape or form, though invisible to us, of
which Christ's body was the ' image ' or visible resem-
blance ; and as form can be produced only by a boundary
line, it necessarily involves limit. Besides, the creative
act being immediately afterwards ascribed to Christ,
shows that He is here spoken of in His Divine nature.
It is to the inward eye of the mind, and that not of
man only, but of any creature whatever, that God is in
Himself invisible. His dwelling in light that no man can
approach unto, refers to no physical light, but to the
incapacity of any created mind to know anything of His
Being, His Nature, His Attributes, or His Character, ex-
cept as they are revealed in and by His only-begotten Son.
An ' image ' is the most complete representation that
can be made of any material object ; so much so, that if
the image were perfect, it could not be distinguished
by sight from the original, and therefore to see it
would be as good as seeing the original. This is the
idea here employed to set forth one of the deepest
truths that have been revealed to us with reference to
the Divine Existence. But for the manifestation which
He has made of Himself in Christ, the eternal God
would have dwelt for ever alone and unknown: in
perfect light wherein was no darkness at all, but in
light unseen by any — except Himself. In Christ there
is a full and complete manifestation of God. Whatever
Tlin GLORY OF CHRIST. 3
there is in Him to be known, may be known by Christ,
just so far as our own powers of vision are able to see
Christ. Our view may be dim or distorted, so that we
see the image obscurely or untruly ; or the image may
be of such vast dimensions, that we are unable to take
it all in : but so far as we do see it, we see Grod. ' He
that hath seen me, hath seen the Father.'
Now just what Paul here asserts in a figure drawn
from the sense of sight, St. John asserts in a figure
drawn from the sense of hearing — ' The Word.' Words
represent thoughts. Until we speak, thoughts dwell only
within our own mind. But as soon as we speak, if the
language be perfect and perfectly understood, the hearer
understands them as well as we understand them our-
selves. But for Christ, Grod would have dwelt in
' eternal silence.' Thought there would have been, all-
embracino- thought, that could never receive the addition
of one new idea ; but it wou* 1 have been thought that
led to nothing, that terminated in itself, and remained
absolutely unknown to any, except the solitary Thinker.
Christ is the utterance of that one universal thought ;
and an utterance so clear and full, that as far as the
language is understood and rightly interpreted, the
thought is perfectly revealed.
Again, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, the same truth
is stated under yet other figures. Christ is said to be
'the brightness of His glory, and the express image of
His person.' The word rendered ' brightness ' means —
B 2
4 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
shining forth. Without Christ, the glory would have
existed, but could never have been manifested.
Through Him it is to illumine the universe with the
light and warmth of its glorifying beams. The word
rendered * express image,' is literally — character. It
means, in the first place, the mark stamped upon any-
thing by a die : and then, from that, any distinctive
mark upon a person or thing, which, as we commonly
speak, gives it a character. Our special use of the
term, as referring to moral conduct, is an uninten-
tional witness to our consciousness of the fact, that
in responsible creatures the really distinguishing marks
are moral qualities. The lines that are cut into a
man most deeply, and stamp him as what he is,
are not social or intellectual or physical distinctions,
but the characters of holiness or sin engraved upon
his soul. He may be a helpless cripple, all but an
idiot, and a pauper as well, and yet rank higher in
the scale of being than the veriest giant in body and
mind that ever swayed the destinies of an empire. It
is not, however, in this limited sense that Christ is the
' character ' of the Divine Being, but universally, in
everything by which He is distinguished from all other
beings ; He is the impression, struck off from the whole
of what constitutes the Eternal God.
And now we ask, When did He begin to be ' the
image of the invisible Grod ' ? Some would reply, At
the Incarnation. But can the Apostle be speaking of
THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
what began at the Incarnation, when he goes on to say,
e For by Him were all things created'? And how could
St. John's language be harmonised with that view ? He
speaks of Christ as the Word, before He e became flesh,'
and seems anxious to declare in the most emphatic
manner that He was always the "Word, by adding, { The
same was in the beginning with God,' that is in the
same capacity, as the Word. So also was He always the
image of God,' in the essential conditions of the Divine
existence. The Godhead so existed, that in the Son
lay the capability of Divine manifestation, the possi-
bility as well as the guarantee of all the revelation that
should ever be made of God. The first step in the
putting forth of that power was the first act of creation.
But from eternity He was the ' image,' or the ' word.'
The word was as yet unspoken, but it was formed, and
ready for utterance at the right moment. The image
was veiled, but it existed in all its perfection, ready to
be unveiled in due time. The process of speaking the
word, of unveiling the image, began, as we have said,
with creation ; it has been going on ever since, and, we
doubt not, will go on to all eternity.
The taking of our nature upon Him was evidently a
most marked and important step in the great work.
His death and resurrection scarcely less so. But every-
thing that has ever been done, great or small, was
necessary to the perfection of the revelation. If the
most trifling of Christ's dealings with any of you this
() TIIE GLORY OF CHRIST.
day had been otherwise than it was, Grod would not
have been so well known to the intelligent universe
as He will be now. The very hairs of your head are
all numbered : and well they may be ; for every one of
them is a string of the instrument from which the
divine harmony is sounding forth, that is to give ever
richer and fuller expression to the Eternal Word. One
hair too many or too few, one hair turning white too
soon, or remaining black too long, would introduce
discord into the music, and impair the perfection
of the image. But no such thing is possible until
Omniscience is deceived or Omnipotence overpowered.
Strange and mysterious as it seems, when we re-
member that part of the material with which He has
to work is the free-will of intelligent responsible
creatures, yet is it most certain, nay, inseparable from
our fundamental conceptions of a Supreme Grod, that
He must work, and none can let it ; that in one way
or other He must order all things after the counsel of
His own will, inasmuch as ' Of Him, and through Him,
and to Him are all things.' May we all be able to
say from the bottom of our hearts, 'To whom be glory
for ever. Amen.'
THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
SEEMON II.
Who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every
creature. For by Him were all things created, that are in
heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they
be thrones or dominions or principalities or powers ; all things
were created by Him and for Him ; and He is before all things,
and by Him all things consist. And He is the Head of the
body, the Church; who is the beginning, the first-born from
the dead, that in all things He might have the preeminence. —
Col. i. 15-18.
We have already spoken of Christ as ' the image of the
invisible God,' in the essential nature of His Divine
existence. And now we proceed to enquire in what
sense He is ' the first-born of every creature.' Our first
impression would naturally be that it referred to His
preeminence in dignity amongst all creatures, — the
term ' first-born ' being often used solely with re-
ference to rank, irrespective altogether of time. But
this view is quite irreconcilable with the following
words, which speak of Him as the Creator : ' For by
Him were all things created.' Here, therefore, it can
mean only, that He was born prior to all creation ;
referring to that mysterious relationship within the
Godhead of which we know absolutely nothing, except
8 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
that it bears some analogy to the relation of father and
son among ourselves. A son becomes in time equal to
his father in everything but relationship. The father
continues father, the son continues son ; that is all. In
the Godhead, that knows no time, to which all the past
and all the future are one ever-present moment, the
Father and the Son were always equal, except in rela-
tionship. But of the essential nature of this relation-
ship we are unable to form the slightest conception.
It is quite possible, indeed, that the expression may
have been selected to include a reference to the fact,
that He who, in His Divine nature, was born from all
eternity, before creation, was also afterwards to assume
the form of a creature, to take creaturehood into the
Grodhead, and a form of creaturehood in which birth
takes place ; and that in that nature he was to occupy
the position of the first-born in point of preeminence,
being exalted to the highest rank in all creation. But
the primary reference must be to His Divine nature,
or the Apostle's argument becomes hopelessly dis-
located.
' For in [not ' by '] Him were all things created.'
As the seeing power of our body resides in the eye, and
the hearing power in the ear, so the creative power of
Deity resided in the Son, as part of the self-manifesting
power. 'That are in heaven, and that are in earth' —
heaven being used to include everything beyond the
region of this globe. ' Visible and invisible ' — the world
THE GLORY OF CIIEIST. V
of matter and the world of spirit. ' Whether they be
thrones or dominions or principalities or powers.' — It is
very questionable whether the Apostle meant to say that
the heavenly hosts are arranged in ranks, answering- to
the several terms here employed. From the third
chapter of this epistle it appears that the Colossians
pretended to be very learned in matters connected with
the unseen world. They probably marshalled the armies
of heaven according to some fanciful arrangement of
their own. And Paul, waiving any argument on such
a purely speculative matter, says — Well, whatever they
are, call them what you please, they are all the creatures
of His hand.
Still it must be remembered that in writing to the
Ephesians he directly calls the evil spirits 'principali-
ties and powers ' ; so that there can be no doubt as to
the same principle of rank and order prevailing in the
unseen world, that we see to prevail in all the visible
creation. From an archangel to an insect there is no
dead level to be found ; all is gradation ; the highest
creature having enough to humble him, and the lowest
enough to ennoble him, in his immediate connection
with, and dependence upon, the Creator Himself.
Equality is the dream of man's littleness and ignorance,
and all his levelling propensities are merely the re-
bellion of his pride and self-will against God's universal
law of rank, and order, and subordination.
10 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
Order is Heaven's first law ; and that confessed,
Some are, and must be, greater than the rest.
This is just what makes the abuse of authority one of the
greatest crimes — because it turns a power, which God
has given for the purpose of benefiting others, into an
instrument for oppressing them.
He from whose hand all power on earth proceeds
Ranks its abuse amongst the foulest deeds.
All things were created by Him ' — Here is the
creative power, that resided ' in Him,' actually put
forth. ' And for Him ' — as an intermediate step to-
wards what is declared to be the great end of all things,
' the glory of God the Father.' All will conduce to the
glory of the Father, by first bringing glory to the Son.
6 Every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to
the glory of God the Father.' He is the point from
which all the glory of the Godhead shines forth, and the
point to which it all returns — the focus and centre of
the universe.
' And He is before all things.' It is very difficult to
see why the Apostle here goes back to Christ's pre-
existence. Probably some phase of the Colossian errors,
if we knew it, would account for the train of thought.
In the concluding words, however, we shall find no
difficulty — s And in Him all things consist,' or hold
together. He is the universal Sustainer and Preserver,
as well as the universal Creator. In Him, observe, not
' by ' Him. The sustaining of creation is not effected by
Till: GLORY OF CHRIST. 1 1
a succession of acts : but as a house rests ou its foun-
dation, so creation rests on the Divine power, which
resides in the Son ; interpenetrated throughout by His
sustaining energy, it ' consists.'
The importance of this last truth will appear in a
subsequent sermon. For the present we must pass it
over, and proceed to the Apostle's next step in the
unfolding of his argument.
Depending upon this primal glory of Christ as the
Eternal Son, follows an additional glory, in connection
with the new creation, which was to arise out of the ruin
of one part of the old creation. 'In Him was Life,'
the original life of all things. And in Him is that
higher life, eternal life, which can be reached only
through death.
It was in the eternal purpose of God to raise one
portion of His creatures to a height of dignity and
honour far above any other ; to bring it into the closest
possible relationship to Himself. Oeaturehood was to
be taken into the Godhead. In that created form all
the fulness of the Godhead was to dwell for ever :
' creature and Creator were to meet at that point ; ' and
from that point was to flow forth in ever-widening
circles, and with infinite variety of application, the
Divine love, which would embrace the universe. Nearest
to the Throne were to stand some, in such intimate
relationship to the Incarnate Son that He would not
be ashamed to call them brethren ; partakers of the
12 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
very nature that He had Himself assumed, receiving
their new life directly from union with Him, aud asso-
ciated with Him in the government of the universe.
But to reach that height of glory, He and they alike
must first pass through death. Why, we know not.
We can partly understand that aspect of it in which
Christ's death was necessary to make atonement for the
guilt of sin, and our own death is necessary to purify
us from the defilement of sin. But why a state of
things requiring so terrible a process should ever have
been allowed, why it should have been rendered ne-
cessary that death and resurrection must intervene
before we can reach the destined glory, are questions
which only the shallowest minds will imagine that they
can answer, and about which the highest possible
attainment is to be able to rest satisfied with the assu-
rance, 'What I do, thou knowest not now but thou
shalt know hereafter.'
But whatever be the reason, the fact is certain. And
its grand interest to us lies in the fact, that ive are
the creatures destined to be raised to such a stupendous
height, to sit with Christ on His throne, and shine as
the stars for ever and ever. It is our nature that the
Son has already taken into the Godhead, and out of
our race is now being gathered that ' Church ' which
under its immediate ' head ' is to occupy the foremost
place in all creation, as the mystical ' body ' of Christ.
It was necessary to take this glance at the glory of
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 13
the Church, in order to appreciate what the Apostle
here wishes to show,— namely, the glory of Christ as its
Head.
'And He is the Head of the body, the Church.'
Throughout these verses 'He' and "Him' are empha-
tic ; doubtless in implied opposition to some Colossian
errors. And this perhaps also accounts for the abrupt-
ness with which he speaks of 'the body.' The natural
way of expressing it, and that which he elsewhere
adopts, is ' the Church, which is His body.' But with
reference to controversies that were prevailing about
the Church as a body, especially about its head, Paul
asserts that ' He is the Head of the body ; ' a position
which he immediately proceeds to establish.
' Who is [inasmuch as He is] the beginning.' Christ
is the beginning, the origin, of the new creation, which
was to spring from death ; as He was the beginning of
the old creation, which sprang from nothing but what
was contained within the Deity itself. And this He
becomes by being ' the first-born from the dead ; ' not
the first who was ever restored to life, but the first-6om
from the dead, the first who arose from death into that
new life which His Church is to partake of. It is not,
however, mere priority of resurrection that constitutes
Him the Head of the body, but the fact that His
resurrection, including of course all that led to it, from
His incarnation to His death, was both the essential
condition and the effectual guarantee of our resurrec-
14 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
tion. When the Head rose, the whole body rose also
in Him ; (rod ' quickened us together with Christ, and
raised us up together, and made us sit together in
heavenly places in Christ Jesus.' So that He obtained
His position as e Head of the body ' by becoming its
origin, by overcoming death, and opening the kingdom
of heaven to all believers.
' That in all things ' — the new, as well as the old,
creation — ' He might have the preeminence.' In His
Divine nature He has preeminence over it, as having
called it into being. In His Divine and human nature
united He has preeminence over it, as having raised it
from its fall, and placed it in a position of security and
honour far above that which it originally held.
The union of those two natures, with the ultimate
results of what has been accomplished by the God-man,
the Christ of God, will be brought before us in the next
verses. Meanwhile, let us rejoice with joy unspeak-
able and full of glory, at the wonderful prospect set
before us ; let us in spirit already cast our crowns
before His feet, singing, Thou art worthy, for Thou
hast redeemed us ; and let us seek for grace to walk
even here more worthy of the vocation wherewith we
are called, more worthy of God, who has called us unto
His kingdom and glory.
THE GLOKY OF CHEIST. 15
SERMON III.
For it pleased the Father, that in Htm should all fulness
dwell; and having made peace through the blood of His cross,
by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; by Him, I say,
whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. — Col. i.
19-20.
The Apostle began by speaking of the Son, in His
Divine nature, as ' the image of the invisible God,'
the Eevealer of Deity. In that capacity He was the
Creator of all things, the ' beginning ' of the old creation.
Then came the incarnation, when the Word was made
flesh, creaturehood taken into the Godhead by the
union of the Divine and human natures in Christ. In
that capacity, by His death and resurrection, he became
the 'beginning,' or origin, of the new creation, the
' Head ' of that ' body ' which, being gathered out of
the human race, is called the 'Church.' This second
glory was added to the first, 'that in all things He
might have the preeminence.' And the reason why it
was necessary that He should thus have universal pre-
eminence, was that the whole fulness of the Godhead
was permanently to abide in the bodily form which He
assumed, and therein to effect a complete and ever-
16 TEE GLORY OF CHRIST.
lasting reconciliation between the creature and its
Creator.
The word ' fulness ' means either that which fills
something else, or that which is filled with something
else. In Eph. i. 23, the Church is called 'the fulness'
of (rod, as the special receptacle of Divine fulness.
Here, 'the fulness of the Godhead' is the plenitude
and perfection of all that belongs to God, all that con-
stitutes Him what He is. This in its entirety dwells
in the incarnate Son. This of itself would not directly
prove Christ's Deity. It would prove that He should
be worshipped as God ; ' that all men should honour
the Son even as they honour the Father ' — because if
all the fulness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily,
He must be equal with God, — if not God. He
must have been raised to a level with God, — and what-
ever reverence is due to God, must be due to Him
also. And if this were admitted fully and unreservedly,
the rest would be little more than a dispute about
words. For it would practically come to the same
thing. If you are to feel and act towards Christ as
God, why then He is God to you. But it never is fully
admitted by those who deny his Deity. And no wonder.
For we instinctively feel, that God would not raise a
mere creature to equality with himself ; ' My glory will
I not give unto another.' And here lies the importance
of maintaining the absolute Deity of Christ. For if you
give it up, everything else follows, the whole edifice
THE GLORY OF CUEIST. 17
comes down together. Now, that truth depends, not
upon the whole fulness of the Godhead dwelling in Him
bodily, but upon His being the Incarnate Son, the Word
made flesh. His Deity rendered it possible for all the
fulness of the Godhead to dwell in Him.
It is not the whole Godhead, observe, that dwells in
Christ. He is not the Father, nor the Spirit ; but He
is the Son. Neither the Father nor the Spirit became
man ; but the Son did, and therefore Christ is God.
And in Him, not in His humanity only, but in His
entire Person as the God-Man, dwells all the Fulness
of the Godhead, the whole attributes and perfections of
Deity. To carry out His great self-manifesting design,
God saw fit that the whole fulness of Deity should be
embodied in a visible created form. He selected the
human form ; which the Son, consequently, took upon
Himself, being made in the likeness of man, and thereby
rendered it capable of containing all the Divine ful-
ness.
This residence was to be a permanent one : the
fulness was to ' dwell,' not sojourn, in Him. It was
not a mere temporary expedient to meet a necessity
that had arisen. This is one aspect of it, no doubt.
And it is the first which presents itself to us in the
Gospel. But here we rise far above that to the great
design of self-manifestation, and the universal recon-
ciliation of all things to Himself, towards which man's
redemption is only a step in the process.
18 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
' And having made peace through the blood of His
Cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto himself.' If
there could be any doubt as to the ' all things ' here
being coextensive with the 'all things' that were
* created ' by Christ, it would be at once removed by
the same classification being employed, ' whether they
be things in earth or things in heaven ; ' it is the whole
universe. In the Epistle to the Ephesians we are told
that this is to be ' gathered together,' literally headed
up, ' in Christ.' While He is to be peculiarly the Head
of the Church, He is also to be the Head of the Uni-
verse ! And as this is here called being ' reconciled ' to
God, it is manifest that the universe is to be brought
not merely into subjection, but into harmonious rela-
tion to God.
This is said to be effected by 'having made peace
through the blood of His Cross.' Here is the heart of
the whole system, the pivot on which everything turns,
the central point between the creation and the recon-
ciliation of all things. On which observe, first, that it
was accomplished by the same eternal Son, Who ever
was, in the conditions of His Divine existence, and ever
will be, in the endless fulfilment of those conditions, the
one sole ' image of the Invisible God,' the Manifester
of Deity from first to last : and secondly — which is the
most wondrous thing of all, and constitutes it, perhaps,
the exceptional fact in the history of the universe —
that it was accomplished, not by doing, but by suffer-
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 19
ino- ; not by acting, but by being acted upon ; not by
any exercise of power, but by an abandonment of all
power, and stooping to the lowest depth of humiliation.
He was ' crucified through weakness.'
And what did this do ? Did it merely illustrate in
His own person one of the deepest laws of the universe,
that only through death can the highest life be at-
tained ? No. It did that, no doubt ; but it did more.
Our views of this question must at best be limited
and imperfect, and it is unwise to insist upon rigid
definitions. But if Scripture teaches anything, it
teaches that there was some moral necessity for it,
arising out of God's own essential and unchangeable
character. Whether we are able to see it or not, it is a
matter of revelation, that in order to put away sin, and
bring in everlasting righteousness, on which depends
eternal life, it was required by the righteousness of
God, that the Son of His love, in human form, should
be ' made sin for us,' that sin should be * laid upon "
Him, and that He should pay the death penalty which
was its righteous due — that He should ' put away sin
by the sacrifice of Himself.' No wonder the Apostle
puts this in the very forefront of the great reconciliation,
which is to be the ultimate end of Christ's work. For
if the universe is to be harmoniously and securely
headed up in Christ, above all things must it be neces-
sary that sin should be done away with. Any other
reconciliation that may be effected must be altogether
C 2
20 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
subsidiary to the bringing into conscious harmony with
God, those moral intelligent creatures who were alien-
ated from Him by wicked works.
Now we pass over at present any consideration of the
bearing of this upon the destiny of the fallen angels,
which will come before us subsequently. And we pro-
ceed to inquire how it affects those intelligent creatures,
who have never fallen, the holy angels, or any other
sinless beings that may exist throughout the universe.
They do not need the same kind of reconciliation that
we do : in their case there is neither guilt nor enmity
to be removed ; they are already at ' peace ' with God.
But still we believe that Christ's redeeming work will
confer infinite blessing on every one of them to all
eternity. It is not from curiosity, nor even from sym-
pathy alone, but from their own personal interest in it,
that ' the angels desire to look into ' the mystery of
the cross. There do they learn, and there will they
ever learn, their deepest lessons in the knowledge of
God. One object in man's redemption was, ' that in the
ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His
grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.'
As the fruits of this are unfolded to all eternit}^, their
minds will expand, and become more capable of re-
ceiving from the fulness of God ; they will rise ever
nearer and nearer to God — nearer to His heart, and
nearer to His throne. By this, and perhaps by other
means of which we can understand nothing, they will
TIIE GLORY OF CHRIST. 21
be saved from the possibility of ever falling ; they will
be kept eternally at one with God ; the peace will never
be broken, the harmony never be disturbed. This we
believe to be the chief benefit conferred upon them by
Christ's death. It may be, that to have restored them,
if they had fallen, He must have taken their nature ;
but to establish them in holiness, so that they never
can fall, the work He accomplished in our nature may
very possibly be sufficient. In the dispensation of the
fulness of time, they will be 'headed up in Christ,'
and so brought into indissoluble union with God.
And now as to the rest of creation, animate or in-
animate. How will it be reconciled to God ? By
harmony and order being restored where they have
been disturbed, or preserved where they are as yet un-
broken. Sin has introduced discord and confusion into
the universe. To what extent we know not. But we
learn from the Apostle's statement that, however far it
has extended, it will at length cease wholly and for ever.
When sin comes to an end all suffering and all disorder
will come to an end also. From the highest creature
nearest the throne, down to the minutest atom of matter,
everything will be in its right position and fulfilling its
proper function. What will be the actual state of
things resulting from that in the material world, whether
ihere or elsewhere, we have no means of knowing. We
expect new heavens and a new earth, but what they
22 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
however, there can be no doubt. Grod is Love. And if
all His creatures are to be reconciled to Him, then, in
every breast throughout the universe, amongst all ranks
and classes, with all their endless diversities, must Love
reign supreme. Christ is that Love incarnate, and with
that Love the Spirit of Christ will fill all things.
THE GLORY OF CHRIST 23
SEEMON IV.
By Him to reconcile all things unto Himself ; by Him, I say,
whether they be things in earth, or things in lieaven. — Col. i. 20.
The ultimate object of Christ's redeeming work is to
reunite creation to its Creator, to restore universal and
eternal harmony, so that discord and disorder shall
never again by possibility enter, but Grod be * all in all.'
How does this bear upon the future destiny of the
wicked — whether men or devils ?
We can hardly be surprised that the Apostle's de-
claration here should encourage some to hope that they
will all be eventually restored. Nor can it be denied,
that, as regards men, there are other passages that seem
strongly to confirm the hope. But notwithstanding
this, it is quite impossible to maintain such a view, if
we admit the Bible, as a whole, to be a revelation from
God. If it teaches anything at all, it teaches that some
will never be saved. It declares that there are vessels
of wrath fitted to destruction, just as plainly as that
there are vessels of mercy prepared unto glory. Ample
proof of this will come before us, as we proceed. It may
be sufficient at present to remind you of our Lord's
words concerning Judas, ' Good were it for that man
24 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
if he had never been born.' How could He possibly
have said this, if Judas, after however long a period of
suffering, is to enjoy an eternity of happiness?
Is this belief then required by the Apostle's state-
ment concerning the reconciliation of all things ? Cer-
tainly not. For, although by the ' all things ' created,
and the ' all things ' reconciled, we must in each case
understand the whole universe, without any exception,
yet, on examining the Apostle's language, we see that he
takes the scriptural and philosophical view of creation,
not as carried on in every fresh development of being,
but as accomplished once for all when the germs of the
several orders of beings were called into existence ; ' By
Him ivere' — not are — 'all things created.' In each
case, therefore, he speaks of the universe as a whole.
And the reconciliation of all things is, not the restora-
tion of every particular form of life that has ever been
developed out of the original creation, but the resto-
ration of perfect harmony to creation as a whole ; so
that, when it is accomplished, all shall again be ' very
good.' We are told nothing of the changes that will
have previously taken place in the various kinds of
beings, how many creatures will have come into ex-
istence, lived their little life, and passed away for ever ;
but we are assured that whatever forms of existence
are found throughout the universe 'in the dispensation
of the fulness of times,' will be ' gathered together
in one,' 'headed up in Christ,' and according to their
THE GLORY OF CnRIST. 25
several capabilities made eternally at one with their
Creator.
We are therefore placing no limit whatever upon the
universality of the Apostle's statement, when, on the
most positive testimony of God's word, we are compelled
to reject absolutely and unhesitatingly the possibility
of universal individual salvation.
What, then, will become of those who are not saved?
The popular view is, that they will live for ever, in un-
mitigated enmity against God, and consequently in un-
mitigated suffering ; in other words, that evil of every
kind, moral and physical, will continue for ever.
If anything were needed to show how diametrically
opposed this is to the reconciliation of all things, it
would be the desperate shift to which the advocates of
that view are driven, in order to escape from the di-
lemma. All things in heaven and earth, they say, will
be reconciled to God, but not all things in hell. Then,
if hell is to be excluded from the ' all things ' to be re-
conciled by Christ, it must be excluded also from the
' all things ' created by Him — for there also the Apostle
uses the same classification, ' both which are in heaven
and which are in earth.' But St. John says, ' Without
Him was not anything made that was made.' In point
of fact, however, Scripture knows nothing of any hell
beyond the region of this earth. By ' things in earth '
is meant not merely things on the surface of this
globe, but everything connected with it.
26 THE GrLORY OF CHRIST.
There are other inspired statements also as to the
object of Christ's redeeming work, Avhich are quite as
hopelessly irreconcilable with the popular view. In
Heb. ii. 14, we read — ' That through death He might
destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the
devil;' which is explained in 1 John iii. 8 — 'For this
purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might
destroy the works of the devil.' Could anything be
more directly opposed to these statements than the
supposition that one part of the universe is to be set
apart for the eternal exhibition of Satan's works in their
fullest possible maturity ? Instead of losing his ' power
of death ' he will retain it in a more tremendous form
than ever. Some have argued against the destruction
of this earth, on the ground that it would give Satan a
triumph. This may or may not be so. But most
assuredly, if Satan is to be the author of eternal sin,
and consequently of eternal suffering, he will have an
eternal triumph, and God will suffer an eternal defeat.
How would the Almighty be compensated for this, by
the power of eternally torturing him ? The enemy
would retain his ' spoils.' Some of them would have
been taken from him, but enough would be left to en-
able him to hurl back hate and defiance against Him
who created, and tried to redeem, the victims of his wiles.
This hatred would be as hard for God to bear from any
of His creatures, as it would be for them to bear the
heaviest infliction that He could lay upon them. For
' God is Love ! ' and love cannot bear to be hated.
THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
27
This brings before us another consideration. The
popular doctrine is totally opposed to the central truth
of Scripture as to the Divine nature, namely that * God
is Love.' Here we tread on different ground. To the
statements we have just been considering, the doctrine
in question is directly opposed. The argument against
it from the love of God is one of inference only. Now
some persons tell us, that we are wholly incapable of
drawing any such inference whatever, both because our
moral judgment has been warped by the fall, and also
because our mental capacities are necessarily limited.
That an undoubted truth lies at the bottom of this ob-
jection, we readily admit. The existence of evil is in
itself a tax upon our faith. "We have to believe in God's
love, notwithstanding some appearances to the contrary.
And with the grand proof of His love afforded us in
the gift of His Son, our faith ought to be able to bear
the strain. Though it is not what we should have ex-
pected, though we cannot understand it, yet, if all
evil will sooner or later come to an end, and result
in eternal glory to God, and eternal blessing to the
universe, we can easily believe that when that time
arrives, when, with all the facts before us and minds
capable of grasping them, we look back upon the
shadow that was allowed just for an instant to darken
the scene, every trace of which is gone, except the
ever-increasing blessedness and glory that infinite
wisdom and grace evolved out of it, — we shall ourselves
28 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
perceive the permission of sin and suffering to have
been as much the result of infinite Love, as anything
else that God ever did.
But if evil is never to end, the whole case is
altered. If a single creature is to be kept alive
for ever in flames that would instantly consume
him, were not Almighty power put forth to sustain him
under the torture, so that he may never be put out of
his misery, — then we cannot form the faintest concep-
tion of what Love means, as applied to God. Yet by
telling us that He is Love, He implies that we can
understand what is meant by it. And if so, we may
be as certain as we are of our own existence, that
He would never have created anything at all, if it had
involved the necessity, or even risked the possibility, of
one single creature writhing in eternal agony. It would
have destroyed His own happiness. Infinitely rather
would He have remained alone in solitary existence, than
take a step that could possibly lead to anything so dread-
ful. But when it is said that these millions of suffering
creatures will know Who it is that is thus keeping them
alive in their torments, and will consequently hate
Him with ever-increasing hatred, we reach the climax
of impossibility. To suppose that a God of Infinite
Love can be perfectly happy, while conscious of being
the object of eternal hatred to multitudes of His own
creatures, is the most violent moral self-contradiction
that could possibly be invented.
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 29
Let us endeavour to illustrate the foregoing distinc-
tion. If you had to work out a sum in arithmetic,
involving a vast number of figures, and a variety of com-
plicated calculations, you would readily admit the possi-
bility of making some mistake. If an arithmetician, in
whom you had perfect confidence, assured you that the
result of your calculations was wrong, you would feel
quite sure that you had made a mistake, however
unable you might be to discover it. But if all the
arithmeticians in the world assured you that two and
two make five, you would not believe them ; nor would
you feel the slightest doubt as to the accuracy of your
own calculation, that they make four. You would not
be at all disturbed by any charges of presumption,
or any appeal to your own admitted fallibility. It
might be said, If you allow that you may err in one
case, but not in the other, where do you mean to
draw the line ? — where does your infallibility end, and
your fallibility begin ? At all this you would merely
smile ; or if you gave a serious answer, it would be to
the effect, that confidence is a matter of degree, and that
the degree of confidence you felt, as to two and two
making four, was precisely the degree of confidence
you felt as to your own existence. In either case you
may be mistaken ; but you feel fully justified in acting
as if it were impossible. You see the one, and you
knoiv the other. Just so — if evil be of limited duration,
I can easily attribute all the difficulties connected with
30 TIIE GLORY OF CHRIST.
it to my own ignorance. I cannot make the sum come
right ; but I have not the least doubt that that results
from some mistake in my calculation, which I am
unable to discover. The problem is too vast for me.
But when you say, that Infinite and Almighty Goodness
will allow evil to maintain a kingdom of its own to all
eternity, and that Infinite Love will be eternally and
supremely happy, while knowing that it is eternally
hated by millions of creatures who are writhing in
hopeless agony, I simply reply that you might as well
try to persuade me that two and two make five, or that
the three angles of a triangle are equal to four right
angles.
What ! even if Grod declared that it would be so ?
There is happily no need to say what I should do, on
the impossible supposition of Grod declaring anything so
self-contradictory ; for as a matter of fact, He has not
declared anything of the kind. On the contrary, His
own Word, from beginning to end, plainly declares the
very reverse. In every variety of language, with every
kind of metaphor and illustration, directly and in-
directly, positively and negatively, by assertion and
inference, it teaches that evil will come to an end, that
evil-doers will utterly perish, that the devil and his
works will be totally destroyed, and the whole universe
be brought into a state of reconciliation with Grod.
Scripture, therefore, confirms the judgment of that moral
instinct, which Grod has implanted within us, and which
TEE GLORY OF CHRIST. 31
pronounces it impossible, that He whose name is Love
could have allowed it to be otherwise.
And this fact enables us with perfect freedom to
pursue the subject one step further.
It is believed — indeed it is essential to the consistency
of the theory — that the endless sufferings of the con-
demned will heighten the enjoyment and enhance the
blessedness of all holy creatures throughout the uni-
verse. Now here we can speak not from inference, but
from intuition. Our feelings, of course, are liable to
considerable alteration when we are placed in other
circumstances ; but again we say, that there must be
some limit to this, or we should wholly lose our identity.
And for myself I can only express the confidence I feel
by repeating the formula in all seriousness, that I am
just as certain as I am of my own existence, that before
long I should rush to the Throne in despair, and entreat
to be annihilated, in order to escape from the intolerable
thought of the unceasing agonies of the condemned.
And, not believing myself to be an exceptional case, I
am equally confident that this would be the feeling of
every creature in the universe, who possessed a spark of
love within his breast. They would come again and
again with the same importunate cry to the great
Creator, saying, Lord, if it must be that this is never to
end, if the condemned cannot be put out of their misery
consistently with Thy glory, oh, then blot us we pray
Thee out of existence, or send us into an eternal sleep —
32 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
anything to escape the horror of the thoughts that haunt
us incessantly ; we cannot, indeed, see the writhings of
their agony or hear their shrieks of despair, but we
know what they must be, we can never forget them for
a moment, and the thought of them makes life unendur-
able to us.
How do the advocates of the doctrine attempt to meet
this ? Why, they say, that sin being committed against
an Infinite Being must deserve infinite punishment, and
that a feeling of satisfaction at wrong-doing, unre-
pented of, receiving its due reward is part of our moral
nature — one of the results of our being made in the
image of Grod. The latter part of this statement is per-
fectly true ; the former a palpable fallacy, which has
often been conclusively disposed of. For a sin to
deserve infinite punishment it must be committed not
merely against, but still more by, an infinite being. The
opposite position makes a finite being capable of per-
forming an infinite act, nay, it gives an infinite value
to every moral act that any responsible being can
possibly perform. For if whatever he does wrong de-
serves infinite punishment, then whatever he does right
must deserve infinite reward. So that the appeal to
metaphysics not only utterly fails, but supplies a power-
ful argument against the theory of endless suffering. *
* It should have been added, that the theory of infinite guilt is irre-
concilable with the doctrine of Scripture, that there are degrees of guilt ;
that which is infinite admitting of no degrees. Yet Mr. Grant, who
contends for infinite guilt, objects to the doctrine of Destruction, that it
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 33
These four positions, then, appear absolutely impreg-
nable. First, that the doctrine in question is directly at
variance with the declarations of Scripture as to the
devil and his works being destroyed, and all things re-
conciled to God. Secondly, that it is utterly irrecon-
cilable with any intelligent belief that God is Love.
Thirdly, that it does the utmost conceivable violence to
some of the deepest instincts that God has implanted
in our nature. And lastly, that it involves a meta-
physical impossibility.
In our next discourse we shall show, that it con-
tradicts the plainest statements of God's word as to the
final doom of those who will not come to Christ that
they may be saved.
does away with degrees of punishment and therefore of guilt. Strange,
that he did not see how fatal the objection is to his own doctrine, how
perfectly frivolous as against that which he was opposing.
34. THE GLOKY OF CHRIST.
SEEMON V.
The ivages of sin is death ; but the gift of God is eternal life,
through Jesus Christ our Lord. — Rom. vi. 23.
Strange and startling words these must sound in the
ears of the Christian world. If anyone were to preach
such doctrine as this now, he would probably meet
with the same reception that Paul met with at Athens.
Some would ask, What will this babbler say? — other
some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods —
because he preached Jesus and eternal life. A few, less
ignorant and therefore less bigoted, would say to him,
May we know what this new doctrine, whereof thou
speakest, is, for thou bringest certain strange things to
our ears ? And if he replied, We write none other things
unto you than those ye read ; our doctrine stands out
on almost every page of the Bible as plain as words can
speak ; it is simply this, that the wages of sin is death,
but the gift of Grod is eternal life, through Jesus Christ
our Lord ; they would at once say : Oh, impossible ; that
text cannot be in the Bible, you must have got it out of
the Apocrypha ; we have read the Bible all our lives,
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 35
but no such idea as that ever entered our minds. We
always believed that death was impossible to man ; we
know, of course, that his body, the lower part of his
nature, goes to corruption, but as long as the higher
part of his nature, the soul, lives, the man does not die ;
and even the body is dissolved only for a time, it will
be raised again, and then he will live for ever, whole
and entire, and can never die. Eternal life is no
peculiar gift of God through Christ, it is the common
possession of every man. Indefeasible immortality is
his great glory, the thing in which alone he is equal to
his Creator. The wages of sin is not death, but to
spend eternal life in sin and misery ; and the gift of
God is to spend it in holiness and happiness.
Yet no ; the text is not out of the Apocrypha, but
out of the Epistle to the Eomans. And it is only one
of a multitude in which the same truth is quite as
plainly, sometimes even more plainly, declared.
We will first take those passages in which ]ife and
death simply are the alternatives put before us. There
is no need to quote them ; a glance at the Concordance
will show anyone, who is not already aware of it, how
incessantly the Bible assures us, that if we live after the
flesh we shall die, but if through the spirit we mortify
the deeds of the body we shall live ; that he who hath
the Son hath life, but he who hath not the Son of God
hath not life ; that he who believes in Christ shall
never die, while he who rejects Christ will fall under
D 2
o
6 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
the power of ' the second death.' Life and Death, Life
and Death — these are the two words with which the
Bible rings from beginning to end.
Now if endless happiness and endless misery are
the alternatives intended, why are they never stated
in plain language ? * Why are they so incessantly
and persistently set forth under figures that are
directly calculated to mislead ? Why is the case so
infinitely understated — on one side at least — that of
endless misery? If there was any single truth that
we should expect to have been stated in the fullest
and most explicit terms, it would surely have been
this. And yet there are only three or four expressions
in the whole Bible which even appear to teach it, not
one of which, on fair examination, is found to do so ;
while we find a doom incessantly threatened, which is
quite awful enough in itself, quite enough to fill the
impenitent sinner with horror and dismay, but which at
its utmost severity, however ' many stripes ' may be
incurred in the process of destruction, is infinitely less
than endless misery. That life and death may sometimes
be used figurative!}^, of course we admit. That the
* It will be shown in the next sermon, that neither ' everlasting eon-
tempt' nor 'everlasting punishment' nor 'everlasting fire' necessarily
involve everlasting pain. If that be the sinner's doom, it is never once
declared in Scripture, unless you take one single part of a scenic repre-
sentation near the end of the Apocalypse, and, while compelled to admit
that every other part of it is in the highest degree figurative, insist upon
that being taken literally.
THE GLOKY OF CHRIST. 37
future destiny of the righteous and the wicked are often
described in figurative language, of course we admit
also. But we maintain that the whole of that figura-
tive language points not to endless misery but to de-
struction ; and that if endless misery be the real doom
of the lost, and death be only a figure to describe it,
then both that figure, and every other similarly em-
ployed, are utterly misleading.
Let us look at it closely. It is admitted by all that
the death, which is the wages of sin, and which when
inflicted is called 'the second death,' means the death
of the whole man — body and soul. Now we can infer
what is meant by the death of the soul only from what
we know of the death of the body. The second death
must bear some analogy to the first death, or it would
be simply a misleading term. What, then, happens to
the body when it dies ? It becomes utterly incapable of
feeling, or acting, or performing any one of its appro-
priate functions. It is not that it performs them badly
— that is disease — but that it does not perform them
at alL When, then, death is said to be inflicted on
the soul what are we to understand ? Why surely that
it will be reduced to the same condition. But the
popular theory is that it will live for ever, performing
all its functions, but performing them badly. In other
words, that instead of being punished with death, it
will be afflicted with a loathsome and painful disease,
which can never be cured, and from which death will
38 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
never release it, — that it will be always dying, but
never die.
The same thing holds good with regard to the share
which the raised body is to have in the second death.
The popular theory will not allow even it to die. It
is to be kept alive in agony for ever. What a teacher
the Bible must be, if this is the meaning of God being:
' able to destroy both body and soul in hell ! '
It may be said that after the first death, conscious-
ness remains in the surviving soul ; and that therefore
consciousness may remain after the second death. So
it might, if the second death were only another death
of the body ; but as both body and soul are to be
destroyed by it, no remaining consciousness is possible.
This one word, therefore, the key-word to the whole
subject, is amply sufficient to decide the question. It
would be difficult to conceive a more violent perver-
sion of the plainest possible teaching, than that which
makes death to mean eternal life in miser} 7 . And this
perversion is all the more inexcusable, on account of
the earnestness with which the whole Bible labours to
guard us against it. Every expression that human
language can supply, and every metaphor that the
material world can yield, to impress upon us that the
wicked will wholly cease to exist, are piled one upon
another, almost continuously, from Genesis to Eevela-
tion. They are said to perish — to pass away — to fade —
to wither — to be destroyed — consumed — devoured —
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 39
burnt up — ground to powder — cut down — plucked up
by the roots — broken to shivers — put away like dross —
besides other similar expressions. What dependence
can be placed upon the teaching of Scripture, if all
this means that they will live for ever, with all their
powers and faculties of body and mind in full exercise,
though at enmity with God, and consequently in a
state of unmitigated suffering ? *
* ' They are to be as " chaff driven away before the wind," or " burnt
up; " as " stubble before the wind ;" as " thorns burned in the fire ;" as
" trees cut down," "rooted up," and "burned in fire." They are to be
as " beasts taken and destroyed ; " as " a light put out ; " as " waters melt-
ing away;" as " the whirlwind passing by ;" as "the cloud consumed
and vanishing away ; " and as a " dream " which " flees away." They are
to be as "ashes under the feet ; " as " powder" ground down; as a "vessel
dashed in pieces;" as a "garment eaten by the moth," or "consumed in
rottenness ; " as " grass withering away ;" as " fat consumed into smoke; "
and as "tow" and " tares" " burned in the fire.'" — Bev. W. Kcr.
' In exact conformity with our view will be found the illustrations
of future punishment in the Old and New Testaments. These are some
of the illustrations of the former. The wicked shall be dashed in
pieces like a potter's vessel : they shall be like the beasts that perish:
like the untimely birth of a woman: like a whirlwind that passeth
away : like a waterless garden scorched by an eastern sun : like gar-
ments consumed by the moth. They shall consume like the fat of
lambs in the fire : consume into smoke : melt like wax : burn like tow :
consume like thorns : vanish away like exhausted waters. The illus-
trations of the New Testament are of the same character. The end of
the wicked is there compared to fish cast away to corruption : to a house
thrown down to its foundations : to the destruction of the old world by
water, and that of the Sodomites by fire : to the death and destruction
of natural brute beasts. They shall be like wood cast into quenchless
flames : like chaff burnt up : like tares consumed : like a dry branch
reduced to ashes. Every one of these images point — not to the pre-
servation of life in any state of pain, but to the loss of life, the utter
blotting out of being and existence.' — Rev . H. Constable.
40 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
But let us look at a few passages, and see if there is
anything in them to suggest such a strange interpreta-
tion of the words.
Matt. iii. 12. ' Whose fan is in his hand, and He
will throughly purge His floor, and gather His wheat
into the garner ; but He will burn up the chaff with
unquenchable fire.' Could any figure be employed
more utterly repugnant to the idea of perpetual con-
tinuance in whatever is here represented by ' unquench-
able fire'? or could auy figure more forcibly depict
utter destruction by its irresistible power ? The only
difficulty is to say anything that can make it plainer or
more decisive than it appears in itself. We really can
do nothing but ask anyone, who still feels a doubt, to
try the experiment of throwing some chaff into an
intensely hot fire, and see what becomes of it. The
fallacy of the common idea lies in supposing that, if
fire be unquenchable, what is put into it must be inde-
structible. But we shall have more to say upon this in
the next sermon.
Matt. x. 28. 'And fear not them which kill the
body, but are not able to kill the soul : but rather fear
Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in
hell.' We select this from a host of passages in which
the destruction of the wicked is spoken of, because both
body and soul are so emphatically specified, and because
the contrast drawn between the power of man and the
power of God, renders the meaning of ' destroy ' so
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 41
perfectly clear. To ' destroy ' the soul is to ' kill ' it.
This man cannot do. He can make the soul very wicked
and very miserable. What he is not able to do, is to
put it out of conscious existence. That power he does
possess with regard to the body ; not, as we explained in
a former discourse, by putting out of existence its com-
ponent atoms, but by causing such a disarrangement of
them, or producing such an effect upon them, as leaves
the body totally incapable of performing any one of
its functions. The quibbling about e annihilation ' is
wholly beside the mark.* No one contends for annihi-
lation, but for destruction — which is quite another
thing.
Luke ix. 24. ' For whosoever will save his life shall
lose it : but whosoever will lose his life for My sake the
same shall save it.' What is the 6 it,' which he shall
either save or lose hereafter ? Evidently ' his life.'
What else can it be ? He may lose it hereafter in a
much more awful manner than he can possibly lose it
now ; or he may save it hereafter for much higher
* The language commonly employed on this subject is instructive.
Our opponents chargo us with believing in ' annihilation,' and denying
' everlasting punishment ;' both of which charges are absolutely ground-
less. "VVe doubt whether God will ever annihilate a single particle of
matter that He ever created, and we hold everlasting punishment as
strongly as they do. But we understand the punishment to be 'ever-
lasting destruction,' and what we deny is eternal evil. From both of
these terms our opponents shrink with instinctive dread ; the one ex-
presses too strongly what they do not believe, the other puts too clearly
before them what they do believe.
42 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
enjoyment than he can possibly have from it now. But
the thing which he will either save or lose, is his life :
the difference being, that at present he can only lose
it partially, man not being ' able to kill the soul,' while
then he will lose it entirely, being ' destroyed, soul and
body.'
Gal. vi. 8. ' He that soweth to his flesh, shall of
the flesh reap corruption ; but he that soweth to the
Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.' Cor-
ruption means literally the decay of a dead body, and so
comes to represent death or destruction. It is the
same word in the original, that in 2 Pet. ii. 12 is ap-
plied to the slaughter of animals, and in Col. ii. 22 to
the consumption of food.
2 Thess. i. 9. 'Who shall be punished with ever-
lasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and
from the glory of His power.' The peculiar value of this
text is in connection with the last verse of Matt, xxv.,
which we shall have to consider in our next sermon ;
■* These shall go away into everlasting punishment.'
Here we are distinctly told what the 'everlasting
punishment ' is, namely, ' everlasting destruction.' It
no more follows that everlasting punishment should be
eternally in process of infliction than that everlasting
destruction should be eternally in process of accomplish-
ment. The wicked will no more be undercroino-
continuous punishment for ever, than they will be
undergoing continuous destruction for ever. The
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 43
destruction will take place once for all, ' when Christ
shall come to be glorified in His saints,' but its effects
will be everlasting - , inasmuch as there will be no
recovery from it. That punishment therefore will be
strictly everlasting — as lasting as the life of the
righteous, for it will be the eternal deprivation of the
blessedness which they would otherwise have been for
ever enjoying.*
Heb. x. 26, 27. 'For if we sin wilfully after that
we have received the knowledge of the truth, there re-
maineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful
looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which
shall devour the adversaries.' Of course the word
' devour,' like any other of those we have quoted, may
be used figuratively — indeed it is used figuratively
here ; but we maintain that, as employed to describe
the effects of a ' fiery indignation,' it can denote only
utter destruction. And this is confirmed by what im-
mediately follows; in which it is compared to the
stoning of an offender against the Mosaic Laws. ' He
that despised Moses' Law died without mercy under
two or three witnesses. Of how much sorer punish-
ment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath
trodden under foot the Son of God.' Some have argued
that as the dignity of Christ is infinitely greater than
that of Moses, the punishment threatened must be
infinitely sorer. But this is a mistake. For the sin
* But see Appendix.
44 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
was, in each case, committed against God, and the con-
trast is between rejecting a revelation made through
Moses, but quite sufficiently attested to be from (rod,
and rejecting a much more important revelation made
through Christ. And though perhaps not very much
weight may attach to the argument, yet, as far as the
expression goes, it seems scarcely likely that any com-
parison would be instituted between endless suffering
and the mere stoning of a man to death. The punish-
ment alluded to would be so ' much sorer ' as to make
any reference to the other almost absurd. But under-
stand it, in the light of other Scriptures, as a far more
terrific destruction than anything that can befall a man
in this life, and the comparison is natural and forcible.
Heb. xii. 29. ( For our God is a consuming fire.'
The word rendered ' consuming ' is as strong a word as
the Greek language could supply. The popular theory
makes God to be only a scorching fire ; those who are
exposed to His wrath being for ever tortured, but
never consumed, by it. These words furnish the answer
to an objection that may possibly be raised against the
view that the soul as well as the body will be destroyed
in hell. Material fire, it may be said, could not
destroy that which is immaterial. Perhaps not. But
the God, who is Himself a consuming fire, is not con-
fined to the use of material instruments for effecting
any destruction that may be required. That He will
make large use of material fire, there appears no reason
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 45
to doubt. But who imagines that He will use nothing
else?
1 Peter i. 23-25. 'Being born again, not of cor-
ruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of
God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh
is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of
grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof
falleth aw T ay : but the Word of the Lord endureth for
ever.' The contrast is between the regenerate and the
unregenerate, those w r ho are subjects of the new birth,
and those who are merely subjects of the old birth.
The regenerate partake of endless life, because they are
begotten of God through the Word, the effect of which
must necessarily be abiding. The unregenerate in
their natural state are like grass which withers and falls
away. If this referred merely to the frailty of man's
present life, there would be no force in the contrast ;
for in that the regenerate and unregenerate are alike.
The contrast is between the imperishable life of those
who are born of the incorruptible enduring seed, and
the transitory existence of man in his natural fallen
state — ' all flesh.'
2 Peter ii. 12. 'But these, as natural brute beasts,
made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the
things that they understand not; and shall utterly
perish in their own corruption.' The form of the
original shows that they are not compared to the brutes
in their evil speaking, but in the ultimate consequence
46 THE GLORY OF CnRIST.
of it.* That consequence is described in precisely the
same terms as the slaughter of the animals. It is
literally, 'made for capture and destruction,' and
'shall utterly perish in their own destruction.' The
words ' their own ' show that there will be a fitting-
difference in the manner of it ; but it must be destruc-
tion, if there is to be the smallest propriety in com-
paring it to the killing of an animal.
1 John ii. 1 7. ' And the world passeth away, and the
lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of (rod abideth
for ever.' A careful' examination of the context will
show that the ' world ' is here not the material world,
but the world of ungodly men. And the contrast
between its passing away, and the righteous abiding for
ever, is in perfect harmony with the whole teaching of
Scripture.
In our next discourse we shall consider the four
expressions which are thought to teach an opposite
doctrine : namely, that the wicked will abide for ever,
no less than the righteous, only in misery instead of
in happiness.
Before concluding, however, let us answer a question
that must naturally occur to any reflecting mind, and
the answer to which is not a little instructive. There is
* From a comparison of this test with Jurle 10, it seems probable
that St. Peter had their conduct as well as their destruction in his mind:
although it is only in the latter point, that he directly likens them to
the lower animals.
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 47
no difficulty in the doom of the wicked being described
simply as ' death ; ' but how is the term ' life,' standing
alone as it so often does, sufficient to describe the
blessedness of the righteous ? Other expressions no
I doubt make it abundantly clear that their bliss will
not consist simply in endless existence. But how is all
that included in 'eternal life'? The answer to this
involves the essential principle of the whole matter.
In Christ * all things consist ' or hold together ; as
from Him they all at first derived their existence.
In Plim is life, and in Him only. Nothing can perma-
nently live that is separated from Him. It may be
allowed to retain for a time an unnatural existence;
it may continue in a dying state as long as He sees
fit; but it 'hath not life? and it must ultimately
perish. The death of those who ' have not the Son ' is a
necessary consequence, arising out of the essential condi-
tions of all existence. Irresponsible beings, animate or
inanimate, may live by unconscious union with Christ,
the nature of which perhaps we cannot understand ; but
moral creatures, by the very conditions of their being,
can only live permanently by conscious willing union
with, and subjection to, the great Head. As long as
they remain without that, they are only ' dead while
they live,' and if they continue so, must in due time
perish.
Eternal life, therefore, necessarily implies eternal
moral union with Christ, and so carries everything with
48 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
it. ' Because I live, ye shall live also ; ' there is no
need to add 'in holiness and happiness,' for it must
be so. An eternally dying life is impossible. When
this state of trial and probation is over, and the final
judgment comes, there are but two alternatives — life
or death.
This day life and death are set before you ; therefore
choose life ; for why will ye die ?
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 49
SEEMON VI.
Who shall be punished ivith everlasting destruction from the
presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power. —
2 Thess. i. 9.
Having shown the clearness and fulness with which
Scripture foretells that the doom of impenitent sinners
will be utter destruction, we now proceed to examine
those particular passages which are thought to teach
that their doom will be — not everlasting destruction,
but — eternal life in hopeless misery. Multitudes of
texts are brought forward against universalism, which
have no bearing whatever upon the present argument.
There are only four expressions in the whole Bible,
which even appear to teach endless suffering, as dis-
tinguished from everlasting destruction.*
As to the first there is no difficulty. l Many of them
* A text commonly adduced, in Isa. xxxiii. 14, ' Who among ns shall
dwell with the devouring fire ? who among us shall dwell with ever-
lasting burnings,' has no reference to future punishment, but to the
perpetual invasions of Judaea by their enemies. The people in their
distress say, ' "Who can live in such a state of things as this ? Who can
bear these constant desolations ? ' As the Egyptians said to Pharaoh,
' Knowest thou not yet that Egypt is destroyed ? '
The parable of the Eich Man and Lazarus refers to the intermediate
state. The Eich Man was in ' Hades,' not in ' Gehenna." Eoth words
are translated ' hell ' in our Bible.
E
50 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to
everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting-
contempt' (Dan. xii. 2). It does not at all follow,
because they will be objects of everlasting contempt,
that therefore they will remain conscious of it for ever.
In Is. lxvi. 24, the same word, here rendered 'con-
tempt,' and there ' abhorring,' is applied to the ' car-
cases of the men that have transgressed against Me ; '
and they could not of course be conscious of it. This
passage, therefore, is in perfect harmony with the
general teaching of Scripture : the wicked will awake
to a sense of shame, and to become the objects of
everlasting contempt. Whether the remembrance of
individuals will be preserved for ever may perhaps be
questioned ; but it will never be forgotten, as one of
the most marvellous illustrations of the power of evil
over those whom it possesses, that multitudes of intel-
ligent creatures, having life and death set before them,
chose death rather than give up the pleasures of sin for
a season.
We may therefore proceed to the next passage,
namely, Matt. xxv. 46. ' And these shall go away
into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into
life eternal.' This is more relied on than any; so
much so, that it supplies the conventional term for
the doctrine of endless suffering. You are never asked
whether you believe in 'everlasting destruction,' or
any similar term, but whether you believe in ' ever-
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 51
lasting punishment.' Now it is surely of itself a note-
worthy circumstance, when the advocates of a doctrine
invariably select, as the name for it, an expression that,
occurs only once in the whole Bible, although the sub-
ject to which it refers is so constantly mentioned in
every form and variety of language. But let us see
whether our Lord's saying does necessarily teach what
is supposed. The question turns on the meaning of the
two words rendered ' everlasting ' and ' punishment.'
As to the former, there is no doubt whatever ; both
its etymology and its use are decisive. It is taken
from a word which means an age or period of time,
and it consequently means lasting through the period
referred to. What that period may be in any particular
case, we can only learn, either from the context, or from
our previous knowledge of the facts ; the word itself tells
us nothing. For instance, the Mosaic ordinances were
over and over again declared to be ' everlasting ; ' that
is, they were to last through the whole period of that
dispensation; and the 'hills' are called 'everlasting,'
because they will last throughout the present state of
natural things on the surface of our globe — that is,
until ' the heavens shall pass away with a great noise,
and the elements shall melt with fervent heat,' and 'the
earth also with the works that are therein shall be
burned up.' So, again, the fire that consumed Sodom
and Gomorrah is called in Jude 7 ' eternal fire,' because
the effect of it still remains. Indeed, without these
E 2
52 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
plain proofs of the sense in which the word is used in
Scripture, it seems strange that our own familiar use of
that whole class of expressions — everlasting, eternal,
endless, unceasing, continual, perpetual, always, never,
for ever — with an implied limit, should not have saved
us from attaching the idea of absolute endlessness to
them when found in the Bible. The common answer to
this is, that in so speaking we use exaggerated language,
which it is impossible to attribute to God's Word. If
so, then a Jew is quite justified in adhering to the Mosaic
ritual, for that was most positively declared to be ever-
lasting. But it is altogether a mistake. Such language
is no exaggeration at all ; it expresses the simple truth,
that the thing referred to lasts continuously throughout
the whole period, which is implied by the nature of the
case. Perhaps no language in the world possesses a
word which necessarily implies absolute endlessness —
certainly not the Greek. A stronger word than that
commonly used in the New Testament for everlast-
ing, is applied by Jude to the ' chains,' in which the
fallen angels ' are reserved under darkness ; ' and yet
the duration of those f everlasting chains ' is expressly
limited ' unto the judgment of the great day.'
Let us see, then, how this bears upon the subject
before us. When the word ' eternal ' (or * everlast-
ing,' which is only another translation of the same
word) is applied in Scripture to the existence of
God, or to the future glory of the Church, we under-
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 53
stand it as meaning absolutely endless, because we
know, from other statements, that neither the one nor
the other will ever come to an end.* When it is
applied to the future punishment of the wicked, we
know that — as far as regards the consciousness of
punishment — it cannot mean absolutely endless, be-
* This meets the objection, that if we put a limit to the misery of
the condemned, we must also put a limit to the happiness of the saved :
in other words, that if the wicked perish, so must the righteous, — if the
wicked have not immortality, neither can the righteous have it, — if there
is no eternal life out of Christ, neither can there be any in Christ.
' Eternal' means lasting throughout the period referred to; and that
period may be limited in one case and unlimited in another. But see
Appendix on ' Everlasting Punishment.'
We may also ask, how the way of holiness could be called ' the way
everlasting,' in contrast to every ' wicked way ' (Ps. cxxxix. 24) ; if the
two ways were both everlasting, the one being the way of everlasting
holiness and happiness, the other the way of everlasting sin and
misery.
' The certainty that the blessedness of the righteous will be truly
everlasting does not depend on the use of the adjective altiivios in con-
nection with the life promised to them. If we had no evidence beyond
the use of that word, we should not, so far as the proof turns upon
language, have a certainty that immortal life is the inheritance of the
saved. But we are not left to the imperfect assurance of an adjective
of ambiguous meaning. The heavenly heritage is declared to be "in-
corruptible, undefiled, and unfading," and " the crown of glory, one that
fadeth not away;" "the corruptible is to put on ineorruption, and the
mortal to put on immortality." The future life of Christ's faithful
servants is set forth as flowing from Him, and being like unto His life :
"Because He lives, they shall live also;" "He is their life, and their
life is hid with Him in God;" "they shall be made like unto Him;"
"whether they wake or sleep, they are to live together with Him;"
"they are to be for ever (-rrdvTOTt) with the Lord;" and, "their vile
bodies are to be changed, and fashioned like unto His glorious body."' —
Appeal to Scripture. Rev. J. Barton, M.A.
54 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
cause Scripture positively declares that evil will come
to an end, and the irreclaimably wicked he utterly
destroyed. ' Everlasting punishment ' therefore, as
used by Our Lord in this parable, if it be understood
of felt punishment, can only mean, at the utmost,
punishment which will continue through the remainder
of their existence ; whilst the ' eternal life ' promised
to the righteous we know to mean endless indissoluble
union with God in Christ.
Still it may be said, that although such a view may
be logically tenable, yet the impression naturally pro-
duced by the contrast is, that the duration in each
case is the same. This impression, so far as it con-
cerns the duration of happiness and misery, is pro-
duced by coming to the passage with that belief in our
minds. The Komanist, who has been taught from
infancy to believe that the words 'This is my body'
mean, ' This is the substance of my body,' is confirmed
in his impression every time that he hears those words.
He wonders how you can be so blind and perverse as to
reject such plain teaching. In answer to all your
arguments from Scripture and reason, he recurs again
and again to his one text, ' This is my body ; ' just as
the advocates of Eternal Evil recur again and again
to, ' These shall go away into everlasting punishment.'
Look at a straight stick under water, and it will appear
crooked. You may know that it is not crooked, and
be able to prove it to a demonstration ; but as long as
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 55
you look at it through the distorting medium it will
appear so. In the same way, while you look at this
passage through the doctrine of Eternal Evil, it will
appear out of line with the general teaching of Scrip-
ture. And however completely you may be silenced in
argument, it will still continue to look crooked. But
let your mind be thoroughly possessed with the re-
vealed truth, that the wicked are to perish for ever,
and then, if you look at the passage with a right un-
derstanding of the terms employed, it will wear no
such distorted appearance ; * the stick will not only
be proved to be straight, but taken out of the water
and seen to be so.
Notwithstanding all this, I quite believe that our
Lord did mean to ascribe the same duration to the
punishment of the wicked, in one of its two elements,
that he ascribes to the life of the righteous. In what
will that punishment consist ? In suffering and in loss.
Many or few stripes will be inflicted, according to each
one's deserts ; while in every case they will end in the
final loss of life, as the necessary consequence of not-
being united to Christ, in whom alone can anything
permanently ' consist.' Now this latter element in the
punishment necessarily involves the termination of the
* This is described by the Christian Advocate as ' settling the matter
beforehand.' No ; it is only acting upon the principle laid down in one
of our own Articles, that one passage of Scripture is not to be inter-
preted so as to contradict another.
M,
mi. 01,011 , 01 (Willi i.
I"i in' i i lull il - II li.i | no I' i n,m.il urn. To .ill fitoj m! V
will I Iny |i;iy I In pi n.ill : o| li,i . m;- i > | • • I < < I | l,i i I ,
in i in Lon "I that '!m nil lid '.vim ii i hey would
oi lii i wi: ■<■ li.i v pom 'I. I -il ' i In 'ii leu oi ; kodom
• • < i < I < ionioi i. ill I ||| , v. ill I" ' nil. i j J i .* '. I llC vrln'iMlirr
oi eternal fire,' lu thi ' everlasting di truction which
Nun pei i I. :,. i in ' il li.i i i •hi upon i In in.
1 1 iuIii ; I mill I In • | i linn nl Inn to im linlr both
Hi- ' Ii on ni , .mil 1 1 1' ii . o i.i i from there being the
llghti i 'iiiin nil y in i in .i.ii inn ni , ii 1,1 conn .i i Imple
pn i ' i'ii Ion "i i in- whole 1 1 ni i,. a | ,,
:;.ii'i i ii' • Ii mi iii i.i uiii i mi;, i in | , 1 1 1 1 1 ihment i evei
Ing mill, i ii ' oi i mil 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' - i [trough the remainder
Of their I l 1.1 l" . . A;; H mini : I In . I. i,i«ni ,,| [q| , l| [|
' I i I.i I in", .i I In ,",.im of I In' i million.. To iii i I
ii|i"n i Iii Mild i im; iii in- abi oiui. I v rmii. i to force
• m ii I'll in ) ml' i pn I.i! urn Upon llm wonl ,, wlmli
'••'"'■: iii. in mio \ loli ni &ntti foni ni wiiii iim whole
I- .i. hing "i I li i Iptun i
II It I" 1 Ili"ii"lil ,1 i.ii.'o thai "Hi I, mil . Imiilil ,, ,
i oi " which ilr. knew would bi o grierouih pei
verted, Il In quite enough to adduce once more i he
* li "i'\ ""' Ihlnl 1 1ml 1 1" irord ranilored ' punl limi nl ' i mnol
i""i" 1 1 n-pplj lo " i" n .ii ni Idling of 1 --I .I' pin i, hi h i
""ly to 1. 1. ' 1.0 i htn pdldi - 1 1 i li 1 1. ;., i .j,, ,, hi »iii I
• '■! -i "i if|j ' '/"■ • i" i. .ii hi i hod uiiii ii,. propi i
1 'ii''". ■•■ hli li Mihli ii und HooM/m Li Ii on pi i |u -i ...
ippO l(.l tO ...p.... (j ,i |,, mill v in | |, lr '
I'.ni ' . . A pi ii
I in ..i OR) OF rilKi. i .
words, 'This ii m> body.' What groaa auperatitions He
i,.i, , iw api in mm j up .) n« 1 ooi i up! iii •, uotti l\ i he whole
[ Ihuroh foi i •.• , kind w hat w holesale ma wore i oi ilia
r.in 1 1 1 1 1 1 people foi refu >ing to admit I be mon il i ou He '
\ word "i explanation would have reudered all thil
impossible. Bui II was not given, \ >».l millions ot
t in i ,i i in . ha\ e lived and died as perfeol ly certain
i iini • Tin . i . m\ bod} ' teaches tran >ubstan! I it Ion, u
i ii.n evei li i ing punishment ' me ma etei aal life In
llll 10] Y.
The next argument we have to oonsidei I drav» n
From « >i i r l lord's woi ds, j eoordi d In Mark I x. I . , I >;
• \n,i ii i bine eye offend I hee, pluek It out i It ti
better for thee to ontei into the kingdom ot '""l
u H ii one < \ e, I ban ha\ ing I wo ej ea to be oa it into
hell fur: wlinv theii worm dleth not, and the In'-
ii u«>t quenched.'
The que I ton i , I oi what pm po ■• are I bej • i I
Into bell fire to be deal royed, oi to be toi I m ed for
evei Now, without again referring to oui Lord's
exprei a dei n, i hat * lod Is able to de it roy hot li
ioul and body In hell i oi to n is wai ning, recorded In
i he preoeding chaptei (Mai b viii. 9 I ), I hat u ho loevei
i . not u illing i" >' i ifloe hi i life, it required, by fldelit y
to Him, will ultimately 'lose , we might be content to
i i. whet li< i i he oont rait 1 1 not t>\ Ident U Intended
(though more pointed!} brought out In M.iii. \. 80
•that "lie of thy member should pcrwA'), between
58 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
the loss of a single member now and the loss of the
whole body hereafter. But let us examine the figures
more closely.
We will take the ' fire ' first, as the simpler. What
is the meaning of ' unquenchable tire ' ? Does it mean
fire that will never cease to burn ? Certainly not. If
a fire broke out in London, which could not be quenched,
it would burn on until it had burnt down the whole
town, and then it would go out of itself for want of
any more fuel to consume.* So Our Lord means that,
when the wicked are cast into hell, there will be no hope
for them ; they will neither be able to escape from the
fire nor to extinguish it. It will burn on till it has
utterly consumed them. ' He will burn up the chaff
with unquenchable fire.' f And even if it were certain,
that a visible memorial of evil will be preserved, in
* In verses 43 and 45, the phrase is rendered ' that never shall be
quenched' ; but it ought to be ' unquenchable.' The idea is precisely the
same as in the Baptist's ' unquenchable fire.'
f I have been favoured with the following criticism by a member of
my congregation : —
' I believe you have not mentioned in any of your sermons that the
Greek authors used aa-fiearos (unquenchable) in the sense of violent or
excessive, without any reference to its duration, or the possibility of
its being quenched or stopped. Homer speaks of afffiearos yeXias, II.
i. 599, and after saying that in the attempt of the Trojans to burn the
Grecian fleet, <f>A.b| aa^ecmj (an unquenchable flame) spread itself over
one of the ships (xvi. 123), he saw nothing absurd or contradictory in
adding in the same book (xvi. 293) of Patroclus that he extinguished
the blazing fire, and that the ship was left half burned— kot a 5'
ecrfiecrev al96p.evov irvp.'
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 59
some material fire kept burning for ever, there would
be no reason to conclude that what is cast into it is
indestructible ; even if we had not been so plainly told,
that the wicked will be destroyed, consumed, devoured,
burnt up, by it.
In the 'undying worm' we have the same fact presented
under a different aspect. It is nothing to say that the
two figures thus combined are mutually inconsistent
(inasmuch as the fire would destroy the worm) ; it is
enough if the things they represent are consistent. The
fire represents death in its most terrific, the worm in
its most repulsive, aspect — its painfulness and its loath-
someness. The worm not dying means precisely the
same as the fire not being quenched. And if we came
to such expressions without preconceived ideas, we
should never imagine that either of them were endless.
Just as, when we are told that the fire is unquenchable,
we should understand, that it would burn on, until it
had consumed everything within its reach; so, when
we are told that a worm feeding on a carcase ' dieth
not,' we should understand that the worm would go on
devouring the carcase until there was nothing of it
left. What becomes of the worm after that, we should
never stay for a moment to consider, because it does
not come within the range of the figure. Who could
imagine that the carcase would be miraculously re-
newed, so that though the worm was for ever preying
upon it, it would never be devoured? So far from
60 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
the worm not dying, affording any proof that the
body will continue for ever in existence, it is manifestly
intended to show that it will not. The ravages of the
worm must bring the carcase to an end, unless addi-
tional corrupt matter is perpetually supplied to com-
pensate for the loss.
Instead, therefore, of finding anything here even to
suggest the idea of endless suffering, we must do
extreme violence to both the figures, in order to force
it upon them. Besides the improbable notion of
an eternal fire and an eternal worm, we have to
imagine a living human body so constructed that fire
will go on for ever scorching but never consuming it,
and also a dead body which will for ever supply food
to a worm that unceasingly preys upon it — which will,
in fact, possess more astounding vitality than any
living body that was ever known.
"We have taken for granted, you will observe, in the
preceding argument, that it is a dead body upon which
the worm is supposed to be preying. This is surely
self-evident ; for from what other fact in nature could
the figure be drawn ? Any doubt, however, is set at
rest by turning to the passage in the Old Testament to
which Our Lord manifestly refers. In Isa. lxvi. 24 we
read: 'And they shall go forth, and look upon the
carcases of the men that have transgressed against Me :
for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be
quenched ; and they shall be an abhorring unto all
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 61
flesh.' Surely this passage should have preserved us
from attaching the idea of eternal suffering to the same
expressions, when applied by Our Lord to the final doom
of all impenitent sinners. Here they cannot mean
eternal suffering, or any suffering at all ; for the Prophet
speaks only of the dead bodies of persons previously
slain — which are exhibited to view, disgraced and de-
graded, 'an abhorring unto all flesh.' But as our Lord
evidently means to represent the wicked as cast alive
into hell-fire, the figure must there be held to include
the sufferings which they will endure in the process of
destruction, as well as their subsequently becoming-
objects of 'everlasting contempt.'
Before passing on, perhaps we ought to mention an
argument that has been drawn from the words which
immediately follow : ' For every one shall be salted
with fire ; and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.'
It is said that salt represents preservation from corrup-
tion, and that therefore the preservation of the wicked
from being destroyed by the fire, is what Our Lord here
asserts. But the words are— 'salted with fire,' — not
salted so as to be proof against it. Besides, salt pre-
serves from corruption, not in corruption ; so that
this interpretation would directly contradict what had
just been represented by the worm. The universalist
might draw a plausible argument from the word, to
the effect that the fire was remedial ; but no ingenuity
can make it teach eternal suffering. I believe it does
62 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
refer to the purifying effect of fire ; but to the purifica-
tion of the universe by the destruction of the wicked,
not to their own purification. Every sacrifice was
mingled with salt ; which represented, no doubt, freedom
from corruption. As the whole universe is to be recon-
ciled to Grod, and presented to Him an acceptable sacri-
fice, by Christ, every taint of corruption must be eradi-
cated from it. And Christ here warns us, that unless
we will submit to the purifying fire of self-sacrifice
during our period of probation, cutting off the right
hand or plucking out the right eye that would cause
us to offend, we must submit to be cast into the fire of
hell, which will effectually put an end to our corruption,
by utterly destroying us body and soul.
We now come to the last argument which is adduced
to support the doctrine of Eternal Evil — drawn from
some of the closing scenes in the Apocalypse. The par-
ticular passages quoted are, ch. xiv. 9-11, xix. 3-20,
and xx. 1 ; of which we may say, generally, that they
describe the devil and certain victims of his wiles as
tormented for ever and ever in a lake of fire.
Now it is very natural that anyone, who already
believes in eternal torment, should understand these
passages as referring to it. But one, whose mind
was thoroughly imbued with the whole tenor of inspired
teaching upon this subject, and who consequently knew
that evil was not to last for ever, would no more sup-
pose them to teach that either men or devils will
THE GI.011Y OF CHRIST. 63
literally suffer endless torment, than he would suppose,
from other parts of the same scenic representation, thai
when Christ appears to inllici punishment upon them,
He will ride on a white horse, and be clothed with
a vesture dipped in blood; that out of His mouth will
go a sharp sword; that an angel will stand in the sun,
aud call to all the fowls that fly in the midst of hi aven
to come and gather themselves together to the supper
of the great God. Is it nol palpable that the whole
sceue is figurative to the highest degree, and that we
must interpret the figures by the light which the general
teaching of Scripture throws upon them ? Now, we can
give a very much stronger reason for denying that the
smoke of their torment ascending up for ever and ever
is to be understood literally, than for denying that
Christ will ride on a white horse. For of the latter we
can only say that it seems extremely improbable;
while of the former we can say thai it is absolutely
impossible, because it would contradict the plainest
and most positive declarations of God's word, that the
wicked are to be: utterly destroyed and evil come to
an end.
Even without this appeal, however, taking the repre-
sentations just as they stand, we find the strongest
ground for denying any literal interpretation of them.
In the first place, this perpetual torment is said to be
endured ' in the presence of the Lamb ' ; whereas St.
Paul says that the wicked will be 'punished with
64 THE GLOBY OF CHBIST.
everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord.'
Again, chap. xiv. 9-11 and ch. xix. 3-20 refer to
judgments inflicted before the millennium, while it is
not until the end of the millennium that the general
judgment takes place, and the wicked receive their
final doom. This is made still more obvious by what
follows the statement of the beast and the false prophet
being cast alive into the lake of fire, in ch. xix. 21 :
e And the remnant were slain with the sword of Him
that sat upon the horse.' If the being cast into a
lake of fire represents the commencement of endless
suffering, what does the being slain with a sword repre-
sent, when put in contrast with it? Again, we may
observe, that the beast and the false prophet are not
persons but systems. And more decisively still, that
death and hell (Hades, the place of departed spirits)
are cast into the lake of fire ; which cannot mean the
inhabitants of Hades, for it has been previously
emptied of its inhabitants in order that they might
stand before the great white throne.*
* In addition to what is mentioned above, let it be observed, that
after the last judgment St. John ' saw a new heaven and a new earth,
for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away ; ' and there-
fore, it would seem, the lake of fire also, which was on the first earth.
That it is referred to aftarwards, affords no proof of its continued
existence on the new earth, where ' there shall be no more death,
neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain : ' for in
ch. xxii. 12, reference is made to the Lord's coming, which cannot be an
event of eternal continuance. Then where is it? For of any 'Hell'
separate from this earth Scripture gives not a hint. Can anyone sup-
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 65
If it be asked what the lake of fire does represent, we
would reply — the partial overcoming of evil and destruc-
tion of evildoers at the beginning of the millennium,
with their complete overthrow at the close of it. Fire
is the most irresistible agent of destruction that we
know ; and it is used here to give us the most vivid idea
that could be presented to our minds of the complete
destruction of what is represented by the persons and
things cast into it. The devil probably represents all
the evil connected with the unseen world; the beast
and the false prophet the most conspicuous typical
developments of human wickedness ; death and hades
the physical evils introduced by sin. All will come to
an end ; every trace of sin and its results will be swept
away for ever.
How far literal fire will be made use of, and whether
any visible monument will be preserved of the mighty
overthrow, are questions to which it is equally difficult
and needless to give any decided answer. But with
regard to the word ' torment ' being used here, we can
have little doubt that it refers to the sufferings which
will accompany the final death of the wicked ; it will
not be a simple act of annihilation, but a process of
pose that these glowing descriptions of earth's future blessedness merely
refer to the surface of our planet, while underneath its crust, ' death,'
and ' sorrow,' and ' crying,' and pain,' are to reign and rage eternally
with greater fury than ever? Whatever be the interpretation of it,
there can be no doubt that in the prophetic picture, the 'ages' have
passed away, and ' the smoke of their torment ' has ceased to ascend.
F
66 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
destruction. What will be the nature or duration of
the torment we are not informed, and need not at-
tempt to guess. All we know is that it will produce
no change in their character. '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 ' (ch. xxii.
11). After the final judgment, the wicked will continue
wicked, and must therefore perish ; the righteous can
never fall again, and must therefore live for ever.
I know not how it may appear to you, but to me it
appears as clear as daylight, that neither this passage
nor any of the others, nor all of them together, prove
the doctrine of Eternal Evil one whit more than ' This
is My body' proves the doctrine of Tran substantiation.
If, however, any of you should still think that the
difficulty of reconciling these passages with the general
teaching of Scripture has not been wholly removed,
let me beg you to consider whether it is at all greater
than the difficulty of reconciling some other pas-
sages with the Deity of Christ, or the Atonement, or
Justification by Faith, or indeed almost any doctrine in
the wmole Bible. We never admit the smallest doubt
of Our Lord's deity, merely because we are unable
to interpret one or two texts, without such an amount
of what a Unitarian would call special pleading, as, if
heard alone, would probably confirm, rather than shake,
his conviction of its untenableness. Neither ought we to
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 67
admit the smallest doubt of the ' everlasting destruc-
tion ' of the wicked, merely because it requires some
degree of thought and patient examination to get a
right understanding of the very few texts that may
seem opposed to it. And in our belief that we have
not misunderstood either those particular passages, or
the general teaching of Scripture, I shall be greatly
mistaken if we are not confirmed, when we come to
look at the whole subject from a practical point of view,
and consider the mischief which has been done by the
popular theory, as well as the light which is thrown on
some of the darker features of revelation by a right
understanding of the truth on this important matter.
But first we shall endeavour to show how the error
arose, and also how inconsistent it is with the revela-
tions of Scripture concerning man's Creation, Fall, and
Eedemption.
f2
68 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
SEEMON VII.
In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Gen. ii. 17.
No sooner was Christianity established in the world,
than Satan set himself to corrupt it. His greatest suc-
cess was the infusion into it of Judaism and of hea-
then philosophy ; resulting in sacerdotalism and in the
doctrine of Eternal Evil. In each case, as usual, the
error was engrafted on a truth ; in the former on the
priesthood of Christ and of all Christians, in the latter
on the Eesurrection of the dead and everlasting life in
Christ. The purpose of the former was to hide (rod
from our view ; that of the latter to present Him in
such an aspect as would inspire us with horror.
As regards that, with which alone we have now to
do, the root of the whole mischief lay in the Platonic
philosophy with regard to the immortality of the soul.
To this day is that supposed inherent immortality man's
proudest boast. It seems so glorious to think that he
must live for ever. Glorious indeed, for it clothes him
with one of God's own essential attributes. He cannot
climb up to equality with God in His omnipotence,
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 69
omniscience, or omnipresence ; the one point in which
alone his vain imagination can hope to place him on a
level with his Creator, is his presumed indefeasible im-
mortality, — that whatever else may happen, he must
and will live for ever. We may see at a glance how
easily this idea, so agreeable to man's pride, would be
engrafted upon the Christian's belief in a state of con-
sciousness after death, a subsequent resurrection, and
eternal life through Christ. And then, how natural
and consecutive appear the links in the chain. All live,
in a limited sense, after death, — all will stand, abso-
lutely alive, before the judgment seat, — the saved will
continue to live for ever in perfect holiness and happi-
ness, — the lost will — what ? — had Satan ever an easier
task than to suggest — live for ever in sin and misery ?
What else is possible ? Their restoration is hopelessly
barred by the plain declarations of Scripture; their
souls are presumed to be indestructible ; and for what
purpose can their bodies be raised, unless to be habita-
tions for those immortal souls ? The inference is irre-
sistible — body and soul must both be tormented for
ever. How easily may an apparently innocent error
find entrance ! How disastrous may be its results !
To a heathen it was little matter whether he believed
in the immortality of the soul, or not. Christianity
was poisoned by the infusion.
But how was this to be reconciled with the constant
testimony of Scripture, that the wicked will not live
70 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
for ever, but be destroyed and utterly perish ? Why
did not a host of texts open their eyes and show them
their mistake ? In reply we may ask, again, Why does
a straight stick put into water look crooked? And
why will no arguments make it look straight ? Simply
because it is seen through a distorting medium. So
may men search the Scriptures for ever, with a pre-
established belief in their own indestructibility, and
they will be only more and more confirmed in their
belief of eternal evil. The longer they look at the
stick, the more certain they will become that it is
crooked. This accounts for the otherwise perplexing-
fact, that some of the most determined advocates of
this doctrine are men who have studied the Bible all
their lives, and in many points have the deepest under-
standing of it. And it also accounts for the rapidity
and thoroughness with which many persons change
their views, as soon as their eyes are opened to see the
fundamental fallacy that underlies them. The moment
the stick is taken out of the water, it appears perfectly
straight.
Let us, then, see whether there is any ground for this
postulate, of natural immortality, either in reason or in
Scripture.*
* ' I permit the Pope to make articles of faith for himself and his
faithful,— such as, that the soul is the substantial form of the human
body, that the soul is immortal, with all those monstrous opinions to be
found in the Roman decretals.' — Martin Luther.
'To the Christian, indeed, all this doubt would be instantly removed
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 71
The ground on which reason is appealed to in its
favour, is the supposed indestructibility of matter ; the
inference being that, if the lower part of our nature
cannot be annihilated, it is very unlikely that the higher
part can. But this argument involves two palpable
fallacies : first, that because matter is indestructible by
man, it must also be indestructible by God, and se-
condly, that any compound thing can be destroyed only
by being annihilated. With regard to the former, it
is hard to believe that the Creator could not put out
of existence whatever he had called into existence.
With regard to the latter, it simply confounds the de-
struction of a material object with the destruction of its
component parts. It is not necessary that they should
be destroyed in order to destroy it. A vessel is de-
stroyed when it is broken to pieces ; it ceases to exist
as such. Now, as we know nothing of the composition
of the human soul, we can form no idea as to the kind
of process that would be required for its destruction, —
but to say that it cannot be destroyed is simply absurd.
Indeed, so far from reason suggesting the smallest
if he found that the immortality of the soul was revealed in the word of
God. In fact, no such doctrine is revealed to us. The Christian's
hope, as founded in the promises contained in the Gospel, is the
resurrection of the body.' — Archbishop Whately.
'That the soul is naturally immortal is contradicted by Scripture,
which makes our immortality a gift dependent on the Giver.' — Richard
Watson.
' The doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and the name, are alike
unknown to the entire Bible.' — Olshausen.
72 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
argument in favour of its indestructibility, all the
analogies from the material world are directly against it.
Not a single material organisation can be found that is
indestructible: why should any spiritual organisation
be so ? Would not reason itself lead us to conclude
that it must be at least as easy for God to destroy a soul
as for man to destroy a body?
But what saith the Scripture ? Does it represent man
as created indestructible ?
First, we are told that 'God created man in His own
image.' But how did that make him necessarily im-
mortal, any more than omnipotent or omniscient? An
image of a person or thing does not necessarily last as
Ions; as the original. In what the likeness did consist,
we are plainly told, namely, in his moral nature : ' Ke-
newed in knowledge after the image of Him that created
him,' 'Which after God is created in righteousness and
true holiness.'
Then we are reminded, that ' God breathed into his
nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living
soul.' But a ' living soul ' simpty means an animated
being, and is applied to the lower animals as well as
to man.* The expression ' God breathed ' is purely
figurative, and affords no countenance whatever to the
heathen notion of man's soul being an emanation of
Deity ; indeed, the very circumstance here referred to
is actually brought forward to illustrate the frailty of
* Gen. i. 30, margin.
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 73
man's life ; ' Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his
nostrils, for wherein is he to be accounted of? '
Then it is said that the threat, 'In the day that
thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die,' virtually
implied, that as long as he remained obedient he could
not die. It certainly did no such thing. Though
obedience would save him from any such abrupt cutting
short of his days as disobedience would incur, it by no
means followed necessarily that he could never die
from the natural decay of his vital powers. There is
a plain intimation afterwards, however, that he would
have been preserved from any such decay, had he re-
mained obedient. ' And now, lest he put forth his hand
and take of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.'
The Tree of Life either represented, or actually was, the
provision made by God for preserving man from death ;
which implies, that otherwise he would have been liable
to death, even if he had remained obedient. For ob-
serve, it was not by supplying him with food that the
Tree of Life would have kept him alive. God had
given him every green herb for food. And yet, with
a full supply of food, and under the most favourable
circumstances possible, within and without, it was ne-
cessary for him to eat of that tree, in order that he
might live for ever. Is not the inference irresistible,
that he was created with a nature, which would sooner
or later have worn out, but for the special provision
that was made to counteract this natural tendency ?
74 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
There is certainly no appearance as yet of indefeasible
immortality. All we can gather is, that man was made
capable of living for ever, provided certain conditions
were complied with.
Further light will be thrown upon this, as we pro-
ceed to enquire, what was the punishment threatened
to Adam by the words, 'In the day that thou eatest
thereof, thou shalt surely die.'
Some have understood it to mean moral death, or
the separation of his heart from Grod. But surely this
took place before he ate the forbidden fruit. It was
the cause of his doing so ; whereas death was evidently
threatened as the consequence of it.
Others suppose it to mean, that he would at once
become mortal, and therefore necessarily die in course
of time. But this is not at all sufficient to meet the
language, and is also at variance with what is said of
the Tree of Life.
The question is, what must Adam himself have
understood by it ? With such a tremendous issue at
stake as the fate of a whole race, surely the conse-
quences of disobedience must have been set before him
to their fullest extent and in unmistakable language.
The penalty which God meant to inflict could not surely
be something infinitely greater than that of which
Adam was warned.*
* ' Adam was not threatened with never-ending torments ! Quite
true.' So says the Bible Treasury. And Dean Close argues, that, as
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 75
Now what could he possibly have understood by the
threat, except that he would die, and cease to exist
as a man? How could he ever have imagined that
when (rod said he should die, it was really meant that
he should live for ever in sin and misery ? or that such
would be the necessary consequence of his act in any
way whatever ? If, after sinning, he had found him-
self and his posterity exposed to a doom so infinitely
greater than that which he was warned of, might he
not have replied against Grod, that had he been aware
of its consequences, nothing would have induced him
to commit the act ? No ; he believed that Grod meant
what he said. There is not a word in the inspired
narrative which affords any warrant for the belief, that
Adam had the least idea of any separate conscious
existence out of the body. And if he had, how could
the threat of death give him the slightest warning of
the unutterable woe that is supposed by the popular
doctrine to be the penalty of sin ? *
the happiness of the redeemed will exceed anything that hath entered
into the heart of man to conceive, so will the ' torments of the damned.'
But surely it is a totally different thing, for a promised reward to exceed
what the promise itself could convey, and for a threatened punishment
to exceed what the person, who was warned of it, could possibly con-
ceive to have been intended.
* From the words 'Adam was not deceived' (1 Tim. ii. 14), many
thoughtful persons have concluded that Adam, seeing the ruin in which
khis wife was involved, deliberately chose to share her fate. If he
supposed that fate to be eternal life in misery, it is absolutely incon-
ceivable that he could have been actuated by any such motive : for what
comfort could it have been to either of them to witness the other's
76 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
But why was the threatened penalty not inflicted on
the day that Adam sinned ? Because provision had
been made in the everlasting covenant of grace, for
bestowing upon man as a free gift that eternal life
which was at first offered him as the reward of obe-
dience. That covenant was ' ordered in all things and
sure ' before man was created ; and it was to be sealed
with the blood of the Lamb, who in the mind and
purpose of Grod was ' slain before the foundation of the
world.' But for Christ, Adam would have died on the
day he sinned, and the whole human race of course
have perished with him. Thus Christ is ' the Saviour
of all men,' and ' gave his flesh for the life of the world.'
That it was through Christ his life was spared, was at
once made known to Adam, with what degree of clear-
ness it may be difficult to say, by the promise, and by
the ordinance of Sacrifice. On the former it is unneces-
sary here to dwell ; but the latter has too important a
bearing upon our present subject to be overlooked.
The idea represented in sacrifice was — the penalty of
sin being laid upon another. What then was inflicted
on the animal offered in sacrifice ? Death. It was
killed — it ceased to exist. It was not kept in prolonged
torture, but slain outright. Now, fully admitting that
everlasting agonies ? But it is quite possible that he might choose to
die with her, rather than to live without her.
In what other way, we may also ask, is it possible to understand
the willingness of Moses to be blotted out of the book of life, and of
Paul to be accursed from Christ, for the sake of others ?
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 77
some difference may be expected between a type and its
antitype, there surely must be some likeness between
them. And there certainly is none whatever between
the death of an animal and a man's eternal life in
misery.
This is placed beyond a doubt, when we consider the
true sacrifice for sin. Our iniquities were laid upon
Christ. He paid the penalty of sin. He delivered us
from the curse of the Law, by being made a curse for
us. And what was the penalty he paid ? What did he
suffer for us ? Eternal life in misery ? No, he ' tasted
death for every man.' The advocates of eternal
suffering try to escape from this by saying, that the
dignity of the Sufferer rendered His temporary sufferings
a sufficient equivalent for the eternal sufferings of those
whom He redeemed. To which it has been sometimes
replied, that on such a view, the slightest possible pain
endured by Him would have been sufficient to redeem
the world. A more satisfactory answer is, that Christ
is positively declared to have endured the penalty due
to man's sin ; and what He did endure was mental and
bodily suffering, ending in death. The mental anguish
which he endured in the garden and on the cross, how-
ever much greater in degree, was doubtless the same in
kind, as that which would have come upon Adam, if he
had known that the death penalty was about to be
inflicted upon him. It would only have been necessary
that he should have been given some due appreciation
78 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
of what he had lost, to break his heart and terminate
his existence; just as the hiding of His Father's face
broke the heart of Jesus and ended His sufferings for
ever.*
We are not left to these inferences, however, irresist-
ible as they are, on the question of man's natural
immortality. St. Paul makes as decisive a statement
as could be uttered in human language : ' Who will
render to every man according to his works ; to them
who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for
glory and honour and immortality, eternal life.' (Rom.
ii. 6, 7.) If all men possessed immortality, naturally
and indefeasibly, how could it be classed with glory and
* It may be argued, that as the soul of Jesus did not cease to exist
after death, so neither would the soul of Adam have ceased to exist if
the death penalty had been inflicted on him. This is an intricate point,
on which I would speak with great diffidence. It seems very doubtful,
how far we may infer what would have happened in Adam's case, if
there had been no redemption, from what does happen to men now in
consequence of that redemption, or what did happen to Christ when his
atoning work was finished, and he had drained the last dregs of the cup
of wrath. But this we may confidently say, and it is quite enough for
our present purpose, that whatever would have happened to the soul of
Adam after death if he had been left to bear the penalty of sin, it could
not possibly have been doomed to a condition of eternal anguish, or else
the penalty of which he was warned, would have been but an inappreci-
able fraction of the penalty which he actually incurred.
I cannot forbear suggesting the enquiry, whether the sustaining of
our blessed Lord's human spirit during the hiding of His Father's coun-
tenance, so that it should not be utterly crushed, may not have been
the answer to those prayers and supplications, which He offered with
strong crying and tears unto Him that was able to save h\m from death,
and in which we are told He was heard, in consequence of His reverent
submission to His Father's will.
THE GLOET OF CHRIST. 79
honour as one of the things which were to be sought by
patient continuance in well-doing ? Or how, we may
further ask, could it have been ' brought to light by the
Gospel ? ' According to the popular theory, neither
the Gospel, nor well-doing, has anything to do with it :
man was created immortal, and immortal he must ever
remain, do what he will.*
Before concluding, it may be well to answer a
question which is often asked, namely, why is it still
' appointed unto man once to die,' when Christ has
' tasted death for every man ' ? The answer is, that
the death which we have now to undergo, is not the
penalty of sin at all, but merely a result of the con-
dition in which God has seen fit to place man since
his fall ; the result, in fact, of his being cut off from the
Tree of Life, whatever that may mean. His being
deprived of that was not the penalty incurred by sin.
Immediate death was the punishment with which he
* The Apostle's desire to ' attain unto the resurrection of the dead '
is no parallel. His aim was to share, not in the general resurrection,
but in the first resurrection, which is exclusively of ' them that are
Christ's.'
I have not quoted 1 Tim. vi. 16, 'Who only hath immortality,'
because it might be said, that there is nothing in that to debar the
Creator from communicating His own immortality to any of His creatures.
Still, to my own mind it appears perfectly certain, that the Apostle
would not have used such an expression, if he had believed in man's
inherent indefeasible immortality.
Neither have I quoted 1 Cor. xv. 53, ' This mortal must put on im-
mortality,' because it might be said to refer only to the body. But if it
does, then it is a mere repetition of what has been stated in the pre-
ceding words, ' This corruptible must put on incorruption.'
80 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
was threatened, and, that being remitted through
Christ, God might deal with him just as He pleased.
He might have been replaced in his former position,
with access to the Tree of Life, so long as he was obe-
dient. In other words, he might have been given
another opportunity of earning eternal life by his own
obedience. But the covenant of grace had provided
something better for him than that. A higher life
than he could ever have attained to by his own obe-
dience was to be bestowed upon him as a free gift.
That higher life could only be reached through death.
So he was cut off from the Tree of Life, and placed in
a position where death became inevitable in the course
of nature. Death therefore, though one of the con-
sequences of sin, and therefore, according to St. Paul's
argument, a standing witness of it, was by no means
a necessary consequence, after it had been remitted
as a penalty.* And though it should remind the be-
liever of the death from which he has been redeemed,
inasmuch as it entered into the world by sin, yet in
itself it is to him only a necessary step in the develop-
ment of that eternal life which is the gift of God
through Jesus Christ ; while to one who has finally
rejected Christ, it is only a step toward the total death
which is the wages of sin, and which will be inflicted
on him in the judgment, when he will be destroyed
body and soul in hell.
* Gen. v. 24 ; 2 Kings ii. 11 ; Heb. xi. 5.
THE GLORY OF CHKIST. 81
SERMON VIII.
Thou, shalt not put a stumblingblock before the blind.
Lev\ xix. 14.
Being blind, he is not unlikely to stumble, whether
we do or not ; but that is no excuse for our putting- a
stumblingblock in his way. And this is what has been
done to the spiritually blind by the doctrine of Eternal
Evil. We have already shown that it is not only desti-
tute of any solid foundation in Scripture, but directly
opposed to its plainest teaching ; and we now proceed
to point out some of the injurious results which flow
from its adoption.
First and foremost, it begets more positive infidelity
than perhaps all other causes put together. Men are
told that the doctrine of Endless Suffering rests on
precisely the same authority as the Gospel ; that the
one is as plainly taught in God's Word as the other ;
and that if they deny one they have no ground for
believing the other. The few texts that sound very
much like it have been drilled into them from child-
hood ; so that, when they begin to reflect, and find the
doctrine absolutely incredible, it never occurs to them
that these passages may possibly admit of another inter-
G
82 THE GLORY OF CUEIST.
pretation, and they therefore reject the whole Bible to-
gether. We are far from saying that they are guiltless
in so doing ; but the measure of their guilt can be
estimated by God alone. We may see a marked dif-
ference between one case and another, from the half-
reluctant abandonment of traditional belief to the con-
temptuous sneer or malignant scowl with which it is
denied and defied. But God alone can know how far
they have wilfully shut their eyes against the light and
been only too glad of an excuse for getting rid of the
Bible, because it testified of them that their deeds were
evil. In no case can the Church be held guiltless for
the persistency with which she has kept this millstone
tied about the neck of inspiration, making it a funda-
mental part of the Gospel, harping on those few texts
that sound like it to a carefully attuned ear, and using-
them as a lever to upturn the whole teaching of Scrip-
ture on the subject to which they refer. Neither can
anyone, whose eyes have been graciously opened to see
the delusion, be absolved from a grave dereliction of
duty, unless he does his utmost to rid Christianity of
such an incubus, and remove such a stumbling-block
out of the way of the blind. Let those who can, ' lift
up their voice like a trumpet,' and let those who can-
not, at least add a hearty Amen.
But this is not all. To adopt positive infidelity
requires more determination of character than most
persons possess. For one who is driven into that
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 83
position by the popular teaching, perhaps twenty are
lulled by it into a fatal slumber. Of all the delu-
sions that prevail upon this subject, none can exceed
that which supposes the doctrine of endless suffering
to be a powerful instrument for awakening sinners
to a sense of their danger. The deterring effect of
punishment depends far more upon its certainty than
upon its severity. Now, the excessive severity of
the punishment thus threatened, not only robs it of
all certainty whatever, but makes almost every one
feel sure that, in his own case at least, it will
never be inflicted. When he is told that the only
alternative before him is, at the moment of death,
to enter at once into a state of endless happiness or
endless woe, he feels so perfectly sure that he neither
does, nor ever can, deserve the latter, that his future
entrance into bliss becomes to him a matter of course.
He may be quite aware that he is not fit for it yet, nor
even on the road to it: but in some way or other it
must come all right at last. And he is confirmed
in this by observing, that in spite of the general pro-
fessed belief in the saying, * strait is the gate, and
narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, and few there
be that find it,' almost every separate individual, after
his decease, is supposed by his friends to have entered
into bliss. Few persons, in their last hours, refuse to
receive a minister of religion; nearly all profess re-
pentance and faith ; and when the only alternative
g2
84 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
known to the survivors is, that they are in endless bliss
or in endless torment, how can it be otherwise than
that every one, except in the extremest cases, should
be supposed to have entered into life ? And how can
this fail to make the survivors themselves expect that
their own latter end will be the same ? Thus the law
is virtually robbed of its terrors, and the thunders of
Sinai reduced to 'sound and fury signifying nothing.'
A still worse evil perhaps is the tendency of this
theory to diminish the saving power of the Gospel.
That power is love. 'We love Him, because He
first loved us ; ' and ' hereby we perceive His love,
because He laid down His life for us.' Therefore,
whatever clouds the revelation of God's love that is
made to us in the Gospel, must lessen its power to
save and sanctify us. And what can possibly throw a
darker shadow over it, than to combine with its
glorious message such a hideous doctrine as this ?
That the Gospel, even with this tremendous hindrance
in its way, should actually have saved such a multitude
of souls, only shows what a marvellous weapon it is,
and how the Spirit of God can enable it to overcome
almost any amount of poison, that the craft of Satan,
or the infirmity of man, may mingle with it.
That the same objection applies to the Scripture
doctrine of everlasting destruction, we entirely deny.
As no creature has any right to live at all, it would
be perfectly consistent with infinite love for the
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 85
Creator to terminate its life whenever He pleased ;
even apart from the consideration of the condemned
having wilfully rejected the eternal life offered them
in Christ. And as to the specific punishment pre-
viously inflicted upon them for their own particular
sins, that is perfectly in accordance with one of the
deepest moral instincts that God has implanted within
our breast, namely, that there ought to be retribution
for wrong doing unrepented of. So long as we are sure
that the retribution will not exceed what the wrong:
doing actually deserves, it need not in the least degree
lessen our confidence in God's righteous love. What
amount of punishment anyone's sins do deserve, we
cannot tell. All we know with absolute certainty is,
that by no possibility can they deserve infinite punish-
ment. So long as there is a limit to the number of
stripes, we can confidently leave God to pronounce how
many or how few they should be. Scripture distinctly
assigns a limit to them, by assuring us, in every variety
of language, that they will end, sooner or later, in the
utter destruction of the lost soul. And therefore
Scripture throws no cloud at all over the proof which
the Gospel affords of God's amazing love, in having
given His only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth
on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Another evil resulting from this theory is, that it
aggravates the enmity of the world against those who
are chosen out of it. Such enmity, in a more or less
86 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
developed form, is unavoidable, from the very nature
of the case ; but that is no excuse for our needlessly
provoking it. On the contrary, we should do all in our
power to conciliate them that are without, ' giving no
offence in anything.' A believing wife is enjoined to
behave towards her unbelieving husband in such a way
that he may be ' won ' thereby. Now could anything
be conceived more calculated to exasperate worldly
people, nay to excite a feeling of righteous indigna-
tion in their minds, than the knowledge that we con-
sider them so unutterably bad, as to deserve endless
torment ? No words can describe the abhorrence
with which we ought to regard them, if we really
believe this. It is nothing to say that we hope they
may repent. That may so far mitigate the horror
with which we think of the prospect before them,
as to prevent our heart breaking, or our brain giving
way — though it seems a mystery how we can eat
or sleep, knowing that any moment their doom may
become inevitable. But that does not in the least
affect our estimate of their present character. Our
theory compels us to regard them at present as all but
infinitely wicked. For though we may admit degrees
in the severity of the punishment, yet the endless-
ness of it reduces the difference to insignificance.
Neither can we escape from this by reference to the
fuller development of the evil principles within them,
when the restraints of this present life are removed,
THE GLORY OF CIUUST. 87
and the Spirit wholly ceases to strive with them. For
it must be by their conduct during this state of pro-
bation that they have incurred the penalty of being
hopelessly consigned to such a condition : so that it
comes practically to the same thing. Now, however
bad they may be, so bad that they cannot even them-
selves dream of being on the narrow path to life, yet
their deepest instincts assure them that they cannot
possibly have incurred such guilt as to deserve infi-
nite punishment. They therefore resent, consciously
or unconsciously, the unmeasured imputation which
our theory casts upon them. And the only thing
which makes them tolerate us at all, is the knowledge
that it is a mere theory, and that our feelings towards
them are totally different; in which confidence they
are of course greatly strengthened by knowing that we
regard ourselves to have been in the same condition,
until we became new creatures in Christ Jesus.
For example. Suppose a model husband, who is a
thorough worldling, has a model wife, who is a decided
Christian. He knows her theory to be, that if he were to
die now, he would enter into a state of hopeless eternal
misery ; and as God cannot possibly inflict upon anyone
severer punishment than he deserves, as He has declared
that whatsoever a man soweth that shall he also reap,
she must believe his guilt to be enormous beyond
all power of conception. She hopes that he will yet
repent of it, and be saved; but she knows that she
88 TIIE GLOKT OF CHRIST.
may awake any morning, and find that his everlasting
agonies, of mind at least, have actually commenced, and
all hope of their ever being mitigated or brought to an
end utterly gone. Further, so certain is she that this
tremendous doom, on whomsoever it may fall, is not
one whit more than he deserves, that the continu-
ance of it, in ever-increasing intensity, is part of the
permanent ultimate prospect, the hope of which should
cheer her under all the trials of this mortal life, and
make her rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory.
She cannot, it is true, as yet derive any conscious satis-
faction from thinking that the smoke of their torment
will ascend for ever and ever ; but she believes that she
will do so, when she gets into a right state of mind ;
inasmuch as whatever conduces to the glory of Grod
must conduce to the happiness of all whose minds are
in harmony with His. And what at first sight seems to
make the matter worse, is that she is so wonderfully
happy under this state of things. Not only can she
enter with apparent zest and enjoyment into a variety
of innocent pleasures, perhaps appreciate humour, have
no objection to a little quiet merry-making, and rather
like a moderate amount of society; but even in her
religious exercises, which ought to overwhelm her with
gloom or plunge her into despair, she endeavours to
assume as joyful a tone as possible. The most wonder-
ful thing is to see her at the piano, and hear her sing
charming hymns of joy and hope about the glorious
THE GLORY OF CUEIST. 89
prospect of eternal holiness and happiness that is set
before us — with her husband in the room, whose
eternal agonies are perhaps to form part of the dark
background on which the glories of Heaven will stand
out so brightly. Hark !
There is a land of pure delight,
Where saints immortal reign,
Infinite day excludes the night,
(to him it will be, infinite night excludes the day )-
And pleasures banish pain — *
that is, from them, the pain being all concentrated
elsewhere.
How do these two manage to live so comfortably
together ? The answer is suggested by what we have
just been saying. He knows that this theory has
no place in her heart and soul, but merely lies on
the surface of her brain. And if she would reflect a
moment, she would see it herself. Her feeling is, not
how bad he is, but how good he is. She never tires of
praising him as a pattern of every virtue under heaven.
And what does often make her sad, is the melancholy
thought that such a man should be living only for the
perishing things of this passing life, and sacrificing his
prospect of glory and honour and immortality by
* A lad)-, who heard this sermon preached, afterwards told the
author, that a friend, in arguing with her some years ago against the
doctrine of eternal suffering, had quoted that particular verse, just as it
is used above, with reference to the case of her own husband.
90 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
refusing to lay hold on the eternal life offered him in
Christ. All that she sees in him to love and admire
makes her realise more deeply his capability of some-
thing higher and better, and she sometimes cannot help
weeping to think how he will himself be filled with
shame, and what an object of everlasting contempt he
will become to the universe, for having sacrificed the
substance to the shadow, and sold his glorious inheri-
tance for a contemptible mess of pottage ; for having
fallen into a net that was spread before his very eyes ;
for having sown to the flesh from which he knew that
he could only reap corruption ; and chosen to gratify
for a moment the lust of the flesh and the lust of
the eye and the pride of life,- -whether in the form
of sensual indulgence, intellectual gratification, or
earthly distinction, — rather than to wear an imperish-
able crown, to possess a kingdom that cannot be moved,
to sit with Christ on His throne, and to share in the
government of the universe. All this is put before
him in Scripture again and again. Human language
is exhausted, and all human things ransacked for meta-
phors, to fire his ambition, and make him resolve, at
any cost or any effort, to obtain such a prize, to lay
hold on eternal life. But his answer is, No, it is too
much trouble ; let me eat and drink, and have others
to eat and drink with me, and to-morrow I am willing
to die. This, no doubt, makes her often weep and
always pray. It is not the greater or less number of
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 91
stripes he may receive that troubles her so much ; it is
the thought that he is throwing himself away, that by
and by he will be cut down like the grass and wither
as the green herb, and that one who might have been
an heir of immortality will soon be amongst the things
of the past — at length perhaps forgotten by all except
the Infinite mind that can never forget anything. This
is quite sufficient trial for her. But heavy as the
burden may sometimes be, it is simply nothing to the
unutterable anguish that would crush her to the earth,
if she really felt in her inmost soul, that he actually
deserved, and might any moment be plunged into
eternal torment.
No, it is a hideous dream. And those whom God has
been gracious enough to awaken out of it should show
their gratitude by using every effort to awaken others,
so that they may bask in the light and warmth of the
Sun of righteousness, and know what it is to be able to
believe, that God is love ; feeling it no exaggeration to
say-
Could we with ink the ocean fill,
Were the whole sky of parchment made,
Were every blade of grass a quill,
And every man a scribe by trade;
To tell the love
Of God above
Would drain the ocean dry,
Nor would the scroll
Contain the whole,
Though stretched from sky to sky.
92 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
SERMON IX.
Take up the stumblingblock out of the way of My ■people.
ISA. LVII. 14.
Being God's people, they will not ' stumble that they
should fall ; ' but they may receive grievous injury,
notwithstanding, from striking their foot against a
stumblingblock. And such injury has the Church
undoubtedly received from the doctrine of Eternal Evil.
We have already pointed out some of its injurious
effects upon the world. Now let us see how it affects
those who have been called out of the world, and have
received the gift of eternal life, through faith in Christ
Jesus.
Perhaps its worst effect is that it must necessarily,
to whatever extent it is realised, cloud their view of
God's love. They cannot get rid of an uneasy feeling,
though hardly perhaps aware of it, which prevents them
looking up to Him with entire confidence and perfect
love. The knowledge that God is a * consuming fire'
to sin, and therefore to impenitent sinners, greatly
helps us to love Him, and to confide in Him ; for it
assures us, that sooner or later there will be an end of
evil, and that the whole universe will become ' very
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 93
good.' But if there is never to be an end of it, if God
is not to be a consuming fire, but only a torturing fire,
in which His enemies will be kept alive for ever, then
a perpetual effort must be made to keep the whole
subject out of our minds, if we are to feel any con-
fidence whatever in our Father's love. This was spoken
of incidentally in a previous sermon ; so that we may
pass on to another consideration, which is not quite so
palpable, but which exercises a more powerful influ-
ence than is commonly supposed.
The popular doctrine reduces to a minimum the
grace of Christ in dying for us. People strangely talk
as if the depth of misery from which we have been
rescued, was a measure of Christ's self-sacrificing love
in coming to our rescue. Surely it leans all on the
other side. The same amount of sacrifice, that I
might think very great for anyone to make, in order to
save me from a small punishment, may appear trifling,
if made in order to save me from a very heavy one. A
Christian once told me how much distressed he was
by his inability to overcome the feeling, that it would
have been rather hard, if we had been left under con-
demnation, and nothing been done to save us from it.
No wonder ! The marvel is that such thoughts do not
press so continually upon the minds of all men, as to
make them search and see what it is that lies at the
bottom of them, or at least constitutes their sting. If
we are all born in such a condition, as without help
94 THE GLORY OF CHEIST.
would render it practically inevitable that we should
spend an eternity in misery, it is not easy to think
very much of the grace, that was willing to make even
the sacrifice that has been made, to deliver us from
such a doom. As another believer once said to me,
6 Who would not have done it ? '
But embrace the teaching of Scripture, and the whole
aspect of the case is altered.
For from what does Christ save us ?
In the first place, from non-existence. But for Christ,
Adam would have died the day he sinned, and we of
course should never have existed. Would that have
been at all hard upon us ? What right have we to
exist at all? None whatever. And we are indebted
for our existence to the provision made in the ever-
lasting covenant of grace, which was to be sealed with
the blood of Jesus Christ. Is not that free grace ?
In the next place we are saved from that death
which is the wages of sin, and which would be in-
flicted upon us at once on account of our own sin,
but for the intercession of Christ. We are saved
from the penalty of Adam's sin, in that we came
into existence ; we are at present saved from the
penalty of our own sin, in that we continue to
exist a moment after committing it ; death being the
natural wages of sin. And in these two ways Christ is
absolutely 'the Saviour of all men' alike — He 'gave
His flesh for the life of the world ; ' and in Him ' Grod
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 9-3
reconciled the world unto Himself, not imputing their
trespasses unto them.' The life of the world was for-
feited in Adam, and freely given hack in Christ.
Everyone who lives long enough to know God's will,
has forfeited his own life hy not submitting to it. The
infliction of that penalty is suspended, and far more
than the remission of it freely offered to those who are
willing to accept it through Christ. If they refuse it,
they commit a worse sin than Adam's, and incur a
heavier doom, a more fearful death. For them 'there
remaineth no more sacrifice for sin, hut a certain
fearful looking for of judgment and of fiery indignation,
which shall devour (not keep alive in torture, but de-
vour) the adversaries.' What is there ' hard ' in this ?
Nothing whatever. We have only to clear away that
terrible fiction of eternal suffering, and then we can see
in its true light the wondrous ' grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ, who, though He was rich, yet for our sakes
became poor, that we through His poverty might be
rich ; ' and to some extent can appreciate that love,
which God commends to us, ' in that when we were
yet sinners, Christ died for us.'
Another loss which the Christian sustains through
the belief of this unscriptural doctrine, arises from the
difficulty it interposes in the way of his cultivating that
highest of all Christian graces — 'joyfulness.' Again
and again is he urged to 'rejoice evermore,' again and
again is he told that 'joy and peace in believing' are
96 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
among the fruits of the spirit. Now the main element
of joy is hope. Peace comes from a sense of present
reconciliation ; hut real joy can be produced only by
the prospect of what is to come. We ' rejoice in hope
of the glory of God.' But how is it possible to rejoice
in a prospect that includes the endless suffering of
millioDs of our fellow-creatures? It would be simply
impossible, but for that happy, though not blameless,
inconsistency between our opinions and our feelings,
that we have so often had occasion to notice. What is
it you are so earnestly longing for ? Js it for your own
individual happiness only ? Far from it ; you are not
so selfish. You are longing for the groans of creation
to cease, for sin and suffering to be at an end. Some
terrible act of wickedness shocks you, some heart-
breaking tale of woe makes you weep in sympathy, and
you say, Ah, well, it will soon be over ; this is not to go
on for ever, it is ' but for a moment,' and then all will
be peace and holiness and joy ; ' Creation itself shall be
delivered from the bondage of corruption into the
glorious liberty of the children of God.' What are you
talking about ? Do you ever think what you are
saying ? Sin and suffering at an end ! Why it will
be multiplied a hundredfold. No enmity against God
that is now felt by the most hardened sinner in the
world, can compare with the intense hatred of Him
that must be felt by those who are writhing under His
hand in hopeless agony ; whom He will neither allow
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 97
to die, nor cease to torment. Nor can all the groans
that have ever been wrung from creation approach the
unutterable anguish of an eternal hell. What is it,
that all the sin and suffering will be transferred to
another globe, or buried within the centre of this ? It
will exist, and exist for ever. And this is part of the
glorious future that you are hoping for, and praying
for, and the thought of which is to make you « rejoice
with joy unspeakable and full of glory ' ! Happily you
are able generally to keep it out of your mind, and
think only of the bright side ; but your efforts can be
only partially successful ; and I believe that this terrible
phantom does more than all other causes put together,
to damp Christian joy, and render it well nigh impos-
sible heartily to rejoice. The present is often far too
dark to rejoice in, and you are almost afraid to think
of the future, for there starts up an apparition of some-
thing darker still. The result is a degree of gloominess,
and cheerlessness, a want of buoyancy and elasticity,
that constitutes a hindrance to yourself and a stum-
blingblock to others. It impedes your running in the
race, paralyses your arm in the battle, and mars the
attractive grace, with which you should seek to ' adorn
the doctrine of Grod your Saviour.'
Again, this doctrine tends to produce an injurious
effect upon the mind, by almost abolishing any moral
superiority of one man over another, and making
the Apostolic doctrine that there is * no difference ' as
H
98 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
regards all having * come short of the glory of God,' to
mean that all are equally bad. You admit, no doubt,
in words, and certainly feel, that there is a very great
difference amongst them. But your theory reduces it
almost to nothing. For if all deserve endless suffering,
the difference between the intensity of the suffering in
one case or another, is hardly appreciable to us : the
fact of its being hopeless and endless is so overwhelm-
ing to the mind, that everything else sinks into in-
sicmificance. You are therefore obliged to do violence
to your moral instincts by making an effort on prin-
ciple to think as badly as possible of all men ; for if
the smallest sin deserves endless suffering, it must be
practically impossible to think too badly of any sinner.
But on the other hand, if the wages of sin is death, if
sin — that is, separation from God — renders it impossible
for any moral creature permanently to live, if life is
drawn from God, and can be sustained only by union
with God, so that without God any creature must
necessarily perish, then, in the amount of punishment
that may be inflicted in the process of his death, in the
greater or less severity of his dying agonies, there is
abundant room for all the difference that our moral
instincts require between the most opposite extremes of
human character, that are to be found amongst those
who are out of Christ.
Lastly, we may observe, that this doctrine injures
the moral sense of those who accept it, by the inevit-
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 99
able discord which it creates between their opinions
and their feelings. It would be a still worse evil, if
they really felt as they profess to believe; and we
have at every step to give them credit for not doing
so. But still they cannot do such violence as this
theory requires, to the harmony that ought to subsist
between the mind and the heart, without throwing a
shade of unreality over the whole of their inner being —
and, we must add, casting doubt upon the sincerity of
all their religious convictions, in the eyes of the world
around them. Why do they not go mad at the sight
of such multitudes rushing into endless woe ? Or, if
faith have such enormous power as to save them from
that, why do they not put on sackcloth and ashes, cover
their faces, and wail with a bitter lamentation ? Why
do they not rush frantically about the streets, stop
everyone they meet, and, with horror and dismay de-
picted upon their countenances, warn them of the
unutterable woe that lies before them ? * Why do they
ever let a smile play upon their features ? How can
* Mr. Grant thinks that the question must have arisen in the minds
of my hearers, ' Why did not he himself feel and act thus, when he
believed it?' I doubt whether there was a single hearer so destitute
of intelligence as to think anything of the kind. The answer of course
would have been — For the same reason that others do not ; that is, as I
was endeavouring to show, because the doctrine has no r?al hold upon
any one's soul. I was proving this from the inconsistency invariably
seen between the natural, and the actual, effect of such a belief upon the
conduct. If I had been an exception to this, it would of course have so
far weakened my argument.
h2
100 THE GLORY OP CHRIST.
they eat and drink and sleep amidst such a scene of
horror ? They know that a human being dies every
second ; they believe that only a small fraction of them
are saved ; and yet they go on, laughing and singing,
buying and selling, building and planting, marrying
and giving in marriage, just as if it was all a myth.
They rejoice at the birth of a probable inheritor of this
tremendous doom ; and make merry at a wedding, which
may probably add thousands to the wretched inhabitants
of that eternal prison-house.
Are you about to marry? Stop and think! You
may have children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren ;
your descendants may go on multiplying, generation
after generation. You know that but few are saved,
and, whatever confidence you have about your own
children, it must grow less and less about every suc-
cessive generation ; so that the ultimate result of the
step you are about to take, will probably be the addi-
tion of a few to the number of the blessed, of many to
the number of the lost — the intensity and the dura-
tion of the happiness or misery of each being the same.
Dare you take the step? What! face an eternity,
spent in the knowledge that thousands of your own
descendants are mingling with their frantic curses
against God for creating them scarcely less bitter
curses against you, for having been the willing in-
strument of bringing them into existence — for the
horrible selfishness of having, merely to gratify your-
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 101
self, taken a step that you knew might at least lead to
such a result ! * And if you are prepared to encounter
even this, do you expect to find any minister of religion,
that believes in an eternal hell, who will dare to join
you in wedlock ? ' No ! ' he would say : ' Find some
one who believes that evil is limited, but good un--
limited ; that life may continue for ever, but that death
cannot ; that heaven is a place to live in, and hell a
place to die in ; and he may bless your marriage. For
if it sends a thousand to hell, and only one to heaven,
the gain would then be so incalculably greater than the
loss, that there would be scarcely an appreciable draw-
back to the satisfaction with which the proceeding might
be regarded ; the unlimited happiness of one of course
infinitely outweighing the limited misery of any possible
number. But don't ask me to do it ; my tongue would
cleave to the roof of my mouth, and an horrible dread
would overwhelm me.' f
Surely our Great Enemy well knew what he was
about, when he succeeded in inducing the Church to
accept this monstrous perversion of God's Word. She
was led astray unwittingly ; and millions of saints are
now adoring the grace that pardoned, and to such a
* The Author has since become acquainted with the case of a person
who was for some time actually deterred from marriage by the above
consideration.
f It must surely be obvious to anyone of moderate intelligence, that
the above is merely intended to depict the doctrine in its true colours, by
showing what might naturally be expected from those who heartily
believe it.
102 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
great extent neutralised the effect of, such a disastrous
error. But Satan was not deceived. Again has he
tried, only too successfully, his old lie, in a different
meaning, hut from the same wilful enmity against
God — 'Thou shalt not surely die? His main object
was the same in both cases — namely, to persuade man
that sin would briDg no penalty at all. At first, he
did it by a direct assurance of impunity, and then
afterwards by putting before him, as the only alter-
natives, eternal happiness, or something that no one,
in his own case at least, would ever believe possible.
And really, if we could admit the possibility of eternal
evil, if we could believe that anything might provoke
God to inflict infinite punisbment upon a finite
creature, if we could ever imagine Him unwilling to
let an enemy escape out of His hands, even by anni-
hilating him, — it would be in the case of that dark
spirit of evil, who has wilfully led multitudes of His
dearest children to believe their Heavenly Father
capable of what this doctrine attributes to Him.
But no ! Scripture assures us that the devil and his
works are to be destroyed together, that the long con-
flict between good and evil is to end in the consuming
fire of hell, that evil will be a thing of the past, and all
things be reconciled to God through Jesus Christ, so
that He Himself may be all in all.
Amen ! Even so, Lord Jesus, come quickly !
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 103
SEEMON X.
The Lord hath made all things for Himself ': yea, even the
wicked for the day of evil. — Pkov. xvi. 4.
The subject of our present, discourse, though not at all
essential to the argument which we have been endea-
vouring to pursue, is far too important to be overlooked.
Few minds have not been perplexed and distressed by
difficulties connected with the existence and the de-
struction of evil. Those difficulties cannot be wholly
overcome. God evidently intends them to remain
difficulties to the last. He might, if He had seen fit,
have made everything in His Word so perfectly clear
that no one could possibly have entertained a moment's
doubt. But He has not .done so. He sees it needful,
for our present state of discipline and probation, that
we should have to struggle with difficulties of belief
just as we have to struggle with temptations to sin. In
His Providence and in His Word, He has left just as
much difficulty as it is good for our faith to bear.
Whatever we add to that by misinterpreting them is
injurious to us by putting too great a strain upon our
faith. The exercise of rowing is beneficial to the body,
just because of the difficulty which the water interposes
104 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
to the progress of the boat. Eemove the difficulty, and
all the benefit of the exercise is lost. But it by no
means follows that it is good for a man to row till he
bursts a bloodvessel, or is lifted fainting out of the
boat. Now, I verily believe that it is just this doctrine
of the eternity of evil, which renders the difficulties
connected with the existence of evil — not insuperable,
for that they must remain under any circumstances —
but so crushing as to damage our spiritual constitution
by overstraining our faith. Exclude this, and there is
nothing that faith ought not to be able to bear ; but
this cannot be laid upon it without injury to one part
or another of our moral being. Sometimes faith itself
breaks down ; sometimes it is able to hold up, but
with an effort that warps the judgment, hardens the
heart, and blunts the moral sense.
Now let us take the facts before us, in conjunction
with the teaching of Scripture, and see precisely what
the difficulties are.
Scripture tells us, that evil was permitted to enter
for the glory of God. ' The Lord hath made all things
for Himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.'
It tells us that this will be accomplished by some being
raised out of it to a higher life than they could other-
wise have reached, while it is allowed to do its work
upon the rest and destroy them ; there being * vessels
of wrath fitted for destruction,' as well as 'vessels of
mercy which He had afore prepared unto glory.'
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 105
Now where lies the difficulty in this ?
Not in the idea that God should create beings for
a temporary purpose. A flower blooms for a few days,
and is then gone for ever. An insect dies, and few
persons imagine it will ever reappear. Why should
the principle stop there ? Why should not creatures
of a higher order live for a time, and then vanish
away ? It is only our pride that makes us think it at
all improbable.
Nor in what is called the 'partiality' of creating
one being for one purpose, and another being for
another purpose. Has a horse a right to complain that
God has been partial, in placing him in such a vastly
inferior position to a man ? — or a reptile to complain
that he is still lower than a horse ? If no one ques-
tions the justice of such enormous differences being
made in the creation of them, why should there not
be as great differences in His treatment of them after
they are created? If God may create one a horse,
and the other a man, why may He not create one man
for life, and another man for death ? * Partiality is
making a difference in our treatment of two persons
who have equal claims upon us. The Creator, therefore,
* It has been thought that this argument is invalidated by the fact
of all men being created with a capacity for immortality, and eternal
life being offered to them all in Christ. I cannot see how that affects
the question, so long as Divine sovereignty is actually admitted. But
the reader must judge for himself; and he will probably decide accord-
ing to the prevailing bias of his own mind.
106 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
cannot possibly be guilty of it ; because no creature
lias any claim upon Him whatever, having- not the
smallest right to exist at all. For one creature to
complain that some other creature has been called to a
higher destiny than his own, is simply absurd, and
shows that he has no adequate sense of his dependent
position.
The only difficulty is, that any creature should be
placed, during his existence, in such a condition that
he would rather not have existed at all. Differences
are nothing. Whether others are better or worse off,
does not touch the question. The sole difficulty lies
in the fact of any sentient creatures being brought into
an existence, whether long or short, in which evil pre-
dominates. And it is one, which, as it appears to
me, applies almost equally to responsible, and to irre-
sponsible creatures. For, although the assurance of a
future state of retribution for us is an immense satis-
faction to our moral instincts, it hardly touches the
question before us in its ultimate form, which is this :
— How can it consist with Infinite Love to place any
responsible creatures in a position where it is certainly
known that they will bring irremediable suffering upon
themselves ? Granting that it is their own fault, why
were they given the opportunity of committing the
fault ? — that is, why were they created ? I confess that
this consideration relieves me from all temptation to
accept any of the improbable theories that have been
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 107
suggested about the brute creation — whether the sup-
position of a previous existence to account for their
sufferings, or of a future existence to compensate for
them. I see no greater difficulty in the creation of
beintrs, who would have to suffer for no fault of their
own, than in the creation of beings who would have to
suffer by or for their own fault. It makes a wonderful
difference, of course, to a responsible creature, during
his state of probation, to know that a way of escape is
set before him, and that it is his own doing if he
perishes. But taking a comprehensive view of the
question, it seems equally to concern the sufferings
of animals and those of men or devils.
How then can the difficulty be met ? Only by ad-
mitting that evil is necessary, in order to bring out a
greater good than would otherwise have been possible.
And the admission is demanded both by reason and by
revelation. To deny it, is both to deprive of all mean-
ing our Lord's agonising cry, t If it be possible, let this
cup pass from Me,' and also to make God love Evil for
its own sake. For if the good could have been reached
equally well without it, evil must have been permitted
for its own sake — in other words, it must be in itself
a positive good. But this seems to limit either the
Wisdom or the Power of God. And to this objection it
is difficult to give a complete answer. The declarations
of Scripture, that ' it is impossible for God to lie,' and
that l He cannot deny Himself,' clearly point out the
108 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
direction in which we are to look for it. They assure us
of what reason itself might have suggested, that there
are necessities and impossibilities in Grod's own essential
nature. But when we try to peer into those depths,
we soon discover the weakness of our eyesight. Some
may be able to see a little farther than others. But
sooner or later all have to give it up, and acknow-
ledge the incapacity of the finite to fathom the Infinite.
This, however, observe, is a purely intellectual diffi-
culty, which taxes our humility rather than our
faith. It arises from the necessary limitations of our
own miods. When once we have subdued our pride
sufficiently to admit this without reserve, all the rest
becomes comparatively clear. Every moral difficulty
is removed. All the darkness lies behind us, and it
is our own fault if we will keep looking back, and
letting its shadow rest upon us. Before us all is
bright, if only we look far enough ; for, however
long evil is to last, it will be i but for a moment ' in
eternity. However many creatures are to be destroyed
by it, and pass out of existence, they will be but an in-
appreciable fraction of those who are to be blessed by
what accrues from the overcoming of it. * In the ages
to come,' will the ever-widening circle of created in-
telligence be learning deep lessons of truth from the
never-to-be-forgotten story of evil. There will be no
need to keep any creatures eternally under its power,
in order to show them what it is. The destruction that
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 109
it brought on all who persisted in it, and the living
witnesses of the redemption from it that was wrought
out by the Son of God, will be enough to show ' the
exceeding sinfulness of sin,' and ' the exceeding riches
of His grace in His kindness towards us by Christ
Jesus.'
On this view, even we ourselves are capable of seeing,
that to produce an infinite good by any finite evil, is
an act of pure love ; and that to have shrunk from
doing so would not have been love, but weakness. The
moment, however, that you make the evil to be infinite,
the whole aspect of the case is altered, and you become
hopelessly enveloped in darkness that may be felt.
And the popular theory does make the evil infinite, at
least in duration. In two out of the three points of
comparison, the evil will equal the good — namely, in
duration and intensity. Hell will be as wicked and
miserable, as heaven is holy and happy. And the one
will be as lasting as the other. Heaven will exceed it
only in the number of its inhabitants. How can we be-
lieve that, merely for this balance of gain, God would
ever have put forth His creative power ?
You will have observed, that in the preceding argu-
ment, we have taken for granted the sovereignty of
God in determining which of His creatures are to live,
and which to die. And this is so self-evident, even to
our own reason, and so positively asserted in Scripture,
that I believe no one, who is capable of reflection, or
110 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
who admits the truth of Scripture, would ever think of
questioning it for a moment, but for this monstrous
bugbear, which perpetually comes up, frightening us
out of our senses, and throwing us off our balance.
Few persons are aware how strongly it is declared
in (rod's Word ; because they have instinctively shrunk
from paying any attention to those passages. Many
Christians are able to find great comfort in the
texts, which speak of God's sovereignty in saving
some ; but they generally pass by with a thrill of
horror, or at least a painful feeling of uneasiness, those
which speak quite as plainly of His sovereignty in
leaving the rest to perish. They tell you that they
believe in election, but not in reprobation.
Let us, however, look the matter full in the face —
because the texts are there, whether we like them or
not. To attempt to get rid of the difficulty by ig-
noring them, is merely to act like the ostrich, who,
when pursued, thrusts its head into the hole of a rock,
and imagines that it can no more be seen than it can
see. If you believe the Bible, hear what it says : —
Prov. xvi. 4. — ' The Lord hath made all things for
Himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.'
1 Sam. ii. 25. — ' Notwithstanding they hearkened not
unto the voice of their father, because the Lord would
slay them.' Not — The Lord would slay them because
they hearkened not to their father.
John x. 26. — 'But ye believe not, because ye are not
THE GLORY OF CHEIST. Ill
of my sheep.' Not — Ye are not of my sheep because
ye believe not.
Eom. ix. 6-24.- On which we need only remark at
present, that the absolute national election and rejec-
tion of Isaac and Ishmael, of Jacob and Esau, are ad-
duced to illustrate the absolute sovereignty with which
God determines the ultimate destiny of all His crea-
tures.*
1 Pet. ii. 7, 8. — ' Unto you therefore which believe
He is precious : but unto them which be disobedient,
the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is
made the head of the corner, and a stone of stumbling,
and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble
at the word, being disobedient :. whereunto also they
were appointed.'
Now what is it that shocks people so much in
these texts, and makes them stigmatise anyone as
a ' Calvinist,' who professes to believe them in their
plain obvious sense ? Simply the idea, that the doom
of the wicked is endless misery. Who can wonder
at the blasphemies of the infidel against God's Word,
when he is told by its own advocates that it teaches
this ? And who can wonder at the quibblings, the
evasions, the straw-splittings, with which Christians try
to soften the truth down, or explain it away, so that
* The 'words ' Esau hare I hated ' imply no more than that Jacob was
absolutely preferred to him. The same Hebraism is found in our Lord's
saying, ' If any man will come after Me, and hate not his father,' &c.
112 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
it may not sound quite so dreadful ? But once see
that the end is death, preceded by a retributive judg-
ment, in which they will reap precisely what they have
sown, neither more nor less ; and then we maintain
that there is nothing which should make us hesitate
to admit the plain teaching of Scripture, that 'He
will have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and
whom He will He hardeneth.'
Indeed, as we have already intimated, even our
reason should teach us that it must be so. In the first
place, how can we imagine that the Creator would call
beings into existence to thwart His own purposes,
baffle His designs, and permanently oppose His will ?
How can we attribute anything so suicidal to infinite
wisdom and infinite power ? One moment's realising
apprehension of what is involved in the relative position
of creature and Creator, would make us feel its utter
impossibility. In the next place, how could God keep
the universe in order, if even the minutest part of it
were beyond his control ? How could He govern any-
thing, unless He governed everything? Is it not as
necessary for Him to decide whether you shall live or
die, as it was for Him to decide whether you should be
a man or a horse ?
Is this Fatalism ? No — it is precisely the opposite
extreme. Fatalism makes God to have the control of
nothing ; Predestination makes Him to have the control
of everything. There is a common subterfuge, which
TIIE GLORY OF CIIKIST. 113
tries to evade the difficulty by steering a middle course,
and making God to have the control of everything,
except what depends upon the freewill of responsible
creatures; that is to say, it makes Him the God of
the mineral, vegetable, and purely animal kingdoms,
but leaves Him no power to deal effectually with any
higher orders of creatures, except by force. This view,
however, is quite as unscriptural as it is irrational. For
Scripture not only implies God's control of the wills
of responsible creatures, by telling us of some being
appointed to death, arid others appointed to life, but
also directly asserts it, by ascribing the acceptance of
eternal life to Divine influence upon the will. 4 As
many as were ordained to eternal life believed ' (Acts
xiii. 48). ' Who, when he was come, helped them
much which had believed through grace ' (Acts xviii.
27). 'No man can come to Me, except the Father
which hath sent Me draw him ' (John vi. 44). ' All
that the Father giveth Me shall come to Me ' (John
vi. 37). ' Whose heart the Lord opened, that she at-
tended unto the things which were spoken of Paul'
(Acts xvi. 14).
Now, if you ask, ' How can these things be ? — how can
any creature be responsible for his owd actions, if that
which directs them, and gives them all their moral
character, namely, his will, is under the control of
another ? ' — we acknowledge at once, that it is utterly
impossible either to explain or to understand it. And
i
114 TIIE GLORY OF CHRIST.
Paul himself distinctly admits tliis in the passage we
have just quoted. He supposes the difficulty to he
propounded in the plainest way. ' Thou wilt say then
unto me, Why doth He yet find fault? For who hath
resisted His will ? ' That is, how can we be blamed for
what we do, if our wills are under the control of His
will ? And what is his reply ? — i Nay but, man, who
art thou that repliest against Grod ? Hath not the
potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make
one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour ? '
That is, he just reasserts the fact, without attempting
to explain it at all. He gives it up as incapable of
explanation ; and only warns the objector, that he had
better leave the difficulty alone, and beware of acting
as if he was not responsible, when God tells him that
he is. Oh for the honesty and courage and confidence
of a mam who is not afraid to state a difficulty plainly
and fully, which at the same time he acknowledges him-
self unable to remove ! Paul knew the truth of what he
was preaching, and therefore he proclaimed it — whether
men would hear, or whether they would forbear.
Observe however again, that this difficulty is purely
intellectual. It is most important to notice, in ex-
amining this whole range of subjects, how the moral
difficulties give way, and only those of an intellectual
nature remain ; in other words, how the whole strain is
left upon our humility, and scarcely any upon our sense
of right and wrong. On that deep moral instinct,
THE GLORY OF CHRIST. 115
Abraham ventures to plead with God against a certain
course of action which He appeared about to take —
* Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right ? ' To
that same moral instinct Jehovah Himself appeals —
' Judge, I pray you, betwixt me and my vineyard,'
and again — ' Are not my ways equal, are not your
ways unequal ? ' Our Lord also asks the Jews — ' Why
even of your selves judge ye not what is right? 1 And
Paul assures us that ' God is not unrighteous, to forget
our work and labour of love.' Where is any such
reference made to our power of solving metaphysical
difficulties ? No : the more we attempt to grapple
with them, the more are we made to feel our own
littleness, and, when they touch upon the actions of
Deity, to exclaim, ' Oh the depth both of the wisdom
and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His
judgments, and His ways past rinding out ! '
The only question of practical importance to us is,
how we are to deal with those passages of Scripture
which refer to the two sides of this truth respectively ?
They have been treated in three ways. The first is
what we may call the ostrich method — of looking
only at one side, and ignoring the other altogether.
The second is, to make the statements fit in together,
by explaining them both away; to blend the two
colours into a neutral ambiguous tint, that nieaDS
nothing, and fades away the moment you look steadily
at it. The third, and only honest way, is to deal
i 2
116 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
with them as you do with opposite sides of a globe.
We know they are both there, we can bring either
of them into view in a moment, but we cannot see
them both at once. Whichever side is turned to-
wards us, the other is, for the time, concealed. We
may, or may not, remember it is there, but we can-
not see it. What ! not if the globe be made to turn
round with great velocity ? Yes : and hereafter we
may be able to see all round this metaphysical globe ;
but at present we must be content to see one side at a
time. Whichever side is put before you in any passage
of Scripture, believe that it truly represents something
in the mind of God; look steadily at it, get a clear
view of the truth so presented, and let it take its full
effect upon you. When God tells you that He has
* made all things for Himself, yea, even the wicked for
the day of evil,' tremble lest you should be found
amongst them ! When He tells you that if you are
so, it will be your own fault, because ' you will not
come to Christ that you may have life,' acknowledge
it, and beware of replying against God ! When He
tells you that He ' willeth not the death of a sinner,
but that all should come to repentance,' believe Him
absolutely, and you will experience an immediate sense
of relief; a gleam of hope will shine into your soul.
When He pleads with you, saying, ' Why will ye die ? ' —
when He beseeches you to be reconciled to Him, believe
in His sincerity, and yield to His entreaties. When He
THE GLORY OF CIIRIST. 117
says, ' Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life
freely,' embrace the offer, and drink your fill. When
He tells you that Christ ' is made unto you wisdom and
righteousness, and sanctification and redemption,' be-
lieve Him, and rejoice at your completeness in Christ.
And when, after all this, He tells you that it was
' through grace' you ' believed,' that He ' loved you with
an everlasting love, and therefore with lovingkindness
has been drawing you ' — that ' He predestined you to be
conformed to the image of His Son,' and therefore has
'called,' and 'justified,' and will hereafter 'glorify' you
— accept it all without reserve, and say, ' Who maketh
me to differ ? What have I that I have not received ?
By the grace of God I am what I am. What shall I
render unto Grod for all His benefits conferred upon me?'
And if Satan tempt you to fear lest you should not be
able to endure unto the end, but should turn back unto
perdition, then believe the assurance, that ' He who has
begun a good work in you will perform it unto the day
of Jesus Christ.' Say, ' I know whom I have believed,
and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I
have committed unto Him ; —
' The work which His goodness began,
The arm of His strength will complete :
His promise is Yea and Amen,
And never was forfeited yet.
Things future, nor things that are now,
Not all things below or above,
Can make Him His purpose forego,
Or sever my soul from His love.
118 THE GLORY OF CHRIST.
* My name from the palms of His hands
Eternity will not erase,
Impress' d on His heart it remains,
In marks of indelible grace.
Yes, I to the end shall endure,
As sure as the earnest is given
More happy, but not more secure,
The glorified spirits in HeaTen.*
APPENDIX.
FIRST INTRODUCTION OF THE POPULAR DOC-
TRINE INTO THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH.
An able article has appeared in the Rainbow for April 18G9,
by the Rev. H. Constable, from which we make the following-
extracts : —
' The end of the ungodly, according to Scripture, is their destruction
or death. As this death is the punishment of sin, and as there is no
recovery from it, it is called everlasting punishment and destruction.
This was also the doctrine of the apostolical age of the Church, as we
find it declared in those " Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers" which
have been preserved to our time. The best and soundest of the Fathers
of the age immediately succeeding were also of this opinion. Justin
and Irenseus, men who suffered martyrdom for their Master, and Theo-
philus of Antioch, all maintained the old scriptural doctrine. If the
opinion of the Church had never departed from it, we would probably
have never heard of the view of Origen.
'At an early period, however, doctrine on this point began to be cor-
rupted, and the corruption grew with a rapid growth. Of all the systems
of philosophy in vogue at the time, the most sublime was that of Plato.
Of a part of human nature, the soul, it took a very loft}' and captivating
view. It abandoned the body for ever to its dust, but it ascribed to the
soul a life which should have no end.
' The reader of Scripture knows how earnestly and frequently Paul
warned the Church against philosophy.* He is the only one of the
apostles who has specially done so, as he was probably the only one of
them who had any accpiaintance with philosophical systems. In his
warnings he does not make any exception ; he does not condemn the
Stoic or Epicurean Schools, and exempt that of Plato ; he prohibits
* Col. ii. 8 ; 1 Cor. i. 22.
120 ORIGIN OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE.
with all the weight of his authority the introduction of any philosophical
system or dogma into the Church. He warned that it would spoil and
corrupt, not elevate or strengthen truth. It might be that every system
of philosophy had its portion of truth, hut he knew that every system
was also poisoned with error. Accordingly, while he has quoted more
than once from the poets, he has never quoted from the philosophers of
heathenism.
' Many of the early fathers forgot this warning of the apostle, and it is
amongst these, precisely, that we find the origin of error upon the great
doctrine of future punishment. Educated in Platonism, they thought
that they might, with great advantage to the cause of Christianity,
bring at least a portion of their old learning into its service. Some
brought less, some more, according as they were more or less thoroughly
acquainted with Christianity. But on one point they were substantially
agreed. All of them, with Tertullian, adopted the sentiment of Plato—
" Every soul is immortal."* On this point Plato took rank, not among
prophets and apostles, but above all prophets and apostles. A doctrine
which neither Old Testament nor New taught directly or indirectly,
nay, which was contrary to a great part of the teaching of both, these
fathers brought in with them into the Church, and this gave to the old
Sage of the Academy a greater authority and a wider influence by far
than he would ever have had otherwise. It was in effect Plato teaching
in the Church, under the supposed authority of Christ and His apostles,
doctrine subversive of and contrary to the doctrine which they had one
and all maintained. This dogma of Plato was made the rigid rule for
the interpretation of Scripture. Christ, and Paul, and John, all were
forced to Platonise. The deduction of reason was palmed off on men's
minds as the teaching of revelation. We have read the writings of the
early fathers with carefulness, at least on this question. It is impossible,
of course, to affix a date to a nameless forger, but we think it quite
possible, if not probable, that the first known holder of the theory of
eternal life for the reprobate was the author of the writings known
under the title of "Clementina," and falsely attributed to Clemens
Romanus. It is indeed difficult, if not impossible, to ascertain the
exact sentiments of this writer. If his work is not itself interpolated,
he appears to hold directly opposite opinions in different parts of it.
In one place he speaks of the soul as if it would at length be ex-
tinguished in the fire of hell ; in another as if, from its essential im-
mortality, its sufferings could have no end.f To our mind, he seems to
* Tertullian. Dp Eis. 327: iii. Paris, 1675.
f Clementina; Horn. Ter.vi.; Horn. Undec. xi.; ed. Antwerpia?, 1698.
ORIGIN OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE. 121
haTe lived at a period and a place where opinion was changing from the
Apostolical to the Augustinian point of view, and that it is thus we are
to account for his inconsistency. It is enough for our present purpose
to note that he has fully adopted the lofty language of Plato on the
nature of the human soul, and thus laid the sure foundation for that
change of doctrine which he did not, perhaps, himself fully adopt.
With him the soul is of " the same substance with God," and is hence
" immortal" and "incorruptible."* And all this he has placed in the
mouth of an apostle who, in his genuine sayings, has taken precisely
the opposite view of human nature. f This nameless forger is, so far as
is known, the first maintainer of the doctrine of eternal life in hell.
' We now come to a man who has at least the recommendation of
having a name. We know his antecedents, and can give some fair
opinion of what his judgment is worth. He is Athenagoras, who
lived from about a.d. 127 to a.d. 190. He was born at Athens ; was
educated there in the philosophy of Plato ; became a Christian, and
settled at Alexandria, where his great object seems to have been to
show that Christianity and Platonism were one and the same in sub-
stance. Beyond a question, he held to its full extent the doctrine of
eternal life for the reprobate, as it was afterwards elaborated by
Augustine. He based it on an argument of reason, for, it is as clear
as daylight, this theory of the soul's immortality is pre-eminently a
Rationalistic deduction. He laid it down that God's grand object in
making man was that man should live.\ He does not say a word about
God's having man's happiness, or his own glory, in view in creation ;
but that simple existence was his end. Hence, he argues, as God's end
cannot possibly be defeated, man must live for ever, be he good or evil,
miserable or happy. This is indeed Rationalism, except that it is
Rationalism of a very poor order. One text of Scripture Athenagoras
never dreams of advancing for his opinion ; but then he has his master's
sonorous phraseology for our nature. With him, as with Plato, the
soul is " immortal," it must continue to exist; it was made immortal at
its creation, and cannot be subjected to death; no change can affect its
invulnerable being ; for it is, and was, and always will be " incor-
ruptible." § Athenagoras, being a Christian as well as a Platonist,
took the liberty to add to his master's theory. Plato dropped the body
altogether at death, and was only glad to do so as being with him only
* Horn. Decimasenta, xvi.; Horn. Undec. xl.
t 1 Peter i. 24; 2 Peter ii. 12.
} St. Justini Opera: Paris, 1615. Athenagorre, 53, c. ; 57, b.
§ p. 31, a.; 53, d.; 57, d.; 64, c.
122 ORIGIN OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE.
a clog, a prison, a curse to the soul. Here Athenagoras struck out a
new line for himself, which diverged, we must say, fully as much from
Scripture as from Plato, and was no improvement to either system.
The body, according to our Alexandrian philosopher, was originally
created immortal, but became mortal by Adam's sin. At the resur-
rection, however, it will, in the case of the wicked as much as of the
righteous, resume its original immortality. The glorious chapter of St.
Paul, in which he describes the resurrection of the just, and the change
which passes on their corrupt, dishonoured, weak, and natural bodies,
to fit them for an eternal life, is applied by Athenagoras to the resur-
rection of the unjust as much.* Monstrous as this idea is to us —
abstaining as our modern Augustinians do from this application of
Paul's great chapter — such an application is a necessity to them, and
Athenagoras was reasonable here. The mortal body must put on im-
mortality if it is to endure an eternity of pain.
'But while Athenagoras, the Platonist, is at Alexandria maintaining
the novel doctrine of eternal life in hell, he has a worthy fellow-labourer
in Mesopotamia, in the person of Tatian, the Marcionite heretic. It is
curious and instructive to trace, when we can, the progress of error.
Tatian had been, in his earlier days, a scholar of Justin Martyr,
and after the death of the latter professed great reverence for his old
master's opinions, and affected to consider them identical with his own.f
Justin, a great admirer of Plato, had, to a great extent, adopted the
phraseology of Plato concerning the soul, and called it immortal and
incorruptible. We know, however, that his meaning was, that it was
immortal as compared with the body, and did not suffer death when the
latter did, but continued to exist in a separate state. We know this
from a very remarkable passage in his writings, in which he describes
with much minuteness the death of the soul when God withdraws from
it the life he had given to it. J Tatian, well aware of this prominent
doctrine of Justin, introduced a view of the soul of wicked men which,
so far as we know, was quite peculiar to himself. He supposed that
when the body of the wicked died the soul also died with it, being for-
saken by the higher spirit ; that, at the resurrection, it is raised to life
again along with the body, and then receives an immortality which
makes it capable of enduring endless pain.§
' In Athenagoras, Tatian, and the forger of the " Clementina," we
have the earliest known advocates of the theory of eternal life in hell.
From their writings we gather the marvellous power which the intro-
duction of the Platonic dogma of the soul's immortality had upon the.
doctrine of the Church. But this theory required a more powerful
* 54, a.; 50, a.; 65, c. f 158, a. \\ 224, b. c. § 152, b. c.
ORIGIN OF THE TOrULAR DOCTRINE. 12
o
advocate than any of the above writers, and it found it somewhat later
in the person of Tertullian. A perfect master of the Latin tongue, a
powerful reasoner where not led away by his peculiar errors, of a vehe-
ment nature and a vivid imagination, he was well suited to impress an
idea on an age disposed to accept it ; and, spite of his heresies, spite of
his strange hallucinations, he left the lasting impression of his mind
upon the Church of succeeding times. Accordingly, the theory of eternal
torments culminated, in the second century, in this fierce African theo-
logian. He did not hold it more plainly than Athenagoras and Tatian,
but he impressed it with a power to which they were utter strangers,
and he freed it from some of their statements which would expose it to
animadversion. In his utter ignorance of the Hebrew language, he
attempted to find some scriptural support for the base of his theory —
the immortality of the soul — in the description given in Gen. ii. 7, of
the creation of man.* But he does not rely on this alone, or even
chiefly ; he appeals boldly to the natural argument, and when he feels
pressed here, he throws himself on the revelations of a sister, to.whom
divine visions of the soul were vouchsafed.! Thus fortified he uses, to
their utmost possible latitude of meaning, most of Plato's terms for the
soul. It is, even in the case of the wicked, not subject to death, but
must ever continue immortal: it is ever indissoluble, indivisible, an
eternal substance, having the very same immortality which belongs to
Deity.J But it is in the descriptions of the endless agony of the lost
that Tertullian surpassed his predecessors, and threw them into the
shade. He does not draw any veil over his scene of punishment.
"Without saying that he took a positive delight in the contemplation of
it, he depicts its fancied circumstances with a minuteness and a force
that has scarcely been surpassed by the imagination of Dante, or the
agonising details of a Jesuit or a Kevivalist preacher. Nor can we say
that he was wrong, if his theory were but true. No amount of terror,
horror, disgust, that could possibly be awakened here in the human
mind could be too great, if only by it a single soul could be persuaded
to fly in time from this wrath to come. The delicacy that tells us there
is such a hell, but that good manners or regard for feeling should lead
us to conceal its naked and terrible aspect, is a false delicacy, which
risks eternity rather than give pain for a moment. Tertullian certainly
was not guilty of this false delicacy. He believed in eternal torments,
and he drew faithful pictures of them. With him hell was a scene
where endless slaughtering {aterna occlsio) was being enacted, where
* Tertulliani Opera: Paris, 1675; p. 270, b.
f 269, c. d. | 269, 346, 281.
124 origin of the roruLAit DOCTRINE.
the pain of dying was to be ever felt, but never the relief which death
could bring.* And God was the author and inflictor of this !
******
' The theory of Origen was man's revolt against this doctrine of man.
This fearful picture of God could not be laid in its bare horrors before
the mind without drawing forth a protest. It came in the form of
Universal Restoration. Tertullian had consigned reprobate men and
devils to endless suffering in hell ; Origen converts hell into a purgatory,
and sends men and devils forth from it purified and humbled to the feet
of the great Father and to the joys which are at His right hand for ever-
more. It is the old story of human thought — from one extreme to its
opposite. The truth always lies between the two.
' Origen had seized hold of a scriptural truth— the final extinction of
evil, which was just as much a part of our Father's revelation as Ter-
tullian's eternity of punishment. Each had his share of truth, and if
the question lay between these two human systems it could never be set
at rest. If Tertullian could appeal to Scripture for the overthrow of
the wicked, whether angels or men, as being of an endless nature,
Origen could point from the same source of truth to a blissful coming
time when all that had breath should praise the Lord.f
' What was there which prevented Origen from going back to the old
scriptural doctrine of death as the end of sinners, which places the two
scriptural truths just mentioned in harmony and not in opposition? It
was the very same human dogma of the immortality of the soul which
had led Athenagoras and Tertullian to their endless life in hell. This
dogma of Plato, this creation of human reason, this tradition of men,
made the revolt from Tertullian to be only the exchange of one human
system for another, instead of being a return from man's heresy to
God's truth.
******
1 But Origen, while he only became acquainted with the Hebrew
language in his old age, was a Greek scholar from his youth. He had
the advantage, which Augustine had not, of being thoroughly acquainted
with the language in which the gospel was inscribed. He knew the
meaning of its terms, and among the terms which described the future
punishment of sinners, who in this life rejected Christ, were all the
terms of the Greek language which describe the utter destruction of
organisation, the utter loss of life, and being, and existence. What was
to be done with these?
*
p. 364, d. f Psalm d. 6.
ORIGIN OF THE TOPULAR DOCTRINE. 125
' Were they to l>o explained away ? This is what the holders of
Augustine's theory have done. They put an insufficient, an unnatural,
or a positively false meaning on the terms of the New Testament.
With them death means life, and life means happiness, and destruction
means preservation, and so on. Having put these convenient meanings
on the phraseology of Scripture, they can look placidly upon a thousand
passages, which contradict what they teach from platform, and pulpit,
and press, and instil into children's minds almost with their mother's
milk. Origen coidd not, or would not, do this. He gives, as any
Greek scholar not possessed with the spirit of Augustine would do,
their proper force to the terms of the New Testament — the same mean-
ing which Plato, or Euripides, or Demosl henes, or Cicero, would attach
to them.
' We will give an example of this. Everyone is familiar with the
solemn warning of our Lord, " Fear not them which kill the body, but
are nut able to kill the soul : but rather fear Him who is able to destroy
both soul and body in hell." We remark in the English version the
change from " kill," in the first clause, to " destroy,"' in the second, a
change exactly answering to the Greek original, which uses airoKTeivai
in the first clause, and anSAXv/xi in the second. The maintainers of
Augustine's theory attempt to take advantage of a change which is in
reality only a heavier blow to their system. They explain •' destroy "
as a term of inferior force to "kill." Listen to Bengel, from whom
better things might be expected. He tells us that the word " destroy,"
and not "kill," is used when the soul is spoken of, because "the soul is
immortal;" "cannot die."* Now anyone who came unprejudiced to
this passage of our Lord would acknowledge that every law of right
reason would lead us to conclude that the force of the term in the
second clause must at the least equal that in the first, else tho warning
is diminished in its intensit}'. The real reason why our Lord varied
His phrase was because "destroy" in the Greek was a term of far
greater power than "kill." Let us hear the Greek scholar Origen on
the true force of this word destroy. He is commenting on 1 Cor. iii. 9,
in connection with Jeremiah i. 10: — " Seo what is said to the people of
God: ' Ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building;' therefore the
words of God over nations and kingdoms are, ' to root out, and to throw
down, and to destroy' (air6K\vfxi). If it be rooted out, and that which
is rooted out be not destroyed ; if it be thrown down, while the stones
of the overthrow are not destroyed ; that which is thrown down still
* Bengel on Matt. x. 28.
126 ORIGIN OF TIIE POPULAR DOCTRINE.
exists. It is therefore the result of God's goodness, after the rooting
out, to destroy what is rooted out ; after the throwing down, to destroy
what is thrown down." Such is the mighty power which Origen, a
Greek scholar, gives to this word " destroy." With him it means
blotting out of existence.
' But it will be asked if such be the true force of the words applied
in Scripture to future punishment, how did Origen defend his theory of
universal restoration, with these meeting him in the face ? Very easily.
Origen never found any difficulty in Scripture. If it was for him, well
and good. If it was against him, he made it without any ceremony
speak as he wished.
'Every reader of Scripture knows that its solemn warnings are
addressed to the sinner in person : " wicked man, thou shalt surely
die." Death, destruction, perdition, loss of life — all the multiplied
phrases and illustrations of the Bible are there directed against the
persons of the wicked. Origen's simple mode of neutralising their force
is by directing them against their sin. And so his point is gained.
Their force cannot be too strong for him, so he does not attempt to
diminish it. The Augustinian, directing them correctly against the
sinner, robs them of their meaning : Origen, directing them against the
sin, leaves them their proper sense. It is difficult to say against which
side the charge of perverting Scripture lies heaviest.
******
' But Origen had one grand truth in his system — the glorious scrip-
tural truth of the extinction of all evil. There is a time to come, to
which prophecy points onwards, when the evil which has, doubtless for
wise and wondrous and merciful purposes, been permitted to obscure
the bright face of heaven to our poor contracted view, shall have passed
away. The idea of the Augustinian theorists, that evil for a time is
essentially one and the same thing with evil for eternity, is as opposed '
to Scripture and to God's mind as it is ridiculous in the eye of common
sense. With God — " heaviness may endure for a night" but it shall not
endure for ever; if it did, what would be thought of God or of His
Word? No; with God the heaviness which endures for a night is
borne for the eternal "joy which cometh in the morning." It is not the
same thing that evil should be allowed for some few thousand years, a
speck indistinguishable between the two eternities of the past and the
future — evil, too, never unmixed with good — and that evil, black, foul,
and unmitigated, should, throughout all eternity, exist in the centre of
God's world of righteousness. With this truth — the final extinction of
ev il — i u his possession, and the dogma of the essential immortality of
ORIGIN OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE. 127
the soul admitted, the theory of Origen is fully able to stand its ground
against the rival view of Augustine.
' But it is, after all, a human system, and as such is to he condemned.
God's Word contradicts it in a thousand places. It holds out no hope
to those who stand condemned in the judgment. This world and its
peoples will again be all righteous, all rejoicing ; but the reprobate will
have passed away out of being — their names blotted from the book of
life. Whatever be our opinion of Origen personally — of his learning,
his brilliancy, even of the truth of much of his teaching — his teaching
here places him amongst those prophets condemned in Ezekiel for
'• strengthening the hands of the wicked, that he shoidd not return
from his wicked way, by promising him life" * In that future age
which has no end, the reprobate have no abiding name or place. Their
image has vanished out of the city. Life for them, whether a thing
to be desired or shunned, whether with Origen in heaven, or with
Augustine in hell, is the Devil's lie, repeated now from a thousand
high places, as it was once whispered in Eve's credulous ear in the
garden.'
******
' For the benefit of the readers of the Rainbow we subjoin a table, which
will enable them at a glance to see the relative antiquity in the primitive
Church, of the three great theories of future punishment, which are at
this day maintained in the Church of Christ. In the accuracy of this
table we fully believe ; for its substantial truth we are prepared to con-
tend ; and we now challenge any gainsayer to controvert it. The dates
given for the death of each father are, of course, only vouched for as the
most probable approximations to truth. Exactitude is now unattainable.
Universal Died
Restoration, a.d.
Eternal Death.
Died
Eternal Life in
Died
A.D.
pain.
A.D.
Barnabas
90
Clemens Romanus
100
•
Hermas
104
Ignatius. Martyr
107
Polycarp. Martyr
147
Justin. Martyr
164
The Forger of the
Clementina
Theophilus of Antioch
183
Athenagoras
190
Ir emeus. Martyr
202
Tatian
200
Tertullian
235
O
* Ezek. xiii. 22.
Origen 253
128 ORIGIN OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE.
' From the above table we see how comparatively late the theory of
Augustine appears in the remains of patristic writing, while that of
Origen is later still. That blank space between them and primitive
truth is destructive to both.'
LIFE AND DEATH.
In John xii. 25, two very different words are both translated
'life.' The one is ' psuclie," 1 which, when applied to man,
sometimes denotes his soul, as distinguished from his body or
his spirit ; sometimes the immaterial as distinguished from
the material part of his nature ; and sometimes his natural
life — an ambiguity which no doubt results from our very im-
perfect acquaintance with the mystery of our own being. The
other is ' zoej which denotes the principle or condition of life
in any form, and therefore admits of infinite varieties and
degrees, from the life of a flower to the life of God. This
latter is the word used to define both the present spiritual life
of the regenerate, and that future- life which is to be its ' end '
or result.
Now our opponents maintain that the reward of the righteous
will consist in the everlasting enjoyment of the highest possible
zoe, and the punishment of the wicked in the everlasting de-
privation of it, which they contend may as truly be called
death as may the present death in trespasses and sins. "We
have elsewhere shown how inadequate this view is to meet the
general teaching of Holy Scripture, especially how it con-
founds the death which is the wages of sin with the death of
which it is the wages, making the punishment of the lost to be
the deprivation of what they never possessed. But our Lord's
words in John xii. 25 might have been spoken expressly to
guard against such a mistake ; for it is not zoe only that the
unbeliever will lose, but his own psuche, his actual existence —
LIFE AND DEATH. 129
the very thing which, according to the popular theory, it is
impossible for anyone to lose ; while the believer is to ' keep '
— or, as it is given in Matt. x. o9, 'find,' and in Luke ix. 24,
' save ' — not merely :oe, but his own psuche. With this agree
the words of Ezekiel (xviii. 27), ' He shall save his soul alive.''
The popular doctrine teaches that every man -will save his
soul alive — the righteous ' unto life everlasting,' the wicked
unto death everlasting. But that is not what Christ said,
nor what Ezekiel said.
We are triumphantly asked whether the everlasting life of
the righteous is ' mere existence.' Certainly not. But these
and other passages of Scripture abundantly prove that eternal
existence is not a thing taken for granted, but included in the
zoe which is to be the ' end ' of 'holiness ; ' and that the death
inflicted upon the wicked will be deprivation, not merely of
the higher part of that zoe, but the whole of it — they will
; lose ' not only their happiness, but ' themselves.'
Now page after page has been written, of more or less subtle
reasoning, in order to escape from the plain testimony of
Scripture, and to substitute for its alternative of life or death
the alternative of endless happiness or endless misery. It
would be quite possible to go through it, sentence by sentence,
and unravel the whole web. But it would occupy a con-
siderable space, and the effect upon many persons would only
be to make them think it was too abstruse and difficult a
subject for them to understand. I prefer another plan. I will
ask them, first, to determine in their own minds whether the
Bible was intended to make known at least its great leading
truths in a manner intelligible to plain persons of common
sense reading it with due care, or whether it is addressed to
philosophers and men of science alone. If they are satisfied
of the former, then let them open a Concordance, and, after
reading the multitude of texts which speak of life or death as
K
130 LIFE AND DEATH.
the ultimate destiny of all men, let them consider whether
there can be the smallest doubt — not as to what could possibly
be made of all this, but — as to the impression which it is
meant to convey. In all ages, in all climes, amongst all
classes, there have been no more universally intelligible ideas
than those of life and death. All cannot define them; but all
can understand them quite enough for any practical purpose,
and all understand them alike. The common sense of man-
kind, if allowed to act freely, would condemn the supposition
that the key-words of the whole question — words that form
the staple and substance of Scriptural teaching upon it — can
be employed in any but their natural and familiar meaning.
Whether these tei'ms are applied to the present respec-
tive conditions of the regenerate and unngenerate, be-
cause of their bearing some analogy to those of life and death,
or because the one necessarily leads to the other, or both,
may perhaps be questioned.* But even if the former view
alone be maintained, the argument remains unshaken ;
for the death which is the wages of sin cannot be the
same thing as the death of sin. Man is found at last in a
hopeless state of moral death, and therefore God inflicts upon
him physical death. Man has destroyed himself, and there-
fore God will destroy him. The common view makes the
punishment of death to be the same thing as the death of
which it is the punishment, with the addition only of some
further suffering, which has nothing to do with death at all.
Death is deprivation of life. There are various kinds of
life, and therefore various kinds of death. But there is no
* I believe the true explanation is to be found in the fact, that in
man's fallen condition the highest part of his nature, the spirit, is
virtually dead. Until quickened into life by regeneration, it lies dor-
mant, and may at last become absolutely irrecoverable. (See Delitzsch's
Biblical Psychology, or Heard's Tripartite Nature of Man.)
LIFE AND DEATH. LSI
second meaning to the word death ; it means deprivation of
life, and nothing else. The question therefore is, What kind
of life will be left to the wicked, of which they can be penally
deprived by God at the day of judgment? They are already
'dead in trespasses in sins,' and ' alienated from the life of God.'
In that sense they ' have no life in them,' and therefore have
none to be deprived of. What is there left but conscious exist-
ence ? In what other way but by the termination of that can
they undergo a ' second death,' or be ' destroyed soul and
body in hell ? '
The case has been very clearly stated by Mr. E. F. Litton,
in his able work entitled Life or Death : —
' If a happy life was promised, it might justly be inferred that there
existed also a wretched one ; but by setting forth " eternal life " simply
as the promise, the inference is, that there shall be no life for those
who come short of the promise. It is as though the announcement of
'•eternal life" was in itself sufficient; as if "eternal life" in any
other condition than that of supreme happiness, where that eternal life
shall be passed in fellowship with God, could not be contemplated. If
this were not so, the " eternal life " which was held forth to the re-
deemed as the prize of their high calling would have been qualified by
expressions denoting that the condition of their life should be one of
supreme felicity. It is a fact worthy of deep consideration that
" eternal life " or immortality is constantly set forth as sufficient to
express what God has prepared for His people.
******
' It is the gift of life on the one hand, and the loss of life on the
other, rather than the circumstances in which existence in the future
state must be passed, that is continually advanced in the pages of the
everlasting Gospel, which teaches mankind to look forward to the period
when mortality shall be swallowed up of life.'
IMMORTALITY.
The sense in which man was created immortal, namely, as
' capable of living for ever,' on certain conditions, has been
already explained. Supposing such capacity to have been
x2
132 IMMORTALITY.
part of the image of God in which he was made, why might
lie not lose that, as well as the holiness which undoubtedly
formed part of it ? One writer says, ' We cannot lay too
much stress on the fact that man was made in the imao;e of
God.' We certainly can, if we suppose that the image could
never be destroyed. The truth was admirably stated by
Theophilus Bishop of Antioch in the second century —
' But some one may say, Was not man created mortal ? By no means.
Immortal ? Nor say we this. But my opinion is, that he was neither
mortal nor immortal by nature ; for if he had been from the beginning
immortal. He had made him a God. Again, on the other hand, if He had
made him mortal, God would have seemed to be the author of his death.
Therefore He made him neither mortal nor immortal, as I said before,
but capable of both, that he might advance to immortality, and, by
keeping divine commandments, receive immortality as a reward, and
become divine. But if, by disobedience to God, he should turn to the
works of the flesh, he would become unto himself the author of his own
death.'
Irenasus also, the diseipje of Poly carp, who was a contem-
porary of St. John, writes —
' Life is not from ourselves, nor from oar nature, but it is given or
bestowed according to the grace of God ; and, therefore, he who preserves
this gift of life, and returns thanks to Him who bestows it, he shall,
receive " tevgth of dai/s for ever and ever." But he who rejects it and
proves unthankful to his Maker for creating him, and will not know Him
who bestows it, he deprives himself of the gift of duration to all eternity.
And, therefore, the Lord speaks thus of such unthankful persons, — " If
you have not been faithful in that which is least, who will commit much
to you ?" intimating thereby unto us, that they who are unthankful to
Him with respect to this short transitory life, which is His gift, the effect
of His bounty, shall be most justly deprived of length of days in the world
to corned
The well-known words in Eccl. iii. 21 are often quoted to
prove the immortality of the human soul. But the context
shows that if they proved anything they would prove exactly
the reverse. Solomon has just said, ' That which befalleth
the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth
IMMORTALITY. 133
them ; as the one dieth, so dieth the other ; yea, they have all
one breath ; so that a man hath no pre-eminence above a
beast; for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the
dust, and all turn to dust again.' Oh, yes, some philosopher
will say, That may be quite true of their bodies, but man has
an immortal spirit within him "which the beast has not.
Who can prove that, replies Solomon, from anything that we
see or know of ourselves ? ' Who knoweth the spirit of a
man that (you say) goeth upwards, and the spirit of a beast
that (you say) goeth downward to the earth?'
The peculiar style of the book of Ecclesiastes creates con-
siderable difficulty in deciding how certain passages are to be
taken. But as to the general tone and tenor of Holy Scripture
on this question there can be no doubt whatever. It uniformlv
aims at abasing man's pride, by reminding him that he is a
creature of a day; that he is crushed before the moth; that
he is cut down like the grass, and withers even as the green
herb. ' Orthodoxy,' on the contrary, puffs him up with a sense
of his own importance, by talking to him of his immortal
spirit, his never-dying soul, and so forth. 'All flesh is as
grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass,' says
Scripture. No, replies ' orthodoxy ' ; his flesh may be as grass,
limiting the word to the lower part of his being, his material
organisation, though even that can only perish for a time, to
rise again indestructible, and live for ever; but what con-
stitutes his highest ' glory,' his spiritual nature, is essentially
imperishable, and as far removed as possible from being
like ' the flower of grass.' To the question of Eliphaz (Job iv.
17), ' Shall mortal man be more just than God?' 'orthodoxy'
would have answered, Man is not mortal ; his body no doubt
dies for a time, but it is the highest glory of the man to be as
immortal as God Himself, and, therefore, to introduce his
mortality into the question renders the comparison nugatory.
i 34- IMMORTALITY.
I am well aware that the following remarks will be
adduced, as if they stood quite alone, to sustain the charge of
' rationalism,' which is so freely used to supply the place of
argument; but I cannot refrain from adding, in the language
of one of my principal opponents, ' Let us hear what Reason
has to say ' on this subject.
At what point of his development does man become esg
tially immortal ? When does the human thing, which is at
first admittedly perishable, change into something imperishable?
Who are immortal ? All who are born ? All who are born
alive? or who? A child born dead is allowed neither Chris-
tian baptism nor Christian burial. How can this be accounted
for, except on the supposition that the Church does not regard
it as an immortal being ? Are we, then, to believe that if a
child dies just before its birth it perishes, but that if it dies
just after its birth it must necessarily live for ever? This
may be held by those who think that only the body is be-
gotten, and that at the moment of birth, or at some previous
period, a newly-created indestructible spirit is united to it.
But then what becomes of original sin ? On that theory it is
only man's material organism that is born in sin ; the higher
parts of his being come into existence in a state of perfect,
purity, as everything must be that God creates. And what
becomes of the unity of the race, or the brotherhood of man ? *
According to the teaching of Scripture, the man is developed
from his parent stock by the natural process of generation.
And the question therefore arises, At what period does any,
or every, separate formation from this parent stock become
immortal? It is admitted that none of them are so from the
first ; when does the stupendous change from perishable to
* I am aware of the answers that may be made to some of the above
questions ; and readily admit that the implied arguments grounded on
them are by no means conclusive upon the question at issue. But they
suggest considerations which are not altogether without weight in the
matter.
IMMORTALITY. 135
imperishable, mortal to immortal, destructible to indestruc-
tible, take place ? Scripture replies, It begins in regeneration,
and is completed in resurrection. When the human spirit,
being quickened by the Divine Spirit, is brought to know-
God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent, it ' passes from
death unto life ; ' it ' has everlasting life,' and ' shall never see
death;' it is ' made partaker of the divine nature,' and can
' never perish ; ' 'its life is hid with Christ in God,' and while
Christ lives the possessor of that life must live also. ' The
body indeed,' even in the regenerate, 'is dead because of sin,
but the spirit is life because of righteousness.'* And even the
body has such a principle of immortality communicated to it
that it cannot remain permanently under the power of death ;
' for if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead
dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from the dead shall
also quicken your mortal bodies by [on account of] His Spirit
which dwelleth in you.' The wicked are raised to life again ;
but only to a natural mortal life, which will again come to an
end. Those who are in Christ alone ' come forth unto the
resurrection of life ; ' in their case alone does this mortal put
on immortality, and this corruptible put on incorruption.
Most truly, therefore, do we profess, in the Nicene Creed, to
'believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord, and Giver of Life ;'
and most appropriate are the words used in administering the
Lord's Supper — ' preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting
life.'
' If man were by natural constitution possessed of immortality o
eternal life, then would we expect to find the Scriptures insisting only
on a modification of that life — a change of its dispositions and new
* If it be urged that this excludes from immortality all who die in
infancy, we reply — No more than it excludes them from regeneration.
The normal process is described by the words, ' Of His own will begat
He us by the word of truth.' What is tho nature of the process, where
the mind is not sufficiently matured to receive the word of truth, we
have no means of ascertaining.
136 IMMORTALITY.
direction of its powers, as necessary to his seeing the kingdom of God.
Whereas, if it be true that immortal life is altogether distinct from
natural life — a new life and from another source, then, on the other
hand, we would expect to hear of a new generation, and to find it written
that " except a man he born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."
In other words, we would expect to find not merely conversion, or
repentance, but regeneration insisted on in the Scriptures as necessary
to our partaking of everlasting life. Now, what is the fact? That the
Scriptures, teaching that immortality is only through Christ, and is in
fact the life of God — of Him " who only hath immortality "— participated
in by the redeemed, teach also the doctrine of regeneration by the Spirit
of God, an actual communication of the Spirit as the commencement of a
new life, as that life in itself; whereas the popular creed teaching that
man has eternal life by nature, has been constrained to explain regenera-
tion in such way as reconciles it with this persuasion, — to make it
identical with conversion, and a change of heart or affection, which is,
in fact, to deny that there is any such thing as regeneration, strictly
speaking ; and to interpret it as a metaphor, " a bold figure of speech."
as it has actually been called !' {Christ our Life.)
'IMMORTAL' AND 'INCORRUPTIBLE.'
The words properly translated ' immortal,' and ' immortality,
occur only in 1 Cor. xv. 53, 54, and 1 Tim. vi. 16. In all
other passages 'incorruptible' or 'incorruptibility' would be
the strict rendering of the original. On the strength of
this, the chosen champion of the Bible Treasury replies to my
quotation of Rom. ii. 7 with his characteristic courtesy, ' It
is false ; it speaks of incorruptibility, which Scripture dis-
tinguishes from immortality.' I am disposed to think that
they are distinguished in 1 Cor. xv. 53, 54 ; and that the one
refers to the endless life of the regenerate spirit, the other to
the endless life cf the resurrection body. But how entirely
the above criticism fails to touch the argument drawn from
Rom. ii. 7 may be seen in a moment by referring to Rom.
i. 23, and 1 Tim. i. 17; in both of which places the same
'immortal' and 'incorruptible.' 137
word, ' incorruptible,' is applied to God Himself. How can it be
'distinguished from im mortality' there? Besides, supposing
that the authorized translation of Eom. ii. 7 were ' false,' and
that St. Paul referred only to the ' incorruptibility ' of the body,
how would i hat affect the question ? According to the popular
view, the bodies as well as the souls of the wicked will live for
ever; in all cases alike this corruptible will put on incor-
ruption, as well as this mortal put on immortality ; so that
the one has no more to be sought by patient continuance in
well doing than the other.
I cannot forbear expressing my regret that the editor of a
religious magazine should have admitted into its columns such
a paper as that referred to above. Besides repeatedly apply-
ing the word ' infidelity' to a doctrine advocated by one, who
believes in the plenary inspiration of Scripture, and also pro-
fesses to ground that particular opinion on its uniform con-
sistent teaching, the writer indulges, at every fourth or fifth
sentence, in such expressions as ' It is false — simply false —
clap-trap — idle inattention to Scripture — careless and false —
too bad — extreme carelessness — false — dishonest — gross blun-
der — quite false — another blunder — trifling with Scripture.'
We are all fallible, and too easily betrayed into errors of tone
and spirit, as well as into errors of doctrine ; but when an
editor receives a paper that so grievously offends against the
laws of Christian courtesy, with so very little in the way of
sound reasoning to compensate lor the defect, the least he can
be expected to do is to remit it to the writer for expurgation.
The knowledge that rhetoric will weigh far more than logic
with the majority of his readers, is no excuse for taking
advantage of such rhetoric as forms the staple of that short
paper.
138 'ETERNAL,' ' FOR EVER AND EVER.'
'ETERNAL' or 'EVERLASTING,' 'FOR EVER,'
' FOR EVER AND EVER.'
In endeavouring to meet the argument derived from the
etymology and use of these words, two courses have been
adopted.
The less informed or less candid reasoners have referred to
those passages alone in which they are applied to God Him-
self, and have simply ignored those in which they are applied
to Jewish ordinances, to the ' hills,' to Christian ' consolation,'
and other things of limited duration. According to their
mode of argument, it might be demonstrably proved that the
life of God is not endless. For as we know that some of the
things pronounced to be eternal have already terminated, it
would follow that the word can refer only to a limited period ;
and therefore, as it is applied to God, His existence must have
a limit.
Others, however, and amongst them the editor of the
Christian Advocate, have attempted to grapple with the facts.
And their argument is substantially this : that whenever the
word is used in a limited sense, the limit is shown from the
very nature of the case. Precisely so ; that is just my position,
— namely, that you can only know from the nature of each
particular case whether the period referred to is limited or
unlimited. Mr. Garbett says, that 'in every one of these
cases, without exception, it is qualified by a phrase of limita-
tion, such as, " to thee and to thy seed," " to Aaron and his
sons;" where the qualifying phrases define the duration of the
age to be the duration of the Jewish economy.' And just so,
the whole context of Matt. xxv. 46 defines the duration of the
age there spoken of to be the duration of the millennial king-
dom. In neither case is the ' qualifying phrase ' attached to the
* ETERNAL,' 'FOR EVER AND EVER.' 139
word ; it is the subject which proves the word to indicate a
limited period.
One writer argues, that when these terms are used ' in a
restricted sense,' they ' refer to a time state, and must there-
fore have a meaning limited by the continuance of this worldly
system, and of time.' It is shown in the note on Matt. xxv.
46, that both the 'eternal punishment' and the 'eternal life'
there spoken of, do refer to a ' time state,' namely, the dura-
tion of the Millennial kingdom. But how will this view suit
the common interpretation of Rev. xiv. 11? 'And the
smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever,
and they have no rest day nor night who worship the beast
and his image.' Do not 'day' and 'night' indicate a 'time
state ' ?
Dr. George Sidney Smith, of Trinity College, Dublin, an
excellent scholar, and a firm believer in the popular doctrine,
says: ' There is no mystery or ambiguity about the word
aionios. Like many other words in the Lexicon, it has several
meanings ; but this creates no difficulty : the context is always
sufficient to decide ; the relation and genesis ot' its different
meanings are well ascertained ; and as a general definition, it
may be sai'ely held that it commonly means a continuous
duration as long as the subject is capable of." 1 It would have
been much safer to have said ' a continuous duration' through-
out the period referred to. Of the Jewish priests it was de-
clared that ' their anointing shall surely be an everlasting
priesthood.' Ex. xl. 15. It can hardly be said to have lasted
as long as it was 'capable' of lasting. It lasted until God
saw fit to put an end to it, and then it was abolished. Yet
how sternly an orthodox Rabbi might have rebuked the ' in-
fidelity ' of any presumptuous Jew who had ventured to assert
that that priesthood was ever to be ' changed.' Heb. vii. 12.
Could anything be plainer or stronger than the words ' shall
140 'eternal, 'fob ever \nd ever.
surely be an everlasting priesthood'? What a perverting of
Scripture he would call it ' to say that everlasting does not
mean lasting for ever' !
Other texts, to which Dr. Smith's definition might more
strictly apply, show even more forcibly the very limited sense
of such language as our opponents press so strongly into their
service.
' His master shall bore his ear through with an awl, and he
shall serve him for ever.'' Ex. xxi. 6.
' The righteous shall dwell in the land for ever.'' Ps.
xxxvii. 29.
' So shall I keep thy law continually for ever and ever. -1 Ps.
cxix. 44.
1 I will eat no flesh ivhile the world standetlu 1 Cor. viii.
13. This is literally to the age, the same expression that is
generally translated for ever, and which it is so strongly con-
tended must necessarily mean to all eternity.
There are three passages in which St. Paul speaks of the
Gospel as a long concealed mystery. In Eph. iii. 9, and in Col.
i. 26, it is said to have been hid ' from the ages;' in Eom. xvi.
25, ' through age-long times.' Our translators have rendered
the three expressions — ' from the beginning of the world,'
' from ages,' and ' since the world began.' But if ' to the ages,'
which they render ' for ever,' mean to all eternity, surely ' from
the ages' must mean from all eternity — which it manifestly
does not. To express that idea St. Paul uses the expression
1 before the ages.' 1 Cor. ii. 7. The 'age-long times' in
Rom. xvi. 25 are not eternal times, according to the interpre-
tation which is forced upon the word in Matt. xxv. 46, but
the dispensational times, the times of the ages.
BTERN1TS". 141
ETERNITY.
Though we can only arrive at an approximate idea of eternity,
it is quite possible to get near enough to it for any practical
purpose. To count a trillion, at the rate of a hundred a
minute, would take more than eighteen thousand million years,
a tolerably long period in itself. A trillion years would of
course be just a century for every minute of that period.
But a trillion is expressed by a line of only nineteen figures.
Suppose the line extended to some fixed star, from which the
light, travelling towards us at the rate of 150,000 miles a
second, is said to have taken millions of years in reaching lis.
How long would that number of years last ? Well then,
every sin being supposed to be of infinite guilt and conse-
quently deserving of infinite punishment, it would be a very
small calculation, to begin by supposing that a given
person — say a child of ten years old dying unconverted, or a
hoary reprobate, for the distinction will soon be lost as we
advance — has to endure such a period of intense mental and
bodily suffering for every sin of thought, word, or deed that
he has ever committed. And wdien all those periods have
been passed through, he has to begin again, and undergo for
each of his sins a period of suffering equal to the sum total
of all those j,revious periods. And when those have been
passed through, he has to begin again ; and so on for ever,
with the full consciousness that lie is no nearer the end of his
torment than he was at first. So that if Almighty power
be continually exerted to enable his body to bear its agonies
as well as when in its first vigour, his mental anguish must
necessarily be for ever indefinitely increasing, because the vast
periods already traversed enable him ever more and more
fully to realize the immeasurable eternity that still lies before
him.
42 DESTRUCTION.
DKST11UCTION.
M it. Grant and others Lave laboured to show that the words
' destruction' and ' destroy' arc often useJ by inspired writers
in a figurative or secondary meaning. But the question is,
whether they can be so understood with reference to the final
doom of the impenitent. And on this our Lord's words,
recorded in Matt. X. 28, are, surely, decisive — ' Fear not them
which kill the body, but are notable to kill the soul ; but rather
fear Him, which is able lo destroy both soul and body in hell.'
The importance of this text lies in the meaning of the word
' destroy.' being so precisely fixed by the contrast. God can
do to both body and soul what man can do only to the body —
' hilV them. Nothing could seem to be more clear. I was
at a loss to imagine how this argument would be met. The
only possible way of even pretending to meet it which occurred
to me was to urge that our Lord purposely varied the expres-
sion, so as to avoid conveying the idea of death as the chief
element in future punishment. The answer to which would
of course be, that the object in vai-ying the word is manifestly
to increase, and not lessen, the force of the word first used ;
in other Avoids, to show how awful and complete will lie the
death Inflicted upon those who try their strength against the
Almighty. My opponents seem to have ielt this, as none of
them, to my knowledge, have attempted that way of escape.
What other way, then, is left? I should have said, none.
But nothing is impossible in controversy. ' The verse in
question, 1 writes Mr. Grant, ' does not afford the most slender
reason for the belief that God will in one single instance
destroy the body and soul of any one of His creatures. It.
simply says that lie can do it, that is, if so disposed.' And
an anonymous writer in the Bible Treasury, whom the editor
DESTRUCTION. 143
describes as ' a valued servant of God,' actually considers it a
proof of my ' carelessness ' that I have quoted the words as
asserting that God ' will destroy,' etc. ; whereas, he says, ' it is
a question of power to he feared.' The same, reply has been
given by others.
Now, surely, on that supposition, it is ' a question of power
not to be feared.' Why should we be urged to fear God,
because He could do something which we are quite sure that
He never will do? And why does our Lord add, 'in hell,'
the place of punishment ? God is just as 'able' to destroy
whatever lie has created, out of hell as in it. Yet to believe
that God will ever exercise that power is, according to
Mr. Grant, ' the most unwarranted notion that ever was enter-
tained, so far as my reading extends, by any person possessing
even an approach to average judgment.' What will not
men be driven to say, when it becomes ' necessary to their
position ?'
When the able and excellent editor of the Christian
Advocate expressed his intention of examining this book in
detail, I wrote to beg that he would grapple with the text in
question. I expressed my conviction that, Mr. Grant's ex-
planation would not satisfy him, and my curiosity to know
what would. His next article appeared without the slightest
reference to it. Again I wrote, expressing my disappointment
that he had not attempted to meet it in some way or other,
but adding that his tacit surrender of it confirmed my belief
in its absolute conclusiveness. A third and last article fol-
lowed, but still without an attempt to touch that decisive
utterance. The same result has invariably followed whenever
an opponent has been tightly nailed to that text — it generally
closes the correspondence. In fact, as a very able clergyman,
who still feels some difficulty on the general subject, candidly
acknowledged to me, it is ' logically unanswerable.'
144 DESTRUCTION.
PS. — The above was written immediately after the ap-
pearance of Mr. Garbett's third article. I have since received
a letter from him, in which he endeavours to meet the argu-
ment by reference to Luke xii. 4. But that passage does not
in the slightest degree affect the question, inasmuch as the ques-
tion remains, For ivhat purpcse will anyone be ' cast into hell,'
— to be kept alive there for ever in misery, or to be destroyed?
To which question Matt. x. 28 gives a decisive answer. The
idea expressed in Luke xii. 4, ' and after that have no more
that they can do,' is of course equally implied in Matt, x.,
and makes no difference whatever. One correspondent, indeed,
has argued that if God were to destroy the sinner entirely.
He would have 'no more that He could do.' But even that
singular idea leaves the argument quite untouched. For
what our Lord says is that God's power to punish does not
cease, as man's does, with the death of the body (' after He
hath killed'), but that He is also able, in the judgment, to
destroy both soul and body for ever.
It should be added, that the word rendered ' destroy ' in
verse 28 is the same that is used in verse 39, and translated
' lose.' It there refers to a violent death, submitted to for
Christ's sake ; which, not being final, is little to be dreaded
in comparison with the irremediable loss of life that will be
incurred by those who save their lives here at the price of
unfaithfulness to Christ.
The word, in some of its forms, occurs a hundred and
twenty-eight times in the New Testament, and is generally
rendered either ' destroy ' or in the passive ' perish.' In every
instance it means precisely what is conveyed by those English
terms, except when used figuratively, and then destruction
lies at the foundation of the figure.
ANNIHILATION. 145
ANNIHILATION.
As an instance of the confusion of ideas that prevails, with
reference to annihilation and destruction, may be meutioned
the argument drawn from the words ' perish ' and ' changed '
being both applied to the predicted passing away of the
heavens in Heb. i. 11, 12. 'Is change annihilation?' asks
the editor of the Rock. No ; but it is destruction, if carried
far enough. When ' a potter's vessel ' is ' broken to shivers,'
it is not annihilated, but it is destroyed, and that simply by
the process of changing the position and mutual relationship
of its component parts. Its corporate existence is gone. It
does not become a bad vessel : it ceases to be a vessel at all.
Again, an able and eminent Christian minister writes,
' Fire destroys nothing.' What he means is, that it annihilates
nothing. It is the most destructive agent known.
Another writer says: — 'Philosophers tell us there is no
such thing as the annihilation of a particle of matter, and we
have no reason to believe in the annihilation of spirits.'
Scripture never teaches the ' annihilation ' of the wicked, in
the strictly scientific sense in which ' philosophers ' deny its
ever taking place, namely, the reducing of anything to
nothing. It teaches their ' destruction,' that is, their ceasmff
to exist as living conscious beings; and so far from philosophy
or science saying anything against this, all that it does say is
directly in favour of it— at least, in favour of its possibility ;
for it tells us that there is no such thing as an indestructible
material organism, and therefore ' we have no reason to be-
lieve ' in any indestructible spiritual organism. As even
man can destroy the body, it is not so very hard to believe
that God can also destroy the soid, especially as Christ has
positively told us that He can and will do so. Surely, He
L
146 'unquenchable fire.*
can destroy whatever He has created, even though it was
created capable of immortality —
'He can create, and He destroy.'
The Christian Advocate can hardly ' resist the temptation
to notice with some touch of raillery and ridicule the idea of
a destruction of the soul. . . . Who can conceive,' &c.
No, we cannot conceive, ' the kind of process that would be
required for its destruction ; ' but to argue that therefore
God is not ' able to destroy ' it at all is what our opponents
would call Rationalism.
THE ' UNQUENCHABLE FIRE ' AND THE
UNDYING- WORM.
' Augustine, in his laboured defence of the doctrine of eternal life in
hell, ransacks the realms of fact and fiction for substances and life
which can resist, and are uninjured by, the power of fire. This African
father tells us of worms existing in hot springs, of salamanders living
in the flames, of burning mo\mtains which are not consumed, of
diamonds resisting the heat of the furnace.* The ingenious idea of
another African father, Tertidlian, is that fire as used by man and as
employed by God are of quite opposite natures, for that while the
former wastes in consuming, the latter repairs the waste which it
produces. f A truer philosophy corrects this curious defence of African
theology. In all God's known world, it tells us, whatever life is hurt in
fire becomes extinct if continued in it : whatever substance is injured by
fire is destroyed if it remains in it. And every one of the illustrations
of Scripture refer to substances most readily consumed — to wood, and
tow, and thorns, and fat of lambs.
* We are here naturally led to consider what it is that is really meant
* De Civ. xxi. f Apol. xlviii.
' UNQUENCHABLE FIRE.' 147
by the terms " eternal fire," " unquenchable fire," so often applied to the
fire of hell. We are not now considering the nature of the fire itself,
whether it be identical with or analogous only to fire such as here con-
sumes. What we are considering is whether, be this fire what it may,
it continues throughout eternity to burn as it burns when the reprobates
are first placed therein. The passage from Jude leads us to conclude
that it only continues to burn while it has anything to consume. The
fire of Sodom is called an " eternal fire," but it only burned while
aught remained of the guilty cities to be consumed. It could not be
extinguished until then. Jordan poured upon it could not put out its
flames ; Abraham's prayers could not abate its force ; mercy had put
forward its last plea in the bosom of God. But when all had been re-
duced to ashes, the fire went out, and the smoke ceased to rise, leaving
behind an utter destruction which no lapse of time was to repair. It is
thus we are to view the " unquenchable fire " of hell.
' We are to consider that the term is one in common use. It is not
confined to hell, or peculiar to theology. It is constantly applied to
fire burning here on earth, which is unquenchable inasmuch as all
human efforts cannot quench it, but which, when it has done its work
of destruction, smoulders away and dies out. The classical scholar
will remember the famous passage of Homer where the Trojans hurl
" unquenchable fire " upon the Grecian ships, though but one of them
was burnt, and that one only half consumed.* In the very same way it is
constantly used in Scripture. When God in one place declares that His
wrath against Jerusalem " shall not be quenched," and, in another,
that He will " kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall not be
quenched,"! He means that His wrath was to continue till Jerusalem
was destroyed, and the fire was to burn till its palaces were consumed.
Then wrath ceased because it had spent its force, and the fire went out
because it had eaten up all on which it could prey. So we are to under-
stand that "unquenchable fire" which is the terrible fate of the lost.
Their fire is not quenched. It preys upon them with relentless force.
No cries on the part of the damned arrest it ; no prayers ascend from
the redeemed for the sin which they know to be unto eternal death ; no
further feelings of grace and pity in God's bosom interfere to check its
course. It burns on, consuming, preying, reducing, until it has burnt
and consumed all. When it has spent its force, it dies out for want of
food, leaving behind it the endless sign of the destruction which it has
* 11. xvi. 123, 291. t Jer. vii. 20; xvii. 27.
148 'unquenchable fike.'
brought on fallen archangel, and angel, and man. This is the second
death. But we can bear to look upon it because it is death. We are not
looking upon a picture -which -would overturn reason and banish peace
from all who beheld it. Life has left the realms of the lost. The
reprobates felt, but do not continue to feel, the consuming flames.
These prey upon the dead, and it is dust and ashes which cover the
floor of the furnace of hell.' — Bev. H. Constable.
' Add to this, that the w'ell-known historian Eusebius, who wrote in
the latter part of the third century and the beginning of the fourth,
presents us with evidence equally to our purpose. In recording the
martyrdom of four Christians he writes : " Cronion and Julian were
scourged, and afterwards consumed with unquenchable fire." And, in
another passage : " Epimaclius and Alexander, who had continued for a
time in prison, enduring innumerable sufferings from the scrapers and
scourges, were also destroyed with unquenchable fire." "What can
show more conclusively the customary meaning of this language ? The
martyrs were consumed : therefore the fire was unquenchable.' * — Bev.
T. Davis.
' It is apparent that this language borrows its expressions from the
awful judgments denounced on Edom or Idumea, and may therefore
be properly illustrated by a comparison with the prophecy in Isaiah.
" For it is the day of the Lord's vengeance, and the year of recompenses
for the controversy of Ziou. And the streams thereof [Idumea] shall
be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof into brimstone, and the land
thereof shall become burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night nor
day ; the smoke thereof shall go up for ever: from generation to genera-
tion it shall lie waste ; none shall pass through it for ever and ever "
(Isa. xxxiv. 8-10).
' Now, here is language quite as strong, indeed stronger, than that
which occurs in the book of Eevelation, and yet it is applied to the land
of Idumea, where the fire has long been quenched, and the smoke has
ceased to ascend up, except in the figurative sense of a perpetual memorial.
This language, let it be observed, according to the illustration now
given, is not incompatible with a limited duration. The language in
the book of Revelation, like that of the Hebrew prophets, is highly
poetical and emblematical, and can never be justly pressed into an argu-
ment for the eternal duration of torment, as the future recompense of
the wicked.
' Prom the above comparison of passages of the New with the Old
* Eccl. Hist. b. 6, c. 41.
' UNQUENCHABLE FIRE. 149
Testament, it is, I think, beyond debate that the phrases " unquenchable
fire," &c., are hyperbolical expressions, which, if they are interpreted
as they should be, according to the meaning they have in the Old Tes-
tament, whence they are quoted, will be found to describe not a con-
dition of endless torment, but very grievous suffering, to be followed by
a final annihilation* The fire is fitly termed "unquenchable," because
it will utterly destroy by a resistless, inextinguishable energy.
' Another phrase demands special consideration, because it is always
cited with confidence by the advocates of the popular theory. This
phrase occurs in Mark, and is thrice repeated f — " Where their worm
dieth not." This is an expressive image quoted from the prophet
Isaiah ; and an examination of the original passage will, I think, con-
vince any candid inquirer that, instead of upholding the dogma of
eternal torment, it is at irreconcilable variance with it. This expression
is sometimes explained metaphorically, of the conscience which excites
an eternal remorse in the bosoms of the wicked. But this is evidently
not its meaning. The passage is as follows: — "And they shall go
forth and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed
against me ; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be
quenched ; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." J What the
prophet states is simply this — that so numerous shall be these loath-
some and putrefying carcases, that, hyperbolically speaking, the worms
will never make an end of feeding on them, nor the fire of consuming
them. A glance at the passage will at once convince that the meaning
is not that the "worm" of living persons shall not die, but the "worm"
of their " carcases;" so that what is here intended is the putrefaction of
dead bodies, and not the exquisite eternal torment of the living. Like
the "unquenchable fire," which will not be extinguished until it has
completed its work, the undying worm will do its part in the complete
demolition of the wicked. This expression, instead of implying, ex-
cludes the idea of conscious and everlastingly protracted pain.
'Much light may be cast upon the nature and duration of future
punishment by a consideration of the term which, with one exception,
to which I will presently refer, is always used in the. original Scriptures
to signify the place of future punishment. This term is Gehenna, or
Gehennem, and is derived from two Hebrew words — Ge, a valley, and
Hinnom, the name of a person at one time its possessor. The valley
of Hinnom, situate near Jerusalem, had been the scene of those
abominable sacrifices which the Jews had perpetrated when they burned
* Bather, destruction. f Mark ix. 44, 46, 48.
\ Isa. lxvi. 24.
150 ' UNQEEKCHABLE FIBE.'
alive their children to Baal and Moloch. There the disgusting remains
of these horrid sacrifices were left to be consumed by fire and -worms ;
and from this place the name was derived which denotes, both in
the Hebrew and Greek tongues, the place of future punishment. If
analogy had anything to do with this appropriation of the term Ge-
henna, it is difficult to see how a loathsome valley of decomposing and
smoulder hi g human remains, which were being gradually consumed,
should fitly depict a state of conscious, unending misery as the punish-
ment of the wicked. If the valley of Hinnom was a type of the Ge-
henna of the damned, the unconsciousness and gradual consumption of
its dead carcases cannot portray the consciousness and eternity of living
persons. Analogy suggests rather that suffering to be followed by the
corruption of death is the portion of the guilty in the future righteous
retribution.' — Life and Death. By the Rev. J. Panton Ham.
It should also be observed that even if the word 'un-
quenchable ' did prove that the fire must literally bum for
ever, the common argument, derived from the necessity of its
being for ever supplied with fuel, would fail of its intended
purpose. For the burning mass does not consist of the con-
demned. The fire is burning before they are cast into it, and
may therefore, conceivably, burn on after they are consumed.
The refuse, thrown into the fires of Tophet, outside the walls
of Jerusalem, from which our Lord borrows His figure, was
not the fuel that kept them burning. They were kept burn-
ing by suitable fuel, in order that the refuse thrown into them
might be immediately consumed. The ' consuming fire ' is
God's wrath against sin. In one sense, it will burn for ever,
His nature bein2r unchangeable. But when He has reconciled
all things to Himself by Christ, there will be nothing left for
it to consume.
« ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.'
The interpretation given in Sermon VI. of Matt. xxv. 46 is
defective, from not taking the parable and its context suffi-
ciently into account. Like the two preceding parables, it
* ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.' 151
describes, but under another aspect, the separation that will be
made, at our Lord's coming, between believers and unbelievers
in the visible Church.* All three set forth the importance of
being ready to meet the Lord when He conies. The first
shows the necessity of possessing the Spirit of God in our
hearts. The second shows the necessity of devoting ourselves
to Christ's service. The third shows what is the essence of
that holiness without which no man shall see the Lord, namely,
love. The term3, in which the consequences of being accepted
or rejected are described, rise in strength and dignity accord-
ing to the different aspects under which our Lord presents
Himself in the three parables. The Bridegroom merely refuses
to acknowledge the careless virgins and to open the door for
them, while those who are ready go in with Him to the
marriage supper. The Master promises His faithful servants
places of still higher trust, with immediate participation in
His own rejoicing, while He orders the unfaithful servant
to be bound hand and foot and cast into the darkness
without, where he will bitterly lament his folly. The King
raises His loyal subjects to a throne, while He drives away
those who have been rebels at heart into ' everlasting fire." But
in each case the rewards and the punishments are but dif-
ferent aspects of the same things, namely, admission to or
* I am quite aware of the difficulties attaching to this view ; but those
attaching to every other interpretation that has been offered seem to me
very much greater. If, however, it should be held that this last parable
describes a judgment upon ' nations,' rather than individuals, it becomes
still farther removed, from lending any countenance to the doctrine of
endless suffering.
It is, surely, somewhat remarkable that such an awful doctrine as
that of eternal evil should be made so largely to depend upon two words
picked, out of a very much disputed parable ; almost the only perfectly
certain thing about it being that it does not, describe the final judgment,
but something which takes place at the coming of Christ to establish.
His kingdom upon the earth.
152 'eternal punishment.'
exclusion from the Millennial kingdom. The first parable
suggests only the inauguration of it by the marriage feast ;
the second adds the element of continued and increased
usefulness and honour ; which the third raises to the height
of reigning with Christ.
This gives precision to the meaning of the word aionion
(age-long) as used in the last of the three parables. The
' aaonial life,' into which the righteous then enter, is not the
life, the indefeasible immortality, which they already possessed
through the risen life of Christ having been communicated
to them in regeneration ; it is explained before to be ' the
kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world,'
or, as Christ elsewhere expresses it, the being ' counted worthy
to obtain that age and the (that) resurrection from the dead.'
No resurrection, it is true, is spoken of in these parables.
They deal directly only with the living ; but we know from
other Scriptures that the dead will be judged on the same prin-
ciples, and those who have died in the Lord at the same time.
The living shall not anticipate ' them that are asleep.' All
Christ's saints, living or dead, shall obtain the life of that age
and inherit the kingdom. While, on the other hand, those who
named the name of Christ, but were ' sensual, having not the
Spirit,' who had ' faith without works,' and ' loved not the
Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity,' will be disowned by Christ
at His coming, refused admission to the marriage feast, cast
into outer darkness, and suffer the age-long punishment of
being associated with the devil and his angels, until the day
of final judgment.
This is the ' everlasting destruction ' spoken of in 2 Thess.
i. 10; wherein also the subjects of it are those alone who are
found in opposition to Christ at His coming ; those who have
died in such a state ' live not again till the thousand years
are finished.'
'eteijnal punishment.' 153
Both expressions — • everlasting punishment' and ' everlast-
ing destruction '—might well be applied to the utter de-
struction, soul and body, of the finally impenitent at the
day of judgment. If ' redemption,' which has been already
' obtained ' and will soon be completely accomplished, may
be called ' eternal redemption,' because its effects will be
eternal, and if the fire which consumed Sodom and Gomorrah,
and has long since been extinguished, may be called ' eternal
fire,' because its effects have continued through all succeeding
ages, why may not the ' punishment ' which consists of ' de-
struction ' be called ' eternal,' because its effects will be final
and irremediable ? Eternal redemption is not necessarily eternal
redeeming, eternal fire is not necessarily eternal burning, nor
is eternal punishment necessarily eternal punishing, or eternal
destruction eternal destroying. If it be asked, How can de-
struction or punishment be eternal, when there will be none
left to destroy or punish? we reply by asking, How can redemp-
tion be eternal, when there will be none left to redeem ? And
when ridicide is thrown on the ' unspeakable folly ' of saying
that persons can suffer punishment after they have ceased to
exist, we reply that, in the sense of feeling pain, the word
1 suffering ' could not of* course be applied to anyone after his
destruction ; but that for so applying it in another sense, we
have the authority of St. Jude, who speaks of Sodom and
Gomorrah as still ' suffering the vengeance of eternal fire '
long after they have ceased to exist. And he justifies this, by
reminding us that, in the perpetual memorial of their having
been eternally destroyed by fire, ' they are set forth for an
example.'
But in the passages where alone these two expressions
occur they do not refer to the final judgment at all, but to the
immediate destruction of Christ's enemies from off the earth
when He comes in the clouds of heaven with power and great
15-i 'eternal punishment.
glory ; that is, to the ' gathering out of His kingdom all things
that offend and them that do iniquity.' The destruction is
called ' age-long,' because it will result in the ' age-long
punishment ' of exclusion from the kingdom and confinement in
outer darkness with the devil and his angels. What will
befall them at the end of that period, whether the first
* destruction ' is irremediable, or whether, as some maintain,
it may bring any of them to repentance, is altogether another
question. It is impossible to deny that some weight attaches
to the argument drawn from the word (co'\u<rit; (rendered
* punishment'), which primarily means correction, as distin-
guished from TtjjL(t)p<ci y which means retribution. But there is
much to be said on the other side ; and I forbear to enter into
the question, as it is quite unnecessary to my present purpose.
It is possible to believe that gome may obtain forgiveness in
the world to come who have not obtained it in this world,
without believing that all will do so. But even if it could be
proved, which I entirely disbelieve, that salvation will again
be offered to those who, with sufficient light and knowledge,
reject it now, it would still remain a revealed truth that the
finally impenitent will not be kept alive for ever in sin and
misery, but be- at last blotted out of creation by being de-
stroyed, soul and body, in hell.
It may be objected that, in this view of the parable, the
wicked are represented as enduring the punishment of ' fire '
without being destroyed by it ; and the same remark has been
made on the fact of the beast and the false prophet, who are
cast into the lake of fire at the beginning of the Millennium,
being mentioned as if still alive at the end of it. But there
is no inconsistency in this. Fire is the symbol of God's wrath
against sin. And it by no means follows, because that ' con-
suming fire ' must ultimately destroy every evil doer, that it
can inflict no less punishment during any preceding period.
CORRECTION AND RETRIBUTION. 155
CORRECTION AND RETRIBUTION.
It is important to remember that the final punishment of the
irreclaimably wicked will not be for their own sake. The
superficial remarks, therefore, that are frequently made about
destruction having no terrors for those who are without
spiritual desires, simply fall to the ground. As long as
punishment is corrective, that is, inflicted for the good of the
persons punished, it is essential that they should feel its bitter-
ness. But when it is purely retributive, that is, inflicted with
no hope of benefiting the guilty, but solely to vindicate the
majesty of the law, it is not of the smallest consequence
whether they care about it or not, so long as it is something
which the innocent would dread. Now, whatever may be
thought of any preliminary punishment that the wicked may
have to undergo, it is quite certain that the last stroke, which
blots them out of existence, must be for the sake of others.
Their destruction will be necessary, first, that the universe
may be reconciled to God; and, secondly, to make them an
eternal ' example ' of the destructive nature of sin ; to show
to all intelligent creatures throughout eternity that evil cannot
continue ; that in Christ alone all things consist, and that,
therefore, they cannot live apart from Him. How could it
add clearness or force to this reason for God to put forth an
exceptional energy of His almighty power, in order to main-
tain a multitude of His creatures in an unnatural and wretched
state of existence for ever ? Would it be impossible otherwise
to make creatures who are yet to come believe that evil ever
had wrought such destruction as we are told it shall yet work ?
Would no record, no memorial suffice to convince them that
the wages of sin is death, unless they had perpetually before
their eyes the spectacle of impenitent sinners who were never
to die, but for ever to be spending an eternally dying life ?
156 CORRECTION AND RETRIBUTION.
Are God's resources so limited that He would be driven to
this, surely the very last expedient that He would have
recourse to for any purpose whatever ? His own word alone
could make us believe it. And happily that word most
positively assures us tha,t no such thing shall ever happen.
' If there be one fact in the word of God clearer than another
it is His settled purpose to destroy sin and sorrow out of His
universe and to make all things new. The " destruction " of
every creature who is not united to Christ, " who only hath
immortality," is the revealed law of action. It is settled that
a time is coming when God will be all in all. No being
destitute of the Divine nature will exist in the universe of
God when He shall have completed His most glorious
purpose.' *
'THE SMOKE OF THEIR TORMENT.'
None of the replies that I have seen to my argument on this head
attempt to touch the only question that has to be considered,
namely, What does that highly figurative scene represent?
However clear the picture may be in itself, the question re-
mains, What is the truth which the Spirit of God means to
depict by it ? Nothing can be clearer than the meaning of the
words ' angel ' and ' stand ' and ' sun ' in another part of the
same scene ; but a right understanding of the loords is only the
first step towards ascertaining what is meant to be prefigured
by an angel standing in the sun. And to fix the meaning of
' torment ' and ' for ever ' is only the first step towards ascer-
taining what is meant to be prefigured by the lake of fire, and
all that is said about it. Our opponents have a perfect right
* Letter from Rev. Dr. Leask, editor of the Rainbow, to Mr. James
Grant.
'the smoke of their torment.' 157
to press the word ' torment ' in support of their view ; and we
have an equal right to press all those considerations which we
believe incalculably outweigh it. If anyone maintained, from
Jude verse 7, that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah must
still be a blazing mass of ruins, and their inhabitants
be still writhing in the flames, whatever unbelieving or
mistaken travellers may say to the contrary, we should scarcely
admit that he had advanced very far towards establishing his
position when he had proved the meanings ordinarily attached
in Scripture to the words ' suffer,' ' vengeance,' ' eternal,' and
' fire.' We should still feel at liberty to consider whether the
statement might not mean something more easily reconcileable
with the evidence of our senses. They are, no doubt, liable some-
times to deceive us; but we must be able to place some depen-
dence on them, or there could be no certainty about anything.
Not less violently opposed to our moral sense is the interpreta-
tion that we are asked to put upon what is said of the ' lake of
fire ; ' an interpretation, too, which directly contradicts the
uniform teaching of the whole Bible from beginning to end.
If Scripture is to be its own interpreter, there is an end of
the question. That awful, but majestic, scene represents the
final destruction of evil, and not the eternal perpetuation of it
in its most aggravated and malignant forms. There is no
' lake of fire ' in the ' new earth ; ' it has l passed away ' with
the ' first earth,' upon which it was seen. The ' ages of ages '
have elapsed, the ' smoke of their torment ' has ceased to ascend,
and in the eternal state ' there shall be no more death, neither
sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain, for
the former things have passed away.'
The two judgments by fire, the one before, the other after,
the [Millennium, are in exact accordance with the general
teaching of Scripture on the same subject. The former is
exclusively a judgment upon the living. The beast, the false
158 'the smoke of their torment.'
prophet, and their adherents, being cast into the lake of fire,
represents the destruction from off the face of the earth of all
who are found in opposition to Christ at His coming — the
gathering out of His kingdom all things that offend and them
that do iniquity, and their being cast into a furnace of fire. The
latter is the final judgment upon all evil doers, living and
dead, wicked men and wicked spirits ; together with the
termination of all evil, physical as well as moral, represented
by Death and Hades being cast into the lake of fire. In this
judgment the wicked not only perish from off the earth, but
are blotted out of creation ; they are ' destroyed soul and
body,' they ' lose themselves, 1 and perish everlastingly.
'From this stand-point we contemplate the final scene of retribution.
There is heaven and there is hell. There is eternal life and there is
eternal death. The redeemed enjoy the one : the lost are the subjects
of the other. The Book of Revelation describes the latter — " Death and
Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death." (Rev.
xx. 14.) All that has been and continued to be evil : the fallen angels
who now move in earth and air ; the spirits who are kept in chains of
darkness ; the multitudes who have died without God and without hope ;
the multitudes whom the last day will find impenitent and unholy; have
all been consigned to one common scene of punishment. According to
their deserving is their chastisement. The time for each one's suffering
over, he is wrapped in the slumber of eternal death. Gradually life
dies out in that fearful prison until unbroken silence reigns throughout
it. They who would not find life have found death. But the scene
remains for ever. As Sodom and Gomorrha have exhibited to every
succeeding generation of men the divine vengeance upon full-blown
iniquity, so will the charred and burnt-out furnace of hell afford its
eternal lesson to the intelligences of the future. As angels wing their
way from world to world: as the redeemed touch with fresh delight
their harps of gold: as new orders of spiritual life are called into
existence by the Creator's hand : so the nature and the end of sin are
always remembered in that scene where so many of the inhabitants of
heaven and earth had bid an eternal farewell to the life which is so full
of joy. That lesson of awe is read and pondered on by all. Doubtless
it will be a lesson of mercy to myriads of whom we know nought as yet.
But it will be a lesson read without the shudder of anguish. The dead
'THE SMOKE OF THEIR TORMENT.' 159
know not anything. They have drunk the -waters of Lethe, and for-
gotten long ago their misery. There is no eternal antagonism of good
and evil : no eternal jarring of the notes of praise and wailing. Evil
has died out, and with it sorrow. Throughout God's world of life all is
joy, and peace, and love.' — Rev. H. Constable.
ETERNAL EVIL.
It has been objected to this expression that it is the punish-
ment of evil, and not evil itself, that will be eternal. But
punishment is an evil, however it may be overruled for good.
Besides, one argument used to prove the certainty of endless
punishment is that the condemned will be continually sinning,
and therefore must be continually suffering. This was what
I meant by saying that, according to the popular doctrine,
' the works of the devil will never be destroyed, but a portion
of the universe be set apart for the eternal exhibition of them
in their fullest maturity ; ' to which the writer in the Bible
Treasury replies, in his usual style, 'It is a gross blunder ;
the punishment of the wicked is not the work of the devil ;
he is in the punishment himself.'
A striking illustration of the tendency of error to grow is
afforded by a theory which Mr. Waller, tutor of St. John's
Hall, Highbury, has propounded, to show the moral necessity
for eternal evil: 'An incurably evil man is an agent far too
powerful to be annihilated, if he can be employed ; ' which
he explains to mean, that the wicked will be used to tempt
other orders of beings yet to be created — the victims of their
wiles being added to the number of the condemned, and
' perhaps ' of the tempters ; so that evil will be not only
eternal, but eternally and indefinitely extending. Oh, blessed
eternity to look forward to ! It will scarcely have begun,
when the hosts of immortal beings, waging eternal war with
160 ETERNAL EVIL.
their Creator, writhing in agony tinder His mighty hand, yet
defying Him to His face, and ever encouraged by repeated
successes to fresh assaults upon His fair creation, will im-
measurably exceed in number anything of which our finite
minds can form the slightest conception. What loving heart
can fail, in view of such a prospect, to ' rejoice with joy un-
speakable and full of glory ? '
This view harmonises remarkably well with that of Presi-
dent Edwards, and other thorough-going advocates of the
popular doctrine, namely, that the sufferings of the condemned
will enhance the joy and excite the hallelujahs of the re-
deemed. For here is a prospect of ever-fresh joy and ever-
new hallelujahs opened up before them. Their love can never
grow cold, or their praises languish; they will never need to
hang their harps upon the willows, while multitudes are being
constantly added to the number of the condemned, and the
smoke of their torment ascends in ever denser and denser
volume. As the wail of despair booms more heavily through
the universe, it will only awaken louder shouts of triumph :
the responsive echoes will reverberate from one to the other
with ever-increasing power, until God's creation becomes —
oh, what? Lord, open The eyes of thy servants to see the
horror of horrors that their imagination has substituted for
the glorious future set before us in Thy Word — of a universe
reconciled to Thee, and Thyself ' all in all ' !
Many of my opponents will repudiate this view ; and
therefore, to do them the utmost justice, I quote a passage
of a very different kind from Delitzsch's ' Biblical Psychology '
(Clark's Library), which, they will readily admit, puts their
case with consummate ability : —
' If the whole of creation were one being, it would indeed have to be
perfected in such a manner as that the darkness should be in this one
nature abolished in light. But, as the entire creation is an infinite
ETERNAL EYIL. 161
number of beings, that triumph is then already perfected when those
beings which have taken their stand in the principle of wrath are
capable of nothing further in opposition to the Holy One, whose here-
ditary portion is in light, and which have become the footstool of God
and of His Christ, i.e. the dark ground on which is enhanced the glory
of the divine dominion. God is thus, moreover, "all in all." He who,
in respect of His triune nature, is Love, embraces all who have laid them-
selves open to this love with the light of His glory ; and all who have
shut their hearts to this love He encircles with the darkness and the
fire of His glory. Love has conquered. Evil is placed under bonds.
There needs not its absolute annihilation that the six days of the world's
history may close, as did that of the world's creation, with " everything
very good." . . . Everything that redeeming love repelled to self-
induration is for ever absorbed into the wrathful aspects of the glory,
and there leads a life self-consuming, and, as it were, non-existent,'
The following brief observations are submitted : —
1. 'Capable of nothing further in opposition to the Holy-
One.' — Yes; they will be capable of hating Him,
which, of all things, Love can least endure.
2. 'All [things] in all [persons].' — No ; to some He will
be only an object of terror.
3. ' He encircles with the darkness and the fire of His
glory.' — How, then, can Christ ' reconcile all things
to God ? '
4. 'Love has conquered.'— No ; it will be suffering an
eternal defeat, and be eternally avenged by the
triumph of Power.
5. 'Evil is placed under bonds.' — Not at all. It will
merely be confined — though Mr. Waller will not
even admit that — within a certain locality. And, to
compensate for the restriction, it will be allowed to
reign supreme, and to effect the highest conceivable
triumph, without let or hindrance, in its own king-
dom.
M
162 ETERNAL EVIL.
6. ' Everything very good.' — What is this but directly to
' call evil good ' ?
7. 'A life self- consuming, and, as it were, non-existent.' —
How irrepressible the moral instinct which leads him
unconsciously to acknowledge the self-contradiction
of his hypothesis ! An eternal ' self-consuming Life '
would be not ' as it were,' but really and truly ' non-
existent.' It is an inherent impossibility, as well as
in direct contradiction to God's own revelation.
To the direct Scriptural evidence already adduced against
the eternity of evil, should be added St. Paul's declaration in
1 Cor. xv. 26, ' The last enemy that shall be destroyed is
death.' Does not this imply that every enemy shall ulti-
mately be destroyed — the victory being consummated by the
destruction of death ? And how can that be true, if the
wicked are raised up to an everlasting life of sin and misery
— if sin, the great ' enemy,' is to continue for ever ? But, to
borrow the language of the late Rev. W. de Burgh : —
' We believe, and we are well assured, that the time will come when
we may traverse the whole of God's creation from the one end to the
other, and not find a trace of sin or evil — not see the curse in any form
— not hear a sigh or groan — not meet with an enemy of God ; but when
every heart that beats shall respond to His will, and every voice that
sounds shall swell the chorus of His praise.'
If we may trust the Paradise Lost, it woidd appear that
Milton was no believer in either the eternity of sin or the im-
mortality of Satan. In Book II., line 734, Sin is represented
as warning Satan and Death of
' His wrath, which one day will destroy ye both ' ;
and, a little farther on, as addressing Satan thus : —
' Before mine eyes in opposition sits
Grim Death, my son and foe, who sets them on,
And me, his parent, would full soon devour,
ETERNAL EVIL. 16,
For want of other prey, but that he knows
His end with mine involved; and knows that I
Should prove a bitter morsel and his bane,
Whenever that shall be : so Fate pronounced.
But thou, Father! I forewarn thee, shun
His deadly arrow ; neither vainly hope
To be invulnerable in those bright arms,
Though tempered heavenly ; for that mortal dint,
Save He who reigns above, none can resist.'
PS. — While these pages are passing through the press, the
June number of the Rainbow has appeared. It contains a
reply by Mr. Leonard Strong, of Torquay, to the admirable
article on immortality by Mr. Maude, of Birkenhead, which
was contained in the March number of the same magazine.
In his rejoinder, Mr. Maude makes the following important
remarks : —
' Mr. Strong thinks it is to be regretted that when I was led to bring
the popular belief in the eternal duration of evil to the test of Scripture,
I did not allow my thoughts to carry me back a little further, namely,
to the original permission of evil ; and endeavour to fathom that mystery
also. To this it might suffice to reply that, whereas the ' mystery ' in
the one case is real, in the other it is only suppositive. That evil does
actually exist is a fact which, however mysterious, cannot be questioned ;
but that it must and will necessarily exist to all eternity, is an inference
which the Scriptures, as I read them, in nowise sanction. The objection,
nevertheless, is a plausible oue, and as it has been urged by much greater
men than Mr. Strong, it maybe worth while to consider it for a moment.
Stated in the briefest form, it stands thus : " Seeing that God's goodness
does permit so much evil to exist at present, may it not also permit still
greater evil to exist through eternal ages ?" I answer, that the premiss
is by no means equal to the conclusion. Because God, not only without
impeachment, but to the transcendent manifestation, of His divine good-
ness, permitted His only begotten Son to endure the temporary agony of
the cross, it by no means follows that His goodness would have remained
unimpeachable had He (korresco referens) permitted the Son of His love
to endure that agony to all eternity ! As a means to an end, the suffer-
ings of Christ were not only consistent with, but most gloriously inani-
m2
164 ETERNAL EYIL.
fested, the Divine wisdom and love ; and, in like manner, the temporal
existence of evil, also as a means to an end, is quite consistent with those
divine attributes ; whereas its supposed eternal existence — which would
make it an end as well as a means — cannot possibly be shown to be so.
I do not, of course, intend to say that the recognition of its non-eternity
completely solves the original mystery of the existence of evil ; but I do
unhesitatingly assert that it at least plucks the heart out of it. For, not
only does it eliminate the portentous element of infinity, but it at the
same time reduces it, in a great measure, from a moral to an intellectual
difficulty. In a word, evil is to be regarded not as an end, but as the
means employed by God for the attainment of an end, and only by a per-
fect acquaintance with the greatness and blessedness of that end can we
justly estimate the wisdom and fitness of the means employed. It is no
reflection on the skill of the human architect of some magnificent build-
ing, that during its erection he should find it expedient to use an
unsightly scaffolding ; but if, when the building was completed, it were
found impossible to dispense with the scaffolding, would it not remain a
monument of the architect's incapacity? In like manner, while the
temporary permission of evil is at least conceivable, its supposed eternal
existence is an insoluble problem.'
******
' As regards my opponent's mode of dealing with those grand passages
whi<*hi so plainly assert the final deliverance of God's creation from all
sin and 6orrow, the matter simply amounts to this : that while such texts
as appear to teach the hideous dogma of eternal torment are to be inter-
preted in the largest, most literal, and most offensive sense ; such texts
as, quite as strongly, teach this worthy and blessed consummation of the
Creator's work, are to be explained, softened down, frittered away, lest,
haply, they should be found to quench the fiery glories of an eternal
hell. I must content myself with noticing only one specimen of Mr.
Strong's exegesis, and its results. In reference to the sublime declara-
tion of Rev. xxi. 1-5, that, in the new heavens and new earth, there
shall be "no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there
be any more pain (nor ' curse,' xxii. 3), because the former things have
passed away, and all things are made new," he asserts that, while this
will be true as far as the redeemed are concerned, the lost are neverthe-
less to be consigned to eternal torments in the lake of fire " in the centre
of this glebe." In other words, while the text distinctly declares that,
in the "new earth," there shall be no more death, Mr. Strong asserts
that within it death, in its most terrific form, shall eternally reign ;
while the text declares that there shall be no more pain. Mr. Strong
ETERNAL EVIL. 165
holds that there will be eternal torment ; and while the promise of the
text is that there shall be " neither sorrow nor crying," Mr. Strong
presumptuously asserts that there shall be unending "weeping, and
wailing, and gnashing of teeth." Oh, but all this is to be covered up,
and kept decently out of sight! As the murderer hides away the
damning evidence of his guilt, so God is to hide away the terrible results
of His sublime experiment in moral government from the eyes of His
shuddering universe. But no, even this miserable relief cannot be con-
ceded ; for if in every other particular the language of Kev. xiv. 10, 11,
is to be literally interpreted, so also must this, that those cast into the
lake of fire are to be tormented for ever and ever " in the presence of the
holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb." Never can the eyes of
the redeemed be averted from the spectacle of their appalling misery ;
never shall the ears of the redeemed be closed to the hearing of their
lamentable groans : the smoke of their torment will for ever and ever
darken the new heavens, and their yells of agony to all eternity mingle
with the music of celestial harps. Can it be true ? And if it be, is not
this a heaven only less to be dreaded than the fiery pit itself? But
enough. With the moral argument Mr. Strong, very prudently, will
have nothing to do. He simply casts dust into the air, and cries out —
" The flesh ! The flesh !" That is to say, in plain language, he d;ires
not interrogate that moral consciousness — those innate convictions of
truth and righteousness — which God (not the devil, as my opponent
seems to imagine) has implanted in his spirit ; because he knows what
the response would surely be. Yet let him remember that the very
apostle whose words he quotes, was not afraid to make such an appeal
(Rom. iii. 4-6); and that when Abraham, in his sublime expostulation
in behalf of the righteous inhabitants of Sodom, took upon himself to
say to the Almighty, " That be far from Thee to do after this manner,
Shall not the judge of all the earth do right V the patriarch's appeal to
his own moral consciousness was not only allowed by the Lord, but re-
ceived from Him the most gracious answer.'
Though somewhat out of place here, I cannot forbear trans-
cribing, without undertaking absolutely to endorse, the follow-
ing thoughtful observations, from the same paper, on a very-
difficult branch of the subject: —
' The next point which it seems well to notice, is Mr. Strong's un-
hesitating assertion, " That death nowhere in the word of God means non-
existence, but everywhere. means a certain condition of existence." This
166 ETERNAL EYIL.
somewhat bold statement raises the important and long-debated ques-
tion, " What was the death threatened to and incurred by Adam ? " In
proceeding to answer it, I must first enquire, Whence was the literal
and proper idea of death originally derived ? Beyond all doubt, it was
from the death of the lower animals. Science teaches us that many ages
before the appearing of man upon this planet, death was the condition
of animal existence, and the death of the inferior animals, a phenomenon
with which he was acquainted, was the only kind of death of which
Adam could have any conception. When, therefore, he was told, "In
the day that thou eatest of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,
dying thou shalt die," he must necessarily have understood the punish-
ment threatened to be death such as befell the lower animals ; in other
words, the extinction of his creaturely existence ; and if this be not what
was really intended, then the terms of the threatening were calculated
only to deceive him — a supposition altogether repugnant to our ideas of
the Divine veracity and benevolence. The death, therefore, which Adam
was threatened with, in ease of disobedience, and which be actually in-
curred, was death in the proper and ordinary acceptation of the word ;
that is, the absolute termination of that creaturely existence which God,
at his creation, had conferred upon him. The only distinction between
death in the case of a man, and death in the case of the mere animal,
being that, while the animal dies once for all, the death of the body in-
volving the termination of its existence, man dies by a double death, the
first affecting only the body, but the second involving the extinction of
the entire being. And this distinction, which, important as it is, does
not at all affect the true definition of death, is only in necessary accord-
ance with the peculiar constitution of man's nature. Had man possessed
a merely animal existence, death would have been to him precisely what
it is to any of the lower animals ; but inasmuch as his nature was
created tripartite, consisting of body, soul, and spirit (1 Thess. v. 23);
and not, like the lower animals, duplex, consisting of soul and body
(Gen. i. 30, margin), it follows of necessity that death in his case, in
order to be final and entire, involves, not only that separation of the
soul from the body, which constitutes death in the mere animal, but also
the further separation of the soul from the spirit,* which latter might,
* ' The soul, which man has in common with the brute, would perish
with the body, but for the spirit. It is the spirit which sustains the
soul's consciousness after death, and supported by it, it arrests that dis-
solution to which it would otherwise tend.' — Heard's Tripartite Nature
of Man, p. 177.
ETERNAL EVIL. 167
of course, as in fact it does, constitute a subsequent stage in the process
of his dissolution.'
******
' Further on, Mr. Strong writes, " Our Lord, when He died under
judgment and wrath for our sins, was verily dead, but never out of exist-
ence (of course I mean as man)." I am not prepared to grant this in
the sense intended. We stand here on the brink of a great and divine
mystery. If the punishment threatened to, and incurred by, Adam was,
as I have shown, the termination of his existence as a human being, and
if that punishment was really borne by Christ, then I see not how we are
to escape the conclusion that the death of Christ involved nothing less
than the separation ( for how long or how short a time I venture not to
enquire) of His human soul from His human spirit, as well as of both
of these from His human body.* In the light of this thought how
significant and definite becomes the Messianic language of the Psalms.
" I am counted with them that go down into the pit ; I am as a man
that hath no strength ; free among the dead, like the slain that lie in
the grave, whom Thou rememberest no more, and they are cut off by Thy
hand. Thou hast laid me in the lowest pit, in darkness, in the deeps.
Thy wrath lieth hard upon me, and Thou hast afflicted me with all Thy
waves." (Ps. lxxxviii. 4-7.) " Save me, God, for the waters are
come in unto my soul. I sink in deep mire, where there is no standing ;
I am come into deep waters, where the floods overflow me
Deliver me out of the mire, and let me not sink ; let me be delivered
from them that hate me, and out of the deep waters. Let not the
waterflood overflow me, neither let the deep swallow me up, and let not
the pit shut her mouth upon me." (Ps. lxix. 1, 2, 14, 15.) So, in the
gospels : "And He took with Him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee,
and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then said He unto them,
My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death ; tarry ye here, and
watch with Me. And He went a little farther, and prayed, saying,
My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me ; nevertheless,
not as I will, but as Thou wilt And being in an agony,
He prayed more earnestly, and His sweat was as it were great drops of
blood falling down to the ground." (Matt. xxvi. 37-39 ; Luke xxii. 44.)
In connection with these solemn passages, Heb. v. 7, demands our
* The great German commentator Oldshauscn not only holds that,
there was such a separation of our Lord's soul and spirit, but that they
were only reunited in the resurrection. See Biblical Commentary on the
Gospels.
168 ETERNAL EVIL.
earnest attention : " Who, in the days of His flesh, when he had offered
up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto Him that
was able to save Him out of death (Jk Qavarov), and was heard in that
He feared." What means this strange and awful agony? What object
had these prayers and supplications? That Christ so prayed to be
delivered from the mere act of physical death, which many a martyr has
borne with unflinching fortitude, cannot be supposed. These passages
taken together, and considered in connection with the divine personality
of the Lord Jesus, convey the idea of an anguish such as no mere man
ever yet endured, and such as into the heart of any mere man it has
never yet entered thoroughly to comprehend. And while it is easy and
orthodox to say that it was the hiding of His Father's countenance which
thus appalled Him, it is plain from the last quoted passage that what
Christ really prayed to be saved out of was death, not simply wrath :
yet not the death of the body alone, for in that, if He prayed concerning
it, He was not heard. But it may be said if this be indeed the sense in
which we are to understand the nature of Christ's atoning death; if His
humanity was thus — even for a moment — utterly dissolved and broken
Tip ; then, awful thought! Christ has perished, His personal identity has
come to an end, and the dark waters of death have indeed gone over His
soul ! No : for here the grand fundamental doctrine of the incarnation
comes in. That this must indeed have been the case had Christ been a
mere man is perfectly true ; but, be it ever remembered, He was God as
well as man ; the personality appertained to the Divine nature, not to
the human, and, therefore, though the union between the elements —
body, soul, and spirit — of His most true humanity was suspended, the
union between each one of those elements and His divine nature never
was, the divine nature constituting a still abiding, all comprehending
element, in which they were held together, and in which they were re-
united for ever. And thus, in a far deeper and truer sense than Mr.
Strong contemplates, was the soul-man brought to nought in the death
of Christ, and we are new created, begotten again into a new life by the
resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.'
MORAL EFFECTS OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE
UPON CHRISTIANS.
' Even on the best of men its influence has always been heart-harden-
ing. " The Fathers " must have been petrified before they could teach
that "infants departing from the body without baptism are certainly in
MORAL EFFECTS OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE. 169
damnation ; " * that " the bliss of the saved will be greatly enhanced by
their being permitted to gaze upon the punishment of the wicked ;" f
and that " the elect, while they see the unspeakable sufferings of the
ungodly, intoxicated with joy, will thank God for their own salvation." \
And what an indurating process must have gone on, before, in later
days, so good a man as Dr. Hopkins could have brought himself, in
common with thousands of others, to affirm that " should eternal punish-
ment cease, and the fire (of hell) be extinguished, it would in great
measure obscure the light of heaven, and put an end to a great part of
the happiness and glory of the blessed ; " § or before, in our own, a
Christian minister, editing a magazine devoted to the promotion of
Christian union and benevolent effort, could bring himself to say that
" the tender mercies of those who woidd throw- down some of the pave-
ment of heaven to cover over the pit of hell are cruel (to the saved !) "
' It seems impossible that any divine truth could ever occasion a state
of mind so utterly unchristian as is indicated in sentiments like these.
******
' Intolerance in relation to this subject can, in a free country like our
own, scarcely go farther than it has done, since it has issued in a terror-
ism so abject, that the lips of thousands are now sealed by the mere fear
of consequences. Well do those who have evoked this demon know,
that few men can afford to discuss, and that most men will dread to
examine, a topic so fenced by social penalties as is the doctrine under
consideration. Mr. Barlow says, " I have scarcely ever seen a clergy-
man who could hear eternal punishment doubted without complimenting
his opponent as an infidel or an atheist." Surely this temper of mind,
utterly unchristian as it is, indicates a secret consciousness that the
point in question can only retain its hold on men by the force of con-
stant and vehement assertion.
' The practical result of such pressure may be seen in a state of things
described by John Foster as existing even in his day, but which since
then has become so common as scarcely to excite notice. He says, " A
number, not large, but of great piety and intelligence, of ministers
within my acquaintance have been disbelievers of the doctrine of eternal
punishment ; at the same time, not feeling themselves imperatively called
upon to make a public disavowal, they content themselves with employ-
ing in their ministrations strong general terms in denouncing the doom
of impenitent sinners." Recent avowals made in more than one of our
most orthodox religious magazines are equally painful.
* Augustine. f Aquinas.
{ Peter Lombard. § Works, ii. 457, 458.
170 MORAL EFFECTS OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE.
' Tried, therefore, by the tone of mind it has fostered, and by the per-
versions of Scripture to which the necessity for defending it has given
rise, no less than by its effects on the community at large, the doctrine
fails to establish its divinity — the tree does not bring forth good fruit.
******
' But a third test may be applied. All truth, before it can be influ-
ential, must be realized. But this doctrine is, from its very nature, and
by the admission of its warmest defenders, incapable of being realized.
' Dr. Archer Butler does not scruple to say, that " were it possible for
man's imagination to conceive the horrors of such a doom, all reasoning
about it were at an end ; it would scorch and wither all the powers of
human thought. Human life were at a stand, could these things be
really felt as they deserve. It is God's mercy," he adds, " that we can
believe what adequately to conceive of were death." Surely the question
may be put, Is it reasonable to suppose that God calls upon us to
believe (even if it were possible to do so) anything which, if realized
in the miud, would produce death or madness, and which, if true,
" ought to separate the two sexes in monasteries and nunneries, so that
at all events the accursed race should increase no more ? "' — Tracts for
Thoughtful Christians. By Henry Dunn.
As a specimen of the uncharitable dogmatism referred to
above, take the following extract from a recent tract by ' An
Old Soldier'—
' But how any clergyman of the Church of England, holding such
views, can stand up before God and man and unhesitatingly lead his
congregation in repeating the portions of the three Creeds above referred
to, and then teach another gospel, is both lamentable and inexplicable.'
Observe, first, how he denounces those who differ from his
interpretation of Scripture on future punishment, as teaching
' another gospel ; ' which, according to St. Paul, renders any-
one 'accursed.' And, secondly, how he assumes that every-
one must necessarily understand the creeds in the same sense
that he does ; although the highest ecclesiastical court in this
realm has formally condemned that assumption, and decided
that the language is ambiguous.
So, another anonymous writer asks, 'How can Mr. Minton
pray every Sunday, " From Thy wrath, and from everlasting
MORAL EFFECTS OF THE POPULAR DOCTRINE. 171
damnation, good Lord deliver us," when he believes damnation
is not everlasting ? ' The answer to which is, that damnation,
like the ' eternal fire ' that destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah,
is everlasting in its effects ; the condemned will ' perish ever-
lastingly.'
THE DIVINE CHARACTER AND THE HUMAN
CONSCIENCE.
Some of our opponents express themselves rather strongly
upon this point. Take the following, from Mr. Grant : —
' I speak with a thorough conviction of the truth of what I say, when
I affirm that those who have come to the conclusion that future punish-
ments will not be eternal, do assume, in almost every instance, that
conclusion, not from the statements of Scripture, but from the substitu-
tion of their own feelings for what the law and testimony say on the
subject. Instead of submitting with humility to the utterances of the
Word of God, in relation to the destiny and duration of the wicked
in the world to come, and bringing their own feelings into subjection to
the volume of inspiration, they first of all resign themselves to the
dictates of their own feelings, and then so interpret the holy oracles as
to make them accord with the conclusions to which they have come.
They presumptuously erect themselves into judges, guided only by their
own feelings, as to what God may or may not do in His dealings, in a
future state, with those who have lived and died in their sins ; and then
resolutely refuse to listen to the plain teachings of the Bible on the
subject. They thus deliberately incur the awful guilt of deciding what
must be the principles on which God will administer His moral govern-
ment, so far as relates to the wicked, in that state of being which succeeds
the present. This is practically setting themselves up as above God —
as being wiser than God. They are, in effect, to be— not Jehovah- — the
arbiters of the destiny of the ungodly in the world to come.'
Yet this is the writer who complains that I show no
' charity ' towards my opponents, that I ' make no allowance
for them,' and ' load them with condemnation ; ' charges which
are as purely fictitious as the opening statement in the pre-
ceding paragraph.
172 THE DIVINE CHARACTER
In a similar strain writes an excellent clergyman, whose
name I withhold from personal regard : —
' We are at God's bar, and not God at our bar. Men talk as if they
must needs vindicate and clear the character of God from the suspicion
cast on it by His poor erring short-sighted creatures. Men talk as if
the Eternal Jehovah were to be summoned to the judgment bar of their
finite consciousness in order to be tried on these questions, Why was sin
permitted? How can its existence be consistent with love? must there
not be an end to the punishment even of the lost ? And they talk as if
they would wish to dismiss Jehovah from their judgment bar, with a
certificate of His character being freed from suspicion. proud man,
when wilt thou learn to beware instead of judging? when wilt thou
learn that thou must stand before the bar of God, and not venture in
thy arrogance to summon God to the bar of thy judgment? when wilt
thou learn to submit thy reason to Omniscient love, and in child-like
faith and implicit trust rest on Him who is too wise to err and too good
to be unkind, and who teaches respecting all mysteries, " What I do,
thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter."'
All this is merely an unworthy caricaturing of those who
seek to justify the ways of God to man, and remove the veil
which human infirmity and Satanic craft have cast over the
revelation that He has been pleased to make of His own
righteousness and love. The fallacy of it will become ap-
parent if we apply such reasoning to another of the Divine
attributes — that of Truth. Suppose some one admitted the
Bible to be the Word of God, but at the same time avowed
that he had no confidence in either its threatenings or its
promises, because, although God was perfect truth and it was
impossible for Him to lie, yet our finite minds were incom-
petent to judge what course of action was consistent or in-
consistent with truth in Him. If His promises were to fail, it
might seem like lying, according to the ' finite consciousness '
of us ' poor erring short-sighted creatures ; ' and, no doubt,
for us to beguile one another by holding out deceptive
allurements would be highly immoral. But who would dare
AND THE HUMAN CONSCIENCE. 173
to incur ' the awful guilt of deciding what must be the prin-
ciples on which God will administer His moral government ? '
Wilt thou ' venture in thy arrogance to summon God to the
bar of thy judgment,' and decide that He must necessarily
keep His word, on pain of being made a liar ? ' O proud
man, when wilt thou learn to beware, instead of judging?'
Would not our opponents think that such reasoning was in
the highest degree dishonouring to God's character, and that
it turned His revelation of Himself into a mockery ? Would
they not endeavour to ' vindicate and clear the character of
God from the suspicion cast on it by His poor erring short-
sighted creatures,' and, as far as reason and argument could
do it, ' wish to dismiss Jehovah from their judgment bar with
a certificate of His character being free from suspicion ' ?
Would they not urge that any revelation of Himself whicn
God is pleased to make to us can only be addressed to
' our ideas,' and that if we are unable to form any opinion,
from those ideas, of what He will or will not do, in con-
secpience of such revelation, it cannot be of the slightest use
to us ?
Then why do they denounce us for making the same reply
to them ? We say that ' God is not unrighteous ' to keep any
of His creatures alive for ever in a state of hopeless misery.
The whole Bible declares that He will do no such thing ; and
even we, ' short-sighted ' as we are, can yet see how utterly
inconsistent it would be with all that He Himself has revealed
of His own justice and love. We are quite willing to weigh
any arguments that may be brought against either of these
positions ; but when our brethren call us ' proud,' and accuse
us of ' awful guilt,' ' apostacy,' ' infidelity,' and ' blasphemy,'
because we maintain them, they do us a grievous wrong and
sin against Christ.
Let it be observed too, in this connection, that the popular
174 THE DIVINE CHARACTER
argument, derived from our alleged absolute inability to form
the least idea as to what would or would not be an act of love
or justice in the Divine Being, deprives the Gospel of all its
power. For that power consists in the revelation which it
makes of God's righteous love ; not merely by a miraculously
attested declaration of it, but by such a manifestation of it as is
calculated to reach the human heart and conscience, and make
us love Him whom we see to have first loved us. But if our
moral incapacity to apprehend such matters be as complete as
some of our opponents contend, there is nothing left in us to
which the Gospel can appeal. Besides, St, John tells us that
God's love is begotten in those who are born of Him, so that,
whatever may be thought of the unregenerate, it is hard to
believe that God's own children can understand nothing what-
ever of the ' Divine nature,' of which they themselves are
made ' partakers.'
The following observations of Mr. Birks may be read with
profit : —
' But if the thought would revolt us in the dealings of an earthly ruler,
what is there, in the Almighty Power of God, to erase those moral
outlines, which His own hand has engraven upon the consciences of
men ? " Far be it from God that He should do wickedness, and from
the Almighty that He should commit iniquity." '
And again —
' In this case the sin of the Pharisees, with respect to the ceremonies
of the law, has been transferred to the deeper mysteries of the Gospel ;
and heavy burdens, grievous to be borne, have been laid upon the natural
conscience, which the imposers have not cared to lighten with one of
their fingers. A strange notion seems almost to have been entertained,
that faith was magnified, in proportion as the truths of revelation were
presented in a shape repulsive to the moral instincts of thoughtful men.
When conscience has been disposed to revolt against the burden, it has
been sought to silence it by an appeal to the authority of the Bible,
without any answering efforts to enlighten it on the ways of Divine
Providence. The great enemy of souls has seized the advantage given
him by a misdirected championship of truth.'
AND THE HUMAN CONSCIENCE. 175
And again —
' Now it is not enough to say that the facts are revealed, and that
God is just and holy, good and wise, and therefore all farther inquiry
is presumptuous and dangerous. The conscience of man is too mighty
a power to be set at rest by theological evasions. We may not, without
folly, expect in this life to see all the reasons of the Divine counsels :
but when we build up laboriously a human system on the basis of
revealed facts, we are bound to inquire that the results shall not clash
violently with the consenting voice of Scripture and reason, concerning
the fundamental attributes of the Most High. We are not at liberty to
call that conduct justice and wisdom in the Almighty, which we should
charge with folly or cruelty in a human governor, nor to silence doubts
which may have arisen from our own unskilful handling of the Word of
Life, by a bare appeal to the Divine Sovereignty, as if the Most High
were exalted above those eternal laws of justice and goodness which are
binding on all the reasonable creatures He has made. This is nothing
else than that sin of accepting persons, which the God of truth and
holiness has so sternly and repeatedly condemned. Such erring advo-
cates of Divine truth, however sincere in their mischievous course, must
expect to hear from Him the reproof which Job addressed to his friends
— "Will ye speak wickedly for God? and talk deceitfully for Him?
Will ye accept His person? Will ye contend for God? Is it good that
He should search you out? He will surely reprove you, if ye do secretly
accept persons." ' — Difficulties of Belief.
I am not claiming Mr. Birks as an advocate of my view ;
but the principles, so forcibly expressed above, are the strongest
possible condemnation of the popular doctrine.
The remarks of another writer, also differing (apparently)
from my conclusion, are well worthy of consideration : —
' If after a candid examination of Scripture, we remain in doubt
whether or not the old dogmatic position is untenable, we ought carefully
to weigh the arguments which proceed on moral and intellectual grounds,
and to seek in them the supplementary aid we need. It can scarcely be
denied, indeed some of the most strenuous maintainers of the dogma of
an everlasting hell have admitted, that the dogma strains our faith in
God to the utmost, and is quite at variance with what the sense of
fitness, order, and justice demands. Sin and disorder may prevail
largely in this temporary and transition state, but reason and piety bid
us cherish the expectation that in the future and eternal state, sin and
176 THE DIVINE CHARACTER
disorder will be alleviated, and at length made to cease. To imagine
(without necessity laid upon us by perspicuous revelation) the imper-
fections, iniquities, wrongs, and woes of the present life, carried onward,
aggravated, and immortalised, is to indulge in conjectures which border
on blasphemy, which double most difficulties, relieve none, and go far to
render faith in the High and Holy One an impossibility.
' If God is in truth our Almighty Creator, how can there be in us,
His creatures, moral disorders which He will never be able to rectify or
subdue ? The resistance to the Divine will which the eternity of penal
sufferings implies, is no limited or temporary resistance, but an unlimited,
infinite resistance, which baffles all the resources of Omnipotence, and
leaves the Creator no choice, but to smite and harass in vindictive anger,
the creatures He has tried in vain to conquer. For we must bear in
mind, that unless Christianity is a cunningly devised fable, the Almighty
has taken the field against moral evil, and declared Himself to be its
eternal unchanging foe. He has shown that there is nothing so truly
opposed to His nature, nothing which He is so determined to overcome,
as sin ; but an everlasting hell, crowded with hosts of tortured sinners,
would be an everlasting witness that He is unable to effect His purpose,
and that, in spite of His utmost efforts, sin will hold its own. If
redemption, when rightly understood, attests the hatefulness, does it not
also, when rightly understood, predict the ultimate conquest of human
sin? Has perfect wisdom united to Omnipotence, employed means
so costly, to win a final residt of doubtful victory, and incomplete
success ?
******
' These are questions which the maintainers of the traditionary dogma
dare not face. They take refuge in emphatic avowals of human igno-
rance, and against appeals to reason, conscience, and the broad features
of God's revealed character, they adopt a tone of protest aud rebuke
which there is nothing to justify or excuse. It is easy to exclaim,
" Who are we that we should ask whether this or that is consistent
with the wisdom, the justice, or the love of God ? We, who take these
liberties with the attributes of God, who are we but criminals ? What
right have we to murmur against our Lord, accusing His justice or mercy
in punishing?" We can, perhaps, imagine circumstances in which
language of this kind might be applicable. Hopeless, never ending
misery for the lost, might have been revealed so distinctly and in-
dubitably, as to make objections on moral grounds defiant and pre-
sumptuous. But it has not been so revealed, and, therefore, objections
on moral grounds have a claim to a patient hearing, and are, in fact, a
AND THE nUMAN CONSCIENCE. 177
part of the evidence on which our conclusions must be built. They are
not murmurings against our God, but against misapprehensions about
God ; they do not accuse His justice or mercy, but vindicate His justice
and mercy against the defamations of human systems and errors. And
no reasonable man, unfettered by the requirements of a theory, will
venture to affirm that, because we are criminals, we have lost our moral
nature, and .are incapacitated from estimating the justice or injustice of
our sentence.
******
' The discretion which shuns being " wise above what is written," has
been grievously violated, and with no good results, in proclaiming an
eternity of future penalties. The fear of an eternal hell has not pre-
served the world from sin, and made men just, and temperate and holy,
in a sufficient degree to encourage us to cling to it as more effective than
the fear of a certain, righteous, retribution. The sense of the heinous-
ness of sin is not deepened in sane minds by denouncing against sin an
unspeakably awful vengeance, repugnant alike to God's character, and
man's conceptions of justice and mercy. What is thought to be unjust
and cruel soon ceases to be dreaded, and becomes practically impotent
for the purposes of restraint. The most persistent assertions will not
make efficient, threatenings which men do not in their hearts believe an
Almighty, redeeming, and gracious God will execute. The very awful -
ness of the penalty discredits its reality; belief in a future retribution
of any kind is weakened ; and moral influence is lost, just in proportion
as an eternity of torment is proclaimed. Unless our moral and intel-
lectual constitution is changed — unless the broad features of justice and
love which mark God's revelation in Christ Jesus our Saviour are swept
away, sound and educated minds will shrink from the faith that endless
misery is the certain doom of sinners. Whatever the lips may profess,
the heart and intellect will revolt ; doubts, which at least seem to rest
on the surest moral and intellectual grounds, will intrude themselves,
and in the presence of these the threatened penalty can have but slight
deterring power. It has, I am aware, been suggested that such doubts
have their source in a perversely rebellious heart, and in the secret
dreads of an accusing conscience. The suggestion is uncharitable and
insolent. The sentiments which Christianity itself inspires take up and
intensify all the reasons which the understanding and natural affections
set in array against the doctrino of endless life in endless pain. Men
who love in their inmost hearts the God whose moral glory shines in
the character of the Lord Jesus Christ, find in the strength of their love,
the measure of their repugnance to the hideous thought, that vast
N
178 THE DIVINE CHARACTER, ETC.
multitudes of their fellow-creatures are to mourn for ever, beneath the
merciless abandonment, or the still more merciless visitations, of their
Creator and Kedeemer. And a doctrine which cannot establish itself in
the minds of numbers of cultivated, earnest, and pious men, is not likely
to be so taught or so received as to be practically a restraint on the
ignorant, the careless, and the ungodly. A fictitious, easy way of escape
is contrived against a danger which is too frightful to be other than
fictitious, and the consequence is that the standard of holiness is lowered,
and the requirements of the Gospel pared down, to meet the supposition
that Christians of frivolous and unfaithful, though not of scandalously
sinful lives, are in peril of sinking into the agonies of utterly hopeless
damnation. Whatever our theories may be, we dare not unflinchingly avow
that such persons have, by missing salvation, fallen within the grasp of
the horrible, everlasting alternative — and so, we talk as if salvation were
an arbitrary and sudden act of mercy — we use freely the language of
hope, and practically, though not intentionally, build each other up in
the delusion that Christ came to save us in our sins, and not to cleanse
us from our sins. Observation and experience bear no doubtful witness
that this is one evil into which the commonly professed belief in the
everlasting misery of the lost has betrayed us.' — Rev. J. Barton.
THE DESERT OF SIN.
What a contrast between the unnatural exaggerated represen-
tation of Sin's desert, given by popular theology, and the
plain, simple, intelligible, yet tremendous declaration of God's
word — ' The soul that sinneth, it shall die ! ' How the one
violates all our moral instincts ; how the other commends
itself to the universal conscience of mankind ! How impos-
sible really to feel that the sins of a finite being during a
limited period can deserve an eternity of suffering; how easy
to recognise ' the judgment of God, that they which commit
such things are worthy of death ! '
Every moral creature is indebted solely to the good plea-
sure of God for calling him into existence, and is dependent
upon Him each moment for the continuance of his life. If,
therefore, he refuses to use his life in his Maker's service, is it
TIIE DESERT OF SIN. 179
likely that he will be allowed to retain possession of it? Life
is the all-comprehensive trust committed to him by the Cre-
ator. If he abuses it, the trust is withdrawn. What can be
more righteous, more God-like? What can be farther re-
moved at once from weakness or from cruelty ? How per-
fectly every object is attained by this act of justice ! What
possible gain could accrue from leaving him in possession of
the life that he has misused, and allowing him to continue in
sin and misery for ever ? Absolutely none. While the loss
would be enormous ; for it would keep the universe in eternal
discord.
What amount of suffering the sinner may have to undergo
while life remains to him, is another question. On that point
we only know, and only need to know, that in every case the
stripes Avill be exactly proportioned to the heinousness of the
offence, which the Judge of all the earth is alone competent
to estimate. When, however, God resolves to spare the rebel
no longer, but to inflict upon him the extreme penalty of the
law, the righteousness of the sentence is patent to all. The
conscience of the universe is satisfied, and all creation can say
— Amen.
THE DOOM OF JUDAS.
The following remarks occurred in a leading article of the
Rock : —
' Again, Mr. Minton's theory of destruction reduces the Divine threat-
enings to a sinner to the very extreme of absurdity, as in the case of the
sinner -whose future doom will be so intolerable that it would have been
better for him if he had not been born. (See Matt. xxvi. 24.) This
single text goes to the very root of the whole question, and utterly anni-
hilates Mr. Minton's annihilation theory. In that solemn and awful
declaration two alternative conditions were present to the mind of our
blessed Redeemer— a condition of continued existence after aeath in tor-
ment, and a condition of non-existence before the life of the traitor Judas
n2
180 THE DOOM OF JODAS.
began. Here our Lord pointedly and positively contrasts the terrors
and the torments that await Judas in a future state of suffering with
the "better" lot that would have been his had he never been born — that
is, to put it briefly, our Lord contrasts the existence of the wicked in a
future state with their non-existence before their birth, and thus totidem
verbis not only asserts what Mr. Minton denies, the continued existence
of the wicked in a future state, but shows it forth in the strongest of all
terms by contrasting it expressly with its opposite — non-existence. If a
painter (who is presumed to be the best judge of colours) tells us to use
white as a colour, and points to it expressly as the very opposite of
black, by way of contrast, what are we to think of the amateur who
persists in advising us to use black because white is a colour he cannot
reconcile to his reason and notion of art? Equally absurd, we contend,
is Mr. Minton's theory in the case of Judas, if he will persist in inter-
preting future pimiskment as non-existence, which punishment our Lord
Himself not only asserts to be existence, but actually contrasts with
non-existence.'
Observe, first, how the writer misrepresents my view of
future punishment to be mere 'non-existence.'* Secondly,
how he begs the whole question, as to wliat was ' present to the
mind of our blessed Redeemer.' Thirdly, how entirely his
own statement of it would fail to touch the question whether
the ' continued existence after death in torment ' was to be
endless or not. Fourthly, how he assumes that anyone who
declines to accept his dictum as to what was present to our
Lord's mind, when He darkly but awfully spoke of some ter-
rible doom awaiting the traitor, can only be influenced to act
with such ' absurd ' perverseness, by not being able to ' recon-
cile it Avith his reason.' And lastly, how triumphantly he
believes himself to have made out by such a chain of reason-
ing that ' this passage goes to the root of the whole question,' —
which it literally does not touch.
* Similarly the editor of the Achill Herald confounds everlasting
destruction with disbelief in any future state. ' St. Paul does indeed
mention the doctrine of annihilation, but only to condemn it. There
were some who used it to make themselves easy in the indulgence of
their lusts. They said, " Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die." '
THE DOOM OF JUDAS. 181
It is certainly fatal to Universalism, even on Mr. Birks'
ingenious view of the word ' good.' But upon Destructionism
it has absolutely no bearing whatever ; unless the editor
maintains that Judas enjoyed during his lifetime such a won-
derful amount of happiness, that neither the remorse which
drove him to suicide, nor any mental anguish that he has
since undergone, nor any suffering he may yet have to endure,
if it be short of endless suffering, nor all of them together,
could so overbalance it, that it would have been better for him
never to have been born.
The above extract, if thoroughly digested, may be of inva-
luable service to those who are apt to be frightened by bold
assertion, and to suppose that where there is so much smoke
there must be some fire. It will be of special use in reading
Mr. Grant's book.
PLATO AND THE NEW TESTAMENT.
' We have brought forward a variety of phrases from the New Testa-
ment. We have now to consider the mighty bearing on their meaning
of the fact that this New Testament is written in the Greek tongue. In
that tongue all these phrases are to be found. Before the Gospel was
preached, their meaning was fully established in the cultivated and the
common mind of the human race. What is more — they were all in
common use, and applied to, and their sense established, with reference
to this very point now under discussion. The immortality of the soul
was not a question for Jewish and Christian thought alone ; it was the
question of questions for the universal human mind. In particular it
was the question of questions in the various schools of Grecian Philo-
sophy. One of the noblest specimens of human reasoning, building its
lofty superstructure on uncertain data, that has ever charmed, exalted,
and, for our part we must add, bewildered the human intellect, is found
in the dying discourse of Socrates to his friends, handed down to a
deathless fame in the "Phsedo" of Plato. Its object was to prove the
immortality of the soul — that it could never cease to be — that through
whatever changes it might pass, whatever pollutions it might suffer,
whatever fearful torments it might endure, there was the deathless
182 PLATO AND THE NEW TESTAMENT.
principle of the human soul which asserted an eternal life and utterly
refused to die. It could never be, according to Plato, a thing of yester-
day, an existence of the past hut not of the present, a figure once jotted
down in the book of life and then blotted out of it for ever. In what
terms is the denial of its mortality conveyed? In the very terms in
which the punishment of the wicked is asserted in the New Testament.
Where this latter says the soul shall die, Plato says it shall not die ;
where this latter says it shall be destroyed, Plato says it shall not be
destroyed ; where this latter says it shall perish and suffer corruption,
Plato says it shall not perish, and is incorruptible. The phrases are
the very same, only that what Plato denies of all souls alike, the New
Testament asserts of some of the souls of men. But the discussion of
the question was not confined to the school of Plato or to his times.
Every school of philosophy took it up, whether to confirm Plato's view,
or to deny it, or to heap ridicule upon it. All the phrases we have been
discussing from the New Testament had been explained, turned over and
over, handled with all the power of the masters of language, presented
in every phase, so that of their sense there could be no doubt, nor could
there be anyone ignorant of their sense, before Jesus spoke, or an Evan-
gelist or Apostle wrote. The subject had not died out before the days
of Christ. It never could and never will die. out. In every city of the
Koman world were schools of Grecian thought in the days of the Apos-
tles. In every school the question before us was discussed in the
phrases and language of the New Testament. In Jerusalem and Eome,
and Corinth, and Philippi, and Ephesus, and Thessalonica— wherever a
Christian preacher opened his mouth to speak to man of his future destiny
— were Platonists, or Epicureans, or Stoics, or Alexandrians, to whom
the question of the soul's immortality was a question of constant thought,
with whom the phrases in which the preacher addressed them as to
their solemn future were familiar household words. Their language
was his language, whether he spoke or wrote ; their terms were his
terms, and their meaning his meaning, else there were perplexities
without a clue, logomachies without an end. And what did the Chris-
tian preacher declare, and the Christian writer write to that world-wide
community which was ruled and bound together, not merely by the
power of Koman will, but by the sceptre of the Grecian tongue ? In
Sermon and Disputation, in Gospel and History and Epistle and Eevela-
tion, the propagators of the new religion asserted of the persons of the
wicked — i.e. of souls and bodies reunited at the resurrection — that which
Plato had denied could happen to any soul. The cultivated intellect
of the world, as well as the popular mind, read in the words of Christ,
PLATO AND THE NEW TESTAMENT. 183
of Pattl, of John, of Peter, of James, that what one of its sects of philo-
sophy taught couhl happen to no soul ; and what another taught should
happen to all souls, the rising school of the Nazarene taught would
happen to those whom its phraseology described as "unjust," "wicked,"
" unbelievers." Plato's noble conception, itself but the utterance of the
longing of the human heart for its original inheritance, was taken up
by the New Testament, only that it had here given to it its true direc-
tion, and had the eternal life after which it yearned connected with the
God of Life manifested in His Son. In Jesus Christ was that "Life"
which Plato fancied to exist in the soid itself. This Life He would
bestow upon His people, realising more than the conception of Plato.
Put away from Him there was no life. On those who would not come
to Him there would come finally— after stripes few or many — the end
pictured for all by Epicurus. The Gospel brought together the frag-
ments of truth scattered throughout human systems. Those who would
soar it raised to God; those who would revel in the sty of sensuality it
sunk to the state of the beasts that perish.' — Rev. H. Constable.
ARCHBISHOP WHATELY ON FUTURE
PUNISHMENT.
The Scriptures do not, I think, afford us any ground for ex-
pecting that those who shall be condemned at the last day as
having wilfully rejected or rebelled against their Lord will be
finally delivered ; that their doom, and that of the evil angels,
will ever be reversed.
What that doom will be — whether the terms in which it is
commonly spoken of in Scripture — ' death,' ' destruction,'
' perishing,' &c, are to be understood figuratively, as denoting
immortal life in a state of misery, or, more literally, as de-
noting a final extinction of existence — this is quite a different
question. It is certain that the words, ' life,' ' eternal life,'
' immortality,' &c, are always applied to the condition of
those, and of those only, who shall at the last day be approved
as ' good and faithful servants,' who are to ' enter into the joy
of their Lord.'
184 ARCHBISHOP WHATELT
1 Life,' as applied to their condition, is usually understood
to mean ' happy life.' And that theirs will be a happy life,
we are indeed plainly taught ; but I do not think we are any-
where taught that the word ' life ' does of itself necessarily
imply happiness. If so, indeed, it would be a mere tautology
to speak of a ' happy life,' and a contradiction to speak of a
' miserable life,' which we know is not the case, according to
the usage of any language. In all ages and countries, ' life,'
and the words answering to it in other languages, have always
been applied, in ordinary discourse, to a wretched life, no less
properly than to a happy one. Life, therefore, in the received
sense of the word, would apply equally to the condition of the
blest and of the condemned, supposing these last to be destined
to continue for ever, living in a state of misery. And yet to
their condition the words ' life ' and ' immortality ' never are
applied in Scripture. If, therefore, we suppose the hearers of
Jesus and His Apostles to have understood, as nearly as pos-
sible in the ordinary sense, the words employed, they must
naturally have conceived them to mean (if they were taught
nothing to the contrary) that the condemned were really and
literally to be ' destroyed,' and cease to exist ; not that they
were to exist for ever in a state of wretchedness. For they
are never spoken of as being kept alive, but as forfeiting life ;
as, for instance, ' Ye will not come to Me that ye might
have life ; ' ' He that hath the Son hath life ; and he that hath
not the Son of God hath not life.' And again, ' perdition,'
' death,' ' destruction,' are employed in numerous passages to
express the doom of the condemned ; all which expressions
would, as I have said, be naturally taken in their usual and
obvious sense, if nothing were taught to the contrary.
That these expressions, however, are to be understood not
in their ordinary sense, but figuratively, to signify an im-
mortality of suffering, is inferred by a huge proportion of
ON FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 185
Christians from some other passages; as, where our Lord
speaks of ' evei'lasting punishment,' ' everlasting fire,' and of
being ' cast into hell, where their worm dieth not, and the fire
is not quenched.'
This last expression of His is taken from the book of the
prophet Isaiah (lxvi. 24), who speaks of ' the carcases of the
men that have transgressed, whose worm shall not die, neither
shall their fire be quenched ; and they shall be an abhorring
unto all flesh ; ' describing evidently the kind of doom inflicted
by the eastern nations on the vilest offenders, who were not
only slain, but their bodies deprived of the rites of burial, and
either burned to ashes (which among them was considered
a great indignity), or left to moulder above ground, and be
devoured by worms.
From such passages as these, it has been inferred that the
sufferings — and, consequently, the life — of the condemned is
never to have an end. And the expressions will certainly
bear that sense, which would, perhaps, be their most obvious
and natural meaning, if these expressions were the only ones
on the subject that are to be found in Scripture. But they
will also bear another sense, which, if not more probable in
itself, is certainly more reconcileable with the ordinary mean-
ing of the words ' destruction,' etc., which so often occur.
The expressions of ' eternal punishment,' 'unquenchable fire,'
etc., may mean merely that there is to be no deliverance — no
revival, no restoration — of the condemned. 'Death,' simply,
does not shut out the hope of being brought to life again ;
' eternal death ' does. ' Fire ' may be quenched before it has
entirely consumed what it is burning ; ' unquenchable fire '
would seem most naturally to mean that which destroys it
utterly.
It may be said, indeed, that supposing man's sovd to be an
immaterial being, it cannot be consumed and destroyed by
186 ARCHBISHOP WHATELY
literal material fire or worms. That is true ; but no more
can it suffer from these. We all know that no fire, literally
so called, can give us any pain unless it reach our bodies.
The ' fire,' therefore, and the ' worm ' that are spoken of,
must, at any rate, it would seem, be something figurativeby so
called — something that is to the soul what worms and fire are
to a body. And as the effect of worms or fire is not to pre-
serve the body they prey upon, but to consume, destroy, and
put an end to it, it would follow, if the correspondence hold
good, that the fire, figuratively so called, which is prepared
for the condemned, is something that is really to destroy and
put an end to them ; and is called ' everlasting ' or ' un-
quenchable ' fire to denote that they are not to be saved from
it, but that their destruction is to he final. So in the parable
of the tares, our Lord describes Himself as saying, ' Gather
ye first the tares, and bind them in bundles to burn them ; but
gather the wheat into My garner ' — as if to denote that the
one is to be (as we know is the practice of the husbandman)
carefully preserved, and the other completely put an end to.
"We must not, indeed, venture to conclude at once, from
our conviction of the divine goodness and power, that evil
will ever cease to exist, since we know not how to explain the
existence of any evil at all. We can only say there is some
unknown cause for it, and that it is a foolish presumption to
think of assigning a limit to the effects of an unknown cause,
except where revelation guides us. But when we are told
that Christ is to ' reign till He shall have put all things under
His feet,' and that ' the last enemy that shall be destroyed is
death, ' this does afford some ground for expecting the ultimate
extinction of evil and of suffering by the total destruction of
such as are incapable of good and of happiness. If ' eternal
death ' means final death — death without any revival — we
can understand what is meant by 'Death being the last
ON FUTURE PUNISHMENT. 187
enemy destroyed? viz. that none henceforth are to be sub-
jected to it. But if ' death ' be understood to mean ever-
lasting life in misery, then it would appear that death is never
to be destroyed at all, since, although no one should be hence-
forth sentenced to it, it would still be going on as a continual
infliction for ever.
On the whole, therefore, I think we are not warranted in
concluding (as some have done) so positively concerning this
question as to make it a point of Christian faith to interpret
figuratively and not literally the ' death ' and ' destruction '
spoken of in Scripture as the doom of the condemned ; and
to insist on the belief that they are to be kept alive for ever.
— Scripture Revelations of a Future State*
'THE RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS.'
BY THE KEV. ANDREW JUKES.
This is a remarkable book. A more ingenious and attractive
plea for Universalism has perhaps never appeared. And al-
though, in my judgment, it fails to prove the endless existence
of every form of human life that reaches some (undefined)
stage of development, or to shake the direct evidence from
Scripture that the ultimate reconciliation of all things, in-
cluding the salvation of the human race, will be accomplished
only after a vast destruction ; yet no intelligent Christian can
peruse its pages without receiving instruction. So compre-
hensive a knowledge of Scripture, combined with such a
spiritual penetration into some of its depths, is rarely ex-
* It is somewhat remarkable that, after the publication of such views
by so eminent a prelate, the author of this volume should be described,
in reference to the present controversy, as ; one solitary clergyman,' and
be taunted by the editor of the Bock with supposing himself to have
' made a great discovery,' and to be ' the only true prophet.'
188 'THE RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS.'
hibited within the same compass. It is especially valuable
upon the inspired revelations with reference to the ' ages,'
which, in consequence of our mistranslation of certain Greek
words, is almost entirely concealed from the English reader.
I take the liberty of transcribing some of the most important
passages ; without in the least committing myself to all the
writer's inferences from the numerous texts which, on the whole,
he so ably expounds. In particular, I must again express my
conviction that his belief in universal salvation is absolutely
irreconcileable both with the general tenour of Scripture, and
with many of its plainest statements. Still, we all need to
have our views of the future enlarged by such considerations
as Mr. Jukes adduces ; and I cannot refrain from enriching
these pages with some of his remarks, though totally dissent-
ing from his opinion on the point referred to, and doubting
upon one or two others.
' The language of the New Testament, in its use of the -word which
our translators have rendered " for ever "and "for ever and ever,"*
but which is literally " for the age," or " for the ages of ages," points
not uncertainly to the same solution of the great riddle, though as yet
the glad tidings of the " ages to come " have been but little opened out.
The epistles of St. Paul will prove that the "ages" are periods in
which God is gradually working out a purpose of grace, which was
ordained in Christ before the fall, and before those " age-times," f in
and through which the fall is being remedied. So we read that " God's
wisdom was ordained before the ages to oxir glory" J — that is, that God
had a purpose before the ages out of the very fall to bring greater glory
both to Himself and to His fallen creature. Then we are told distinctly
of " the purpose of the ages," § showing that the work cf renewal would
only be accomplished through successive ages.
******
* €is alum, and els alHi/as aluvwv.
f xP^oi alAvioi (2 Tim. i. 9 ; Tit. i. 2).
\ 1 Cor. ii. 7 : vpb to>v aiuvtuv.
§ Eph. iii. 11 : xaTawpSdecriv tw alwvwv — translated, in our Authorised
Version, ' the eternal purpose.'
'the restitution of all things.' 189
'Now, what is this " purpose of the ages " which St. Paul speaks of,
but of which the Church in these clays seems to know, or at least says,
next to nothing? I have already anticipated the answer. The "ages"
are the fulfilment or substance of the "times and seasons" of the
Sabbatic year and Jubilee under the old law. They are those " times
of refreshment from tho presence of the Lord when He shall send Jesus
Christ, who before was preached;"* and when, in due order, liberty
and cleansing will be obtained by those who are now in bondage and
unclean, and rest be gained by those who now arc without their rightful
inheritance. In the " ages," and in no other mystery of the gospel, do
we find those " good things to come," of which the legal times and
seasons were the " shadow." f Of course, as some of these " ages " are
" to come," being indeed the " times and seasons which the Father hath
put in His own power," J we can as yet know little of their distinctive
character, except that, as being the ages in which God is fulfilling His
purpose in Christ, we ma} 7 be assured their issue must be glorious. Yet
they are constantly referred to in the New Testament, and the book of
the Revelation more than any other speaks of them,§ for this book opens
out the processes and stages of the great redemption, which make up
the Eevelation of Jesus Christ which God gives Him ; and this Revela-
tion is not accomplished in one act, but through the " ages" and "ages
of ages" foreshadowed by the "times" and "times of times" of the
old law, the "age-times," again to use the language of St. Paul, in
which the Lord is revealed as meeting the ruin of the creature. And
the reason why we sometimes read of " ages," and sometimes of " the
age," when both seem to refer to and speak of the same one great con-
summation, is that the various " ages " are but the component parts of
a still greater "age," as the seven Sabbatic years only made up one
Jubilee.
'At any rate, and whatever the future "ages" may be, those past
(and St. Paul speaks of "the ends" of some) are clearly not endless;
and the language of Scripture as to those to come seems to teach that
they are limited, since Christ's mediatorial kingdom, which is "for the
ages of ages," must yet be " delivered up to the Father, that God may
be all in all." ||
******
* Acts iii. 19. t Heb. x. 1. J Acts i. 7-
§ Rev. i. 6, 18; iv. 9, 10; v. 13, 14; vii. 12 ; x. 6 ; xi. 15; xiv. 11 ;
xv. 7 ; xix. 3 ; xx. 10 ; xxii. 5.
|| Compare Rev. xi. 15, and 1 Cor. xv. 24.
190 'THE RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS.'
' The " ages," therefore, are periods in which God works, because
there is evil and His rest is broken by it, but which have an end and
pass away, when the work appointed to be done in them has been ac-
complished. The " ages," like the " days " of creation, speak of a prior
fall : they are the " times " in which God works, because He cannot
rest in sin and misery. His perfect rest is not in the " ages," but
beyond them, when the mediatorial kingdom, which is "for the ages of
ages," * is " delivered up," f and Christ, by whom all things are wrought
in the ages, goes back to the glory which He had " before the age-
times," \ " that God may be all in all." § The words " Jesus Christ
(that is, Anointed Saviour), the same yesterday, to-day, and for the
ages," || imply that through these "ages" a Saviour is needed, and will
be found, as much as " to-day " and " yesterday." It will, I think too,
be found that the adjective ^ founded on this word, whether applied to
"life," "punishment," "redemption," "covenant," "times," or even
"God" Himself, is always connected with remedial labour, and with
the idea of " ages" as periods in which God is working to meet and
correct some awful fall. Thus the " seonial covenant " ** (I must coin a
word, to show what is the term used in the original) is that which com-
prehends "the ages" during which "Jesus Christ is the same" — that
is, a Saviour ; an office only needed for the fallen, for " they that are
whole need not a physician." The " seonial God " (language found but
once in the New Testamentft ) refers, as the context shows, to God as
* Kev. xi. 15. t 1 Cor. xv. 24.
1 2 Tim. i. 9, and Tit. i. 2 : npb xp<^&>i> alaiviuv — translated, in our
Version, 'before the world began.' The Vulgate translation here is,
'Ante ssecularia tempora,' which is as literal a rendering as possible.
§ 1 Cor. xv. 28. || Heb. xiii. 8 : eh roi/s alwvas.
% aldivws. ** Heb. xiii. 20.
tf Rom. xvi. 25, 26. In this passage we read, first, of ' the mystery
kept secret from the (gonial times,' ixvcrrTipiov xp^vois alwvlois <T€<nyr)iiivov
(translated, in our English version, ' Since the world began ') ; and then
of ' the (sonial God,' aiuvtov ®eov, ' by whose command this mystery is
now made manifest.' In the Septuagint version of the Old Testament,
the epithet alwvws is only applied to God four times, in one of which
the corresponding D^Jiy of the Hebrew is- not to be found, though in all
the reference is direct, either to ' the age of ages,' or to God's redeeming
work as wrought through ' the ages.' The passages are Gen. xxi. 33,
where, after the birth 'of Isaac, the type of Christ, God is known by
this name, Q^y ^x > tllen Isa - xx "' 4 > an< * x1, 28 ' iu botl1 wuicn tlle
'THE RESTITUTION OF ALL TniNGS.' 191
working His secret of grace through " seonial times " — that is, successive
worlds or "ages," in some of which "the mystery has been hid, but
now is made manifest by the commandment of the seonial God " — that is
(if I err not), the God who works through these " ages." And so of the
rest, whether "redemption,"* " salvation," f "spirit," J " fire,"§ or "in-
heritance," || all of which in certain texts are called " seonial," the
epithet seems to refer to the same remedial plan, wrought out by God
through "worlds" or " ages." And does not our Lord refer to this in
the well-known words, " This is life eternal ^[ (that is, the life of the
age or of the ages), that they may know Thee, the only true God, and
Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent?"** Does He not say here, that to
know the only true God, as the sender of His Son to be a Saviour, and
to know that Son as a Saviour and Eedeemer, mark and constitute the
renewed life which is peculiar to the ages ? JEonial or eternal life
therefore is not, as so many think, the living on and on for ever and
ever. It is rather, as our Lord defines it, a life, the distinctive peculiarity
of which is, that it has to do with a Saviour, and so is part of a remedial
plan. This, as being our Lord's own explanation of the word, is surely
conclusive as to its meaning. But even had we not this key, the word
carries with it in itself its own solution ; for " asonial " is simply " of
the ages," and the " ages," like the days of creation, as being periods in
which God works, witness not only that there is some fall to be remedied,
but that God through these days or ages is working to remedy it. ft
context shows the reason for the epithet; and, lastly, Job xxiii. 12, in
which passage the LXX. have given us alwvios for Q>n^N' or Elohim,
in the original, which name, as we see from a comparison of Gen. i. and
ii. (in the former of which God is always Elohim, in the latter Jehovah
Elohim), refers to the One who is working through periods of labour to
change a ruined world, until His image is seen ruling it — a title not
lost when the day of rest is reached, but to which another name, show-
ing what God is in Himself, is then added. In Exod. iii. 15, we read
of God's ovofxa aicoviou — that is, His name as connected with deliverance.
I believe the word is never used but in this connection.
* Heb. ix. 12. f Hob. v. 9. + Heb. ix. 14.
§ Jude 7. || Heb. ix. 15. ^f r) al&vios fart.
** St. John xvii. 3.
ft As to the Old Testament use of the word ' age ' or ' ages ' (trans-
lated ' for ever ' in the English version), a few words may be added here.
We have, first, the unconditional promise of God that ' the seed of
Abraham shall inherit the laud for ever: ' Q^y^j — LXX., els rbv iwra
1 92 * THE RESTITUTION OF ALL TIIINGS.'
'Be this as it may, the adjective "seonial," or age-long, cannot carry
a force or express a duration greater than that of the ages or "aeons "
(Exod. xxxii. 13). The same words are used of the Aaronic priest-
hood (Exod. xl. 15); of the office of the Levites (1 Chron. xv. 2); of
the inheritance given to Caleb (Joshua xiv. 9) ; of Ai being a desola-
tion (Joshua viii. 28) ; of the leprosy of Gehazi cleaving to his seed
(2 Kings v. 27) ; of the heathen bondsmen whom Israel possessed, of
whom it is said, ' They shall be their bondsmen for ever ' (Lev. xxv. 46).
The same words are also used of the curse to come on Israel for their
disobedience : ' These curses shall come on thee, and pursue thee till
thou be destroyed ; and they shall be upon thee for a sign, and upon thy
children for ever' (Deut. xxviii. 45, 46). So of Ammon and Moab it is
said, 'Thou shalt not seek their peace for ever' (Deut. xxiii. 6); and
again, ' They shall not come into the congregation of the Lord for ever'
(Deut. xxiii. 3); here Q^y »jy. In all these and other similar instances,
Q^iy, and its equivalent aloiv, mean the age or dispensation. In Exod.
xxi. 6, where the ear of the servant who will not go free is bored, and
he becomes a 'servant for ever' (Q^y ; LXX., tls rhv aiwva), the sense
must necessarily be much more limited; as also in 1 Sam. i. 22. It is
to be observed also that not only the singular, a'piy, as in 1 Kings ix. 3,
and 2 Kings xxi. 7, but the plural, Qift^iy, is used in l Kin S s viii - 13 >
and 2 Chron. vi. 2, in reference to the temple at Jerusalem. The double
expression, -jyi D^IJJ 1 ?. is variously translated by the LXX. ; sometimes
eh rbv alwva koI in, as in Dan. xii. 3, where it is used of those ' that
turn many to righteousness ;' sometimes -rbv ouZva. koX eV alwvos ko.\ tVt,
as in Exod. xv. 1 8, where it is used of God ; sometimes els rbv alwya rov
alwuos, as in Psalm xlv. 2, where it is used of Christ and His kingdom;
while in Micah iv. 7, the same Hebrew words, here Q^y -py, are trans-
lated by the LXX., and here only, by the plural, has els robs alaivas.
More commonly, however, Q^iy -jy is rendered simply e»s rov alwvos
by the LXX., as in Gen. xiii. 15 ; Joshua iv. 7, and elsewhere. Lastly,
in Dan. vii. 18, we have both the singular and the plural form together,
iVftb]} thy IV) NO^J? *iy> rendered by the LXX. ews alwvos tS>v alcbvwv.
The adjective aiwvios is used continually by the LXX.— in reference
to the Passover (Exod. xii. 14, 17), the tabernacle service (Exod. xxvii.
21), the priestly office of the sons of Aaron (Exod. xxviii. 43), the meat-
offering (Lev. vi. 18), and other things of the Jewish dispensation — all
of which are called v6/j.ifxov ai&viov. So in Jer. xxiii. 40, we have al&viov
oveideiffixov, and ari/j-iav al&viov, used of the corrective judgments on
Israel, whose restoration is also foretold.
'TIIE RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS.' 19
O
■which it speaks of. If, therefore, these " ages " are limited periods,
some of -which are already past, while others, we know not how many,
are yet to come, the word "seonial" cannot mean strictly never-ending.
Nor does this affect the true eternity of bliss of God's elect, or of the
redeemed who are brought back to live in God's life, of whom it is said,
" Neither can they die any more, for they are equal to the angels, and
are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection ; " * for
this depends on a participation in the divine nature, and upon that
power which can "change these vile bodies, that they may be fashioned
like unto Christ's glorious body, according to the working whereby He
is able even to subdue all things unto Himself." ' f
The following observations also, in their general spirit, are
worthy of the deepest attention : —
' The writer feels the solemn responsibility of dissenting on such a
question from the current creed of Christendom ; and nothing but his
most assured conviction that the popular notion of never-ending punish-
ment is as thorough a misunderstanding of God's Word as the doctrine
of Transubstantiation, and that the one as much as the other conduces
directly to infidelity, though both equally claim to stand on the express
■words of Holy Scripture, would have led him to moot a subject which
cannot even be questioned in some quarters without provoking the
charge of heresy. Truth is worth all this, and much more. If we will
not buy it at all cost, we are not worthy of it.
******
' But is it possible that the Church should have been allowed to err
on so important a point as the doctrine of future judgment? Would
our Lord Himself have used, or permitted others to use, words which, if
final restitution be true, might be understood as teaching the very
opposite ? I say again, look at the doctrine of Transubstantiation.
Has, or has not, the Church been suffered to err as to the meaning of
•words which are at the very foundation of her highest act of worship ?
Did not our Lord, when He said, " Take, eat, this is my body," j know
how monstrously the words would be perverted ? Yet, though a single
sentence would have made any mistake almost impossible, He did not
add another word. Why ? Because the very form in which the Word
* St. Luke xx. 36.
t Phil. iii. 21. See also 1 Cor. xv. 53; Eom. viii. 29; Heb. vii. 16;
xii. 28 ; 1 St. Peter i. 3, 4, 5 ; 1 St. John iii. 2.
{ St. Matt. xxvi. 26.
194 'tiie restitution of all things.'
is given is part of our discipline; and because, without His Spirit, let
His words be what they may, we never really understand Him. Tran-
substantiation is a mistake built on Christ's very words ; and the doc-
trine of endless torments is but another like misunderstanding, which
not only directly contradicts many other Scriptures, but practically
denies and falsifies the glorious revelation of Himself, which God has
given us in the gospel, and in the face of Jesus Christ. Both show the
Church's state. And though thousands of God's children have held,
not these only, but many other errors, the fact, instead of approving
their errors, only proves the grace of Him, who, spite of such errors,
can yet bless and make His children a blessing.
******
' Such then, I believe, is the testimony of Scripture as to the purpose
and way of God our Saviour. That it will be judged as false doctrine
by those who, like Israel of old, can see no purpose of God beyond
their own dispensation, is as certain as that Israel slew the prophets,
and rejected the counsel of God toward sinners of the Gentiles ; that it
will be hateful also to fallen spirits may be seen from the way in
which proud souls in every age rebel against the gospel. Their thought
is that they shall continue for ever. Very humbling is it to think that
all their pride and rebellion must be overthrown. Even with true
souls, who have been teaching another doctrine, there must be special
difficulties in receiving a truth which proves them to have been in error.
Now, therefore, as of old, Samaritans know Christ as " Saviour of the
world," * while masters of Israel reject Him in this character. For
teachers to learn is to unlearn; and that is not easy. Nor can we
expect that those who occupy the chief seats in the synagogue will
readily descend from them and humble themselves, not only to take the
place of learners, but to be reproached for doing so. How can masters
of Israel eat their own words? All these things, and, still more, our
natural hard thoughts of God, are against the spread of the doctrine set
forth in these pages. But if it be God's purpose, it shall stand, and
each succeeding age shall make it more manifest. Meanwhile He says,
" He that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is
the chaff to the wheat ? saith the Lord." f I do not fear, therefore,
that the declaration of God's righteousness and love will lead men, as
some suppose, to think less of Him. " We are saved by hope," J not
by fear. It is the lie, that He is a destroyer and does not love us,
* St. John iv. 42.
f Jer. xxiii. 28. J Bom. viii. 24.
'the restitution of all tilings.' 195
which has kept and yet keeps souls from Him. And though some
argue that the doctrine of final restitution, even supposing it to be
true, ought not to be whispered, except with great reserve, because men
will abuse it, I cannot but think their prudence unwise, and that the
truth, when God has revealed it, may be trusted to do its own work.
Of course this truth, like every other, may be abused. "What good
thing is there which may not be perverted ? The Bible and the gospel
itself may be wrested to men's destruction, and Christ Himself be made
a savour of death to those He died for. But surely this is no reason
for locking up the Bible or the gospel, or for keeping back or denying
any truth which God has graciously revealed to us. And when I think
of past objections to the gospel, that if grace is preached, men will
abuse it, and sin that grace may more abound — when I remember how
the doctrine of justification by faith has been opposed, on the ground
that it must undermine all practical godliness — when I see how God's
election, clearly as it is revealed in Holy Scripture, is denied by some,
who, wiser than God, think that such a doctrine must be perilous to
man and opposed to God's love and truth — I have less faith in the
supposed consequences of any doctrine, assured that if it be only true,
its truth must in the end justify it. I rather believe that if the exact-
ness of final retribution were understood, if men saw that so long as
they continue in sin they must be under judgment, and that only by
death to sin are they delivered, they could not pervert the gospel as
they now do, nor abuse that preaching of the Cross which is indeed
salvation.
' I cannot but think too that this doctrine of final restitution would
meet much of the hopeless scepticism which is certainly increased by
this dogma of never-ending punishment. Men turn from the gospel
and from the Scriptures, not knowing what they contain, offended at
the announcement, which shocks them, that God who is Love consigns
all but a "little flock," the " few who find the narrow way," to endless
misery. Even true believers groan under the burden which this doc-
trine, as it is commonly received, must lay on all thoughtful and un-
selfish minds. " For my part," says Henry Rogers, " I fancy I should
not grieve if the whole race of mankind died in its fourth year. As
far as we can see, I do not know that it would be a thing much to be
lamented." * " The same gospel," says Isaac Taylor, "which penetrates
our souls with warm emotions, dispersive of selfishness, brings in upon
* Professor Henry Eogers, in Greysoris Letters. Letter vii. to C.
Mason, Esq., vol. i, p. 34.
o 2
196 'the restitution op all things.'
the heart a sympathy that tempts us often to wish that itself were not
true, or that it had not taught us so to feel." * Even more affecting
are the words of Albert Barnes, as a witness to the darkness of the
• ordinary orthodox theology : " These and a hundred difficulties meet
the mind, when we think on this great subject ; and they meet us when
we endeavour to urge our fellow-sinners to be reconciled to God, and to
put confidence in Him. I confess for one that I feel these, and feel
them more sensibly and powerfully the more I look at them, and the
longer I live. I do not know that I have a ray of light on this subject
which I had not when the subject first flashed across my soul. I have
read to some extent what wise and good men have written. I have
looked at their theories and explanations. I have endeavoured to weigh
their arguments, for my whole soul pants 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 the dead, and why man must suffer to all
eternity." f
' Such confessions are surely sad enough ; but they do not and cannot
express one thousandth part of the horror which the idea of never-
ending misery should produce in every loving heart. As Archer Butler
says, " Were it possible for man's imagination to conceive the horrors
of such a doom as this, all reasoning about it would be at an end ; it
would scorch and wither all the powers of human thought." J Indeed,
human life would be at a stand, could this doctrine of eternal punish-
ment be realised. Can such a doctrine then be true ? If it be, let men
declare it always and in every place. But if it be simply the residt of
a misconception of God's "Word, it is high time that the Church awake
to truer readings of it.
' It is not for me to judge God's saints who have gone before. Their
judgment is with the Lord, and their work with their God. But when
I think of the words, not of the carnal and profane, but even of some
of God's dear children in that long night, when "the beast," which
looked "like a lamb, but spake as a dragon," had dominion § — when I
find Augustine saying, that " though infants departing from the body
without baptism will be in the mildest damnation of all, yet he greatly
* Isaac Taylor's Restoration of Belief , p. 367.
f Albert Barnes's Practical Sermons, p. 123.
| Sermons, second series, p. 383.
§ Bev. xiii. 11.
<TIIE RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS'.' 197
deceives and is deceived who preaches that they will not he in damna-
tion," meaning thereby unending punishment ; or Thomas Aquinas,
that " the bliss of the saved may please them more, and they may
render more abundant thanks to God for it, that they are permitted to
gaze on the punishment of the wicked ; " or Peter Lombard, that " the
elect, while they see the unspeakable sufferings of the ungodly, shall
not be affected with grief, but rather satiated with joy at the sight, and
give thanks to God for their own salvation ; " or Luther, that " it is the
highest degree of faith to believe that God is merciful, who saves so
few and damns so many ; to believe Him just, who of His own will
makes us necessarily damnable" — when I remember that such men
have said such things, and that words like these have been approved by
Christians, I can only fall down and pray that such a night may not
return, and that where it yet weighs on men's hearts the Lord may
scatter it.'
1 RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.'
BY MR. JAMES GRANT.
My subject has already led me to mention this book. There
are several personal references in it, to which, on its first
appearance, I wrote full replies. But I prefer to pass them
over in silence, and to let them fall by their own weight.
Anyone with the two volumes before him can easily judge
between us.
The writer's direct defence of Eternal Evil is grounded on
those old traditional arguments, with which we are all familiar,
and which had been already considered in the preceding
sermons. But as he publicly declared his belief that he had
' entered/)//^ into the question,' and as the Christian Advocate
recommends his book to anyone who wishes to see ' how full
and varied ' are the proofs of the popular doctrine, it may be
useful to give the following list of arguments against it, or
replies to arguments in favour of it, with which Mr. Grant
has not even attempted to grapple : —
1. That when Adam was threatened with death, as the
198 'RELIGIOUS tendencies of the times.'
penalty of sin, he could not possibly understand it to mean
eternal life in misery.
2. That the typical sacrifices taught death, and not endless
suffering, to be the penalty of sin.
3. That the ever recurring alternative of Life or Death, set
before us in Scripture, teaches the same.
4. That our interpretation of these words is confirmed by
Christ's warning, that if we try to save our life by unfaithful-
ness to Him in this world, we shall ' lose itf that is the same
thing which we tried to save, in the world to come.
5. That the final destruction of the wicked being compared
to that of ' natural brute beasts,' precludes its consisting of
eternal torture.
6. That our being urged to seek for ' immortality,' as well
as ' glory and honour,' by ' patient continuance in well-doing,'
precludes the idea of all men alike possessing immortality.
7. That the promise ' Whoso doeth the will of God abideth
for ever ' leans strongly to the same side.
8. That the contrast between the natural man perishing
like the grass, and the regenerate man being born of incor-
ruptible seed, namely the word of the Lord which abideth
for ever, precludes the idea of equal duration.
9. That the way of Holiness could not be called ' the way
everlasting,' in contrast to every ' wicked way,' if the two
ways were equally everlasting.
10. That the doctrine of endless suffering being the wages
of sin is inconsistent with the vicarious sacrifice of Christ,
inasmuch as He did not endure it.
11. That the metaphysical argument in favour of every sin
incurring infinite guilt, because it is committed against an
infinite being, could only hold good if it were committed by
an infinite being.
'RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.' 199
12. That the argument drawn from Matt. xxv. 4G to
prove that if the wicked do not live for ever, neither will
the righteous, could only prove at the very utmost, that
the endless bliss of the righteous was not asserted in that
passage, and would leave all the other assertions of it quite
untouched.
13. That the word rendered 'contempt,' to which we are
told in Dan. xii. the wicked will awake, is the same that is
rendered ' abhorring ' in Isa. lxvi., and is there predicted of
' carcases ; ' so that it does not necessarily describe the wicked
as awaking to become everlastingly conscious of contempt, but
may describe them as awaking to become objects of ' ever-
lasting contempt.'
14. That the word rendered ' unquenchable,' when applied
to fire, does not mean that it will burn on for ever ; as is
shown by Homer's saying that an unquenchable fire broke out
in one of the ships of Troy, which was extinguished by
Patroclus, — and also by many passages in the Old Testament.
15. That the 'torment 'in 'the lake of fire ' toward the
end of Revelation, is part of a dramatic scene, so highly figura-
tive that there is hardly another incident in it which anyone
expects to be literally fulfilled ; and that the casting of Death
and Hell into the lake of fire indicates its representing destruc-
tion rather than torture.
16. That the doctrine of Eternal Evil is totally at variance
with any reasonable understanding of the predicted recon-
ciliation of all things to God by Christ, so that ' God may be
all in all.'
17. That it is inconsistent with the declaration, that ' The
Son of God was manifested that He might destroy the works
of the devil,' and ' that through death he might destroy him
that had the power of death, that is the devil.'
200 ' RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF TIIE TIMES.'
18. Also with the revealed truth, that ' in Him (Christ) all
things consist.' *
To the best of my belief there is not a word in Mr. Grant's
500 pages, from -which it could be gathered that he had ever
heard or thought of any of the foregoing points. In fact, like
most other writers on the same side, he has altogether failed
to perceive the magnitude of this great subject. The confident
tone of his assertions, and his vehement denunciations of
those who venture to differ from him in their interpretation of
Scripture, may produce a considerable effect upon weak or
ill-informed minds ; but they will fall perfectly'harmless upon
those who have been enabled to penetrate into the heart of the
whole matter, namely, Life and Immortality in Christ alone, f
* In a private letter, since published, Mr. Grant maintains that some
of the arguments mentioned above are answered, directly or indirectly,
in the course of his volume. But, after examining the passages he
adduces, I cannot admit his plea even in a single case. Several of the
subjects are treated of — such as 'unquenchable fire' and 'infinite guilt'
— but no attempt is made to meet any of the specified points in connec-
tion with those subjects.
f ' On the second great point of agreement among " Annihilationists,"
the grand and blessed doctrine of immortality only in Christ, Mr. Grant
presents us -with— a blank ! It is actually never mentioned. Not a
reference, not an allusion, not a word about it is to be found in the
whole book ! Now, that it should be a truth quite beyond Mr. Grant's
range of spiritual vision is only what might be expected ; but how pro-
minent, we might even say how supreme, a position it occupies in the
system he is controverting, must surely have been well known to him
from the perusal (if he really perused them) of the books he mentions.
He was bound, therefore, to meet and disprove it : and the very signifi-
cant fact that he has made no attempt to do so, can be accounted for
only on the supposition, either that he had utterly failed to acquaint
himself with the doctrine he denounces, or, as in the former case, that
he felt himself unable to grapple with it To grapple with the pro-
found and perilous questions connected with man's essential nature and
eternal destiny, we hold him to be as incompetent as is the passing
shower to melt the rock on which it falls, or as is a child to overthrow a
giant by tilting against him with a bundle of straws. And it is a
* RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF TIIE TIMES.' 201
Precisely analogous to his treatment of the Scripture
evidences, is his treatment of the question relating to the
respective consequences of preaching these opposing views.
Two whole sermons in this volume are exclusively occupied
with pointing out the disastrous results that follow the popular
doctrine of Eternal Evil. "Without attempting to answer any
one of those allegations, and apparently without the slightest
consciousness that there could be a second opinion on the
subject, Mr. Grant just lays it down, that ' The conviction,
if groundless, that future punishments will be only of limited,
not of eternal duration, is an error so absolutely frightful that
the human mind shrinks from its contemplation. On the
other hand, should perchance, after all, the opposite belief
— namely, that punishments in a future state will be of end-
less duration — be a mistaken faith, and that a period will be
put, sooner or later, to the miseries of those who have died
unsaved, the mistaken notion Avill involve no disastrous
results. Not the slightest harm will come to anyone, because
it was reserved for the light of eternity to dispel, on this point,
the darkness which enveloped his mind in time.'
"Where can a man have been living to utter such a senti-
i ment as that ? * Could anything betray more entire ignorance
lamentable indication of the low ebb of theology among us to find such
a work as this receiving the warm commendation and eager suffrages of
our religious newspapers and magazines. Throughout his book, it is
quite obvious that Mr. Grant is destitute of even the rudiments of the
theological learning essential in dealing with his subject; it is equally
manifest that ho is incapable of constructing a logical argument.' — The
Rainbow.
* ' The doctrine of Eternal Punishment is now actively at work in
undermining Christianity itself; it is — sometimes openly, but much
oftener in secret — driving thousands into infidelity ; and is, beyond all
question, the great repulsive force which prevents the alien from enter-
ing within the Christian pale.' — Eternal Punishment and Eternal Death,
by J. W. Barlow, M.A.
202 'religious tendencies of the times.'
of what is going on in the Church and the world, and con-
sequently more hopeless incompetence to deal with the
' Religious Tendencies of the Times ' ?
There is one other assertion, however, that perhaps exceeds
even that ; and is so thoroughly characteristic of the whole
book, that it must not be omitted.
' Let me impress deeply and abidingly on their minds this great fact,
that no one of those many learned and gifted men who have written in
favour of the limited duration of future punishments, have been able to
point to one single passage of Scripture, which can, by any amount of
ingenuity, however great, be made to give even a seeming positive sanc-
tion to the doctrine that there will be an end to the misery in a future
state, of those who have perished in their sins in the present world.'
Not one single text, even apparently, to sanction the belief
that the wages of sin is death, that the finally impenitent will
be destroyed soul and body in Hell, that they Avill be con-
sumed, devoured, burnt up, and perish for ever !* I should be
sorry to speak with undue severity of Mr. Grant's book, espe-
cially when it has been recommended by the Christian Advo-
cate, as 'on the whole, with a little caution here and there,
a safe and comprehensive guide.' But it is only the simple
truth to say that it abounds in statements just as sweeping
* Mr. Grant says ' The brutes, we are elsewhere told, are destined to
perish, that is, when they die there is nothing more of them' Yet when
Scripture declares that the wicked will perish for ever, no amount of
ingenuity can make it lend even a seeming positive sanction to the
doctrine that there will be ' nothing more of them ! '
Another specimen of this writer's consistency may be found by com-
paring what he says (p. 91) on the text, ' Many of them that sleep in
the dust of the earth shall awake,' namely that ' the word many means
all, just as the expression " By one man's disobedience many were made
sinners," demonstrably means all,' with what he says (p. 254) on the
words 'many sons,' in Heb. ii. 8, namely that they are fatal to the
theory of ultimate universal salvation, inasmuch as ' many cannot be
regarded as equivalent to all.'
'RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.' 203
and just as reliable. The word ' positive ' is printed in
italics ; and therefore Mr. Grant may understand his own
assertion in some sense not obvious to the ordinary reader.
But the fact is, that there are literally hundreds of texts,
■which not only seem to afford the most ' positive sanction '
that could be expressed in human language to the view Mr.
Grant impugns, but which require the utmost ' ingenuity ' of
the subtlest casuists to rationalise away, so as to make them
sanction anything else !
If anyone thinks that this is an exaggeration, let him look
out in his Concordance the words, live, die, destroy, perish,
with their cognate forms, and words of similar import ; and
then, setting aside the traditions of men, disregarding party
anathemas, and, if he pleases, waiving all consideration of what
may be consistent or inconsistent with the revelation which
has been made to us of the Divine nature and character, let
him honestly, as in the sight of God, ask himself this one
question —
What Saith the Scrittlre ?
PS. — While these pages are passing through the press,
another volume of ' Religious Tendencies ' has appeared from
Mr. Grant's prolific pen. There is nothing in it, in the way
of argument, that requires any further answer. Indeed, upon
Mr. Grant himself argument seems to be thrown away. For,
on p. 144, he says, ' It is a significant fact, that I have never
met with an Annihilationist, either in print or in private, who
undertook to answer the argument in question (from Dan.xii.2)
against their hypothesis ' ; though on p. 4 he had himself
actually put ' in print ' the ' answer ' which I ' undertook ' to
give to that very ' argument ' in my published sermons, and
204 ' RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.'
which, as my letter to him shows, I had ' in private ' pressed
upon his attention.
In this volume he has taken Mr. Garbett's judicious advice
to avoid the Scriptural word ' destruction,' which expresses
Avhat we do believe, and persists in fastening upon us the
unscriptural word ' annihilation,' which expresses what we
have repeatedly declared that we do not believe. This is all
the more unpardonable, inasmuch as a scientific argument is
brought against our belief in the destruction of the wicked
' soul and body in hell,' grounded upon the opinion commonly
entertained, that even God Himself never annihilates a single
particle of matter.
He has also followed the example of many others on that
side, in assuming the impossibility of his opponents understand-
ing language in any sense different from his own, and there-
upon denouncing them as dishonest lying hypocrites. Witness
the following : —
' I regret to learn that, notwithstanding the vehemence with which
the doctrine of everlasting punishments is denounced by him, as
" horrible," " monstrous," " revolting," and so forth, he still continues
to make a practical profession of his faith in it, by reading that part of
the Litany in which the prayer occurs, that God would be pleased to
deliver those using the prayer from everlasting damnation. The prayer
stands thus : " From Thy wrath and from everlasting damnation, good
Lord deliver us"; the latter four words of response being said by all the
congregation. To me there is something inexpressibly awful in the fact,
that any man holding ixp, both in the pulpit and through the press, the
doctrine of eternal punishments, as one which is absolutely frightful,
and deeply dishonourable to God, could bring himself to proclaim
publicly, Sunday after Sunday, his belief in that " dreadful doctrine,"
by praying himself, and asking his people to pray, for deliverance from
" everlasting damnation." '
Now, there could of course be nothing ' inexpressibly awful '
even to his mind ' in the fact ' of my interpreting those words
differently from himself; nor would my use of them, in that
'RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.' 205
case, constitute any 'practical profession' of what he under-
stands by them. Unless the whole paragraph is ' sound and
fury, signifying nothing,' it can only be a direct charge of wilful
hypocrisy. His horror is excited by the fact — not that I can
1 bring myself to regard ' everlasting damnation ' as meaning
condemnation to the everlasting punishment of irremediable
destruction,* but — that I can ' bring myself to proclaim pub-
licly, Sunday after Sunday, my belief in a doctrine which I
elsewhere repudiate. And this, let it be observed, after
abundant material had been siipplied in ' The Glory of Christ '
for a right understanding of the sense in which I take the
words ; after I had publicly replied to the same attack from
other quarters; and after the Church of England had formally
decided, in her highest court of appeal, that not a single word
in her formularies teaches the doctrine of endless suffering'.
Mr. Grant closes his first chapter in so kindly, and even
complimentary, a tone towards myself, that hostile criticism
is almost disarmed. Yet it would be ungenerous to Dr. Leask,
who has incurred such sacrifices for the truth's sake, if I were
to pass over in silence the unwarranted attack which is made
upon him in this last volume. It is precisely the same as that
made upon me in the former volume. Persons of Mr. Grant's
temperament seem to think it a necessary part of common
honesty that, whenever a doubt arises in anyone's mind, it
should be at once proclaimed to the world. That neither
Dr. Leask nor myself acted on such a principle is the whole
gravamen of our opponent's furious assaults upon us. It may
be necessary to inform him that, after a view has been long
under consideration, it is not always easy to know the precise
moment when it becomes sufficiently matured to justify its
* Just as the fire which consumed Sodom and Gomorrah is called
' eternal fire,' although it has long since ceased to burn, and those cities
have long since ceased to exist.
206 'RELIGIOUS tendencies of the times.'
publication. It is often something which looks like a mere
accident, that at last, to borrow Mr. Grant's mild language,
' tears the mask from the face.' For myself, I am thankful
to feel perfectly satisfied with the crisis, when I was enabled
to see the truth distinctly and to proclaim it fearlessly. For
Dr. Leask, I have his own assurance that, during the greater
portion of the time referred to, it would not have been easy
for him to preach ' his universalist or annihilationist creed '
(which Mr. Grant seems unable to distinguish), inasmuch as
he was then a ' blind follower of the blind ' in believing the
popular creed.
There is another point which I cannot refrain from noticing,
as strikingly illustrative of the spirit too apt to be engendered
by a cordial acceptance of the doctrine of eternal torment ;
and that is, the encouragement given by Mr. Grant, to certain
members of the Evangelical Alliance in their present attempt
to expel from that body the ablest man that ever belonged to
it, and who is still one of its honorary secretaries. Mr. Birks
believes that an irreversible sentence of condemnation will be
passed upon the wicked, and that they will live for ever to
bear the consequences of it. One might have thought that
this would have been enough to satisfy the most determined
advocate of ' eternal punishment.' But, no. Unhappily for
his own comfort, from a party point of view, he holds that
this punishment will help to work a salutary change in their
moral condition, so that hell will not continue for ever to be
the frightful scene that it is usually painted. This deviation
from the strict line of orthodoxy Mr. Grant and his friends
cannot endure ; it is ' vital error.' They can no more tolerate
any mitigation of the sufferings of the lost than any termina-
tion of them.* So the Evangelical Alliance, which was formed
* ' Mr. Birks' hypothesis as to the nature of the punishment does not
involve anything resembling those intense agonies, that writhing of
' RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.' 207
to promote brotherly love amongst Christians, must be purified
from Mr. Birks ; and, unless this can be effected, its members
are solemnly warned, in the most authoritative manner, that
they will ' seriously compromise their character as Christians,'
that ' the Alliance cannot long exist,' that even its dissolution
would be better than ' the flagrant inconsistency of conduct
involved in maintaining external fellowship with one whose
creed on points of momentous importance they privately
condemn in the strongest terms,'* that 'not only the Divine
blessing will be withheld from the labours of the Alliance,
but none of their members, however much their hearts may
otherwise be right with God, can enjoy real peace of con-
science.'
And this is the writer who, a few pages later, speaks with
severe, though richly-deserved, censure of the bigotry, intole-
rance, and more than papal assumption, of an extreme section
of Plymouth Brethren ! Could Mr. Darby himself out-Herod
the above ?
Not long ago a series of meetings was held in Freemasons'
Hall for confession of sin with reference to the divisions
amongst Christians, and for special prayer that they might
exhibit more of the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace.
body as well as anguish of mind, with which the Scriptures uniformly-
associate the doom of the ungodly in the world to come, when they speak
of the worm that never dies, the fire that is never quenched, the weep-
ing, and wailing, and gnashing of teeth, and the smoke of their torments,
which ascendeth up for ever and ever.' — P. 209.
For a graphic description of these agonies, by the powerful pen of
President Edwards, see p. xxxii. of this volume.
* These ' points of momentous importance' — these ' vital errors ' — all
resolving themselves into an attempt to render the doctrine of eternal
misery less violently opposed to the revelation which God has made of
His own character, and to the moral instincts which He has implanted
in our nature, by eliminating some of the most frightful of the horrors
associated with it by Dante, President Edwards, and Mr. James Grant.
208 'RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.'
Two persons of long-established Christian character, who
believe that life and immortality are in Christ alone, and con-
sequently that all out of Christ will 'perish everlastingly,'
attended the first and second meetings as silent worshippers.
On the third occasion, when presenting themselves at the
door they were refused admission, on the ground that they
were unbelievers in eternal punishment. They pleaded that
they had not yet opened their lips at any of the meetings, and
had no intention of doing so. But all in vain. They were
told that their ' presence was an offence to the brethren,' who
' could not recognise them as Christians at all,' and they were
turned away ; one of them, an American, from whose lips I
received the account, saying that he little thought when
coming to London, of the honour that would be put upon him
in being counted worthy to suffer shame, and to have his
name cast out as evil, for the truth's sake. Mr. Grant will,
no doubt, say — The perpetrators of that act must have been
Darbyites. Very likely indeed ; but was their conduct one
particle worse than that which he himself is urging upon the
Evangelical Alliance ?
What a bitter satire upon the glorious word ' evangelical '
is involved in its application to the doctrine of eternal tor-
ture ! Evangelium — gospel — good news. The good mews —
that sin and misery will last for ever ; and that, not only with-
out the slightest mitigation, but with an aggravated intensity of
horror far beyond our present power of conception ! Let it not
be said that the good news consists in the offer of salvation,
and the prospect of eternal glory that is set before the
believer ; for in all that we are entirely agreed. The only
difference between us relates to the destiny of those who
finally reject the offer. So that, if the doctrine of eternal
torment is ' evangelical,' and the doctrine of destruction not
( evangelical,' it can only be that ' those intense agonies, that
1 RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF TIIE TIMES.' 209
writhing of body as well as anguish of mind ' to all eternity,
which Mr. Grant so peremptorily requires us to believe in,
are themselves regarded as an essential part of the good news.
And, according to the view of President Edwards, this is
strictly logical. For he evidently believes that the happi-
ness of the redeemed would not be complete without a con-
tinued view of the misery of the condemned : —
'When they (the saints) shall see how miserable others of their
fellow creatures are, who were naturally in the same circumstances witli
themselves ; when they shall see the smoke of their torment, and the
raging of the flames of their burning, and hear their dolorous shrieks
and cries, and consider that they, in the meantime, are in the most
blissful state, and shall surely be in it to all eternity, how will they
rejoice ! . . . How joyfully will they sing to God and the Lamb when
they behold this ! ' — Works, vol. ii. p. 209, edit. 1840.
If this be true, then an ' Evangelical Alliance ' is right in
refusing to bate one jot of all the horrors of the Augustinian
theory, and Mr. Grant is its most faithful and outspoken
representative.
The following remarks, however, — extracted from a Leaflet
entitled ' Sectarianism,' published by Mr. Kellaway, of Wey-
mouth, — are earnestly commended to the attention of all whom
they may concern : —
' A very apt writer on the subject of sectarianism once said, — '• I
learned long ago that it is not with men we are at war, but with doc-
trines and sentiments. I do not therefore see any reason why we
should act like the sons of Ishmael toward each other. A man em-
braces a false sentiment— what then? Is he therefore a hypocrite, a
scoundrel, or a liar? Who of us do not hold some sentiments which
may be wrong ? Shall we therefore all fall on each other with words and
acts of cruelty ? What little Pope amongst us will start up and say, " I
am right — you are all wrong ? " Is not every man entitled to respect, love,
kindness, and consideration? Will it reform any man to look at him
with a countenance fraught with wrath and thunder ? But the man is
in a fatal error — what then? What will save him from his error? Will
it make him see his error and our truth by appearing toward him
P
210 'RELIGIOUS TENDENCIES OF THE TIMES.'
unkind, vinegar-faced, and cloudy? Will turning Lira out of doors by
treating him with such cold contempt that he cannot remain in our
company, draw him any nearer to the truth and to Christ ? This was
not the policy of the Galilean. The enemies of Christ said before Him,
" This man reeeiveth sinners and eateth with them." Hear the reply of
the Son of God to this charge : " They that are whole need no physician ;
but they that are sick."
' One of the primary laws of reformation, both in doctrine and in
practice, is association. Jesus came down from heaven that He might
associate with men and reform them. It does not make us sinners to
talk with, walk with, eat with, worship with, sinners, of necessity. It
does not make them saints to let them see us all shun them, and treat
them with contempt. When will men learn that bigotry, sectarianism,
coldness, contempt, stiffness, and reserve, are not attractive elements ?
When will men learn that they cannot scold, drive, frighten, or repulse
human beings into truth ? When shall we learn, if men are brought
into truth at all, it will be done by association, love, plainness, frank-
ness, kindness, and argument?'
THE POWER OF PRAYER.
About twenty years ago, a Christian in Philadelphia was
asked to give a course of lectures, in answer to a book that
had lately appeared in favour of Universalism. After deliver-
ing the first lecture, he felt so deeply the responsibility of
his position that he besought the Lord with all earnestness to
show him clearly the whole truth of the matter, whatever it
might be, and whatever consequences his acknowledgment of
it might involve. His eyes were opened almost immediately,
and he saw that he and his opponent were both wrong. He
saw the glorious truth of life and immortality in Christ alone ;
and from that day to this he has seen it, with ever-increasing
clearness, to be the grand revelation which God has made to
us in His Word. He has rejoiced in being counted worthy
to suffer shame, and obloquy, and persecution for the truth as
it is in Jesus, esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches
THE POWER OF TRAYER. 211
than popular applause, the smiles of party, or even the appro-
bation of the best of men. ' If ever,' were his own words to
me, ' the Spirit of God alone taught any man any truth out of
the Word, against all his own prejudices, He taught me that.'
Reader, -will you try the same experiment, and ask God,
not to confirm you in your present opinions, but ' to show
you the whole truth of the matter, xoliatevev it may be"? If
you have sufficient distrust of your own infallibility to enable
you to do this honestly, and sufficient love of truth for its
own sake to make you do it earnestly, I shall have no fear ol
the result.
"With great reluctance, and at the last moment, I am in-
duced to mention an incident in my own experience, hoping
that it may gain from some of my friends a more dispassionate
consideration for the arguments contained in this volume.
When entering the pulpit to deliver one of the foregoing dis-
courses, I felt oppressed with a sense of my own unworthiness
of the honour which God had put upon me, in calling me to
bear witness to His truth, and probably to have my name
cast out as evil for its sake. I wondered why He could have
enrolled me among the small band of men, Avho have been
given light to see and courage to proclaim the two great
truths of revelation, namely, that life and immortality are in
Christ alone, and that at length God will be ' all in all.' At
that moment, for the first time during many years, was re-
called to my mind a petition that formed part of the first
prayer ever taught me, and which the mother of my children
was also urged to embody in theirs, — ' Give me Thy Holy
Spirit to guide me into all truth. ' The mystery was at once
explained ; the seed sown near half a century before was
sending up a fresh shoot ; and though I was almost incapaci-
p2
212 THE POWER OF PRAYER.
tated for proceeding with the sermon, I have never since
doubted the Divine call, grudged the sacrifices that it has cost
me, or quailed before the storm of opposition that I knew
full well would be evoked. Some have thought they were
doing God service by the most unscrupulous efforts to alienate
my Hock, while others have believed themselves to be proving
their faithfulness by refusing to support any public or private
benevolent enterprise with which my name might be connected.
But none of these things move me ; I know the truth, and the
truth has set me free ; it has set free many others also ; and it
will yet deliver many more from that dark shadow, out of
which even some of Christ's most honoured servants appear
so strangely unwilling to emerge.
213
BE TRUE.
' Speax thou the truth. Let others fenco
And trim their words for pay ;
In pleasant sunshine of pretence
Let others bask their day.
' Guard thou the fact ; though clouds of night
Down on thy watch-tower stoop ;
Though thou should'st see thine heart's dolight
Borne from thee by their swoop.
' Face thou the wind ; though safer seem
In shelter to abide,
We were not made to sit and dream ;
The safe must first be tried.
' Where God hath set His thorns about,
Cry not, " The way is plain ;"
His path within for those without
Is pared with toil and pain.
' One fragment of His blessed word
Into thy spirit burned,
Is better than the whole, half-heard,
And by thine interest turned.
' Show thou the light. If conscience gleam ,
Set not the bushel down ;
The smallest spark may send his beam
O'er hamlet, tower, and town.
' Woe, woe to him, on safety bent,
Who creeps to age from youth,
Failing to grasp his life's intent,
Because he fears the truth.
' Be true to every inmost thought,
And as thy thought, thy speech :
What thou hast not by suffering bought,
Presume thou not to teach.
' Hold on ! Hold on ! thou hast the rock ;
The foes are on the sand :
The first world-tempest's ruthless shock
Scatters their shifting strand.
' While each wild gust the mist shall clear
We now see darkly through ;
And justified, at last appear
The true in Him that's trvk.' — I)ncn A:
BY THE SAME AUTHOR.
' The MERCHANTS of TAESHISH ; ' or, England, America,
and Russia in the Last War. Ezekiel, Chapter XXXVIII. A Lecture de-
livered during the Crimean Campaign. Now first published. Price Gd.
OUR PRESENT POSITION. The 1260 Years of Papal
Domination just expiring, and ' The Time of the End ' commencing. Price 9d.
The CENTRAL SUPERSTITION of CHRISTENDOM.
A Sermon on the Perversion of the Lord's Supper. Second Edition. Price 3d.
The PHILOSOPHY of PRAYER; or, The Power of
Paith one of the ' Immutable Laws of the Universe.' Price Gd.
A LETTER to the BISHOP of LONDON on LITUR-
GICAL REVISION. Second Edition. Price Gd.
LECTURES on UNITARIANISM. Second Thousand.
Price 2*.
The ROMISH DOCTRINE of INTENTION ; or, Has the
Church of Rome, on her own showing, any Pope, Priest, Sacraments, or Rule of
Paith ? Third Edition. Price 3d.
The FOUNDATIONS of the EARTH. An Ancient Re-
cord, interpreted by the light of Modern Science. Price Gd.
The FIRST RESURRECTION. Reprinted from the
' Quarterly Journal of Prophecy.' Second Edition. Price Gd.
CHRISTIAN UNION. Reprinted from the 'Christian
Observer.' Price 2d.
'FORBID HIM NOT.' A Sermon on Schism. Second
Edition. Price 2d.
The SAVING POWER of the GOSPEL. Second Thousand.
Price Id.
RIGHTEOUSNESS and REDEMPTION. Second Edi-
tion. Price Id.
The BELIEVER'S COMPLETENESS in CHRIST. Sixth
Edition. Price Id.
The ETERNITY of EVIL. Eighth Thousand (exclusive
of American Editions). Price Gd. per dozen, or 3s. per 100.
LETTER to a CHRISTIAN MINISTER on FUTURE
PUNISHMENT. Third Thousand. Price Id. or Gs. per 100.
TRUTH and LOVE. Price Gd. per dozen, or 3s. per 100.
DEATH and DESTRUCTION. Notes on an Address
delivered at a Clerical Meeting in defence of the Doctrine that the end of the
wicked will be an everlasting life of misery in the world to come. Price Id. or
6*. per 100.
IMMORTALITY. An appeal to Evangelist?!. With a Letter
from the Rev. Dr. Mortimer, late Head Master of the City of London School.
Price Hd. per dozen, or 3s. per 100.
' WHOSE END IS DESTRUCTION.' Price Gd. per dozen,
or 3s. per 100.
'The WAY EVERLASTING.' A Review of the Con-
troversy upon Eternal Evil. Price Is.
The DESTINY of the ELECT CHURCH. Rom. viii. 29, 30.
Price 3d.
*** Most of the above may be obtained at a reduced price from S. Lynch,
57 Coleshill Street, Eaton Square.
The following Works may be consulted upon the main
subject treated of in this volume.
REVELATIONS of a FUTURE STATE.
Archbishop Whately. Longmans.
ESSAYS in ECCLESIASTICAL BIOGRAPHY
(The Epilogue). Sir James Stephen. Longmans.
LIFE in CHRIST ; or, Immortality peculiar to the
Regenerate.
Eev. E. White. Jackson & Walford.
LIFE or DEATH.
E. F. Litton, M.A., Barrister-at-Law. Longmans.
CHRIST our LIFE. Price Is. Gd.
A Clergyman of the Established Church (the late Rev. W. de Burgh).
Simpkin, Marshall, & Co.
POPULAR IDEAS of IMMORTALITY.
Rev. W. Ker, M.A., Incumbent of Tipton, Staffordshire. Laxton, Dudley.
ENDLESS SUFFERINGS not the DOCTRINE of
SCRIPTURE.
Rev. T. Davis, M.A., Incumbent of Roundhay, Yorkshire. Longmans.
The DURATION and NATURE of FUTURE
PUNISHMENT. Price 2s.
Rev. H. Constable, M.A., Prebendary of Cork. Longmans.
The TRIPARTITE NATURE of MAN.
Rev. J. B. Heard, M.A. Hamilton, Adams, & Co.
LIFE and DEATH, as TAUGHT in SCRIPTURE.
Elliot Stock.
EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT not EVERLASTING
PAIN.
Rev. R. Reynoldson, for nearly 40 years Minister of Upper Hill Street Chapel,
Wisbeach. Elliot Stock.
ETERNAL PUNISHMENT and ETERNAL DEATH.
Rev. J. W. Barlow, M.A., Fellow and Tutor of Trinity College, Dublin.
Longmans.
SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE of FUTURE PUNISHMENT.
Rev. H. H. Dobney. "Ward & Co.
The KINGDOM of GOD.
Henry Dunn. Simpkin, Marshall, & Co.
The DURATION of EVIL. Simpkin, Marshall, & Co.
The QUESTION of AGES. W. Morris, M.D., Philadelphia.
DEBT and GRACE. Professor Hudson, New York.
The ENTIRE EVIDENCE of EVANGELISTS and
APOSTLES on FUTURE PUNISHMENT. Price 1*. Gd.
Rev. W. Griffith. Elliot Stock.
The RESTITUTION of ALL THINGS. Price 8d.
Rev. H. Constable, M.A., Prebendary of Cork. James Clarke & Co.
LIFE in CHRIST ONLY. Price Cd.
Rev. E. White. James Clarke & Co.
PAULINE THEOLOGY. Price Is.
W. H. Hastings, Boston, U.S. Elliot Stock.
FORGOTTEN THEMES, or FACTS for FAITH. Price Is.
G. A. Brewer, Plymouth, U.S. Elliot Stock.
The MOMENTOUS QUESTION— Who shall Live for Ever ?
Price Zd. W. Morris. Elliot Stock.
A DIALOGUE on LIFE in CHRIST. Price 4d.
S. Wright. Elliot Stock.
FOR GOD and the TRUTH. A Reply to Dr. Angus.
Price 2d. Elliot Stock.
FUTURE PUNISHMENT. Letter to a Lady. Price Id.
Henry Constable, M.A. Prebendary of Cork. Elliot Stock.
WILL SIN and SUFFERING be EVERLASTING?
Price M. Joseph Stratford. Elliot Stock.
REV. S. MINTON RIGHT, and the RECORD WRONG,
on the Question of Endless Miseries.
Rev. H. Smith Warleiuh, Rector of Abchurch. Elliot Stock.
The RAINBOW. Gd. monthly. Kent & Co.
OLD TRUTHS in NEW FORMS. Price Is.
Rev. Joseph Parker, D.D. Hurren, Poultry Chapel House, Cheapside.
ftp <k i -y
! ' Hi
m
m
.'■'■•-• V'-
Hii
SB
h££9
Safi
Ml
mm
sasss
g&g
K?ms3iiL
SfiaHS
Hi
Jntfn
SSffiL
