II. AN EXPLANATION OF PARTICULAR TEXTS SUPPOSED TO TEACH ENDLESS WOE.
Leaving out the classes of texts spoken of in the last chapter, let us see what remains to sustain the popular doctrine. Prof. Stuart claims but fifteen, and we shall see he has far too many. Andrew Fuller claims but twelve as indicating time of woe, except the three I have examined, with the terms, "the fire shall not be quenched” in them. So he claims but fifteen. I affirm there is not one plain text in the Bible for the doctrine; and will endeavor to sustain my position by explaining all the fifteen texts thus claimed; asking the reader to withhold anathemas till he has "heard me patiently."
I will first refer to them all, to make some general remarks on them, and then explain them separately.
1. Isa. 33 14, "Who shall dwell with everlasting burnings?”
2. Isa. 66:24, "And the fire is not quenched."
3. Dan. 12:2, "To shame and everlasting contempt.”
4. Matt. 5 26, "Not come out till the utmost farthing be paid."
5. Matt. 18 34, "Delivered to tormentors, till all is paid."
6. Matt. 25:41, "Depart into everlasting fire.”
7. Matt. 25:46, "Go to everlasting punishment."
8. Mark 3:29. "In danger of eternal damnation," (condemnation).
9. John 3:36, “Wrath abideth on n him."
10. 2 Thess. 1:9, “Punished with everlasting destruction."
11. 2 Pet. 2:17, “Mist of darkness is reserved forever.”
12. Jude 13: "Is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.”
13. Jude 7:7. “Vengeance of eternal fire."
14. Rev. 14:10, 1 1, “Smoke of their torment aseendeth forever and ever. 19:3, "Her smoke rose up forever and ever:” Note.—These refer to one event.
15. Heb. 20:10, "Devil—tormented day and night forever and ever."
These are all I can find which are quoted to prove protracted woe, except the three, (properly but one.) in Mark 9, which I have showed are positive proof of destruction.
On these passages I remark, First, They are few when compared with the 210 opposing tests I have referred to. They are few too, when we consider the awfulness of the doctrine to be proved by them.
Secondly, All but four are in the parables and figures used by Christ; or in the extreme (as is admitted.) figurative and symbolic language of Isa., Dan., and Rev. Of these four, one (2 Thess. 1:9.) is decided for destruction, and I have only quoted it to answer an objection; the other three are figurative, and proved so by the terms “mist of darkness" and “fire.”
Our best critics say, and say rightly, that no doctrine can be originated and settled by parables and symbolic language. A doctrine must first be expressed in plain terms, and then figures may illustrate it. I ask where in the book of God it is said, in plain terms, that the wicked shall suffer endless misery or torment after the final judgment? Echo answers, where? By the above rule, advocated by the orthodox themselves, these fifteen texts do not lay the first stone in the foundation of their towering fabric; and my assertion is proved, that not a plain text for endless woe, can be found. But Christians generally seem to think that Christ taught in a plain style. It appears strange to me now, that when investigating this doctrine, so little notice has been taken of Christ's words in John 16: 25, “These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs, but the time cometh when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall show you plainly of the Father.” Notice- This was said in his lust discourse, and so of course referred to all he had taught; and the "time" of his “speaking plainly," is by inspiration through the apostles; who never tell of a hell, nor intimate endless woe. "Without a parable, spake he not unto them." Matt 13 : 31: and in Mark 4:34, it is said, "And when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples." But notice, only a small part of this “expounding" is written.
All the great doctrines of the gospel are taught by many, and the most important, by scores of plain texts; and then sometimes illustrated by similitudes. I ask if a more important doctrine exists than the one we are considering— not the momentary, but the eternal consequences of sin!!
Thirdly, In seven of these texts the word fire is used; and in Bible judgments, fire is about universally a symbol of utter destruction. These seven are also further proved to be symbolic by this term. Where on God's footstool do we hear of fire being a preservative except in man made systems of divinity? The common people are wont to call salt a preserver, and fire a destroyer.
Fourthly, Twelve ot these texts derive all their force or proof of this terrific doctrine from the uncertain terms aion (for ever), and its adjective, aionios (everlasting).
To show briefly their uncertain meaning in the Bible, I remark, that any one, by Cruden's large Concordance, can find, in a few hours, over 200 texts, besides the few for future punishment, in which these words are used to express limited time. Pres. Edwards says, "These terms occur 101 times in the N. T. ; and thirty two of these mean temporary duration, and in seven of them the meaning may be doubtful,”—making most one half. Says a learned writer, "These terms are translated in the Bible, twenty five times old, and of old—six times ancient—four times long—five times age and ages—and in the N. T. thirty times world.” See a sample—"The sin against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven in this world, [aion, for ever,) nor in the world, (aion, for ever.) to come." Here, as in most or all of the places where it is translated world, we see that age is meant. To argue as divines do, that these words are applied to the existence of God, and the state of the saints, and therefore they must mean endless time in all texts, just as absurd as to say wisdom and power are applied to God and men, and as God is infinite in wisdom and power, therefore men must be.
This is but an item of the evidence that these terms are variable and uncertain in their meaning, and that the context must settle their import as being endless or not.
Destructionists, however, only need to limit these terms in Isa. 13:14; Rev. 14:11; 19:3, and 20:10, and these texts I shall prove mean only earthly judgments. Universalists need to limit them in others.
Prof. Stuart, on these terms, as used in the N. T., says, "On this enquiry, of course depends, substantially, the issue of the question before us referring to endless misery. So it comes out that the mighty fabric of immortality and endless torment, is founded "substantially" on these two terms thus uncertain in their use in the Bible; and, so far as Destructionists are concerned, on their use in four extremely symbolic texts: and these four texts, if proved to refer to earthly judgments, as I have said, the whole foundation will be swept away, according to Stuart's confession. Any one can see too that Stuart is correct; for no other terms help sustain the doctrine except as the one, "the fire shall not be quenched," has been wrested from its Bible meaning to aid in the case. This is the reason so much has been said to prove these terms always mean unlimited time, notwithstanding over 200 texts positively forbid it.
Look over the 210 texts for destruction, and it is plain that we need not depend at all on these variable terms to prove the wicked will eternally cease to be. “They shall be no more”—“Destroyed without remedy"—"utterly perish, and perish as the beasts,”— “not be written with the living"—" not see life" and other terms show this. I ask the attention of Universalists to this fact, while I admit they are right in holding that aion, etc, do not prove the doctrine of endless woe, and that it is not found id the Bible. Another solemn penalty is found there, for mortal man, which is strictly and literally endless in its consequences. O, come to Christ that you may avoid it—"live and not die," John 6:48-50.
Fifthly, I remark, that such are the figures, and such the imagery—(so uncertain to us, but not so much so to a Jew) that all the fifteen texts claimed by Stuart as proof of endless misery, have been given up as proof, by different critical writers who hold the doctrine. Not all by any one, of course, but some by one and some by others. This assertion I shall notice as I examine the texts. They have, in reality, all been relinquished, by the correct rule of critics, viz., poetic, symbolic, and figurative books and texts can prove no doctrine.
Again, I assert that nine of these fifteen texts refer only to earthly judgments, as I shall prove by the analogy of Bible language, and the confessions of our best orthodox writers.
These six remarks, if well considered, certainly show that positive proof for the popular doctrine, is not found in the Bible; and show, with what I have before said, that inferential proof is weak in the lowest degree, even were there no opposing texts. But I remark,
Lastly, One consideration alone annihilates the whole of them ; viz., the overwhelming number of opposing texts.— Not only their number, but their plainness does it. A large share of them, say at least 100, are in plain language and didactic teaching.
But, popular opinion “will catch at, and can swim on a straw”:—or, like “the chameleon, live on air”; so I proceed to test the weight of these fifteen texts separately.
FIFTEEN MAIN TEXTS EXPLAINED.
Isa. 33 : 14, " "Who among us shall dwell with devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?"
The great Andrew Fuller, in his letters to a Universalist, gives this text up, as not referring to future punishment. And well he may, for (1.) by reading from v. 7, we see only an earthly judgment is spoken of. The enemies of hypocritical Israel were to be a " devouring fire," and they were either killed or carried away captive to Babylon. Or, if the heathen nations were meant, they were to be "devoured," and "as thorns be burned in the fire."
(2.) The text is a question, implying that none could "dwell in devouring fire." Just as Paul asks, "How can we escape if we neglect so great salvation?” "Everlasting" is used here in its intensive sense, as in the text everlasting hills." Traditionists can see the words “dwell, and everlasting” in this text, but not “devour,” nor the interrogation point A few following verses are promises to the righteous; but the terms, "bread shall be given and water be sure, and meditate terror,” etc, show that both the threatening and the promises are earthly.
I will here make what may seem a harsh charge, but will prove it correct before I finish these texts, viz., that orthodox churches, on this subject, are equal to the catholics, and much worse than Universalist, in quoting a few isolated texts, and neglecting to examine their connections.
All orthodox sects holding the doctrine of endless woe, popular opinion has led ministers and people to treat with scorn all opposers, and only quote a few texts without criticism, while many of them have no relation to the subject. The excuse that “our fathers have examined them, and all real Christians believe the doctrine,” have produced idleness and contented ignorance.
(2.) Isa. 65: 4. "And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against me, for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched: and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.”
I have showed that President Alexander, Albert Barnes, Scott, Lowth, and Bishop Whately, say this text only tells an earthly scene. It would sound odd, indeed, to hear of immortal “worms'' and “carcasses" in the fire of Gehenna! The terms. - “all flesh, coming to worship, and abhorring." etc. in this and verse 23, fully prove it is on earth; as "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God." The text seems to refer to the slaughter of Gog and Magog, or the battle of Armageddon, where "birds eat flesh?" etc, told of in Rev. 16 and 19. When, O when will Christians cease to pervert the precious Bible, by applying such texts to future punishment? Since literal worms and fire have been given up, as too absurd, a “gnawing conscience” has been invented, with less authority than catholics have for a purgatory.
(3.) Dan 12:2, "Many awake some to shame and everlasting contempt"
(1.) If the “awaking” here foretold could be made a literal resurrection, let it be noticed that - everlasting is only applied to "contempt." Arnold, the traitor, who awoke to a sense of shame is dead, but held in everlasting "contempt"; so will the wicked be, if they die as criminals at the judgment.
But (2.) This chapter and the previous one is a vision, and extremely symbolic; so no literal resurrection is meant as the context shows. The term "many" shows it is partial. When Christ arose none "came out of their graves but saints," so it cannot refer to that resurrection; Matt. 27:52, 53. The events of this verse, are at the time named in the close of chap, ii., and that is before the final resurrection or end of the world.
(3.) The three first verses of chap. 12, may be thus briefly explained,—The "time of trouble," v. 1, refers to the destruction of Jerusalem. See Matt. 24:15-21, " When ye shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel, (Dan. 9:27; 11: 31,) then shall be great tribulation." When Christ came " Michael stands up,"— all "written in the books," — “the election," (Rom. 11:7) "awake from the dust,” not literal graves,—the darkness of the old dispensation, and Christ "gave unto them, (the election,) everlasting life," and they "shined as the firmament"—"as lights in the midst of a crooked generation ;" Phil. 2 : 15—and "turned many to righteousness." While most of the Jews "awaked" to hear the gospel, but rejecting it, when the "time of trouble" came, —Jerusalem was destroyed,—they "awaked to shame," and are yet held in “everlasting contempt." In Jer. 23:39, 40, we read a like threatening, and probably tells the same event. "I will forsake you, and the city that I gave you, and cast you out of my presence; I will bring an everlasting reproach upon you, and a perpetual shame." Who quotes Ezk. 37 : 1-J3, to prove a resurrection? Yet there it is said "I will open your graves—cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel." Isa. 52:2, "Shake thyself from the dust; arise but sit down, 0 Jerusalem." The prophets abound in such similitudes.
* Dr. George Campbell says, "The primitive meaning of resurrection, is being raised from inactivity to action, and from obscurity to eminence."—Note on Matt. 22: 23. Thus in Rev. 11; 7-12, the "witnesses" are said to "lay dead to arise and to ascend up to heaven," where all agree literal death and resurrection are not meant. Men often tell of comparing Bible with Bible, but they “say, and do not.”
Christ said, "This is my flesh and my blood," and when the Catholics wish to establish a particular dogma, they say, "this must be literal"—the Protestants have been their apt scholars, in learning about a hell from symbolic language.This symbolic text then, can be no positive proof on this subject, and a full criticism would show it has nothing to do with it. As the murderers of Christ said, " His blood be on us and our children," they will be held in "everlasting contempt" whether living, or " burned up, root and branch." Calvary will never be forgotten.
These are all the texts I know of in the 0. T., where it is pretended by any that protracted or endless woe is intimated. And as these fail, we must say, with Stuart, it is not there.
That a God of pity and justice should leave the world 4,000 years without an intimation of such a doom, if true, and in the same time fill more than 100 pages, and make more than 3,000 threatenings of earthly and momentary sufferings for sin, is a matter of astonishment, which should strike dumb its advocates; and lead them to re-examine their parabolic proof from the N. T.; instead of charging infidelity on those who find, in that same O. T., ninety seven threatenings of death, destruction, etc, as can be seen in the above catalogue of texts. And we should think too, that this silence, and the awfulness of the subject would arouse them to examine the ninety-three texts to the same point, in the N. T., found side by side with the dozen presumptive ones, claimed to sustain their theory. I am aware that some, if not all of the ministers, are proclaiming that we take all, or about all our texts for destruction, and the state of the dead, from the O. T. "Whether this is done ignorantly, or to deceive, I leave the Judge of all hearts to decide.
We come now to the New Testament.
(4. and 5.) The first two are alike, viz., Matt. 5:26, "Thou be cast into prison... not come out till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing"; and 18:34, "And his Lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him."
These two texts, A. Barnes gives up as referring to punishment in the world to come. He says on Matt. 5 :25-6, "This is still a farther illustration of the sixth commandment… The phrase, ‘Thou shalt not come out,’ etc, does not refer to the eternity of future punishment—that will be eternal, but this passage does not prove it."—Notes on the gospel. The parable in 18:23-35, he also applies to God's dealings with His church on earth. Dr. Clarke on these texts says, "No metaphor ever proves a doctrine."
But if these texts do refer to future punishment, death will "pay the uttermost farthing," as that is the "wages (pay) of sin." If endless suffering be the penalty, it will be paying, but never paid—justice can never be satisfied. The sinner “owes” love and obedience to God ;—will suffering, and cursing, and hating, pay the debt? The "furnace for the tares" will be a "tormentor," and none will “come out" of "the second death."
I ask, if good sense will say these texts prove what they are often quoted for—eternal woe ? Christ, we find, used parables to illustrate earthly duties and penalties, as well as future scenes. These make up five texts, so far, telling only earthly woes.
6. Matt. 25: 41, "Then shall he say also unto those on his eft hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels, for I was hungered," etc.
Here the scenes of the judgment are represented by proceedings in an earthly court, and similitudes and figures are used, as in the parable of the ten virgins and talents in the same discourse. I remark —
1. In Matt. 18:8, 9, "To be cast into everlasting fire," and “into Gehenna of fire," we see means the same thing, and as these two expressions refer to the same event as this one, the doom must be the same. We have seen that the “fire of Gehenna" is a symbol of destruction, so the same must be meant in this text.
Historians of the French Revolution, in telling the final fate of Louis the 14th, do not mean to make out that his doom was various—that of the rack or the Bastile, or the block, but simply one—he was beheaded. So Christ, in the various representations he makes of the final doom of the sinner, must mean but one; and the expression,— "cast into everlasting fire"— “into the fire of Gehenna,"— "go to everlasting punishment"—"burn up as chaff"— “lose life," etc., must be made to agree in one fate. Torment believers talk as if they had never got this idea into their heads.
Again, the apostles were authorized expounders of Christ's teaching, and they in thirty-one plain texts say the final doom of the sinner is to be death, to perish, to be destroyed, devoured, etc, and these six symbolic texts by Christ must harmonize with those of the apostles. This remark alone compels us to explain the symbols of Christ, on this subject, to mean destruction.
But let us see if this text cannot be harmonized with my views, without this general argument.
2. The term fire is always symbolic when literal fire is not meant; and as it is not claimed to be literal here, of what is it a symbol or sign? I ask special attention to this question, as it affects other texts with the term fire in them.
Note—It is the FIRE, and not the SINNER, nor his woe, that is said to be "everlasting": and fire when used figuratively, often represents an attribute of God, or his nature and dispositions. This is plain from Deut. 4:24, "For the Lord our God is a consuming fire." Heb. 12 : 29, Our God is a consuming fire." President Edwards says, "hatred to sin, is as essential to the Deity as the love of holiness, as necessary to the general good, that he express the former as the latter.” Butterworth and Cruden, say in their Concordances, “fire is a symbol of God's holiness, justice and displeasure with sinners."
A. Barnes, in his note on Matt. 3:11, (" Baptize with the Holy Ghost, and with fire") says "fire is a symbol of vengeance."
Further, God's anger, fury, wrath, and indignation, are often called fire, or compared to it. It is used figuratively much oftener than any term in the Bible. I will give a few examples :—Jer. 21:12, "Lest my fury go out like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings." 4:4, is the same. Lam. 2:3, "And he burned against Jacob like a flaming fire; which devoureth round about." Ezk. 21:31, "I will blow against thee (the Ammonites) in the fire of my wrath." Amos 5:6, " Seek the Lord, and ye shall live; lest he break out like fire in the house of Joseph, and devour it, and there be none to quench it." Neh. 1:6," Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger? Fury is poured out like fire." Mal. 3:2 , "He is like a refiner's fire.” Matt. 3:10, " Every tree which bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire"(God's wrath). 7:19; Luke 3:9.
But Heb. 10:26-27, decides this point, and the meaning of the text before us,—yes, and all other texts with the term fire in them, which relate to the final doom of the impenitent, “If we sin willfully... there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and FIERY INDIGNATION, which shall DEVOUR the adversaries." V. 31, " It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God,"—to "depart" as "cursed," into, or under God's wrath, for they must fall be "devoured"— not kept alive and tormented!!
Now call to mind the fact that "God and his attributes change not," and we see plainly an "everlasting fire" in God himself—see it as we see "everlasting love and mercy” there. To be plain — God's justice, wrath, and hatred to sinners and sin, ever was, and ever will be the same; and as these qualities, or dispositions are called fire, the finally "accursed" who "depart," that is, fall under Christ's justice, displeasure, and wrath, or “indignation," fall into “everlasting fire"; and so must be consumed, as "our God is a consuming fire."
This Bible view of the term “fire, and everlasting fire," applies equally to the term "unquenchable fire" and the "fire of Gehenna" (hell) and to most, if not all the texts, where the final doom of the impenitent is told and fire is used. God is an unquenchable, as well as a "devouring fire"; and the fire of Gehenna may only mean God's wrath, "indignation," etc. But it requires a trip-hammer to beat this idea into the brains of some men, they have become so stereotyped by traditionary explanations of these texts —But few see the blinding power of old views and explanations. It is the curse of the Catholic and the Jew; and is just as much so of Protestants, as to this doctrine. ("Let the righteous smite me," etc.)
It is yet a matter of doubt with me, whether literal fire is ever intended as the instrument to destroy the wicked; but it may be. And it is comparatively of but little importance for us to know, while it is fully revealed that God will by some means put an utter end to them.
Whoever will examine carefully will find reason to doubt, as I do. In telling of judgments on the “beast and false prophet" alone, fire and burn, are used eight times where literal fire is not meant; and in over 100 texts they are thus used.
This accounts for the frequency of the terms in Christ's teaching, as he inspired the prophets, and spoke in their style.
In Rev. 19:20, the beast and false prophet (false systems) are "cast into a lake of fire.” Rev. 20:14, "Death and the grave are cast into a lake of fire.” Now notice—a nonentity cannot be cast into a literal fire. The idea is plainly this—God is displeased with false systems of religion, and with death, and the grave,—they are personified and fall under his displeasure, here called a “lake of fire," and are put an end to. "The last enemy, death, shall be destroyed." 1 Cor. 15 : 26. Notice again—in the next v. Rev. 20: 15, (and 21 : 8,) the wicked are cast into "the lake of fire,"—the same fire as in v. 14, is evidently meant; and if so literal fire is not meant in these texts, but "fiery indignation," as in Heb. 10: 27, where the same scene is spoken of.
These texts demonstrate destruction. Woe preachers admit that four things, beast, false prophet, death, and the grave, are ended by this "lake of fire,"—Why say the, fifth the sinner is preserved?
A. Barnes says, "there is no distinct affirmation respecting the mode of future punishment." Note Matt 25:41. As symbolic descriptions of judgments on the living wicked, when Christ comes, are intermixed with their final doom, literal fire may be used in the first and not in the last.
3. I remark further on our text : —“departing into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels," can only mean —sharing the same fate, which had been decreed, ("prepared") for devils, who had sinned first. Heb. 2:14, says the devil is to be "destroyed," and 1 John 3:8, says Christ is to "destroy his works,"—the wicked, and of course they are cast into the same "fire" or one doom is decreed for both. Amen—"Let the wickedness of all the wicked come to an end," and also the wicked themselves, if it be in the alwise plan of our Maker.
4. Compare this text with Matt. 21:44, where Christ himself is the "stone," (the same as fire in our text,) which "falls on," (the same as being "cast into,") the sinner, and grinds him to powder: powder meaning dust,—“dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return," poor sinner, if not in Christ. Christ will verily be an "everlasting" “stone," “fire” and " fall on” “the last enemy."
Thus we see that it is the instrument of punishment, God's wrath and vengeance, which is "everlasting" and not the sinner and misery. See another text to illustrate : Jer. 17:4, "Ye have kindled a fire in mine anger which shall burn for ever.” The context shows that Judah was slain or cast out of the land, but restored; so God's wrath did not "burn" without end, and "for ever" must be limited here, as the fire as well as the effects ceased. Note —No "Scriptures" were written but the 0. T., when Christ commanded to "search them."
With this brief explanation, dare any say "everlasting" torment is intended? If Christ meant it, why did he not say so, instead of using the word fire, which he knew all the prophets, by his own inspiration, had used to denote utter destruction? Why does he never say there will be "everlasting" torment or misery, if he meant to teach it? Remember, the word "punishment" in v. 46, is not synonymous with torment, and blind must the learned be who do not see it. Let us examine it.
7. Matt. 25 : 46, "And these shall go to everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal," (George Campbell's translation). Go away into, adds darkness to the text.
When a murderer is going to the gallows, it is proper to say, he is "going to punishment," but not so to say, he is going into punishment.
1. This text is in the same figurative discourse as the one in v. 41, and so cannot be positive proof of a doctrine.
2. It must mean the same as the 41st v., which we have seen proves destruction. Christ did not tell two contradictory dooms in the same parable or symbolic account of the judgment.
3. Paul was an authorized expounder of Christ's figurative teaching, and his plain language settles the meaning of this text to be destruction, as seen in 2 Thess. 1:7-9. (1.) Christ says, v. 31, “When the Son of Man snail come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit," etc. (2.) Paul says, "When the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance… Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power.”* Thus we see the event and time are the same. Paul's words here, just agreeing with twenty-two other positive assertions made by him for utter extinction, must decide what Christ meant, or their testimony is contradictory.*
4. The Greek word translated punishment here, is kolasin, and is a noun from the verb kolaso; the radical meaning of which is, to cut off. Donegan's Greek Dictionary says, “kalaso means, (1) properly, to cut off, or take from—to curtail, clip, etc." Liddel and Scott have kolasis (1) a pruning, (cutting off,) (2) hence a checking, punishing, etc." Thus punishment is seen to be only an inferential or secondary meaning. Christ never uses this word only in this text.
The words punishment, torment, sorrow, and misery, in their variations are used seventy times in our English N. T., and this original word is found in only four of them, viz., Matt. 25:46, and 1 John 4:18, as nouns; and Acts 4:21 ; 2 Pet. 2:9, as verbs. In the three last they admit, and seem to demand the sense of cut off. We have seen by the translation of sheol, hades, ghost, etc, that no confidence can be put in the translators when they come to words relating to this subject. Such has been the corruption, that the Germans and Hollanders translate kolasin by a word that means pain.
The word implies punishment, but like the word hanging, it also implies the kind of punishment, viz., loss of life, as “cut off” means this.
A. Barnes says, “It means being cut off from hope and happiness.” This is blank assumption, and destroys the contrast—death is the opposite to life. Ps. 37:9, 22, 28, 38, and 34:16, tell us the wicked "shall be cut off forever," and Christ does not mean to contradict David.
Ellis and Read in Bible vs. Tradition, translate it thus, "And these apeleusontai will go eis kolasin aionion to the cutting off [that takes place] at the age."
5. The English word punishment, means not the same as torment. Death is the highest punishment, but not the greatest pain that could be inflicted on the criminal.
If God should put to death for one year, a prosperous, happy man, it would be a year's punishment; if for a 1,000 years, and then bring to life, it would be a 1,000 year's punishment; and so, if he never raised him to life, it would be an "everlasting punishment" but not everlasting torment. Was loss a punishment to Moses when deprived of entering Canaan?
Confusion, and the sad effects of old and wrong explanations are seen in the statement, that the wicked must live and be conscious, or else their punishment cannot be said to be everlasting.
The New York Recorder, of May 11, 1853, in an article to which I have referred, says, “The idea of punishment involves life, and is impossible without it.” Profound instruction this! Who holds that a stone can be punished with death? But he adds, “To use the term in connection with a being which has ceased to exist is simply nonsense.” This is a specimen of the sophistry now used by divines. Did Christ, or do we say, the wicked will be punished (that is, tormented) after they are "cut off ?" or does Paul say, they will be punished (tormented) after they are “destroyed?” Where does the Bible say they will be tormented after they are "burned up as chaff and tares?”
"Weigh these remarks well, and we see the ‘simple nonsense' belongs to the muddy brain from whence these vain statements came. Query:—Is such a brain a proper one to instruct the rising ministry?
If God should say to Gabriel, ‘In one year I will, for disobedience, blot you out of existence for ever,' I think Gabriel would feel and say, 'it is a great, and everlasting punishment.' O! tell me not I must rot eternally in yonder gloomy grave, even if there is to be no “second death”!
6. The learned editor. Mr. Lord, ofNew York, in opposing H. H. Dobney, on destruction, says, “This text only tells the destruction (cutting off) of the living wicked who are on the earth when Christ comes the second time; and they are not to be raised and judged till after the thousand years." Here is another sample of the strongest texts being given up, as I have said, owing to their uncertain meaning. See his Review, for 1850, p. 411.
This is one witness turning traitor to his party. But let us hear a better one.
7. Pres. Edwards, in his Review of Chauncey, the “Unitarian Restorationist, v. 1, p. 80, when proving sin to be an infinite evil, which Chauncey had denied, charges Chauncey with admitting it, by admitting that annihilation would be just in God. In remarking on Chauncey's admission, he says, “Endless annihilation is an endless or an infinite punishment. It is an endless loss of, not only all the good a man at present enjoys, but of all that good which he would have enjoyed throughout eternity, in the state of bliss to which he would have been admitted, if he had never sinned. This in an endless duration, would amount to an infinite quantity of good. Annihilation, therefore, is an infinite punishment, both as it is endless, and as the quantity of good lost is infinite...T hat annihilation is an evil, no man will deny, who allows that existence and happiness are good…. final annihilation then is an infinite evil, as it is inflicted in disapprobation of sin."
He says much more to illustrate and prove this point. —And here is good sense, and conclusive proof that our text, though it bears against Universalism, bears not against destruction, but favors it.
We see Destructionists need not limit the sense of everlasting in this text, and all the cry about it is vain. The cutting off, or “destruction," will be endless.
We are told by most ministers now, (J. G. Stearns among them,) that annihilation, loss of life and glory, would be no punishment to the sinner—no terror in the prospect —no motive to induce to seek for life and heaven!
Thus "the witnesses agree not among themselves"; and we ask who manifests the most wisdom, Edwards, or those who, against the light now being spread, still struggle to prop up their falling doctrine, by such Babel-like language — death, no punishment! O! “tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the streets of Askelon, lest the enemies of God's church triumph" over the weakness and confusion of the standard-bearers!
This is altogether the strongest text in the Bible, from which to infer endless woe, and properly the only one. I ask if it looks strong enough to vanish the 210 opposing texts? No, it is a silent witness even if there were none to oppose it. It cannot make out even a prima facia case; and yet it is quoted as if it was a full refutation of destruction; and quoted with the same air of triumph and scorn that Luther beheld in his popular opposers.
8. Mark 3:29, "But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation."
Darkness has been thrown over the Bible by the learned corruptly explaining "damn, and damnation" to mean eternal torment. Thus even Webster's Dictionary gives this popular notion, as one of its meanings, and so deceives the unlearned. He took it from popular use and not the Bible. The light of the present day begins to drive ministers to own it only means condemnation. Christ says, "Some will come forth to the resurrection of condemnation" (damnation). But what are they condemned" to? or, what is the punishment of the condemned? The Bible says it is "everlasting destruction," and "the second death," and as there is to be no recovery from this death, it is proper to say it is an "eternal condemnation." This word only shows it is final, just as "the eternal judgment ;" Heb. 6:2, denotes a final decision, and not that the judgment would last for ever. The Syriac Version has it —"But is obnoxious to eternal judgment;" and this makes it agree with Heb. 6 : 2. This text is no witness.
9. John 3:36, would explain itself, had not traditionary explanations blinded the Christian world on this subject. "He that believeth not the Son, shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." "Not see life" not be alive, and yet be in torment!!
The wrath of a government abides on the murderer, and if not forgiven, ho must die ; and if it does not raise him from the dead, it abides on him: thus God's wrath will abide eternally on the destroyed sinner.
Geo. Campbell renders it, "The vengeance of God awaiteth him." The Bible is perverted when this text is used to prove endless woe, as it is direct proof of destruction. It is strong proof against restoration.
10. 2 Thess. 1 7-9, " When the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming tire taking vengeance....who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power."
There is no avoiding full proof of my views here, only by adding "favorable" presence, as deluded men are doing. In Lev. 10:2; 9:23-24 ; and Num. 16:19, 35, we learn what is meant here—"And fire went out from the Lord and devoured them, and they died before the Lord." If Christ "devours" the wicked in any way, they will be “from his presence," but not so if they are alive any where. Again, if the "fire in which he is revealed" destroys them, the fire comes "from his presence." Here are two of tho most natural ways to explain, "from the presence of the Lord," without adding to God's book.
Note—(1.) If there is to be no recovery, it is proper to say "everlasting destruction." (2.) Why did Paul not say "everlasting" torment or misery if he believed it, and not attempt to deceive by the word "destruction"? (3.) This text, as it tells the same event, must mean the same as Heb. 10:26, where " fiery indignation devours the adversaries."
"Woe unto them that put darkness for light, and light for darkness." Isa. 5:20.
11. and 12. 2 Pet. 2:17; and Jude 13, are one in meaning. " These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest, to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever." Jude has it, " raging waves... wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever."
Here we have full evidence that the language is figurative as the apostles sometimes used figures, and none as much so as Peter and Jude.
The figures here favor destruction much more than life in woe, as the analogy of Bible language shows. 1 Sam.2:9, " The wicked shall be silent in darkness." Job 17:3, " If I wait the grave is my house, I have made my bed In darkness:' 10:21, 22, "I go even to the land of darkness, and the shadow of death; a land of darkness, as darkness itself." Ps. 9:17, " The wicked shall be turned into sheol," the state of the dead. These texts, we see, must mean the same as Ps. 92 : 7, "When the workers of iniquity do flourish, it is that they shall be destroyed forever." Desperate must be the case, and confused the mind which relies on these texts for proof of endless woe.
The three parables of Christ in which "outer darkness and wailing” are told, will be seen to refer only to God's dealings with Jews, Gentiles, and his church on earth.—They are in Matt. 8:12; 22:13; 25:30, and are more easily proved earthly events than Matt. 5:26 ; 18:34, which Barnes admits to be so. No time is told for the wailing, and it is only inferred to be endless by divines. The second death will produce wailing if they refer to that.
In these two texts, the word "for ever" is added to show the doom is final, just as in Ps. 92 : 7, "destroyed forever." These texts have not even a shadow of evidence in them against destruction; but they have against restoration.
13. Jude 7, " Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them, in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."
I remark (1.) The people have been kept in the dark by being taught that “eternal" means unending, though "everlasting" does not ; while the learned know they are from the same original word aionios. (2.) The Syriac N. T. has it—"are placed beneath everlasting fire, being doomed to judgment."
The "eternal fire" is now admitted not to be literal fire, and so only is a symbol of God's justice, displeasure, etc, which are eternal in their nature, as I have before explained.
(3.) What is meant, is plain from 2 Pet. 2:6, where the same thing is told in plain language, which Jude tells in figurative. “And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them with an overthrow, making them an example unto those that after should live ungodly." Hare we see it is only the “overthrow" of these cities which is the “ensample," and not their suffering in another state.
(4.) If suffering in another world was to be "an example," why did God not tell of it till 2,000 years afterwards, and then only in this very figurative language, and also have Peter and Jude make contradictory statements about it?
(5.) Luke 17:29, 30, says, But the day Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all: even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed." Where will this “eternal fire and suffering" be when all the wicked are "destroyed" at Christ's coming?
Lastly, if iit could possibly be inferred from this text, and the rich man (and they are the only ones in the Bible from which to infer,) that the wicked are now suffering somewhere, it would not be a particle of proof that they will suffer after the "wailings" of the "second death." It is when that comes that Christ is to "destroy the last enemy” and "the works of the devil.”
We have now examined all the texts in the Epistles except Revelation; and find only three figurative texts from which to infer endless woe; and one other (2 Thess. 1:9,) used for the purpose, by adding to the Bible. By turning to my list, thirty-seven plain texts are found in these epistles for destruction. Who are fanatics and jump at conclusions, without "searching the Scriptures" ? “He who sitteth upon the throne," will ere long decide this question.
Comments