Skip to main content

Full text of "The verdict of reason upon the question of the future punishment of those who die impenitent"

See other formats 


THE 


YERDICT  OF  REASON 


UPON  THE  QUESTION  OF 


THE  FUTUEE  PUNISHMENT  OF  THOSE  WHO  DIE 
IMPENITENT. 


BY 


HENRY  MARTYN  DEXTER. 


■4- 


BOSTON: 
NICHOLS     AND     NOYES. 

186  5. 


THE  NEW  YORK 


PUBLIC 


7571 


Ll 


ASTOR,  LEMOX  AND 
a  i93S>  (L 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1865,  by 

NICHOLS  AND  NOYES, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  for  the  District  of  Massachusetts. 


GEO.  C.   RAXD    &    AVERT, 
STEREOTYPERS     AND     PRINTERS 


TO 


THE  ^EMBEKS 

OF 

THE  BERKELEY-STREET  CHURCH  AND  CONGREGATION, 

IN 

BOSTON, 

WHOM    IT   IS   MY  JOY   TO  SERVE   IN   THE   GOSPEL, 


^k  f  itlb  ^xzntm. 


ORIGINALLY    PREPARED    FOR    THEIR    PULPIT,    AND    NOW    REVISED    AND 

REPUBLISHED,    LARGELY    IN    THE    HOPE   THAT    IT   MAY 

BENEFIT  SOME   OF   THEM, 

IS    AFFECTIONATELY    DEDICATED. 


CO 


o 
cc 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 


In-  the  summer  of  1858,  certain  circumstances  gave 
special  prominence  in  this  community  to  the  ques- 
tion of  the  reasonableness  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
future  eternal  punishment  of  those  who  die  impeni- 
tent ;  and,  in  accordance  with  what  he  believdd  to 
be  his  duty,  the  author  prepared,  and  preached  to 
his  o^\Ti  congregation,  two  sei*mons  maintaining  the 
affirmative  of  that  question,  which,  on  request,  were 
afterwards  published.  Through  the  favor  of  the 
public,  they  reached  a  wide  circulation ;  and  the  de- 
mand for  them  has  showed  itself  occasionally  in 
letters  from  distant  places,  asking  for  copies,  up  to 
the  present  time.  Lately  these  letters  have  taken  the 
form  of  a  request  that,  the  sermons  might  be  recast 
into  a  brief  treatise,  and  re-issued  in  a  form  better 
suited  for  general  circulation  and  for  preservation ; 
a  request  which,  in  view  of  some  of  the  tendencies 
of  the  pubhc  mind,  and  the  feehng  that  no  man  has 
any  right  to  withhold  from  the  conflict  of  opinion 


VI  INTRODUCTORY  NOTE. 

any  agency  which  God  seems  to  claim  from  him 
for  it,  it  has  not  been  thought  right  to  decline. 

In  the  work  of  recasting,  care  has  been  taken  to 
condense  and  clarify  the  argument  as  much  as  possi- 
ble in  some  directions,  while  enlarging  it  in  others ; 
and  constant  reference  has  been  had  to  objections 
brought  against  it  by  some  who  criticised  it  at  the 
date  of  its  first  issue. 

H.    M.   D. 
Hillside,  Roxbury,  8th  May,  1865. 


ANALYSIS, 


QUESTION :  Is  it  reasonable  that  God  should  pun- 
ish  ETERNALLY  .  THOSE  WHO   DIE   IMPENI^CE;?!  ? 

CHAPTER  I.    Eeason  the  ultimate  Judge p.  1 

The  question  a  reasonable  one 1 

Loose  use  of  the  tei-m  Reason  to  be  avoided 2 

Term  used  here  to  signify  Common  Sense,  in  its 

broadest  and  most  conscientious  use 2 

That  Reason  — so  defined  — is  Judge,  philosophi- 
cally inevitable 3 

Reason  behind  the  Bible  and  the  Judge  of  it 4 

God  gave  it  to  us  to  be  our  Guide 5 

The  Scriptures  take  it  for  granted  as  such 6 

It  must  be,  then,  our  Judge,  or  God  has  left  us 

helpless 7 

CHAPTER  II.    The  Peenciples  on  which  Reason   must 

DECIDE 8 

I.  Reason  —  wliile  final  Judge  —  insufficient  alone.      8 

II.  She  decides  thai  God  may  be  expected  to  help  her 

by  some  Revelation 9 

in.  She  decides  that  the  Bible  is  that  Revelation  of 

help 11 

She  would  be  justified  in  rejecting  its  claim:— 

(1.)  If  there  were  no  evidence  of  any  God 13 

(2.)  If  his  character  made  it  most  improbable 

that  he  would  give  help 13 

(3.)  If  man  needed  no  revelation 13 

VII 


VIII  ANALYSIS. 

(4. )  If  outward  improbabilities  overweighed  the 

inwai-d  probability  of  the  Bible 13 

(5.)  Or,  the  reverse:  — 

(a.)  If  it  made  no  real  revelation 14 

(b.)  If  it  were  a  weak  and  silly  volume 14 

(c. )  If  it  were  self-contradictory 15 

(d.)  If  it  contradicted  facts  obvious  to  sense..    15 

(e.)  If  it  contradicted  natural  morality 15 

Illustration  from  the  Ocean  Telegraph 16 

Great  liability  of  misjudgment  from  imperfect 

information 19 

Philosophical  to  believe,  on  eternal  subjects, 
even  in  the  face  of  great  difficulties,  when 
they  are  due  to  the  imperfection  of  our  fac- 
ulties      19 

Judgment  of  Sir  Matthew  Hale 20 

Judgment  of  Jil'Cosh 21 

IV.  Having  accepted  the  Bible,  Reason  decides  it  rea- 
sonable to  make  it  her  guide,  when  interpreted 
on  sound  principles.  But  what  are  sound  prin- 
ciples f 21 

A.  We  must  taJce  the  whole  of  it  or  none 22 

(a.)  The  evidence  for  any  of  it  is  evidence 

for  all 23 

(b.)  A  semi-revelation  would  need  another  to 
supplement  it,  and  another  to  supple- 
ment that,  and  so  on  ad  infinitum 24 

B.  It  must  he  interpreted  by  the  laws  of  language 

honestly,  honorably,  and  without  artifice  to 
suit  a  theory 25 

C.  It  must  be  so  interpreted  as  to  be  self-consist- 

ent      27 

D.  The  most  obvious  meaning  —  other  things  being 

equal —  the  probable  one 27 

E.  It  must  be  interpreted  as  a  progressive  revela- 

tion      28 

F.  It  should  be  interpreted  naturally,  and  from  the 

position  of  its  own  speakers  and  audiences. . .     29 

G.  Tet,  with  all,  we  can  not  —  icith  our  finite  minds 

at  their  present  stage  of  development  —  ex- 


A^'^ALYSIS.  IX 

pect  to  understand  it  all ;  perhaps,  indeed, 

little  of  it  fully 30 

Illustration  from  the  child  and  the  telegraph 
wire 30 

H.   Of  two  possible  meanings,  thai  likeliest  to  he 
true  which  has  most  commended  itself  to  the 

Christian  exj^erience  of  the  past 31 

Not  necessarily  of  "  the  Church  " 33 

God's  promise  to  lead  his  people  into  all 
truth  must  have  left  traces  in  the  exegesis 

of  the  past 33 

I.   Of  iico  possible  meanings  of  a  text,  that  is  often 
probably  truest  which  is  least  tasteful  tons. ..     33 

Medicine  apt  to  be  bitter 34 

Sin  apt  to  be  hostile  to  its  own  correctives . .    34 
J.   Of  tico  possible  meanings  that  is  most  reasona- 

able  tchich  is  safest  for  man 34 

Objected.  (1.)  Proves  too  much  and  would 

make  Romanists  of  us 36 

Ans. :  Not  unless  the  claim  of  Rome 
is  valid,  and  if  it  is  we  ought 

to  go  to  it  in  any  event 3f» 

(2.)  To  make  safety  a 'considera- 
tion is  cowardly  and  dishon- 
orable, and  would  have 
made  a  man  a  tory  in  the 
Revolution,  and  a  copper- 
head now 36 

Ans. :  This  begs  the  question  in  dis- 
pute, besides  ignoring  the 
distinction  between  safety 
as  a  principle  of  exegesis, 

and  as  a  rule  of  life 36 

Safety  for  men  is  the  animus 
of  the  Gospel,  and  so  is  le- 
gitimate as  interpreting  its 

records 37 

These  objectors  consult  safe- 
ty in    daily    matters,    and 
have  no  fear  of  its  being 
"  selfishness,"  or  cowardice.     37 
Summary  of  the  argument  thus  far 38 


X  ANALYSIS. 

CHAPTER  III.  The  Testimony  of  the  Old  Testament 40 

God's  word  to  Adam,  (Gen.  ii.  17),  the  corner  stone 
of  the  fabric 41 

Means  more  than  prophecy  of  death 41 

Means  more  than  threat  of  death 41 

Means  more  than  mere  emphasis 42 

It  projects  a  mysterious  menace  over  into  the  fu- 
ture      44 

This  corner  stone  not  immediately  built  upon 
because  of  the  too  great  immaturity  of  the  race 

at  that  time 45 

Objection:  If  future  punishment  be  true,  God 
ought  to  have  revealed  it  so  that  Adam  and  all 
men  could  have  understood  it,  from  the  first. .     46 

Ans. :  (1.)  It  was  revealed  sufficiently 47 

(2.)  If  it  could  have  been  miraculously 
made  clearer  there  would  be  no  gain 
to  the  believer,  and  more  loss  to  the 

denier 47 

(3.)  In  any  event  guilt  and  light  are  pro- 
portionate       47 

Illustration,  in  regard  to  deadly  poison 47 

The  Jews  believed  in  the  immortality  of  the  soul  48 
The  testimony  of  Moses,  Enoch,  Jacob  and  Job .  48 
The  Psalmist  speaks  more  clearly  of  separation 

between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked 49 

Testimony  from  Proverbs,  Ecclesiastes,  Isaiah, 

Ezekiel,  Nahum  and  Daniel 49 

History  of  the  word  sheol  as  illustrating  the  pi'o- 

gress  of  the  Hebrew  mind  in  this  doctrine 52 

Testimony  of  Josephus,  Jahn,  the  Rabbis,  and 
the  Apocrypha,  that  the  Jews  at  the  date  of 
Christ's  coming  actually  did  believe  in  the  fu- 
ture punishment  of  the  wicked 53 

Objection :  That  the  Jews  got  this  from  Alexan- 
dria, and  not  from  the  Old  Testa- 
ment      56 

Ans.:  Alexandria  was  not  built  until  hundreds 
of  yeai's  after  the  doctrine  asserts  itself 
clearly  in  the  Old  Testament.  Easier  to 
prove  Alexandria  indebted  to  Judea, 
than  the  contrary 56 


ANALYSIS.  XI 

The  actual  teaching  of  the  Old  Testament,  then, 
would  seem  to  have  made  the  Jews  believers  in 
future  punishment 57 

The  fact  that  they  were  so  when  Christ  came, 
though  it  does  not  demonstrate  the  doctrine,  nor 
prove  that  they  got  it  from  their  Scriptures, 
hightens  the  probability  of  both,  and  is  of  the 
greatest  consequence  in  the  interpretation  of 
Christ's  own  teaching 58 

CHAPTER  IV.  The  Testimony  of  Cheist 59 

Objection :  Christ's  words  were  too  fragmentary  and 
poetical  to  bear  rigid  classification  into 

doctrine 59 

Ans. :  Granted  (for  argument's  sake),  still  he  did 
teach  something,  and  knew  the  bearing  of 

it  upon  the  facts 59 

These  things  must  be  true  :  — 
(1.)  Christ  knew  that  the  Jews  believed  future 

punishment 60 

(2.)  He  was  himself  a  Universalist,  or  an  oppo- 
nent of  its  faith 60 

(3.)  He  knew  that  the  truth  on  this  subject  was 
of  great  consequence,  and  must  have  had 
an  earnest  desire  that  all  should  know  it. .     60 
(4.)  For  him  to  say  nothing,  then,  would  be  to 

*  endorse  the  doctrine 60 

(5.)  To  have  spoken  casually  of  it  without  con- 
demnation, would  endorse  it 61 

(6.)  His  direct  utterance  must  be  taken  to  its  full- 
est extent  as  endorsement  if  favorable  in 
any  particular,  and  unfavorable  in  none. .     61 
Illustration :  of  one  lecturing  on  political  economy 
in  Charleston,  S.  C,  since  the  Rebel- 
lion      61 

If  Christ  were  a  Universalist,  we  shall  find  him 

teaching  like  one 62 

Follow  his  recorded  words  in  their  order  of  utter- 
ance and  see 62 

Conversation  with  Nicodemus 62 

Interview  with  the  woman  at  Jacob's  well 63 


XII  ANALYSIS. 

At  tlie  pool  of  Bethesda 64 

Sermon  on  the  Slount 65 

Healing  of  the  Centurion's  servant 66 

Upbraiding  the  cities 67 

Healing  the  demoniac 67 

Dining  with  the  Pharisee 67 

Parable  of  the  tares  and  its  interpretation 68 

Parable  of  the  net 68 

Sending  out  of  the  Apostles 69 

Discourse  at  Capernaum  —  the  "  hard  saying  " . .  69 
What  is  a  man  profited  to  gain  the  world  and  lose 

the  soul? 70 

Who  shall  be  greatest?  70 

Sending  forth  the  seventy 71 

Reproving  the  unbelieving  Jews  at  Jerusalem. .  71 

"  Lord  !  are  there  few  that  be  saved  ?  " 71 

Parable  of  Lazarus,  &c 72 

The  rich  young  man 72 

The  parable  of  the  wicked  husbandman 73 

Denouncing  the  Pharisees 73 

Prediction  of  the  judgment 73 

Everlasting  punishment 74 

AiuvLog 74 

Before  Gethsemane 75 

On  the  way  to  the  cross 76 

After  the  resurrection  —  the  last  command 76 

John's  summary 76 

All  these  are  anti-Unlversalist  words  ;  everj'-  one . .  77 
Only  way  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  Christ  op- 
posed Universalism  is  to  deny  that  the  New  Tes- 
tament is  to  be  depended  upon  as  fairly  reporting 

him 77 

Affirmations  of  Theodore  Parker  to  that  affect. .  77 

Equivalent  conclusion  of  Eev.  Thos.  Starr  King.  78 

Similar  averment  of  M.  Eenan 79 

The  New  Testament  settles  it,  then,  that  Christ 
shared  and  advocated  the  doctrine,  which  he 

found  in  the  nation,  of  future  eternal  punishment.  80 


ANALYSIS.  XIII 

CHAPTER  V.  The  Testimony  of  the  Apostles 81 

Stream  is  not  expected  to  rise  higher  than  its 

fountain 81 

Great  burden  of  Apostolic  Christianity,  salva- 
tion for  the  lost 82 

Peter  at  Pentecost 82 

Healing  of  the  lame  man 82 

Peter  to  the  Sanhedrim 82 

To  Cornelius 82 

Paul  at  Antioch  in  Pisidia 82 

Paul  to  the  Galatians 83 

To  the  Thessalonians 83 

To  the  Corinthians 84 

To  the  Romans 84 

To  the  Ephesians 86 

To  the  Philippiaus U 

To  the  Hebrews 86 

Peter,  in  his  Epistle 87 

James,  in  his 87 

Jude,  in  his 87 

John,  in  the  Apocalypse ^S 

CHAPTER  VT.  The  more  indirect  Testimonies  of  the 

Bible 89 

If  the  Bible  really  teaches  the  future  punishment 
of  the  wicked,  it  must  show  it  indirectly  in  a 
thousand  ways  of  allusion  and  inference  —  a  form 

of  proof  of  great  value 90 

Does  it  do  this,  or  does  it  similarly  teach  Univer- 
salism  ?  Let  us  examine  a  few  classes  of  passa- 
ges.   We  shall  find  affirmations  like  these  :  — 

1.  Some  men  will  be  excluded  from  the  king- 

dom of  God 90 

2.  Some  will  never  possess  holiness 90 

3.  Some  never  will  see  life 91 

4.  Some  die  without  any  hope 91 

5.  Some  have  no  forgiveness 91 

6.  For  some  the  atonement  will  not  avail 91 

7.  The  atonement  will  aggravate  the  condem- 

nation of  some 91 

S.    .The  state  of  the  dead  will  be  unalterably 

fixed 91 


XVI  ANALYSIS. 

The  indirect  evidence  of  the  Bible  does  then  affirm 

the  futui-e  punishment  of  the  wicked 107 

Summary  of  the  argument  from  the  Scriptures 109 

CHAPTER  VII.  There  is  no  reasonable  objection  to 

THIS    testimony    WHICH     HAS     FORCE    TO 
MODIFY    IT 113 

It  is  objected  :  — 

I.  That  the  Bible  does  not  really  teach  the  dociriney 

after  all 114 

(1.)  Because  the  texts  quoted  do  not  fairly  im- 
ply It J14 

(a.)  The  word  "perish"   does  not    imply 

eternal  death 114 

(b.)  Nor  the  phrases  "kingdom  of  God," 

and  "  kingdom  of  heaven,"  &c 116 

(c.)  Nor  the  words  "  damn,"  "  damnation," 

&c. 117 

(d.)  Nor  the  words  "  save,"  "  salvation,"  &c.  119 
(e.)  Nor  the  words  "sheol,"   "Gehenna," 

&c 121 

But  (i.)  Gehenna  did  mean  that   to 

the  Jews  when  Christ  came . .  122 
(ii.)  Christ  used  it  so  that  he  knew 
he  should    be  understood  in 

that  sense 123 

(f.)  Nor  the  words  "  eternal,"  "  everlasting," 

"  for  ever,"  &c 125 

(2.)  Because,  even  if  these  texts  do  teach  it,  there 

are  others  that  contradict  it 127 

II.  But,  even  if  the  Bible  does  teach  the  doctrine, 

it  is  objected  that  it  is  imjyossible  for  us  to  be- 
lieve it,  because  it  is  overruled  by  other  con- 

tr oiling  considerations 129 

(1.)  Men  cannot  believe  it  and  live  In  any  peace. 
But  God  has  shielded  the  sensitiveness  of 
the  soul;  and  men  do  live  in  the  same 
world  with   awful  suffering,  and  live  in 

peace 129 

Besides,  God's  justice  is  administered  in  in- 


ANALYSIS.  xvn 

finite  kindness;  and  he  does  just  iHght  with 

aU. 131 

(2.)  The  end  of  all  punishment  is  restorative,  and 
so  future  eternal  punishment  can  not  be 

true 132 

But  this  is  pure  assumption 132 

(3.)  Eternal  fiiture  punishment  would  be  unjust, 

and  so  can  not  be  true 133 

But  (a.)  Is  this  true  ? 133 

(i.)    We  can  not  know  that  it  is 133 

(ii.)  Sin  expresses  disposition,  and  one 
sin  may  reveal  a  heart  of  mur- 
der   134 

(iii.)  If  a  sinner  will  not  repent,  and  dies, 

and  persists  in  sinning  for  ever, 

what  shall  be  done  with  him?..  135 

(b.)  It  is  urged,  that,  even  if  future  pim- 

ishment  can  be  abstractly  just,  it 

can  not  be  concretely  so  for  men ; 

for  they  have  not  been  duly  notified 

of  their  danger 136 

But  all  who  have  the  Bible  are  "  du- 
ly notified;"  and  the  Heathen  (i.) 
have  the  light  of  nature,  which  Paul 
says  puts  them  "  without  excuse," 
and  (ii.)  are  in  the  hands  of  infinite 
justice  administered  with  infinite 

kindness 136 

(4.)  It  is  said  that  there  will  be  future  probation.  137 

(a.)  No  evidence  of  any 138 

(b.)  Such  a  probation  would  be  needless 

and  unreasonable 138 

(c.)  There  is  no  probability  that  men  would 
repent  in  a  second  probation  who  had 

resisted  the  first 138 

(d.)  Such  a  theory  makes  no  provision  for 

the  obdurate 139 

(e.)  The  Bible  asserts  the  absolute  contrary.  139 
(5.)  It  is  said  that  the  wicked  will  be  annihilat- 
ed   140 

(a.)  If  this  were  true,  it  would  be  worst  of  all.  140 
2 


XVIII  ANALYSIS. 


(b.)  It  is  doubtful  if  a  soul  can  cease  to  live. .  140 
(c.)  All  the  evideuce  that  souls  exist  proves 

them  immortal 140 

(d.)  No  evidence  that  death  does  more  than 

transfer 140 

(e.)  We  have  an  instinct  of  immortality 141 

(f.)  Conscience  argues  eternal  life 141 

(g.)  God's  moral  government  requires  it 141 

(h.)  No  evidence  from  the  Bible  of  any  dis- 
crimination as  to  the  fact  of  future  life, 

between  men 141 

(i.)  All  texts  which  assert  future  punishment 
imply  its  infliction  on  conscious  suffer- 
ers    141 

Testimony  of  Prof.  Barrows 142 

(6.)  It  is  said  God  is  too  good  to  punish  men  for 

ever,  no  matter  what  they  do 142 

But   (a.)  facts  show  that  this  kind  of  reasoning 

is  unsafe 143 

It  would  have  njftde  Fort  Pillow  and 

Andersonville  impossible 144 

(b. )  Severity  is  one  center  in  the  ellipse  of 
God's  nature,  while  goodness  is  the 

other 145 

(c.)  The  only  safe  course  is  to  inquire  of 

the  Bible 147 

These  arguments,  then,  amount  to  noth- 
ing   150 

There  is  no  valid  objection  of  any  sort 
ao-ainst  the  doctrine 151 


CHAPTER  VIII.  Summing  up  of  the  Aegument 152 

(1.)  Reason  is  first  and  final  arbiter 152 

(2.)  She  decides  that  she  needs  help 152 

(3.)  She  decides  that  she  may  expect  it  from  God.  152 
(4.)  She  decides  that  the  Bible  brings  that  help. . .  152 
(5.)  She  decides  that  it  is  reasonable  for  her  to 

take  its  testimony  fairly  rendered 152 

(6.)  She  decides  on  the  conditions  of  a  fair  render- 
ing   152 


ANALYSIS.  XIX 

(7.)  She  decides  that,  on  those  conditions,  it  does 
reveal  the  fact  that  the  impenitent  will  be 

punished  for  ever 153 

(8.)  She  decides  that  no  valid  objection  lies  against 

this  view 153 

(9.)  Therefore  she  decides  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
future  endless  punishment  of  those  ivho  die  im- 
penitent is  in  the  highest  degree  one  reason- 
ably to  be  believed 153 

Is  it  not  wise  to  accept  this  result  ? 154 

Is  it  not  safest  to  do  so  ? 154 

A  consistent  Universalist  can  not  believe  the  Bible.  155 
So  Theodore  Parker  and  Thomas  Paine  taught,  and 

so,  one  day,  all  will  judge 155 

Let  us,  then,  follow  Eeason  and  the  Word,  and  re- 
pent and  believe  and  live 156 


VEEDICT    OF    EEASON. 


CHAPTEE  I. 

REASON   THE   ULTIMATE  JUDGE. 

THE  question  before  us  for  consideration  is  tHs :  Is  it 
reasonable  that  God  should  punish  eternally  those 
who  persist  in  sin  and  die  impenitent? 

I  wish  to  be  understood,  in  the  outset,  as  admitting 
that  this  is  a  perfectly  fair  question,  and  one  which  every 
man  not  merely  has  a  right  to  ask,  but  is  bound  to  ask. 
I  do  not  sjTnpathize  at  all  with  those  who  have  spoken 
from  among  us,  who  have,  sometimes  at  least,  seemed  to 
decry  reason  as  a  dangerous  arbiter  in  matters  of  reHgion ; 
and  who  have  been  understood  —  whether  with  full  inten- 
tion on  their  own  part  or  not  —  to  take  substantially  the 
ground,  that,  no  matter  how  unreasonable  a  thing  may 
be,  men  are  still  bound  to  beheve  it  if  the  Bible  seems  to 
assert  it. 

I  hold,  on  the  contrary,  as  Lord  Bacon  says,  that  "  the 
first  principle  of* religion  is  right  reason."  I  believe  that 
God  gave  us  our  human  intelligence  —  that  aggregate  of 
1  1 


'A  VERDICT. OF  REASON. 

mental  and  moral  powers  which  distinguishes  us  from  the 
bi-uteSj  the  natural  and  healthy  working  of  which  we  are 
accustomed  to  call  "the  exercise  of  our  common  sense "  — 
in  order  that  we  may  use  it  in  the  acquisition,  criticism, 
and  acceptance  of  all  truth.  I  believe,  that,  as  sentient 
and  immortal  beings,  we  are  solemnly  bound  to  receive 
and  incorporate  into  our  life  every  thing  which  it  indorses 
as  truth.  I  believe,  on  the  other  hand,  that  we  are  as 
solemnly  bound  to  reject  from  our  faith  and  life  every 
thing  which,  after  thorough  and  honest  scrutiny,  it  con- 
demns as  false. 

Be  pleased  however  to  notice,  in  this  connection,  the 
fact  that  a  loose  and  narrower  usage  of  the  word  "  reason  " 
has  sometimes  prevailed  among  writers  on  this  subject, 
which  would  vitiate  my  proposition.  Such  is  that  of  that 
German  school  of  philosophy  which  appropriates  the  term 
to  those  intuitional  conceptions  which  the  mind  has  of  the 
true,  the  beautiful,  and  the  good.  In  that  transcendental 
use  of  the  term,  reason  would  be  very  far  from  being  the 
ultunate  —  as  it  would  fall  utterly  short  of  being  a  safe  — 
arbiter  of  religious  questions ;  since  it  would  substitute 
what  is  practically  undistinguishable  from  the  fervid  or 
morbid  dreams  of  the  imagination,  working  alone,  for  those 
calm  decisions  of  the  grouped  and  balanced  faculties  which 
furnish  the  only  secure  data  of  life,  whether  considered  in 
its  relations  to  the  here  or  the  hereafter.    * 

That  reason  —  thus  defined  as   common   sense  in  its 


REASON  THE  ULTIMATE  JUDGE.  3 

broadest  and  most  conscientious  use  —  is  for  every  man  the 
ultimate  judge  on  all  subjects,  and  so  on  religious  subjects, 
•will  be  made  clear  from  the  consideration  of  the  fact,  that, 
by  the  very  constitution  of  the  human  soul,  it  cannot  be 
otherwise. 

It  is  a  matter  of  course  that  his  t)wn  reason  must  be 
itself  the  arbiter  for  every  man,  or  that  something  else  must 
be  that  arbiter. 

But  if  something  else,  then  what  ?  Shall  it  be  the  dic- 
tum of  another  man,  or  of  some  other  being  less  than  God, 
or  of  God?  If  of  another  man,  by  what  authority?  and 
if  of  any  other  created  bemg,  or  of  God,  on  what  evidence  ? 
What  shall  decide  that  any  communication  purporting  to 
bring  wisdom  and  judgment  from  any  superior  source, 
whether  angelic  or  divine,  is  really  what  it  purports  to  be, 
and  not  a  fallacy  or  a  fraud  ? 

The  only  practicable  source  of  answer  to  these  questions 
is  for  the  man  himself  to  decide.  He  must  say,  "  My  fel- 
low-man, or  some  superhuman  agent,  or  the  Divine  Being, 
knows  more  than  I  do  about  this  matter,  and  has  spoken ; 
and  it  is  safer  for  me  to  trust  him  than  to  trust  myself; 
and  I  am  satisfied,  on  scrutiny,  that  this  communica- 
tion is  really  from  him  from  whom  it  purports  to  come,  and 
therefore  I  shall  receive  it  and  act  upon  it."  He  must 
say  this,  or  its  opposite,  in  regard  to  every  such  claim  from 
any  source  to  set  up  a  tribunal  over  him ;  must  say  it,  and 
act  accordingly. 


4  VERDICT  OF  REASOX. 

But  that  speech,  and  the  decision  which  it  enshrines,  is 
nothing  less  than  a  judgment  upon  that  claim  to  judge  ; 
"and,  in  judging  it,  the  man  erects  himself  into  a  tribunal  of 
last  resort  above  it :  so  that,  if  it  gets  power  over  his  own 
future,  it  is  only  in  virtue  of  the  fact  that  in  judging  thus 
he  has  given  to  it  that  power.  So  that  his  reason  remains 
the  ultimate  arbiter,  after  all. 

This  makes  it  clear  that  God  has  so  constituted  every 
man  monarch  of  himself,  that  he  cannot,  if  he  would,  abdi- 
cate the  function  of  being  the  judge  of  what  is  best  for 
himself;  cannot,  if  he  would,  disen throne  himself  of  this 
imperial  task  and  responsibility. 

"But,"  asks  somebody  who  has  been  accustomed  to 
hear  it  spoken  of  as  a  feaifal,  and  fearfully  common, 
thing  for  men  to  set  reason  above  revelation,  "  is  not  the 
Bible  to  be  received  in  every  event  ?  Is  not  whatever  it 
teaches  to  be  imj)licitly  accepted,  and  acted  upon,  however 
much  reason  may  object  against  it?  " 

I  answer,  — 

1.  We  do  not  know  that  we  need  any  revelation  at  all, 
except  as  reason  so  declares. 

2.  And  when  that  fact  has  been  determined,  and  we 
look  around  for  a  supply  for  our  asserted  need,  it  is  only 
by  reason  that  we  can  identify  our  Bible,  and  settle  it, 
whether  we  ought  to  take  the  Sibylline  leaves  of  the  Ro- 
mans, or  the  Shasters  of  the  Hindus,  or  the  Arabic  Koran, 
or  the  Book  of  Mormon,  or  the  Christian  Scriptures,  for 


REASON  THE  ULTIMATE  JUDGE.  5 

our  guide.  And  if  the  Christian  Scriptures  had  the  qual- 
ities of  the  Koran,  and  the  Koran  the  quahties  of  the  Chris- 
tian Scriptures,  we  should  be  compelled  by  reason  to  reject 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  and  accept  the  oracles  of 
Mahomet ;  on  the  gi'ound  that  the  latter,  rather  than  the 
former,  came  from  a  compassionating  holy  God  to  needy  and 
sinful  man. 

But  if  Reason  must  thus  decide  whether  we  need  any 
revelation  at  all,  and,  if  we  do,  must  further  decide  between 
the  conflicting  claims  upon  our  acceptance  of  different  and 
incompatible  volumes,  each  affirming  itself  to  be  that  reve- 
lation, it  becomes  clear,  that,  in  this  radically  important 
sense,  it  is  inevitable  to  that  constitution  of  things  which 
God  has  given  us,  that  Reason  should  be  our  ultimate  judge 
in  all  matters  of  religious  truth.  It  is  the  faculty  which 
God  has  created  in  us  to  be  our  guide  to  himself.  He 
gave  us  eyes  with  which  to  see,  and  ears  with  which  to 
hear,  and  the  whole  group  of  the  senses  to  put  us  into  com- 
munication with  external  nature,  and  notify  us  of  those 
facts  appertaining  to  it,  in  view  of  which  our  life  ought  to 
be  shaped.  So  he  gave  us  intellect  and  sensibility,  and  con- 
science and  will,  that,  from  their  co-working  in  ' '  good  com- 
mon sense,"  we  might  be  put  rightly  into  relation  with  the 
moral  and  spiritual  world,  with  time  and  eternity.  And 
as  we  should  displease  God  if  we  were  to  neglect  or  misuse 
the  senses  to  our  own  disaster,  so,  by  an  emphasis  gather- 
ing force  from  the  infinite  issues  involved,  should  we  dis- 


6  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

please  him  if  we  were  to  dethrone  Reason  in  order  to  set 
up  any  other  tribunal  of  moral  and  spiritual  duty. 

The  Bible  everywhere  conforms  to  and  recognizes  this 
\dew.  Abraham,  pleading  for  Sodom,  referred  to  the  stan- 
dard of  rioht  and  wrono;  existing  in  the  common  sense  of  the 
race,  —  implanted  there  by  God  himself  as  the  countersign 
by  which  men  may  surely  recognize  him  and  his  works, 
—  and  reasoned  on  the  assumption  that  he  who  had  or- 
dained such  a  tribunal  would  not  desecrate  or  do  violence 
to  it,  when  he  said,  "  That  be  iwv  from  thee  to  do  after  this 
manner,  to  slay  the  righteous  with  the  wicked ;  and  that 
the  righteous  should  be  as  the  wicked,  that  be  far  from 
thee :  shall  not  the  Jud2;e  of  all  the  earth  do  rio;ht  ?  "  ^  And 
God,  by  his  tone  of  reply,  approved  the  view  which  the 
patriarch  took.  Isaiah  was  directed  by  the  Lord  to  appeal 
to  this  same  standard  :  "  And  now,  0  inhabitants  of  Jeru- 
salem and  men  of  Judah,  judge,  I  pray  you,  betwixt  me 
and  my  vineyard  :  what  could  have  been  done  more  to  my 
vineyai'd  that  I  have  not  done  in  it  ?  Wherefore,  when  I 
looked  that  it  should  bring  forth  gTapes,  brought  it  forth 
wild  gi-apes?  "^  So  the  18th  and  the  33d  chapters  of  the 
prophecy  of  Ezekiel  are  mainly  the  record  of  an  argument 
addressed  to  the  Jews  by  the  prophet,  at  God's  command 
and  dictation,  making  appeal  before  this  very  tribunal  of 
right  reason  and  sound  common  sense,  which  he  had  set  up 
in  the  human  breast,  in  proof  of  his  own  lighteousness,  and 

1  Gen.  xviii.  25.  2  Isa.  v.  3,  4. 


REASON  THE   ULTIMATE  JUDGE.  7 

of  the  sin  of  Israel,  summing  up  the  -whole  by  claiming 
a  verdict  from  that  tribunal  for  himself  and  against  them  : 
"Are  not  my  ways  equal,  and  are  not  your  ways  unequal, 
saith  the  Lord?  "  Paul  cannot  refer  to  any  thing  other 
than  this  arbiter,  when  he  declares,  in  the  2d  of  Romans, 
that  men  "  are  a  law  unto  themselves,  which  show  the  work 
of  the  law  written  in  their  hearts,  then'  conscience  also 
bearing  witness,  and  their  thoughts  the  mean  while  accus- 
ing or  else  excusing  one  another."  And  to  this  judg- 
ment-seat Christ  himself  appeals,  when,  in  the  12th  of 
Luke,  he  says,  "Why,  even  of  yourselves,  judge  ye  not 
what  is  right?" 

There  can,  then,  be  no  sound  rational  or  scriptural  ar- 
gument upon  the  relations  of  man  to  God,  which  does  not 
rest  upon  this  fundamental  truth,  that  Reason  —  as  I  have 
explained  the  term — is  the  ultimate  judge  of  what  is  true. 
Either  this  must  be  so,  or  God  has  made  it  impossible  for 
us  securely  to  distinguish  truth  from  falsehood,  and  left  us 
to  drift  helpless  upon  the  eternal  ocean. 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE    PRINCIPLES    ON    WHICH    REASON   MUST    DECIDE. 

ATEUE  decision  from  Reason  must  be  a  reasonable 
decision  ;  and  a  reasonable  decision  is  one  founded 
upon  reasons ;  and  a  decision  founded  upon  reasons  must 
be  one  in  which  the  facts  of  the  given  case,  claiming  judg- 
ment, are  referred  to,  and  compared  with  the  great  princi- 
ples of  right,  their  aspects  toward  those  principles  noted, 
and  so  the  decision  made  up  upon  those  aspects.  If 
Reason  is  to  tell  us  whether  those  who  die  impenitent  will 
be  eternally  lost,  or  not,  she  must  do  it  by  bringing  that 
question  to  the  test  of  all  the  self-evident  principles  within 
her  purview  which  bear  upon  it.  The  first  step  toward  an 
answer  to  that  question,  then,  becomes  the  identification 
and  clear  statement  of  those  principles.  To  this  work  I 
now  advance. 

I.  The  first  iwinci'ple  is,  that  while  Reason  recog- 
nizes herself  as  the  final  judge,  ivith  reference  to  the 
reception,  hy-  the  mind,  of  any  thing  that  claims  to  he 
religious  truth,  she  is  yet  incompetent,  without  help,  to 
conduct  that  mind  to  all  that  religious  truth  which  it  is 
needful  for  man  to  hiow. 
8 


RULES  OF  IKTEBPRETATIOK,  9 

This  is  because  she  sees  that  she  cannot  see  all  that  is 
essential  to  human  safety  and  happiness.  She  is  conscious 
of  immense  reaches  of  truth  spreading  far,  on  every  side, 
beyond  the  circle  of  the  horizon  that  shuts  her  in  ;  and 
though  so  far  that  she  cannot  know  them,  nor  solve  the 
problems  which  they  present,  they  are  not  so  far  but  she 
can  see  that  tbose  problems  must  have  important  reference 
to  human  well  being.  She  therefore  craves  help.  She 
looks  around  for  it.  Specially  does  she  this  when  the 
question  turns  toward  the  future  world.  She  knows,  that, 
though  all  men  may  guess,  no  man  of  himself  can  know 
any  thing  conceniing  that  which  lies  beyond  the  grave. 
She  cannot  believe  that  this  life  is  to  be  all  of  human  life ; 
yet,  unassisted,  she  has  nothing  wliich  she  can  make 
the  basis  of  any  secure  decision  with  regard  to  any  life  to 
come.  Distressed  thus  with  her  own  essential  incompe- 
tency to  decide  for  man  some  of  the  most  important  ques- 
tions that  cluster  about  his  life,  reason  looks  around  for 
help.  She  decides  it  to  be  most  improbable  that  that  great 
and  wise  and  good  Being,  whom  she  discerns  at  the  helm 
of  the  universe,  should  leave  his  creatures  in  the  dark, 
where  light  is  so  essential  to  their  welfare  ;  and  this  leads 
her  to  the  enunciation  of  a  second  principle,  in  her  judg- 
ment on  this  subject ;  namely  :  — 

II.  Reason  decides,  that  since,  alone,  she  cannot  solve 
the  gravest  questions  of  human  destiny,  it  is  both  neces- 
sarythat  God  should,  and  probable  that  he  will,  make  up 


10  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

this  deficiency  in  her  data  of  knowledge  hy  a  revelation 
to  her  of  those  facts  which  must  othe^'wise  remain  beyond 
her  reach. 

In  the  judgment  of  Reason,  it  is  incredible  that  such  a 
Being  as  she  readily  perceives  God,  in  his  works  of  crea- 
tion and  providence,  to  reveal  himself  to  be,  should  permit 
that  creature  of  his,  for  whose  development  he  shaped, 
subordiuately,  all  material  things,  and  in  whose  well  or  ill 
being  and  doing  the  problem  of  the  success  or  failure  of 
universe  must  find  its  resolution,  to  remain  permanently 
destitute  of  any  knowledge,  the  possession  of  which  is 
essential  to  his  welfare.  Feeling,  therefore,  that  there  is 
much  knowledge  in  regard  to  this  world,  and  every  thing 
in  regard  to  what  comes  after  this  world,  which  lies  beyond 
the  research  of  the  unassisted  human  powers,  yet  is  im- 
perative to  human  prosperity  and  happiness.  Reason  decides 
that  it  is  to  be  expected  that  God  will  make  a  revelation  of 
this  needful,  but  otherwise  impossible,  knowledge.  To 
suppose  that  he  will  not  reveal  it,  under  these  cncumstan- 
ces,  is  to  suppose  that  he  does  not  know  that  men  need  it, 
or  does  not  wish  men  to  possess  it.  To  suppose  that  he  is 
not  conscious  of  our  great  want,  is  to  suppose  that  he  is 
not  God ;  and  to  suppose  that  he  does  not  wish  men  to 
possess  all  knowledge  needful  to  make  them  perfect,  is  to. 
suppose  that  he  does  not  wish  them  to  become  perfect  as 
He  is  perfect,  —  conclusions  which  Reason  cannot  accept, 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  It 

especially  in  the  face  of  the  opposite  teachings  of  a  volume 
asserting  itself  to  contain  such  a  revelation  from  God. 

This  leads  to  the  enunciation  of  the  next  principle  which 
bears  upon  the  matter  before  us ;  naniely  :  — 

III.  When  her  attention  is  called  to  the  Bible,  and 
she  has  examined  its  claims,  Reason  decides  that  God 
has  spoken  in  it,  and  that  its  unfoldings  are  to  he  received 
as  an  authentic  revelation  to  man  of  the  'particulars  of 
that  knowledge  lohich  he  needs  to  know;  could  not 
hioiv  ivitliout  it;  can  knoio  loith  it. 

There  are  four  great  considerations  which  bring  sound 
human  reason  to  this  decision  in  regard  to  the  Bible.  One 
is  its  thorough  cognizance  of  the  fact,  that  man  needs  a 
revelation  of  truth  which  he  otherwise  has  no  means  of 
knowing.  The  second  is  its  apprehension  of  the  fact,  that 
the  Bible  does  actually  make  just  that  revelation  of 
truth  which  man  needed  to  receive,  and  looked  for  else- 
where in  vain.  The  third  is  its  discovery,  that  there  is 
nothing  in  the  Bible  inconsistent  with  its  claims  to  be  such 
a  revelation.  The  fourth  is  the  assurance  which  it  has, 
that  the  manner  in  which  this  revelation  has  been  made 
and  authenticated  to  the  race  is  such  that  there  is  no  rea- 
son to  doubt,  but  every  reason  to  believe,  that  it  is  indeed 
what  it  professes  to  be,  and  inwardly  appears  to  be,  —  a 
divine  revelation. 

This  process  of  establishing  belief  in  the  authenticity  of 
the  Bible  resembles  that  which  satisfies  the  absent  child  of 


12  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

the  genuineness  of  the  letter  which  he  gets  from  his  father 
at  home.  He  needed  some  money,  and  some  advice  in  re- 
gard to  his  future  course.  He  knows  that  his  father  knows 
his  need.  The  letter  contains  that  money  and  that  advice. 
And  further,  the  handwriting,  postmark,  style,  incidental 
allusions,  all  things,  are  such  as  they  ought  to  be,  if  the 
letter  did  come,  as  it  professes  to  come,  from  his  father  to 
him.  So  of  man's  need  of  the  Bible,  —  its  adaptedness  to 
supply  that  need,  and  the  natural  fitness  of  its  incidental 
circumstances.  Satisfied  on  all  these  points.  Reason  says 
it  is  from  God ;  it  has  come  to  supply  the  knowledge  that 
we  lacked  ;  it  is  reasonable  for  us  to  receive  its  declara- 
tions, and  make  them  the  basis  and  guide  of  life,  —  even 
though  they  should,  in  some  particulars,  be  obscure,  or 
even  very  different  from  our  anticipation. 

But  here  some  one  may  object.  You  are  craftily  beg- 
ging the  very  question  in  dispute.  You  now  assume  that 
Reason  will  accept  the  Bible  as  a  revelation  from  God, 
even  though  it  reveal  the  future  jpunishment  of  the  wicked ; 
while  the  very  point  at  issue  is,  whether  the  doctrine  be 
not  in  itself  so  unreasonable,  that  men  cannot  and  ought 
not  to  believe  it,  however  revealed,  and  therefore  cannot 
and  ought  not  to  receive,  as  from  God,  any  book  that 
should  reveal  it,  —  on  your  own  admission  that  Reason  is 
final  judge. 

I  reply.  Reason  is  final  judge,  and  there  are  good  grounds 
on  which  it  might  consistently  reject  the  Bible  as  assuming 


RULES  OF  INTEEPBETATION.  13 

to  be  a  revelation  from  God ;  but  the  fact  that  it  reveals  the 
future  punishment  of  the  wicked,  if  it  be  a  fact,  is  not 
one  of  them.  The  whole  matter  hinges  on  this  inquiry : 
What  would  justify  Reason  in  rejecting  the  Bible  as  from 
God  ?  I  think  there  are  five  grounds,  on  either  of  which- 
Reason  would  be  justified  in  rejecting  the  claims  of  the 
Bible. 

(1.)  If  there  were  no  evidence  of  the  existence  of  any 
God,  then  it  would  be  absurd  to  receive  any  volume  as  his 
message  to  us. 

(2.)  If  God's  chai-acter  was  manifestly  such  as  to  make 
it  in  the  highest  degi'ee  improbable  that  he  should  make 
any  revelation  to  man,  then  it  would  be  in  the  highest 
degree  improbable  that  any  volume  should  be  his  message 
to  us. 

(3.)  Or  if  man  clearly  needed  no  revelation;  if  he 
had  knowledge  enough  of  all  kinds  without  one,  so  as  to 
be  just  as  well  off  in  the  absence  of  any  Bible  as  in  its 
presence ;  then  it  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  that  any  vol- 
ume contained  such  a  needless  message  from  God, 

(4.)  Or  if  the  Bible  were  encompassed  with  outward 
improbabilities  sufficient  to  much  more  than  outweigh  any 
inward  probabilities  which  it  contains  that  it  is  a  revela- 
tion from  God,  then  it  would  be  absurd  to  receive  it  as 
such.  As,  for  example,  if  it  were  susceptible  of  demon- 
stration that  the  books  of  the  Bible  were  written  centuries 
after  the  date  claimed  by  them,  and  by  other  persons  than 


14  VEEDIVT  OF  reason: 

their  reputed  authors ;  or  if  it  were  notorious  that  the  in- 
dividuals who  first  put  thera  in  circulation  were  bad  men  ' 
and  public  deceivers ;  or  if  difierent  copies  and  versions 
varied  so  widely  as  to  render  it  hopeless  to  get  any  consis- 
tent and  reliable  record ;  or  if  it  was  clear  that  the  book 
had  been  practically  injurious  wherever  it  had  gone  ;  then 
Reason  would  be  justified  in  denying  that  it  came  from 
God. 

(5.)  Or,  once  more,  if  the  Bible  were  inwardly  so  im- 
probable as  to  overbalance  all  outward  probabilities  of  its 
divine  origin,  then  Reason  would  do  right  to  decline  to  re- 
ceive it  as  from  God. 

There  are  five  inward  improbabilities  which  I  can  im- 
agine, either  of  which,  to  my  mind,  would  justify  Reason 
in  the  rejection  of  the  Bible,  no  matter  what  might  be  the 
outward  ewidenGQ,  jJJ^ovided  Heaso?!  could  feel  certain  that 
she  had  possession  of  all  the  related  facts  as  a  basis  for 
judgment. 

(a.)  If  it  really  made  no  revelation ;  told  us  nothing 
that  we  needed  to  know,  —  nothing  that  we  did  not  know 
before,  —  then  it  must  be  absurd  to  imagine  that  God 
sent  it  here.  For  this  reason,  I  reject  the  pretended  reve- 
lations of  Spiritualism.  I  have  never  seen  any  sufficient 
evidence  of  its  telling  us  any  thing  of  the  least  value  that 
we  did  not  know  before. 

(b.)  If  it  were  a  weak  and  silly  volume,  I  should  re- 


RULES  OF  INTERPBETATION.  15 

joct  the  Bible,  as  fatally  lacking  the  necessary  dignity  of 
inspiration. 

(c.)  If  it  were  a  self-contradictory  volume,  I  should 
reject  the  Bible ;  for,  if  one-half  its  books  neutralized  the 
other  half,  if  all  sorts  of  conflicting  assertions  were  made 
by  it,  we  should  say  at  once  the  book  is  not  merely  useless, 
but  impossible  to  come  from  a  God  of  truth. 

(d.)  So,  if  the  Bible  contradicted  facts  obvious  to  sense ; 
if  it  said  the  moon  shines  by  day,  and  the  sun  by  night ;  that 
the  earth  is  flat ;  that  the  sea  is  solid ;  that  men  are  quad- 
rupeds, or  any  thing  else  thoroughly  irreconcilable  with  our 
consciousness  of  realities  around  us,  —  our  reason  would  be 
obliged  to  reject  it  as  a  voice  from  God,  whom  we  cannot 
help  believing  to  know  and  to  speak  that  which  is  true. 

(e.)  So,  once  more,  if  the  Bible  clearly  contradicted 
the  first  principles  of  natural  morality,  my  reason  would 
reject  it;  because  I  cannot  help  believing  that  my  con- 
victions of  right  and  wrong  were  given  me  by  God  himself, 
that  I  may  use  them  in  judging  what  is  right  in  him  as 
well  as  myself;  what  is  right  in  any  thing  purporting  to 
be  his  Word,  as  well  as  in  the  words  and  acts  of  my  fellow- 
man.  And  it  would  be  absurd  for  me  to  believe  that  any 
revelation  which  God  should  m.ake  in  a  book  can  contra- 
dict that  previous  revelation  of  right  which  he  has  implant- 
ed in  my  breast,  on  purpose  that  I  may  have  some  standard 
by  which  to  receive  or  reject  any  document  subsequently 
purporting  to  come  from  him.     It  is  much  as  if  a  king 


16  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

should  send  an  ambassador  to  a  distant  court  that  is  sur- 
rounded by  hostile  influences,  and  puts  into  his  hands  the 
key  of  an  intricate  cipher  in  which  all  his  official  despatches 
will  be  written.  Now,  this  ambassador  may  receive  many 
false  messages  from  enemies  who  have  intercepted  the  true 
letters  of  the  king,  and  who  have  tried  to  mislead  him  by 
their  own  deceptive  ones :  but  he  always  has  the  means  of 
verification ;  and,  so  long  as  he  rejects  every  thing  which 
his  key  will  not  unlock,  he  acts  reasonably  and  safely.  So 
conscience,  and  our  innate  sense  of  right,  are  our  key  by 
which  to  test  every  thing  which  claims  to  be  revelation ; 
and  all  which  it  will  not  apply  to  we  shall  be  safe  to  reject. 
But,  as  I  said,  we  must  he  sure  that  we  thoroughly  under- 
stand the  subject  that  we  reject ;  that  we  have  all  the  facts 
which  ought  to  come  into  the  case ;  and  that  the  apparent 
discrepancy  between  it  and  natural  morality  is  a  real 
one,  and  is  not  the  unavoidable  consequence  of  want  of 
information  on  our  part. 

Suppose,  when  the  *'  London  Times"  announced,  on  the 
17th  of  July,  1858,  the  departure  from  Queenstown  of  the 
fleet  on  its  mission  to  connect  the  shores  of  the  Old  World 
and  the  New  with  an  ocean  telegraph,  a  copy  of  it  should 
have  struggled  over  distant  seas  to  some  remote  laud  where 
dwelt  a  man  of  science  who  had  never  heard  of  the  prop- 
osition to  lay  down  such  a  telegraph  cable,  or  of  those 
wonderful  modern  advances  in  the  science  of  electro-mag- 
netism which  make  such  a  work  possible  :  the  question  is, 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  17 

what  posture  of  mind  would  be  reasonable  in  him  concern- 
ing this  intelligence.  If  the  ' '  Times ' '  stated  that  those  ships 
had  started  to  lay  down  a  chain  cable,  or  a  cotton  cod-line, 
for  that  distance  and  that  purpose,  clearly  he  would  be  justi- 
fied in  saying  at  once,  "The  mmor  is  false ;  the  thing  is 
incredible  !  A  chain  cable  would  cost  more  than  any  sane 
nations  would  pay  for  such  use  ;  would  be  more  cumbrous 
that  any  fleet  could  manage  in  the  transit,  and  would  be 
worth  absolutely  nothing  for  the  purpose  desired  when 
down.  And  a  cotton  cod-line  could  carry  no  electricity, 
nor  would  it  bear  the  strain  of  trailing  for  the  first  half- 
mile.  Therefore  the  rumor  must  be  false  :  my  knowledge 
of  science  is  sufficient  to  waiTant  me  in  rejecting  the  idea  as 
utterly  absurd. 

But  suppose  the  statement  is,  that  they  are  carrying 
over  a  little  rope  of  twisted  wire  covered  with  insulating 
and  protecting  material,  as  was  the  fact,  and  he  should 
then  say :  It  must  be  false ;  the  .  thing  is  incredible  ;  my 
knowledge  of  science  assures  me  that  it  is  impossible  to 
make  electricity  work  over  so  immense  a  space ;  and  two 
sensible  nations  would  never  attempt  an  impossibility,  — 
the  question  would  be,  is  he  acting  now  as  reasonably  as 
before  ? 

Before,  he  was  sure  he  was  in  possession  of  all  the  facts 
needful  to  a  correct  judgment ;  but  is  he  sure  now  ?  Does 
he  not,  from  want  of  information,  for  which  he  is  not  to  be 
blamed,  overlook    the  very   facts  which  are    most  of  all 


18  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

necessary  to  the  formation  of  a  correct  judgment  in  the 
matter,  —  the  facts,  that  experiments  of  'which  he  never 
heard,  and  of  a  character  quite  new  and  surpising,  have 
convinced  those  having  the  thing  in  charge,  that  (  by  the 
use  of  a  machine  of  which  he  never  even  dreamed)  there  is 
such  assurance  of  success  as  to  make  the  attempt  in  the 
highest  deoi-ee  reasonable  ?  Is  it  not  clear,  that,  under  all 
the  circumstances,  the  truly  wise  and  rational  course  would 
be  for  him  to  say ;  This  matter  is  very  strange ;  I  had 
always  supposed  it  to  be  impossible  to  manage  the  electric 
fluid  to  any  purpose  under  conditions  of  so  great  difficulty, 
and  I  am  aware  of  no  machine  by  which  it  could  be  made 
to  carry  messages  across  the  Atlantic.  At  first  thought, 
the  idea  seems  incredible ;  and  yet  it  never  becomes  the 
man  of  science  to  say  of  any  thing  that  is  difficult,  it  is  im- 
possible, because  it  is  difficult ;  and  since  the  rumor  comes 
through  a  channel  every  way  reliable,  and  even  in  the  col- 
umns of  a  copy  of  the  "London  Times,"  I  will  suspend  my 
judgment  concerning  the  subject  long  enough,  at  least,  to 
read  the  whole  article  announcing  it,  and  not  say,  point 
blank,  that  it  cannot  be  a  copy  of  the  "Times,"  because  it 
coptains  this  rumor.  It  may  after  all  turn  out,  that,  from 
want  of  knowledge,  I  have  omitted  some  essential  fact  that 
would  explain  the  whole.  And  yet,  on  the  face  of  it,  it 
does  still  seem  incredible. 

It  will,  I  take  it,  be  readily  granted  on  all  hands,  that 
this  would  be  sound  sense  in  the  case  supposed ;  and  I 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  19 

submit  that  it  indicates  to  us  what  is  sound  sense  in  regard 
to  all  questions  touching  the  acceptance  or  rejection  of  the 
Bible  as  God's  Word,  because  of  some  apparent  conflict 
of  its  teachings  with  natural  morality.  If  it  gravely  told 
us,  that  God  will  lie,  or,  that  it  would  be  right  for  God  to 
lie  ;  if  it  said,  "  Thou  shalt  steal,"  "  Thou  shalt  commit 
adultery,"  "  Thou  shalt  kill,"  "  Thou  shalt  not  honor  thy 
father  and  mother,"  "Thou  shalt  not  remember  the  Sabbath 
day  to  keep  it  holy,"  —  we  should  be  safe  in  rejecting  its 
claims  as  a  revelation,  because  we  know  sufficiently  the 
elements  involved  in  such  a  question  to  warrant  our  deci- 
sion. But  suppose  it  tells  us  that  God 'will  punish  eternally 
those  who  will  not  accept  his  offers  of  mercy  in  this  world, 
is  it  safe  for  us  to  reject  the  Bible  for  that,  as  being  against 
natural  morahty?  Are  we  sure  that  we  know  all  the 
facts?  The  question  is  broader  than  the  Atlantic,  and 
deeper  than  its  depths !  It  reaches  over  into  eternity ! 
May  we  not  overlook  the  very  principle  which,  if  seen, 
would  remove  all  our  difficulty  ?  Does  not  sound  Beason 
say  here :  This  seems  indeed  very  dark,  yet  I  feel  that 
I  am  but  imperfectly  acquainted  with  the  facts.  I  am  not 
enough  master  of  the  subject  confidently  to  say  that  a  book 
with  such  a  revelation  cannot  be  from  God.  I  will  rather 
examuie  its  claims ;  and,  if  they  satisfy  me,  I  will  decide 
that  it  is  reasonable  to  receive  it,  in  spite  of  all  its  myste- 
ries, and  wait  for  further  knowledge  hereafter ;  for,  need- 
ing a  revelation  as  much  as  we  do,  it  is  more  reasonable  to 


20  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

receive  a  volume  with  such  difficulties  mingled  with  its 
great  and  obvious  Uessings  than  to  take  the  ground  that 
God  has  made  no  revelation  at  all  to  our  need. 

The  way  of  the  reasonable  mind,  in  regard  to  such  truths 
beleagured  with  difficulties,  was  well  stated  by  Sir  Matthew 
Hale:  "It  is  true  that  they,  [i.e.,  these  truths]  being 
above  the  reach  of  Reason,  cannot  be  by  force  of  Reason  as- 
sented unto ;  yet  there  is  no  reason  against  the  truth  of 
them.  Natural  Reason  hath  a  privative  opposition  to  the 
knowledge  of  them  ;  namely,  an  absence  of  a  necessity  of 
assenting,  not  a  positive  opposition,  or  a  constraint  by  ne- 
cessity of  reason  to  disassent  to  them."^  So,  also,  a  later 
wiiter  has  suggested  with  great  force  and  beauty,  "  There 
are  truths  to  be  believed  which  are  not  and  cannot  be  reached 
by  any  native  shrewdness  of  intelligence,  or  by  the  con- 
secutive deductions  of  reasoning.  Of  this  description  are 
some  of  our  convictions  as  to  infinity.  Of  a  similar  char- 
acter are  many  of  the  doctrines  which  God  has  revealed  in 
his  word.  In  regard  to  some  of  these,  not  only  is  a  de- 
ductive reasoning  incapable  of  demonstrating  them,  Reason  in 
its  highest  degree  is  incapable  of  fully  comprehending  them. 
When  it  labors  to  do  so,  it  is  encompassed  in  darkness,  and 
finds  itself  utterly  at  a  loss,  as  it  would  seek  to  reconcile 
them  with  other  truths  sanctioned  by  Reason  or  experience. 
But  still,  even  here,  faith  is  not  without  reason ;  for,  in  re- 
gard to  certain  of  these  truths,  the  intuitive  Reason  which 
1  Discourse  of  the  knowledge  of  God  and  of  ourselves,  p.  1,05. 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  21 

commands  us  to  believe  in  them  is  above  all  derivative  Rea- 
son ;  and,  in  regard  to  truths  revealed  to  us  supernaturally 
"by  God,  Reason  calls  on  us  implicitly  to  submit  to  them  as 
to  an  intelligence  which  cannot  err.  Reason  always  de- 
mands that  we  shoidd  have  evidence,  immediate  or  medi- 
ate, in  order  to  helieve  ;  hut  it  does  not  insist  that  the 
truth  he  cornpletely  within  the  comprehension  of  the  reason, 
or  unclouded  hy  mystery  of  any  description.  Faith  has 
ever  the  support  of  Reason ;  yet  it  goes  far  beyond  Reason, 
and  embraces  much  which  is  far  beyond  the  conceptions  of 
the  intellect  in  its  widest  gi'asp  and  excursions.  It  is  be- 
cause man  has  a  natural  capacity  of  faith  in  the  unseen 
and  unknown,  that  he  is  able  to  cherish  a  faith  in  the  su- 
pernatural truths  of  God's  word.  It  is  because  he  has  the 
natural  gift  of  fait^i,  that  he  is  capable  of  rising  to  the 
supernatural  grace."  ^ 

This  leads  us  to  the  next  principle  which  Reason  settles, 
and  which  has  a  most  important  bearing  on  the  subject 
before  us,  namely  :  — 

IV.  Reason,  having  accepted  the  Bihle  as  the  needed 
revelation  from  God,  and  studied  its  affirmations,  decides 
that  it  is  reasonahle  to  receive  it,  and,  interpreting  it  on 
sound  principles,  to  make  it  in  all  particulars  the  guide 
of  faith  and  life.  Of  course,  if  we  need  it,  — and,  not- 
withstanding all  its  difficulties^  it  is  what  we  need,  — it  is 
reasonable  to  receive  it ;  and,  since  we  do  not  receive  it 

1  McCosh's  Intuitions  of  the  IVIind  Inductively  investigated,  p.  42G. 


22  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

unless  we  make  its  words  the  teacher  of  our  faith  and  the 
guide  of  our  life,  it  is  reasonable  for  us  to  shape  all  belief 
and  action  by  its  voice.  To  have  it,  and  neglect  to  live 
by  it,  would  be  as  wickedly  absurd  as  the  throwing-away  of 
a  life-preserver  when  one  is  struggling  for  existence  among 
the  storm-waves. 

But  what  are  the  sound  principles  of  its  interpretation  ? 
The  Bible  is  a  multifarious  and  many-sided  volume,  pre- 
senting its  message  in  a  great  variety  of  aspects.  It  has 
some  phase  of  truth  for  every  mood  of  man.  The  parable 
instructs  the  child ;  the  precept,  the  philosopher.  The 
history  illustrates  the  precept,  the  biography  re-enforces  the 
history;  and  so  voices  come — from  Eden  to  Patmos  — 
from  every  page  to  every  ear,  often  diverse  in  seeming,  yet 
always  blending,  at  last,  into  the  grand  monotone  of  eter- 
nal truth.  How,  amid  this  vast  diversity  of  outward  form 
and  sound,  shall  man  gather  securely  from  it  its  great  in- 
ward and  vital  lessons  ? 

Beason  has  her  ready  answer.  She  suggests  the  follow- 
ing, as  obviously  just  principles  on  which  to  proceed  in 
interpreting  its  words :  — 

A.  We  must  take  the  ivliole  Bible  as  our  revelation, 
or  none  of  it.  It  hangs  together,  and  stands  or  falls  in 
the  mass.  Christ  vouched  for  the  Old  Testament  in  the 
same  shape  in  which  we  have  it  to-day.  And  the  Gospels 
and  Epistles  of  the  New  Testament  are  so  interwoven,  that 
we  must  pass  judginent  upon  it  as  a  whole.     It  is  all  rea- 


RULES  OF  interpretation:  23 

sonable  and  reliable,  or  none  of  it  is.  That  moment  in 
which  Theodore  Parker  could  reasonably  say,  I  don't  be- 
lieve such  and  such  portions  of  the  history  of  Jesus,  and 
therefore  threw  it  out  of  the  canon,  I,  by  the  same  right, 
may  say,  I  don't  believe  in  such  and  such  other  portions ; 
and  another,  by  the  same  right,  may  say,  I  don't  believe 
in  Paul ;  and  still  another,  I  don't  believe  in  Peter ;  and 
yet  another,  I  don't  believe  in  John ;  until,  together,  we 
have  eviscerated  the  New  Testament,  and  left  ourselves 
.with  no  Gospel  and  no  Bible  at  all.  And  all  reasonably, 
if  it  is  reasonable  for  him  to  begin  !  Each  of  our  reasons 
is  as  reasonable  as  his :  my  I  don't  like  it ;  it  doesn't 
commend  itself  to  my  good  sense  in  this  chapter  and  this 
verse,  is  just  as  good  —  I  mean,  of  course,  before  the  tri- 
bunal of  my  reason  —  as  his  before  his  reason ;  everybody's 
else  as  good  as  either.  And  so  the  Bible  is  left  to  fall 
asunder  into  useless  fragments;  like  a  cask,  when,  one 
after  another,  you  knock  off  the  hoops. 

It  may  be  confidently  affirmed  that  it  is  impossible  to  re- 
ceive the  Bible  as  a  revelation  from  God,  unless  we  receive 
the  whole  of  it  as  such,  for  these  two  reasons :  — 

(a.)  All  the  evidence  which  we  have  to  establish  any 
of  it  as  from  God  establishes  the  whole  as  from  him. 
Christ  indorsed  the  Old  Testament  —  undeniably  identi- 
cal with  that  now  in  our  possession  —  as  a  whole  ;  while  to 
succeed  in  demonstrating  the  claims  of  the  eight  men  who 
wrote  the  New  Testament  to  inspiration,  is  .to  succeed  in 


24  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

justifying  the  claim  of  the  entire  contribution  of  each  to  our 
faith.  If  they  were  inspired  at  all,  their  inspiration  covers 
every  line  and  letter  of  then*  books ;  if  they  were  not  in- 
spired, then  no  line  nor  letter  of  their  books  is  inspired  :  so 
that  it  is,  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  impossible  to  dissect  out 
a  verse  here  and  a  verse  there,  and  throw  it  out  as  worth- 
less, while  receiving  the  rest.  We  must  take  the  whole, 
or  none.     While,  — 

(b.)  Such  a  semi-revelation  as  is  supposed  by  those  who 
would  accept  a  part  of  the  Bible,  and  reject  the  rest,  at^ 
their  own  judgment,  would  be  really  no  revelation  at  all ; 
because  we  should  need  a  second  revelation  to  make  clear 
to  us  what  portions  of  the  first  are  trustworthy,  and  a  third 
to  certify  us  how  much  of  the  second  one  to  beheve, 
and  so  on  ad  infinitum.  Besides,  to  assume  to  sit  in  judg- 
menton  the  details  of  a  revelation  from  God  —  after  Beason 
has  satisfied  herself  that  it  is  a  revelation  from  him  —  is  to 
treat  it  as  no  longer  a  revelation,  but  as  a  mere  communi- 
cation within  the  purview  of  our  criticism.  To  criticise  its 
details  is  to  assume  to  have  the  knowledge  to  do  so ;  to 
have  that  knowledge,  we  must  be  above  them ;  and  for  us 
to  be  above  them  is  to  place  them  below  us  :  and  so  we 
take  them  down  from  the  loftiness  of  God's  thoughts,  which 
are  not  ours,  and  degrade  them  to  the  level  of  mere  good 
advice,  to  be  taken  or  rejected  at  our  pleasure. 

So  that  I  insist  upon  it  as  the  first  rule  of  a  sound  inter- 
pretation of  tlio  word  of   God,  that,  rightly  understood, 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  25 

every  part  of  the  Bible  bas  equal  claim  with  every  otber 
part  upon  our  confidence  and  obedience. 

B.  The  second  rule  is,  that  the  language  of  the  Scrip- 
tures must  he  interpreted  hy  the  laws  of  language  honestly, 
honorahly,  and  without  twisting  or  forcing,  to  suit  any 
preconceived  theory,  or  any  existing  logical  necessity. 
Much  of  the  language  of  the  Bible  presents  this  difficulty 
over  that  of  other  ancient  writings,  in  that  it  labors  to  ex- 
press the  most  recondite  and  spiritual  truths  in  the  matter- 
of-fact,  materialistic  speech  of  men ;  compellmg  it  to  seize 
upon  common  sensuous  epithets,  and  endeavor  to  dignify 
and  hallow  them  sufficiently  to  make  them  hint  the  great 
realities  of  God.  In  doing  this,  it  simply  follows  the  ne- 
cessary laws  of  all  growth  of  language  by  which  words  always 
travel  up  from  lower  to  higher  usage,  —  from  a  material  to 
a  metaphysical  and  religious  sense.  Thus,  to  express  the 
idea  of  the  soul,  it  took  the  word  for  breath  (because,  when 
the  breath  is  gone,  the  soul  is  gone),  and  put  upon  it  that 
higher  significance,  idealizing  it  as  spirit.  So,  to  convey 
the  conception  of  immortality,  the  word  signifying  "to 
spoil,"  "  to  coiTupt,"  was  taken,  and  prefixed  by  a  nega- 
tive ;  and  so  the  compound  "  not-to-corrupt "  was  freighted 
with  the  sense  of  immortal  life.  In  like  manner,  when  it 
was  desired  to  express  the  idea  of  repentance,  there  was 
nothing  better  than  to  lay  hold  of  the  compound  "  to  change 
the  mind,"  and  impress  upon  it  the  new  idea  ;  though,  in 
this  case,  sometimes  the  kindred  compound,  *'  to  change  the 


26  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

purpose,''^  was  used  to  hint  the  same  result  from  a  slightly 
different  point  of  view.  So  heaven  is  '*  the  expanse  of  the 
sky,"  because  God  was  supposed  to  dwell  there;  hell  is 
"  hades,"  that  is,  the  "  under-world,"  or  *'  gehenna,"  that 
is,  "  the  Valley  of  Hinnom,  whither  all  the  abominations  of 
Jerusalem  were  sewered,  and  where  they  were  burned. 

As  every  one  of  this  great  company  of  words  embody- 
ing spiritual  ideas  —  which  can  be  comprehended  by  us, 
and  described  to  us,  only  through  the  metaphysical  sugges- 
tion of  some  sensible  object  or  transaction  —  is  thus  a 
flower  or  a  fruit,  grown  on  the  stalk  of  some  prosaic  literal 
epithet  or  phrase,  of  course  it  follows  that  all  of  them, 
which  have  not  so  long  been  spiritualized  as  to  have  dropped 
all  trace  of  their  birth  into  oblivion,  may  be  said  still  to 
have  two  meanings,  the  primal  and  the  secondary :  nay, 
as  they  often  retain,  for  some  uses,  still,  that  primal  sense, 
they  may,  on  one  page,  mean  one  thing  literally,  and,  on 
the  next,  another  thing  spiritually.  So  that  it  becomes  a 
great  art  of  the  honest  interpreter  to  decide,  from  the  con- 
nection and  the  good  faith  of  the  writer,  in  what  sense  his 
language,  in  any  particular  instance,  ought  to  be  taken. 

It  is  a  favorite  artifice  of  those  who  would  empty  the 
Bible  of  all  reference  to  any  future  punishment  of  sin,  to 
seek  to  prove  that  the  terms  used  in  a  secondary,  metaphy- 
ical  sense,  to  teach  it,  should  only  be  taken  in  their  first  and 
literal  sense,  which  would  not  teach  it;  that  "hell"  is 
only  *' the  Valley  of  Hinnom,"  &c.     But  the  interpreter 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  27 

must  be  cautious  how  far  he  moves  in  this  direction  to  ac- 
commodate their  desire,  lest  in  self-consistence  he  be  com- 
pelled to  overthrow  the  whole  fabric  of  spiritual  religion 
not  merely,  but  to  crowd  language  from  its  infinite  diversi- 
ty and  luxuriance  of  inteUectual  and  spiritual  wealth  back 
into  the  bleak  poverty  of  its  crude  and  rudimentary 
forms ;  making  it  impossible  for  God  to  reveal  any  thing 
to  man,  lest  perchance  he  should  reveal  a  hell  for  the  per- 
sistently sinful.  Such  conduct,  if  any  thing  can,  must 
come  under  the  condemnation  of  "  adulterating  the  word 
of  God,"  1  and  "  cheating  by  it."  ^ 

C.  The  third  rule  is,  the  Bihle  must  he  so  interpreted 
as  to  he  self-consistent.  If  we  find  Christ  prophesied  in 
the  Old  Testament,  as  to  be  the  Messiah,  we  must  expect 
to  find  the  history  of  the  New  revealmg  his  coming,  as  to 
fill  that  office.  If  we  find  it  revealed  that  the  righteous 
are  to  be  rewarded  with  life,  and  the  wicked  with  death, 
and  the  same  adjective  is  used  to  describe  the  duration  of 
the  life  of  the  one  and  the  death  of  the  other,  we  must 
translate  it  in  the  one  part  of  the  verse  as  we  do  in  the 
other ;  though  it  sadly  teaches  us  that  the  death  of  the 
wicked  will  be  co-eternal  with  the  life  of  th^  good.  If 
the  revelation  is  not  thus  consistent  with  itself,  it  is  not  the 
work  of  a  consistent  being ;  is  not  God's  word,  —  does 
not,  cannot,  claim  our  faith. 

D.  The  fourth  ride  of  a  reasonahle  interpretation  is, 

1  2  Cor.  ii.  ir.  2  2  Cor.  iv.  2. 


28  VERDICT  OF  EEASOIf. 

that,  among  j^ossihle  senses  of  a  given  passage  of  the 
Word,  that  ichich  is  plainest,  and  most  lilcely  to  strike  the 
iniiid  of  an  unprejudiced  reader  of  common  intelligence 
and  culture,  is  likeliest  to  he  right.  This,  because  the 
Bible  is  intended  for  the  great  mass,  —  and  the  great 
mass  will  always  be  rude  in  culture  ;  and,  if  the  Bible  is 
to  do  them  any  good,  it  must  be  so  shaped,  that,  in  their 
hasty  glances,  they  may  grasp  its  general  significance; 
that,  in  their  hurried  and  homely  perusal,  though  wayfaring 
men  and  —  in  the  wisdom  of  the  world  —  fools,  they  need 
not  err  therein.  If  it  is  not  such  a  Bible  as  gives  its  gen- 
uine (though  not  its  completest)  sense  to  the  unskilful 
searchings  of  the  rudest  swain,  it  is  either  because  God 
would  not  or  could  not  make  it  so ;  and  that  he  would 
not,  we  should  affirm  as  reluctantly,  as  that  he  could  not. 

E.  The  fifth  ride  of  reasonable  interpretation  is,  that 
the  Bible  should  be  dealt  with  as  a  progressive  revelation. 
That  it  is  so  is  obvious  on  the  face  of  it.  The  world  was 
young  when  its  first  books  were  written.  Men  were  as 
children.  The  Hebrews  were  rude  and  illiterate-  The 
Sermon  on  the  IMount  would  have-  been  as  unintelligible 
on  the  plain  before  Sinai  as  the  "  rule  of  three  "is  to  the 
boy  only  half  through  with  simple  addition.  The  gradual 
training  of  the  Jews  to  sacrifice  a  lamb  for  their  sins  was  all 
the  approach  to  the  doctrine  of  Christ  crucified  —  the  lamb 
of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sins  of  the  world  —  that  they 
were  then  prepared  to  appreciate.     Fifteen  hundred  years 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  29 

after,  fifteen  centuries  of  sacrifices  had  educated  them  up 
to  the  apprehension  of  the  idea  of  the  atonement  through 
the  blood  of  Jesus.     So,  measurably,  with  all  doctrines. 

We  therefore  do  violence  to  the  fundamental  construction 
of  the  Bible,  if  we  assume  that  all  its  books  are  on  a  level 
of  preceptive  revelation,  and  suspect  the  doctrme  of  the 
Trinity,  or  that  of  the  atonement,  or  of  immortality,  or  of 
future  punishment,  because  we  cannot  find  them  as  clearly 
set  forth  in  the  Old  Testament  as  in  the  New,  and  are  un- 
able to  get  proof-texts  of  equal  clearness  for  them  from 
every  page  of  the  word  alike. 

F.  The  sixth  rule  of  a  reasonable  interpretation  is, 
that  the  Bible  is  to  be  understood  natui^ally,  and  from 
the  position  occupied  by  its  oion  sjjeal'ers  and  audiences. 
This  would  be  too  obvious  to  demand  a  word,  did  not  men 
so  strangely  misunderstand  the  Scriptures.  Nobody  thinks 
of  reading  Shakspeare  or  Spenser,  as  if  written  now,  and 
affixing  to  his  language  the  signification  now  cuiTent ;  but, 
when  we  study  old  authors,  we  endeavor  to  drink  in  the 
spirit  of  their  time,  and  hear  them  as  their  cotemporaries 
heard  them,  and  interpret  them  as  their  friends  and  neigh- 
bors did.  So  we  ought  to  do  with  the  Bible.  If  we  wish 
to  know  what  Christ  really  meant  to  teach  on  any  given 
occasion,  we  must  try  to  settle  exactly  what  he  would 
naturally  have  been  understood  to  mean  by  those  who 
heard  him  :  and,  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten,  that  is  his  real 
meaning ;    always,  I  think  it  is  safe  to  say,  where  he 


30  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

does  not  avowedly  speak  in  parable  or  prophecy  unex- 
plained, or  with  some  similar  limitation  or  modification  ex- 
pressed or  obviously  understood. 

G-i  The  seventh  rule  of  a  reasonable  interpretation  of 
Scripture  is,  that  we  cannot  expect  to  understand  it  all, 
or  perhaps,  indeed,  little  of  it  fully.  This  follows  from 
the  necessary  incomprehensibleness  of  many  of  its  topics  to 
our  minds  in  their  present  stage  of  advancement.  God, 
eternity,  heaven,  hell,  the  soul, — these  are  themes  that 
run  at  once  far  out  beyond  any  present  human  power  of 
complete  comprehension,  just  as  the  blue  heavens  stretch 
away  beyond  the  utmost  limit  of  our  eyesight.  We  may 
understand  them  in  another  world.  Our  best  interests 
here  require  that  we  should  have  hints  about  them.  And 
so  God  reveals  something  concerning  them.  But  the  very 
attempt  to  bring  them  down  at  all  to  our  present  plane 
of  thought  brings  down  their  difficulties  with  them,  and 
introduces  us  partially  to  numberless  questions  which  we 
cannot  answer  now,  —  ought  not  to  expect  to  be  able  to 
answer  here.  Yet,  concerning  these,  sound  Reason  says  : 
Beheve  what  portion  you  can,  and  trust  God  for  the  rest ; 
it  is  not  necessarily  unreasonable  or  false  because  you  can* 
not  now  understand  it. 

A  telegraph-wire  sings  in  the  morning  breeze  before 
your  door.  Your  little  child  gazes  at  it,  and  asks  you  to 
tell  him  about  it.  You  say  it  carries  messages.  But 
how?     You  try,  and  try,  and  try  again,  but  find,  that  at 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  31 

his  tender  age,  and  with  his  limited  data  of  knowledge,  you 
cannot  make  him  understand  hoio  it  does  it.  Yet  you  feel 
that  it  is  reasonable  for  him  to  believe  it  on  your  word, 
though  it  may  seem  absurd  to  him;  and,  troubled  by 
an  inconsistency  that  to  his  little  mind  seems  fatal,  he 
keeps  on  saying,  Father,  the  wire  is  dead  iron,  how  can 
it  talk  or  write  or  carry  ?  You  answer  :  My  son,  you 
cannot  expect  to  understand  this  now,  —  one  of  these  days, 
when  your  mind  grows  large,  and  your  studies  embrace 
these  subjects,  you  will. 

The  same  is  true  of  us  —  the  wisest  of  us  —  in  regard 
to  some  of  the  revelations  of  the  Bible.  As  we  are  now,  we 
cannot  expect  to  make  every  thing  which  it  contains  consis- 
tent with  every  thing  else  in  the  Bible,  and  out  of  it,  — not 
because  of  its  non-consistence,  but  because  our  minds  are  not 
yet  developed  enough,  our  range  of  study  is  not  yet  broad 
enough,  to  fit  us  to  see  that  consistency. 

H.  The  eighth  rule  of  a  reasonahle  interpretation 
of  Scripture  is,  that,  where  tivo  interpretations  are  pos- 
sible, that  one  is  prohahly  truest  which  has  most  com- 
mended itself  to  the  Christian  experience  of  the  past. 
This  is  naturally  suggested  by  the  consciousness  of  our  per- 
sonal inadequacy  to  such  investigations  as  the  Bible  offers. 
We  crave  help  to  our  work.  We  long  to  know  how  other 
minds,  looking  on  these  same  great  questions  from  other 
quarters  of  the  heavens, — from  the  varied  influences  of 
distant  climes  and  diverse  ages,  ^—  have  regarded  them.   We 


32  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

have  found  that  we  can  get  wisdom  from  the  experience  of 
our  fellow-men  on  every  other  subject :  so  we  believe  we  can 
do  in  the  inquiry  what  in  their  Hfe  they  have  proved  to 
be  the  most  satisfying,  apposite,  likeliest  sense  of  the 
Scripture.  Besides,  the  promise  is,  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
will  intei'pret  the  word ;  and  we  want  to  know  what  the  re- 
sult of  his  work  in  the  past  has  been.  It  is  eighteen  cen- 
turies since  Christianity  began  to  gather  its  system  out  of 
the  whole  Bible  as  we  now  have  it.  More  than  twice  that 
number  of  generations  have  rolled  away,  each  having  its 
proportion,  larger  or  smaller,  of  faithful,  humble,  devout, 
godly  men  and  women  ;  the  savor  of  whose  sweet  graces 
in  a  naughty  world  makes  the  record  of  the  inward  life  of 
the  Church  during  all  those  ages,  in  spite  of  its  outward 
troubles  and  shames,  to  be  "  as  ointment  poured  forth." 
Every  one  of  them  has  had  communion  with  the  mind  of 
the  Spirit,  and,  with  all  personal  imperfections  and  all  frail- 
ties incident  to  nation  or  station,  has  been  divinely  led  into 
sympathy  with  essential  godliness.  Differing  widely  in 
lesser  matters,  they  have  been  mainly  one  in  their  gi-eat 
life  and  love.  They  have  been  one  with  each  other  be- 
cause one  in  Christ ;  one  in  Christ  because  one  in  the 
truth  of  Christ ;  one  in  the  truth  of  Christ  because  divinely 
led  by  Christ  into  one  truth,  —  the  truth  of  God,  which 
always  makes  men  wise  unto  salvation.  The  Bible  is  a 
practical  revelation.  Men  have  tried  its  precepts,  and 
the  Church  has  therefore  prepared  herself  to  testify  :  This 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  33 

is  true,  for  it  has  proved  true  in  car  case.;  we  have  found 
this  precept  sound,  this  doctrine  effective,  this  duty 
blessed. 

When,  then,  two  interpretations  of  any  portion  of  the 
Bible  are  possible,  that  stands  a  very  strong  chance  of 
being  truest  which  can  claim  the  coincident  faith  and  love 
of  the  Church  of  Christ  during  all  these  ages  ;  not  neces- 
sarily of  the  Church  in  its  hierarchal  forms,  as  men  are  apt 
to  look  to  it  (for  there  is  often  least  of  the  inward  spirit 
where  there  is  most  of  the  outward  form,  so  that  what  calls 
itself  and  is  called  "  the  Church,"  par  excellence,  may  be 
but  the  world  specially  rampant  in  ecclesiastic  garb) .  But 
ignoring  the  Cliurch  nominal,  as  ambition  and  unholy 
policy  have  made  it,  if  we  look  to  the  Church  real,  the 
humble  faithful  ones  who  in  every  generation,  often  cast 
out  as  evil  by  ''the  Church,"  have  maintained  their  re- 
generate purity,  and  lived  and  walked  with  God,  we  shall 
find  then:  words  reflecting  light  upon  the  sacred  page. 
God  promised  expressly  that  his  Spirit  should  lead  his  chil- 
dren into  all  truth,  and  it  is  not  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
he  has  failed  in  great  essentials  to  verify  that  promise. 
Therefore  that  version  of  a  controverted  doctrine  which 
truly  good  men  have  most  loved  and  believed,  bears  this 
reasonable  witness  of  its  probable  truth,  —  especially  as 
against  one  which  they  have  almost  uniformly  rejected. 

I.  The  ninth  rule  of  a  reasonable  interj^retatiooi  of 
Scripture  is,  that,  where  tioo  interpretations  seem  to  he 


34  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

possible,  that  is  fiften  prohahhj  truest  which  we  naturally 
like  least.  I  do  not  moan  to  intimate  that  the  Bible  is 
against  our  natural  instincts,  or  adverse  to  our  innocent 
tastes;  but  that  many  of  its  doctrinal  teachings,  being 
medicine  for  our  disease  of  sin,  are  apt  to  seem  bitter  to 
our  spiritual  palate.  We  are  naturally  wanderers  from 
God,  and  at  antagonism  "with  him ;  our  will  being  op- 
posed to  his  will.  But  his  Word  must  naturally  contain 
and  be  saturated  with  his  will,  and  therefore  will  be 
likely  to  express  itself  in  terms  distasteful  to  our  will.  So 
that,  where  two  spiritual  seniles  seem  possible  to  God's 
words,  that  sense  is  often  likeliest  to  be  nearest  his  will, 
and  therefore  truest,  which  is  furthest  from  ours,  and  which, 
therefore,  we  Hke  least.  We  may  indeed  expand  this  in-' 
to  a  general  principle,  and  safely  pronounce  that  interpre- 
tation of  the  Word  of  God  which  favors  God  most  and  sin 
least  to  be  prima  facie  the  true  one,  because  the  very 
object  of  the  gospel  is  to  destroy  sin.  If  there  can  be  gath- 
ered out  of  the  Scriptures  two  theories  on  any  subject,  each 
claiming  the  support  of  sundry  passages,  it  will  nearly 
always  be  safe  to  conclude,  other  things  being  equal,  that 
that  theory  which  is  most  comfortable  to  the  sinner  must 
be  the  false  one,  and  that  theory  which  is  strictest  m  its 
judgment,  and  sternest  in  its  condemnation  of  all  evil,  and 
least  inviting  toward  transgression,  must  be  the  true  one. 
J.  Still  another  principle  which  reason  suggests  for 
the  interpretation  of  the  Bible  is,  that,  wliere  two  senses 


BULES  OF  INTEBPEETATION.  35 

are  possiUe,  that  must  he  most  reasonahle  ivMch  is  on  the 
whole  safest  for  man.  This  is  not  sinful  selfishness,  but 
rational  self-care ;  for  sound  judgment  always  says,  In 
a  world  of  danger,  you  are  sacredly  bound  to  make  the 
best  provision  for  your  own  safety  that  you  can.  If,  of 
two  commercial  ventures  which  are  equally  profitable,  one 
has  large  contingencies  of  loss  which  the  other  wholly 
avoids,  no  sane  merchant  would  risk  his  all  upon  the  un- 
certainty when  the  certainty  was  equally  at  his  disposal. 
No  wise  traveler  selects  a  route  where  it  is  quite  probable 
that  be  may  meet  with  disaster  and  death,  in  preference  to 
one,  even  though  less  inviting,  which  promises  absolute  se- 
curity. If,  then,  for  our  eternal  journey  into  the  cloud- 
curtained  and  mysterious  future,  we  can  classify  the  great 
biblical  guide-book  into  the  indication  of  two  possible  paths, 
one  of  which,  if  too  late  there  should  prove  to  be  any 
mistake  about  our  understanding,  will  endanger  our  final 
wreck,  while  the  other  by  no  possibility  can  do  so,  sound 
reason  will  at  once  and  instinctively  select  that  which 
gathers  most  of  security  about  that  after-world  which  has  in 
itself  the  elements  of  so  fearful  a  mystery,  and  say  :  This 
is  the  way,  —  walk  ye  in  it. 

Two  objections  have  been  urged  against  this  principle  : 
one,  that,  if  true,  it  proves  too  much,  and  would  make  Ro- 
manists of  us  all ;  the  other,  that  it  is  a  mean  and  ignoble 
one.  Both  misconceive  its  real  character  and  just  appli- 
cation. 


36  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

(1.)  The  Romauist  insists,  it  is  said,  tliat  Protest- 
ants may  be  wrong,  while  "the  Church  "  is  infallibly  right ; 
therefore,  if  this  principle  of  safety  is  to  be  taken  into  the 
account,  it  will  send  us  all  into  the  embrace  of  the  Pa- 
pacy. 

To  this  I  answer :  Not  unless  the  claim  of  the  Romanist 
be  a  valid  one  ;  and,  if  it  be,  we  ought  to  follow  it.  His 
assumption,  that  there  is  no  safety  out  of  his  Church,  begs 
tlie  very  question  at  issue,  and  is  worth  nothing  until  it 
can  establish  itself  out  of  the  Bible  before  the  judgment-seat 
of  common  sense.  If  it  can  do  so,  then  safety,  and  every 
principle  of  honor  and  right  as  well,  would  prompt  us  to 
become  Romanists.  If  it  fail  to  do  so,  safety,  no  more 
than  every  principle  of  honor  and  right,  constrains  us  to 
resist  his  assumption. 

(2.)  It  is  objected  that  to  make  the  superior  safety  of  a 
given  course  of  conduct  an  element  in  coming  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  Bible  recommends  it,  is  a  cowardly  and 
dishonorable  procedure,  —  one  that  would  have  made  its 
disciple  a  Tory  in  the  Revolution,  a  "  Copperhead,"  in  our 
present  struggle. 

This  not  only  begs  the  question  equally  with  the  other,  — 
for  events,  in  both  cases  mentioned,  settle  it  that  the  path 
of  safety  and  the  path  of  duty  arc  identical,  —  but  it  ignores 
the  important  difference  between  t'he  idea  of  safety  as  one 
rule  of  interpretation  of  the  work  of  God,  and  as  an  ele- 
ment in  the  decisions  of  human  conduct.     It  lies  on  the 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  37 

face  of  the  Bible,  and  of  all  the  Divine  Providence  over 
men,  that  human  safety  was  a  moving  consideration  on 
God's  part  in  all.  "  Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  world  to 
save  ainners;  "  ^  and  Paul  characterizes  the  design  of  the 
gospel  as  to  be  "  for  salvation  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth.  "^ 
Surely,  then,  if  human  safety  is  one  great  design  for  which 
a  revelation  has  been  made  to  men,  it  cannot  be  unreason- 
able for  them  to  bear  that  fact  in  mind  in  their  interpreta- 
tion of  that  revelation  ;  and,  where  its  language  admits  of 
two  diverse  constructions,  to  put  upon  it  that  which,  so  far 
as  they  can  carefully  judge,  will  be  safest  for  them. 

The  truth  is,  that  those  very  men,  who,  when  they  ap- 
prehend danger  to  their  theology  from  the  admission  of 
such  a  principle  into  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures, 
reject  it,  and  sneer  at  it  as  an  ''  appeal  to  our  selfishness 
and  our  fears,"  habitually  and  unquestioningly  act  upon  it 
as  a  fundamental  principle  of  their  daily  life.  They  never 
think  it  to  be  an  act  of  selfishness  and  of  fear  to  select  the 
stanchest  and  most  seaworthy  of  two  competing  lines  of 
steamers  when  they  take  passage  for  a  foreign  port ;  or, 
even  that  route  of  rail,  for  a  journey  of  a  few  miles,  which 
is  reputed  freest  from  all  risk  of  accident  and  harm.  Then 
the  consideration  of  superior  safety  is  a  rational  and  honor- 
able one.  How,  then,  on  any  sound  principles  of  reason- 
ing, does  it  suddenly  become  so  mean  and  despicable, 
when  it  is  proposed  to  apply  it  to  eternal  things  ! 

1  1  Tim.  i.  15.  2  Acts  xiii.  47. 


38  VERDICT  OF  BEASON. 

Thus,  then,  I  sum  up  our  argument  thus  far.  It  is 
reasonably  settled  that  Reason,  as  I  have  defined  it,  is  our 
ultimate  judge  in  matters  of  religion. 

Yet,  when  interrogated  upon  so  vast  and  wide  a  question 
as  the  eternal  punishment  of  those  who  die  in  impenitence, 
she  replies  that  she  cannot  without  help  answer  it ;  but  has 
cause  confidently  to  rely  upon  help  from  God  to  enable 
her  to  answer  it. 

She  decides  it  clear  that  he  has  sent  her  the  aid  which 
she  needs,  in  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament ;  and  so  remits  us  to  their  pages  for  her  final  ver- 
dict. 

She  decides  that  it  is  the  highest  dictate  of  Reason  for 
us  humbly  and  faithfully  to  receive  whatever  we  find  in 
those  pages,  soundly  interpreted. 

She  decides  that  sound  principles  of  interpretation  are 
these :  — 

1.  We  must  take  the  whole  of  it  or  none. 

2.  We  must  interpret  it  honestly,  honorably,  and  in  the 
interest  of  no  previous  theory. 

3.  We  must  interpret  it  consistently  with  itself. 

4.  The  plainest  and  most  obvious  meaning,  other  things 
being  equal,  is  probably  the  true  one. 

5.  We  must  interpret  it  as  a  progressive  revelation. 

6.  We  must  interpret  it  naturally,  and  from  the  posi- 
tion of  its  own  speakers  and  audiences. 

7.  Yet  we  cannot,  with  our  finite  minds  at  their  pres- 


RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION.  39 

ent  stage  of  development,    expect  to  understand  it  all ; 
perhaps,  indeed,  little  of  it,  fully, 

8.  Of  two  equally  possible  meanings,  that  is  likeliest  to 
be  true  which  has  most  commended  itself  to  good  men  all 
alonor  fhe  ao;es. 

9.  Of  two  equally  possible  meanings,  that  is  often 
most  probably  true  which  is  least  tasteful  to  us. 

10.  Of  two  equally  possible  meanings,  that  must  be 
most  reasonable  which  seems  to  be  safest  for  men. 

Studying  the  Scriptures  prayerfully,  in  the  use  of 
those  principles  she  decides  that  we  may  look  to  find  clear 
and  suflBcient  answer  to  our  inquiry.  To  that  study  let 
us  now  advance.  And  may  that  great  God  of  infinite 
wisdom,  who  knoweth  with  an  eternally  perfect  knowledge, 
not  only  the  right  answer  to  this  question,  but  the  vast 
import  to  his  honor  and  our  own  welfare  of  our  gaining 
that  answer,  with  all  the  difficulties  that  lie  in  our  path 
toward  it,  be  mercifully  pleased  to  guard  us  from  error, 
and  to  conduct  us  to  that  conclusion  which  shall  be  right 
in  his  sight,  for  the  sake  of  him  who,  promising  to  men 
the  spirit  of  truth,  to  guide  them  into  all  truth,  laid  down 
his  own  life  that  he  might  bear  witness  to  the  truth  ! 


CHAPTER  III. 

THE   TESTIMONY   OF   THE   OLD   TESTAMENT. 

IN  endeavoring  to  develop  the  actual  position  of  the 
Bible  upon  this  question  of  the  future  eternal  punish- 
ment of  the  finally  impenitent,  it  seems  to  me  that  it  will 
be  fairest,  as  well  as  every  way  most  convenient,  for  us 
to  search,  in  the  first  place,  for  the  more  direct  testimony 
of  the  Old  Testament ;  secondly,  for  that  of  our  Saviour ; 
thu-dly,  for  that  of  the  apostles ;  and,  fourthly,  for  those 
more  casual  and  indirect  utterances,  from  whatever  source, 
which,  in  the  light  of  those  previously  considered,  which 
are  impossible  of  misconstruction,  take  a  decided,  and, 
from  their  very  incidental  character,  peculiai-ly  weighty 
significance. 

Such  an  arrangement  will  at  least  facilitate  our  en- 
deavors to  comply  with  the  fourth  and  fifth  rules  which 
we  have  laid  down  to  aid  in  a  reasonable  interpretation ; 
namely,  that  we  regard  the  Bible  as  a  progressive  revela- 
tion, and  that  we  interpret  it  from  the  position  of  its 
writers  and  speakers.  We  shall  thus  also  most  easily 
hope  to  avoid   that   danger,    which   threatens  the    argu- 

40 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        41 

ments  of  all  who  search  indiscrimmately  for  proof-texts  of 
any  doctrine,  guided  merely  by  the  apparent  appositeness 
of  the  language  used,  of  unconsciously  affixing  to  some 
such  passages  a  sense  greater  or  less  or  other  than  really 
belongs  to  them  when  studied  in  their  connection,  and 
balanced  by  all  those  counterpoising  considerations  which 
naturally  associate  themselves  with  their  normal  intention 
and  relations. 

Let  us,  then,  proceed  to  inquire  what  is  the  testimony 
of  the  Old  Testament  in  regard  to  the  future  state  of  those 
who  die  impenitent. 

As  we  open  the  book,  almost  on  its  first  page  we  read 
the  voice  of  God  to  Adam,  in  reference  to  the  fruit  of  the 
tree  of  knowledge:  "Thou  shalt  not  eat  of  it;  for  in 
the  day  thou  eatest  thereof  (n^?2!n  tii^  moth  td  muth), 
to  die,  thou  shalt  die.^'^  This  is  a  very  peculiar  ex- 
pression. What  does  it  fairly  and  honestly  mean?  and 
how  much  is  legitimately  expressed  by  it  ?  I  remark  in 
exposition  of  it :  — 

1.  It  means  more  than  the  simple  prophecy  of  physical 
death  as  sure  to  come  upon  Adam,  should  he  disobey. 
That  idea  would  have  found  natural  utterance  through 
the  future  form  of  the  same  verb  (yamuthu),  as  in  Numbers 
xiv.  35;  or,  by  another  verb  {guva),  as  in  Genesis  vi.  17; 
Job  xiii.  19,  and  other  passages. 

2.  It  means  more  than  the  threatening  of  what  we  call 

1  Genesis  ii.  17. 


42  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

capital  punishment  upon  Adam  for  the  offence  of  eating. 
That  would  have  found  expression  by  the  last  word  of  the 
two  {td-muth, — thou  shalt  he  put  to  cleatli),  without  the 
intensifier  {moth, — to  die),  as  where  Pharaoh  told  Moses  : 
**In  that  day  thou  seest  my  face  (ta-muth) ,  thou  shalt 
die;"  ^  and  where  God  decrees  that  the  negligent  owner 
of  an  ox  which  gores  a  man  {yumoth,  —  another  tense  of 
the  same  verb)  "  shall  be  put  to  death." " 

3.  But  if  this  language  meant  more  to  Adam  than  the 
mere  prophecy,  that  to  eat  the  forbidden  fruit  would  prove 
suicidal  to  his  bodily  life ;  more  even  than  the  threat,  that 
he  should  be  put  to  death  for  such  disobedience ;  what  did 
it  mean?  If  to  have  told  him  "  Thou  shalt  die"  would 
have  been  telling  him  that  much,  what  was  he  to  under- 
stand from  being  told,  that  "he  should  die  to  die,''^  if  he 
disobeyed  ? 

One  answer  is,  that  it  was  a  mere  hightening  of  empha- 
sis (as  in  Genesis  xx.  7 ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  39,  44 ;  2  Sam. 
xii.  14,  &c.),  making  the  sense  of  it  to  be,  "  There  can  be 
no  mistake  about  it;  thou  shalt  surely  die."  But  to  this 
it  may  be  replied,  that  there  seems  to  be  no  call  for  such 
special  emphasis  in  the  divine  utterance  here,  if  simple 
physical  death  were  all  that  were  intended.  The  idea  of 
death,  in  any  form,  was  as  yet  without  illustration  before 

1  Exodus  X.  28. 

2  Exodus  xxi.  29.  Compare  also  Numbers  i.  51,  and  many  kindred 
passages. 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        43 

Adam's  mind;  but  he  was  unhackneyed  m  speech,  words 
had  not  lost  force  to  him  by  that  long  famiharity  which 
breeds  contempt ;  and,  so  far  as  death  meant  any  thing  to 
him  then,  its  force  would  seem  to  have  been  as  sufficient 
of  itself  as  if  hightened  by  such  repetition. 

It  seems  to  me  that  to  tell  Adam  that,  if  he  disobeyed, 
he  should  die,  to  die,  was,  vaguely  to  be  sure, — for  all 
such  ideas  must  have  lacked  important  elements  of  clear- 
ness and  force  to  his  virgin  mind  in  its  earliest  hours,  —  to 
tell  him,  not  merely  that  his  physical  life  should  come  to 
an  end,  but  that  that  dying  should  be  for  the  purpose  of 
yet  another  death  beyond,  —  he  should  die,  in  order  to  die ; 
dying  here,  that  he  might  die  again,  and  somewhere  else. 
And,  if  we  examine  the  use  of  the  same  words  in  the  next 
chapter,  this  view,  to  my  mind,  gains  confirmation.  There, 
in  the  interview  between  the  serpent  and  Eve,  the  latter , 
says  to  the  former,^  "  Of  the  fruit  of  the  tree  which  is 
in  the  midst  of  the  garden,  God  hath  said  (to  us)  ye  shall 
not  eat  of  it,  and  ye  shall  not  touch  it,  lest  (fmu-thun  — 
third  person  plural,  future,  without  the  intensitive)  ye  shall 
die.^^  The  serpent  in  his  reply  does  not  give  her  back 
her  own  term,  which  might  apply  to  physical  death  only, 
but  adds  the  very  word  which  God  had  originally  used  in 
his  interview  with  Adam,  but  which  Eve  had  dropped  out, 
and  says,  "  By  no  means  {moth  f  mu-thuii),  to  die  shall 
ye  die  /  for  God  is  knowing  that,  in  the  day  of  your  eating 

1  Genesis  iii.  3-5. 


44  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

of  it,  your  eyes  shall  be  opened,  and  ye  sliall  he  God-like, 
hiowing  good  and  eviiy  The  latter  member  of  the  an- 
tithesis here  intimated  reflects  light  upon  the  former ;  and, 
by  suggesting  the  idea  of  God-likeness  and  omniscience  as 
the  real  result  of  eating  the  forbidden  fruit,  the  serpent 
indicates  his  understanding  of  God's  thi-eat  to  have  con- 
sisted in  the  opposite  of  God-likeness  and  omniscience, 
which  is  much  more  decidedly  the  eternal  death  of  impeni- 
tence than  the  mere  instantaneous  cessation  of  the  bodily 
life. 

But,  whether  the  Hebrew  text  necessitates  this  view  or 
not,  it  demands  more,  in  my  judgment,  than  mere  proph- 
ecy or  threat,  more  even  than  emphasis  from  the  double 
verb ;  and  the  gi-eat  majority  of  careful  students  of  the 
verse  have  regarded  it  as  projecting  a  dark  mysterious 
menace  over  into  the  shadowy  future,  —  as  revealing  to 
the  first  man,  as  clearly  as  the  circumstances  of  his  case 
made  possible,  the  fact  that  unrepented  sin  compels  an 
unrewarded  eternity.^ 

1  There  seems  to  be  great  good  sense  in  Calvin's  suggestion  in 
explanation  of  this  text,  that  "  the  definition  of  this  death  is  to  be 
sought  from  its  opposite,  —  the  kind  of  life  from  which  man  fell. 
His  earthly  life,  truly,  would  have  been  temporal ;  but  he  would  have 
passed  from  it  directly  into  heaven,  without  death  and  without  injury. 
Hence  it  follows,  that,  under  the  name  of  '  death'  is  comprehended  all 
those  miseries  in  which  Adam  involved  himself  by  his  defection."— 
Comment,  i.  127. 

So  Bush  says,  "  "We  are  taught  by  the  actual  result  what  sense  to 
afSx  to  the  terms.    So  that  the  threatening  embraced  all  the  evils, 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        45 

But  grant  tliat  here,  in  this  first  experience  of  the  race, 
was  laid  the  corner-stone  of  the  revelation  of  the  doctrine 
of  future  punishment,  the  question  at  once  arises :  Why 
did  not  the  superstructure  immediately  follow  ?  I  answer, 
there  is  something  more  than  poetry  in  the  idea,  that  the 
life  of  the  world  resembles  the  life  of  individuals.  His- 
tory is  full  of  illustrations  of  the  fact,  that  the  nations 
have  their  infancy  when  their  ideas  are  crude  and  their 
capacity  for  knowledge  is  limited.  So  the  race  had  its 
centuries  of  childhood.  The  children  of  Israel  were  at 
first  incapable  (as  we  readily  perceive  the  savage  now  to 
be)  of  understanding  abstract  and  advanced  truth,  and 
needed  to  be  led  from  weakness  to  strength,  and  then 
from  strength  to  strength,  by  the  simplest  picture  lessons. 
Accordingly,  we  find  that  God,  for  centuries,  dealt  with 
them  as  with  children,  gradually  advancing  from  milk  to 
strong  meat,  as  they  were  able  to  bear  it.  And  the  Bible 
contains  the  record  of  this  advance,  with  that  of  the  means 
used  to  accomplish  it. 

Now,  as  we  practically  know  that  immature  minds  are 
more  influenced  by  the  present  than  by  the  future,  and  as 
we  are,  therefore,  not  accustomed  to  secure  the  obedience 
and  moral  advance  of  our  young  children  by  appeals  to  a 
distant  retribution,  so  much  as  by  immediate  and  tangible 
discipline ;    so  God  did  not,  at  first,  rely  for  the  training 

spiritual,  temporal,  and  eternal,  which  we  learn  elsewhere  to  be  in- 
cluded in  the  term  death,  as  a  punishment  for  sin." —  Comment,  i.  63. 


46  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

of  the  Hebrew  mind  upon  the  idea  of  the  eternal  life,  and 
of  heaven  and  hell,  with  then-  rewards  and  punishments, 
so  much  as  he  sought  to  stimulate  obedience  by  motives 
appealing  to  their  immediate  and  temporal  welfare. 
Length  of  days,  peace,  wealth,  and  honor  were  promised 
to  him  who  obeyed  the  law ;  while  disaster,  distress,  and 
death  were  threatened  as  the  punishment  of  the  disobedient 
and  rebellious.  In  this,  nothing  was  either  affirmed  or 
denied  in  reference  to  the  future  world, — just  as  we 
neither  affirm  nor  deny  any  thing  in  reference  to  it  while 
we  are  training  our  little  ones  by  nearer  and  more  obvious 
considerations. 

But  it  is  objected  here,  that,  if  the  doctrine  of  eternal 
punishment  be  true,  it  was  true  in  Adam's  time ;  true 
through  all  those  early  centuries  which  intervened  before 
the  race,  in  their  slow  progressive  intelligence,  began  to 
take  knowledge  of  it ;  but  that  if  so  true,  and  if  all  those 
generations  of  men  were  exposed  to  it,  God  ought  —  and 
from  his  known  character  might  be  expected  —  to  have 
announced  it  "on  the  very  morning  of  creation,  in  the  most 
positive  and  unmistakable  language,  as  a  warning  to  Adam 
and  all  future  generations.  And  if  it  was  not  so  an- 
nounced, no  man,  who  reverences  the  character  of  God, 
ought  to  ask  for  a  more  overwhelming  presumptive  proof 
that  it  is  not  true."^ 

1  Review  of  Rev.  H.  M.  Baxter's  Sermon,  by  Rev.  T.  B.  Thayer. 
Boston,  1858,  p.  10. 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        47 

To  this  I  answer  :  — 

1.  If  revealed,  as  we  claim  that  it  was,  to  tlie  ex- 
tent to  which  the  immature  Hebrew  mind  was  able  to  re- 
ceive it,  that  revelation  was,  under  the  circumstances,  fair 
and  sufl&cient. 

2.  If,  by  any  sudden,  miraculous  work  upon  that  mind, 
it  had  been  possible  for  God  to  highten  the  distinctness 
and  force  of  that  revelation,  it  is  not  clear  that  it  would 
have  added  any  thing  to  the  safety  of  the  receiver  of  the 
doctrme,  while  it  would  clearly  have  added  to  the  guilt  of 
its  rejectors. 

3.  The  Scripture  makes  obvious  the  fact,  that  responsi- 
bility and  guilt  are  always  directly  and  exactly  proportioned 
to  the  degree  of  light  in  possession;  to  the  result  that  only 
*'  as  many  as  have  sinned  in  the  law  shall  be  judged  by 
the  law,"  so  that  God  will  be  clear  when  he  judges. 

The  essential  futility  of  the  principle  on  which  such  an 
objection  rests  may  be  illustrated  thus  :  If  it  be  a  fact  that 
poison  is  deadly  to  human  life,  it  is  a  fact  while  children 
are  yet  too  young  to  comprehend  it.  But,  if  all  the  infants 
in  the  world  are  hourly  exposed  to  death  by  poison,  a  God 
of  infinite  power  and  kindness  might  be  expected  to  an- 
nounce that  danger  on  the  very  morning  of  human  exist- 
ence, in  the  most  positive  and  unmistakable  language,  as 
a  warning  to  every  babe  in  the  world.  And,  if  it  has  not 
been  so  announced,  no  man  who  reverences  the  character 
of  God  ought  to  ask  for  a  more  overwhelming  presump- 
tive proof  that  poison  is  not  deadly  to  human  life  ! 


48  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

Though  a  long  time  passed,  thou,  before  future  rewards 
and  punishments  were  at  all  urged  upon  the  Hebrews  as 
motives  of  action,  it  is  not  true  that  they  did  not  believe 
in  the  immortality  of  the  soul.  Their  ideas  were  doubtless 
crude  and  dim  at  first ;  but  the  laws  which  Moses  made 
against  necromancy,^  or  the  invocation  of  the  dead,  imply 
that  the  Israelites  must  have  had  some  impression  that  dead 
men  were  not  gone  into  non-existence.^  So  the  record 
which  was  made  of  Enoch,  "  God  took  him,"  implies  an 
invisible  life  with  God.  So  where  Jacob  says,  "  I  will  go 
down  into  sheol  ViWto  my  son,"^  he  suggests  his  belief  of 
a  place  where  society  is  possible  among  the  departed.  And 
the  common  phrase  of  one  dying,  "  he  went  to  his  fathers, '^ 
or  "  was  gathered  to  his  fathers,"  indorses  the  same  belief. 
Job,  with  a  brave  heart,  though  in  speech  so  vague  as  to 
demonstrate  that  his  convictions  were  not  yet  clear,  points 
towards  the  future  world  as  the  place  where  his  Redeemer 
should  vindicate  his  character,*  and  even  inquires  of  his 
friends  if  they  have  not  heard,  and  will  not  admit,  that  the 
wicked  is  reserved  to  the  day  of  destruction,  and  will  be 
brought  forth  in  the  day  of  wrath ;  adding  —  in  evidence 
that  he  does  not  mean  any  day  of  wrath  in  this  world  — 
that  this  will  happen  though  the  wicked  man  here  is  pros- 
perous, and  is  borne  with  honor  to  the  tomb.^ 

Gradually,  clearer  intimations  are  given  of  the  future 

1  Deut.  xviii.  11.  2  Gen.  v.  24.  3  Gen.  xxxvii.  35. 

4  Job  xix.  25.       5  Job  xxi.  29-33.    See  Barnes  on  Job,  i.  xciii. 


TESTIMONT  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        49 

world,  and  more  decided  allusion  is  made  to  the  separation 
there  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked.  A  thousand 
years  before  Christ,  the  Psalmist  speaks  with  much  greater 
distinctness  and  decision.  He  says,  "  The  wicked  shall  be 
turned  into  hell  {sheoV),  and  all  the  nations  that  forget 
God."  ^  "  Upon  the  wicked  he  shall  rain  snares,  fire  and 
brimstone,  and  a  horrible  tempest."^  So  "  Salvation  is 
fai'  from  the  wicked."  ^  So  he  closes  a  vivid  picture  of  the 
guilt  and  excess  of  bad  men,  and  the  record  of  his  wonder 
that  God  should  permit  such  guilt  in  them,  by  saying,  that, 
when  he  went  into  the  sanctuary  of  God,  he  understood 
"their  end,"  and  saw  that  they  were  to  be  brought  into 
desolation,  and  consumed  with  terrors.*  And  in  the  ninety- 
second  Psalm  he  pursues  the  same  thought,  "  When  all 
the  workers  of  iniquity  do  flourish,  it  is  that  they  shall  be 
destroyed  for  ever."  ^ 

A  little  after,  we  find  the  authors  of  the  Book  of  Pro- 
verbs, and  of  the  Ecclesiastes,  speaking  even  more  strongly. 
We  read,  "  The  wicked  is  driven  away  in  his  wickedness; 
but  the  righteous  hath  hope  in  his  death."*'  And  again, 
"  The  hope  of  the  righteous  shall  be  gladness ;  but  the  ex- 
pectation of  the  wicked  shall  perish."  ^  And  yet  again, 
"  When  a  wicked  man  dieth  his  expectation  shall  perish."^ 
And  again,  as  if  to  explain  some  of  the  mysteries  of  life 

1  Psalm  ix.  17.  2  Psalm  xi.  G.  3  Psalm  cxix.  155. 

4  Psalm  Ixxiii.  17.  5  Verse  7.  6  Proverbs  xiv.  32. 

7  Proverbs  x.  28,  8  Proverbs  xi.  7. 
4 


60  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

by  the  fact  that  the  punisbmcnt  which  the  wicked  deserve 
is  delayed,  "  Because  sentence  against  an  evil  work  is  not 
executed  speedily,  therefore  the  heart  of  the  sons  of  men 
is  fully  set  in  them  to  do  evil ;"  -^  which,  for  its  full  effect 
demands  to  be  regarded  as  an  implication  of  a  future  exe- 
cution of  such  sentence.  So  we  are  told  that  "  God  shall 
bring  every  work  into  judgment,  with  every  secret  thing, 
whether  it  be  good,  or  whether  it  be  evil,"  ^  where  not  only 
judgment,  but  retribution,  beyond  the  grave,  is  inevitably 
asserted.^ 

Passing  on  to  the  times  of  the  prophets,  we  find  Isaiah 
saying,  "  Woe  unto  the  wicked,  it  shall  be  ill  with  him,  for 
the  reward  of  his  hand  shall  be  given  him ;  "  *  and  Ezekiel 
declaring  that  God  will  pour  out  his  fury  upon  the  wicked, 
and  accomplish  his  anger  upon  them,  and  judge  them  ac- 
cording to  their  ways,  and  recompense  them  for  all  their 
abominations  ;  ^  and  Amos  predicting  that  they  that  swear 

1  Ecclesiastes  viii.  11.  2  Ecclesiastes  xii.  14. 

3  Prof.  Stuart  argues  with  great  force  in  proof  that  the  design  of  the 
Book  of  Ecclesiastes  is  to  prove  (1)  that  retribution,  adequate  and  just, 
of  good  and  evil,  will  certainly  be  made.  (2)  It  is  not  made  here.  (3) 
Therefore  it  will  be  made  in  the  future  world.  He  says,  "  If  there  be 
any  way  of  properly  shunning  or  avoiding  this  conclusion,  it  is  un- 
known to  me."  And  some  German  critics,  like  Knobel,  have  consid- 
ered the  verse  quoted  above  as  so  clear  and  unmistakable  an  assertion 
of  a  future  judgment,  that  they  have  supposed  it  to  be  the  forgery  of 
some  later  date,  because  they  held  that  the  author  of  the  book  could 
have  had  no  such  belief.  But  Prof.  Stuart  both  shows  that  its  author 
could  and  did  believe  it,  and  that  there  is  no  shadow  of  proof  of  the 
imagined  forgery.—  Commentmnj  on  Eccles.  pp.  33,  29G, 

■1  Isaiali  iii.  11.  5  Ezekiel  vii.  8. 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.         51 

by  the  sin  of  Samaria,  "  Even  they  shall  fall,  and  never 
rise  up  again  ;  "  ^  and  Nahum  urging,  "  The  Lord  is  great 
in  power,  and  will  not  at  all  acquit  the  wicked."  ^ 

The  last  verse  of  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah  says  of  that  dis- 
tant future  when  the  kingdom  of  God  shall  be  finally  and 
perpetually  established,  "And  they  (God's  people)  shall 
go  forth  and  look  upon  the  carcasses  of  the  men  that  have 
transgressed  against  me ;  for  their  worm  shall  not  die,  nei- 
ther shall  their  fire  be  quenched,  and  they  shall  be  an  ab- 
horring unto  all  flesh.  "^  Here  is  the  origin  of  the  meta- 
phor which  we  shall  find  Christ  often  using  in  his  fearful 
descriptions  of  the  future  condition  of  the  wicked.^  So  the 
last  chapter  of  the  prophecy  of  Daniel  (supposed  to  date 
about  534  years  before  Christ)  indicates  a  clearer  concep- 
tion than  before,  of  the  great  idea  of  a  future  and  unend- 
ing difference  between  the  righteous  and  the  wicked.  The 
prophet —  speaking  of  some  time  of  future  resurrection  of 

1  Amos  viii.  14.  2  Nahum  i.  3.  3  Isaiah  Ixvi.  24. 

4  '<  The  Saviour  (Mark  ix. 44-46)  applies  tliis  lavguageio  the  future 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  and  no  one,  I  think,  can  doubt  that  in  Isaiah 
it  «'ncZM(?es  that  consummation  of  worldly  affairs.  The  radical  and  es- 
sential idea  in  the  prophet  is,  as  it  seems  to  me,  that  such  would  be  the 
entire  overthrow  and  punishment  of  the  enemies  of  God  ;  so  condign 
their  punishment,  so  deep  their  sufferings,  so  loathsome  and  hateful 
would  they  be  when  he  visited  with  divine  vengeance  for  their  sins 
that  they  would  be  an  object  of  loathing  and  abhorrence.  They  would 
be  swept  off  as  unworthy  to  live  with  God,  and  they  would  be  con. 
signed  to  punishment  loathsome  like  that  of  ever-gnawing  worms  on  the 
carcasses  of  the  slain,  and  interminable  and  dreadful  like  ever-consum- 
ing and  inextinguishable  fires."  —  Barnes's  Comment,  on  Isaiah,  ii.457. 


52  vehdict  of  reason. 

the  dead  —  says,  "  And  many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust 
of  the  earth  shall  awake,  some  to  everlasting  life,  and  some 
to  shame  and  everlasting  contempt."^ 

The  history  of  the  Hebrew  word  bSj<:i3  {sheol)  illustrates 
this  progress  of  the  ideas  of  futurity  and  future  punish- 
ment in  the  Old-Testament  tunes.  It  literally  means  a 
hollow,  subterranean  place,  and  first  came  into  use  as  a 
name  for  the  grave.  As  where  Jacob  says,  "  I  will  go 
down  into  skeol  unto  my  son  mourning.^  But,  as  the  grave 
is  the  visible  resting-place  of  all  of  the  dead  that  is  obvious 
to  sense,  it  was  a  very  easy  transition  that  soon  after  led 
to  the  appHcation  of  the  word  to  the  spiiitual  position  of 
the  departed,  —  the  home  of  all  souls,  a  vast  receptacle 
where  the  life  that  had  ceased  here  is  continued  until  the 
resumption  of  the  body  at  the  resurrection,  and  the  day  of 
judgment  with  its  decisions.  Gradually,  as  the  successive 
utterances  of  inspired  men  and  the  successive  books  of  the 
Bible  imparted  to  the  Jewish  people  clearer  ideas  of  the 
future  state,  this  word  came  to  be  modified  in  accordance 
with  those  ideas.  Sheol,  the  great  cavernous  under-world, 
was  conceived  to  be  divided ;  its  upper  portion  was  imag- 
ined to  contain  an  inferior  paradise,  where  the  righteous 
waited  until  the  resurrection  and  the  judgment  should  re- 
mit them  to  heaven ;  and  its  lower  portion  —  the  abyss, 
gehenna  —  was  supposed  to  retain  the  souls  of  the  wicked 

1  Daniel  xii.  2.  2  Genesis  xxxvii.  35. 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        53 

until  the  same  epoch  of  finality.  Sometimes  the  word  clearly 
carried  more  distinctly  the  latter  significance.  David 
uses  it  in  a  sense  which  can  not  naturally  apply  to  any 
place,  in  this  world  or  the  next,  where  the  righteous  as  well 
as  the  wicked  are  sent.^  So  in  Proverbs  we  find  several 
passages  so  employing  it  as  most  naturally  to  suggest  the 
association  with  it,  in  the  mind  of  the  writer,  of  the  idea  of 
the  abode  of  the  wicked  and  miserable  dead,^ 

The  Old  Testament  was  the  great  teacher  of  the  Hebrew 
people ;  given  to  be  so,  and  demonstrably  fulfilling  its  de- 
sign. It  follows,  therefore,  that  the  state  of  opinion  on 
this  subject  actually  existing  among  the  Jews,  at  the  time 
when  the  canon  of  the  Old  Testament  was  closed,  and  it 
had  wrought  its  full  work  upon  their  minds,  may  be  taken 
in  evidence  of  the  actual  fact  and  force  of  its  instructions . 
And  what  that  state  of  opinion  was  we  need  be  at  no  loss 
to  discover.  Josephus,  bom  four  years  after  the  ascension 
of  Christ,  whose  learning  and  opportunities  of  knowledge 
will  not  be  questioned,  describes  with  considerable  care  the 
philosophical  and  religious  belief  of  the  nation.  He  classi- 
fies the  Jews  into  three  sects,  —  Pharisees,  Sadducees, 
and  Essenes ;  the  first  dividing  with  the  last  the  vast  ma- 
jority of  the  nation.  Of  the  Essenes  he  says,  "To  the 
bad  they  allot  a  gloomy  and  tempestuous  cavern  full  of 
never-ending  punishment."^    He  says  that  the  Pharisees 

1  Psiilm  ix.  17.  2  Proverbs  v.  5 ;  ix.  18  ;  xv.  24 ;  xxiii.  11. 

3  Jewish  War,  book  ii.  chap.  8,  sect.  11. 


54  VERDICT  OF  BEASON. 

believed  that  the  souls  of  the  bad  "  suffer  eternal  punish- 
ment." ^  Of  the  Sadducees  he  says,  "  The  permanency  of 
the  soul,  and  the  punishments  and  reward  of  Hades,  they 
reject."^  These  last  were  the  infidels  of  their  day,  and 
Josephus  elsewhere  adds,  ' '  This  doctrine  is  received  but 
by  a  few."  ^  So  that,  on  his  testimony,  the  vast  majority 
of  his  nation,  when  Christ  came,  were  firm  believers  in  the 
future  punishment  of  the  wicked. 

Jahn  sums  up  his  researches  into  the  doctrine  of  the 
Jews  ill  this  department,  by  saying  that  the  Pharisees 
taught  "  that  the  spirits  of  the  wicked  were  tormented  with 
everlasting  punishments ;  that  the  good,  on  the  other  hand, 
received  rewards  ;  "  ^  and  that  the  Essenes  believed  "  that 
the  good  after  death  received  rewards  beyond  the  islands 
of  the  sea,  and  that  the  wicked  suffered  punishments  under 
the  earth." ^ 

The  Jewish  Rabbis  had  various  theories  of  explanation 
of  the  mysteries  involved  in  tbis  fearful  subject,  but  they 
agreed  in  teaching  an  eternal  difference  between  the  right- 
eous and  the  wicked.^  We  find  corroboration  of  this  as 
the  view  then  taken  by  the  Jewish  nation  as  a  whole,  in 
the  fact,  that  future  punishment  is  appealed  to  as  a  motive 


1  Jewisli  War,  book  ii.  chap.  8,  sect.  14.  2  Ibid. 

3  Antiquities  of  the  Jews,  book  xviii.  chap.  i.  sect.  4. 

4  Biblical  Archaeology,  p.  403.  5  Ibid.  p.  411. 

6  See  a  learned  article  by  Prof.  Barrows  in  the  Bibliotkeca  Sacra  for 
July  1858. 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        55 

to  virtue  in  the  apocryphal  books,  (supposed* to  range  in 
date  from  B.  C.  300,  to  B.  C.  30,)  which  —  although 
without  the  authority  of  inspiration  —  have  yet  a  certain 
value  as  witnesses  of  the  opinions  of  the  times  which  pro- 
duced them.  In  the  second  book  of  the  Maccabees,  the 
old  man  Eleazer  is  represented  as  refusing  to  be  guilty  of 
deceit  to  save  his  life,  for  he  says,  "  Though  for  the  pres- 
ent time  I  should  be  delivered  from  the  punishment  of 
men ;  yet  should  I  not  escape  the  hand  of  the  Almighty, 
neither  alive  nor  dead."  ^  So  a  young  martyr  is  represent- 
ed as  saying,  with  his  dying  breath,  to  the  wicked  king  : 
"  Think  not  thou,  that  takest  in  hand  to  strive  against 
God,  that  thou  shalt  escape  unpunished."  ^  So  in  the  thii'd 
chapter  of  the  Wisdom  of  Solomon  we  read,  "The  souls 
of  the  righteous  are  in  the  hand  of  God,  and  there  shall 
no  torment  touch  them  ; ' '  while  of  the  wicked  it  is  said, 
"  If  they  die  quickly,  they  have  no  hope,  neither  comfort 
in  the  day  of  trial ;  for  horrible  is  the  end  of  the  unright- 
eous generation."  ^ 

So  conclusive  is  the  evidence  on  this  point,  that  no  well 
informed  and  candid  person  will  attempt  to  deny  it.  Bev. 
T.  S.  Kino;  conceded  this  in  his  sermons  ap;ainst  the  doc- 
trine,  saying,  "  There  is  no  doubt  that  the  Pharisees  of  . 
the  New-Testament  times  believed  in  eternal  damnation. 
Let  the  doctrine  receive  all  the  strength  and  respectability 
which  such  an  indorsement  may  confer."  ^ 

1  2  Maccabees  vi.  26.  2  Ibid.  vii.  19. 

3  Verses  1,  18,  19.  4  Two  Sermons,  p.  23. 


56  VERDICT  OF  REAS02T. 

An  eariiesT effort  has  been  made  to  prove  that  the  Old 
Testament  was  not  responsible  for  this  opinion  thus  existing 
among  the  Jews,  but  that  they  received  it  from  their 
heathen  neighbors.  That  respectable  writer  just  quoted 
has  even  gone  so  far  as  to  say,  — 

**  There  is  no  allusion,  in  the  Old  Testament,  to  punish- 
ment at  all  in  the  unseen  world.  So  long  as  the  Jews 
were  under  the  exclusive  influence  of  the  Old-Testament 
literature  and  inspiration,  they  held  no  doctrine  of  future 
punishment.  Down  to  the  time  of  Malachi,  it  had  not 
appeared  among  them.  That  doctrine  came  into  their 
mind  from  heathen  sources,  chiefly  from  Alexandria  in 
Egypt,  and  their  connection  with  Greek  mythology  and 
speculation.  It  is  only  in  the  later  books  of  the  Apocry- 
pha, approaching  the  time  of  Christ,  that  the  dogma  is 
detected  in  their  literature."^ 

But  the  first  stone  of  Alexandria  in  Egypt  was  not 
laid  until  B.C.  332,  and  it  was  nearly  or  quite  a  century 
after  that,  before  it  began  to  be  felt  as  a  radiating  power 
in  philosophy;  and  this  was  two  hundred  years  after 
Malachi  had  written  the  final  Old-Testament  page,  and 
more  than  three  hundred  after  the  latest  utterance  (that  of 
Daniel)  which  I  have  quoted  from  the  Old  Testament  on 
the  question  at  issue,  and  more  than  eight  hundred  after 

1  "  Tlie  Doctrine  of  Endless  Punishment  for  the  Sins  of  tliis  Life 
Unchristian  and  Unreasonable,"  by  llev.  Thomas  Starr  King.  Boston, 
1858,  p.  22. 


TESTIMONY  OF  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.        57 

David  bad  written,  "the  wicked  shall  be  turned  into  sheol, 
and  all  tbe  nations  that  forget  God."  Wbile  it  is  clear 
to  tbe  slightest  examination,  that  tbe  passages  of  the 
Apocrypha  to  which  he  refers,  —  which  I  have  just  quoted 
above,  —  are  less  clear  and  decided,  as  expressions  of  a 
belief  in  future  retribution,  than  many  which  we  have 
found  having  their  place  in  the  Psalms  and  the  Proverbs 
and  the  Prophets,  centuries  before  tbe  name  of  the  city  of 
Alexandria  was  ever  syllabled  from  mortal  lips.  It  would, 
in  point  of  fact,  be  a  much  easier  task  to  prove  that 
Alexandria  learned  its  doctrine  from  Jerusalem,  than  that 
Jerusalem  imported  hers  from  Alexandria. 

We  are  prepared,  then,  to  say,  in  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion. What  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Old  Testament  in  regard 
to  the  future  state  of  the  impenitent,  that,  conforming  to 
the  immature  and  only  gradually  advancing  condition  of 
the  Jewish  mind,  the  Hebrew  Scriptures  very  gradually, 
and  at  the  best  dimly,  and  yet  with  growing  distinctness, 
did  convey  to  the  Hebrew  nation  the  gi'eat  ideas  of  immor- 
tality, and  of  future  punishment  for  the  wicked,  and  reward 
for  the  righteous.  That  nation  had  actually  received  those 
ideas  from  them,  and  had  wrought  them  radically  into  its 
theology,  before  the  Christian  era.  And  such  —  with  the 
exception  of  the  inconsiderable  sect  of  the  infidel  Saddu- 
cees  —  was  the  decided  conviction,  though  perhaps  not 
very  intelligent  or  intelligible  to  themselves,  of  the  Jewish 
people  when  Christ  came. 


58  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

I  do  not  claim  that  the  fact,  that  the  Jews  when  Christ 
came  did  actually  believe  in  the  future  punishment  of  the 
wicked,  establishes  either  the  truth  of  the  doctrine,  or 
renders  it  certain  that  they  took  it  from  the  Law,  the 
Prophets,  and  the  Psalms.  But  I  do  claim,  that  the 
fact  of  such  belief  greatly  hightens  the  probability  that 
we  are  right  in  understanding  those  writings  as  really 
teaching  what  we  have  seen  that  they  seem  to  teach,  while 
I  insist  that  this  universal  belief,  which,  from  some  cause, 
had  worked  its  way  into  the  substructure  of  the  actual 
theology  of  the  nation  to  whom  Christ  preached,  is  of  the 
greatest  consequence  to  be  always  and  everywhere  remem- 
bered in  the  interpretation  of  his  words. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


THE   TESTIMONY   OP    CHRIST. 


WE  pass  next  to  tbe  inquiry,  What  was  the  actual 
teaching  of  our  Saviour  on  this  question  of  the 
future  punishment  of  the  wicked? 

But  here  we  are  met  in  the  outset  by  the  objection  that 
our  New  Testament  gives  us  but  the  most  fragmentary 
record  of  the  utterances  of  Christ  upon  eternal  subjects, 
and  that  since,  in  his  humanity,  he  shared  the  oriental 
temperament,  his  language  ought  not  to  be  pressed  to  that 
degree  of  Hteral  interpretation  which  would  be  allowable 
in  the  construction  of  the  dry  decree  of  a  court,  or  the 
formal  act  of  a  legislature. 

Grant  both  of  these,  for  argument's  sake,  and  it  will 
still  remain  imperishably  true,  that  our  Saviour  did  teach 
some  doctrine  (however  fragmentary  in  form,  and  however 
poetic) ;  and  that  his  solicitude  for  men  was  such  as  to 
make  him  greatly  desire  that  they  should  not  be  misled 
in  eternal  things,  and  his  intelHgence  such  that  he  could 
not  fail  to  perceive  the  drift  of  their  minds  under  the 
circumstances   in  which    they   were    addressed   by   him. 

59 


60  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

Doubtless,  we  shall  all  agree  that  he  both  knew  whether 
the  doctrine  of  future  eternal  punishment  is  true  or  false, 
and  knew  that  it  must  be  of  consequence  to  human  wel- 
fare for  men  to  know;  and  —  since  he  was  divinely  honest 
— we  have  a  right  to  suppose  that  he  shaped  his  words 
(however  fragmentary,  and  however  poetic)  in  such  a  way 
that  they  would  not  tend  to  mislead  the  multitude,  whose 
welfare  he  desired  with  a  desire  which  led  him  to  the 
cross. 

These  things  are  indisputably  true  :  — 

1.  Christ  knew  that  the  vast  majority  of  all  whom  he 
addressed,  —  the  few  Sadducees  excepted,  who,  being 
rich  and  exclusive,  seldom  came  into  contact  with  him,  — 
did  believe  that  the  wicked  will  be  punished  in  the  future 
world.  Whether  they  got  that  doctrine  from  Moses  and 
the  prophets,  from  Alexandria,  or  from  some  other  source, 
they  had  it,  and  held  it. 

2.  He  was  himself  a  UniversaHst,  or  (for  neutrality 
on  such  a  question  is  impossible)  a  believer  in  the  doctrine 
of  an  eternal  hell  for  those  who  die  in  sin. 

3.  As  one  who  knew  all  things,  and  loved  men,  even 
so  much  as  to  lay  down  his  life  that  they  might  live,  he 
not  only  knew  that  the  truth  on  that  subject  was  of  great 
consequence,  but  he  must  have  had  a  most  earnest  desire 
that  all  might  come  to  the  knowledge  of  that  truth,  and 
act  in  view  of  it. 

4.  Such  being  the  facts,  for  him  to  say  nothing  about 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHEIST.  61 

the  doctrine  before  his  Jewish  audiences,  while  discussing 
the  great  realities  which  shape  the  soul's  destinies,  would 
have  been  to  have  sealed  to  their  minds  its  truth  by  the 
consent  of  his  silence. 

5.  Such  being  the  facts,  further,  for  him  to  have  spoken 
casually  of  the  doctrine  without  condemnation  would  have 
been  to  give  it,  before  the  Jewish  mind,  the  benefit  of 
his  manifested  consideration,  with  the  natural  seeming  of 
agreement  with  it. 

6.  Such  being  the  facts,  still  further,  whenever  he  did 
utter  himself  directly  upon  that  question,  his  language 
must  necessarily  take  on  the  force  of  the  fullest  and 
clearest  indorsement  of  the  doctrine,  of  which  his  words 
could  be  capable,  unless  he  in  terms  opjwsed  it ;  because, 
under  the  circumstances,  he  must  have  intended  to  in- 
dorse, unless  he  did  oppose  it. 

We  may  illustrate  his  position,  with  the  inferences  which 
it  necessitates,  thus :  suppose  a  teacher  of  political  econ- 
omy to  have  visited  Charleston,  S.C.  in  the  first  year  of 
the  Rebellion,  where  he  would  have  found  the  people  — 
without  visible  exception  —  earnest  advocates  of  State 
rights  and  of  secession.  In  lecturing  upon  his  favorite 
science  there  and  then,  for  him  to  say  nothing  about  the 
State-rights'  theory,  or  to  refer  to  it  by  any  words  of  indi- 
rection, would  be  practically  to  indorse  it.  Nothing  short 
of  the  language  of  du'ect  attack  would  be  taken,  in  such 
a  position,  in  evidence  of  dissent  from  the  drift  of  the 


62  VEUDICT  OF  REASON. 

general  mind,  —  language  wliicli  must  •  have  left  instant 
traces  on  the  records  of  the  time,  of  bitter,  perhaps  bloody, 
answer. 

So,  when  Christ  was  in  Jerusalem,  the  Jews  were  no 
Universalists.  If  he  had  been  one,  he  must  necessarily 
teach  like  one,  and  his  teaching  would  stand  out  into  relief 
upon  the  backgTound  of  their  dissent. 

With  these  obvious  principles  in  mind,  we  need  not  go 
amiss  in  our  interpretation  of  what  Jesus  actually  did  say 
upon  the  question  before  us;  and  we  will  proceed  to 
glance,  in  chronological  order,  at  every  recorded  word  of 
his  having  obvious  reference  thereto.-^ 

The  conversation  with  Nicodemus  is  the  first  recorded 
instance  of  any  utterance  upon  it.^  Christ  urges  upon  this 
rabbi  of  the  Jews  the  necessity  of  being  born  again,  be- 
cause, without  it,  one  can  not  see  the  kingdom  of  Grod, —  a 
phrase,  which,  unquestionably,  was  understood  by  Nico- 
demus to  include  reference  to  future  life  in  heaven.  And 
this  inference  must  necessarily  have  been  encouraged  in 
his  mind  by  Christ's  subsequent  remarks  :  That  the  Son 
of  man  must  be  "lifted  up,"  like  the  serpent  in  the 
wilderness,  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not 
perish,  but  have  everlasting  life :  for  God  so  loved  the 
world  that  he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever 

1  The  order  is  tliat  of  Dr.  Eobinson's  "  Harmony,"  and  Prof. 
Greenleafs  "  Testimony  of  the  Four  Evangelists." 

2  John  iii.  1-21. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  63 

believeth  in  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting 
life ;  adding,  that  God  sent  his  Son  that  the  world  might 
through  him  he  saved.  Here  is,  obviously,  running 
through  all  this  conversation  the  clear  intimation  of  future 
remediless  danger,  from  which  one  course  only  —  that  of 
belief  in  Christ  —  can  save  the  world.  Christ  knew  that 
Nicodemus  was  a  Pharisee.  Even  Universalists  admit 
that  the  Jews,  and  particularly  the  Pharisees,  at  the  time 
of  Christ,  did  believe  in  future  punishment,  though  they 
think  they  got  their  faith  from  Alexandria,  and  not  from  the 
Old  Testament.  But  for  this  matter,  it  made  no  differ- 
ence whence  Nicodemus  got  his  faith  in  future  punishment; 
he  evidently  must  have  had  it,  and  Christ  must  have 
known  that  he  had  it,  and  must  have  known  whether  it 
was  true  or  false,  and  must  have  known  that,  if  it  were 
false,  it  ought  to  be  rebuked,  —  and  yet,  in  the  face  of  all 
this  knowledge,  he  tells  him  that  if  he  is  not  born  again 
he  must  perish.  Now,  we  may  call  Christ  incoherent,  or 
poetical,  or  what  we  please ;  but,  unless  we  call  him 
dishonest,  I  think  we  must,  under  these  circumstances, 
admit  that  he  did  intend  to  encourage  (certainly  did  not 
intend  to  c?wcourage)  the  faith  of  Nicodemus  —  as  a 
Pharisee  —  in  future  punishment. 

Significant  also  are  the  words  of  the  Samaritans  of 
Sheehem,  when,  after  Christ  had  preached  there  two  days, 
subsequently  to  his  interview  with  the  woman  at  Jacob's 
well,  they  said,   '*  Now  we  believe ;   for  we  have  heard 


64  VEEDICT  OF  REASON. 

him  ourselves,  and  know  that  tbis  is  indeed  the  Christ, 
the  Saviour  of  the  worlds  ^  Had  he  not  taught  them, 
then,  that  the  world  was  lost  without  him,  and  so  far  as  it 
should  withhold  faith  in  him  ? 

The  next  record  is  at  the  pool  of  Bethesda,  where  Jesus 
healed  the  infirm  man  on  the  Sabbath  day.^  The  act 
disturbed  the  Jews,  who  raised  a  tumult  against  him.  He 
seized  the  opportunity  to  address  them,  defending  himself 
for  saying  that  God  was  his  Father,  and  adding  (remem- 
ber that  this  was  a  crowd  of  Pharisees,  who  believed  in 
future  punishment,  and  whose  error,  if  Christ  were  a 
Universalist,  he  was  bound  to  rebuke),  "Verily,  verily, 
I  say  unto  you,  he  that  heareth  my  word  and  belie veth 
on  Him  that  sent  me,  hath  everlasting  life,  and  shall  not 
come  into  condemnation,  &c.  The  hour  is  coming,  and 
now  is,  when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of 
God;  and  they  that  hear  shall  live,  &c.  The  hour  is 
coming  in  the  which  all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear 
his  voice,  and  shall  come  forth  ;  they  that  have  done  good 
unto  the  resurrection  of  life ;  and  they  that  have  done  evil 
unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation. ^^  Now,  as  I  said 
before,  we  may  call  this  poetry,  or  we  may  call  it  prose ; 
but,  if  we  call  it  the  sincere  utterance  of  an  honest  voice, 
we  are  driven  to  believe  that  our  Lord  himself  believed 
and  taught  the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked; 

1  John  iv.  42.  2  John  v.  1-47. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  65 

Next  comes  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. -^  Throughout, 
—  especially  when  you  interpret  it  in  the  necessary  re- 
collection of  the  fact  that  Christ  was  speaking  to  those 
who  had  been  trained  to  believe  in  future  punishment, 
and  must  therefore  have  been  predisposed  to  interpret  his 
language  into  coincidence  with  that  belief,  —  this  seniion 
is  veined  by  thoughts  that  look  and  lean  that  way.  The 
opening  beatitudes,  in  their  glorious  promise  of  comfort 
and  heaven  for  the  possessors  of  the  virtues  which  they 
catalogue,  perpetually  intimate  a  darker  alternative  for 
those  who  lack  them.  The  remark  that  saving  righteous- 
ness must  exceed  the  strict,  technical,  yet  hollow  right- 
eousness of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  in  order  to  "  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  heaven,"  surely  has  no  look  like  that 
of  censure  for  their  faith  of  hell  for  the  wicked.  So  all 
those  striking  precepts,  which  affirm  and  re-affirm  the  need 
of  a  more  thorough  and  genuine  excellence  of  character 
than  that  which  the  Pharisees  possessed,  would  naturally 
highten  their  old  impression  of  the  uncertainty  of  future 
salvation.  Then  the  distinct  command,  "Enter  ye  in  at  the 
narrow  gate,^  —  for  wide  is  the  gate  and  broad  is  the  way 

1  Matthew  v.  1  to  vii.  29 ;  Luke  vi.  20-49. 

2  T?7f  arevriq  'nv?i7]g.      [tes  stenes  indes.}     This  adjective,  GTijvog 

[stBnos],  is  the  epithet  which  Herodotus  uses  (B.  7.  223)  to  describe  that 

narrow  and  difficult  pass,  in  a  rugged  and  mountainous  country,  where 

Leonidas  fell  at  Thermopylte.    It  includes  the  two  ideas  of  narrowness 

and  difficulty ;  that  is,  it  pictures  a  path  which  is  not  only  unfriendly 

to  travel  because  of  its  confined  dimensions,  but  because  of  its  rough 

obstacles. 

5 


66  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

that  leadetli  to  destruction,  and  many  there  hs  that  go  in 
thereat ;  because  narrow  is  l^e  gate  and  nari'ow  the  way 
that  leadeth  unto  life,  and  few  there  he  that  find  it^^  — 
contains  —  most  of  all  to  that  audience  —  the  unmistakable 
announcement  of  our  Saviour's  belief  in  the  future  punish_ 
ment  of  the  wicked.  And  that  revelation  is  confirmed  by 
the  illustrations  that  follow  :  of  the  burning  of  fruitless 
trees ;  of  the  exclusion  from  the  kingdom  of  heaven  of 
those  who  merely  say,  "  Lord,  Lord;  "  and  by  the  fear- 
ful, final  image  of  the  dreadful  ruin  of  the  house  that 
was  not  founded  on  a  rock. 

Next  in  chronological  order  occurs  the  healing  of  the 
centurion's  servant,  with  the  Saviour's  remark, — called 
out  by  the  faith  which  the  centurion,  as  a  Gentile,  exhibited 
beyond  any  yet  seen  in  Israel,  — "  I  say  unto  you  that  many 
shall  come  from  the  east  and  west,  and  shall  sit  down  with 
Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven ; 
but  the  children  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  cast  into  outer 
darkness,  —  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of 
teeth."  ^  Doubtless,  modern  ingenuity  can  explain  this 
text  into  some  reference  consistent  with  the  system  of 
Universalism.  But  the  real  questions  are,  What  did 
those  to  whom  Christ  made  the  remark  understand  by 
it  ?  and  how  did  he  mean  them  to  understand  it,  —  ques- 
tions whose  honest  answers  can  not  fail  to  give  us  the 
passage. 

1  Matthew  viii.  11-13. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  OHRIST.  67 

Next  on  the  record  are  those  words  of  upbraiding,  in 
which  Christ  reproached  '*  the  cities  wherein  most  of 
his  mighty  works  were  done,"  because  they  repented  not.^ 
They  are  vague  in  their  anathema,  yet,  as  I  conceive,  it 
must  have  been  impossible  to  dissevei:  them,  in  the  minds 
of  the  Hstening  Jews,  from  distinct  reference  to  the  doom 
of  hell. 

Next  is  the  healing  of  the  demoniac,  followed  by  the 
blasphemy  of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  and  the  Saviour's 
consequent  declaration :  "  Yerily  I  say  unto  you,  all 
sins  shall  be  forgiven  unto  the  sons  of  men,  and  blasphe- 
mies wherewith  soever  they  shall  blaspheme ;  but  he  that 
shall  blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  never  for- 
giveness, hut  is  in  danger  of  eternal  damnation.  And 
whosoever  speaketh  a  word  against  the  Son  of  man,  it 
shall  be  forgiven  him ;  but  whosoever  speaketh  against 
the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall  not  he  forgiven  him,  neither  in 
this  world,  neither  in  the  world  to  come.^^^  Does  this 
sound  like  the  language  which  an  honest  Universalist 
would  utter  in  the  ears  of  those  whom  he  knew  mis- 
takenly believed  in  future  endless  punishment,  and  whom 
he  wished  to  convert  from  that  error  to  its  opposite 
truth? 

Next  comes  the  discourse  called  out  by  his  dining  with 
a  Pharisee,  and  the  discussion  that  followed  in  reference 
to  their   ceremonial  rites.^     What  does  Christ  say  now, 

1  Matthew  xi.  23-30.        2  JLark  iii.  20-30.  3  Luke  xi.  37-54. 


68  VERDICT  OF  REASO^T. 

■when  he  expressly  takes  it  upon  him  to  rebuke  and  de' 
nounce  their  errors?  "Woe  unto  you,  Pharisees,  for  ye 
tithe  mint  and  rue,  and  all  manner  of  herbs,  and  pass  over 
judgment  and  the  love  of  God."  Does  he  rebuke  their 
belief  in  future  punishment  as  an  error  ?  Hear  him  : 
"  Fear  him,  which,  after  he  hath  killed  hath  power  to  cast 
into  hell,  yea,  I  say  unto  you,  fear  him."  "He  that 
denieth  me  before  men  shall  be  denied  before  the  angels 
of  God."  "Except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise 
perish. ^^ 

Next  we  have  the  parable  of  the  tares,  with  its  inter- 
pretation, ending,  "  As  therefore  the  tares  are  gathered 
and  burned  in  the  fire ;  so  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  this 
world.  The  Son  of  man  shall  send  forth  his  angels,  and 
they  shall  gather  out  of  his  kingdom  all  things  that  offend, 
and  them  which  do  iniquity,  and  shall  cast  them  into  a 
furnace  of  fire :  there  shall  be  wailing  and  gnashing  of 
teeth."  ^  Take  away,  now,  as  much  as  you  please  of  the 
drapery  of  this,  and  put  it  to  the  account  of  the  rhetorical 
tendencies  of  Jesus,  can  you  make  it  the  doctrine  of  a 
Universalist  ?  Must  there  not  remain,  underneath  all 
drapery,  the  honest,  earnest  purpose  to  arouse  the  sinner 
to  alarm  with  reference  to  the  future  ? 

So  also,  on  the  same  occasion,  explaining  his  parable  of 
the  net  with  the  bad  fish  thrown  away,  Christ  says,  "  So 
shall  it  be  at  the  end  of  the  world :    the  angels  shall  come 

1  Matthew  xiii.  24-53;  Hark  iv.  20-34. 


THE   TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  69 

forth,  and  sever  the  wicked  from  among  the  just,  and  shall 
cast  them  into  the  furnace  of  fire  :  there  shall  be  wailing, 
and  gnashing  of  teeth." 

Next,  we  come  to  Christ's  sending  forth  his  twelve  apos- 
tles to  teach  and  to  preach  throughout  Judaea.  We  have 
seen,  that,  so  f\r  as  the  record  shows,  he  has  never  yet 
intimated  to  those  apostles  that  the  belief  of  the  endless 
punishment  of  the  wicked  in  the  future  world  which,  as 
Jews,  they  had  previously  held,  was  an  erroneous  one; 
but,  on  the  contrary,  has  always  encouraged  it,  and  inti- 
mated that  it  was  his  own.  And  now  that  he  formally 
sends  them  out  as  Christian  teachers,  enumerating  the  doc- 
trines which  he  desires  them  to  preach  everywhere,  is  Uni- 
versalism  one  of  them  ?  There  is  certainly  no  precept  to 
them  to  teach  it.  But  we  find  more  than  one  distinct 
reference  to  its  opposite,  as  being  truth.  He  exhorts  them 
—  in  allusion  to  the  perils  that  might  encompass  them  — 
"  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 ;  "  ^  and  encourages  them  ^by 
the  assurance  that  "he  that  endureth  to  the  end  shall  be 
saved.^ 

"We  have,  soon  after  this,  the  detail  of  a  discourse  of 
some  length  in  the  synagogue  at  Capernaum,^  in  which,  in 
answer  to  repeated  inquiries,  our  Saviour  develops  his 
views  in  regard  to  human  salvation.     Yet  here  he  says 

1  Matthew  x.  28.  2  Matthew  x.  22.  3  John  vi.  22-71. 


iV  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

nothing  of  Universalism,  but  everywliero  guards  his  words 
as  if  hell  threatened  all  men,  and  deliverance  from  it  could 
only  be  obtained  through  faith  in  liim  :  ' '  Labor  for  that 
meat  wliich  endureth  unto  everlasting  life."  "  Every  one 
whicb  seeth  the  Son  and  believeth  on  him  may  have  ever- 
lasting life."  "  Whoso  eateth  my  flesh  and  drinketh  my 
blood  hath  eternal  life ;  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last 
day."  And  when  many  of  his  disciples  called  this  ''an 
hard  saying,"  and  murmured  at  it,  Jesus  did  not  relieve 
their  dissatisfaction  by  preaching  any  less  distasteful  doc- 
trine, but  re-affirmed  his  words,  and  let  them  go.  And 
they  "  walked  no  more  with  him." 

Not  long  after  this,  Jesus  said  unto  his  disciples,  "  If 
any  man  will  come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself,  and 
take  up  his  cross  and  follow  me.  For  whosoever  will  save 
his  life  shall  lose  it ;  and  whosoever  will  lose  his  life  for 
my  sake  shall  find  it.  For  what  is  a  man  profited,  if  he 
shall  gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  his  own  soul ;  or  what 
shall  a  man  give  in  exchange  for  his  soul?  "  ^  From  one 
whose  previous  teachiDg  had  been  what  we  have  seen 
Christ's  to  be,  to  those  whose  previous  training  had  been 
what  it  is  impossible  not  to  believe  that  of  the  disciples  had 
been,  how  unmistakably  does  this  imply,  and  rest  its 
whole  weight  upon,  the  doctrine  of  an  eternal  hell ! 

We  next  come  to  the  account  given  ^  of  the  strife  among 
the  disciples,  which  should  be  greatest  in  the  kingdom  of 

1  Matthew  xvi.  24-26.  2  Matthew  xviii.  1-35. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  71 

heaven,  and  the  rebuke  of  Jesus,  who  took  a  little  child 
and  said,  "Except  ye  be  converted,  and  become  as  little 
children,  ye  shall  not  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  " 
adding,  subsec^uently,  the  recommendation  to  avoid  every 
obstacle  in  the  way  of  salvation,  and  even  urging  to  cut  oflf 
the  members  of  the  body,  if  they  cause  sin,  —  since  it  is 
better  to  enter  maimed  into  eternal  life,  than  "to  be  cast 
into  everlasting  fire." 

A  second  .time  ^  Christ  sent  forth  his  followers,  now  the 
seventy,  to  teach  and  to  preach,  and  in  his  commission 
again  he  instructed  them  to  exhibit  the  danger  of  refusing 
to  repent,  and  declared  that  Capernaum,  for  its  neglect  of 
his  word,  should  be  "  thrust  down  to  hell." 

"We  next  find  him  reproving  the  unbeheving  Jews  at 
Jerusalem,  and  saying,  "  Ye  shall  die  in  your  sins  :  whith- 
er I  go,  ye  can  not  come,"  ^  — an  utterance  which,  to  their 
ears,  inevitably  predicted  eternal  punishment. . 

Our  next  record  ^  is  of  Christ's  answer  to  one  who  came 
to  him  as  he  was  journeying  for  the  last  time  toward  Jeru- 
salem, and,  as  if  to  draw  him  out  on  this  very  point  in 
controversy  among  us,  said,  "  Lord,  are  there  few  that  be 
saved?"     His  remarkable  answer  was:    " Agonize,*. ^o 

1  Luke  X.  1-16.  2  John  viii.  12-59.  3  Luke  xiii.  22-35. 

4  The  Greek  word  is  ' ^.yuvl^ea&e  (agonizesthej.  It  is  a  word  taken 
from  the  gladiatorial  games,  applying  to  their  contests  there ;  and 
means  "  struggle  as  for  life."  It  is  the  word  from  which  our  verb 
agonize,  and  its  noun  agony,  were  derived. 


72  VERDICT  OF  REAS02T. 

enter  in  at  the  narrow  ^  gate :  for  many,  I  say  unto  you, 
will  seek  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  he  able ;"  and  then  he 
goes  on  to  picture  the  scene,  at  the  end  of  time,  when  bad 
men  shall  knock  at  the  door  of  heaven  for  admission,  only  to 
get  the  answer  :  "Depart  from  me,  all  ye  workers  of  iniqui- 
ty ;  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth,  when  ye 
shall  see  Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob  and  all  the  prophets 
in  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  you  yourselves  thrust  out." 
Strip  this  of  all  its  poetry,  if  it  has  any ;  does  it  look  like 
the  honest  attempt  of  an  honest  Universalist  to  preach  Uni- 
versalism  to  the  Jews  who  believed  in  future  punishment 
as  an  imported  Alexandrian  error  ? 

Next  in  order  ^  we  have  the  parable  of  Lazarus  and  the 
rich  man,  in  which  Christ,  for  the  purpose  of  illustration, 
seizes  hold  of  the  current  Jewish  idea  of  sheol,  and  pictures 
Lazarus  as  entering  the  portion  assigned  to  the  good,  and 
the  rich  man  sinking  into  its  scorching  depths,  and  thus 
vividly  depicts  the  contrasted  results  of  worldliness  and 
piety ;  without,  indeed,  affirming  any  thing  with  reference 
to  the  accuracy  of  this  imagery,  yet  most  certainly,  in  gen- 
eral, sanctioning  the  current  Jewish  idea  of  the  impossi- 
bility of  the  restoration  of  the  wicked. 

Next,  in  the  account  of  the  rich  young  man,^  we  find 
Jesus  remarking  to  his  disciples  upon  the  extreme  improb- 
abiUty  of  the  salvation  of  the  rich,  and  to  their  astonished 

1  See  p.  C5.  2  Luke  xvi.  19-31. 

3  Matthew  xix.  16-30 ;  Mark  x.  17-31 ;  Luke  xvui.  18-30. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  73 

query,  "  How,  then,  anybody  could  be  saved,"  replying 
that  ''with  God  all  things  are  possible." 

So,  in  the  parable  of  the  wicked  husbandmen,^  we  find 
Christ  strongly  urging  the  idea,  that  those  who  reject  him 
must  be  for  ever  lost:  "He  will  miserably  destroy  those 
wicked  men."  And  he  goes  on  immediately  to  press  the 
idea  in  the  same  parable  of  the  marriage  of  the  king's  son,^ 
where  the  man  who  presented  himself  without  a  wedding 
garment  was  bound  hand  and  foot  and  taken  away  and  cast 
into  outer  darkness  :  where  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing 
of  teeth,  "/or  many  are  called,  hut  few  are  chosen.''''  ^ 

On  the  same  day  we  find  Christ  denouncing  the  Phari- 
sees and  their  opinions.^  But  he  does  not  denounce  their 
belief  in  the  eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked  ;  does  not 
intimate  that  it  is  an  error ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  after  re- 
buking their  formality  and  hypocrisy,  he  thunders  out : 
"Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers,  how  can  ye  escape 
the  damnation  of  hell  ?  " 

We  come  next  to  Christ's  prediction  of  the  judgment- 
day,^  to  which  he  was  led  by  a  natural  transition  from  his 
announcement  of  the  impending  destruction  of  Jerusalem. 
And  here  he  says,  in  preliminary  parable,  that  the  un- 

1  Matthew  xxi.  33-46;  Markxii.  1-12  3  Luke  xx.9-19. 

2  Matthew  xxii.  1-14. 

3  He  had  used  this  precise  expression  a  short  time  before  ;  see  Mat- 
thew XX.  16. 

4  Matthew  xxiii.  13-39  ;  Mark  xii.  40  \  Luke  xx.  47. 

5  Matthew  xxiv.  43-51  ;  xxv.  1-40. 


74  VEBDICT  OF  REASON. 

watchful  and  unprofitable  servants  shall  be  cast  "  into  outer 
darkness  ;  there  shall  be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth  ; ' ' 
and  then  draws  the  picture  of  the  great  last  tribunal ;  all 
nations  gathered  ;  the  angels  attending ;  the  Judge  on  the 
throne ;  the  righteous  on  the  right  hand  accepted,  and  the 
Judge  saying  to  those  on  the  left,  "Depart  from  me,  yQ 
cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  Devil  and  his 
angels;  "  summing  up  by  the  observation  :  "  These  shall 
go  away  into  Ko^aaiv  aluvtov  (Jcolasin  aibnion,  punishment 
everlasting) ;  but  the  righteous  into  C"^^  aidviov  (zoen 
aibnion,  life  everlasting)." 

Of  this  adjective  aluviog,  —  here  used  to  bound  and 
describe  both  the  life  of  the  good  and  the  punishment  of 
the  bad,  —  it  is  enough  in  this  connection  to  say,  that, 
whatever  may  be  its  possible  meanings,  our  special  con- 
cern is  with  its  actual  sense  as  habitually  used  by  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament. 

It  is  employed  seventy-two  times  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. In  four  instances,  it  is  loosely  used  as  an  adjective 
describing  long  past  events,  as  where  it  is  translated  "  Be- 
fore the  world  began,"  ^  &c. ;  in  two  instances  it  is  used 
to  represent  a  complete  eternity,  without  beginning  or 
end,  —  once  of  God,  and  once  of  Christ.  In  eight  in- 
stances it  refers  to  an  eternal  future,  as  "  The  things  which 
are  not  seen  are  eternal."  ^  In  seven  instances  it  is  ap- 
plied to  the  future  of  Christ's  kingdom,  as,  "  The  ever- 

1  2  Timothy  i.  9.  2  2  Corinthians  iv.  IS. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  75 

lasting  kingdom  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ."  ^ 
In  forty-four  instances  it  describes  the  unending  life  of  tbe 
good,  and  in  the  remaining  seven  instances  it  similarly 
describes  the  unending  death  of  the  wicked.  There  is 
absolutely  no  indication,  in  its  New-Testament  use,  that, 
in  the  passage  under  consideration,  or  any  similar  one, 
it  was  intended  to  include  any  limit  to  its  significance. 
And,  whatever  that  significance  may  be,  it  is  clear  that 
Christ  here  attaches  it  as  effectually  to  the  life  of  the 
good  as  to  the  death  of  the  bad ;  so  that,  if  the  latter 
be  limited,  the  former  must  be  also. 

In  his  conversation  with  his  disciples,  after  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Lord's  Supper,  before  they  went  out  to  Geth- 
semane,  the  Saviour  —  still  referring  to  the  doctrine  which 
he  had  found  in  existence  among  the  Jews,  and  which  his 
teachino;  had  never  assailed,  but  often  stren2;thened  —  de- 
clared  to  them,  "  If  a  man  abide  not  in  me,  he  is  cast 
forth  as  a  branch,  and  is  withered  ;  and  men  gather  them, 
and  cast  them  into  the  fire,  and  they  are  burned."  ^  And 
in  the  prayer  which  followed,^  he  said  of  them,  "None 
of  them  is  lost,  but  (Judas)  the  son  of  perdition,"  is 
lost ;  of  whom  a  little  while  before  he  had  affirmed,  that 
"it  had  been  good  for  that  man  if  he  had  not  been 
bom,"  —  language  which  it  seems  impossible  to  justify, 
if  the  feet  of  the  apostate,  after  never  so  weary  a  pil- 

1  2  Peter  i.  11,  2  John  xv.  6. 

3  John  xvii.  1-26. 


76  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

grimage  through  jjerdition,  are,  at  last,  to  stand  on  the 
golden  pavement  of  heaven. 

On  his  way  to  the  cross,  Christ  told  the  daughters  of 
Jerusalem  that  the  days  are  coming  when  the  unbelieving 
shall  try  in  vain  to  hide  under  the  hills  and  behind  the 
mountains,  from  the  vengeance  of  God.^ 

And,  after  his  resurrection,  as  he  was  about  to  ascend 
up  where  he  was  before,  we  find  him  re-afiirming  the  entire 
teaching  of  his  life  on  this  subject,  in  the  final  command 
to  his  disciples:  "  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach 
the  gospel  to  every  creature.  He  that  belie veth  and  is 
baptized  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  helieveth  not  shall  he 


And  John  afterward,  summing  up  the  whole  matter, 
says  of  his  record  of  the  teachings  of  the  Saviour,  "  These 
are  written,  that  ye  (all  future  generations)  might  believe 
that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  ;  and  that  heliev- 
ing  ye  might  have  life,  through  his  name,''^^  which  is  in 
itself  an  assertion  of  his  undoubting  faith,  that  eternal  life 
is  possible  only  to  those  who  escape  eternal  death  by  faith 
in  the  mercy  of  God  through  the  crucified  one ;  and  yet 
John  was  the  beloved  and  intimate  disciple,  who  must  be 
supposed  thoroughly  to  have  known,  and  faithfully  to  have 
reported,  the  views  of  his  great  Master. 

Such  are  the  words  of  Jesus  upon  the  question  before 
us.     They  are  all  the  words  of  his  which  the  Holy  Spirit 

1  Luke  xxiii.  30.         2  Mark  xvi.  15-16.         3  John  xx.  31. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  77 

thougbt  it  important  should  be  recorded  beai'ing  directly 
upon  it.  They  are  all  on  one  side  of  that  question. 
They  settle  the  aspect  of  Christianity  toward  it.  Not 
one  of  them  —  when  we  remember  that  they  were  uttered 
to  those  who  believed  in  future  eternal  punishment,  and 
whom,  if  wrong  in  that  belief,  it  must  have  been  our 
Saviour's  first  great  desire  to  correct  in  reference  to  it  — 
is  susceptible  even  of  ambiguity.  They  are  scattered 
through  all  his  active  years,  journeys,  teachings.  They 
increase  in  solemn  earnestness  as  he  drew  near  the  end  of 
his  career.  They  culminate  their  distinctness  and  their 
strength  in  his  final  words  to  his  disciples. 

If  any  man  can  prove  by  them  that  Jesus  Christ  was 
a  Universalist,  by  the  same  process  he  may  prove,  from 
their  writings  and  history,  that  George  Washington  and 
Abraham  Lincoln  were  traitors,  and  Benedict  Arnold  and 
Jefferson  Davis  and  John  Wilkes  Booth,  true  men  and 
patriots. 

The  only  way  to  avoid  the  conclusion,  that  Christ  be- 
lieved and  taught  the  eternal  punishment  of  those  who  die 
impenitent,  is  to  deny  that  the  New  Testitaent  can  be 
depended  upon  as  giving  a  fair  and  trustworthy  account 
of  his  views  and  teachings.  This  was  the  view  taken  by 
Theodore  Parker.  He  said,  "To  me  it  is  quite  clear 
that  Jesus  taught  the  doctrine  of  eternal  damnation,  if  the 
evangelists  —  the  first  three,  I  mean  —  are  to  he  treated 


78  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

as  inspired.  I  can  understand  his  language  in  no  other 
way. 

"But  as  the  Protestant  sects  start  with  the  notion, 
which  to  me  is  a  monstrous  one,  that  the  words  of  the 
New  Testament  are  all  miraculously  insphed  of  God,  and 
so  infallibly  true ;  and  as  the  doctrine  of  eternal  damna- 
tion is  so  revolting  to  all  the  human  and  moral  feelings  of 
our  nature,  men  said  the  Word  must  he  interpreted  in 
another  way. 

"So,  as  the  Unitarians  have  misinterpreted  the  New 
Testament  to  prove  that  the  Christos  of  the  Fourth  Gos- 
pel had  no  pre-existence,  the  Universalists  have  misinter- 
preted passages  of  the  Gospels  to  show  that  Jesus  of  Naz- 
areth never  taus-ht  eternal  damnation."  ^ 

So  the  same  frank  writer  has  confessed,  in  one  of  his 
elaborate  treatises,  "  It  is  vain  to  deny,  or  attempt  to  con- 
ceal, the  errors  in  his  [Jesus']  doctrine,  —  a  revengeful 
God,  a  Devil  absolutely  evil,  an  eternal  Hell,"  &c.  "  He 
considers  God  so  imperfect  as  to  damn  the  majority  of  men 
to  eternal  torment."  "  Hell  is  eternal,  and  the  wide  road 
thereto  is  traveled  well."  ^ 

Entirely  Equivalent  to  this  is  the  admission  of  Rev. 
Thomas  Starr  King:  *'I  freely  say  that  I  do  not  find 
the  doctrine  of  the  ultimate  salvation  of  all  souls  clearly 

c 

1  In  a  letter  to  Rev.  N.  Adams,  D.D.,  printed  in  Evenings  loith  the 
Doctrines,  p.  402. 

2  Discourse  on  Matters  pertaining  to  Religion,  pp.  239-243. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  CHRIST.  79 

stated  in  any  text  or  in  any  discourse  that  has  been  re- 
ported from  the  lips  of  Christ."  ^ 

To  these  may  be  added  the  later  admissions  of  M. 
Renan.  He  says,  in  describing  the  faith  and  teaching  of 
Jesus,  "The  others  [the  wicked]  will  go  into  Gehenna. 
Gehenna  was  the  valley  west  of  Jerusalem.  At  various 
periods  the  worship  of  fire  had  been  practiced  in  it,  and 
the  place  had  become  a  sort  of  cloaca.^  Gehenna  is, 
therefore,  in  the  mind  of  Jesus,  a  dismal  valley,  foul  and 
full  of  fire.  Those  excluded  from  the  kingdom  will  be 
burned  and  gnawed  by  worms,  in  company  with  Satan  and 
his  rebel  angels.  There,  then,  shall  be  weeping  and  gnash- 
ing of  teeth.  The  kingdom  of  God  will  be  like  a  closed 
hell,  lighted  up  within,  in  the  midst  of  this  world  of  dark- 
ness and  of  torments.  This  new  order  of  things  will  he 
eternal.    Paradise  and  Gehenna  shall  have  no  end.  .  .  . 

"  That  all  this  was  understood  literally  by  the  disciples 
and  the  Master  himself,  at  certain  moments,  stands  forth 
absolutely  evidenced  in  the  writings  of  the  time.^''^ 

We  are  grateful  for  these  admissions.*  Coming  from 
men  whose  bias  and  desire  were  against  them,  they  share 
the  eminent  value  of  "declarations  against  interest"  in 

1  Two  Sermons^  p.  5. 

2  A  receptacle  of  all  manner  of  filth. 

3  Life  of  Jesus,  p.  243. 

4  Thomas  Paine,  J.  S.  Hittell,  and  other  infidels  have  made  similar 
concessions,  and  denied  the  New  Testament  because  it  does  teach  the 
doctrine  of  future  punishment.  Age  oflieason,  ed.  1796,  part  i.  p.  18. 
Evidences  against  Cliristianity ,  i.  pp.  121-127. 


80  VERDICT  OF  REASOK. 

testimony;  wbicb  the   lawyers   tell  us   '*  are  entitled  to 
claim  extreme  improbability  of  falsebood."^ 

I  maintain,  tben,  as  tbe  result  of  tbis  examination  of 
bis  words,  that  Jesus  Cbrist  believed  and  taugbt  tbe  doc- 
trine of  tbe  eternal  punisbment  of  tbose  wbo  die  in  sin. 
His  language  goes  beyond  tbe  mere  avowal  of  future 
punisbment ;  it  requires  for  its  bonest  interpretation,  the 
theory  that  that  punisbment  will  never  die.  Tbe  word 
"perish"  [anoXkviiL — apollumi]^  means  to  be  destroyed 
thoroughly,  and  without  any  hope  of  relief.  Tbe  expres- 
sion "  eternal  damnation,"  must  have  been  understood  by 
Christ's  hearers  to  imply  an  irremediable  and  unceasing 
woe ;  and  if  be  intended  to  teach  that  doctrine,  be  could 
use  no  other  stronger  words  by  which  to  enforce  it.  It  is, 
therefore,  under  the  circumstances,  impossible  to  believe 
that  our  Saviour  acted  in  good  faith  toward  those  whom 
he  addressed,  unless  he  intended  that  they  should  under- 
stand him  as  teaching  that  the  state  of  the  lost  admits  of 
no  recovery.  And,  if  be  taught  thus,  that  doctrine,  fear- 
ful as  it  is,  must  be  true,  and  we  are  bound  to  believe  it, 
and  govern  ourselves  accordingly. 

1  Greenleaf  on  the  Law  of  Evidence,  i.  198. 

2  uTv6?i?iVfit  is  compounded  of  o/l?i,u/z«,  wMcli  means  "to  destroy," 
*'  to  make  au  end  of,"  and  o.7CO  implying  "  completeness,"  "  thorough- 
ness;" so  that  the  compound  word  means  "  thoroughly  to  destroy," 
*'  utterly  to  make  an  end  of." 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE   TESTIMONY    OF    THE   APOSTLES. 

HAVING  seen'that  the  common  belief  of  tbe  Jews 
when  Christ  came,  was,  that  the  wicked  would  be 
punished  in  the  future  world  for  ever ;  and  that  our  Saviour 
never  contradicted,  but,  on  the  other  hand,  indorsed  and 
re-affirmed  that  belief,  let  us  now  advance  to  the  inquiry, 
"What  was  the  attitude  of  the  apostles  towards  the  doctrine  ? 

"We  may  well  infer  what  that  would  be.  The  stream 
can  not  rise  higher  than  its  fountain.  If  Christ  recogni^ied 
and  re-affirmed,  again  and  again,  the  existing  Jewish  faith, 
that  the  persistently  bad  will  be  eternally  punished  here- 
after, it  is  not  very  probable  that  we  shall  find  the  apostles 
reversing  his  teaching,  and  uttering  Universalism.  Nor, 
on  the  other  hand,  since  the  future  punishment  of  the 
wicked  was  one  of  the  few  doctrines  upon  which  they  and 
the  Jews  were  agreed,  shall  we  be  likely  to  find  it  much 
dwelt  upon  by  them,  except  in  the  way  of  occasional  ur- 
gency of  argument.     Let  us  glance  over  the  record. 

It  is  obvious,  on  the  very  face  of  the  Acts  and  the 
Epistles,  that  the  great  idea  of  Christianity,  as  a  scheme 

6  81 


82  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

of  SALVATION  tlirough  Christ,  was  the  burden  of  apostolic 
preaching ;  which  imphes  the  faith,  on  their  part,  that,  out 
of  Christ,  man  can  not  escape  perdition.  Peter's  sermon 
at  Pentecost  presses  the  point,  that  "  whosoever  shall  call 
on  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved."  ^  And  when,  a 
few  days  after,  he  addressed  the  people,  after  the  healing 
of  the  lame  man,  he  declared  :  "  And  it  shall  come  to  pass 
that  every  soul  which  will  not  hear  that  prophet  (Jesus) 
shall  be  destroyed  from  among  the  people."^  And  when 
he  subsequently  spoke  to  the  Sanhedrim,  he  said  of  Christ, 
* '  Neither  is  there  salvation  in  any  other ;  for  there  is  none 
other  name  under  heaven  given  among  men,  whereby  we 
must  be  saved."  ^  And  so,  when,  visiting  Cornelius  by  di- 
vine command,  he  had  preached  Christ  to  him,  he  says,* 
it  was  that  he  and  all  his  house  might  "  be  saved;  "  and 
then  we  read  that  all  the  apostles  and  brethren  glorified 
God  because,  contrary  to  their  fii^st  expectation,  he  had 
now  visibly  granted  unto  the  Gentiles  also  "repentance 
unto  life.^'' 

Some  five  years  after,  we  find  Paul  gone  on  a  mission 
into  Asia  jMinor.  At  Antioch,  in  Pisidia,^  he  preached  to 
the  people  salvation  through  Christ,  accompanied  with  this 
warning,  if  they  rejected  him:  "Beware,  therefore,  lest 
that  come  upon  you,  which  is  spoken  of  in  the  prophets ; 
behold,  ye  despisers,  and  wonder  and  perish,  &c."     So, 

1  Acts  ii.  21.  2  Acts  iii.  23.  3  Acts  iv.  12. 

4  Acts  xi.  14.  5  Acts  xiii.  14-50. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  83 

on  the  next  Sabbath,  he  preached  to  "  almost  the  whole 
city,"  and,  when  the  Jews  contradicted  and  blasphemed, 
Paul  said,  "  Seeing  ye  put  it  from  you  and  judge  yourselves 
unworthy  of  everlasting  life,  lo!  we  tui-n  to  the  Gen- 
tiles ; "  and  then  follows  the  record,  of  the  Gentiles  there  : 
**  As  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  believed." 

Next  in  order  of  time  comes  in  Paul's  Epistle  to  the 
Galatians.  Of  this  he  devotes  a  portion  to  an  earnest  per- 
suasion to  them  to  lay  hold  upon  the  life  and  hope  of  the 
gospel,  saying,  —  as  an  argument  why  they  should  "  walk 
after  the  spirit,  "  — of  those  who  were  guilty  of  the  sins  of 
the  flesh,  "  Of  the  which  I  tell  you  before,  as  I  have  told 
you  in  time  past,  that  they  which  do  such  things  shall  not 
inherit  the  kingdom  of  God, "^  and  adding  the  solemn 
warning,  "Be  not  deceived:  God  is  not  mocked.  For 
whatsoever  a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also  reap  ;  for  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."^ 

So,  in  his  first  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  he  encour- 
ages believers  by  saying,  "  God  hath  not  appointed  us  to 
wrath,  but  to  obtain  salvation  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  ^ 
And,  in  the  second  Epistle,  which  soon  followed,  he  makes 
it  a  special  point  to  urge  the  danger  of  future  punishment 
as  an  argument,  declaring  *  that  ' '  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be 

1  Galatians  v.  21.  2  Galatians  vi.  7. 

3  1  Thessalonians  v.  9.  4  2  Thessalonians  i.  8-9. 


84  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

revealed  from  heaven,  with  his  mighty  angels,  in  flaming 
fire,  takino;  veno;eanco  on  them  that  know  not  God  and 
that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who 
shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction  from  the 
presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from  the  glory  of  his  power ;  " 
adding,  further  on,  the  assertion  of  God's  pleasure  that 
"  They  all  might  be  damned  who  believed  not  the  truth, 
but  had  pleasure  in  unrighteousness."  ^ 

About  A.  D.  57,  Paul  first  writes  to  the  Corinthians.  In 
the  course  of  his  letter,  denouncing  certain  false  teachers, 
and  the  fruits  of  their  instructions,  he  says,  "  Know  ye  not 
that  the  unrighteous  shall  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God  ? 
Be  not  deceived,  neither  fornicators  nor  idolaters  nor 
adulterers,  &c.  shall  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God."  ^ 

Some  two  years  after,  Paul  writes  to  the  Romans.  It 
is  impossible  here  to  do  justice  to  the  absolute  eutheness 
of  conviction,  and  energy  of  reasoning  with  which  the 
apostle,  through  that  whole  epistle,  asserts,  directly  and  in- 
du-ectly,  the  doctrine  of  future  punishment.  It  begins  by 
a  dark  picture  of  heathen  vice,  and  then  accuses  the  Jews 
of  similar  guilt,  saying,  "  Thinkest  thou  this,  0  man,  that 
judgest  them  which  do  such  things,  and  doest  the  same, 
that  thou  shalt  escape  the  judgment  of  God  ?  or  despisest 
thou  the  riches  of  his  goodness  and  forbearance  and  long- 
suflfering ;  not  knowing  that  the  goodness  of  God  leadeth 
[was  intended  to  lead]  thee  to  repentance  ?  But,  after  thy 

1  2  Thessalonians  iii.  12.  2  i  Corinthians  vi.  9-10. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  85 

hardness  and  impenitent  heart,  treasurest  up  unto  thyself 
wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath,  and  revelation  of  the  right- 
eous  judgment  of  God ;  who  will  render  to  every  man  ac- 
cording to  h*s  deeds  :  to  them  who,  by  patient  continuance 
in  well-doing,  seek  for  glory  and  honor  and  immortality, 
eternal  life ;  but  unto  them  that  are  contentious  and  do 
not  obey  the  truth,  but  obey  unrighteousness,  indignation 
and  wrath,  tribulation  and  anguish,  upon  every  soul  of 
man  that  doeth  evil ;  of  the  Jew  first,  and  also  of  the  Gen- 
tile." ^  He  then  adds  :  "  There  is  no  respect  of  persons 
with  God ;  for  as  many  as  have  sinned  without  law  shall 
also  perish  without  law ;  and  as  many  as  have  sinned  in  the 
law  shall  be  judged  by  the  law."  So,  further  on,^  he  asks, 
"Is  God  unrighteous  who  taketh  vengeance?"  and 
answers,  "  God  forbid  !  for  then  how  shall  God  judge  the 
world?  "  And  then  he  urges ^  that  God  especially  mani- 
fests his  love  in  the  fact,  that,  "  while  we  were  yet  sinners, 
Christ  died  for  us,"  that  we  maybe  "saved  from  wrath 
through  him  ;  "  adding  the  assurance,  that  Christ's  atone- 
ment is  as  broad  in  its  possibilities  and  ojQfers  of  salvation 
as  Adam's  ojence  was  in  its  entailment  of  condemnation : 
"  Therefore  as  by  the  offence  of  one,  judgment  came  upon 
all  men  to  condemnation,  even  so,  by  the  righteousness  of 
one,  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  unto  justification  of 
life,"  —  so  that  though  the  impenitent,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
will  eternally  die,  it  is  yet  possible  for  all  men,  if  they 

1  Romans  ii.  3-9.  2  Komans  iii.  5.  3  Romans  v. 


86  VERDICT  OF  REASON, 

would,  to  exercise  penitence,  and  gain  everlasting  life.  A 
little  further  on  he  refers  again  to  the  same  familiar  truth, 
"  For  the  end  of  those  things  (iniquities)  is  death.  But 
now,  being  made  free  from  sin,  &c.,ye  havS  your  end, 
everlasting  life ;  for  the  wages  of  sin  is  death,  &c. ; "  ^  and 
again  he  reminds  them  :  "  If  ye  live  after  the  flesh,  ye 
shall  die ;  "  ^  and  again  he  speaks  of  wicked  men  as  "  ves- 
sels of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction."  ^ 

Some  six  or  eight  years  after  this,  while  in  custody  at 
Rome,  Paul  writes  his  epistles  to  the  Ephesians,  Colos- 
sians,  Philippians,  and  Hebrews,  to  Philemon,  and  the  Sec- 
ond to  Timothy,  all  teaching  no  other  doctrine  than  that 
so  often  before  affirmed  ;  and  which  is,  on  fit  occasions,  re- 
affirmed in  them.  Thus,  to  the  Ephesians,  he  said  of  cer- 
tain notorious  offenders,*  that  no  such  person  "  hath  any 
inheritance  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ  and  of  God,"  and 
adds  :  "  Let  no  man  deceive  you  with  vain  words ;  for  be- 
cause of  these  things  cometh  the  wrath  of  God  upon  the 
children  of  disobedience."  And  to  the  Philippians,  he 
says,  of  the  enemies  of  the  cross  of  Christ,  "  whose  end  is 
destruction."  ^  And  to  the  Hebrews,  "  If  w^sin  willfully 
after  that  we  have  received  the  knowledge  of  the  truth, 
there  remaineth  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins,  but  a  certain 
fearful  looking-for  of  judgment  and  fiery  indignation,  which 
shall  devour  the  adversaries."  "^ 

1  Komans  vi.  21-23.        2  Komans  viii.  13.         3  Romans  ix.  22. 
4  Ephesiaas  v.  5.  5  Philippians  iii.  19.     6  Hebrews  x.  26-27. 


THE  TESTIMONY  OF  THE  APOSTLES.  87 

So  much  for  the  testimony  of  Paul.  With  his  intense 
devotion  to  that  Saviour  whom  he  saw  "  as  one  born  out  of 
due  time,"  we  knew  that  he  could  not  be  a  Universalist,  and 
we  have  found  that  he  was  not  one,  but  that  he  lost  no 
proper  opportunity  to  warn  men,  as  his  Master  had  done, 
to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come. 

The  Epistles  of  Peter  and  James  and  Jude,  and  the 
writings  of  John,  remain.  They  all  bear  deep  the  same 
stamp  of  Christ's  doctrine.  Peter  says,^  "  God  spared  not 
the  angels  that  sinned,  but  cast  them  down  to  hell,  and 
delivered  them  into  chains  of  darkness,  to  be  reserved  unto 
judgment,"  and  "the  Lord  knoweth  how  to  deliver  the 
godly  out  of  temptation,  and  to  reserve  the  unjust  unto 
the  day  of  judgment  to  be  punished ;  "  and  again  he 
declares  :  ^  "  The  heavens  and  the  earth  which  are  now,  by 
the  same  word  are  kept  in  store,  reserved  unto  fire  against 
the  day  of  judgment  and  perdition  of  ungodly  men. ' '  James 
declares  that^  "he  which  converteth  a  sinner  from  the 
error  of  his  ways  shall  save  a  soul  from  death;"  Jude* 
repeats  Peter's  testimony  in  reference  to  the  doom  of  the 
fallen  angels,  and  testifies  that  the  sinners  of  the  old  world 
are  "  set  forth  as  an  example,  suffering  the  vengeance  of 
eternal  fire,"  and  says  of  corrupt  church-members,  that 
they  are  "  wandering  stars  to  whom  is  reserved  the  black- 
ness of  darkness  for  ever."    And  John,  in  the  Apocalypse, 

1  2  Peter  ii.  4,  9.  2  2  Peter  iii.  7. 

3  James  v.  20.  4  Jude  6-13. 


88  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

says  of  the  wicked,  ''And  the  smoke  of  their  torment 
ascendeth  up  for  ever  and  ever,  and  they  have  no  rest  day 
nor  night,"  and  testifies  of  'j  that  great  city  the  holy  Jeru- 
salem," that  there  shall  "  in  nowise  enter  into  it  any  thing 
that  defileth,  neither  whatsoever  worketh  abomination,  or 
maketh  a  lie ;  but  they  which  are  written  in  the  Lamb's 
book  of  life,"  ^  and  describes.the  law  of  the  future  world  as 
being,  "  He  that  is  unjust,  let  him  be  unjust  still ;  and  he 
which  is  filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still ;  and  he  that  is  right- 
eous, let  him  be  righteous  still ;  and  he  that  is  holy,  let 
him  be  holy  still.  "2 

Such  —  if  my  success  has  equalled  my  intent  —  is  a 
perfectly  fair  and  honest  digest  of  the  opinions  and  pre- 
cepts of  those  who  taught  by  inspiration,  after  Christ 
ascended,  upon  the  subject  under  discussion.  I  have 
inserted  no  word  of  an  opposite  character  —  such  as  a 
Universalist  teacher  in  their  place  would  have  been  likely 
to  promulge  —  only  because  I  have  found  none.  Nor 
have  I  dwelt  at  length  upon  their  precepts,  or  attempted 
to  quote  largely  from  them,  because  I  only  desired  to 
show  that  they  did  not  depart  from  the  position  of  their 
great  Master.  We  have  seen  what  his  was,  and  we  now 
see  that  it  was  theirs  also. 

1  Revelation  xiv.  11.  2  Revelation  xxii.  11. 


CHAPTER  YI. 

THE   MORE   INDIRECT   TESTIMONIES   OF    THE   BIBLE. 

"ITWTE  have  seen  that  the  Old  Testament  announces, 
¥  f  as  directly  as  was  natural  to  its  time  and  office, 
the  doctrine  of  the  future  eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked ; 
and  we  have  seen  that  Christ  not  only  never  contradicted 
that  doctrine,  but  gave  to  it  the  full  weight  of  his  constant 
indorsement;  and  that  the  Apostles  repeated  and  re- 
affirmed it  as  the  truth  of  the  gospel. 

In  developing  the  evidence  of  this,  I  have  made  refer- 
ence almost  exclusively  to  direct  assertions  having  for 
their  object  an  utterance  upon  that  subject.  But,  if  the 
future  endless  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  the  doctrine 
of  the  Bible,  there  ought  to  be  also  scattered  through  its 
pages  a  great  variety  of  indirect  evidences  of  its  truth,  in 
the  form  of  sub-assertions,  allusions,  inferences,  and  pre- 
cepts, founded  upon  and  made  natural  by  it,  all  inevi- 
table as  growing  from  it,  and  weaving  their  roots  more  or 
less  visibly  into  the  whole  texture  of  the  Word.  That 
is  to  say,  if  the  inspired  writers  believed  and  taught  the 
doctrine,  they  would  inevitably  often  shape  their  appeals 


90  VERDICT  OF  reason: 

in  regard  to  other  doctrines  witb  reference  to  it ;  would 
make  manifest,  in  many  ways  and  often,  that  belief,  by 
indirect  allusion;  while,  on  the  contrary,  if  they  were 
Universalists,  that  fact  would  be  naturally  expected  to 
show  itself  in  this  indii*ect  manner,  at  frequent  intervals  in 
their  writings.  No  examination  of  the  testimony  of  the 
Scriptures  on  the  question  before  us  can,  then,  be  com- 
plete which  does  not  at  least  glance  at  this  (which  may  be 
called  circumstantial)  evidence,  —  a  form  of  proof  of  great 
value  in  the  comts,  and  which  "often  leads  to  a  conclu- 
sion far  more  satisfactory  than  direct  evidence  can  pro- 
duce." ^ 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  inquiry,  what  is  the  quality 
of  this  collateral  and  circumstantial  testimony  of  the 
Scriptures  upon  the  point  at  issue;  premising  only  that 
the  greatest  possible  condensation  of  such  testimony  is 
obviously  indispensable  to  its  use  in  this  brief  treatise. 
All  that  can  be  done  is  to  indicate  classes  of  passages 
which  the  reader  is  desired  to  examine  at  large  and  at 
leisure  in  this  connection. 

1.  Those  which  declare  that  some  shall  he  excluded 
from  the  hingdom  of  God;  like,  "Many,  I  say  unto  you, 
shall  seek  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able,"  ^  &c. 

2.  Those  which  indicate  danger  that  many  will  never 
possess  "holiness,  without  which  no  man  shall  see  the 
Lord,"^  &G. 

1  Greenleaf  s  "  Lmo  of  Evidence,''  i.  19. 

2  Luke  xiii.  28,  &c.  3  Hebrews  xii.  14,  &c. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.      91 

3.  Those  which  assert  that  many  shall  never  see  life  ; 
such  as,  ' '  He  that  believeth  not  the  Son  of  God  shall  not 
see  life;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him,"^  &c. 

4.  Those  which  affirm  that  many  die  ivithout  any  hope  ; 
such  as,  "Sorrow  not  even  as  others,  who  have  no  hope." ^ 
*'  The  wicked  is  driven  away  in  his  wickedness ;  but  the 
righteous  hath  hope  in  his  death,"  ^  &;c. 

5.  Those  which  record  the  fact  that  there  are  men  for 
whom  there  is  no  forgiveness  ;  such  as,  "  There  is  a  sin 
unto  death :   I  do  not  say  that  ye  shall  pray  for  it,"  ^  &c. 

6.  Those  which  assert  that  there  are  men  for  whom  the 
atonement  of  Christ  will  not  avail;  such  as,  "The 
preaching  of  the  cross  is  to  them  that  perish  foolishness,"  ^ 
such  as,  "A  sweet  savor  of  Christ  in  them  that  are  saved, 
and  in  them  that  perish ;  to  the  one  the  savor  of  death 
unto  death,  and  to  the  other  the  savor  of  life  unto  life."  ^ 

7.  Those  which  make  it  clear  that  the  atonement,  in- 
stead of  saving  some,  will  only  aggravate  their  condem- 
nation; such  as,  "  Of  how  much  sorer  punishment,  suppose 
ye,  shall  he  be  thought  worthy,  who  hath  trodden  under  foot 
the  Son  of  God,  and  hath  counted  the  blood  of  the  cove- 
nant, wherewith  he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing,  and  hath 
done  despite  unto  the  Spirit  of  gi'aee?  "^  &e. 

8.  Those  which  testify  that  the  state  of  the  dead  will 

1  John  iii.  3.  2  1  Thessalonians  iv.  13.         3  Proverbs,  xiv.  32. 

4  1  John  V.  16.  5  2  Corinthians  ii.  15. 

6  2  Corinthians  iii.  10.  7  Hebrews  x.  29,  &c. 


92  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

he  unalterably  fixed,  —  taken  in  connection  with  the  ob- 
vious fact  that  many  have  gone  down  to  the  grave  in 
dreadful  and  unrepented  guilt;  such  as,  "If  the  tree 
fall  toward  the  south,  or  toward  the  north,  in  the  place 
where  the  tree  falleth,  there  it  shall  be,"  ^  &c. 

9.  Those  which  make  it  probable  that  God  will  be  'per- 
manently angry  with  some  of  his  creatures  on  account  of 
their  incorrigible  wickedness;  such  as,  "Suffering  the 
vengeance  of  eternal  fire."  ^  "  It  is  a  fearful  thing  to 
fall  into  the  hands  of  the  living  God,"  ^  &e. 

10.  Those  which  represent  men  as  being  in  danger  of 
placing  themselves  where  no  prayers  nor  entreaties  will 
avail  them  any  thing;  such  as,  "I  also  will  laugh  at 
your  calamity,  and  mock  when  your  fear  cometh  .  .  .  then 
shall  ye  call  upon  me,  but  I  will  not  hear ;  ye  shall  seek 
me  early,  but  ye  shall  not  find  me."  *  &c. 

11.  Those  which  state  that  men  do  perish;  such  as, 
"The  wicked  shall  perish  "  ^  "  with  all  deceivableness  of  un- 
righteousness in  them  that  perish."  ®  "These  shall  utterly 
perish  in  their  own  corruption,  and  shall  receive  the  re- 
ward of  unrighteousness,"''  &c. 

12.  Those  which  teach  that  some  men  shall  not  he 
saved;  such  as,  "  If  the  righteous  scarcely  be  saved, 
where  shall  the  ungodly  and  the  sinner  appear?  "  ^    "  The 

1  Ecclesiastes  xi.  3.  2  Jude  7.  3  Hebrews  x.  31. 

4  Proverbs  i.  2G-33.  5  Psalms  xxxvii.  20. 

C  2  Thessalonians  ii.  10.    7  2  Peter  ii.  13.         8  i  Peter  iv.  18. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.       93 

harvest  is  past,  the  summer  is  ended,  and  we  are  not 
saved;  "^  &c.,  taken  in  connection  with  the  multitude  of 
passages  which  make  salvation  conditional  on  faith  and 
obedience ;  such  as,  "  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee."  ^  "  Be- 
lieve to  the  saving  of  the  soul,"  ^  &c. 

13.  Those  which  affirm  that  wicked  men  are  in  danger 
of  going  into  a  remediless  state;  such  as,  "He  that, 
being  often  reproved,  hardeneth  his  neck,  shall  suddenly 
be  destroyed,  and  that  without  remedy,"  ^  &c. 

14.  Those  which  insist  on  the  idea  of  the  great  danger 
that  man  will /m7  of  heaven ;  such  as,  "Looking  dili- 
gently lest  any  man  fail  of  the  gi-ace  of  God,"^&c. 
"  Why  will  ye  die?  "«&c. 

15.  Those  which  imply  the  danger  of  the  misuse  of 
this  life  considered  as  a  i^rohation  ;  such  as,  ' '  What  shall 
the  end  be  of  them  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  God  ?  "  ^  &c. 
"If  thine  eye  offend  thoe,  pluck  it  out:  it  is  better  for 
thee  to  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God  with  one  eye,  than 
having  two  eyes,  to  be  cast  into  hell-fire,"  ^  &c. 

IG.  Those  which  declare  that  the  hope  of  the  had  man, 
that  he  shall  he  somehow  eternally  safe,  shall  he  disap- 
pointed;  such  as,  "  The  fear  of  the  wicked  it  shall  come 
upon  him;  ...  the  expectation  of  the  wicked  shall 
perish,"  ^  &c.     "  The  hypocrite's  hope  shall  perish,"  ^^  &c. 

1  Jeremiah  viii.  20.  2  Luke  vii.  50.  3  Hebrews  x.  39. 

4  Proverbs  xxix.  1.  6  Ezekiel  xxxiii.  11. 

5  Hebrews  xii.  15.  7  i  Peter  iv.  17.       8  Mark  ix.  43-48. 
9  Proverbs  x.  24,  28.  1<>  Job  viii.  13. 


94  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

17.  Those  which  threaten  punishment  upon  those  who 
encourage  the  wicked  to  believe  that  there  is  no  future 
retribution  ;  such  as  the  denunciation  against  them  who 
"  with  lies  have  made  the  righteous  sad,  whom  I  have  not 
made  sad;  and  strengthened  the  hands  of  the  wicked 
that  he  should  not  return  from  his  wicked  way,  by  prom- 
ising him  life,"^  &c. 

18.  Those  which  warn  men  so  persistently  from  one 
end  of  Revelation  to  the  other,  in  so  many  varied  forms 
of  speech,  and  from  so  many  different  points  of  approach, 
that  there  is  a  fatal  contingency  always  hanging  over 
every  impenitent  man,  liable  to  descend  upon  him  at  any 
moment,  and  sure  to  do  so  at  some  time,  if  he  does  not 
repent;  such  as,  "Seek  ye  the  Lord  while  he  may  be 
found,  call  ye  upon  him  while  he  is  near."^  "Now  is 
the  accepted  time,  behold  now  is  the  day  of  salvation,"  ^ 
&c.  "Watch  ye,  therefore,  and  pray  always  that  ye 
may  be  accounted  worthy  to  escape  all  these  things  that 
shall  come  to  pass,  and  to  stand  before  the  Son  of  man,"  * 
&c.  "Fear  lest,  a  promise  being  left  us  of  entering 
into  his  rest,  any  of  you  should  seem  to  come  short  of 
it,"  ^  &c. 

19.  Those  which  foretell  destruction  as  the  end  of  the 
wicked;  such  as,  "Foolish  and  hurtful  lusts,  which 
drown  men  in  destruction  and  perdition,"  ^  &c.    "  Whose 

1  Ezekiel  xiii.  22.  2  Isaiah  Iv.  0.  3  2  Corinthians  vi.  2. 

4  Luke  xxi.  30.  5  Hebrews  iv.  1.        C  i  Timothy  vi.  9. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.      95 

end  is  destruction,"  ^  &c.  "  Who  shall  be  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction,"^  &c.  "And  bring  upon  them- 
selves swift  destruction,"  ^  &c. 
'^  20.  Those  which  affirm  that  the  death  of  the  soul  is 
the  doom  of  the' wicked  who  will  not  repent;  such  as, 
"  Sin  when  it  is  finished  bringeth  forth  death,"  *  &c. 
*'  He  which  converteth  the  sinner  from  the  error  of  his 
way  shall  save  a  soul  from  death,"  ^  &c.  "  The  wages  of 
sin  is  death,"  *^  &c. 

21.  Those  which  foretell  a  second  death;  such  as, 
*'  He  that  overcometh  shall  not  be  hurt  of  the  second 
death,"  ^  &c.  "  Blessed  and  holy  is  he  that  hath  part  in 
the  first  resurrection ;  on  such  the  second  death  hath  no 
power,"  ^  &c. 

22.  Those  which  predict  coming  wrath  to  the  impen- 
itent;  such  as,  "After  thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart, 
treasurest  up  unto  thyself  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath,"  ^ 
&c.  "  Jesus,  which  delivered  us  from  the  wrath  to 
come,"  ^^  &c.  "  The  great  day  of  his  wrath  is  come,"  ^ 
&.C.  "  Who  hath  warned  you  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to 
come?"  12  &c. 

23.  Those  which  teach  that  some  men  become  apostates 


1  rhilippians  iii.  19.        2  Thessalonians  i.  9.      3  2  Peter  ii.  1. 
4  James  i.  15.  5  James  v.  20,  6  Eomans  vi.  23. 

7  Revelation  ii.  11.  8  Revelation  xx.  0.        9  Romans  ii.  5. 

10  1  Thessalonians  i.  10.  H  Revelation  vi.  17. 

12  Matthew  iii.  7. 


yo  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

and  are  cast  off  for  ever  ;  sucb  as,  "  If  thou  forsake  him, 
he  will  cast  thee  off  for  ever."  ^  "  Christ  is  become  of  none 
effect  unto  you ;  ye  are  fallen  from  grace,"  ^  &c.  "  If  we 
sin  willfully  after  that  we  have  received  the  knowledge  of 
the  truth,  there  remaineth  no  more  sacrifice  for  sins,  but  a 
certain  fearful  looking-for  of  judgment  and  fiery  indigna- 
tion," ^  &c. 

24.  Those  which  affii-m  that  wicked  men  shall  he  cut 
of ;  such  as,  "  Evil-doers  shall  be  cut  off.""*  "  The  seed 
of  the  wicked  shall  be  cut  off."  ^  "  The  wicked  shall  be 
cut  off  from  the  earth,"  ®  &c.  "  Otherwise  thou  also 
shalt  be  cut  off,"^&c. 

25.  Those  which  announce  a  curse  upon  the  transgres- 
sors ;  such  as,  "  Cm'sed  is  every  one  that  continueth  not 
in  all  things  which  are  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to 
do  them."^  "Ye  are  cursed  with  a  curse,  for  ye  have 
robbed  me;"''  &c.,  taken  with  "Depart  from  me,  ye 
cursed,  into  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his 
angels,"  ^  &c. 

26..  Those  which  denounce  such  men  as  resist  and 
neglect  the  gospel;  such  as,  "It  shall  be  more  tolerable 
for  Tyi'e  and  Sidou  at  the   day  of  judgment  than  for 

1  1  Chronicles  xsrviii.  9.  2  Galatians  v.  4. 

3  Hebrews  x.  2G,  27.  4  Psalm  xxxvii.  9. 

5  Ibid.  28.  6  Proverbs  ii.  22. 

7  Romans  xi.  22,  8  Galatians  ill.  10. 

9  Malachl  iil.  9.  10  Matthew  xxv.  41. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.       97 

you,"  ^  &;c.  "It  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  the  land  of 
Sodom  in  the  day  of  judgment  than  for  thee,"  ^  &c. 
"  The  men  of  Nineveh  shall  rise  in  judgment  with  this 
generation,  and  shall  condemn  it,"  ^  «&c. 

27.  Those  which  plead  with  men  to  repent  and  be- 
lieve that  they  may  not  eternally  die ;  such  as,  "I  have 
no  pleasure  in  the  death  of  him  that  dieth,  saith  the  Lord 
God  :  wherefore  turn  yourselves,  and  live  ye,"  ^ &c.  "  As 
I  live,  saith  the  Lord  God,  I  have  no  pleasure  in  the  death 
of  the  wicked,  but  that  the  wicked  turn  from  his  way 
and  live  ;  turn  ye,  turn  ye  from  your  evil  way ;  for  why 
will  ye  die,  0  house  of  Israel  ?"  ^  &c.  "  Ye  will  not  come 
to  me  that  ye  might  have  life."  ^ 

28.  Those  which  teach  that  the  gospel  was  mercifully 
provided  as  the  remedy  against  the  eternal  death  of  the 
race  (of  course  implying  that  where  it  is  not  known,  or  is 
not  accepted,  that  doom  still  threatens)  ;  such  as,  "  God 
sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn  the  world,  but 
that  the  world  through  him  might  be  saved,"  ^  &c.  "That 
as  sin  hath  reigned  unto  death,  even  so  might  grace  reign 
through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life,"  ^  &c.  "  We  shall 
be  saved  from  wrath  through  him."  ^  "  Being  reconciled, 
we  shall  be  saved  by  his  life,"  ^°  &c. 

1  Matthew  xi.  22.  2  Ibid.  24.  3  Matthew  xli.  41. 

4  Ezekiel  xviii.  32.  5  Ezekiel  xxxiii.  11. 

6  John  V.  40.  7  John  iii.  17.         8  Romans  v.  21. 

9  Koraans  v.  9.  10  Ibid.  10. 

r 


98  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

29.  Those  which  teach  that  admittance  to  heaven  is 
to  he  on  conditions  which  it  is  obvious  that  all  men  do  not 
fulfil;  such  as,  "  Blessed  are  they  that  do  his  command- 
ments, that  they  may  have  right  to  the  tree  of  life,  and 
may  enter  in  through  the  gates  into  the  city  ;  for  without 

^re  dogs  and  sorcerers  and  whoremongers  and  murder- 
ers and  idolaters,  and  whosoever  loveth  and  maketh  a 
lie,"  ^  &c.  "And  the  nations  of  them  which  are  saved 
shall  walk  in  the  light  of  it,"  ^  &c.  "  He  hath  prepared 
for  them  (those  having  faith)  a  city,"  ^  &c. 

30.  Those  which  declare  that  those  who  are  guilty  of 
the  works  of  the  flesh  shall  not  be  saved  ;  such  as,  "  Now 
the  works  of  the  flesh  are  manifest ;  which  are  these  : 
adultery,  fornication,  uncleanness,  lasciviousness,  idolatry, 
witchcraft,  hatred,  variance,  emulations,  wrath,  strife,  se- 
ditions, heresies,  envyings,  murders,  drunkenness,  revel- 
ings,  and  such  like  ;  of  the  which  I  tell  you  before,  as  I 
have  also  told  you  in  time  past,  that  they  which  do  such 
things  shaH  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God,"  ^  &c.  "  Nor 
thieves  nor  covetous  nor  drunkards  nor  revilers  nor  ex- 
tortioners shall  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God,"  ^  &c.  "  Let 
no  man  deceive  you  with  vain  words ;  for  because  of  these 
things  cometh  the  wrath  of  God  upon  the  children  of 
disobedience,"  ^  &c. 

1  Revelation  xxii.  14,  15.  2  Revelation  xxi.  24. 

3  Hebrews  xi.  16.  4  Galatians  v.  19-21. 

6  1  Corinthians  vi.  10.  6  Ephesians  v.  6. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.       99 

31.  Those  wbich  teach  that  the  unfaithfulness  of 
Qtristians  to  sinners  may  he  the  death  of  the  latter ; 
such  as,  "  If  thou  dost  not  speak  to  warn  the  wicked 
from  his  way,  that  wicked  man  shall  die  in  his  iniquity,"  ^ 
&c. 

32.  Those  which  teach  that  faithful  Christian  labor 
may  he  expected  to  save  souls  from  death;  such  as,  "  Let 
him  know  that  he  which  converteth  the  sinner  from  the 
error  of  his  way  shall  save  a  soul  from  death,  and  shall 
hide  a  multitude  of  sins," ^  &c.  "If  any  man  see  his 
brother  sin  a  sin  which  is  not  unto  death,  he  shall  ask,  and 
he  shall  give  him  life  for  them  that  sin  not  unto  death,"  ^ 
&c.  "In  meekness  instructing  those  that  oppose  them- 
selves ;  if  God  peradventure  will  give  them  repentance  to 
the  acknowledging  of  the  truth,"  *  &c. 

33.  Those  which  imply  that  helievers  make  a  good  ex- 
change in  suffering  -pain  and  peril  in  this  life  in  order 
thereby  to  secure  heaven;  such  as,  "Blessed  are  they 
which  are  persecuted  for  righteousness'  sake  ;  for  theirs  is 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Eejoice,  and  be  exceeding  glad ; 
for  great  is  your  reward  in  heaven,"  *  &c.  "  If  we  suffer 
we  shall  also  reign  with  him,"*^&c.  "These  are  they 
which  came  out  of  great  tribulation,  and  have  washed 
their  robes,  and  made  them  white  in  the  blood  of  the 

1  Ezekiel  xxxiii.  8.  2  James  v.  20. 

3  1  John  V.  16.  4  2  Timothy  ii.  25. 

5  Matthew  v.  10-12.  6  2  Timothy  ii.  12. 


75^150  A 


100  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

Lamb,"  ^  &c.  "  For  I  reckon  that  the  sufferings  of  this 
present  time  are  not  worthy  to  be  compared  with  the  gloj-y 
which  shall  be  revealed,"  ^  &c. 

34.  Those  which  teach  the  vital  relation  of  persever- 
ance to  salvation  (implying  that  its  absence  would  be  fatal) ; 
such  as, ' '  Let  us  labor  to  enter  into  that  rest,  lest  any  man 
fall,"  ^  &c.  "  Give  dihgence  to  make  your  caUing  and  elec- 
tion sure,"^  &c.  "  If  any  man  abide  not  in  me,  he  is  cast 
forth,"  ^&c.  "To  them  who,  by  patient  continuance  in 
well-doing,  seek  for  glory  and  honor  and  immortality,  eter- 
nal life,"  ^  &c. 

35.  Those  which  imply  that  some  men  have  been  lost; 
such  as,  "  None  of  them  is  lost,  but  the  son  of  perdition  [is 
lost]"'  &c.  "Then  the  Lord  rained  upon  Sodom  and 
Gomorrah  brimstone  and  fire  from  the  Lord  out  of  heaven ; 
and  he  overthrew  these  cities,  and  all  the  plain,  and  all 
the  inhabitants  of  the  cities,"^  &c.  "And  there  went 
out  fii'e  from  the  Lord,  and  devoured  them  [Nadab  and 
Abihu] ;  and  they  died  before  the  Lord,"^&c.  "And 
they  [Korah  and  his  company]  went  down  alive  into  the 
pit,  and  they  perished  from  among  the  congregation,"  ^^ 


1  Revelation  vii.  14.  2  Komans  ix.  18. 

3  Hebrews  iv.  11.  4  2  Peter  i.  10. 

5  John  XV.  6.  6  Romans  ii.  7. 

7  John  xvii.  12.  8  Genesis  xix.  24-25. 

f  Leviticus  x.  2.  10  Numbers  xvi.  33. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.    101 

&c. ;  "  And  Ananias  bearing  these  words  fell  down,^  and 
gave  up  the  ghost," ^  &c. 

36.  Those  which  intimate  the  approval  of  the  righteous 
of  the  eternal  punishmeyit  of  the  loiched ;  such  as,  "I 
heard  a  great  voice  of  much  people  in  heaven,  saying  Alle-^ 
luia,  salvation  and  glory  and  honor  and  power  unto  the 
Lord  our  God ;  for  true  and  righteous  are  his  judgments, 
&c.  —  and  again  they  said.  Alleluia,  and  her  smoke  rose 
up  for  ever  and  ever ; "  ^  &c. ,  compared  with  ' '  In  the  great- 
ness of  thine  excellency,  thou  hast  overthrown  them  that 
rose  up  against  thee, — thou  sendest  forth  thy  wrath,  which 
consumed  them  as  stubble,  who  is  like  unto  thee,  0  Lord, 
among  the  gods  ?  who  is  like  thee,  glorious  in  holiness, 
fearful  in  praises,  doing  wonders  ?  "  *  &c. 

37.  Those  which  indicate  that  God  is  glorified  by  the 
eternal  destruction  of  the  incorrigihly  sinfid ;  such  as, 
"  For  this  cause  have  I  raised  tliee  up,'  for  to  show  in  thee 
my  power,  and  that  my  name  shall  be  declared  throughout 
all  the  earth ; "  *  &c. ,  compared  with  ' '  What  if  God,  willing 
to  show  his  wrath  and  make  his  power  known,  endured 
with  much  long-suffering  the  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to  de- 
struction,"^ &c. 

1  Acts  V.  5. 

2  The  natural  impression  on  the  face  of  the  narrative  is,  that  these 
reprobates  went  to  hell.  To  suppose  that  they  went  to  heaven  is  to 
suppose  God  to  have  defeated  his  own  end  of  punishment,  to  say  noth- 
ing of  the  violent  incongruity  of  such  character  as  theirs  in  heaven. 

3  Revelation  xix.  1-3,  4  Exodus  xv.  7-11. 
6  Exodus  ix.  16.  6  Komans  ix.  22. 


102  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

38.  Those  whicli  speak  of  the  resurrection  of  the  unjust; 
such  as,  "  There  shall  be  a  resm-rection  of  the  dead,  both 
of  the  just  and  unjust,"  ^  &c.  ''They  that  have  done  good 
unto  the  resurrection  of  life ;  and  they  that  have  done  evil 
.unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation,"^  &c. 

39.  Those  which  teach  that  worldly  prosperity  imperils 
the  immortal  interests  ;  such  as,  "A  rich  man  shall  hardly 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven, ' '  ^  &c.  ' '  Ye  can  not  serve 
God  and  Mammon,"*  &c.  "The  prosperity  of  fools  shall 
destroy  them," ^  &c.  "Therefore,  this  night  thy  soul  shall 
be  required  of  thee,  then  whose  shall  those  things  be  which 
thou  hast  provided  ?  "  *^  &c. 

40.  Those  which  make  clear  the  danger  of  self-decep- 
tion;  such  as,  "  There  is  a  way  that  seemeth  right  unto  a 
man;  but  the  end  thereof  are  the  ways  of  death," '^  &c. 
"  Many  will  say  to  me  Lord,  Lord,  have  we  not  prophe- 
sied in  thy  name  ?  and  in  thy  name  have  cast  out  devils  ? 
and  in  thy  name  done  many  wonderful  works  ?  and  then  I 
will  profess  unto  them,  I  never  knew  you ;  depart  from  me, 
ye  that  work  iniquity, ' '  ^  &c.  '  'And  for  this  cause  God  shall 
send  them  strong  delusion,  that  they  should  believe  a  lie ; 
that  they  all  might  be  damned  who  believed  not  the  truth, 
but  had  pleasure  in  unrighteousness,"  ^  &c. 

1  Acts  xxiv.  15.  2  John  v.  29. 

3  Matthew  xix.  23.  4  Matthew  vi.  24. 

6  Proverbs  i.  32.  6  Luke  xii.  20. 

7  Proverbs  xvi.  25.  8  Matthew  vii.  22-23. 
9  2  Thessaloniaus  ii.  11-12. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.    103 

41.  Those  which  assert  that  the  love  of  this  ivorld  is 
fatal  to  salvation;  such  as,  "  Love  not  the  world,  neither 
the  things  that  are  m  the  world,  if  any  ^ man  love  the 
world,  the  love  of  the  Father  is  not  in  him."  ^  "Whatsoever 
is  born  of  God  overcometh  the  world,"  ^  &c.  "  The  friend- 
ship of  the  world  is  enmity  with  God,  whosoever,  therefore, 
will  be  a  friend  of  the  world,  is  the  enemy  of  God,"  ^  &c. 

42.  Those  which  declare  that  unbelief  is  fatal  to  salva- 
tion; such  as,  "  He  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned,"* 
taken  in  connection  with,  "He that  believeth  not  is  con- 
demned already :  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see 
life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him," ^  &c.  "Being 
alienated  from  the  life  of  God  through  the  ignorance  that 
is  in  them,  because  of  the  blindness  of  their  heart,"  ^  &c. 

43.  Those  which  denounce  eternal  judgment  upon  some 
gi'ossest  offenders  ;  such  as,  "  No  murderer  hath  eternal 
life  abiding  in  him," ''  &c.  "  Mui'derers  and  whoremongers 
and  sorcerers  and  idolaters,  and  all  liars,  shall  have  their 
part  in  the  lake  which  buraeth  with  fire  and  brimstone, 
which  is  the  second  death,  "^  &c. 

44.  Those  which  prescribe  repentance  as  a  condition  of 
salvation;  such  as,  "  Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way  and 
the  unrighteous  man  his  thoughts,  and  let  him  return  unto 

1 1  John  ii.  15.  2  1  John  v.  4. 

3  James  iv.  4.  ^  Mark  xvi.  16. 

5  John  iii.  18-36.  6  Ephesians  iv.  18. 

1  John  iii.  15.  8  Kevelation  xxi.  8. 


104  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

the  Lord,  and  he  will  have  mercy  upon  him,"  ^  &c.  "  Re- 
pent therefore  of  this  thy  wickedness,  and  pray  God,  if  per- 
haps the  thoughts  of  thy  heart  may  he  forgiven  thee,"  ^ 
&c.  "Except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish,"^ 
&c. 

45.  Those  which  prescribe /azY/i  as  a  condition  of  sal- 
vation; such  as,  "  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and 
thou  shalt  be  saved,"  ^  &c.  "  Whosoever  believeth  in  him 
shall  receive  remission  of  sins,"^&c.  Receiving  the  end 
of  your  faith,  even  the  salvation  of  your  souls,"  ^  &c. 

46.  Those  which  announce  love  to  Christ  and  to  the 
truth  as  fundamental  to  salvatioii;  such  as,  "  Them  that 
perish  because  they  received  not  the  love  of  the  truth  that 
they  might  be  saved,"  ^  &c.  "  K  any  man  love  not  the 
Lord  Jesus  Chiist, »let  him  be  anathema,"^  &c. ;  that 
is,  let  him  be  consigned  to  perdition.^  "  The  crown  of  life, 

1  Isaiah  Iv.  7.  2  Acts  viii.  22.  3  Luke  xiii.  3. 

4  Acts  xvi.  31.  5  Acts  X.  43.  6  i  Peter  i.  9. 

7  2  Thessalonians  ii.  10.  8  i  Corinthians  xvi.  22. 

9  '^^  Anathema  —  accursed  ;  a  thing  devoted  by  a  solemn  malediction  to 
God's  wrath  and  indignation."  —  WordsivortK' s  Comment.  Galatians 
1.8. 

The  word  uvadeiia  —anathema  —  never  denotes  simply  an  exclusion 
or  excommunication,  but  always  devotion  to  perdition."  —  Alford  on 
Eomans  ix.  3. 

The  scholar  will  be  interested  in  Trench's  distinction  between 
ava-dTjfia  (anathema),  "a  thing  devoted  to  God"  for  its  own  honor  as 
well  as  for  God's  glory,"  and  avadsiia  (anathema),  "  that  which  is  de- 
voted to  God,  but  devoted,  as  were  the  Canaanites  of  old,  to  his  honor 
indeed,  but  its  own  utter  loss.'^  —  Synonyms  of  New  Testament,  p.  40. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.    105 

which  the  Lord  hath  promised  to  them  that  love  him,"^ 
&c. 

47.  Those  which  teach  that  the  incorrigibly  wicked  will 
go  on  becoming  worse  and  worse ;  such  as,  ' '  Evil  men 
and  seducers  shall  wax  worse  and  worse,  deceiving  and  be- 
ing deceived,"  ^  &c.  "  They  will  increase  unto  more  un- 
godliness,"^ &c.  "And  blasphemed  the  God  of  heaven,  and 
repented  not  of  their  deeds,"  *  &c. 

48.  Those  which  teach  that  there  is  great  danger  that 
the  Devil  will  deceive  and  ruin  souls  ;  such  as,  "  Lest  Sa- 
tan should  get  an  advantage  of  us,"  ^  &c.  "  I  fear  lest  by 
any  means,  as  the  serpent  beguiled  Eve  through  his  subtle- 
ty, so  your  minds  should  be  corrupted  from  the  simplicity 
that  is  in  Christ ;  and  no  marvel,  for  Satan  himself  is  trans- 
formed into  an  angel  of  light,"  ^  &c.  "  The  God  of  this 
world  hath  bhnded  the  minds  of  them  which  believe  not,"  ' 
&c.  "  That  old  serpent  called  the  Devil  and  Satan,  which 
deceiveth  the  whole  world,"  ^  &c.  "  The  working  of 
Satan,  with  all  power  and  signs  and  lying  wonders,  and 
with  all  deceivableness  of  unrighteousness  in  them  that 
perish."^  &c. 

49.  Those  which  exhort  to  continual  vigilance,  on  the 
ground  that  only  by  resisting  the  Devil  can  salvation  be 

1  James  i.  12.  2  2  Timothy  iii.  3. 

3  2  Timothy  ii.  16.  4  Kevelation  xvi.  11. 

5  2  Corinthians  ii.  11.  6  2  Corinthians  xi.  3-14. 

7  2  Corinthians  iv.  4.  8  Revelation  xii.  9. 
9  2  Thessalonians  ii.  9. 


106  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

gained;  such  as,  "Be  sober,  be  vigilant;  because  your 
adversary  the  Devil,  as  a  roaring  lion,  walketh  about,  seek- 
ing whom  he  may  devour,"  ^  &c.  "  Put  on  the  whole  ar- 
mor of  God,  that  ye  may  be  able  to  stand  against  the  wiles 
of  the  Devil,  .  .  .  and  having  done  ail  to  stand,"  ^  &c. 
"  Kesist  the  Devil,  and  he  will  flee  from  you,"  ^  &c.  "  If 
God  peradventure  will  give  them  repentance  to  the  ac- 
knowledging of  the  truth;  and  that  they  may  recover 
themselves  out  of  the  snare  of  the  Devil,  who  are  taken 
captive  by  him  at  his  will,"  *  &c. 

50.  Those  which  everywhere  teach  that  it  is  the  very 
essence  of  the  worh  of  the  gospel  to  secure  everlasting 
life  to  believers  ;  such  as,  "  God  so  loved  the  world,  that 
he  gave  his  only-begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  belie veth  in 
him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life,"^&c. 
"  Being  made  free  from  sin,  and  become  sei-vauts  to  God, 
ye  have  your  fruit  unto  holiness,  and  the  end  everlasting 
life,"*^&c.  "He  that  soweth  to  the  spirit  shall,  of  the 
spirit  reap  life  everlasting,"  ''  &c.  "  Believe  on  him  to  hfe 
everlasting,"  ^  &c. 

Now  what  I  claim  concerning  these  classes  of  passages, 
and  the  many  similar  ones  of  which  space  will  not  here  per- 
mit the  record,  is  this  :  — 

1  1  Peter  v.  8.  2  Ephesians  vi.  11-13.  3  James  iv.  7. 

4  2  Timothy  ii.  26.       5  John  iii.  10.  6  Romans  vi.  22. 

7  Galatians  vi.  8.         8  i  Timothy  i.  If.. 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.    107 

1.  Not  that  they  (or  many  of  them)  in  so  many  words 
approach  toward  the  affirmation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  fu- 
ture eternal  punishment  of  those  who  die  impenitent. 

2.  Not  that  they  (or  many  of  them)  would  compel  our 
belief  of  that  doctrine  in  the  absence  of  direct  evidence, 
and  in  the  silence  of  the  Scriptures,  otherwise,  on  the  sub- 
ject. 

3.  But  that  they  fall  in  more  naturally  with  that  doc- 
trine than  its  opposite,  when  we  find  that  it  is  estabhshed 
by  direct  evidence,  as  true. 

4.  That  they  are  just  such,  in  their  quality,  as  we 
should  expect  them  to  be,  if  the  doctrine  were  taken  for 
granted  as  true  by  the  writers. 

5.  That  they  are  quite  inexplicable  on  any  other  theory 
than  the  truth  of  the  doctrine. 

6.  That,  coming  from  every  part  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
indirectly  confirming  every  aspect  of  the  doctrine,  and 
uncontradicted  by  others  of  opposite  character,  —  their 
existence  is  incompatible  with  any  other  theory  than  that 
the  doctrine  is  the  doctrine  of  the  book,  if  it  be  a  self- 
consistent  volume. 

If  the  sixty-six  books  of  the  Bible  declare  that  some 
men  are  to  be  excluded  from  the  kingdom  of  God, — never 
to  see  life,  to  die  without  any  hope,  to  have  no  forgiveness, 
not  to  be  saved,  to  perish,  in  danger  of  remediless  ruin,  in 
danger  of  misusing  probation,  and  of  being  disappointed 
and  losing  heaven ;   that  some  never  will  possess  holiness. 


108  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

never  will  get  the  benefit  of  the  atonement,  but  have  their 
condemnation  aggravated  by  it,  and  will  go  where  prayers 
and  entreaties  will  avail  them  nothing,  but  their  state  be 
unalterable,  and  where  JGrod  will  be  permanently  angry 
with  them ;  that  a  fatal  contingency  always  overhangs  the 
sinner,  coming  wrath,  destruction,  the  death  of  the  soul,  and 
the  second  death  being  foretold  as  the  doom  of  the  wicked, 
who  shall  be  cut  off;  that  some  will  become  apostates, 
and  be  cut  oflf  for  ever,  while  those  guilty  of  the  works 
of  the  flesh  can  not  be  saved,  and  that  some  have  been 
lost  beyond  a  doubt,  whose  punishment  the  righteous 
approve,  and  by  which  God  is  glorified ;  that  a  curse  is 
denounced  on  those  who  neglect  the  gospel,  which  is  the 
remedy  against  eternal  death,  so  that  men  must  repent 
and  believe,  or  die  for  ever ;  that  the  conditions  of  en- 
trance to  heaven  are  such  as  many  men  clearly  do  decline, 
while  there  is  danger  from  self-deception,  and  love  of  the 
world,  and  worldly  prosperity,  and  unbelief,  and  the  lack 
of  perseverance,  and  the  deceit  of  the  Devil,  so  that  while 
Christian  faithfulness  may  save  souls,  unfaithfulness  leaves 
them  to  perish ;  that  believers  make  a  good  exchange  in 
giving  up  the  world  to  gain  heaven,  while  their  salvation 
is  only  secured  by  continual  conflict  with  Satan,  and  judg- 
ment is  denounced  on  gross  offenders;  that  there  is  a 
resurrection  of  the  unjust ;  and  that,  while  the  very  object 
of  the  gospel  is  to  give  everlasting  life  to  believers,  they 
can  attain  salvation  only  by  repentance   and  faith,  and 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  Tl^f:  BIBLE.    109 

love  to  Christ  and  the  truth;  —  if,  I  say,  the  sixty-six 
books  of  the  Bible  make  these  declarations  in  hundreds  and 
thousands  of  passages,  in  their  free,  unforced  significance, 
—  shooting  rays  of  indirect  testimony  at  every  angle 
athwart  the  darkness  of  the  subject,  —  one  of  two  things 
must  be  true,  —  either  those  books  are  incoherent,  incom- 
prehensible, and  valueless,  or  they  do  teach  the  doctrine  of 
the  future  punishment  of  those  who  die  in  unrepented  sin. 
I  accept  the  latter  as  the  reasonable  alternative ;  and 
claim,  therefore,  that  the  indirect  testimony  of  the  Bible 
is  consonant  with  what  we  have  seen  to  be  its  direct  teach- 
ing, and  that,  with  that  peculiar  force  which  is  due  to 
such  evidence,  it  affirms  that  the  persistently  wicked  will  be 
for  ever  punished  in  the  future  world. 

Here  I  rest  our  inquiries  from  the  word  of  God.  We 
have  found  that  the  Old  Testament,  with  as  much  of 
distinctness  as  could  be  expected  when  its  progressive 
adaptation  to  the  advancing  training  of  the  Hebrew  nation 
is  considered,  does  reveal  an  eternal  difference  between 
the  condition  of  the  good  and  the  bad  in  the  future  world. 
AVe  have  seen,  from  the  unquestioned  testimony  of  Jose- 
phus,  that  the  Jewish  nation,  with  the  exception  of  the 
few  infidel  Sadducees,  —  holding  this  Old  Testament,  and 
studying  it  with  reverence, — had  acquired,  at  the  time 
when  Christ  came,  a  firm  belief  in  the  doctrine  of  the 
future  eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked.     We  have  seen 


110  JEEDICT  OF  JiEASOX. 

that  Clu-ist  never  contradicted  that  behef ;  but,  on  the 
contrary,  appealed  to  it  perpetually  as  an  argument  why 
men  should  repent  and  exercise  faith  in  himself,  as  the 
Saviour  of  the  world.  We  have  seen  that  he  closed  his 
earthly  ministry  by  commissioning  his  disciples  to  go  into 
all  the  world  and  preach  to  every  creature  the  gospel 
which  they  had  received  from  his  lips,  concentrating  once 
more  its  essence  into  that  formula  which  asserts,  ''  He  that 
believeth  not  shall  be  damned.''  "We  have  seen  that  those 
disciples  went  and  preached  as  he  had  commanijed  ;  their 
voic-e  being  clear  as  his  had  been  in  the  assertion,  that 
eternal  perdition  must  be  the  portion  of  those  who  persist 
in  rejecting  the  love  of  God  in  Christ  to  the  end  of  their 
life  on  earth.  We  have  seen  that  this  is  true  of  all  these 
indirect  allusions  to  truths  related  to,  or  bordering  upon, 
this  subject,  as  well  as  of  their  direct  teachings.  This 
gives  us  the  voice  of  the  whole  Bible.  From  the  threat 
of  God  to  Adam,  that  he  should  die  if  he  disobeyed,  on  its 
first  page,  to  the  prophetic  word  of  his  apostle,  excluding 
unworthy  men  from  heaven,  on  its  last,  that  voice  is  clear, 
strong,  one.  It  testifies  that  %U  who  ai-e  inveterate  in 
disobedience  shall  be  for  ever  separated  from  God  and 
from  the  good.  It  states  this  as  a  truth.  It  does  not 
apologize  for  it,  nor  philosophize  about  it;  it  reveals  it  as 
a  matter  of  fact,  which  it  is  of  great  consequence  for  men 
to  believe. 

I  say  it  reveab  it.     I  know  this  is  denied.     But  I  in- 


INDIRECT  TESTIMONIES  OF  THE  BIBLE.     Ill 

sist  that  it  can  not  be  denied,  except  on  that  false  principle 
of  interpretation  which  would  make  the  Bible  merely 
pliant  to  the  pleasure  of  the  interpreter.  All  sound  prin- 
ciples of  interpretation  affirm  eternal  punishment  for  the 
sinner  impenitent,  as  its  revelation.  To  refer  to  those 
which  have  been  laid  down  in  this  treatise,  —  we  can  not 
cull  all  pleasant  passages  which  point  toward  heaven,  and 
reject  all  others  as  "uninspired,"  and  so  evade  it;  for 
we  must  take  the  whole  of  the  Bible,  or  none  of  it,  and, 
as  a  whole,  it  affirms  this  doctrine.  The  self-consistence 
of  the  Scriptures  asserts  it,  —  light  streaming  back  upon 
all  that  Ls  obscure  in  the  Old  Testament  from  the  blazing 
words  of  Jesus  in  the  New.  It  is  the  obvious  sense  of 
the  sacred  volume ;  nobody  ever  naturally  read  Univer- 
salism  out  of  the  Bible.  "We  find  it  revealed  progressively, 
^st  as  we  should  expect  from  such  a  progressive  volume. 
The  common-sense  version  of  the  words  of  the  Bible  — 
that  which  all  their  suiToundings  of  time  and  place  neces- 
sitate—  asserts  it.  Its  obscurity  and  fearfulness  are  only 
such  as  are  reasonable,  when  we  remember  the  necessary 
infiniteness,  obscurity,  and  awfiilness  of  the  subject-matter 
to  which  it  relates.  And  as  between  it  and  the  doctrine 
of  Universalism,  in  those  few  passages  where  any  doubt 
seems  possible,  we  are  constrained  to  interpret  the  Bible 
toward  its  enunciation ;  because  it  favors  God  most  and 
sin  least  to  warn  the  sinner  of  Bt  wrath  to  come,  and  not 
hold  out  to  him  the  hope  of  eternal  impunity  as  a  bounty 


112  VERDICT  OF  reason: 

on  transgression;  because  the  incalculable  majority  of 
those  thus  far  who  have  loved  God  and  been  warmest  in 
sympathy  with  him,  and  have  walked  nearest  to  him  and 
been  most  led  by  his  Spirit,  —  and  have  therefore  been 
likeliest  to  be  right,  —  have  firmly  believed  it ;  and  because 
it  offers,  beyond  question,  the  safest  alternative  of  faith. 
He  who  believes  that  the  wicked  will  be  punished  eter- 
nally, and  exercises  faith  in  Christ,  so  as  not  to  "come 
into  condemnation,"  will  be  eternally  safe,  even  should 
the  future  world  reveal  that  his  faith  was  vain  and  there 
is  no  hell;  while  he  who  interprets  the  Bible  toward 
Universalism  must  be  lost,  unless  his  own  belief  shall  bear 
the  test  of  the  Judgment.  The  one  can  not  be  lost  in 
any  event,  while  the  other  runs  a  risk  whose  vastness  may 
well  make  any  man  tremble. 

I  claim,  therefore,  on  all  reasonable  grounds,  that  th^ 
testimony  of  the  Bible  is  distinctly  this  :  there  will  he  a 
fearful  and  eternal  difference  between  the  future  of  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked! 


CHAPTER  Vn. 

THERE    IS     NO     REASONABLE     OBJECTION     TO     THIS    TESTI- 
MONY,   HAVING     FORCE     TO     MODIFY     IT. 

BEFORE  considering,  in  detail,  any  of  those  objec- 
tions which  are  uro-ed  a2;ainst  the  doctrine  under 
discussion,  it  will  aid  us  to  revert  for  a  moment  to  under- 
lying first  principles,  in  order  to  see  what  form  of  objection, 
if  any,  may  have  validity  against  it. 

It  would  be  competent  to  object  that,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  notwithstanding  the  seeming  proof  which  we' have 
adduced,  the  Bible  does  not  teach  that  the  wicked  will  be 
punished  eternally  in  the  future  world ;  or,  that  while  it 
seems  to  do  so,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  accept  its  testi- 
mony, because  it  is  overruled  by  other  considerations 
which  make  it  impossible  for  us  to  believe  that  it  can 
teach  such  a  doctrine.  The  establishment  of  either  of 
these  lines  of  refutation  would  amount  to  the  logical  de- 
struction of  our  argument,  as  thus  far  developed  ;  but  no 
other  form  of  assault  would  be  competent  to  overthrow  it. 
To  adduce  any  of  the  prepossessions  or  notions  of  our 
minds,  as  proof  having  validity  superior  to  the  clear  word 
of  God,  would  amount  to  nothing ;  for  the  necessary  ob- 

8  113 


114  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

scurity  of  the  subject,  and  its  unavoidable  remoteness 
from  the  possibilities  of  our  earthly  experience,  render  our 
conjecture  inevitably  worthless  in  comparison  with  his 
revelation,  however  unsatisfying  to  us  that  may  be,  so 
long  as  it  maintains  itself  as  reasonably  his.  We  may, 
then,  confine  our  consideration  of  objections  desemng  to 
be  analyzed  and  weighed,  to  those  which  come  under  these 
two  heads ;  and  may  be  sure,  if  these  do  not  overthrow 
the  doctrine,  that  it  can  not  be  overthrown, 

I.  It  is  objected  that,  notwithstanding  all  the  seeming 
evidence  which  ive  have  adduced,  the  Bible  does  not 
really  teach  the  doctrine  of  the  future  eternal 'punishment 
of  those  who  die  in  impenitence. 

This  objection  divides  itself  into  two  heads  :  (1.)  That 
the  language  quoted  as  announcing  the  future  eternal 
punishment  of  the  impenitent  does  not  really  imply  that ; 
(2.)  That  there  are  other  texts  which  render  another  eon- 
•clusion  necessary. 

(1.)  It  is  affirmed  that  those  texts  which  tve  have 
quoted  as  declaring  that  those  who  die  in  impenitence 
shall  be  eternally  lost,  do  not  fairly  imply,  nor  render 
necessary,  that  doctrine.     For  example  :  — 

(a.)  It  is  said^  that  the  word  translated  "perish,"  on 
which  our  argument  relies  in  such  passages  as,  "Except 
ye  repent  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish,''^  &c.,  ^  does  not 
imply  the  sense  which  I  have  put  upon  it ;  that,  in  such 

1  Mr.  Thayer^s  Sermon,  p.  15.  2  Luke  xiii.  3. 


NO  OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       115 

texts  as  "Lord,  save  us:  we  perish,"  &c.,^  it  bas  a 
lesser  significance,  which  ought  to  be  given  to  it  in  all 
cases. 

To  this  I  answer,  as  I  have  already  shown, ^  the  literal 
sense  of  the  Greek  word  uirbllvixL  (apollumi)  is  "  to  de- 
stroy utterly."  This  primary  and  dominant  sense  is,  of 
course,  always  to  be  interpreted  by  the  circumstances  of 
its  application;  but  whoever  will  examine  carefully  the 
ninety-two  instances  of  its  use  in  the  New  Testament  will, 
I  think,  be  obhged  to  confess  that  when  applied  to  per- 
sons, it  always  implies  the  utmost  extent  of  destruction  of 
which  its  object,  under  the  circumstances,  is  capable. 
Thus,  when  spoken  of  the  body,  it  means  death ;  as, 
"  Shall  perish  with  the  sword,"  &c.^  "  I  am  not  come 
to  destroy  men's  lives, ''^  &c.,^  and  that  referred  to  above. ^ 
But  when  spoken  of  the  soul  it  implies  the  utmost  de- 
struction of  which  the  soul  is  capable,  that  is,  the  second 
death ;  as  where  it  is  put  into  direct  contrast  with  those 
who  are  saved.  "  For  we  are  unto  God  a  sweet  savor  of 
Christ  in  them  that  are  saved,  and  in  them  that  perish."  ^ 
Any  student  in  any  degi'ee  familiar  with  the  laws  of  lan- 
guage knows  that  it  is  impossible  to  lay  down  beforehand 
laws  defining  what  words  shall  in  all  cases  mean ;  the 
only  way  of  determining  what  they   do  mean  being  to 

1  Matthew  viii.  25.  2  See  page  80. 

3  Matthew  xxvi.  52.  4  Luke  ix.  56. 

5  Matthew  viii.  25.  6  2  Corinthians  ii.  15. 


116  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

study  them  in  their  actual  usage,  and  to  develop  the  sense 
which  their  author  deposited  in  them. 

(b.)  It  is  said  that  the  phrases  the  "■  kingdom  of  God  " 
and  the  "  kingdom  of  heaven  "  merely  imply  the  reign  oF 
the  Messiah  in  this  world ;  so  that  ' '  all  that  is  intended 
by  saying  that  the  wicked  shall  not  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  God,  is  that  they  will  not  be  received  as  discijDles  of 
Christ  so  long  as  they  continue  wicked."^  But  very 
nearly  the  opposite  of  this  is  the  judgment  of  the  best  com- 
mentators. Alford  says,  **  It  has  been  observed  by  recent 
critics  that  whenever  the  term  ''kingdom  of  heaven  "  (or 
its  equivalent)  is  used  in  the  New  Testament,  it  signifies, 
not  the  Church,  nor  the  Christian  religion,  but  strictly  the 
kingdom  of  the  Messiah  which  is  to  he  revealed  hereaf- 
ter.^^ He  adds,  "I  should  doubt  this  being  exclusively 
true."^  So  Tholuck  says,  "That  all  the  senses  of  this 
phrase  are  only  different  sides  of  the  same  great  idea,  — 
the  subjection  of  all  things  to  God  in  Christ.''^  ^  Here, 
as  before,  the  study  of  the  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight 
instances  in  which  the  phrases  are  used  is  the  best  appeal : 
and  this  will  make  it  clear  tliat,  while  in  a  few  instances 
fairly  susceptible  of  the  sense  put  upon  them  by  this  ob- 
jection, they  much  more  frequently  imply  the  everlasting 
reign  of  Christ  beyond  this  world  and  the  judgment-day.* 

1  Mr.  Thayer^s  Sermon,  p.  16. 

2  New  Test.  i.  1?.  3  Bergpredict,  74. 

4  See  a  discussion  of  the  use  of  the  phrase  "  kingdom  of  God,"  in 
the  Christian  Bevieio,  iii.  380. 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       117 

(c.)  It  is  insisted,  again,  that  the  words  "damn," 
"  damnation,"  &c.,  "  are  used  in  such  a  way  in  Scripture 
as  to  show  that  they  mean  any  thing  but  endless  tor- 
ment; "  ^  and  various  instances  are  cited,  such  as,  "  Dost 
not  thou  fear  God,  seeing  thou  art  in  the  same  [condem- 
nation] damnation,"  &c.,  in  proof  of  this  position.  In 
reply  to  this,  I  freely  acknowledge  that  .the  three  words, 
Kpivo),  Kpcfia,  and  Kplacg  {_/tTind,  hrima,  krisis']  usually  mean 
less  than  eternal  condemnation.  Our  second  principle  (B) 
of  interpretation  applies  here.^ 

The  literal  sense  of  the  verb  krmd  is  to  separate,  to 
discriminate  between,  and  hence  to  judge  in  regard  to, 
and  hence  to  condemn  (to  announce  the  result  of  an  ad- 
verse judgment).  Sometimes  in  the  New  Testament  it 
intends  merely  a  mental  conclusion;  as,  "If  ye  have 
judged  me  to  be  faithful,"^  &c.  "Thou  hast  rightly 
judged,"^  &c.  Very  often  it  means  a  decision,  as  of  a 
court;  as,  "Judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel,"^ 
"Sittest  thou  to  judge  me  after  the  law,"^  «&c.  The 
nouns  which  take  their  meaning  from  the  verb,  follow  it  in 
these  respects.  But  sometimes,  both  verb  and  nouns  are 
so  placed  as  to  force  a  sterner  seifse  upon  them.  Thus, 
the  verb  in  the  text,  ' '  God  shall  send  them  strong  de- 
lusion, that  they  should  believe  a  lie,  that  they  all  might 

1  Mr.  Thayer's  "  Sermon,"  p^  18.  2  See  p.  25. 

3  Acts  xvi.  15.  4  Luke  vii.  43. 

6  Matthew  xix.  28.  6  Acts  xxiii.  3. 


118  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

be  damned  who  believed  not  the  truth,  but  had  pleasure  in 
unrighteousness,"^  &c. ;  while  it  does  not  necessarily 
imply  eternal  exclusion  from  heaven,  and  would  not  teach 
it  alone,  still  does  accord  with  that  teaching,  when  estab- 
lished from  other  Scripture,  better  than  with  any  milder 
idea.  So  the  nouns  —  and  especially  that  most  often 
rendered  "damnation"  in  our  version  [krisis]  —  are 
sometimes  so  placed  as  to  make  any  trivial  intent  impos- 
sible; as,  "The  resuiTection  of  damnation. ^ ^  "^  "How 
can  ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell  ?  "  ^  "  He  that  shall 
blaspheme  against  the  Holy  Ghost  hath  never  forgiveness ; 
but  is  in  danger  oi  eternal  damnation.'"^  A  "fearful 
looking  for  of  yz<cZ^/??e?i^  and  fiery  indignation,"^  &c.  I 
am  not  anxious  that  the  Greek  word  should  be  translated 
here  "  damnation"  instead  of  "judgment;  "  the  latter  is 
—  in  the  connection  —  quite  as  fearful,  and  the  mere 
assertion  that  it  often  (nay,  almost  always)  means  a  mere 
judgment  of  the  intellect,  or  a  petty  decree  of  some  court, 
does  no  more  free  it  from  the  alarming  sense  which  its 
gravest  use  in  these  cases  puts  upon  it,  than  the  fact  that 
the  English  verb  "hang,"  in  nine  hundred  and  ninety- 
nine  cases  out  of  every  thousand  of  its  use,  implies  the 
mere  harmless  suspension  of  a  coat  upon  a  nail,  or  some 
kindred  act,  settles  it  that  it  never  means  to  kill  by  suffo- 
cation. 

1  2  Tliess.  ii.  12.  2  John  v.  29. 

3  JIatt.  xxiii.  33.  ■*  Mark  iii.  29. 

5  Ileb.  X.  27. 


NO  OBJECTION  TO  THIS  TESTIMONY.       119 

(d.)  It  is  further  declared  that  the  terms  "save," 
"salvation,"  &c.  do  not  carry  the  sense  of  deliverance 
fi'om  eternal  punishment ;  and  that,  therefore,  so  far  as 
they  are  concerned,  our  argument  fails."  ^  But  the  verb 
(TwCw  [505;o]  has  the  original  significance  of  "  delivering," 
"making  safe."  As  to  what  it  makes  safe  from,  its 
usage  must  show.  So  the  nouns  a(^Tr]p  and  au-rjpla  \_soter, 
soteria]  derived  from  it,  mean  "Saviour"  and  "salva- 
tion;" from  what  —  their  application  must  decide. 
Sometimes  the  verb  is  applied  to  the  deliverance  from 
temporal  disaster  or  death ;  ^  sometimes  to  deliverance  from 
sin;^  and  sometimes  it  goes  down  to  a  deeper  stratum 
of  thought,  and  iraphes  deliverance  from  eternal  judgment ; 
as,  "We  shall  be  saved  from  wrath  through  him;"* 
"  A  sweet  savor  of  Christ  in  them  that  are  saved,  and 
in  them  that  perish  ;  "  ^  "  Shall  save  a  soul  from  death,"  ^ 
&c.  The  same  usage  holds  of  the  nouns,  as  well.  And 
it  is  important  to  remember  in  the  critical  examination  of 
such  words  as  these,  that  the  Jews,  in  whose  hearing 
Christ  spoke,  confessedly  must  have  interpreted  them  as 
havmg  reference  to  that  eternal  death  in  hell,  which  they 
believed  to  be  the  portion  of  the  sinner  ;  and  Christ  knew 
that  they  would  so  understand  them ;  so  that  the  inference 
is  unavoidable  that  he  intended  to  allow  them  to  be  mis- 

1  Mr.  Thayer's  "  Sermon,"  p.  19.  2  Matt.  viii.  25  ;  ix.  21,  &c. 

3  Matt.  i.  21;  Acts  xvi.  30,  &c. 

4  Eom.  V.  9.  5  2  Cor.  ii.  15.  6  James  v.  20. 


120  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

led  by  his  words,  or  tbat  —  in  these  passages  —  he  did 
refer  to  salvation  from  eternal  death. 

One  way  of  putting  this  objection  deserves  a  moment's 
consideration.  The  Rev.  Mr.  Thayer,  in  his  criticism 
upon  this  argument  when  published  some  years  ago  in 
abbreviated  form,  says,  that  the  words  translated  "  save  " 
and  "  salvation  "  occur  one  hundred  and  fifty-seven  times 
in  the  New  Testament,  and  that  one  hundred  and  three  of 
these  instances  clearly  refer  to  ' '  spiritual  or  gospel  salva- 
tion. And  yet,"  he  says,  "in  not  one  of  these  texts  is 
it  said  that  Christ  came  to  save  the  world,  or  any  part 
of  it,  from  endless  punishment,  or  even  from  '  hell.'  But 
it  is  said  repeatedly,  and  emphatically,  that  he  came  ex- 
pressly to  save  us  from  something  quite  different  from 
this;  [e.g.  from  'sins,'  'iniquities,'  'the  present  evil 
world,'  &c.]  How  shall  we  explain  this,  if  '  salvation 
through  Christ '  means  what  Mr.  Dexter  assumes  ?  What 
shall  we  say  of  those,  who,  speaking  by  the  Spirit  of  God 
in  exposition  of  gospel  salvation,  never  state  the  case  as  it 
really  is,  but  spend  all  their  words  on  matters  of  com- 
paratively trifling  importance  ?  "  ^ 

It  seems  to  be  a  sufficient  reply  to  this,  to  say,  that,  in 
the  judgment  of  the  Saviour  and  his  apostles,  "  sins," 
"iniquities,"  and  "this  present  evil  world,"  &c.  were 
far  from  being  "  matters  of  comparatively  trifling  impor- 
tance," and  that  salvation  from  them  had  —  in  their  view 

1  Jlr.  Thayer's  "  Sermon,*'  p.  21. 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       121 

—  the  same  relation  to  salvation  from  hell  which  deliver- 
ance from  a  cause  has  to  security  from  its  ejffects. 

(e.)  Another  favorite  objection  by  which  the  force  of 
the  testimony  of  the  Word  of  God  on  this  subject  is 
sought  to  be  evaded,  is  by  the  allegation  that  the  words 
"sheol"  and  "gehenna"  do  not  imply  future  punish- 
ment ;  but  that  the  former  simply  means  the  place  of 
departed  souls,  and  the  latter  the  valley  of  Hinnom. 
With  regard  to  the  former,  as  it  has  been  already  referred 
to,  ^  and  as  its  exact  sense  has  but  slight  bearing  upon  the 
question  of  the  attitude  of  the  New  Testament  toward  the 
subject  under  discussion,  I  will  not  take  space  here  to 
discuss  it.  As  to  the  latter,  it  will  be  perceived  at  once, 
by  recalling  the  second  principle  (B),  set  down  for  the 
interpretation  of  the  Bible,  ^  that  the  question  must  be 
one  partly  of  general  Jewish  usage,  and  partly  of  the  spe- 
cific usage  of  the  New  Testament.  It  is,  of  course,  conceded 
that  the  original  application  of  the  word  was  to  the  valley 
of  Hinnom,  as  it  was  simply  a  transfusion  into  the 
Greek  lano-aao-e  of  the  Hebrew  words  CHH  i^'^S  [  Ge-Hin- 
9zom],  meaning  the  valley  of  Hinnom ;  thus  constructing 
the  compound  Greek  word  yeewa  [^eenna]  exactly  as  the 
word  baptize  was  transferred  to  the  English  from  the 
Greek.  But  the  fact  that  its  primary  meaning  was  thus 
local  and  literal  does  not,  of  itself,  settle  it,  that  it  never 
took  on  a  deeper  metaphorical  significance.     That  is  a 

1  See  p.  52.  2  See  p.  25. 


122  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

question  to  be  decided  by  the  evidence.  An  orator  may 
speak  of  New  England  as  the  land  of  Bunker  Hill.  Lit- 
erally interpreted,  his  words  merely  assert  a  geographical 
fact.  But  that  does  not  prove  that  he  has  not  idealized 
the  fact,  and  did  not  intend  by  it  to  designate  New  Eng- 
land as  the  spot  where  freedom  conquered-^r  herself  a 
home.  Whether  he  did  so,  or  not,  in  any  particular  in- 
stance, must  be  a  question  of  fact,  to  be  decided  by  the 
evidence. 

Turning,  then,  to  the  question  of  fact,  I  suggest  as 
conclusive  in  proof  that  the  word  Gehenna  was  used  by 
Christ  in  the  advanced  and  metaphorical  sense  of  "  the 
place  of  future  punishment,"  the  following  considera- 
tions :  — 

i.  It  is  undeniable  that  long  before  the  time  of  Christ 
the  place  Gehenna  had  been  idealized  by  the  teachers  of 
the  Jews,  and  its  putrescent  heaps  of  decaying  garbage, 
eaten  by  the  worms,  and  burned  by  the  ever-fed  fires  de- 
signed to  purify  the  air,  had  been  seized  upon  by  them  to 
convey  to  the  popular  mind  the  horror  of  that  hell  which 
awaits  the  wicked  in  the  future  world ;  so  that  the  use  of 
the  word,  without  qualification,  in  speech  susceptible  of 
that  sense,  would  naturally  have  conveyed  to  any  listening 
Jew  of  our  Saviour's  time  the  idea,  not  of  Hinnom,  but  of 
hell.^     If,  then,  he  used  it  in  that  connection,  without  re- 

1  "  From  the  depth  and  narrowness  of  the  gorge,  and,  perhaps  its  eve:-- 
burning  lires,  as  well  as  from  its  being  the  receptacle  of  all  sorts  of 


NO  OBJECTION  TO  THIS  TESTIMONY.       123 

buke  or  hint  of  any  other  and  lesser  intent,  if  he  were  not 
deceiving  the  people,  he  certainly  did  design  that  they 
should  receive  his  words  as  intending  future  punishment.^ 

ii.  He  used  the  word  eleven  times;  seven  times  in 
the  record  of  Matthew,^  three  times  in  those  of  Mark,^  and 
once  in  that  of  Luke.*  In  every  instance  there  is  no  im- 
plication to  forbid  the  inference,  but  every  evidence  that 
he  intended  to  be  understood  as  speaking  of  hell  and  not 
of  Hinnom  —  of  the  future  condemnation  of  lost  souls.  It 
is  incredible,  under  the  circumstances,  that  he  should 
not  have  been  so  understood.  It  is  more  incredible  that 
under  such  circumstances  he  should  have  so  used  the  word, 
if  he  did  not  believe  in  hell,  and  did  not  mean  to  warn  men 
against  it. 

The^only  remaining  instance  of  the  use  of  the  term  in  the 
New  Testament  is  in  the  epistle  of  James. ^  But  that  in 
no  sense  modifies,  but  every  way  confirms,^  this  judgment, 

putrifying  matter,  and  all  that  defiled  the  holy  city,  it  became  in  later 
times,  the  image  of  the  place  of  everlasting  punishment,  '  where  their 
worm  dieth  not,  and  their  fire  is  not  quenched,'  in  which  the  Talmudists 
place  the  mouth  of  hell." 

1  See  Lange's  Comment,  i.  114.    SmitWs  Diet,  of  the  Bible,  ii.  G61. 

2  Matthew  v.  22,  29,  30;  x.  28;  xviii.  9;  xxiii.  15,  33. 

3  Mark  ix.  43,  45,  47.  4  Luke  xii.  5.  5  James  iii.  6. 

6  Alford's  Comment  on  this  verse  is  "  These  words  are  not  to  be  ex- 
plained away— as  Theile—'igne  foedissimo  acfunestissimo'  ;  such  is 
not  St.  James's  teaching  (compare  chap.  iv.  7,  where  the  devil,  as  a 
tempter  to  evil,  is  personally  contrasted  with  God),  but  are  to  be  liter- 
ally taken.  It  is  the  Devil,  for  whom  hell  is  prepared,  that  is  the  temp- 
ter and  instigator  of  the  habitual  sins  of  the  tongue."  Vol.  iv.  pt. 
i.  306. 


124  .         VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

that  the  real  meaning  of  the  word  Gehenna,  at  that  date, 
under  such  ch'cumstances  of  use  as  those  in  which  Christ 
and  the  Apostles  lived  and  taught,  was  that  which  our 
common  English  version  faithfully  conveys.^ 

Nor  does  the  objection,  that  if  our  Saviour  and  the  Apos- 
tles believed  in  future  punishment,  and  intended  to  teach 
it  by  the  use  of  the  word  Gehenna,  they  would  have  used 
that  word,  and  so  proclaimed  the  doctrine  a  great  deal 
oftener,^  avail  to  destroy  the  fact,  that  when  they  did  use  it, 
they  meant  future  punishment  by  it.  The  word  paradise 
is  used  only  three  times  in  the  New  Testament,  and  only 
once  by  Christ ;  —  does  that  prove  that  it  does  not  mean  the 
abode  of  the  justified,  and  that  Christ  and  the  Apostles 
did  not  believe  that  any  will  be  justified?  The  word 
holiness  is  used  only  thirteen  times  in  the  New  Tester 
ment,  and  never  by  Christ ; — are  we  thence  to  infer  that  he 
did  not  have  faith  in,  and  desire,  hohness  for  men  ?  The 
word  purity  is  used  only  twice  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
never  by  Christ ;  —  are  we  to  understand  that  he  and  his 
followers  did  not  believe  in,  and  labor  to  promote  that  vir- 
tue on  the  earth  ?  The  absurdity  of  such  reasoning  might 
be  shown  by  scores  of  similar  examples.  Our  only  safe 
course  is  to  take  what  the  Bible  does  say,  —  not  what  we 
think  it  ought  to  have  said,  —  and  deal  honestly  and  honor- 
ably with  that ;  then  we  may  be  made  wise  unto  salvation. 

1  Notice  what  is  said  on  this  subject  by  Thompson  in  The  Land  and 
the  Book,  ii.  494-8;  Hohinson' a  Biblical  Researches,  i.  404;  and  Physical 
Geography  of  the  Holy  Land,  100.  2  Jir.  Thayer's  Sermon,  29. 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       125 

(f.)  A  further  strenuous  effort  has  been  made  to  nullify 
the  testimony  of  the  Gospel  in  regard  to  future  punishment, 
by  the  assertion  that  the  words  "  eternal,"  "  everlasting," 
"forever,"  &c.,  do  not  intend  unlimited  duration.  Here, 
as  before,  the  artifice  is  to  press  the  point  that  the  words 
sometimes  mean  less  than  an  eternal  duration,  and  thence 
to  argue  that  they  never  mean  that.  Thus  Mr.  Thayer 
says,^  "  '  I  will  give  thee  the  land  of  Canaan  for  an  everlast- 
ing possession,'  and  the  covenant  of  circumcision  is  called 
*  An  everlasting  covenant ; '  and  the  priesthood  of  Aaron 
is  called  '  an  everlasting  priesthood,'  and  yet  the  Jews 
were  driven  out  of  the  land  of  Canaan,  and  the  covenant 
of  cu'cumcision  was  abolished,  and  the  priesthood  of  Aaron 
set  aside,  by  God  himself,  more  than  eighteen  hundred 
years  ago  !  Now,  if  Mr.  Dexter  insists  that  this  woi-d  neces- 
sarily, or  by  usage,  means  endless,  then  he  insists  that  God 
has  brol£en  his  promise  to  the  Jews  three  several  times. 
But,  as  the  apostle  says  '  it  is  impossible  for  God  to  lie,' 
the  only  conclusion  is  that  everlasting  does  not  mean  end- 
less." 

I  have  already  referred  to  this  question  of  the  sense  of 
these  words  of  duration.^  I  will  only  add  here,  as  very 
pertinent  and  conclusive,  an  extract  from  a  valuable  work 
by  Prof.  Bartlett,  now  of  the  Chicago  Theological  Semi- 
nary.    He  says  : "  — 

1  Mr.  Thayer's  Sermon,  p.  22. 

2  See  page  74.  3  Modern  Universalism,  82. 


126  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

"  Universalists  make  much  parade  of  a  few  instances  in 
which  the  Hebrew  term  for  '  everlasting '  designates  some- 
thing less  than  absolute  eternity,  as  '  the  everlasting  hills.' 
But  the  phrase,  when  appHed  to  future  time,  always  denotes 
the  longest  duratmi  of  which  its  subject  is  capable.  '  Ever- 
lasting hills '  are  those  which  will  continue  to  the  end  of  the 
world.  '  He  shall  serve  forever,'  i.  e.  during  the  longest  pe- 
riod of  which  he  is  capable,  his  whole  life.  Hannah  devoted 
Samuel  to  the  Lord  '  forever  ; '  i.  e.  he  was  never  to  return 
to  private  hfe.  '  An  ordinance  forever '  is  one  which  lasts 
through  the  longest  possible  time,  ^.  e.  the  whole  dispensation 
of  which  it  is  a  part.  Such  cases,  few  in  number,  do  not 
contravene  in  spirit  the  scores  of  instances  in  which  it  sig- 
nifies absolute  eternity  —  the  original  and  prope?-  sense  of  the 
term. 

"  The  Greek  adjective  ti'anslated  '  everlasting '  aluvioc 
[aidnios']  when  applied  to  future  duration,  in  all  cases  (ex- 
cepting, for  the  time,  its  application  to  punishment)  denotes 
an  endless  period.  It  is  used  sixty-six  times ;  twice  in  rela- 
tion to  God  and  his  glory ;  fifty-one  times  concerning  the 
happiness  of  the  righteous ;  six  times  of  miscellaneous  sub- 
jects, but  with, the  plain  signification  'endless;'  and  seye/i 
times  concerning  future  punishment.^  The  phrase  trans- 
lated 'forever,'  ek  tov  alC>va  [eis  tan  aidna']  with  its  plural 
form,  uniformly  denotes  endless  duration,  and  is  employed 
sixty-one  times,  six  of  which  relate  to  future  punishment. 
The  phrase  '  forever  and  ever '  dg  tovc  aluvag  rcbv  aluvuv 
[^els  tons  aionas  ton  aionon']  also  invariably  denotes  endless 
duration.  It  occurs  twenty-one  times,  eighteen  of  which 
relate  to  the  continuance  of  the  perfections,  glory,  govern- 
ment, and  praise  of  God  ;  one  to  the  happiness  of  the  right- 
eous ;  and  two  to  future  punishmentl^  Plain  men  can  under- 
stand such  facts." 

1  StitarVs  Essays,  47.  2  StuarVs  Essays,  36. 


NO  OBJECTION  TO  THIS  TESTIMONY.       127 

(2.)  But  it  is  farther  affirmed  that,  even  if  these 
texts  which  have  been  examined,  or  some  of  them,  do 
fairly  teach  the  doctrine  of  future  punishment,  there  are 
others  which  render  the  opposite  conclusion  necessary. 

The  texts  mainly  relied  on  in  this  connection,  are  those 
which  affirm  the  relation  of  the  atonement  of  Christ  to  the 
salvation  of  men  in  very  broad  terms;  such  as,  "He  is 
the  propitiation  for  our  sins ;  and  not  for  ours  only,  but  also 
for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world;  "  ^  "  Who  gave  himself 
a  ransom  for  all,^^  &c.  ^  '*  Who  is  the  Saviour  of  all 
men,  especially  of  those  that  believe,"  &c.^  But  it  is 
only  needful  to  suggest  here  the  recalling  to  mind  of  our 
third  principle  (C.)  ^  of  a  sound  interpretation  of  the 
Scriptures.  They  must  be  presumed  to  be  self-consistent, 
and  their  sense  gathered  accordingly.  And  those  many 
texts  which  announce,  in  the  most  distinct  and  unambigu- 
ous terms,  the  dependence  of  personal  salvation  upon  per- 
sonal faith,  and  which  explain,  that  while  Christ  died  for  all 
men,  in  the  sense  that  he  thereby  made  it  possible  for  all  to 
be  saved  if  they  will  accept  of  his  conditions  of  salvation, 

1 1  John  ii.  2.  2  1  Timothy  ii.  6. 

3  1  Timothy  iv.  10.  "  This  is  what  St.  Paul  declares,  when  he  says 
that  God  is  '  the  saviour  of  all  men,'  that  is,  in  desire  and  design. 
This  is  his  primary  predestination.  But  then  the  Apostle  adds, 
^specially  of  them  that  believe.^  In  desire  he  predestinates  all  men  to 
salvation  ;  and  he  predestinates  the  f aithful  in  act."—  Wordsivorth 
New  Test.  ii.  198. 

4  See  page  27. 


128  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

they  yet  remain  free  to  reject  bis  work,  and  that  in  point 
of  fact,  many  do  reject  it,  are  sufficient  to  foreclose  all  the 
conclusions  of  Universalism  from  this  branch  of  argument. 
There  is,  then,  no  firm  ground  in  this  direction.  All 
these  efforts  to  resist  the  natural  force  of  the  language  of 
Scripture  are  as  futile  in  their  result,  as  they  are  unwar- 
ranted in  their  processes.  No  man  —  not  even  the  warm- 
est advocate  of  the  Universalist  theory  —  can  deny  that 
the  weight  of  sound  disinterested  scholarship  is  against  all 
such  endeavors  to  empty  the  language  of  the  Scriptures  of 
the  doctrine  of  the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked.  It 
was  meant  to  teach  it.  It  does  teach  it.  To  take  the 
ground  that  it  does  not  teach  it,  is  to  take  the  ground  that 
it  is  impossible  for  it  to  be  taught  through  the  Greek  lan- 
guage —  for  there  are  no  more  absolute  declarations  of 
never-ending  eternity  in  that  language  than  those  which  it 
applies  again  and  again  to  this  subject,  —  a  conclusion  to 
which  no  competent  scholar  in  the  full  consciousness  of 
what  he  is  doing  can  come.  So  that  the  only  logical  pro- 
cess possible  to  that  denier  of  the  doctrine  of  future  pun- 
ishment who  is  honest,  intelligent,  and  a  thorough  student 
of  the  original  tongues  of  the  Bible,  is  that  which  was 
adopted  by  Theodore  Parker,  when  he  said,  "It  is  quite 
clear  that  Jesus  taught  the  doctrine  of  eternal  damnation, 
if  the  evangelists  are  to  be  treated^  as  inspired.  I  can 
understand  his  language  in  no  other  way;  "^  namely,  to 

1  See  page  77. 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       129 

admit  that  the  Bible  does  teach  the  doctrine,  and  then 
deny  that,  so  teaching,  it  can  be  inspired.  A  persistent 
Universahst,  therefore,  must  be  faithless  to  his  own  logical 
faculty,  not  to  be  an  infidel. 

II.  But  granting  that  the  Bible  does,  by  all  the  ordi- 
nary principles  of  interpretation,  seem  to  teach  the 
future  endless  punishment  of  the  iviched,  it  is  further 
objected  that  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  accept  it  as  really 
so  teaching,  —  or  to  accept  the  doctrine,  if  it  be  so  taught, 
—  because  it  is  overruled  by  other  considerations  render- 
ing any  such  belief  impossible. 

Among  the  many  suggestions  of  this  description,  I 
refer  here  to  six,  as  including  all  of  special  moment. 

(1.)  We  are  told  that  it  is  impossible  that  men  can 
really  believe  the  doctrine  of  the  future  endless  punish- 
ment of  the  impenitejit,  and  live  in  any  peace,  not  to  say 
happiness.  It  is  said,  "  If  it  were  thoroughly  credited  and 
acted  upon,  all  the  business  of  the  world  would  cease,  and 
the  human  race  would  soon  die  out."  ^  It  is  said  of 
the  ordinary  believer  of  it,  "Either  his  professed  faith  is 
an  unreality  to  him,  or  else  he  is  as  selfish  as  a  demon, 
and  as  hard-hearted  as  the  nether  millstone.  If  he  really 
believed  the  doctrine,  and  had  a  human  heart,  he  must 
feel  it  to  be  his  duty  to  deny  himself  every  indulgence, 
and  give  his  whole  future  and  earnings  to  the  missionary 
fund.     And  when  he  had  given  all  else,  he  ought  to  give 

1  Alger's  Doctrine  of  a  Future  Life,  048. 


130  VERDICT  OF  REASOW. 

himself,  and  go  to  Pagan  lands,  proclaiming  the  means 
of  grace  until  his  last  breath.  If  he  does  not  that  he  is 
inexcusable."^  "No  more  children  should  be  brought 
into  the  world  :  it  is  a  duty  to  let  the  race  die  out  and 
cease." ^  "God  ought  not  to  have  let  Adam  have  any 
children."  ^  "If  the  doctrine  in  question  be  true,  it  must 
destroy  the  happiness  of  the  saved,  and  fill  all  heaven 
with  sympathetic  woe,"  &c.,  &c.  ^ 

All  this  is  plausible  at  the  first  glance,  but  a  little  cool 
reflection  will  show  that  it  has  no  real  logical  force. 

In  the  first  place,  God  has  mercifully  shielded  the  sensi- 
tiveness of  the  soul  —  as  he  has  that  of  the  body  by  tough 
and  insensible  enclosino;  interments  —  from  that  immedi- 
ate  and  constant  contact  with  outward  disagreeabilities 
which  —  if  their  power  were  not  thus  deadened  —  would 
be  perpetual  torment.  The  Rev.  Mr.  Alger  unquestion- 
ably has  a  kind  heart  and  a  sympathizing  spirit,  and  would 
be  easily  moved  by  the  sight  or  consciousness  of  suffering 
in  others.  And  there  unquestionably  are  at"  every  mo- 
ment of  the  twenty-four  hours  of  every  day  of  every  year 
within  the  sweep  of  a  half-mile  radius  from  his  residence 
on  Temple  Street,  in  Boston,  cases  enough  of  poverty, 
wretchedness,  and  abandoned  guilt,  accompanied  by  the  ex- 
treme of  both  physical  and  mental  anguish,  to  keep  him 
perpetually  filled  with  sympathetic  agony,  were  he  fully 
conscious  of  the  facts.     Will  he  then  deny  the  truth  of  the 

1  Alger's  Doctrine  of  a  Future  Life,  544.  2  ibid.  545. 

3  Ibid.  54.").  4  •Ihid.  540. 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       131 

"  doctrine  "  that  there  is  this  suffering  actually  around  him  ; 
or,  while  believing  it  in  all  honesty,  is  his  jDrofessed  faith  in  it 
so  far  an  unreality  to  him  that  he  is  able  to  eat,  sleep,  and 
enjoy  life,  and  increase  the  number  of  children  exposed  to 
all  this  earthly  wretchedness,  and  so  —  on  his  own  theory 
—  prove  himself  to  be  "  as  selfish  as  a  demon,  and  as  hard- 
hearted as  the  nether  millstone  "  ?  There  seems  to  be  a 
practical  flaw  somewhere  in  his  argument.  The  fact  that 
we  all  of  us  in  the  North  have  been  able  to  live  mostly  in 
great  general  comfort,  and  even  happiness,  while  thousands 
of  our  fathers,  brothers,  and  sons  have  been  starving  to 
death  in  Southern  prisons,  under  circumstances  of  fiendish 
atrocity,  unheard  of  before  in  the  history  of  the  world,  and 
impossible  in  this  nineteenth  century  except  as  the  fruits  of 
that  petrifaction  of  the  human  heart  which  the  barbarism 
of  slavery  engenders,  — does  neither  prove,  on  the  one  hand, 
that  we  are  monsters,  nor,  on  the  other,  that  the  asserted 
horrors  of  Andersonville,  and  Belle  Isle,  and  elsewhere, 
are  not  real,  and  that  we  do  not  believe  them.  There  is  a 
flaw  in  the  argument. 

And,  in  the  second  place,  there  is  a  view  of  the  subject 
of  the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked,  which  even  the 
most  tender-hearted  of  the  good  can  accept  as,  if  not  a 
comfortable,  at  least  an  endurable  one.  It  is  the  consid- 
eration that  the  lost  are  in  the  hands  of  a  Being  who  is 
both  infinitely  just  and  infinitely  kind ;  so  that,  however 
they  may  suffer,  and  in  whatever  way  they  may  be  dis- 


132  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

posed  of,  it  is  impossible  tliat  any  thing  should  happen  to 
them,  which  they  do  not  deserve,  not  merely,  but  which  is 
unkind  to  them,  which  is  not  for  their  best  good,  and  the 
best  good  of  the  universe,  and  which,  however  it  may  par- 
take of  severity,  will  yet  be  the  result  of  severity  guided 
by  infinite  kindness.  Such  considerations  assist  those  who 
truly  love  God,  to  acquiesce  in  all,  even  the  most  myste- 
rious of  his  ways.  And  to  affirm  that  the  abolition  of  fu- 
ture punishment  is  essential  to  the  eternal  happiness 
of  the  good,  is  to  affirm  that  the  good  can  not  be  eternally 
happy,  without  making  it  a  condition  of  their  happiness 
that  God's  will  should  not  be  done  in  earth  as  it  is  in  hea- 
ven, which  is  an  incredible  supposition.  So  that,  to  take 
the  ground  that  the  clear  doctrine  of  the  Bible  on  this  sub- 
ject can  not  be  received  by  us,  on  any  such  ground  as  this, 
is  simply  absui-d. 

(2.)  We  are  told  that  it  is  impossible  for  the  human 
mind  to  believe  that  the  persistently  impenitent  will  be 
eternally  punished  in  hell,  because  the  end  of  all  punish- 
7nent  is  restorative,  and  any  such  punishment  ivould,  there- 
fore, defeat  its  oivn  end.  But  this  is  pure  assumption, 
unsustained  either  by  the  sound  judgment  of  men,  or  by 
the  Word  of  God.  The  primary  intent  of  punishment  is 
the  general  safety  and  welfare  of  society  and  the  vindica- 
tion of  the  insulted  majesty  of  the  violated  law ;  the  resto- 
ration of  the  offiinder  by  the  punitive  process  to  virtue  and 
obedience  is  often  present  indeed,  —  always,  when  possi- 


NO  OBJECTION  TO  THIS  TESTIMONY.       133 

ble  —  but  always  as  a  subordinate  element.  It  has  no 
place  at  all  in  the  legal  idea  of  penalty.  This  is  the  com- 
mon judgment  of  the  world  as  expressed  in  its  treatises  on 
law  and  government. 

This  is  no  doubt  the  truth  so  far  as  the  matter  is  within 
our  purview;  but  as  —  from  the  nature  of  the  case  — 
only  God  can  know  what  are  all  the  designs  which  he  has 
in  view  in  punishing  persistent  and  incorrigible  sin ;  and 
what  is  the  relative  rank  of  these  designs  among  them- 
selves ;  it  is  very  clearly  a  most  unreasonable  step  for  ns 
to  assume  that  he  has  only  one  intent  in  punishment,  and 
that  that  one  is  incompatible  with  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible 
in  regard  to  hell,  and  so  that  doctrine  is  one  which  —  Bi- 
ble or  no  Bible  —  it  is  impossible  for  a  sane  mind  to  re- 
ceive ! 

(3.)  We  are  told  that  it  is  impossible  that  the  doctrine 
of  the  future  punishment  of  sin  can  he  true,  even  though 
the  Bible  does  seem  to  reveal  it,  because  it  is  palpably  utv- 
just.  This  objection  takes  two  forms  :  that  the  sins  of  a 
short  life  can  not  deserve  eternal  punishment ;  and  that, 
even  if  they  do  deserve  it,  man  has  not  been  duly  notified 
of  his  danger,  and  so  it  is  unjust  to  punish  him  in  that 
dreadful  manner. 

(a.)  Is  it  true  that  the  sins  of  a  human  life —  short  or 
long  —  can  not  deserve  eternal  punishment  ?  In  reply,  I 
urge  :  — 

i.  It  lies  on  the  face  of  the  subject  that  it  is  impossi- 


134  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

ble  for  us  to  know  that  they  do  not.  We  may  think  so ; 
it  may  seem  so  to  us ;  but  then  we  are  compelled  to  confess 
that  we  are  looking  only  at  the  outside  of  the  subject,  and 
looking  at  it  only  in  its  most  trivial  relations.  Is  it  safe 
for  us,  then,  to  say  that  we  knoiu  that  not  to  be  true,  which 
God  says  is  true  with  regard  to  it  ?  Suppose  God,  who 
built  the  earth,  should  tell  us  that  there  is  a  great  diamond 
weighing  a  ton,  in  its  exact  centre,  around  which  its  whole 
mass  is  concreted  and  compacted  ;  would  it  be  safe  for  us 
to  say,  ' '  I  have  bored  down  an  artesian  well  a  thousand 
feet,  and  have  gone  down  in  a  mine  a  thousand  feet  more, 
and  saw  no  signs  of  the  diamond ;  therefore  I  know  that 
it  is  not  there  "  ? 

ii.  It  is  clear  that  sin  is  the  expression  in  act  of  the 
selfish  disposition  which  is  resident  within,  which  is  in  re- 
bellion against  God ;  and  that  its  demerit  is  to  be  measured 
not  by  itself  abstractly,  but  by  its  relation  to  that  dispo- 
sition, so  that  it  is  surely  abstractly  possible  even  for  one 
sin  to  deserve  eternal  punishment.  Dr.  Parkman  was  hung 
for  one  murder.  Nobody  felt  that  it  was  important  to  prove 
a  succession  of  acts  of  homicide,  in  order  to  establish  his 
ill-desert.  One  such  indication  of  a  selfishness  within, 
which  has  grown  to  such  a  ravening  power,  that  it  stops  at 
nothing  to  gain  its  ends,  is  felt  so  fully  to  interpret  the 
character,  as  to  jusCify  the  extremest  action  which  the  case 
demands.  The  Bible  does  not  make  the  question  one  of 
how  much  sin,  but  of  what  kind  of  a  character  that  sin 


NO   OBJECTION  TO  THIS  TESTIMONY.       135 

reveals;  and  it  says,  *'  The  wages  of  sin  is  death."  Its 
measure  of  the  guilt  and  doom  of  human  offenses  is  not 
mathematical  but  spii'itual ;  not  "  so  many  sins  —  so  much 
punishment ;  "  but  "  such  a  character  (revealed  by  these 
sins)  must  necessarily,  for  the  general  good,  and  even 
safety,  be  treated  in  such  a  manner." 

Sin  is  the  worst  thing.  It  is  the  deadliest  enemy  of  all 
true  peace,  prosperity,  and  happiness.  Its  essence  is  sel- 
fishness, which  would  gather  all  into,  and  sacrifice  all  to, 
one ;  while  the  essence  of  all  that  is  good  and  glad  and 
gracious,  is  so  to  manage  one,  as  to  bless  all.  Sin  puts 
"I "  as  above  all,  and  would  sacrifice  every  thing — even 
God  himself —  to  its  single  personality.  There  is,  there- 
fore, no  sucb  possibility  as  peaceably  living  with  it  in  the 
universe.  If  it  will  not  yield  and  be  willing  to  share  .with 
others,  and  cease  its  offense  to  all,  the  only  course  left,  for 
peace  to  the  universe,  is  to  shut  it  up  where  it  can  not 
absorb  any  longer.  God  can  not  be  a  good  being,  if  he 
do  not  hate  the  worst  thing  ;  can  not  be  a  good  ruler,  if 
he  do  not  shut  it  up  in  some  safe  prison-house  when  it  is 
demonstrated  to  be  incorrigible. 

iii.  As  the  question  is,  after  all,  with  the  sinner  rather 
than  with  his  sin  —  when  he  proves  incorrigible,  and 
will  not  repent,  but  persistently  keeps  on  growing  worse 
every  day,  and  every  day  demonstrating  more  and  more 
clearly  that  the  happiness  of  others,  and  the  general  good, 
requires  his  seclusion  from  his  fellows,  so  that  he  can  not 


136  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

gratify  his  desire  to  harm  them  for  his  own  benefit,  until 
his  body  is  worn  out,  and  he  can  not  stay  any  longer  in 
this  world,  what  shall  God  do  with  him  ?  Where  shall 
he  go  ?  If  he  compelled  human  government  to  keep  him 
constantly  in  prison  here,  because  the  moment  he  was  let 
out  of  prison  he  went  to  robbing  and  murdering,  so  that 
it  was  impossible  for  society  to  live  with  him  free ;  will 
it  be  safe  for  God  to  let  him  be  free  in  the  other  world  ? 
If  earth  could  not  bear  him,  except  as  a  convict,  can 
heaven  endure  him  ?  What  can  God  do  with  him  —  since 
the  omnipotence  of  his  grace  (which  never  forces  free 
agency)  long  ago  exhausted  itself  in  vain  efforts  to  redeem 
him  —  but  send  him  to  the  prison  of  the  universe,  and, 
since  he  will  eternally  keep  on  sinning,  and  so  keep  on 
more,  and  more  deserving  to  be  incarcerated,  what  can 
God  do  but  make  his  stay  there  eternaU  And  is  it  for  us 
to  say  that  such  a  man,  eternally  sinning,  does  not  de- 
serve eternal  punishment  ?  IMore  than  this,  is  it  safe  for 
us  to  reject  the  Bible,  and  say  that  the  eternal  punish- 
ment of  sin  which  it  reveals,  is  impossible  because  it 
never  can  be  just ! 

(b.)  But  it  is  urged  that*  if  the  eternal  punishment  of 
sin  ever  could  abstractly  be  just,  it  can  not  be  just  con- 
cretely in  any  particular  case,  because  men  have  not  been 
duly  notified.  But  this  can  only  mean  that  some  men 
have  not  been  "  duly  notified  ;  "  for  surely  all  who  have 
the  Bible  and  the  gospel  are  obliged  to  fight  their  way  to 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       137 

perdition  against  perpetual  urgencies,  if  they  are  lost. 
And  as  to  those  who  lived  before  the  revelation,  or  who 
have  since  lived  in  ignorance  of  it,  two  things  are  surely 
true,  viz.  (i.)  they  have  a  sufficient  "  notification  "  in  the 
light  of  nature,  if  they  use  it  aright ;  or  Paul  was  wrong 
when,  speaking  by  inspiration,  he  declared  that  they  are 
"  without  excuse  ;  "  ^  and  (ii.)  they  are  in  the  hands  of 
infinite  justice,  administered  with  infinite  kindness ;  which 
has  laid  down  the  rule,  that  "  he  that  knew  not,  and  did 
commit  things  worthy  of  stripes,  shall  be  beaten  with  few 
stripes,"^ 

I  insist,  then,  that  the  doctrine  of  the  future  punishment 
of  the  incorrigibly  wicked,  is  so  far  from  being  so  unjust 
as  to  be  impossible  of  belief,  that  it  would  be  impossible 
for  us  to  believe  that  God  is  either  just  or  good,  as  the 
Ruler  of  the  universe,  if  it  were  not  true.  No  ruler  on 
earth  would  be  either  just  or  good  who  had  no  prison 
where  the  dangerous  should  be  confined  ;  and  there  is 
every  reason  to  judge  that  heaven  needs  its  prison-house 
even  more  than  earth,  since  it  is  the  law  of  human  na- 
ture that  "evil  men  and  seducers  shall  wax  worse  and 
worse," — a  law  which  disembodiment  can  not  annul,  if 
indeed  it  does  not  enhance  its  force. 

(4.)  It  is  further  urged  that  it  is  inipossihle  that 
the  doctrine  of  future  -punishment  can  he  true,  even  if 
the  Bible  does  assert  it,  because  there  will  be  a  probation 

1  Romans  i.  20.  2  Luke  xii.  48. 


138  VERDICT  OF  reason: 

in  the  next  world,  just  as  there  is  here,  and  those  who 
die  in  sin,  in  the  clearer  light  of  eternity,  will  repent 
and  so  all  he  saved.     But,  — 

(a.)  There  is  no  evidence,  of  any  sort,  that  there  will 
be  such  a  probation  ;  not  a  word  from  God,  from  Christ, 
from  any  prophet  or  apostle,  —  from  any  being  competent 
to  give  evidence,  —  that  there  will  be  such  a  probation  in 
the  future  vrorld. 

(b.)  Such  a  probation  would  be  unreasonable.  It  is 
needless,  because  this  probation  of  which  we  are  now  the 
subjects  is  enough,  if  rightly  used.  And  if  it  be  said  that 
there  ought  to  be  another,  in  kindness  to  those  who  have 
neglected  this;  then,  by  emphasis,  there  ought  to  be  still 
another,  for  those  who  should  neglect  the  second,  and  a 
fourth,  for  those  who  should  neglect  the  third,  and  so  on 
— ad  infinitum  ;  so  that,  to  take  the  ground  that  this  pro- 
bation is  not  enough  for  justice,  is  to  affirm  that  there 
never  can  be  a7iy  that  shall  satisfy  justice. 

(c.)  There  is  not  only  no  proof,  but  absolutely  no 
probability,  that  if  there  were  a  second  probation  after 
death,  those  who  should  have  died  in  sin  would  repent, 
"in  the  clearer  light  of  eternity."  If,  in  such  a  second 
probation,  they  should  be  exposed  to  a  sort  of  purgatorial 
suffering  for  the  sins  of  this  life,  there  is  no  evidence  that 
such  suffering  would  have  any  tendency  to  modify  their 
hearts;  while  if  they  have  no  suffering,  they  will  most 
likely  —  so  determined  is  the  bent  of  depraved  nature  to 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       139 

sin —  "because  sentence  against  their  evil  work  is  not  exe- 
cuted speedily,  fully  set  their  heart  in  them  to  do  evil."-^ 
So  resulting,  such  an  extension  of  probation  would  be  ac- 
tually unkuid ;  as  tempting  sinners  to  continuance  in  sin, 
'till  its  chains  are  too  tough  to  break. 

(d.)  Such  a  theory  makes  no  provision  for  those  who, 
in  the  exercise  of  their  free  agency,  should  persist  in 
sinning  obdurately  through  all  probations,  one  or  many. 
What  shall  God  do  with  them  ?,  What  ought  to  be  done 
with  them  ?  And  who  is  authorized  to  say,  with  certainty, 
that  there  would  not,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  be  many  such, 
if  additional  probation  were  offered. 

(e.)  The  Bible  asserts  the  absolute  contrary.  Its 
whole  drift  is  against  any  such  notion.  It  says  that  now 
is  the  day  of  salvation.  It  everywhere  assumes  that  this 
probation  is  adequate,  and  will  be  final.  It  presents 
Christ  as  to  be  received  now,  or  never.  It  grounds  the 
condemnation  of  the  wicked  upon  their  rejection  of  the 
Gospel  now  and  here.  All  its  solemn  warnings,  and  its 
eager  expostulations  and  tender  entreaties,  hinge  upon  the 
thought  that  all  hope  of  mercy  for  the  sinner  dies  with  his 
death. 

' '  Let  us  therefore  fear,  lest  a  promise  being  left  us  of 
entering  into  his  rest,  any  of  you  should  seem  to  come  short 
of  it."  If  there  is  no  evidence  of  any  further  probation ; 
if  it  would  be  unreasonable  that  one  should  be  provided, 

1  Ecclesiastes  viii.  11. 


140  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

and  indeed  unkind,  as  tempting  to  continuance  in  sin ;  if 
such  a  theory  furnishes  no  probability  of  saving  its  sub- 
jects and  fails  to  consider  the  case  of  those  persistent  reb- 
els who  inveterately  resist  all  gracious  influence,  and  if 
the  whole  tenor  of  Grod's  word  is  diametrically  opposed  to 
it ;  it  is  surely  so  far  against  reason  that  it  is  unworthy 
of  serious  notice  as  overthrowing  the  doctrine  of  the  future 
punishment  of  all  who  die  in  sin. 

(5.)  But,  we  are  told  again,  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
future  eternal  punishment  of  the  wicked  can  not  claim 
our  belief  under  any  circumstances,  and  on  any  amount 
of  evidence,  because  the  wicked  will  be  annihilated,  and 
so  can  not  suffer.     To  this  I  reply  :  — 

(a.)  If  this  were  true,  it  would  be  the  worst  punish- 
ment of  all.  To  cease  to  be,  would,  to  many  minds,  at 
least,  be  more  dreadful,  than  to  live,  even  in  torment. 

(b.)  It  is,  indeed,  susceptible  of  the  gravest  doubt 
whether  a  soul  cati  cease  to  be,  under  any  circumstances  ; 
whether  the  awful  and  mysterious  gift  of  life  once  re- 
ceived, can  ever  be  demitted,  and  whether  that  which  has 
once  become  a  living  soul  has  not  in  that  becoming  en- 
tered necessarily  upon  a  life  thenceforward  co-eternal  with 
that  of  God  himself. 

(c.)  All  the  evidence  from  reason  in  proof  that  we 
have  souls,  proves  that  they  are  immortal  souls. 

(d.)  There  is  no  evidence  that  death  ends  life,  but 
only  that  it  transfers  it  to  the  world  of  spirits. 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       141 

(e.)  We  have  an  instinct  of  immortality,  a  capacity,  an 
expectation  and  desire,  reaching  forth  into  the  future ;  and 
as  really  in  the  case  of  the  sinner  as  the  saint. 

(f.)  Conscience  argues  that  we  are  to  live  for  ever,  and 
as  truly  and  earnestly  in  the  breast  of  the  unbeliever  as  of 
the  Christian. 

(g.)  God's  moral  government  is  of  such  a  nature  as  to 
render  necessary  —  so  far  as  we  can  see  —  to  its  fairness, 
that  the  wicked,  as  well  as  the  righteous,  shall  live  for  ever. 

(h.)  There  is  no  evidence  from  the  Bible  of  any  dis- 
crimination, as  to  the  fact  of  eternal  existence,  between 
the  righteous  and  the  wicked. 

(i.)  On  the  other  hand,  all  those  texts  which  affirm 
future  punishment,  imply  that  it  will  be  inflicted  upon 
conscious  sufferers.  Take  the  text  "  These  [the  wicked] 
shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment."  ^  The  Greek 
word  KolaoLg  [holasis]  not  merely  can  not  mean  annihila- 
tion, but  refuses  to  be  consistent  with  it.  It  is  used  only 
ill  one  other  place  in  the  New  Testament.  "  There  is  no 
fear  in  love ;  but  perfect  love  casteth  out  fear,  because 
fear  hath  {jiolaaLg^  torment.^ ^^  This  can  not  be  rendered 
"annihilation"  without  making  nonsense;  the  term  im- 
plies a  state  of  conscious  distress.  And  the  result  of  the 
widest  and  most  careful  study  of  the  usage  of  this  word 
[liolaaLg'l  in  the  Greek  wi'iters  will  lead  inevitably  to  the  con- 

1  Matthew  xxv,  G4. 

2  1  John  iv.  IS 


142  VERDICT  OF  BEASON. 

elusion  that  it  never  means  annihilation,  or  any  synonyme 
of,  or  approach  to,  that  idea.  ^ 

Says  one  of  the  ablest  living  critics,^  "  Eternal  death, 
in  the  sense  of  banishment  from  God,  and  from  all  good, 
with  the  misery  naturally  belongmg  to  such  a  condition,  is 
an  intelligible  idea,  and  that  is  also  eternal  punishment. 
Eternal  death  as  the  penalty  of  sin,  in  the  sense  of  anni- 
hilation, is  also  an  intelligible  idea,  but  that  would  not  be 
eternal  punishment.  The  death  itself  (in  the  sense  of 
non-existence)  would  be  eternal,  but  the  punishment 
would  be  its  own  limitation.  It  must  cease  when  there 
was  no  lono;er  a  beins;  to  receive  it.  AYe  can  as  well  con- 
ceive  of  a  man  as  punished  a  thousand  years  before  he 
begins  to  be,  as  a  thousand  years  after  he  has  ceased  to  be." 

But,  if  every  consideration  from  reason  and  from  Scrip- 
ture is  against  such  a  conclusion,  shall  we  assume  the 
dreadful  idea  of  ceasing  to  exist  as  so  far  a  reasonable 
probability  as  to  be  a  safe  guide  in  rejecting  the  claim  of 
our  own  nature  and  the  word  of  God :  and  meanly  trust 
to  sneak  into  nonentity  in  order  to  dodge  a  manly  reckon- 
ino:  with  our  Creator  for  the  deeds  which  we  have  done  in 

o 

the  body? 

(6.)  But,  once  more,  if  all  else  fails,  the  luiheliever 
in  eternal  punishment  falls  hack  upon  some  vague  trust 

1  See  the  whole  subject  thoroughly  discussed  from  a  large  induction 
of  Greek  passages  in  Thompson's  Love  and  Penalty,  303-316. 

2  Prof.  Barrows,  of  Andover,  in  "  Bihliotheca  Sacra,"  for  July,  1858. 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       143 

in  God's  goodness,  and  denies  that  it  can  he  reasonahle 
to  believe  that  the  heavenly  Father,  of  infinite  power  at 
the  service  of  infinite  love,  can  punish  his  oivn  children 
for  ever,  no  matter  what  they  may  do. 

In  any  just  consideration  of  this  objection,  we  are 
called  upon  to  remember  that,  though  God  is  infinitely 
good  and  kind  as  a  Father,  he  is  also  infinitely  just  and 
exacting  as  a  Euler.  These  two  attributes  the  Bible  per- 
petually urges  upon  our  thought  together,  as  the  two 
poles  of  the  infinite  character,  —  bidding  us  * '  behold  the 
goodness  and  severity  of  God ;  "  ^  so  that  it  must  clearly  be 
unsafe  to  draw  vital  conclusions  from  one  of  them  without 
remembering  —  least  of  all  in  direct  opposition  to  —  the 
other.    I  reply  directly,  however,  to  this  position,  thus  :  — 

(a.)  Facts  of  constant  occurrence  in  this  life  show  that 
it  is  unsafe  to  trust  to  this  kind  of  abstract  inference  with 
regard  to  God,  unless  it  is  supported  by  his  own  declara- 
tions of  what  he  will  do.  The  following  process  of  reason- 
ing, for  example,  is  entirely  analogous  to  that  of  the 
objection  now  under  consideration,  and  yet  is  manifestly 
false  in  its  conclusion. 

i.  A  being  of  infinite  love  and  kindness  must  always 
infinitely  desire  happiness  in  all  his  creatures ;  and,  if  he 
has  the  power  to  carry  out  that  desire,  must  always  pro- 
mote such  happiness,  and  especially  may  be  relied  upon 
to  shield  them  from  dreadful  calamities,  such  as  torture, 
starvation,  and  agonizing  death. 

1  TiOm.  xi.  22. 


144  VERDICT  OF  EEASOj^. 

ii.    God   is   a  Being   of  infinite    love   and   kindness, 

and  be  has  Infinite  power,  so  that  if  he  desires  to  shield 

his  children  from  calamities,  he  can  do  so  —  by  miracle,  if 

» 
necessary ;   as  he  kept  Daniel  in  the  lion's  den,  and  the 

three  Jews  in  the  burning  fiery  furnace  of  Nebuchad- 
nezzar. 

iii.  Therefore  it  follows  that  God  may  be  depended 
upon  to  shield  men  —  who  are  his  children — from  torture, 
starvation,  and  agonizing  death. 

Read,  now,  the  Reports  of  the  Committee  on  the  Fort- 
Pillow  Massacre,  and  on  the  condition  of  Union  prisoners ; 
look  at  the  gaunt,  skeleton  pictures,  there  all  too  faithfully 
hinting  to  what  a  condition  humanity  can  be  reduced  by 
malignant  and  persevering  hatred  and  cruelty ;  count  the 
graves  of  our  dead,  murdered  by  inches  with  every  imagi- 
nable enhancement  of  torment ;  shudder  at  the  gibbering 
idiocy  —  worse  than  death  —  in  which  some  of  these  poor 
sufferers  have  been  sent  home  to  their  friends;  realize  all 
the  horrors  of  the  Libby,  and  of  Belle  Isle  and  Anderson- 
ville,  and  then  tell  me  why  God  —  if  your  reasoning  is 
sound  —  permitted  this  ;  tell  me  how  it  was  possible  that 
Infinite  goodness  and  kindness,  if  it  is  always  free  to 
follow  out  its  dictates  without  considerations  of  restraint 
from  other  aspects  of  the  Divine  character,  could  have 
tolerated  it  ?  Would  an  earthly  father  have  looked  over 
the  stockade  fence  into  these  dens  of  devilish  torment  day 
after  day,  and  allowed  his  own  sons  to  rot  and  famish  there 


NO  OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY,       145 

—  he  having  the  power  to  release  them  ?  And  does  not 
God  love  his  children  better  than  earthly  parents  can  love 
theirs  ? 

How  is  it  ? 

There  must  he  some  fatal  flaw  in  this  logic ! 

And  yet  it  is  identically  the  same  argument  in  essence 

—  and  so  in  logical  force  —  with  that  on  which  the  Uni- 
versahst  rehes,  when  he  says  that  God  is  surely  too  good 
to  allow  men  to  suffer  in  hell. 

(b.)  This  brings  us  to  the  careful  consideration  of  the 
thought,  suggested  before,  of  that  balancing  fact  in  the 
Divine  nature,  of  severity,  which  is  as  truly  regnant  there 
as  love  itself.  The  Universalist  —  to  turn  for  a  moment 
to  mathematical  similes  —  conceives  of  God's  nature  as  a 
circle  described  around  the  center  of  love.  To  him  he  is 
all  Father.  Some  of  the  sternest  old  theologians  seem 
to  have  conceived  of  him,  on  the  contrary,  as  a  circle 
described  around  the  center  of  severity.  To  them  he  is 
only  Ruler.  Both  are  partly  right,  and  partly  wrong. 
The  truer  conception  of  the  Divine  existence,  is  as  of  an 
ellipse  described  around  the  two  foci  of  love  and  severity ; 
realizing  him  as  both  Father  and  Ruler  —  as  much, 
and  as  truly,  the  one  as  the  other;  and  so  every  act  tinged 
from  both  streams  of  volition,  and  the  harmonized  result 
of  the  conflicting  claims  of  both. 

There  is  just  as  real  and  just  as  much  evidence  of  the 
existence  of  severity  in  the  Divine  nature,  as  there  is  of 
10 


146  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

love.  Nature  deelai'es  it  in  all  her  earthquakes,  tornadoes, 
torrents,  avalanches  ;  Providence  affirms  it  in  shipwrecks, 
famines,  pestilences,  wars,  and  slavery ;  History  endorses 
it  with  her  red  pages,  and  the  Bible  declares  it  when  it 
warns  us  of  the  "terror  of  the  Lord,"^  and  insists  that 
"  the  Lord  will  take  vengeance  on  his  adversaries,  and  re- 
serveth  wi-ath  for  his  enemies,"  ^  and  sums  up  "  our  God  is 
a  consuming  fire."^ 

If  the  world  has  a  ruler,  that  ruler  is  God ;  and,  as 
Lord  Bacon  says,  "  I  had  rather  beheve  all  the  fables  in 
the  Legend,  and  the  Talmud,  and  the  Alcoran,  than  that 
this  universal  frame  is  without  a  mind."  ^  But,  if  God  is 
a  Ruler,  he  must  be  an  infinitely  just  ruler ;  and  an  in- 
finitely just  ruler  must  secure  the  happiness  of  his  loyal 
subjects  by  protecting  them  from  the  acts  and  aims  of 
the  disloyal ;  and  that  can  only  be  done  by  severity,  — 
severity  in  restraint  and  punishment.  Therefore,  if  God 
is  the  just  ruler  of  this  world,  he  must  show  his  severity, 
and  restrain  and  punish  the  guilty ;  and  this,  although 
they  be  his  children,  and  his  heart  yearns  over  them  as  a 
father's  heart.  So  that,  the  reason  of  the  case,  when  the 
entii-e  character  of  God  is  taken  into  the  account,  is  wholly 
against  the  supposition  that  God  will  somehow  shield  the 
guilty  from  suffering,  and  bring  about  universal  happiness. 

And  if  the  Universalist  claims  that  God,  having  omnip- 

1  2  Ck)r.  iv.  11.  2  Nahum  i.  2. 

s  Hebrews  xii.  29.  4  Essay,  Of  Atheism, 


NO  OBJECTION  TO  THIS  TESTIMONY.       147 

otence,  will  constrain  all  his  creatures  to  repentance,  so 
that  he  can,  as  a  Ruler,  safely  pardon,  and  make  them 
happy,  the  stubborn  fact  of  free  agency  is  in  his  way. 
God  has  placed  it  out  of  his  own  power  to  compel  men  to 
cease  to  do  evil  and  learn  to  do  well.  He  persuades  them. 
He  entreats  them.  He  accumulates  the  most  urgent 
motives  around  them,  if  so  be  he  can  draw  their  volition  that 
it  shall  run  after  him.  But  he  never  compels  any  man  to 
repent.  So  that  there  are  always  just  as  many  possibilities 
of  thwarted  omnipotence,  in  this  respect,  as  there  are  free 
agents,  any  one  of  whom  can  hold  out  for  ever.  Among 
so  many  possibilities,  there  must  be  some  probabilities. 
And  Reason  decides  that,  so  far  as  she  can  see,  there  have 
been  and  are  many  such  gloomy  probabilities,  —  men  living 
and  dying  "without  God  and  without  hope."  Toward 
such  ones,  God's  paternal  nature  must  be  constrained  by 
his  official  position.  He  can  not  pardon  them  when  they 
will  not  repent,  much  as  he  loves  and  longs  for  them. 

(c.)  The  only  safe  course  on  this  subject,  is,  then,  to 
turn  to  the  Revelation  which  God  has  made  of  his  character 
and  intentions  toward  bis  children  here,  and  see  whether 
he  there  promises  —  or  even  remotely  hints  the  possibility 
of  his  doing  so  —  to  bring  all  men  to  future  happiness, 
because  he  loves  them  so  much  that  he  can  not  bear 
that  they  should  suffer  eternal  death.  •  What  the  Scrip- 
tm'es  do  say  on  this  point  has  been  made  so  clear  in  our 
progress  thus  far  through  this  volume,  that  I  have  no  need 


148  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

to  develop  it  here.  It  is  sufficient  to  remind  the  reader 
of  those  two  great  classes  of  passages,  which,  on  the  one 
hand,  assert  that  the  persistent  sinner  "  shall  surely  die," 
and,  on  the  other,  plead  with  men  to  repent,  with  all  the 
earnestness  and  pathos  involved  in  the  loving  heart  of  the 
Infinite  Father,  yearning  over  his  children,  whom  he  sees 
in  dangerous  places  and  going  on  to  destruction,  notwith- 
standing all  that  he  can  do  to  save  them  —  "  For  why  will 
ye  die?  0  house  of  Israel !  "  and  then  turning  sorrowfully 
away  from  the  hopeless  end,  saying,  "  Alas  !  if  thou  hadst 
known  !  Oh  that  thou  hadst  hearkened  to  my  command- 
ments !  then  had  thy  peace  been  as  a  river,  and  thy 
righteousness  as  the  waves  of  the  sea  !  " 

There  is  something  beautiful  and  touching,  it  must  be 
confessed,  in  some  of  those  suggestions  which  tender  and 
loving  hearts  make  in  plea  for  mercy  to  all,  from  God's 
infinite  love.  One  can  not  listen  without  emotion  to 
Whittier,  when  he  sings  :^  — 

"  I  trace  your  lines  of  argument : 
Your  logic,  linked  and  strong, 
I  weigh  as  one  who  dreads  dissent, 
And  fears  a  doubt  as  wrong. 

But  still  my  human  hands  are  weak 

To  hold  your  iron  creeds ; 
Against  the  words  je  bid  me  speak. 

My  heart  within  me  pleads. 

I  From  a  late  poem  in  the  Independent, 


JVO  OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       149 

I  see  the  wrong  that  round  me  lies ; 

I  feel  the  guilt  within ; 
I  hear,  with  groan  and  travail-cries, 

The  world  confess  its  sin : 

Yet,  in  the  maddening  maze  of  things 

And  tossed  by  storm  and  flood. 
To  one  fixed  stake  my  spirit  clings,  — 

I  know  that  God  is  good ! 
« 

Not  mine  to  look  where  cherubim 

And  seraphs  may  not  see ; 
But  nothing  can  be  good  in  him 
Which  evil  is  in  me. 

The  wrong  that  pains  my  soul  below 

I  dare  not  throne  above : 
I  know  not  of  his  hate,  —  I  know 

His  goodness  and  his  love !  " 

But  are  not  these  other  verses  of  a  more  truly  Christian 
tone,  which  are  surely  not  less  sweet  in  their  appeal  ?^ 

"  When  my  dim  reason  would  demand 
Why  that  or  this  Thou  dost  Ordain, 
By  some  vast  deep  I  seem  to  stand, 
Whose  secrets  I  must  ask  in  vain. 

When  doubts  distend  my  troubled  breast, 

And  all  is  dark  as  night  to  me, 
Here,  as  a  solid  rock,  I  rest,  — 

That  so  it  seemeth  good  to  Thee. 

1  Ray  Palmer's  nymns  and  Sacred  Pieces, 


150  VERDICT  OF  REASON, 

Be  this  my  joy,  that  evermore 

Thou  rulest  all  things  at  Thy  will: 
Thy  sovereign  wisdom  I  adore, 

And  calmly,  sweetly,  trust  Thee  still." 

The  one  slirinks  from  pain  and  the  thought  of  woe,  and 
reduces  God  to  the  measure  of  his  own  feeling  and  action ; 
the  other  leaves  all  to  God,  —  willing  to  be  led  hy  him 
into  any  darkness  that  can  not  be  understood,  and,  yield- 
ing his  own  thought  and  wish  to  God,  calmly,  sweetly, 
trusts  him  still. 

These  moral  arguments,  then,  amount  to  nothing.  They 
are  mere  assumptions.  It  can  not  be  proved  that  the  hap- 
piness of  the  redeemed  becomes  impossible,  if  any  are  to 
be  lost ;  as,  if  it  could  be,  it  would  not  prove  that  none 
will  be  lost.  It  can  not  be  proved  that  the  sole  end  of 
punishment  is  restoration,  and  so  eternal  punishment  be- 
comes impossible ;  and,  if  it  could  be,  it  would  not  prove 
that  none  will  be  punished  eternally.  It  can  not  be 
proved  that  it  is  unjust  to  punish  the  sins  of  this  life  for 
ever ;  and,  if  it  could  be,  it  would  not  prove  that  the  lost 
will  not  persist  in  sinning  for  ever,  and  so  for  ever  merit 
new  punishment.  It  can  not  be  proved  that  there  will  be 
a  further  probation  in  the  next  world  ;  and,  if  it  could  be, 
it  would  not  prove  that  th^^se  who  have  misused  probation 
here,  will  not  misuse  it  there,  for  ever  and  for  ever.  It 
can  not  be  proved  that  the  wicked  will  be  annihilated ; 


NO   OBJECTION  TO   THIS  TESTIMONY.       151 

and,  if  it  could  be,  that  would  be  tbe  very  fearfuUest 
punishment  of  all.  It  can  not  be  proved  that  God's  in- 
finite goodness  will  lead  him  to  save  men  from  future  pun- 
ishment :  he  does  not  interfere  to  save  them  from  the 
calamities  which  his  laws  necessitate  here,  and  all  the 
evidence  of  his  rulership  over  the  universe  goes  to  prove 
that  it  is  unpossible,  and  so  incredible,  that  he  should  in- 
terfere in  the  future  world — while  his  language  of  warning 
and  entreaty  in  the  Scriptures  makes  it  absolutely  certain 
that  he  will  not  so  interfere. 

There  is,  then,  absolutely  no  valid  objection  of  any  sort, 
from  the  Scriptures,  or  from  Reason,  to  break  the  force  of 
our  argument,  as  heretofore  developed,  or  to  modify  the 
conclusion  at  which  we  had  arrived,  that  there  will  be  a 
fearful  and  eternal  difference  between  the  future  of  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

SUMMING  UP  OF  THE  ARGUMENT. 

THUS,  then,  I  sum  up  our  argument. 
(1.)  Reason  is  first  and  final  arbiter  on  the  ques- 
tion whether  it  is  reasonable  to  believe  that  the  wicked 
will  be  punished  eternally. 

(2.)  She  decides  that,  alone,  she  can  not  grasp  and 
settle  so  great  a  question,  and  needs  help. 

(3.)  She  decides  that  she  may  expect  that  help  from 
God. 

(4.)  She  decides  that  he  has  offered  that  help  in  the 
Bible. 

(5.)  She  decides,  that,  coming  to  her  as  the  Bible 
comes,  and  such  in  itself  as  it  is,  it  is  reasonable  for  her 
to  take  its  testimony,  fairly  made  out  on  the  question  at 
issue,  and  —  if  it  asserts  that  the  wicked  will  be  punished 
eternally  —  to  believe  that  they  will  be. 

(6.)  She  decides  that  its  testimony  will  be  fairly  made 
out  when  she  takes  it  as  a  whole,  rejecting  nothing ;  and 
interprets  it  honorably  in  its  self-consistent,  obvious,  com- 
mon-sense aspect  from  the  standpoint  of  its  speakers  and 

152 


SUMMING  UP  OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  153 

"Writers ;  as  a  progi-essive  record ;  in  which  obscurity  is  to 
be  anticipated  (as  to  the  young  mathematician  in  the  ' '  Prin- 
cipia  "  of  Newton,  — but  not  because  it  is  false)  ;  and  so 
interpreted  as  to  favor  God  most,  to  win  most  the  assent 
of  all  good  men,  and  to  be  least  tasteful  to  bad  men,  and 
safest  for  all  men. 

(7.)  She  decides  that  the  Bible,  so  interpreted,  does 
reveal  that  those  who  die  in  sin  will  be  punished  for  ever. 
The  Old  Testament  affirms  it,  with  all  the  clearness  natu- 
ral, or  even  possible,  to  its  time  and  circumstances.  Christ 
asserted  it  uniformly,  and  with  all  the  tender  and  solemn 
emphasis  to  be  expected  from  his  lips  on  such  a  theme. 
The  apostles  re-affirmed  Christ's  position,  and  shaped  all 
their  arguments  upon  it.  All  indirect  testimonies  con- 
verge toward  the  same  result.  So  that  it  is  impossible  to 
make  the  Bible  a  self-consistent  volume,  unless  this  reve- 
lation of  the  future  jDunishment  of  those  who  persist  in 
rebellion  to  God,  and  die  in  sin,  is  taken  as  its  voice. 

(8.)  She  decides  that  there  is  no  objection  brought 
against  this  view  which  has  logical  force  enough  to  impair 
its  validity,  or,  in  any  way,  to  forestall  or  relieve  its  im- 
perative decision. 

(9.)  Therefore,  she  decides  that  the  docthine  of  the 

FUTURE  ENDLESS  PUNISHMENT  OF  THOSE  WHO  DIE  IMPEN- 
ITENT, IS,  IN  THE  HIGHEST  DEGREE,  AND  ON  THE  SOUND- 
EST   BASIS    OF    REASON,    A    DOCTRINE    REASONABLE     TO    BE 

BELIEVED.  So  she  makcs  the  voice  of  the  Bible  her  ver- 
dict. 


154  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

And  when  she  is  pressed,  on  this  side  and  on  that,  by 
difficulties  and  objections,  her  reply  is,  I  am  not  careful  to 
answer  thee  in  this  matter,  —  this  is  a  world  where  we  see 
through  a  glass  darkly,  and  necessarily  know  but  in  part ; 
and  because  you  can  ask  questions  which  puzzle  me,  I  will 
not  therefore  let  go  of  those  great  fundamental  principles 
which  bid  me  to  expect  queries  unanswerable,  now  while  I 
yet  cling  fast  to  the  eternal  word  of  God.  It  is  more  rea- 
sonable for  me  to  take  the  Bible  and  obey  it,  even  with 
these  queries  unanswered,  than  to  make  myself  eternally 
unsafe  and  wretched  by  rejecting  it  because  of  them,  — 
only  to  throw  myself  upon  a  thousand  others  more  torturing 
still. 

Is  not  this  sound  reason  ?  Will  you  not  accept,  and 
act  upon  it  as  such  ?  Will  you  not  shape  your  faith  and 
life  by  its  decision  ? 

"  It  is  wise  to  make  sure  of  eternal  salvation  in  this  life, 
and  to  risk  nothing  for  the  future.  No  advocate  of  a  future 
probation  has  ever  been  able  to  make  out  the  slightest 
•prohahility  of  such  a  state.  His  moral  arguments  are 
mere  assumptions.  He  assumes  that  the  sin  of  a  finite 
creature  is  not  great  enough  in  the  sight  of  God  to  call 
for  endless  punishment ;  and,  therefore  he  says,  that  God 
can  not  mean  this  when  he  threatens  it.  He  assumes  that 
God  is  too  good  to  punish,  and  therefore  he  can  not  mean 
to  execute  the  threatenings  of  his  law.  But  all  this  is 
mere  guess-work,  —  nay,  it  is  sheer  presumption.     What 


SUMMING   UP   OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  155 

can  we  know  of  God's  intentions  aside  from  Lis  declara- 
tions ?  and,  if  you  bring  tbe  theory  to  the  Bible,  what  do 
you  find  there  to  support  it  ?  Not  one  positive  explicit 
declaration  that  those  who  die  impenitent  shall  be  finally 
restored  and  saved ;  not  even  that  vagueness  of  statement 
from  which  the  ingenuity  of  criticism  could  torture  a  con- 
jecture that  there  may  be  another  state  of  probation  ;  but 
the  whole  tenor  of  the  Scriptures,  every  warning,  every 
call,  every  entreaty,  forbids  that  supposition. 

"  And  are  you  willing  to  take  your  chance  of  a  second 
probation  and  final  recovery  on  such  grounds,  and  to  throw 
away  the  certainty  of  salvation  by  abusing  this  probation  ? 
Will  any  man  in  his  senses  take  that  risk  ?  "  ^ 

I  desire  to  speak  with  utmost  respect  of  all  who  hold 
doctrines  differing  from  my  own.  And  it  is  without  the 
slightest  feeling  of  unkindness,  or  intention  of  disrespect, 
to  any,  that  I  beseech  you  never,  for  one  moment,  to  en- 
tertain the  idea  that  it  is  possible  for  you  to  be  honest 
Universalists  and  consistent  believers  in  the  Bible  as  a 
revelation  from  God.  Many  —  like  Theodore  Parker  and 
Thomas  Paine  ^  —  have  already  perceived  and  announced 
that  conclusion.  The  day  must  come  when  all  will  do  the 
same,  "renouncing  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty,  not 
walking  in  craftiness,  nor  handling  the  Word  of  God  de- 

1  Thompson's  Love  and  Penalty,  195. 

2  I  have  already  quoted  Mr.  Parker  to  this  effect.    See  also  Fame's 
Age  of  Reason  (Ist  ed.),  part  i.  p.  18,  &c. 


156  VERDICT  OF  REASON. 

ceitfully."  The  world  will  be  divided  by  a  line  —  which 
has  not  yet  been  sharply  drawn —  separating  between  those 
who  receive  and  those  who  openly  reject  the  Bible  as 
God's  revelation  to  man ;  when  those  who  hold  it  will 
hold  it  in  its  obvious  and  honest  sense,  and  those  whose 
rationalistic  tendencies  lead  them  to  withdraw  from  it  their 
faith  will  launch  out  boldly  upon  the  ocean  of  human  spec- 
ulation, leaving  the  divine  chart  avowedly  behind.  Then, 
to  believe  in  the  Bible  will  be  to  believe  what  it  says, 
about  future  punishment,  as  well  as  other  things,  to  be 
true. 

But  can  there  be  any  better  thing  for  us  all  than  that 
we  should  believe  the  Bible,  and  the  whole  Bible,  and  prac- 
tice all  its  teachings,  which  are  able  to  make  us  wise  unto 
salvation  ?  I  urge  this,  not  as  being  a  discourtesy  to,  but 
rather  the  very  highest  recognition  of,  reason  as  the  guide 
of  life  ;  for  I  believe,  with  a  great  father  of  mental  philos- 
ophy, ^  that  "reason  is  natural  revelation,  whereby  the 
eternal  Father  of  light  and  Fountain  of  all  knowledge  com- 
municates to  mankind  that  portion  of  truth  which  he  has 
laid  within  the  reach  of  their  natural  faculties,  —  revela- 
tion is  natural  reason  enlarged  by  a  new  set  of  discoveries 
communicated  by  God  immediately,  which  reason  reaches 
the  truth  of,  by  the  testimony  and  proofs  it  gives  that  they 
come  from  God.  So  that  he  that  takes  away  reason  to 
make  way  for  revelation  puts  out  the  light  of  both,  and 

1  Locke's  Essay  on  Human  Understanding,  Book  iv.  chap.  19,  sect.  4. 


SUMMING   UP   OF  THE  ARGUMENT.  157 

does  much-wbat  the  same  as  if  he  would  persuade  a  man 
to  put  out  his  eyes,  the  better  to  receive  the  remote  light 
of  an  invisible  star  by  a  telescope." 

Oh  most  merciful  Father !  who  ai?t  the  Fountain  of  Wis- 
dom, and  givest  liberally  to  them  that  ask  thee ;  who  by 
the  glorious  ministration  of  the  Spirit  hast  made  unto  us  a 
clear  revelation  of  thy  will  in  the  gospel  of  thy  Son ; 
we  beseech  thee  to  pour  into  our  darkened  understand- 
ings the  light  of  thy  truth,  and  quicken  our  minds  that 
we  may  rightly  understand  and  duly  value  it,  and  frame 
our  lives  according  to  it  to  thine  honor  and  glory;  so 
that  we  may  be  delivered  from  pride,  vainglory,  and  hy- 
pocrisy ;  from  all  false  doctrine,  heresy,  and  schism ;  from 
hardness  of  heart,  and  contempt  of  thy  word  and  com- 
mandment ;  from  all  evil  and  mischief ;  from  sin ;  from 
the  crafts  and  assaults  of  the  devil ;  from  thy  wrath  ;  and 
from  everlasting  damnation ;  —  through  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord.     Amen. 


THE    END.