A 07 duration future punishment expressed
VII. The duration of future punishment is expressed in the New Testament by the terms employed to denote absolute eternity.
THERE is, we all admit, such a thing as forever. If the Bible speaks of the natural attributes of God, his eternity is of course brought to view, and there must be a term, or terms, to convey the idea.
Now it is apparent to all, that the words eternal^ everlasting, forever^ never of themselves signify a limited duration. No one ever learns from these words that the duration to which they refer is less than infinite. The idea of limitation, if it be obtained, always is derived from the context.
It is moreover true, beyond the possibility of dispute, that the words eternal^ everlasting^ and forever^ always mean the whole of something.
There is no instance in which they are used to denote a part of a thing's duration. It is always the entire period for which that thing is to last. This no one will call in question.
It is well understood that the words “ forever,” and “ everlasting,” are used to express a duration commensurate with the nature of the thing spoken of. “ Everlasting mountains “ are coeval with creation, and are to endure as long as the earth. “A servant forever” is a servant for life. We cannot take the sense which the word has in connection with a certain thing, and by it prove or disprove anything relating to a totally different thing. We cannot prove, for example, that mountains will not last to the end of time, because forever applied to a servant, means only for life. We must consider the nature of the object to which the word is applied. When it is applied to the Most High, of course it means unlimited duration. Now the words which convey the idea of absolute eternity are applied, for example, to mountains, and to future punishment, and to the being and government of God. This, then, is certain: Because forever when applied to some things, does not mean absolute eternity, it does not follow that it does not mean eternity when applied to future retribution. If it were so, we could not convey the idea of the eternity of God; for it could be said that forever is sometimes applied to a limited duration. That is true; now if this proves that future punishment is not forever, it must also prove that the being of God is not forever.
Two things are beyond dispute: 1. Forever and everlasting are applied to future retributions. 2. These terms always mean the whole as to duration, of that with which they stand connected. If applied to life, it is the whole of life; if to the existence of the world, it is the entire period of its existence; if to a covenant, the covenant is either without limit as to time, or it is the whole of the duration which the subject permits; and when applied to Jehovah, it refers to his whole eternity.
What, then, does it mean, when applied to future retribution? It always means the whole of something. Is it the whole of future existence? No one can base a denial of it on the ground that the word, when applied to human life, means only a few years, or a limited duration when applied to the earth. For, how is it when applied to God and the happiness of heaven?
It is certainly the place of any who deny endless retributions, to show that the words cannot mean the whole of future existence when applied to punishment. The words mean the whole of future existence when applied, by the, use of the same Greek words in the same passages, to the happiness of the righteous. The objector must show that when applied to the future life, they mean only a part of it, notwithstanding they always mean the whole of everything else with which they stand connected.
Such are some of the considerations, drawn from the word of God, which satisfy my own mind that retributions after death are without end. Mr. Foster speaks of it as '' the general, not very far short of universal, judgment of divines.” Such multitudes of the best of men and women are still firmly persuaded of its truth, that we are led to say, there must be a foundation for it in the word of God, -- and for this reason: If mankind could have divested themselves of the conviction that it is not found in the word of God, it is reasonable to think that it would long since have been discarded.
Nay, rather, who would have invented such a doctrine? Good men would not have palmed it upon the world, for more reasons than one. Besides, many an error has been exploded; it is unaccountable, if this be error, that it should have kept its hold upon the human mind. No Protestant, it would seem, would quote a belief in purgatory as a parallel case. We have no coercion, nor any kind of motive to bias our minds towards this article of faith. We use no terms on this subject, -- certainly we approve of none, which are not derived from the Bible.
We are not superstitious, nor fanatical, nor priest-ridden, nor cruel; and we think we have far more exalted reasons for believing in the infinite love of God than any have who do not see it, as we do, in the atoning cross. However good and amiable the opposers of this doctrine may be, they will not assume that they are more humane, more pitiful, more gentle, more the friends of God and man, than those who believe it. In view of the hold which it has on the minds of men, it would be so great a marvel that the doctrine should not be found in the Scriptures, that nothing could be more astounding, not even the fearful truth itself. And that it may be seen, further, how we are confirmed in our persuasion that we read the Bible aright, I refer not only, as above, to the convictions of believers that the doctrine is scriptural, but to the positive statements of some who have rejected it.
Mr. Foster tells us: “And the language of Scripture is formidably strong, -- so strong that it must be an argument of extreme cogency that would authorize a limited interpretation.”
Dr. Thomas Burnett, an English divine, writing in favor of final restoration, says: ''Human nature revolts from the very name of future punishment. But the sacred Scriptures seem to be on the other side.”*
One effect of the recent discussion of this subject in this city has been to elicit from a distinguished advocate of final restoration, the following statement, “ And yet I freely say that I do not find the doctrine of the ultimate salvation of all souls * “ Natura humana abhorret ab ipso nomine poenarura seternarum. At Scriptura sacra a partibus contrariis stare videtur.” -- De Statu Mort. et Resurg.^ p. 228, 2d ed. clearly stated in any text or in any discourse that has ever been reported from the lips of Christ. I do not think that we can fairly maintain that the final restoration of all men is a prominent and explicit doctrine of the four gospels.” * To this, I am able to add the explicit testimony of Rev. Theodore Parker. Wishing to verify a quotation which a friend had tried in vain to find for me in one of Mr. Parker's volumes, I addressed a note to Mr. Parker, asking him to give me the reference. The following polite and obliging answer will speak for itself.
All the italics are Mr. Parker's.
'Boston, Dec. 1, 1858.
“ Rev. De. Adams.
“ Dear Sir: I am ill now, and cannot recollect that the passage you refer to occurs in any of my volumes; yet it might, in several. I am sure it does in some printed sermons -- pamphlets, but cannot now say which. I will try to find the passage.
“ To me it is quite clear that Jesus taught the doctrine of eternal damnation^ if the Evangelists -- the first three, I mean -- are to be treated as * Rev. T. S. King's Two Discourses, p. 5. 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 inspired by God, and so infallibly true; and as- this doctrine of eternal damnation is so revolting to all the humane and moral feelings of our nature, men said ' the words must be interpreted in another way.' So as the Unitarians have misinterpreted the New Testament to prove that the Christos of the fourth gospel had no preexistence, the Universalists misinterpreted other passages of the gospels to show that Jesus of Nazareth never taught eternal damnation. So the geologists misinterpret Genesis to-day -- to save the divine infallible character of the text.
Yours truly, “ Theodore Parker.”
It was but fair to let Mr. Parker state his whole belief on this subject. Thus, in his view, if the Evangelists are to be believed, Christ taught that future retributions are to be endless.
There is nothing to be surprised at in this; but it will be seen that it is not without good reason that those who receive the Bible implicitly as the word of God, have so generally
believed in endless retribution as a doctrine of Scripture. The question then arises, whether our human instincts, or divine revelations, whether man the sinner, or God the sovereign, shall dictate the penalty of sin? Mr. Foster, seeking relief to his mind from the terrible idea of endless sin and misery, says of the doctrine of the annihilation of the wicked, “ It would be a prodigious relief.” Some one respectfully replies to him that “ the divine government is not for the relief of the imagination, but for the relief of the universe.” The question is often asked, How, allowing endless retribution to be a scriptural doctrine, can you have peace of mind in your belief?
I answer. We believe that no one will perish who does not reject the Saviour of the world; or, if he be a heathen, does not sin against light and conviction sufficient to save him.
It has an effect to quiet our minds when we reflect that our thoughts and feelings at the loss of the soul were surpassed in Him whose soul for us was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death.
Tears were shed by him over sinners -- “God hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” If the thought of endless retribution is so terrible to us. who know so little about it, we are constrained to think that there was never any sorrow like unto the sorrow of him, who loved us and gave himself for us, when he sees that he must, nevertheless, pronounce upon any for whom he died, the sentence of that everlasting punishment from which he became incarnate, and died to save us. Great as our astonishment and sorrow are, we cannot forget that they are infinitely less than his. If, through grace, we are saved, we look to him, who knows what his own tears have been, to wipe away all tears from our eyes.
We also consider that the basis of future punishment is a chosen and cherished state of mind, which leads men here to reject Christ, notwithstanding his known character and his efforts for them. This may lead them still to reject him; for, as already stated, we do not find that even the loss of heaven and the experience of chains under darkness, have reconciled lost angels to God. While they choose to sin, therefore, we see no injustice in their being punished, even if they sin forever. That the Bible contains forewarnings and instructions which ought to be sufficient to deter men from future misery, we learn even from the reply of Abraham to the rich man in hell. The rich man desired that Lazarus might be sent to his father's house with testimony concerning that “ place of torment.” Abraham replied that “ they have Moses and the prophets, let them hear them.”' The rich man could have easily reminded Abraham, if truth permitted, that there is nothing about that place in the Old Testament. He makes no such answer, but pleads the supposed efficacy of a visitor from the unseen world. Abraham replied, that such a visitor could have no effect on those who do not believe the testimony of the Old Testament on that subject. All this is from the lips of Jesus Christ.
Inasmuch as we cast no blame on God for the present condition and conduct of cannibals, and pagans, and atheists, and blasphemers, and slavetraders, and every other description of wicked men, (neither do they themselves impute blame to him,) we do not feel that God will be responsible for the endless wickedness and misery of sinners; nor will they charge him with injustice more than they now do.
We believe that the God of the New Testament is the same unchangeable God of the Old Testament; that Christ has not modified the divine character, nor altered one principle of the divine administration; but that the New Testament reveals the mercy of God in fullorbed beauty, though its outlines were always visible from the beginning; that all which was terrible in the God who destroyed the old world, and Sodom and Gomorrha, and cast down rebel angels from heaven to hell, is still the same, and that when mercy has failed under the New Testament to recover sinners, the God of the Old Testament and of the New will be their Judge and King. We read that “ it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.”
'' For our God is a consuming fire.” And we have our choice, to love and serve such a God as this, or to reject him and take the consequences. Our private experience persuades us that He is good. He has always been just and kind, gentle, easy to be entreated. In all our afflictions he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved us.
Knowing this, his stern, uncompromising hatred of sin, his power to inflict suffering and to look upon it forever, if necessary, give us confidence in Him. We may need such attributes for the foundation of our safety and of our confidence in God, as much as that attribute which we now separate from the rest of his character and call his love.
We believe that the Bible teaches -- for surely it follows of course from all which has now been adduced -- that some proportion of pain and misery will forever exist under the government of God. The idea that they are to be wholly expurgated is contradicted by the Scriptures, and is mere fancy. But the scale of things being hereafter enlarged to our apprehension, and the reasons for one thing and another which are now but partially explained, being more fully apparent, we think we see in the present feelings of good citizens with regard to law, and punishments, and the officers of justice, how future pain and misery, in their relation to the infinitely blessed system of government over a universe of free agents, will by no means diminish the happiness of that multitude of obedient souls which no man can number.
I have always been struck by the consideration, that the passages from which Universalists infer the final happiness of all men, do not occur in the Bible in connection with the punishment of the wicked. This is of the utmost importance. It is one presumptive proof that, occurring as they do apart from any mention of the punishment of the wicked, they belong to other subjects. And so we find them, in connection with the blessedness of the righteous, the ultimate victories of Christ over his enemies, his final reign, and the happiness of heaven. But we look in vain for passages where promises, prophecies, hints of ultimate restoration, occur in connection with the subject of future punishment. It will not be disputed that there are passages which seem to teach future endless punishment and the attempt is to show that they are “ metaphorical.” But some appear to think that metaphorical means fictitious unreal on the contrary “metaphorical” language is generally the stronger way of asserting anything, being resorted to for the purpose of intensifying the expression. But how remarkable it is that we find no clause nor phrase, neither literal, nor “metaphorical,” limiting the main drift of a passage which speaks of future endless punishment, or suggesting the idea of restoration. The bold, terrific language of Scripture, asserting the future punishment of the wicked, has not one word of qualification.
We frequently meet with such representations and illustrations as the following, in modern writers, -- from whom I had intended to quote several passages; but the following statement of their views will suffice: -- The soul is God's child. Will a good mother ever cast away her offspring? No; neither will the great ''Mother of us all,” -- the love of God. The worst of men -- the Judases, the Neros, and Caligulas -- will at last fulfil their career of sin and sorrow, and return to the bosom of God. As the earth in some parts of its orbit drives av/ay from the sun, but soon comes “rounding back again,” so every creature that God ever made, Satan and all (if there be any Satan), will at last accomplish its terrible career, and, passing its solstice, rejoice in a new moral existence. The brief reply to all such fancies is this, Have we a Bible? Does it give ns any intimation of such a revolution, such an orbit, for the lost soul? We read of “wandering stars, to whom is reserved the mist of darkness forever and ever; “ but where does the Bible, in speaking of the spirit launching forth on its aphelion, intimate that its path is a cycle, and not a straight line?
We see one part of the race “ go away into everlasting punishment.” But this is said to be merely “a metaphor.” We will be grateful even for “ a metaphor,” if there be any, representing their return.
We have lately been furnished, from high authority in the Universalist denomination, with some of the principal proof texts in the discourses of Christ in favor of the salvation of all men. They occur in the review already spoken of, (in the preface to this article,) written by Rev. Dr. Thomas Whittemore, in which he endeavors to answer Rev. T. S. King's assertion, that he could not find any text or discourse of Christ which contains the doctrine of the final happiness of all men. Dr. Whittemore, of course, would here bring forth some of his strong proofs, for he says of Mr. King's discourse: “We think they will do as much to break down Universalism as to break down the doctrine of endless misery.” The following are Dr. Whittemore's quotations from the words of Christ, to prove that he taught the final salvation of all men.
1. '' This is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world.”* Dr. Whittemore gives an extended exposition of the discourse of Christ at the well of Samaria, which gave occasion to these words of the Samaritans; and he says, “ Jesus Christ, let it be remembered, is declared to be the Saviour of the world; and how could he be justly called the Saviour of the world if the world shall never be saved? “
2. “All things are delivered unto me of my Father.” This is a major premise. “All that the Father, hath given me shall come to me,” is * John 4:42. t P- 390. the minor premise. '' To come to Christ is to become a Christian.”* This involves the ergo of the proposition. He adds, '' We have by no means exhausted our proof; “f and he gives us,
3. “ And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.” We have the word of Christ for it, -- “ will draw all men unto me.”
4. “ Jesus answered. Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection, they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” “ If angels are holy, mankind are to be holy; if angels are to be happy, mankind are to be happy.” “ This is a distinct and positive declaration of the purity and happiness of all men.” “ How, then,” Dr. W. says, '' can we adopt the language of Mr. King, and say, * I do not find the doctrine,' &c. Strange declaration! Jesus joined two great facts together, the resurrection of all men, and their exaltation to the condition of angels.” §
Such passages are, in the opinion of Dr. Whittemore, a plain, obvious refutation, from Christ himself, of that, in Dr. Whittemore's view, dan * p. 391. t p. 392. + p. 395. § p. 395. gerous assertion by Mr. King, viz, “ the ultimate salvation of all souls is not clearly taught in any text or discourse in the gospels.” The principal topics which have now been considered are these, The Scriptures reveal a future state of reward and punishment.
They teach that the body and soul will be joined in future happiness and misery.
Christ teaches that God can destroy both body and soul in hell. If God cannot morally do this, the declaration is unintelligible; it answers no purpose of instruction.
Future punishment will therefore be a natural operation of moral laws, sustained and made effectual by the hand of God upon the sinner, who, by his state of depravity, will be made susceptible to misery forever. The essential elements of misery remain in the wicked after death.
Redemption by Christ is represented as having for its object salvation from final perdition. The work of the Holy Spirit as a part of redemption, and the unpardonable sin against Him,
prove that the present is the final effort to save men.
None of the passages relied on to prove final restoration occur in connection with the subject of future punishment, but with the reign of Christ, and the happiness of the righteous. No passage in the Bible discloses the future repentance of the wicked.
Promises of restoration, made to sinners who in this world were to become penitent, always occur in connection with threatenings and doom. No such promises are made in connection with the threatenings of future punishment, or with the final doom of the wicked. The Bible closes with an express declaration of the future unchangeableness of character.
There are no prophetic visions in the New Testament which contemplate deliverance from hell, and corresponding to visions of God's ancient people in captivity, and of their release and restoration. The fall of angels, and of men, is a confirmatory argument in favor of future punishment, seeing that if God did not keep them from falling, he can consistently refuse to restore them. The terms used with regard to the resurrection of the dead, show that the wicked will have experienced no change since death, but will come forth from their graves to the resurrection of damnation.
If the wicked are punished hereafter merely for their own good, there is no such thing as sin against God or our neighbor; -- which is contrary to Scripture.
- The law of God has no curse if future punishment be in all cases disciplinary. The sentence passed upon the impenitent indiscriminately, forbids the idea of discipline in future punishment.
It is inconceivable that fallen angels and “ the spirits in prison,” who were on earth “in the days of Noah,” should not long ago have repented of their sins, if repentance were the object sought by their punishment.
If death, and the scenes within the veil previous to the judgment-day, do not effect the repentance in the wicked, there is no ground to think that their banishment from Christ with the fallen angels, at the last day, is intended for their reformation, or would effect it.
“ Forever “ and “ everlasting “ always denote the whole as to duration, of that with which they stand connected.
If a finite being cannot justly be punished forever, then, if the whole universe should sin forever, it could not be punished forever, because the whole intelligent universe also is finite. The duration of future punishment is expressed in the New Testament by the terms employed to denote absolute eternity in cases which are never questioned. The provision made in the incarnation, sufferings, and death of the Son of God for pardon and salvation, and the abundant calls to repentance, and offers of eternal life, through Christ, to all, will make the final impenitence of sinners inexcusable, and their misery will be of their own procuring.
I may be allowed, in closing, to quote the words of the apostle Paul, which those who preach and are set for the defence of the gospel, must not hesitate to adopt: “ For we are unto God a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved and in them that perish: To the one we are the savor of death unto death, and to the other, the savor of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?”*
Pursuing my ordinary labors, a Universalist and Unitarian clergyman of this city invited me to repeat, in his pulpit, a sermon on this subject, to which he had listened in my church. As I profess not to be ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, which, in my view, involves the doctrine of endless punishment, I complied with his request. This has led to the present communication. Had mere controversy been my object, I would hot have sought to discuss the scriptural view of this subject, with such admissions before me as those of Rev. T. S. King and Rev. Theodore Parker. When I read them, I thought that one whose only object was to get the advantage of an opponent, might he justified in feeling with regard to the doctrine of Restoration, as Joab did when he found Absalom in the tree, and he blew a trumpet, and all the people returned from the battle. Such men as Mr. King and Mr. Parker, seeing the doctrine of endless punishment in the literal speech of the Bible, as* * 2 Corinthians 2:15-16. interpreted by us, and rejecting its inspiration, partly because they find it there, relieves us greatly from the need of holding controversies on this subject. Controversy has not been my motive. I have sought to persuade my reader to flee with me for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us. In the foregoing discussion, I am not aware that there is anything which intentionally reflects upon the understanding or motives of others. It has cost no effort to abstain from being, in any way, derisory, or satirical, or contemptuous. Conscious only of kindness and good- will to all, and grateful for this opportunity to state and defend important principles,-! am. The reader's friend and servant, N. Adams.