THE LIFE EVERLASTING, Chapter First by J. H. Pettingell

Historical Survey.

SECTION I. Heathen Speculations.

It is always interesting, and often profitable, to study the history of the opinions of men of ancient times on any speculative question, especially on a question like this— the future destiny of man— which so intimately concerns us all. We study it, however, not to find a basis for our own faith — for human opinions on such questions have no more force than there is force in the reasons on which they are founded— but for the sake of the half truths they may express, or the whole truths they may, however dimly, foreshadow; and, more especially, if for nothing else, that we may learn our need of a Divine Revelation to guide us in interpreting the voices of Nature, and to make known to us those higher truths that are beyond the findings of mere reason.

There are elements of truth in all human opinions, however extravagant, or however absurd they may grow to be. It is ours, by such superior advantages as we may enjoy, to discover these elements of truth, and to separate them from the errors with which they are mingled. So is it with all the various opinions and conceits of men with respect to the future life. There is undeniably some truth at the bottom of them all. There is something within us all that foretokens a life beyond the present, and there are analogies and hints in the natural world that seem to confirm these sentiments within us.

But how vague and vapor-like are the opinions of the wisest of men, with nothing but the light of Nature to teach them! They have no more definiteness or consistency than the driven fog or the ever-changing clouds. It is here that we see the need of a special revelation to show man, in his bewilderment, just what and how much these suggestions mean. The error of the old pagan philosophers was, not in guessing, hoping, or even believing with more or less doubt, that there might be a life beyond the present, but in taking no account of man's fallen condition; in claiming for every man, in his alienation from God and holiness, what could be assured to him only on condition of union with his Maker and conformity to His holy will; in assuming that whatever good man may conceive of, or desire, will yet be given to him, whether he seek it or not or be fitted to enjoy it. And yet they hardly ventured to assume so much. Indeed, they knew not how to shape their beliefs to conform them with their hopes and their fears. How could they, without a divine revelation, discover and formulate this, the great special doctrine of the Gospel — Life Everlasting through an atoning Savior ? Well did Cicero, in summing up the opinions of those who had gone before him, express the mystery in which the whole question was involved, and the only way in which it could be solved: "Which of these opinions is true, some god must tell us; which is the most like truth, is a great question."* Some god — yea, the only true God — has told us. It was the ex press object of the incarnation of the Deity, to put men in possession of this great truth; to bring the Immortality for which he yearns, after its forfeiture by sin, again within his reach; and to make known to him the way of attaining it. "Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable gift" — the gift of Eternal Life through an atoning Savior, and the gift of the Gospel, by which it is made known to us.

But, alas, that men to whom this Gospel has been given, and who profess to receive its testimony, should deny its teachings on this very question, and turn from Him who is declared most explicitly to be the only source and way of Eternal Life, and continue to build their hopes of Immortality, their philosophies and their theologies of the future life, on the shadowy foundations of the old pagan notion of the immortal nature of man!

This may well excite our wonder. It would be altogether inexplicable, did not the Scripture explain the mystery, by attributing the inception and prevalence and perpetuation of this great falsehood — that sinning man shall not die, but live forever — to the artifices of the arch enemy of God and man. He was a "liar from the beginning," and at the very outset he whispered this very lie —"ye shall not surely die" — into the ears of our sinning progenitors, to whom God had promised exemption from death, only on condition of continued obedience. And Satan is still able to change any truth of God into a lie, and even to "transform himself into an angel of light," and as the "god of this world" to blind the minds of them that believe not, "lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them."

Here we have revealed to us — while we are cautioned against it — the fons et origo of that delusion, by which the heathen, without the Gospel, were made to interpret the teachings of Nature, which suggest the possibility of Immortality in the way of holiness, as the assurance of Immortality to all, even in sin. The same delusion causes those to whom this Gospel reveals a new way of Eternal Life as the special gift of God's grace through Jesus Christ, to interpret it only as the offer of eternal blessedness to immortal men, whose life had not been and cannot be forfeited by sin. By this delusion the character of God is traduced, and He who is infinitely merciful, as well as just, is made to appear as abominably cruel and tyrannical; and the Gospel is robbed of its distinguishing feature, as a message of Life to dying men, and transformed into a message of Salvation from a doom which none but an almighty monster could inflict!

And then, that this delusive fiction of the inherent and inalienable immortality of man might not too violently contradict the voice of God in Nature, which declares that fallen man is a perishable creature, and the same voice in His revealed Word declaring the wages of sin to be death, that other doctrine of the duplex nature of man was invented, to give it plausibility. This doctrine teaches that man is not an integer, as God made him, but a twofold creature, (or rather a creature and a being under one form,) called body and soul; that the one is mortal, but the other immortal; that the one naturally lives only for a time and then dies, while the other, when separated from the body, rises into greater freedom and activity, and naturally and inevitably lives on forever. This is the philosophy that has insidiously reversed the teachings both of Nature and Revelation, and subordinated them to its malign uses.

We can give only a very hasty glance at the various speculations and opinions that have been entertained by the old pagan philosophers, concerning the nature of man and his destiny hereafter. Those who are curious to inquire further are referred to works more especially devoted to this specific topic.

The Ancient Egyptians, according to Herodotus, "believed that the soul, at death, immediately enters some other animal, and that after using, as vehicles, every species of terrestrial, aquatic, and winged creatures, it finally enters a second time the human body. They affirm that it under goes all these changes in the space of 3,000 years. This opinion some among the Greeks have adopted as their own." They believed, not only in the future existence and transmigration of human souls, but in the divinity of the animal souls of dogs, cats, and crocodiles, and worshiped them as their gods. Are they the people to teach us correct theology?

The Chinese, the Hindus, and other inhabitants of Eastern Asia, from time immemorial believed, and still believe, in some sort of after life. It may be a personal existence, or it may be an impersonal existence. It may be a long series of transmigrations from the body of one animal to that of another, till the soul is finally absorbed into the divine essence from which it originally came. After all their conflicting surmises and fancies, the sum of all that their wisest philosophers could teach them may be expressed in the language of one of them, thus: "The former I state of being is unknown; the present state is apparent; the future is not yet discovered."

The Ancient Persians, according to Zoroaster, believed in the purification of the souls of the wicked by purgatorial fires, and in the final restoration of all men to the favor of Ormuzd, their creator.

The wise men of Araeia appear to have believed in the future existence of man through a resurrection of the body. In this respect, under the light of divine tradition, not extinguished till long after the time of Job who is thought by some to give intimation of such a hope (Job 19:25), their notions were more in accord with the teaching of the Bible than those of other ancient people. Dr. Good, in his Book of Nature, says : "The Hindu philosophers, totally and universally denying a resurrection of the body, support their doctrine of a future life alone upon the natural immortality of the soul; while the Arabian philosophers, passing over the immortality of the soul, rested it alone uponthe resurrection of the body."

Thales, Anaxagoras, Pythagoras, and the leaders of the earlier Grecian schools of philosophy, evidently borrowed many of their thoughts from the earlier schools of Egypt and India. They held similar notions of the pre-existence and metempsychosis of human souls, and to their indestructible nature; and some of them included the souls of brute animals in the same category, and held that the wicked were punished by being changed, after death, into inferior animals; and for this reason Pythagoras and his disciples abstained from eating animal food.

Socrates appears to have had more divine illumination than, perhaps, any other heathen philosopher, and to have come nearer to the knowledge of the true God; and yet, when he looked into the future, he was like one looking into a thick fog. But, while he held his opinions with the modest doubt which characterizes all truly great minds, when dealing with questions too deep for the human mind alone to fathom, he was willing to die for them. Perhaps he is somewhat indebted to the master genius of Plato, his pupil, for something of the assurance with which they are set forth in his Phcedon. Even Socrates, who died like a Christian martyr, faithful to his convictions, leaves a dying request that his friends would not neglect to sacrifice the cock, which he had vowed to Esculapius, and in taking his final leave of them, says : "I am going out of the world, and you are to remain in it; but which of us has the better part, is a secret to every one but God."

Plato, the greatest of all the ancient philosophers, held not merely that man is a twofold being, or rather a creature and a being, consisting of soul and body, but that the soul is bipartite in its nature, one part animal and the other part rational; that the rational is eternal in its existence both in the past and in the future; that the number of immortal souls is definite, so as not to be increased or diminished. He believed also in the transmigration of souls, and in the future restoration — if not of all the wicked — of all excepting the most abandoned and incorrigible.

As for Cicero, Cato, Seneca, Epictetus, Pliny, and the scholars, statesmen, poets, and others of the Roman world, they followed very much in the track of their Grecian predecessors. They were subject to the same hopes, doubts, and fears. Their notions of the future state were equally vague, fluctuating, and contradictory. It is needless to quote in detail from their writings. Cicero very well expresses the common sentiment of them all when he says; "I have perused Plato's Phoedon with the greatest diligence and carefulness, over and over again, but know not how it is; whilst I read it, I am convinced; when I lay the book aside, and begin to consider by myself the soul's immortality, all conviction ceases."

A volume might easily be filled with similar extracts, showing the surmises, poetic fancies, crude notions, or more definite opinions of these and other ancient people. But we get no further light. This is the sum of all they are able to tell us of the future.

And what is the lesson we are taught by it all? Not, surely, that men in their alienation from God and in all their degradation are naturally and necessarily immortal, but that there is a higher and a better life, in union and harmony with God; a perfect good, designed for man, if he but knew how to reach it. But alas ! this was the question of all questions which they could not solve: How shall man secure the favor of the gods, and possess himself of their highest gifts? How to discover this to ayaOov — this summum bonum — this supreme good which they all blindly sought, was the great question which pressed itself upon their anxious minds. None of them could give any certain answer or throw any light on this question.

Seneca quite despairingly says: “Our corrupt nature has drunk in such draughts of iniquity, which are so far incorporated in its very bowels, that you cannot remove it, save by tearing them out;" and yet, faintly conceiving of some supernatural aid, he adds: "No man is able to clear himself; let some one give him a hand ; let some one lead him out."

Ovid makes a similar confession: " If I could, I would be more sane. But some unknown force drags me against my will. Desire draws me one way, conviction another. I see the better and approve; the worse I follow."

Zenophanes closes his work on Nature in these words: " No man has discovered any certainty, nor will discover it, concerning the gods and what I say of the universe. For, if he uttered what is most perfect, still he does not know it, but conjecture hangs over all."

Even Plato — the wisest of all the philosophers of the pagan world, and perhaps the most positive; whose philosophy has been more generally accepted, not only by heathen but also by Christian men, and which has had more influence in shaping their psychological and theological systems than that of all others combined; who has even been installed as the great teacher, throughout the Christian Church, on this subject concerning which we most need divine instruction, and which has been made the special subject of a Divine Revelation; whose authority is made to overrule and contradict the express declarations of that Word, and to control in its interpretation — even he is constrained to acknowledge, as he does in his Phcedon: "It appears to me that to know them [truths concerning the destiny of man] clearly, in the present life, is either impossible or very difficult. But yet, not to test what has been said in every possible way, not to investigate the whole matter, and exhaust upon it every effort, is the part of a very weak man. For we ought, in respect to these things, either to learn from others how they stand, or to discover them for ourselves; or, if both these are impossible, they, taking the best of human reasonings, that which appears the best supported, and embarking on that, as one risks himself on a raft, so to sail through life — unless one could be carried more safely, or with less risk, on a secret conveyance or some Divine Logos." And again he says in his Alcibiades: "We must wait patiently until some one, either God or some inspired man, teach us our moral and religious duties, and, as Pallas in Homer did to Diomede, remove the darkness from our eyes."

How vague and fluctuating, at best, are the notions of those who have no Divine Revelation to teach them! 0, why is it that Christian men, with the Gospel in their hands bringing Life and Immortality to light through Christ the Savior, will reject this everlasting Rock and go back to the sandy foundations of the pagan world on which to build their hope of Immortality?

This Gospel solves for us what, to them, was an insoluble mystery. Man was indeed intended for Immortality, and made capable of it, provided he should continue in union with his Maker, but not apart from Him. In the very outset, by the constitution of man's nature, and by the universal law of Heaven, holiness only could give assurance of Immortality, and sin must end in Death.

And now, after having come under the doom of death through sin, these instincts of Immortality and yearnings after another life beyond, remain in man — not to tantalize and mock him as mere indications of God's original purpose now abandoned, but as pledges of the renewal and continuance of that purpose to give him life again from the dead — the Life Everlasting — if he shall be fitted for it through redemption by a Divine Savior.

But when mankind had lost the knowledge of the true God, "their foolish heart was darkened, and professing to be wise they became fools;" and, under the subtle temptation of their great adversary, "who changed the truth of God into a lie," they essayed to interpret these instincts of humanity as the assurance of Immortality even in sin, as their inheritance by Nature, which God now offers only to such as shall be born again and restored to holiness through grace in Christ. "For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have Everlasting Life." Wonder of wonders! Christ's own church, redeemed by His blood, has come, by the same delusive influence, to reject Christ's own testimony, and to accept and indorse — as we shall soon see—that of their adversary, who was a "liar from the beginning."

SECTION II. Belief of the Ancient Hebrews.

We find among the early Hebrews no trace whatever of the doctrine of the natural immortality of man, for the good reason, that they were more directly under the teaching of divine inspiration than any other people. They did have notions, more or less distinct, of a future life — not on the ground of the natural immortality of the soul, but through the redemption of the soul and body together. It was the object of their divinely ordained sacrificial system to foreshadow this great truth, that man needs to be redeemed from the death to which all are subject on account of sin. Their hope of living again, so far as they laid hold of it, was in a resurrection from the dead by Divine Power, and not, according to the heathen ideas, on account of the living nature of the human soul.

As they came under the demoralizing influences of the nations with which they had intercourse, they imbibed many of their false and superstitious notions concerning the dead. It was expressly to keep them from the corrupting power of these false notions, that they were segregated, and cut off as much as possible from intercommunication and association with them. They were forbidden to practice their rites, and, especially, under pain of death, to practice those delusions of the devil — necromancy, witch craft, and the like — which so commonly prevailed through out the Gentile world. And to the very last, though they became sadly corrupted in their latter days, they were kept more free from the ghostly superstitions of the heathen, than any other people on the face of the earth.

They regarded the sheol into which all men, whatever their character, descended at death, as a region, or rather a state, of silence, darkness, and utter unconsciousness, until God shall awaken them by His almighty power to live again. While, by the rites of their religion, and by divine communications through their prophets, they were taught to look beyond the present life, and by faith to lay hold of sthat mysterious, undefined, future good in reserve for them, -and yet to be more fully revealed ; and while they believed that the wicked should tremble in view of a future judgment and of remediless destruction ; yet their ideas'of any thing beyond this life, even in the case of the most advanced, were exceedingly vague, and the great mass appear to have been hardly at all influenced by them. The motives and sanctions of their divine law and system of religion were pre-eminently earthly and temporal. The rewards of virtue and obedience were health, abundant harvests, numerous progeny, length of days, and general prosperity ; and the penalty of sin and disobedience was just the reverse of these — drought, famine, disease, pain, sorrow, and death. No doubt, there was involved in these promised blessings, and especially in the promise so oft repeated that the righteous should prolong his days, possess the earth, etc., a deeper meaning than at first appeared. Here was the germ of that gospel truth, yet to be revealed through Christ, of Everlasting Life in the kingdom of God, yet to be established on this renewed earth; and in the threatening of evil, and of death itself, there were doubtless intimations of that second death which follows the future judgment of the wicked, and from which there is no possible recall. But these higher truths were not distinctly apprehended till they were brought fully to light in the Gospel.

Warburton, in his Divine Legation, says: "The doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments is not to be found in, nor did it make a part of, the divine legation of Moses.”

Bishop Lowth, in his Lectures, says that "no explicit mention of immortal spirits " is to be found in the Hebrew poets.

Dr. Harmer says: "Many of the Jews understood the life of the world to come in a literal sense;" that is, they believed in a literal resurrection from the dead, and in a real substantial life, and not in any such ghostly life of the spirit only, as was commonly imagined by the heathen.

It does, indeed, seem strange to those who are thoroughly possessed by the Platonic idea of the immortality of the soul as distinct from the body, and who try to find some support for it in the Bible, that the Jews, who of all others might be supposed to be well instructed in this "fundamental truth of religion," as it is called, should be so unsophisticated and innocent of any such idea. It puzzles them. It ought to lead them to inquire whether the idea — so far from being fundamental — ought to have any place what ever in any system of religion, as it certainly did not in that which was divinely given by Moses.

Professor Ernst Stahelin, in The Foundation of Our Faith, says: "Moses and Confucius did not expressly teach the immortality of the soul; nay, they seemed purposely to avoid entering upon the subject. They simply took it for granted."

How does he know they took it for granted? He would better have said, as for Moses, he did not teach it simply because, as God's servant, he had no such doctrine to teach. It was Satan's doctrine, not God's truth; therefore he "purposely avoided" it.

The author of Ecce Homo, himself a believer in this heathen dogma, on pp. 35 and 36, says:

“It is surprising that the early Jews, in whom the sense of God was so strong, and who were familiar with the conception of an Eternal Being, should yet have been behind, rather than before other nations, in suspecting the immortality of the soul. The Greek did not even in the earliest times believe death to be annihilation, though he thought it fatal to all joy and vigor.

But the early Jews, the Legislator himself, and most of the Psalmists, limit their hopes and fears to the present life, and compare man to the 'beasts that perish'. . . . The suspicion of immortality appears in the later Prophets — that suspicion which Christ himself was to develop into a glorious confidence." A glorious confidence in what? Not in the immortality of the soul of man. That doctrine is not found in the later Prophets, nor in the Gospel of Christ; but in the Christian doctrine of the immortality of the whole man through a resurrection from the dead, by the almighty power of God, and by virtue of the death and resurrection of Christ the Savior. It was not the ghostly immortality of disembodied spirits, but a living again of resurrected saints to possess this renewed earth and to hold it forever.

Dr. G. D. Boardman, in his Creative Week, page 215, makes the following admission, though he seems reluctant to do it:

"And yet — for I would be candid — I must add that not a single passage, from Genesis to Revelation, teaches, so far as I am aware, the doctrine of man's natural immortality. On the other hand, Holy Writ emphatically declares that God only hath Immortality; that is to say, God alone is naturally, inherently, in His own essence and nature, immortal. He alone is the I AM, having this as His name forever, His memorial to all generations. If then man is immortal, it is because Immortality has been bestowed on him. He is immortal, not because he was created so, but because he has become so, deriving his deathlessness from Him who alone hath Immortality;" and — he should have added — only by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit and a new birth and a resurrection from the dead through the Savior, as revealed in the Gospel.

It was not till after the return of the Jews from their long captivity, where they imbibed many heathen notions, and after the close of the sacred canon, which had hitherto been the foundation of their religious faith, that they began to think of the soul as a separate essence, and to entertain the fables of the pagan world respecting its separate existence after death. Hence in the Apocrypha, and in the Mishna and Gemara of the Talmud, and in the writings of Josephus, who was a Pharisee and a Platonist, as the Pharisees [of the time] generally were, we find here and there traces of such notions. But there is no uniformity nor consistency of teaching in these writings, nor in the later writings of their Rabbins. By careful scrutiny one may find, mixed with much that is true and in accord with the Old Testament doctrine, many passages, here and there, which favor the Grecian philosophy, as well as vague hints that he may construe either way as he may himself be inclined.

Dr. Pusey, in his Analysis of the Book of Enoch, maintains that it is made up of contributions from several authors, and can be quoted on either side of this question, because it expresses both the belief of the Pharisees in the endless suffering of the wicked, and of the orthodox Jewish church in the everlasting life of the righteous only, and the destruction of the wicked.

While nothing in all their Sacred Scriptures is said of the natural immortality of the soul, as they fell away from the teaching of inspiration, and adopted the views of others, and their modes of thought and expression, we find such phraseology cropping out in their "oral traditions " and in their uninspired writings, as the following, in which both views are mingled.

"God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity. Nevertheless, through envy of the devil, came death into the world, and they that do hold of his side do find it [death.]- For he created all things that they might have their being; and the generations of the world were healthful; nor was the kingdom of death upon the earth — for the righteous is immortal— but ungodly men and their works and words called it to them, for when they thought to have it for their friend, they were consumed to naught." (Wis. 1: 2.)

"After death, the judgment shall come, when we shall live again, and then the names of the righteous be manifest, and the works of the ungodly shall be declared; and that shall die that is corrupt, and misery shall pass away, and the long suffering shall have an end." (Esd. 7.)

At the time of the advent of our Lord, the Jewish people- were divided into various sects, such as the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and others. There was no uniformity of belief among them on this question. Indeed, it was one of the chief questions in dispute among them.

Plato's doctrine of the soul, its eternal pre-existence, and its eternal life in blessedness or misery hereafter, prevailed among the Pharisees. Josephus, who was one of them, and evidently indoctrinated into these notions, presents their side of the case in as favorable a light as possible in his writings, and yet he does not pretend that their authority for this belief was derived from the written Law of Moses, or from the Prophets, but rather from other sources. In regard to the Jews generally, both ancient and modern, Mr. Edward White, in his Life in Christ, p.156, thus remarks : "The Jews themselves have never pretended to derive from the Mosaic Law a defense of the doctrine that eternal suffering is the legal punishment of sin. The greatest of the modern Rabbins, Maimonides, Abarbanel, Kimchi, and Bechai, with one voice teach that the punishment of impenitent sinners is literal and absolute extermination at the last judgment; and they represent this as the tradition of the Jewish Church in interpreting the Law. The absence of the doctrine of eternal suffering from the Law, is decisive proof that modern men have misinterpreted the Revelation, by foisting into it the philosophic doctrine of natural immortality; thus compelling Scripture to utter a language not its own."

The author just quoted still further remarks, in substance, that the doctrine of the Rabbins, during the Christian era, shows that there is no dominant Jewish tradition from the early Christian ages in support of the Pharisaic opinion of an endless misery. "In the Mishna," says Prof. Hudson, "we find no mention whatever of the immortality of the soul — that is of all souls — or of eternal pain, though exclusion from eternal life is often mentioned." In the Gemara, which represents very ancient Jewish thoughts, the destiny of the wicked is thus most fully described:

"Those who sin and rebel greatly in Israel, as well as Gentile sinners, shall descend into Gehenna, and there be judged during twelve months ; at the end of which, the body is consumed, the soul is burned up, and the spirit is scattered beneath the feet of the just, as it is said in Mal. 4:3. But heretics, informers, and infidels, who deny the law of God, and the resurrection of the dead, and those who cause others to sin, as Jeroboam the son of Nebat, shall descend into Gehenna and there be judged ages of ages; but in the end that fire shall utterly consume them, leaving neither root nor branch."

There are in the Talmud traces of Restorationism — chiefly in favor of the Israelites. But we find no indication that the eternity of hell-torments was ever an accepted Jewish doctrine, though asserted by certain Rabbins with infinite puerilities. Maimonides, the greatest of them all, distinctly teaches the immortality of the righteous alone, and the absolute extermination of the wicked, in such emphatic words as these:

"The punishment which awaits the wicked man is, that he will have no part in eternal life, but will die and be utterly destroyed. He will not live forever, but for his sins will be cut off and perish like the brute. It is a death from which there is no return. The reward of the righteous will consist in this, that they will be in bliss and exist in everlasting beatitude, while the retribution of the wicked will be, to be deprived of that future life and to be cut off." Mr. White avers that he has verified these citations from the greatest of modern Jewish writers. Rabbi Manasseh Ben-Israel says that Maimonides, learned in all the lore of antiquity, undoubtedly understood this “cutting off” of the soul, mentioned in the Scriptures, to be no other than its annihilation…

"Philo, nearly cotemporary with the Apostles, and, outside of their circle, the most masterly Jewish intellect of that period, seems to have believed in the annihilation ofthe wicked as the result of future punishment. His idea was, that the material world was to be destroyed and the wicked ' involved in its destruction.' " (Is “Eternal” Punishment Endless? by Dr. Whiton.)

The Sadducees were a sect of materialistic infidels. They interpreted the Mosaic Law literally, and in a sense entirely physical and temporal. They not only denied the immortality of the wicked, but of the righteous also. In a word, they denied all future existence. They held that "there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit." * They were the decided antagonists of the Pharisees, and agreed with them only in their opposition to Christ and His doctrines ; for he showed no favor to the errors of either party. It is often -supposed and argued by those who hold to the Platonic doctrine of the soul, and endeavor to find some scriptural support for their views, that, however much our Lord condemned the practices of the Pharisees, He favored their doctrines; and, that he opposed the Sadducees chiefly on account of their heretical and infidel notions. But this was far from the case. He sided with neither party. He did not set himself to combat with their specific errors. This was not His method of teaching. He endeavored to correct the errors of both parties by supplanting them with the truth. He was quite as severe in the condemnation of the one as of the other.He warned his disciples to beware not only of the Sadducees, but of the Pharisees also. He denounced them for teaching for doctrine the commandments of men, and for making the word of God of none effect through their traditions. "Then understood they that He bade them beware of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees." The fact is, they were both partly right and partly wrong, as is usually the case with opposing religious parties. One extreme begets the other.

* "But this punishment awaits the wicked, that they shall not possess that life, but shall die, and be utterly destroyed. He who is unworthy of that life is dead because lie will not live forever, but on account of his iniquities will be cut off and perish like the beasts. And this is a cutting-off concerning which in the law it is written, That soul shall be utterly extinguished."

Mr. White very justly says :"The Sadducees occupied an unassailable post, when they declared that Moses and the Prophets knew nothing of the Immortality of the Soul as a basis of hope in futurity. The Pharisees were equally in strength when they declared that the Scriptures proclaimed the promise of Eternal Life." And both alike erred, from failing to grasp the truth which Christ himself would have taught them — and which would have reconciled them, had they been willing to receive it — " that man has lost the hope of life eternal under the law, and only regains it by the grace of God in redemption." (Life in Christ, p. 187.)

Both parties endeavored to catch Him in His words, to win from Him something which they could use to support their own cause or employ against their adversaries, or by which they might be able to accuse Him before the people. But they were most signally frustrated in every encounter they sought with Him; for they were obliged to admit that "never man spake like this man."

Some of the disciples, who were aware of the Pharisaic doctrine of pre-existence, made a delicate appeal to Jesus on the subject by asking Him concerning a man who was congenitally blind, " Who did sin, this man or his parents that he was born blind?" Without even noticing the error of doctrine that was implied in this question, our Lord simply said : " Neither hath this man sinned nor his parents, but that the works of God should be made manifest." The Pharisees believed themselves to be the special favorites of Heaven, and that of all others — whatever might become of the heretical Jews and heathen Gentiles — they would most surely inherit the Eternal Life, of which Christ spoke so much. They were such sticklers for all the ceremonial observances of their religion, so punctilious in observing their fasts and paying their tithes, they supposed, of course, that He would admit their claim. But he said unto them : " Ye search the Scriptures ; for in them ye think ye have (the assurance of) Eternal Life, and they are they which testify of Me " — of Me as the only true ground of hope. " But ye will not come to Me that ye might have life." " Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man, ye have no life in yourselves." "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life." " Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread he shall live forever ; and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I give for the life of the world."If they did not understand Him, it was not because He did not speak plainly. But like the believers in the same philosophy at the present day, their minds were so thoroughly prepossessed with another doctrine, and prejudiced against this great gospel truth of Eternal Life only in Christ, that they could not receive it. But so much they did understand, that He did not admit their claim, and that, according- to His doctrine, they had no foundation for their hopes of Eternal Life. Therefore they hated Him, opposed Him, and sought to kill Him.

The Sadducees, on the other hand, though they prided themselves on their strict adherence to the letter of the Mosaic Law, could gain no aid or comfort from Him, in their denial of the doctrine of the resurrection and of a future life. When they came to Him with a supposed case of a woman who had successively married and buried seven husbands and then died herself, closing the case with the inquiry, "In the resurrection whose wife is she?" He replied : " The children of this world marry and are given in marriage ; but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage ; neither can they die any more ; for they are equal unto the angels ; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob ; for He is not a God of the dead, but of the living ; for all live unto Him." (Luke 20: 27-38.)

This reply of our Lord is most remarkable. It has many interesting points, and we are tempted to dwell upon it at some length ; and the more especially, because there are so many who misinterpret it, and apply it to prove a doctrine which is not here in question between Christ and the Sadducees. It is not concerning the intermediate state, but concerning the resurrection of the dead, that the Sadducees inquire of our Lord ; and it is to this point that He directs His reply.

But we can only now note very briefly these few points"

1) In the resurrection, man is not simply restored to his original Paradisal state of purity and blessedness, but lifted up to one that is higher and more spiritual.

2) It is pre-eminently the portion of those who are fitted for it.

3) It is not transitory like the present. "Neither can they die any more." Those who are admitted to it enter upon the Life Everlasting. The implication is that those who are not worthy to be admitted to it must die again in the second death. This deathless existence — this Immortality of which Christ speaks — is the peculiar property of the children of God.

4) Though Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are now confessedly dead and buried, they are not lost or forgotten by God. Their identity is still preserved. They are not utterly extinct. Their whole life is not completed, but only begun. They have passed through one stage of it. They are to enter upon the higher and. eternal stage, when He shall call them. He watches over their sleeping bodies. Their breath or spirit which they surrendered to Him, is in His keeping. He is still their God, and will be, as in the past, so in the future and forever. In the mind and purpose of God His children never die. They all live by Him, and in Him, and unto Him.

That those who heard our Lord's reply, understood it as a complete answer to the cavils of the Sadducees as to the resurrection, is evident from what follows:

"Then certain of the scribes answering, said, Master, thou hast well said ; and after that, they durst not ask him any questions at all." It is well remarked by the author of Life in Christ, "that the conduct of the Incarnate Life towards each of these parties, throws a flood of light upon the cause of their honest differences and the true mode of reconciliation. The existence of the two sects seems to have been permitted by Divine Providence, as the most effectual method of leading men to the Christ who alone can open the gates of Life Eternal to the dead."

SECTION III. Doctrine of the Fathers and Early Church.

With many, the question, What did the early Fathers believe and teach? is one of high importance. Their testimony is regarded by them as next in authority to that of the Apostles themselves. We do not, -however, attach any more importance to their opinions than to those of other men, excepting as it shall be made to appear that they were derived directly from Christ, and those whom He commissioned to preach and teach in His name. In this respect the question is important and very suggestive. Of course, the nearer we approach to the Fountain Head, and listen to the words of those who may be supposed to have drawn their inspiration and doctrines from it — as the companions or immediate successors of the Apostles — the more important it may be for us to know what they believed and taught. With us, the teaching of God's Word is ultimate and supreme; and, when upon such a question as this of Everlasting Life it is full and explicit, it needs not to be supplemented by human opinions to render it entirely credible and authoritative. But more for the sake of others than for our own, and to give completeness to our Survey, we have devoted much time and study to the patristic literature, as regards this subject. We have, also, availed ourselves liberally of the researches of others, who have made this literature a subject of special and thorough investigation; and we shall take the liberty of quoting from their writings in aid of our position, as freely as occasion shall require.*

What the Scripture teaches concerning this Life Everlasting, has been shown at length in another place. John, the forerunner of Christ, proclaimed Him as the Life-giver of the world. Our Lord himself declared it to be the great object and end of His mission to this earth, to give Immortality to perishing men. He offered himself as the unique and only source of Eternal Life, and declared every where and with constant reiteration that, in order to [have] this life, men must "believe" on Him, for he that believeth not on Him cannot see Life. "This is the will of Him that sent me, that every one that seeth the Son and believeth on Him, may have Everlasting Life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

The Apostles and early Christian disciples taught the same doctrine — Life and Immortality through Christ alone. He was the only Foundation upon which they rested all their hopes of living again, after this life, and of living for ever. "This is Eternal Life, that they might know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent."

* Those who would pursue this subject further, we would refer to the Ante-Nicene Library, an English work, edited by Rev. A. Roberts, D. D., and James Donaldson, LL. D. Also, to Prebendary Constable's work on Future Punishment, fifth edition; J. M. Denniston's Perishing Soul; and C. F. Hudson's Debt and Grace.

The titles given to the Lord Jesus, in the Scriptures, are very suggestive. He is called the "Prince of Life," or, as in the margin, Author of Life. (Acts 3 : 15.) Elsewhere we read of "Christ our Life," etc. Mr. J. H. Whitmore, in his excellent work, The Doctrine of Immortality, says that in the Syriac version, He is frequently called the "Vivifier" and the "Life-giver;" and that these titles are made much more prominent in that version than in our authorized English version. The following are sample passages given from Murdock's translation:

"There is not another name under heaven, which is given to men, whereby to live." (Acts 4 : 12.) "Him hath God established as a Head and Life-giver." (Acts 5: 31.) “I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God unto Life to all who believe." (Rom. 1 : 16.) "I did not come to judge the world, but to vivify the world." (John 12: 47.) "Believe on the name of our Lord Jesus Messiah, and thou wilt have Life." (Acts 16 : 31.) "Our concern is from heaven, and from thence we expect our Vivifier, our Lord Jesus Messiah." (Phil. 3 : 20.) "He is able to vivify forever them who come to God by Him." (Heb. 7 : 25.) "The appearing of our Life-giver, Jesus the Messiah, who hath abolished death, and hath made manifest Life and Immortality by the Gospel." (2 Tim. 1 : 10.) "From thy childhood, thou wast taught the Holy Books, which can make thee wise unto Life, by faith in Jesus Messiah." (2 Tim. 3 : 15.) "My Lord will rescue me from every evil work, and give me Life in his heavenly kingdom." (2 Tim. 4 : 18.) This was their assurance and their song :

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to His abundant mercy hath begotten us again to a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible (aphtharton, immortal) and undefiled and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven,... ready to be revealed in the last time."*

* The teachings of Scripture— especially of our Lord and His immediate disciples— are considered at length in another chapter, to which we must refer the reader, without any further enlargement in this place. It will there be shown that the doctrine of Immortality in and through Christ only, is not merely taught, and taught with constant and emphatic repetition, but that it is the distinguishing feature of the Gospel.

If, now, we shall find the Apostolic Fathers following in the same line of thought with Christ and His Apostles; and if the nearer we approach to the beginning of the Christian era, the more nearly they are found to accord with their divinely inspired predecessors, in their forms of thought and modes of expression; and if, in other terms of similar import, we find them honoring Christ as the great giver of the Life Everlasting, and emphatically and always ascribing their hopes of Immortality to Him, by virtue of His death and resurrection, and denying this great boon to unbelievers, as the Scriptures do; and if we shall find that these early Fathers never speak of the soul of man as something separate and distinct from the man himself, or as constituting the man himself without the body, or as living in a disembodied state while the man is dead; and if we discover that they never use such expressions as the " immortal man," " the immortal soul," "the deathless being," "endless sin and misery," "unending torment," " eternal woe," " the death that never dies," and others of like import, which are never found in the Scriptures, but which came into the literature of the Church with the philosophy of Plato, after the middle of the second century, and which are so common at the present day; then we may fairly claim them as witnessing for us, and with us, lo this great central truth of the Gospel — of Immortality and Eternal Life only through Christ the Savior.

This is just what we do find. On the other hand, as we come down from the apostolic time, we shall find these Christian teachers falling away from the simplicity there is in Christ, and "the faith once delivered to the saints." They begin to speculate concerning the nature and destiny of man, and conceits of their own are mingled with the doctrines of the Gospel. Plato's philosophy — which outside of the Church is popular among the learned — comes more and more into discussion in the Church, and a decided leaning towards it soon begins to manifest itself. Converts are made from his disciples. Efforts are made to win others by endeavoring to soften down the antagonism of the Gospel to his doctrines, and by endeavoring to accommodate its teachings to his philosophy.

The temptation in this direction was strong. Nor was it difficult for those who were so disposed, to bring these two theories of man into an apparent agreement. Plato insisted on morality and virtue ; so did Christ. He taught the immortality of man; Christ taught the immortality of the righteous. It was quite natural to enlarge the scope of Christ's doctrine so as to make it universal in its application; and then, as for the wicked, instead of their extinction in the fires of Gehenna and in the second death — instead of the punishment of everlasting destruction according to the teaching of Christ — this punishment of the world to come was allowed, according to Plato's teaching, in the first instance to be purgatorial and reformatory, and then, in the case of the incorrigible, it was declared to be eternal torment. This compromise had the further merit, in the eyes- of those who made it, of giving into the hands of the domineering and ambitious ecclesiastics — who in this age of increasing corruption had begun to claim to hold the very keys of the kingdom of heaven — just the power for which they thirsted, and which they soon learned to wield with such terrible severity over the lives and consciences of the people.

These seeds of error, which afterwards sprung up and bore such bitter fruit, were early sown. Indeed, they began to manifest themselves even in the days of the Apostles. Paul, in his Epistle to Timothy, says : " O, Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust; avoid profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so-called; which some professing have erred concerning the faith." And to the Corinthians he says: "I fear lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve, through his subtility, [referring to this very doctrine, 'ye shall not surely die,'] so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity which is in Christ." He warned the Colossians, saying: " Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."

The incoming of these heresies, and especially of the philosophy of Plato, in which so many of them centered, was stoutly resisted by those who were true to the faith of the Gospel, as we may see in the voluminous discussions of the ecclesiastics, and in the decrees of the Church Councils during this early period. But as the Church rose into power and authority, the spirit of the world increased; human speculations and philosophies gained the ascendancy more and more; the protests of the faithful became more feeble, and at length impossible, excepting at the expense of life itself. Before half a dozen centuries had elapsed, this philosophy of Plato became triumphant in the Church, and the simple Gospel of Christ had become completely overlaid by the dogmas of the schoolmen and the vain conceits of heathen philosophy.

It is not always easy to ascertain what were the teachings of the Fathers, especially of the earliest; for the writings of many of them are now extant only in a very fragmentary form; the writings of others are entirely lost; and of the writings of still others, who wrote in Greek, we have only some portions translated into Latin. Some of them have been evidently interpolated and corrupted in various ways in later times, by those who would use their honored names and influence to support their own heresies. For the same reason spurious Epistles, written long after they were dead, have been attributed to them. Still further; it is quite as practicable to deal unfairly with the credible Epistles of these early Fathers, as, in translating the sacred Scriptures into our language, to misconstrue their meaning, and to make them seem to utter sentiments the very reverse of what they entertained and expressed. In this way controversialists, on all sides of religious questions in debate, have affected to find an apparent support for their doctrines in the writings of the early Fathers, as they have in the inspired writings of the Apostles.

But, using our best diligence, and honestly endeavoring to learn just what these Fathers taught on the question in hand, and availing ourselves of the investigations and criticisms of learned scholars, we can affirm with confidence that the associates and immediate successors of the Apostles gave no countenance whatever to the Platonic doctrine of the nature of man, that afterwards came in, to vex and corrupt the church. In all the genuine patristic literature now extant, for the first century and a half of the Christian era, nothing whatever can be found to favor it. Of course, this question of Immortality in Christ alone, not being denied, nor coming prominently into discussion in the Church till after this period, we should not expect to find such categorical statements, dogmatic utterances, and systematic arguments, in this regard, as are found in the writings of the later Fathers. But the whole drift and tenor of their writing, and all their modes of expression, as well as their lines of thought, are in keeping with the doctrine they so evidently believed and taught, that Eternal Life is the portion of the believers only, and that it is received, not in the natural, but in the spiritual birth — that it is not from Adam, but from Christ only. In some of these writings — though by no means the most important — we meet with the expressions, "everlasting punishment" and "unquenchable fire," as simple quotations from the New Testament, with no addition or specification to define the precise view of the writer. But in not one of them do we find a hint of human immortality, or of "everlasting suffering."

Mr. Henry Constable thus declares: “From beginning to end of them, there is not one word said of that immortality of the soul which is so prominent in the writings of the later Fathers. Immortality is by them asserted to be peculiar to the redeemed. The punishment of the wicked is by them emphatically declared to be everlasting, in the sense of remediless destruction. Not one stray expression of theirs can be interpreted as giving any countenance to the theory of restoration after purgatorial suffering. The fire of hell is with them, as with us, an unquenchable one ; but its issue is with them, as with Scripture, ' destruction,' ' death,' ' loss of life.' We challenge our opponents to controvert our view of their writings in a single particular."

It will be observed that the doctrine of Plato is, in fact, a doctrine of Universalism. It claims for all men that Immortality which is the peculiar prerogative of the Christian. After being received into the Church, it gave rise to two parties: (1) those who held, with Augustine, to the theory of the endless misery of the wicked, and (2) those who held, with Origen, to that of their final restoration through purgatorial suffering. After a time, these two Platonic schools coalesced, under a kind of compromise, by which both doctrines were retained— venial offenders' were reclaimed through purgatorial sufferings, according to Origen's notion, and irreclaimable sinners were consigned to eternal suffering, according to Augustine's doctrine.

Hence we find these three schools in the early Christian Church : First, the school of Christ and the Apostles and their immediate successors, maintaining the doctrine of the Immortality of the righteous only. Second, that of Augustine — called after him, as its most renowned supporter, though it had its rise two centuries before his time — maintaining the doctrine of the Immortality of all men ; of the righteous in blessedness and glory, and of the wicked in sin and misery forever. Third, that of Origen,. as a kind of reaction and protest agaftist the horrible doctrine of eternal torment — as is the doctrine of universal salvation against the same dogma in our day — holding out the hope of the final salvation of all men.

That the reader may be able to see at a glance the chronological order of these three schools, and the names of the Christian Fathers attached to them severally, we subjoin the following table, which is substantially taken from the author last referred to, with some additions, after which we will cite such of their writings as we can find room for in this limited volume. As an entire chapter is de'voted to' the words of Christ and His Apostles on this question, the citations from the New Testament, which might otherwise be in place here, will be reserved for that place, and, contenting ourselves with those made above, we begin at once with the earliest of the Fathers after the Apostles.

THE FIRST SCHOOL.

Barnabas was the companion of Paul. He is freqently mentioned in the Acts. He was bishop of the Church at Milan, which he founded. The writings bearing his name are supposed by some to be apocryphal. If not his, they are of very early date. Tischendorf found them appended to the New Testament in the Codex Sinaiticus. They were regarded in the first ages as canonical. He speaks of the "life" of the righteous; and also of the "death" of the wicked as the great evil to be avoided, but he gives no hint of everlasting suffering. " He that chooses the evil shall be destroyed (apoleitai) together with his works." (c. 21.) "The day is at hand in which all things shall be destroyed, together with the wicked one," whom he calls "the prince of the time of unrighteousness," while "the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting." (c. 18.)

Clement I., bishop of Rome, was probably the fellow- laborer of Paul, of whom he speaks in Phil. 4: 3, "whose name is in the Book of Life." He is supposed to have been martyred A. D. 100. Some of the homilies and epistles that have been ascribed to him are now admitted to be spurious. They were forged long after his death, at a time when the philosophy of Plato was beginning to find advocates in the Church. Some expressions in these apocryphal writings have been quoted as seeming to favor the received doctrines. But those that are evidently genuine contain nothing whatever that can bear any such construction. He never speaks of the immortality of the soul, as later writers do. He represents man as a creature of the dust, whose life is but the "life of a day." He tells us that Immortality is one of " God's gifts to the redeemed ;" that if we would gain it, we must "earnestly strive" for it ; that if we do not thus strive for it, we shall not obtain it. "How blessed and wonderful are the gifts of God ! Life in immortality ; brightness in righteousness," etc. (c. 35.)

Hermas is supposed to be the person mentioned by Paul, Rom. 16 : 14. His writings, though fanciful, were very popular. They were read in the churches for several centuries, and were esteemed by Origen and others as inspired. The Greek original of his Book of the Shepherd is now nearly all lost. We have only a Latin translation, in which his two constant themes are Life and Death. He never speaks of future torment. The torment to which he alludes as the penalty of sin is always of a temporal character. His book is full of such expressions as these : "Life is distant from the wicked ;" "they are ordained to death;" "sin brings to death ;" " all who will not repent have lost their life;" "they shall utterly die." "They who have known the Lord and have seen his wonderful works, if they shall live wickedly, shall be doubly punished and shall die forever." " Many have altogether departed from God ; they have utterly lost life." " Fear God and thou shalt live, and whosoever shall fear Him and keep His commandments, their life is with the Lord — they shall live forever — but as for those who keep them not, there is no life in them."

Ignatius, who was among the most eminent of the Apostolic Fathers, was ordained bishop of the Church at Antioch in about the year 67, by Peter, as some suppose, or, according to others, by John. He continued there for forty years and suffered martyrdom at last, by being exposed to wild beasts in the amphitheatre, in 107. Of the eight epistles that are attributed to him, the three which iire regarded as genuine— namely, those addressed to Polycarp, the Ephesians, and the Romans— contain such expressions as the following : " Be vigilant as God's athlete; the need- is Incorruptibility and Life Eternal." " I do not desire the food of corruption, nor the desires of this world. The bread of God, which is the body of Christ, I seek; and His blood, which is love incorruptible, and perpetual life." "Christ our inseparable Life." "That He, might breathe the breath of Immortality into His church." "The bread which is the medicine of Immortality, our antidote, that we should not die but live forever in Christ Jesus."

Polycarp is supposed to have been acquainted with the Apostle John. He was bishop of Smyrna, and' suffered martyrdom there by fire, at an advanced age, near the year 160. Only one short letter of his is extant, in which nothing definite on this question can be found. Eusebius, in his Ecc. Hist., (b. 6, c. 15,) gives the following as the prayer which he offered after he was bound to the stake: "Father of thy well-beloved and blessed Son, Jesus Christ, through whom we have received the knowledge of Thee — the God of angels, and powers, and of all creation, and of all the family of the righteous that live, before thee — I bless thee that thou hast thought me worthy of the present day and hour, to have a share in the number of the martyrs and in the cup of Christ unto the Resurrection of Eternal Life, both of the soul and body, in the incorruptible felicity of the Holy Spirit ; among whom may I be received in thy sight, this day, as a rich and acceptable sacrifice, as thou the faithful and true God hast prepared, hast revealed and fulfilled . . . . "

Justin. We have seen that the views of the Apostolic Fathers, from the time of Christ to that of Justin — that is, to the middle of the second century — were in complete harmony with the Christian doctrine of Immortality of the righteous only. Their testimony is positive, uniform, and incontrovertible. But the Apostles and their immediate followers have now all passed away. Another generation of disciples and teachers has arisen. The seeds of error, so early sown, are already beginning to bear fruit. The tendency to speculate and philosophize, which the Apostle Paul so earnestly rebuked in his day, has become yet more strong and positive. The philosophy of Plato, which is predominant in the world outside of the Church, now comes into the Church with the converts which have been won from the ranks of his disciples, and from this time onward will become more and more evident and outspoken, till -it gains the complete ascendency.

Justin was an eminent Greek scholar. He was of Grecian parentage, though born in Syria. He was thoroughly educated in the philosophy of Plato, before his conversion; and, after he became a Christian teacher, he wore the philosopher's garb. Although he was an earnest believer in the Christian system, he endeavored to reconcile it with the philosophy of Plato. He is quoted by controversialists on either side of this question as favoring their views, and, perhaps, with good reason. He is thought by many scholars to be inconsistent with himself. It is, indeed, no uncommon thing for men to change their views on certain questions, and to write at one time what they afterwards contradict, or, in a transition period — like that in which Justin lived — to vacillate between two opposing doctrines; or at least, in their endeavor to reconcile them with each other, to seem to be inconsistent.

We are not concerned to vindicate his consistency, or to claim him as one of our witnesses. Our cause is strong enough without his testimony. The time is certainly near at hand, in the history of the primitive Church, when the influence of this doctrine of Plato is to become predominant. We may as well date the beginning of this era with him as with Athenagoras or Tatian or Tertullian, who were more outspoken, a few years later.

It would, however, be easy to cite many passages from his writings which sustain our views. We have marked several such for quotation, but we cannot well spare the space for them. Nor does it seem important ; for it must be allowed that there are others which admit of an opposite construction. He interested himself in behalf of the persecuted Christians, and by his influence with the emperors secured for them some favors. He wrote two or more "Apologies" for the Christian faith, and, no doubt, honestly endeavored to soften as much as possible the apparent an tagonism of the Gospel to the Grecian philosophy, which was held by those in power. Hence in one of his Apologies addressed to them he says; "Plato and we are agreed as to a future judgment. We differ in that Minos and Rhadamanthus are his judges — Christ is ours. For the souls of the wicked, united to the same bodies, will be punished with eternal punishment, and not for a period of a thousand years only, as Plato asserted."

This would certainly seem to imply that he believed in the Immortality of the wicked. " But in numberless passages, Justin tells us that Immortality will be the peculiar and exclusive possession of the redeemed, and that the wicked will not obtain it. In several places he lays down the principle, that Immortality is a gift of God, not bestowed upon any as yet, but promised at the resurrection." Mr. Constable, whom we have just quoted, claims him with the Fathers whose evidence we have already cited, and says that, while he held to the utter dissipation of the souls of the wicked, he also held to the eternal preservation of their bodily members. According to the belief of his time, the fire of God's judgment was distinguished from ordinary fire, in that it possessed the peculiar property of renewing what it preyed on, and so of burning on forever; and "holding that animal life would not continue for eternity in hell, he laid hold of the idea, justified by the philosophical opinion of the time, that the members of the deceased, devoid of animal life and therefore incapable of pain, would forever continue to grow and renew themselves."

Gieseler (in his Dogmengeschichte, p. 45) says : "Justin appears to regard it as possible that the souls of the ungodly will be at some time wholly annihilated."

Hagenbach (in his Hist. of Doc, vol. 1., p. 151) says : "Justin, Tatian, and Theophilus, from various reasons supposed the existence of a soul, which, though mortal in itself, or at least indifferent in relation to mortality or immortality, either acquires immortality as a promised reward by its union with the spirit and the right use of its liberty, or, in the opposite case, perishes together with the body."

We have felt authorized to include him in our table among the Fathers of the first school, but in view of the apparently conflicting sentiments expressed in some of his writings we have affixed an interrogation (?) to his name.

Justin was put to death at Rome about the year 164, for refusing to sacrifice to the heathen gods.

Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, died about 182. Some few expressions of his have been thought to favor the Platonic doctrine ; but the evidence is very strong and overwhelming that he did not believe in the natural immortality of man. On the contrary, he held that we are immortalized only in Christ. In one of his books he uses this language: "When thou shalt have put off mortality and put on immortality, thou wilt worthily see God. For God shall raise up thy flesh immortal with thy soul ; then, having become immortal, thou wilt see him who is immortal if thou believe, on Him here;" In another : " Death was sent as a benefit to Adam, that he might not continue forever existent in sin. Like a vessel marred and recast, so it happens to man through death. For he is broken, that he may be found sound at the resurrection — spotless, just, and immortal. . . . But -some one will say, ' Was man made mortal by nature?' By no means. 'Immortal?' Nor do we say that; If immortal, He would have made him a God. If mortal, God would seem to be the author of sin. Therefore, He made him neither mortal nor immortal, but capable of both ; so that, if he was carried to the things which lead to Immortality, he might receive Immortality as a reward and become godlike. But, on the other hand, if he should turn to the work of death, he might become the author of death to himself. Now God repairs the evil ; for as man brought death upon himself by disobedience, so, by obeying the will of God, he that chooses may obtain for himself the Eternal Life. For God has given us a law and holy precepts, which everyone that obeys may be saved, and obtaining the resurrection may inherit Immortality." (11:27.)

Irenus, who was of Greek parentage and born probably in Asia Minor, was a pupil of Polycarp. He was appointed bishop at Lyons, and entered on his ministry there as junior cotemporary of Justin. He was a learned scholar, and wrote largely, especially against " Heresies." We have only a Latin translation of most of his works. He died as a martyr about the year 202. He held that man was entirely mortal in his original creation; that he is constitute immortal — soul and body — by the inbreathing of the Divine Spirit in regeneration. He argued earnestly against the Gnostics, who held that God (The Demiurge) could not bestow immortahty upon any of His creatures. Hence some have claimed him as arguing in favor of Plato's doctrine of universal immortality. But this is a mistake ; for he certainly claimed this as the peculiar boon of the righteous as the following citations will show:

"Life is not from ourselves, or from our nature, but it is given or bestowed according to the grace of God ; and therefore he who preserves the gift of life, and returns thanks to Him who bestows it, he shall receive length of days for ever and ever. But he who rejects it and proves unthankful to his Maker for creating him, and will not know Him who bestows it — he deprives himself of the gift of duration to all eternity; and therefore the Lord speaks thus of such unthankful persons : ' If you have not been faithful in that which is least, who will commit much to you ?' — intimating thereby unto us, that they who are unthankful to Him with respect to this short transitory life which is His gift — the effect of His bounty — shall be most justly deprived of length of days for ever and ever. . . . For it was for this end that the Word of God was made man, and He who was the Son of God became the Son of Man, that man having been taken into the Word, and received the adoption, might become the son of God. For by no other means could we have attained to incorruptibility and immortality. But how could we be joined to incorruptibility and immortality unless, first, incorruptibility and immortality had become that which we also are, so that the corruptible might be swallowed up by incorruptibility, and the mortal by immortality, that we. might receive the adoption of sons. . . . This was done that man should not suppose that the incorruptibility which belongs to God is his own naturally, and also, by not holding the truth, should boast with empty pride, as if he were naturally like God... For Satan thus rendered man more ungrateful to his Creator, obscured the love which God had towards man, and blinded his mind not to perceive what is worthy of God, comparing himself and judging himself equal with God. This therefore was the object of God's long-suffering, that man, passing through all things, and acquiring the knowledge of discipline, then attaining the resurrection from the dead, and learning from experience what is the source of his salvation, may always live in a state of gratitude to the Lord, having obtained from Him the gift of incorruptibility, that he might love Him the more, and that he may know how frail and mortal he is; when he also understands God, that He is Immortal and powerful to such a degree as to confer immortality upon what is mortal, and eternity upon what is temporary." (Lib. 3 : 19, 20.)

THE SECOND SCHOOL.

We have now come down from the days of the Apostles to the beginning of the third century. We have found all of the Apostolic Fathers through the whole of this primitive period, till near its close, holding to the faith once delivered to the saints by the great Head of the Church, on this question of Eternal Life in Christ alone. We might cite others, such as Clement of Alexandria, Arnobius, Lactantius, and others in the third and fourth centuries in the same line. But it is unnecessary. We might also cite some of the earliest creeds of the church — especially the so-called " Apostles' Creed," which we have placed in the fore-front of this volume. The precise date of its origin is not known, but there is no trace of Plato's doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul to be found in it. It simply proclaims the great Christian doctrine of "The Resurrection of the Dead and The Life Everlasting." But from this time onward we shall see this doctrine of a pagan philosophy coming into notice and discussion, giving color to the teachings of the christianized philosophers who have come into the Church, developing itself more and more, and gaining strength and influence until its supreme authority is acknowledged, and it is declared to be "one of the fundamental truths of the Christian system."

We have seen how the Grecian philosopher Justin cherished the doctrines of his old master, after his conversion, and how he tried to combine them with the simple doctrines of the Gospel.

After him came Athenagoras, another Grecian philosopher, who was more positive and decided in his advocacy of Plato's doctrine of Universal Immortality.

Then came Tatian, who strongly advocated it. He adopted, also, the heresy of the Marcionites, and founded a sect called "Tatianists," after his own name. He is generally regarded as unsound on other questions than the one we are discussing. His name gives little strength to the school that claims him.

The Recognitions of Clement and the Clementine Homilies were produced about this time, but neither the precise date of their appearance nor their authorship is known. They were for a time' attributed to Clement of Rome, and by many supposed to be his productions ; but modern criticism has shown them to be forgeries. They were composed in the interest of this new Platonic philosophy now spreading in the Church, and attributed to Clement with the evident design of securing the influence of his name in its support.

And now, in the early part of this third century Tertullian, the African bishop, educated as a lawyer, and one of the most eminent of the Latin Fathers of his day, gave the weight of his powerful intellect, his ardent mind, and his revengeful spirit, in aid of this increasingly popular dogma. With the philosophy of Plato, a hew phraseology, before unknown, is introduced, which has been perpetuated with this philosophy to the present time. The soul is now spoken of as something "distinct from the body," as " immortal," as suffering " eternal misery," as " receiving death by punishment in immortality," etc. The fierce and vindictive spirit of Tertullian seems to find comfort in contemplating the eternal agonies of the lost. He uses such language, as this:

"How shall I admire, how laugh, how rejoice, how exult, when I behold so many kings and false gods of heaven, together with Jove himself, groaning in the lowest abyss ofdarkness ! So many magistrates who persecuted the name of the Lord, liquifying in fiercer flames than they ever kindled against Christians ; so many sage philosophers blushing in raging fire, with their scholars, whom they persuaded to despise God, and disbelieve the resurrection; and so many poets, shuddering before the tribunal — not of Rhadaman- thus, not of Minos, but — of the disbelieved Christ. Then shall we hear the musicians more tuneful in the expression of their own sufferings, then shall we see the dancers more sprightly amidst the flames ; the charioteer all red-hot in his burning car ; and the wrestlers hurled, not upon the accustomed list, but upon the plain of fire I" (De Spectaentis, c. 30.)

The barbarous, intolerant and persecuting spirit of the age may be some apology for the use of such language by this African Zealot. But it reminds us forcibly of language very similar in the sermons of Hopkins and Edwards, our own immediate fathers in the Gospel. Let us stop for a moment and listen to them:

"The smoke of their torment shall ascend up in the sight of the blessed for ever and ever, and serve, as a most clear flass, always before their eyes, to give them a constant, right and most affecting view. . . . This display of the divine character and glory, will be in favor of the redeemed, and most entertaining and give the highest pleasure to those who love God, and raise their happiness to ineffable heights." Should this eternal punishment "cease and this fire be extinguished, it would, in a great measure, obscure the light of heaven, and put an end to a great part of the happiness and glory of the blessed." (Hopkins' Works, vol. 11, pp. 457, 458.)

"They will not be sorry for the damned ; it will cause no uneasiness or dissatisfaction to them ; but on the contrary, when they have this sight, it will excite them to joyful praises. However the saints in heaven may have loved the damned while here, especially those who were near and dear to them in this world, they will have no love to them hereafter. It will occasion rejoicing in them, as they will have the greater sense of their own happiness, by seeing thecontrary misery... When they shall see how miserable others of their fellow creatures are, who were naturally in the same circumstances with themselves ; when they shall see the smoke of their torment, and the raging of the flames of their burning, and hear their dolorous shrieks and cries, and consider that they, in the meantime, are in the most blissful state and they shall be in it to all eternity; how will they rejoice!" (Pres. Edwards' Sermons, vol. 4.)

Tantasne animis Cadestibus iroe?

It is not for us, but for those who indorse the eschatology and theodicy of these eminent Christian fathers, of these last days, to apologize for them as best they can.*

After Tertullian came Hippolytus, bishop of the Port of Rome, and then Cyprian, another African bishop, men of kindred spirit with Tertullian, and nearly contemporary with him, and both earnestly advocating the same doctrine.

Then came Athanasius, the zealous bishop of Alexandria, and the most eminent and influential man in the Council at Nice. After him came Ambrose and Jerome, and — not to mention others — finally, in the early part of the fifth century, the great Augustine, another African bishop. He was a man of eminent learning, of lively imagination, and great zeal, but of a morbid and ascetic disposition, and of extreme theological views. He probably did more to formulate and establish that theory of theology which rests upon the natural immortality of the soul as one of its chief corner-stones, than any other man. He was an earnest advocate of this doctrine of everlasting life in sin and misery, and, no doubt, the vivid pictures he drew of the ceaseless agonies of the lost were to him living realities. This whole school of doctrine, of which he was the most eminent defender, bears his name and is commonly known as the "School of Augustine."

Though we need not question the piety and sincerity of these Fathers, we may say, with truth, that they contributed directly to the establishment of that abominable system of tyranny and cruel oppression, so antagonistic to the spirit of the Gospel of Christ, that was fastened upon the so-called Catholic Church, and was perpetuated through so many long ages of darkness and corruption. Isaac Taylor, in his Nat. Hist, of Fanaticism, thus speaks of the three last mentioned:

"The regeneration of the Church was in that age hypothetically possible, and was actually attempted ; yet it utterly failed. The men, whose intelligence and expansionMof mind should have taught them to listen to reproof, and who should have entertained — if it had been but for a moment — the suspicion that the course of things might be unsafe, then with a headlong intemperance rushed upon the objectors and triumphed. Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine — the three illustrious leaders of the age — joined their giant strength, and gave to the Church the plunge that sent it down to the abyss. Whatever of degrading superstition, whatever of sanguine fanaticism, whatever fallacy, whatever corruption, whatever cruelty belonged to the religious conviction of Europe, under the sway of Hildebrand, may be assigned (as a true consequence) to the part taken and the course pursued by the great men we have named. The fate of mankind through a long night of ignorance and malign tyranny was sealed when Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine combined to crush dissent."

[Footnote: The expression of such sentiments has generally been considered as unadvised, even by those who may be supposed to entertain tlicm ; but Mr. Landis, who slings more slang and throws mgremud at all from whom he differs than good taste, even in the advocacy of a bad cause, would justify — in his work entitled, The Immortality of the Soul — approbates such sentiments and undertakes to show how proper they are. He even credits the damned with more sympathy for the distresses of their friends than the saved may be supposed- to have for the lost! Thus:

"The ties of earthly relationship, while they shall be remembered in all their controlling power by the lost — as with Dives, who might well dread to see his brothers in hell, to which his own vile example tended to lead them — shall, in the case of the redeemed,have no influence in view of the revelations of the eternal world. .... An incident occurred some years ago, at the launching of a ship in Philadelphia, which may serve, in some respects, as an illustration of the point. As the vessel was one of the noblest that had ever been built in our country, an immense concourse of people assembled to see the launch. They thronged the wharves and surrounding buildings, till every spot which could afford a view was occupied, while even the river for a great distance was covered with boats filled with men, women and children, to enjoy the scene.

By and by the appointed moment approaches and every eye is turned toward the magnificent structure on the stocks ; and the multitude, with breathless expectation, await the signal which is to dismiss her into her element. And now the loud booming cannon gives the signal and the cry, ' She is coming /' bursts from the surrounding multitude. Just at that instant, a man at the outer extremity of the long wharf misses his foothold and falls into the water. But the attention of the multitude is so intently occupied by the grand pageant before them that no one seems to notice the sufferer I He struggles and shrieks for help, and is within reach of hundreds, both in boats and upon the shore, but no one seems to hear him, and there he struggles, and sin/cs, and perishes, surrounded by those who could have rescued him, but whose minds are too intently occupied to witness his dislressor hear his cries/ Such is the all-absorbing power of a strong emotion ; and when the redeemed are assembled before the throne in heaven and behold before them the object of their most intense love and sympathy, and whom on earth they loved infinitely more than life itself, can any one suppose that the_y will be willing to share their sympathies with those who have renounced his authority, despised his proffered love and 'trampled underfoot his blood,' and derided his agonies, and thus intimate that they think he lias treated their enemies too severely? It may comfort the impenitently wicked and ungodly in this world to be assured that they shall here, at all events secure their tender compassion and regard ; but let them remember Eternal Truth declares that, if after the present probationary state, they are found amo.ng the enemies of God, they will meet with no sympathy froni any inhabitant of heaven." (pp .431, 432.)

However truly this may be supposed to represent the moral sentiment of the redeemed in heaven, it is certainly a gross libel on the citizens of Philadelphia. It would be impossible to collect a rabble here, or in any other civilized community on earth, that would willingly suffer such an event to take place, however strong their momentary excitement. Who could suppose it possible for such a crowd to have a scene like this perpetually before their eyes and feel no concern, unless they had become thoroughly brutalized!]

THE THIRD SCHOOL.

It is difficult to see how it can be possible for any man of human instincts, to say nothing of Christian sensibilities, to accept honestly and cordially the doctrine of eternal punishment, in the sense of pain and misery ceaselessly and endlessly inflicted upon immortal creatures by their Almighty Creator. It may be, and certainly is accepted by multitudes as a theory, as an abstract article of a traditional creed, that has come down to us from the earlier ages ; but in these last days, when the Gospel of Christ has done so much to enlighten the minds and soften the hearts and refine the sensibilities of men throughout the Christian world, it may be questioned whether there are any who do considerately, truly, and sincerely accept of it, in its actual, living application to any portion of their fellow men. That enlightened public sentiment which has reformed our penal code, and now insists upon the humane treatment of the very worst of criminals, and even of animals — refusing to tolerate cruelty to either man or beast —

cannot be indifferent to a question that so intimately concerns every man. It inquires whether He, in whom "we live and move and have our being;" who requires and expects us to love and to trust, as well as to obey Him; who sets before us His own character as infinitely good, for our imitation ; will execute upon any of the creatures of His forming, even upon the most ill-deserving, such merciless cruelties, endlessly perpetuated, as their creeds attribute to Him — such penal inflictions of endless misery and woe as shock and outrage every humane sentiment in man which the Deity himself has planted there, the faintest imitation of which by any humane government, civilized or uncivilized, would not be tolerated for one hour. Those who hold to the necessary immortality of every child of Adam that is born into this world, whether he shall prove himself worthy of this boon or not, will have, and must have some way of evading the logical and imperative conclusion to which their doctrine leads them, even in the case of desperate and incorrigible sinners. The idea of tor ments inflicted upon the imperishable bodies of the lost by actual fire— that secret fire, the ignis sapiens of the Augustinian School, which was absolutely inextinguishable and eternal, because it perpetually reproduced that upon which it fed, and which Edwards, Hopkins, Jeremy Taylor and many others so vividly pictured — has very generally given place to a more refined and subtile theory of spiritual suffering. And, in order to relieve the character of God of voluntary cruelty, this suffering is supposed by many, not to be inflicted by His hand, but to be self-inflicted, or, perhaps, to come by a necessary law of Nature ; as though the government under which we live were administered by fate rather than by the will of the Almighty Creator. Others would fain believe and teach that the condition of the lost is simply privative, and may be quite tolerable. It is unhappiness or misery only in comparison with the higher joys of the saved.

Another theory, which is finding many advocates even among those that are considered " orthodox," is, that every one goes to that place, in the future world, which he shall prefer ; that the rebels against the government of God are actually happier among their fellow rebels than they would be if they were gathered with.His loyal subjects ; that the door of heaven is always and forever open, and any moment they shall choose to cease their rebellion and ask to be forgiven, they will be pardoned and admitted to the society and joys of the blessed. This theory ignores and contradicts all the teachings of Scripture with respect to the finality of the awards of the judgment, and the hope less lamentations of those who are rejected at the last day. Among those who have not yet been driven into infidelity by following out the deductions of this false philosophy to their logical end, but who still hold to the evangelical Scheme, and endeavor to accommodate it to the teachings of that system which tends directly to the subversion of the Gospel, various other theories are held which we need not now stop to notice. The drift of public sentiment throughout Christendom at the present day, is unmistakably toward Atheism, Skepticism, Universalism in some of its various forms, and to other errors that sap the foundation of Christianity, as the legitimate fruit of this pagan philosophy ; and it will be more and more strongly in this direction, till the Church comes back to the simple faith once delivered to the saints, of Immortality and Eternal Life through Jesus Christ the Savior and Him only.

In the earlier ages of the Christian era, the pressing need of such alleviations was not so keenly felt. When we see how complacently these Fathers of the Augustinian School contemplated the fate of lost sinners ; how they spoke of their inconceivable and eternal agonies in hell, and discussed the nature of the fire that would forever torment without consuming them; how they disputed about the eternal reprobation of infants and adults alike, as matters of fact, altogether regardless of the claims of justice and mercy ; we must remember that they lived in a cruel and barbarous age, and had become familiar with the sight, if not with the practice, of cruelty and oppression. Punishment then meant torment ; it was inflicted for this very purpose ; and the more intense and agonizing it could be made, the better it answered its end. It was not vindicative, but vindictive. And such were supposed to be the punishments inflicted by the King of Kings ; and that by making them as agonizing as possible and perpetuating them without end, He most truly manifested the supremacy of His majesty and power.

But even in this dark age of barbarism, the instincts of humanity could not be altogether suppressed. The barbarous conceptions of a heathen mythology, which these Fathers were determined to engraft upon the Christian system, would not satisfy those who yearned for a God that they could love and trust, as well as fear — one not merely more powerful than the earthly despots whom they could only fear and hate, but more just and merciful, and more worthy of their affection and confidence.

We have seen with what extreme and intemperate zeal Tertullian, in the early part of the third century, described the terrors of God's wrath and the awful and never-ending torments of the damned. Soon after, and in part cotemporary with him, Origen, the most learned and accomplished scholar of his age, arose to protest against these horrid pictures of eternal suffering, and to defend the character of God against the aspersions which this doctrine cast upon it. But unfortunately, he himself was a devoted Platonist. He believed, as heartily as Tertullian and the other adherents of the Augustinian School, in the indestructibility of the human soul. Hence he could find the alleviation he sought, only in the opposite extreme of error. He found it in what is called the doctrine of Universal- Restoration. He was, no doubt, a sincere Christian, though fanatical to the extreme of self-mortification and mutilation. (See Matt. 19 : 12.) He accepted the Scriptures, as did those whom he opposed, and he sought to sustain his doctrine, as they did theirs, by putting a forced construction upon the plain letter of their teaching. While those of the School of Augustine contrived to take from the words, " death," " destruction," and kindred terms, in which the Scriptures so plainly announce the final end of the sinner their most obvious sense, and to put upon them, asthey still do, another meaning to make them agree with their Platonic doctrine, Origen and his School did precisely the same thing in the opposite direction and for the same purpose. With the one party the death and destruction of the sinner, so often and so plainly declared in the Scriptures, do not mean what they express. They are not applicable to the sinner himself, but only to his well-being and happiness. Everything worth living for dies and is destroyed, but the living, conscious individual himself never dies ; his being is perpetuated in eternal misery. So, with the other party, "death" and "destruction" are not to be predicated of the sinner — for he is immortal — but only of his sins. They are to be purged away by the consuming fires of hell, while the individual himself is to be restored to the favor of God, and his being perpetuated in eternal bliss.

With regard to the followers of Augustine and of Origen at the present day, Mr. Minton, in one of his letters in the Christian World well remarks that Orthodoxy interprets the destruction which is constantly threatened to the finally impenitent to mean the destruction of their happiness, and Restorationism interprets it to mean the destruction of their sinfulness. So that to destroy a man is, according to one view, to make him perfectly miserable, according to the other, to make him perfectly holy. And this in the teeth of our Lord's precise definition of what it is that will be destroyed — neither his happiness nor his sinfulness, but the component parts of his being, his body and his soul, the man himself. On the Orthodox theory the words of Scripture should run, "Fear not them which have power to make the body miserable, but have no power to make the soul miserable ; but rather fear Him who has power to make them both miserable in hell." On the Restorationist theory, they should be, "Fear not them which can make the body holy, but cannot make the soul holy, but rather fear Him who can make them both holy in hell."

If this be the way in which the threatenings of God are to be interpreted, then the Old Serpent was certainly right when he said, in flat contradiction, of the word of the Almighty, " Ye shall not surely die." And he would almost seem to be authorized to expound this fearful text in the same way, as though the Lord had said to him, aside, in the case of every sinner who falls into his power to be tormented forever, or for a season that he may be made fit for the bliss of heaven — as He said concerning His servant Job, "Behold he is in thine hand ; but save his life."

One extreme of error begets another in the opposite direction, while the truth falls between them and is forgotten. So while these rival schools are contending with each other — for Origen had a numerous following for several generations — the true Christian doctrine of the actual death and destruction of the individual sinner, and of the Life Everlasting of believers alone by redemption through Christ, drops into insignificance, and for long centuries remains in obscurity and is apparently lost.

"Heathen philosophy had uttered Origen's theory long before Origen was born, just as it had sketched out that of Augustine. Plato may be said to stand sponsor for both views. In his Tartarus he has given the exact prototype of Augustine's hell. But endless misery for the wicked was what Plato could endure for only a very few, whom he called ' incurable.' The vast majority of the wicked were, in Plato's conception, ' curable.' For all these, the scene of punishment after death was the place of their purgation. He had an Acherusian lake,- to which the majority of wicked souls went, and from which, after a longer or shorter period of suffering, they were released. He had his lake of Acheron, where souls of a moderate amount of crime went, and from which, after due suffering, they were released. Even into his Tartarus, into which incurable souls were sent for unending torment, some very wicked yet curable souls were also sent, and after suffering there, came forth to pass through the places of lighter suffering to a complete purgation. We thus see that Plato suggested his idea to Origen as he did to Augustine. Very little need be added to Plato's teaching, in order to make it one of Universal Restoration. It was but to suppose that his few incurables were not absolutely incurable, but might be ranked among the curable, and the full idea of Origen was displayed." (Constable's Fut. Pun., p. 314.)

It will be observed that both these schools were and are schools of Universalism. They both claim for all men what the Scriptures declare to be true of the righteous only. The one teache"s that all men are immortal, though only a portion will be forever blessed. The other teaches also that all are immortal, and though some will suffer for a limited time, all will eventually be saved. The transition from the one to the other is natural and easy, and with some, inevitable.

Origen is supposed to have derived his method of putting a double sense on the terms of Scripture, and of finding aMhidden, mystical meaning in them, from his teacher, Clement of Alexandria, who was also enamored of this Platonic philosophy, and inclined to believe in the future restoration of all men. There were many advocates of this view after Origen, but he stands pre-eminent among all the defenders of this doctrine, and has given his name to this school, as Augustine, afterwards, did to the other school. This doctrine of restoration was held and taught by many in the Christian Church for several centuries. It prevailed for a time in Syria and Egypt, and elsewhere. Among its advocates are counted Gregory Thaumaturgus, (243,) Pierius and Theognostus, (282,) Pamphilus, (294,) Eusebius, (320,) Titus, (360,) Didymus, (370,) Gregory of Nyssa, (371,) Didorus, (378,) Theodore of Mopsuestia, (394,) and others. But it was condemned by the Council of Constantinople in 553, and finally it was merged and lost to public view, as was that of the first school — the School of Christ and the Apostles and their immediate successors — in the Universalism of the School of Augustine, which was established and sustained by the authority of Councils and ruling Ecclesiastics. Henceforth this doctrine of the Augustinian School

— which taught the natural immortality of all men, in opposition to that of Christ which taught the immortality of the redeemed alone, and which held to the endless misery of the wicked, in opposition to that of the School of Origen which held to their final restoration — was to be, for long ages of darkness, error, and corruption the " Orthodox doctrine " of the Christian Church so-called. All dissent must be ruled out and suppressed by pains and penalties, even down to the time of the Reformation. Indeed, it is still cherished in the Protestant as in the Papal church, as one of the fundamental principles of its faith; but happily, the Church cannot now enforce her decretals by the methods she formerly employed.

The Council of the Lateran, held under Leo X., issued the following decree :

"Whereas, some have dared to assert concerning the nature of the reasonable soul that it is mortal; we, with the approbation of the Sacred Council, do condemn and reprobate all who assert that the intellectual soul is mortal, seeing that the soul is not only truly and of itself and essentially the form of the human body, as it is expressed in the canon of Pope Clement Fifth, but likewise immortal ; and we strictly inhibit all from dogmatizing otherwise ; and we decree that all who adhere to the like erroneous assertions, shall be shunned and punished as heretics."

This decree is no doubt high authority with the Roman Catholic world, even to the present day, for the truth of the doctrine it was issued to sustain. But how much weight it should have among Protestants, it is for those who hold to the same doctrine, and are seeking for arguments to sustain it, to determine. With us it furnishes strong presumptive evidence of the falsity of this dogma, and that it deserves to be classed with the many other false doctrines of this corrupt and apostate Church, which required the same kind of arguments to sustain them.

SECTION IV. Modern Belief.

It is not proposed to sketch the history of this doctrine since the Reformation. We can only note a few points. The Reformers rejected many of the errors and false dogmas of the Papal Church, corrected many of its abuses, and did a noble work for the cause of truth — all, perhaps, that they could reasonably have hoped to accomplish in their day.

But it is too much to say that they did all that was desirable for all coming time; that they left nothing for future generations in a more enlightened and freer age to do on this line. Educated and trained as they were, in the false systems and traditions and superstitions which this ancient Church had gathered and formulated into her faith, through long ages of darkness and corruption, to bind upon the consciences of her subjects, it is not to be presumed that they were able, at one bound, to cast off all their shackles; to come into perfect light and liberty; to see the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; and to formulate and enunciate it so clearly and in such true proportions as to require no further revision or amendment.

They could not but oppose those evils that lay more especially on the surface, and stood directly in their way. They stood manfully for the cardinal doctrine of justification by faith, which Luther declared to be articulus vel stantis vel eadentis ecclesiae; the supreme authority of the Word of God, and the right of private judgment. But they attempted no modification of the Romish doctrine of the future state, excepting in its relation to purgatory. They held as strongly as the papists to the eternal torments of the damned. The great fundamental error of the Augustinian — or rather of that Grecian philosophy of natural immortality, which he and his coadjutors of the same school had laid down as one of the corner-stones of the Christian religion — had been thoroughly wrought into the system and had permeated its every part. It was too deeply hidden and too firmly fixed to be at once perceived and eradicated.

And yet Luther seems to have had some perception of this error when he wrote, in 1620, as follows: "I permit the Pope to establish articles of faith for his faithful followers; such as, the bread and wine are transmuted in the sacrament; that the divine essence is neither generative nor generated; that the soul is the substantial form of the human body ; and himself is the Ruler of the world, and King of heaven, and God on earth ; and that the soul is immortal ; and all the numberless prodigies of the Romish dunghills of decretals."

But he and his associates had too much work on hand, and were too severely pressed, on all sides, to allow them to thoroughly search out and eradicate all the errors of that corrupt system, even had they been qualified to do it. In the modifications they attempted and were able, to accomplish, this monstrous fiction of the pagan world, of the necessary immortality of the wicked as well as the righteous, and the consequent doctrine of the endless torments of the unsaved — which had so long obscured the pure light of the Gospel, throwing its dark shadow over the whole system, transforming the holy character of God into that of a heathen monster, and justifying all the tortures and abominable cruelties of a persecuting Church— was taken over into the Protestant creed, and has been perpetuated, in the confessions and catechisms of the various branches of the Reformed' Churches, to this day. It is still cherished as one of the fundamental articles of their faith.

One of the chief obstacles to the discovery of truth, and the return of the Church to the simplicity of the Gospel, lies in the pertinacity with which good Christian men cling to the creeds and catechisms and traditions of these courageous, self-denying, but half-enlightened men. Their work is held in such high esteem, that it is regarded as sacrilege to call in question any of their formulas of faith or statements of doctrine, however crude they may seem. They are treated as paramount to the Word of God, and men are regarded heretical or sound in the faith — not according to their reception or rejection of the teachings of the Scripture, but —according to their reception or rejection of these early symbols, that have been handed down to us from the hazy morning of the Reformation.

In the wide-spreading Presbyterian Church, and in other great organic Churches, men are tried for heresy in these latter days of the nineteenth century, not by the Word of God, but by these old creeds; nor are they allowed to appeal to the Bible for justification!! In the great Pan-Presbyterian Council which has just held its second meeting in Philadelphia, (October, 1880,) the question of revising these old symbols of faith, with a view to correct some of their more manifest errors, and to simplify some of their statements, was mooted. It found but few advocates. It seemed to be the overwhelming sentiment of the body, that not one of its articles should be altered in the slightest degree; that candidates for ordination, and the clergy in general — if not the laity — should be required to indorse and affirm every sentiment therein expressed, and the precise formula of words in which it was expressed. The most that could be secured by the few who thought there might possibly be some progress in the science of Theology and Scriptural Interpretation, as well as in other branches of knowledge, was the formation of a committee — not to revise, but to define and interpret these church symbols, and to report to the next triennial convention — with what result, remains to be seen.

* This was the plea— according to Burnet — of "Bloody Mary," the persecuting queen, who burned alive so many of her faithful subjects during her short reign : " As the souls of heretics are to be hereafter eternally burning in hell, there can be nothing more proper than for me to imitate the divine vengeance by burning them on earth!!"

Even in the Churches of the Congregational order, in which the spirit of liberty and of progress has ever been more manifest, a strong effort is now being made by certain reactionary leaders, or would-be leaders, to consolidate these Churches, to throw them all back upon the stereotyped confessions of former times, and practically to subordinate to them the Word of God, as the test of an orthodox faith.

This is urged by many well-meaning Christian brethren, in the interests of true orthodoxy, as they no doubt think, under this specious plea, namely: The doctrines of the Bible are given to us in such concrete and fragmentary forms, and so scattered throughout the whole book that it is necessary to bring them together and formulate them into a system, that we may know ourselves, and show to others just what we do believe, and that we may be the better able to indoctrinate the children and the common people. But there is another reason why this is so strongly urged at the present time, whether it be avowed or not—which is, to check the exercise of the spirit of free inquiry, and of independent judgment on the part of individuals, in the study of the Scriptures, which is giving to the conservators of our traditional orthodoxy a great deal of trouble at- the present time, and is likely to give them much more in the future, unless withstood and repressed. This is but a modified form of the plea of the Papal Church, for the policy which withholds the Bible entirely from the people, on the ground of their inability to understand it for themselves, and the necessity of one uniform faith through out the whole Church. Protestants are to be allowed to have the Bible, and are to be encouraged to study it, but not without the catechisms and creeds, which their betters have framed for them, to tell them what is the true religious sense of the terms it uses.

But the difficulty is, we live in a time of active inquiry, and are passing through a transitional period, in respect to our theological notions. Many of the old dogmas, which the zealous Reformers brought out of the Romish Church, and incorporated into their own reformed creeds, have, in the progress of learning and biblical criticism, become so evidently false and untenable, that no intelligent Christian now believes them ; and there are others, that are fast losing their hold on those who venture to do their own thinking. It would be a ridiculous farce to re-enact these old formulas of belief, with all their crudities at the present day; and as for formulating a new creed, just now, which shall express the consensus of the whole Church, it is out of the question, unless it shall be so very brief and comprehensive as to fail of the object which it is proposed to serve, or unless it shall be in the very words of Scripture; in which case, the whole Word would be better than a part, or unless it be couched in such ambiguous phraseology as to mean anything or nothing, according to the pleasure of every one who may adopt it.

The fact is, a large and increasing number of our best Christian scholars and thinkers have advanced far enough into the light of a clearer day, to see the absurdity and untenableness of many of the traditional dogmas with which the Church of Christ has so long been burdened, and to question the soundness of that philosophy from which they have sprung, which dogmas nevertheless, those whom they have left behind them are earnestly striving to perpetuate in the creeds of the church to the end of time. But many of them have not yet been able so to separate the true from the false in the psycho-theological systems in which they have been trained, as to formulate definitely their own ideas ; their thoughts have not yet had time to crystallize into any such precise and systematic form of words as would be quite satis factory to themselves. Much less, are they ready to commission others, whom they know to be in error, to do it for them.

This is the most important business that is to come before the Triennial Congregational Council, which convenes while these pages are passing through the press. Whether those who are so earnestly urging the necessity of a new proclamation of faith, for the Congregational Churches — drawn up of course by themselves — shall succeed in carrying their point, we will not undertake to guess. But we can assure them that if they would promote harmony rather than discord among Christian brethren, by any creed which they shall offer for their acceptance, they must leave out of it all their own philosophy, and conform it strictly to the simple teaching of the Word of God— a condition to which it is to be feared some of them will not consent. But we are confident that, whatever they may do, the discussion of their various beliefs, and the effort to categorize them, will operate to the furtherance of the truth for which we are contending.

The Word of God is not bound; nor is there anybody in Christendom, at this late day, strong enough to bind it; though men may, for a time, bind themselves and such of their fellow men as are willing to submit to their yoke. The fictions of heathen philosophy and the dogmas and traditions of a mediaeval Church cannot always prevail where the Gospel is permitted to have free course, and in opposition to its plain teaching. And this, the most ancient, the most delusive, and the most mischievous of them all, and though now so strongly intrenched and so popular, must— though, perhaps, the last of them all — give place to the truth as it is in Jesus ; and Christ be again honored, as He was in the beginning, as the only Source of Immortality and Eternal Life.

There have always been Christian men since the days of the Reformation, and doubtless there were during the ages of darkness — though their voices were suppressed — who have seen this great Gospel truth, deeply hidden as it has been under the rubbish of human traditions. There have been many others who — though they have not been able to break away from Ecclesiastical restraints and the habits of religious thought and expression, in which they were trained, so far as to see and acknowledge the glorious fact of conditional immortality — have yet been free to confess that the whole scheme of Scriptural truth might not have been so perfectly apprehended and so definitely enunciated by the early Reformers, in the first instance, notwithstanding their best endeavors according to the light they had, as to show no defects, in the light of future ages. Let us hear what some of these men have said:

"If God reveal anything to you by any other instrument of His, be as ready to receive it as ever you were to receive any truth by my ministry; for I am verily persuaded — I am very confident — the Lord has more truth yet to break forth out of His holy Word. For my part, I cannot sufficiently bewail the condition of the Reformed Churches, who are come to a period in religion, and will go at present no further than the instruments of the first Reformation. The Lutherans cannot be drawn to go beyond what Luther saw; whatever part of His will our good God has imparted and revealed unto Calvin, they will rather die than embrace it. And the Calvinists, you see, stick fast where they were left by that great man of God, who yet saw not all things. This is a misery much to be lamented." (Robinson's Last Charge, A. D. 1620.)

"It is owned that the whole scheme of Scripture is not yet understood; so, if it ever come to be understood before the restitution of all things, and without miraculous interpositions, it must be in the same way that natural knowledge is come at, by the continuance and progress of learning and liberty, and by particular persons attending to, comparing, and pursuing intimations scattered up and down it, which are overlooked and disregarded by the generality of the world. For this is the way in which all improvements are made, by thoughtful men tracing out obscure hints, as it were dropped us by nature accidentally, or which seem to come into our minds by chance. Nor is it at all incredible that a book which has been so long in the possession of mankind should contain many truths as yet undiscovered." (Bishop Butler.)

"The Christian Church is even yet but very imperfectly freed from the unholy influence and the mischievous operation of human authority. The house requires to be more carefully swept than it was at the Reformation from popery, and a more thorough search must be made for the old leaven, that it may be more completely cast out." (Dr. Brown.)

"How important to the cause of our heavenly Master is the free discussion of religious topics, which we are naturally so anxious to repress when it goes against our faith. Yet we need not. We dislike being called to account for our more sacred opinions, especially those which we hold with an uncertain grasp ; and we equally dislike to study the reasons advanced by our opponents, without which it must needs be impossible either to persuade or to be persuaded. ' Prove all things' is a counsel of Christian perfection beyond most men's observance, though it is the only way to ' hold fast that which is good.' " (J. P. Gell.)

"The hope of the millennial kingdom of Christ [and, we may add, the hope of ' life and immortality' in Christ alone, with the ultimate 'reconciliation of all things'] has naturally encountered the suspicions of those Christians whose faith has been crystallized and frozen down in artificial systems of theology. When the doctrines of the Gospel have once been compacted together by a logical process, and the result is conceived to embody the whole counsel of God, every new truth drawn fresh from the Scriptures is an unwelcome guest, or even a suspected enemy. It wears a strange and foreign aspect, and disturbs the symmetry of a laboriously-constructed system." ( T. R. Birks.)

"The truth has a vitality in it still ; and many dry rudiments of it, which at present lie dull and uninteresting in our minds, are yet destined to expand and acquire a new significance. Let the mind be frankly open to any and every truth, however unfamiliar to us the first view of it, which may turn out to be in accordance with the teaching of the Apostles." (Dr. Goulburn, Dean of Norwich.)

"It is not all truth that triumphs in the world, nor all good ; but only truth and good up to a certain point. Let them once pass this point, and their progress pauses. Their followers in the main cannot keep up with them thus far. Fewer and fewer are those who still press on in their company ; until at last even these fail, and there is a perfection at which they are deserted by all men, and are in the presence of God and of Christ alone." (Dr. Arnold.)

"When once this weighty question of the after-life has been opened, a controversy will ensue, in the progress of which it will be discovered that, with unobservant eyes, we and our predecessors have been so walking up and down, and running hither and thither, among dim notices and indications of the future destinies of the human family, as to have failed to gather up or regard much that has lain upon the pages of- the Bible, open and free to our use." (Isaac Taylor.)

“Scripture should be to Christians, what the field of nature is to the philosopher. As, since the days of Bacon, no prejudice however inveterate, no principle however long established, can in scientific pursuits be allowed to stand in opposition to fact, observed and authenticated by the slow and cautious but certain method of induction ; so, were professors of religion wise, and true to these principles, the Inspired Writings would be to them a storehouse and treasury of spiritual facts, to which every theory of mere human origin would be made to bend. Painful it is to think that this beau-ideal of Christian practice has never yet, at least on any extensive scale, been realized. In consequence of this, how striking the contrast between the present state of Theology and that of Science ! By making Nature her guide, Science is everywhere removing the obstructions which prejudice and authority in former times had thrown in her path, and is advancing with gigantic and rapid strides towards that temporary supremacy which is her due. By neglecting the Scriptures, or by looking at them only through the medium of human explanations of their meaning, Theology, by her side, droops and languishes. When will this state of matters come to an end ? When shall creeds, confessions of faith, and articles of religion, with other formularies of human origin, submit to be tried by the Scriptures, instead of arrogantly insisting on the God of truth, as fie speaks in His word, making His appearance at their bar ? One thing is certain, that until human expositions of divine things shall have been abandoned, and the only competent authority in such matters shall have been submitted to, Theology must continue to occupy the low and stationary condition in which for ages it has appeared." (David Thom, DD)

Dr. Thom, whom we have just cited, a distinguished British minister in the early part of the present century, was the author of a work entitled Soul and Spirit, in which he maintains the trichotomous nature of the renewed man. The natural man, possessing only a body and soul, is naturally mortal; it is only by the inbreathing of God's Spirit, that he receives a spiritual nature, and it is this which gives him Immortality. He says that Luther, in his Commentaries on Ecclesiastes, comes near to the same point of view: "He there maintains the entire dependency of soul on body, connects the dissolution of the one with the extinction of consciousness in the other, allows of no existence of the soul apart from the corporeal frame, and ascribes to the resurrection alone the joint revival of both."

This was certainly the doctrine of William Tyndale, who says in his controversy with Sir Thomas More: "And ye, in putting them [the souls of the dead] in heaven and hell and purgatory, destroy the arguments wherewith Christ and Paul prove the resurrection. . . . If their souls be in heaven, tell me why they be not in as good case as the angels be ; and then what cause is there of the Resurrection?"

If the space could be afforded, we would be glad to quote largely from the writings of Archbishop Whately, who threw the weight of his high position and his logical reasoning, as may be seen in his Revelations of a Future State, in favor of the doctrine we are maintaining; as also from the. writings of other men of learning and distinction in the Church for the last two centuries. But we must make our quotations as brief as possible, and hasten to the close of this Sketch:

"In fact, no such doctrine [as eternal life in sin and misery] is revealed to us." ( Whately.) "God entrusted Adam with a spark of immortality ; he foolishly blew it out." (Matthew Henry.) "Adam forfeited the blessings of immortality." (Thomas Scott.) "The immortality of the soul is neither argued nor affirmed in the Old Testament." (Perowne.) "The doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and the name, are alike unknown to the entire Bible." ( Olshausen.) “Eternal fixity and duration belong only to those who are in accordance with God." (Dean Alford.) "If there be one blessing more than another, which the Scriptures agree in ascribing to Christ as its author, and for which the believer is taught that he is wholly indebted to redemption, it is immortality." (De Burgh.) "It seems a strange way of understanding a law which requires the plainest words, that by death should be meant eternal life in misery." (John Locke.) "Eternal Life, as I believe, is the inheritance of those who are in Christ. Those who are not in Him will die the second death, from which there will be no resurrection." (R. W. Dale, D. D.) "Hope in death can only spring from the principle of Immortality, and this principle has no root save in Christ." (Principal Tulloch.)

"The human soul is not a simple abstract entity, but it is a concrete thing. As such, it is subject to the law of dissolution. Sin is per se destructive. It ruins. It destroys the soul that practices it. The punishment of hell consists in the sinner being left a prey to the process of destruction, which is already preying upon his very being. The completion of this process is absolute death — -that is, it is the completed destruction of that concrete reality which constitutes the human personality. The dissolution of material organisms is a species of combustion. This holds true of the destruction of the soul. As the dissolution of material organisms is their combustion, so the corrosive, the disorganizing action of sin upon the soul, is the soul's combustion. In this sense the biblical figure of hell-fire is strictly grounded in reality. The wages of sin is ruin, destruction, death. As the flame feeds upon the consuming candle until its whole substance is dissipated and exhausted, so the wasting disease of sin feeds upon the substance of the soul until the personal organism is entirely broken down and destroyed." (Dr. Richard Rothe.)

"It is worthy of remark, that the doctrine of eternal torment is found neither in the Apostles' Creed, nor the Nicene "Creed, nor in two of the principal Confessions of Faith of the sixteenth century, , viz., the otherwise rigid Creed of the French Reformed Church and the Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Church. And we believe that if this dogma has been handed down throughout the Protestant Churches, it is simply as an inheritance from the errors of the middle ages and from the speculative theories of Platonism. If we examine the writings of the earlier Fathers, Barnabas, Clement of Rome, Hermas, Ignatius,' Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Theophilus of Antioch, Irenseus, and Clement of Alexandria, we find them all faithful to the apostolic doctrine of the final destruction of the wicked. The dogma of everlasting torment did not creep into the Church until she yielded to the influence of Platonic philosophy." (Dr. E. Petavel, of Geneva.)

In our own country, this cause has been prejudiced by the unwisdom of some of its advocates. It frequently happens that when a man breaks away from the ecclesiastical restraints to which he had been accustomed, in view of some error against which he would protest, that he runs into the opposite extreme of error ; or, if his mind is not well balanced, he mingles crude and false notions with the truth he actually perceives more clearly than others, and so really hinders the truth he would advance. This was so in the Reformation of the sixteenth century, and is more or less true in all religious movements in behalf of truth.This is due in part, at least, to ecclesiastical intolerance. The church has too often set herself in opposition to any progress in religious affairs. While rapid advances are made in every other department of knowledge, and new discoveries bring honor on those who make them, the man who suggests any advance in the science of theology or religion, only brings suspicion, persecution, and dishonor upon himself.

There is no traditional dogma to which the Christian Church more pertinaciously clings, than this of the natural immortality of all men. It is popular also in the world, outside of the Church ; fpr it flatters men with the idea ofNtheir God-like importance, and makes void the real distinction between the regenerate and the unregenerate, which is that of Eternal Life. And as for its legitimate counterpart, which Christians are better satisfied to retain in their creed, than they are to believe it actually true, or to hear it preached — the doctrine of endless torment — it has ceased to have any constraining influence, excepting among children and others of weak and superstitious minds. Men of intelligence and thought cannot regard it as credible. Hence when the Church insists on making it a part of the truth of God, they only drive men from the sanctuary where it is preached, and from the Christian faith altogether. They cannot consent to worship or acknowledge a Deity whose character as portrayed by His professed followers, they can neither love nor respect. This heathen dogma, baptized with the name "Christian," with its logical and yet incredible counterpart, is one of the most efficient causes of the skepticism and infidelity of the present day. And yet there is hardly any species of " heresy," so-called, which may not be more readily tolerated, than its denial — especially by a preacher of the Gospel. He must be sound on this question of eschatology, however loose he may be on all others, if he would retain his standing among his brethren.

The ministers that have been crowded out, or actually cast out of the Churches of this country, since the more active discussion of this question during the past few years, may be counted by scores. Take for instance one example: The great Methodist Conference, at Cincinnati, recently put on trial two of its preachers; the one, for beastly intoxication in the public streets; the otlier, whose piety was unquestioned and whose praise was in all the Churches, for preaching the doctrine of Eternal Life only in Christ. The former, after a suitable apology, was retained in his position ; the latter was summarily expelled!!

Not a few similar trials and expulsions for the same crime(?) have been enacted in the various Presbyterian Churches of our land, during the past few years.

The same process has been attempted, in various Clerical and Ecclesiastical Associations and Councils of the Congregational body, but not with so complete success, as we can testify from our own personal experience. It is quite common in the case of such heretics, when the power of expulsion is not equal to the will, to request them, as the Chinese do their high criminals, to commit hari kari — to take themselves voluntarily out of the way. Their “honor" is appealed to, and the argument of "consistency" is urged. But so long as we hold to the polity of the Church, and stand . squarely upon the Word of God, we propose to "abide in the same calling wherein we were called," until some higher authority shall release us. We know of not a few ministers — pious, learned, and useful — who are of the same mind, and their number is rapidly increasing.

The Second Advent Churches of this country, of which there are several hundred, and into which so many earnest Christians have been driven by ecclesiastical intolerance in their own native Churches — especially on this question — very generally hold to Eternal Life only in Christ. It is unfortunate, perhaps, for the success of this doctrine, that they should undertake to carry with it certain special and sometimes conflicting views concerning the second coming of our Lord, which are obnoxious to the prejudices of the Christian community at large ; especially as they have no necessary affinity for each other, except in this, that they both are founded on a more literal interpretation of the Scriptures than is common with others. But theseChurches — though especially active— are everywhere small and feeble, and very generally frowned upon by those that are larger and more wealthy.

Of all the great Churches of this country, there is more freedom of opinion — certainly on this question — in the Episcopal Church than in any other; and probably more who hold to our view than in any other; and they hold it unmolested. There is nothing in their symbols of faith, their prayers, or their liturgy, that conflicts with it, but, on the other hand, much to favor it. The constant recognition, in their collects and other forms, of Christ as the Great Source of "Life," "Eternal Life," "The Life Everlasting," is quite remarkable. Dr. W. R. Huntington (in his Conditional Immortality) says : "I am bold to assert that were a believer of the doctrine of Eternal Life only through Christ, to undertake the compilation of a liturgy, such as should best set forth, under a devotional form, the truth he desired to teach, he could not frame one better adapted to the purpose than" that which already exists under the name of 'The Common Prayer.'"

It is interesting to note that the Confession of Faith of this Church, now numbering thirty-nine Articles in the Anglican, and thirty-eight in the American, originally numbered forty-two; but that in Convocation, under the presidency of Archbishop Parker, in 156£, the two articles sustaining this papistic dogma, viz., the "Immortality of the Soul" and the "Eternity of Future Suffering," were suppressed. Since then, the official authority of the Anglican Church has declared that the doctrine of an eternal hell is not an established dogma of the Church. No longer ago than 1864, the question was tried by the Judicial Committee, whether endless torment was a doctrine of the Church or not. In the case of Wilson vs. Fendill, it was argued, on both sides, by most able counsel, and after a mature deliberation, the Lord Chancellor gave judgment— the two archbishops concurring — that it was not a doctrine of the Church. " For," said he, "to affirm it to be so, would be re-instating the expelled article, which we have no power to do."

That this doctrine of Life in Christ only, is more largely accepted, and looked upon with greater favor in Great Britain than in this country, at the present/ time, is due in a very large degree to the earnest, patient, and persevering efforts of Rev. Edward White, of London. His high social position, his unquestioned orthodoxy on all other points, his eminent learning and ability, and, withal, the kind Christian spirit with which he has urged his cause, have contributed to his success. For more than thirty-five years, in the face of much opposition and misrepresentation, he has stood up boldly — and for the first half of this period almost alone — for the truth of the Bible, on this question. For a number of years, however, he has had a strong reinforcement of noble men, eminent alike for their learning, and piety, among whom are Henry Constable, A. M., Samuel Minton, A. M., William Leask, D. D., and Henry S. Warleigh and others, some of whose names will be found on a subsequent page.

The religious press has, also, been less exclusive and un fair. While, in this country, it has never been practicable to argue this question through any of the accredited organs of the various branches of the Church, excepting on the popular side ; or even to state the question, or correct the misrepresentations with which some of them teem; some at least, of their religious organs in England have not been altogether closed to fair discussion. Mr. White is a member in good standing of the great Congregational body of that country, which also numbers several other leading members, who share his views. His last work, entitled Life in Christ— by far the ablest and most thorough that has appeared — has just been translated into French by Rev. Charles Byse, of Brussels, aided by Professor Petavel of Geneva, who also has written largely on this question. His French work La Fin du Mal, also rendered into English under the title of The Struggle for Eternal Life, was issued a few years 'since with an Introduction by R. W. Dale, D. D.," and has done good service in both languages. The light is spreading in France and Switzerland.

It is to be hoped that these and other works, which are now rapidly appearing in behalf of this pre-eminent Gospel truth, may do something to check the lamentable tendency to Universalism and various other forms of error so manifest in these countries, and in Germany; and, indeed, we might say, throughout Chrfetendom — as the natural reaction from this heathen dogma — this fiction of the adversary—which the Church still persists in upholding and proclaiming to be the veritable truth of God.

Mr. White has just been appointed to succeed the late Dr. Raleigh in the Ancient Merchants' Lectureship, in London, which may be regarded not only as a token of high regard, but also as a quasi indorsement of his known views on this question. There lies before us, also, a lecture recently given by him to the Artizans of London, an extract from which will form a fitting close to this sketch. “After candidly admitting that one of the chief causes of the desertion of the sanctuary by the common people, and the fearful prevalence of indifferentism, skepticism and infidelity among all classes, is to be found in the fact that they have outgrown and ceased to believe this great heathenish dogma of eternal torment in the life to come, to which the Church would fain hold them ; and that they do not care to hypocritically worship a Deity whose character, as represented, commands neither their love, confidence, nor respect ; and after declaring that the great requirement of the age is a Reformed Doctrine of the Moral Character of God, and assuring them that there are not a few — and this number is fast increasing — who would take them kindly by the hand and " expound to them the way of Life more perfectly, and are anxious to have them taste and see for themselves that the Lord is good," he says:

"You will ask me, Who agrees with you in this interpretation of the Bible, which represents the character of God in so glorious a light as the merciful Life-giver to sinful men?

I reply, a vast multitude of earnest and thoughtful Christians all over the world. There is no country where able men are not now teaching what I have taught you to-night. It is, indeed, denied and condemned, by many worthy persons who will not examine the evidence, or even pray to God to help them honestly to examine it. This doctrine is rejected, or neglected, or cruelly misrepresented, by many whose station in the Church requires them to be strictly- obedient to orthodox tradition; by many preachers who fear the loss of usefulness among common church-goers, if they even examined it. It is rejected by many of those influential Capitalists of Lombard street, who too much control the teaching of Missionary Societies ; as, for example, lately, when one of them ' chased from him ' several of his ablest and godliest co-directors in the London City Mission, for disbelieving in the endless torments *of the London poor ; and again, when another eminent member of the same banking firm — the otherwise most admirable treasurer of the Baptist Mission — still insists that all the Baptist Missionaries shall teach the endless misery of the unsaved heathen.

"But the Bible truth on Life only in Christ, and the natural mortality of man, is held to my certain knowledge by the following persons, whose names are at least a counterweight to any opposite authorities. The Rev. Samuel Minton, A. M., is well known to have sacrificed his living and promotion to this cause. Prebendary Constable, late of Cork, is also known as one of its ablest advocates. Dr. Weymouth, Head Master of Mill-Hill School, and one of the finest Greek scholars in the country, says that his mind fails to conceive a grosser misinterpretation of language, than when the five or six strongest words which the Greek tongue possesses, signifying "destroy," or "destruction," are explained to mean — maintaining an everlasting but wretched existence.' The late Dr. Mortimer, Head Master of the City School, spoke in the same sense. The late eminent Professor of Hebrew at Cambridge, author of a well-known critical Commentary on the Psalms, in answer to the inquiry whether he knew any reason why the corresponding Hebrew words of the Old Testament should not be taken in their literal and obvious sense, replied in these words, 'None whatever.' The Archbishop of York, Dr. Thompson, in his 'Bampton Lectures,' says : "Life to the godless must be the beginning of destruction, since nothing but God, and that which pleases Him, can permanently exist.' This doctrine has advocates in all our chief cities. In London it is held by Dr. Parker of the City Temple, by the Rev. J. B. Heard, A. M., author of the work on The Tripartite Nature of Man, and by not a few ministers of all denominations. In Birmingham it is taught by Dr. R. W. Dale. In Liverpool by the Rev. Hugh Stowell Brown. In Cambridge it is maintained by Professor Stokes, F. R. S., Secretary to the Royal Society, who holds the Mathematical Chair of Sir Isaac Newton, and is one of the foremost scientific men in Europe. In Edinburgh it is held by several of the leading clergy of all Churches, and by Professor Tait, perhaps the first mathematical reasoner in Scotland. In other parts of England it is held by the Rev. Thomas Davis, A. M., Vicar of Roundhay, and the Rev. W. Hobson, A. M., of Douglas, two most able supporters ; by the Rev. J. Hay Aitken, the earnest Missioner ; by the Rev. W. Kerr, (author of a cheap Introduction to the study of this question, called Immortality: Whence? and for Whom? intended for plain people;) by Professor Stevenson of Nottingham, Professor Barlow of Dublin, and Professor Barrett of the Royal College of Science in Dublin ; by the Rev. W. Griffith of Eastbourne, Dr. Morris of Plymouth, and Mr. Maude of Holloway, several of whom have written largely on the Question, and all of whom are excellent biblical scholars.It is held by the celebrated physicians. Dr. Andrew Clark and Dr. Farre, and by a long array of Christian medical men in all parts of the country. It is held by Mr. Thomas Walker, late editor of The Daily News, a man of firm faith and uncommon literary attainments. It was held by the late Mr. John Sheppard of Frome, and by the late Mr. Henry Dunn, both of whom published works on Human Destiny.

"Among American writers may be mentioned the names of the late Dr. Horace Bushnell, author of Nature and the Supernatural, who recently died in this faith ; Dr. Huntington of Worcester, Mass.; the late Professor Hudson of Cambridge, U. S. A., author of the Concordance to the Greek Testament, and Debt and Grace, as related to the doctrine of a Future Life, one of the most accurate and accomplished scholars of our time ; the Rev. J. H. Pettingell, A. M., of Philadelphia, author of The Theological TrUemma; Mr. H. L. Hastings, of Boston, Dr. Leonard Woolsey Bacon, of Norwich, Ct, and many others.*

* This list of American names — though reliable, as we can vouch, so far as it goes — is exceedingly meager and incomplete. It would be easy to increase it many-fold, by adding the names of those personally known to the writer, as having renounced the old dogma of the immortality of the unsaved and accepted the gospel doctrine of Eternal Life only in Christ ; and of many others whose minds are in a transitional state, which will surely bring them to this conclusion. But, on the whole, it has seemed best to leave the list as Mr. White has drawn it, and let every man speak for himself in his own time and manner. But with respect to the late Dr. Bushnell, we have the testimony of Dr. C. A. Bartol, his intimate friend, that this was the conclusion to which be came in the last years of his life. We had anticipated this result from reading his Nature and Supernatural, the whole spirit and drift of which is in this direction

"In Jamaica we have the Rev. J. Denniston, A. M., author of the work called The Perishing Soul. In India we have Mr. Skrefsrud, Missionary to the Santhals, and one of the greatest linguists in Asia, speaking nearly twenty languages; and the Rev. W. A. Hobbs, of Calcutta, an experienced missionary, who writes that it is ' astonishing how this view of Divine Truth commends itself to the almost instant appreciation of the unprejudiced native Christian mind. I never thrust it to the front, but nevertheless it is silently and rapidly spreading.

" Again — in Paris it is held by M. Decoppet, Pastor of the Oratoire ; M. Bastide, head of the French Religious Tract Society ; M. Pascal, pasteur, M. Hollard, and Pro fessor Sabatier of the Protestant College, one of the fore most theological scholars of France. It is also held by three of the pastors in the Church at Lyons. In Brussels it is held and taught by M. Charles Byse, -who has just published a French translation of Life in Christ, a man of wide and accurate scholarship in Oriental languages. In 'Germany it was held by Rothe, Nitzsch, Olshausen, Hase, Ritschl, and Twesten. It is taught by Professor Gess of Breslau, who was theological tutor of Dr. Godet of Neu-<chatei, and by Professor Schultz of Gottingen. In Genevait is valiantly defended by the accomplished scholar Dr. Petavel of Chene Bougeries, by Professor Thomas of D'Aubigne's College, by' M. Mittendorf, late editor of the Semaine Religieuse, by MM. Walthur and Chatelain, two -¦of the most active evangelists, and by M. Caesar Malan.

" In Africa it is held by Rev. Mr. Impey, Superintendent of the Caffre Mission of the Wesleyan body, who was two years ago ejected from his high office after forty years' labor, because he could no longer teach the endless misery of the poor black Zulus and other heathens of Africa. In China it is held by several of the ablest missionaries ; in ¦Ceylon by the 'Rev. Mr. Clark, A. M., of the Church Tamil Mission. In Sydney it was held by Mr. Ridley, the leading journalist of Australia, and an eminent scholar, whose fame has reached his fatherland; and it is held by many of the Australian pastors.

"I have recited these names of learned believers— of all Protestant Churches— Scholars, Writers, Preachers ; Professors of Divinity, Criticism, and Physical Science; Literary Men, Mathematicians, Barristers, Journalists, Evangelists, Missionaries; some of them men of the first rank, all of them men of high education, who have carefully studied this question, under the conditions of prayerful inquiry and adequate learning; men who have no object to serve except the maintenance of truth ; mep who represent all varieties of modern knowledge and training in nearly every department of study— for a special purpose, namely:— to encourage general investigation, against the attempts of many persons, both clerical and lay, to suppress inquiry by the assertion that no one of any consequence agrees with us. My own extensive acquaintance enables me to add that not a few other persons of eminent ability agree in this view of Di vine Truth, but are constrained to silence by the menaces of ignorant men and fanatical women— especially the latter— who threaten them with the fatal charge of heresy if they avow their convictions."

That this doctrine for which we contend, of Life Eternal only through Christ the Savior, is destined to prevail and to become the orthodox doctrine of the Christian Church, we have no more doubt than we have of the triumph of the Gospel itself. It is indeed the great central doctrine of the Gospel. The civilized world every where is crying out for a better theodicy, a better doctrine of the moral character of God than the mediaeval church has given to it ; and the people will have it, or none at all. Here is just our ground of fear. Not that the Truth as if is in Jesus will fail of ultimate success, but that multitudes will throw away their faith entirely before the way is prepared for them to accept of the simple and humiliating doctrine of God's Word as to the natural man ; that we must pass through a period of skepticism, and infidelity, an eclipse of faith that will threaten the very existence of the Church. Hence it is not so much our object or desire to expose or oppose the errors of the Church of Christ, which, with all her imperfections, is " the pillar and ground of the truth" — they are becoming more and more obvious every day — but rather to strengthen the hands of those who pray for her prosperity, by calling their attention to this great Gospel doctrine from which she has so sadly departed — a doctrine which, though humbling to the pride of man, brings infinite honor to the justice, goodness and grace of God ; which greatly magnifies the excellency and glory of the Gospel ; a doctrine so plainly set forth in His Word that nothing but the perverting, obscuring power of this heathen dogma could have so long hidden it from their view. And we most earnestly hope and pray that the Great Head of the Church will bless the effort, in leading to truer views of the character of God and of the riches of His grace in Christ, in confirming the faith of His disciples, and in strengthening the hands of His servants in preaching the glorious Gospel which "is the power of God unto Salvation to every one that believeth."