Discussion of the scripturalness of future endless punishment

Front matter

Boston Public Library

Do not write In this book or mark It with pen or pencil. Penalties for so doing are imposed by the Revised Laws of the Commonwealth of. Massachusetts.

sJt,

Preface

It is with no ordinary degree of satisfaction that we present to the public a labored and thorough discussion of Future, Endless Punishment, the leading and affirmative part being wrought out by so learned and every way competent a theologian of the Orthodox school, as Rev. Dr. Adams. The origin of this discussion was as follows : —

In the month of May, 1858, Dr. Adams published a discourse in advocacy of the " Reasonableness of Future, Endless Punishment.'' This discourse we reviewed in the columns of the Christian Freeman ; and at the close of the Review we addressed to the author of the sermon the following

NOTE.

To Rev. Dr. Adams : Bear Sir, — In your Sermon, to the review of which I have devoted some labor as above, and in last week's Christian Freeman, though you propose to treat the reasonableness of future, endless punishment, yet you are perpetually falling back on the assumption that it is true, and is asserted by the Scriptures ; and your argument for its reasonableness is but little else than an assumption based on the former assumption, to wit, that it must be reasonable, because in God's economy it is true.

And now, I respectfully invite you, and proffer you the columns of the Christian Freeman for the work, to show the Scripturalness of future, endless punishment. And to avoid losing the subject in a wilderness of verbiage, and in running quotations of fragmen-

VI PREFACE.

tary Scripture passages, I propose that you select the first passage which, in your judgment, clearly announces this doctrine ; or, if it has crept into the Bible so gradually and imperceptibly that you cannot put your finger upon its beginning, select what you regard as one of the most clear and unquestionable declarations of it, and show from the subject of discourse, the natural force of the language, and the Scriptural usus loquendi, that it teaches such doctrine. And we will thoroughly discuss that passage before entering upon another. This, will afibrd you an opportunity to carry your strongest reasons into several thousands of Universalist families ; and I earnestly hope you will accept my proposition. Yours most truly, S. Cobb.

On the morning of July 6th, we received the following from

DR. ADAMS TO THE EDITOR.

Boston^ July 6, 1858.

Rev. S. Cobb : Editor of the Christian Freeman. Dear Sir, — I have received your printed note in your paper of the 2d inst., in which you say : " And now, I respectfully invite you, and profi'er you the columns of the Christian Freeman for the work, to show the Scripturalness of future, endless punishment. This will afford you an opportunity to carry your strongest reasons into several thousands of Universalist families ; and I earnestly hope that you will accept my proposition."

The form in which you propose that I should do this, viz. : by an exposition of isolated proof texts, each to be debated by you before I proceed to another, does not strike me favorably. I will comply with your invitation if you will allow me to do it in my own way, — upon one condition, that there shall be no notes or comments on what I write, in the number or numbers of your paper containing my communication.

Very respectfully yours, N. Adams.

Several notes in direct succession were subsequently interchanged between us, of which we give the following extract, which is from our second to the Doctor :

PREFACE. Vll

Boston, July G, 1858.

Rev. N. Adams, D. D., — Your note of this morning is received. We can undoubtedly come to an agreement in respect to the manner of conducting the proposed discussion. My reasons for the method I proposed will undoubtedly commend themselves to your good judgment on your duly considering them. I have observed that the advocates of endless punishment in controversial encounters with Universalists, usually fill their space with a long string of promiscuous quotations from the Bible, throwing together fragmentary texts regardless of the connections from which they are taken, presenting no argument for their use of the passages collected, but relying on the sound of certain phraseology upon the ear of popular prejudice. Then, when the Universalist follows with his reply, he must employ argum/mt on each passage he deems misused, and would be obliged to fill a volume to get through thus with the catalogue of texts which the other hastily huddled together. You see the unfairness and unprofitableness of this course. If you and I enter into this discussion, it will be with reverence for God's word, and a sincere desire to promote an understanding of it among our readers. And the method which I propose is just as fair for you as it is for me. It is, in its main features, the only method by which you can do the work which you must do in order to make the discussion of any manner of use to the community.

You object to my plan, requiring an " exposition of isolated proof texts, each to be debated by me before you proceed to another." In truth my plan no more requires you to explain isolated proof texts, than any other plan you might propose. Your sending to me a collection of Scripture passages unexplained, and my printing them in the Christian Freeman, would be of no service. You will agree with me that you are to. give your reasons for your use of Scripture texts, and your reasons on the texts one by one. And the method proposed by me allows, and even requires you, when you have selected your supposed decisive proof text, to make such quotations and use of other and collateral texts as you may judge expedient, in order to sustain your use of the

Vlll PREFACE.

leading proof text. My object is, not to run a gauntlet, but to discuss these matters wherein we differ, rationally, and as Professor Stuart would say, " philologically and exegetically." ♦ ♦ * * Yours most truly, S. CoBB.

Finally, we acceded to the method proposed by Dr. Adams, providing that he should do his complete work in argument for future endless punishment in one long article. And we now regard this as the best method. It brings his whole argument in one continuous and connected work, under seven important classifications, thus giving us at once the best thing that can be done for the doctrine in question. If this fails, the doctrine cannot be sustained.

It will be seen by the extract of our second note to the Doctor, that we were particularly solicitous that he should show reasons for whatever applications he might make of Scripture texts to his espoused position. If it shall be found on review that he has not done this, we are sure that it is not his fault, but the difficulty is in the nature of the case. We regard the Argument for Future Endless Punishment as able as any that we have seen, and we do not believe a better can ever be produced. And the excellent spirit in which the work is conducted is signally creditable to the author. We commend the whole, " Argument'' and *' Keview," to the candid and prayerful perusal of the lovers of truth, in hope that, by the blessing of God, it will conduce to the honor of His declarative glory, and the spiritual interests of many people.

S. C.

Part I

THE AFFIRMATIVE, by Rev. Nehei^uah Adams, D. D.

Intkoductory Remarks 13

SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT.

I. The Scriptures teach that there is a Penalty for Disobedience

awaiting the Finally Impenitent 17

II. Redemption by Christ is represented as having for its object Salvation from Final Perdition 34

HI. The Fall of Angels and of Man, is a Confirmatory Proof

of Future, Endless Retribution 49

IV. The Terms used with regard to the Resurrection of the

Dead, are Proofs of Endless Retribution 53

V. The Scriptures Teach that the Law of God has a Curse ;

which it has not if Future Punishment be Disciplinary. . 61 Vl. The Sentence passed upon the Wicked indiscriminately,

forbids the Idea of Discipline in Future Punishment. . . 63 VII, The Duration of Future Punishment is Expressed in the New Testament by the Terms employed to denote Absolute Eternity 65

Recapitulation 78

TABLE OP CONTENTS.

Part II

THE NEGATIVE, by Rev. Sylvanus Cobb.

Preliminahy Observations 83

Chapter I

The Scriptural Argument of Dr. Adams* Pirst Classification,

reviewed Ill

The Phrase "Finally Impenitent/' criticised Ill

Sec. I. The Time and Nature of the Judgment of Christ, with Reference to his General or Entire Judicial

Administration 116

Sec. II. Special Judgments 133

The Day of Wrath 139

Destruction of Soul and Body in Gehenna. 147

The Old Testament Usage of Gehenna 151

Gehenna in the New Testament 1 56

Sec. III. Indifferent Speculations and Miscellaneous Texts. . . 181

Sec. IV. Parable of the Tares —End of the World 193

Sec. V. The Lake of Fire and Brimstone, and the Smoke of

Torment Forever 204

Sec. VI. The Rich Man and Lazarus 218

Sec. VH. The Case of Judas 250

Sec. VIII. Die in your Sins — Cannot Come 259

CHAPTER 11.

Reply to Dr. Adams' Third Proposition, to wit: "The Fall o. Angels and of Man is a Confirmatory Proof of Future^ Endless Punishment " 272

The Sentence passed upon the "Wicked ; or Review of the Sixth

Proposition of the " Argument " 366

The Dead, Small and Great, in the Judgment 370

Chapter VI

Terms of Duration ; or Review of the Argument from the words Everlasting and Eternal, which is the Seventh, and the Prominent Position of Dr. Adams, in support of Endless Punishment 379

The New Witness 409

The Better Witnesses 416-419

Chapter VII

Argument from the Scheme of Redemption, reviewed, thus, for the sake of a Better Climax, closing the ** Reply " with the

consideration of the Second Position of the "Argument". . . . 420

The Infinite Mistake 427

Another Infinite Mistake 432

After this the Judgment 466

Extent of Gospel Provision 469

Method and Consummation of Messiah's Mission 473

The Recapitulation 479

Dr. Adams at Home 483

For a Critical Index of Texts, see pages 506, 507

THEOLOGICAL DISCUSSION.

PART I

BY REV. N. ADAMS, D. D.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.

The invitation from the Editor of the ^' Christian Freeman " to make a statement of views which the *' several thousands of families " who, it is said, will read this paper, repudiate, imposes a responsible, yet, for some reasons, a gratifying task. The names of not a few among my ministerial brethren occur to me, in whose able and more competent hands I would gladly place this labor, both for the gratification of the reader and, as I view it, for the truth's sake. I feel encouraged in this work by the comparative regard which many in this denomination profess for the Bible. They do not assail it as the manner of some is who differ from us ; but their desire to make it speak in their favor secures for it an acknowledgment of its authority. As an illustration of this remark, I refer to a Review of Rev. T.

14 THEOLOGICAT- DISCUSSION,

S. King's ^' Two Discourses," hy Rev. Dr. Thomas Whittemore; in the Universalist Quarterly and General HevieW) October, 1858. Dr. W. says : *' It seems to ■Qs impossible to preserve the public reverence for the Bible if we suffer ourselves to speak about it as Mr. King has done." " The four Gospels, according to Mr. K., are mere shreds and tatters of what Christ taught. His manner of teaching was so peculiar, and so poetical, and fanciful, that it is quite a wonder that we have even those tatters." *' He (Mr. K.) speaks of God choosing to instruct the Church through a few fragmentary flashes of poetry. Good God ! What an idea of revelation ! What an idea of Jesus as a teacher ! He has lost sight of ' the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.' " p. 877.

Inasmuch as nothing but the clearest conviction that this doctrine of endless retribution is revealed in the Bible would allow us for a moment to believe and inculcate the fearful truth, which all who believe it receive with the most solemn awe, it awakens confidence and friendly feeling to think that the most of those who will read this article, thus regard the testimony of Scripture, explained by the ordinary rules of language, to be of binding authority.

I have also been led to think of this denomination as including many who are much exercised in their minds on the subject of future punishment. It is a welcome effort to show such individuals that some of their thoughts with regard to this subject and its advocates are perhaps disproportioned and exaggerated. The most of those who believe in future, endless punishment have far more peace of mind with regard to it than they appear to have who •deny it; for with evangelical believers it sinks into its just proportion in the universal government of God, as the State's Prison, Courts of law, Officers of Justice, blend, like the tonic element of iron in the blood, into the life of a commonwealth with its virtuous and happy homes, its hundreds of thousands of joyous children, its churches, its products, its whole prospero.us tide of affairs. Though hell is not the central figure in the religious ideas of evangelical Christians, the belief in future, endless retribution does exert its powerful influence upon us. We know that it is capable of vast abuse, as we see illustrated in the direful influence of its perversion by the church of Rome. But we find it explicitly revealed, and ^' knowing, therefore, the terrors of the Lord, we persuade men. " If if were preached still more affectionately and plainly by us, conscious of our ill desert and of our obligations to redeeming love, there would be a nearer approach to the apostolic model. Our prevailing associations with this doctrine, we are happy to say, are those of deliverance, through the atoning death of the Son of God.

It is in connection with this sacrifice for us that we always endeavor to preach it; so that we trust we may say concerning our system of faith, as it is said of heaven, *^ The Lamb is .the light thereof '^ While we believe that the contemplation of future misery apart from the cross of Christ would be hurtful to the mind and heart, we also feel that it cannot be of healthful tendency with our moral natures to base our religious associations mainly on the one idea of opposition to endless punishment. An evil thing, real or imaginary, which we inordinately, or upon wrong principles, oppose, has a retroactive influence on our minds and hearts, corresponding to its own baleful nature. It is with such views that I now write, — not, principally, with antagonists in my mind, though my statements will meet with antagonism ; — so that if any are persuaded by counter statements that these views are unscriptural, they will do me the favor, at least, to think of me as their sincere well'Wisher and friend, and as one who has the same eternal interests embarked in this question as themselves. Let us also keep in mind that mere argumentation never convinces men of Spiritual truths, but that there must be on our part an experience, wrought by the Holy Spirit in answer to prayer, to interpret things aright, which otherwise will be stumbling blocks and foolishness. But without further preface, I proceed to my argument.

SCRIPTURAL ARGUMENT.

I. The Scriptures teach that there is a penalty for disobedience awaiting the finally impenitent.

This is plainly declared in Rom. ii. 5-12^ 16: "But after thy hardness and impenitent heart, treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God ; Who will render to every man according to his deeds : To them who, by patient continuance in well-doing, seek for glory, honor, and immortality, eternal life ; But unto them that are contentious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath ; tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first and also of tho Gentile; But glory, honor, and peace to every man that worketh good ; to the Jew first and also to the Gentile ; For there is no respect of persons with God. For as many as have sinned without law, shall also perish without law ; and as many as have sinned in the law, shall be judged by the law, — In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my Gospel. ^' The parenthetic passages omitted here, which occur before the last of these sentences, are a direct assertion of the full accountableness of the heathen world to the tribunal of God, for their sins against their consciences and the light of nature. I take this whole passage of

♦ 2

Scripture as a revelation of a future judgment and retribution, in which all men are to be judged and treated according to their works.

The ideas which are presented of heaven, both by Christ and his apostles, come to us through objects of sense. Every one supposes that by these images, as for example, " sitting with Christ at his table in his kingdom, " *' new wine, " '' beholding his glory,'' and '' gates of pearl," '' streets of gold," ^^ harps"' and '^ crowns,"' it. is intended to give us the idea of the highest pleasures of which our natures, body and soul, shall in another world be capable. We never subtract any thing from these images of heavenly joy, saying. They are only metaphors ; we rather say. Language here is intensified, to convey the ideas of future happiness. And as we believe that we shall have bodies in heaven, ^' like unto Christ's own glorious body," we are never unwilling to think that there will be enjoyments adapted to the body with the soul, — spiritual, of course, in both cases, and yet beautifully distinguished but capable of blending, as in this world. This way of representing unseen things to us is not so much ^^ Oriental " as the only possible way, at present, of communicating spiritual objects to our understanding."

But Avhile the attractions of heaven suffer nothing by reason of criticisms upon the language in which they are presented, some do not use the same tolerance, nor apply the same principles of interpretation when they read or speak of future punishment. Here, they say, all is metaphorical. Oriental; they select certain images, and ask if any suppose that the wicked are, literally, to suffer such things, from just these elements of pain. But the representations of heaven are certainly obnoxious to the very same criticisms, and similar questions may be asked concerning them. But being of a pleasurable nature, they escape criticism. Therefore, if we are inquired of in either case, Do you believe that these things are literally so ? the proper answer seems to be in both cases, Either these things, or things which now can only be expressed by them. Those earthly symbols approach nearer than any thing with which we are now acquainted, to the things signified.

The condition of the wicked after death is represented througli such symbols by Christ and his apostles as a state of positive punishment. With a desire to speak cautiousl}^ on such a point, and to follow only the most obvious leadings of Scripture, very many are constrained to believe that while the finally impenitent will experience the consequences naturally flowing from their moral condition, those consequences of their sins will be kept alive by the power of Ood, and that continual sin will receive continually new punishment. In the sermon on the reasonableness of endless punishment before mentioned, I assumed, for the sake of the argument, that future misery should consist only in the natural consequences of evil, and then argued that it was reasonable that these should be endless. I also deprecated any inquiry beyond the plain language of the New Testament as to the elements of punishment. The subject forbade any extended consideration of the nature of future punishment, nor did 1 undertake to state my own belief on that point. In attempting now to show that the Scriptures represent the future condition of the wicked to be a state of punishment, it will be submitted to the reader whether infliction from the hand of God be not necessarily involved in the language of the Bible.

One of those indirect proofs of a thing which sometimes are more forcible and convincing than direct statements, occurs in the words of Christ which I will refer to as proving the future punishment of the wicked, in which he tells us to ''/ear Him luhicJi IS able to destroy both soul and body in heliy Matt. X. 28.

If God has merely the natural ability to do this, while his character makes it morally impossible that he should ever do it, the illustration is singularly at fault. It would never be proper to tell a child as a reason why it should fear its father and mother that they have power to inflict a punishment which we know is morally impossible. Their mere natural ability to inflict it would not justify the exhortation, — '' yea, I say unto you, fear them." To associate the idea of destroying both body and soul in hell with our proper fear of God our heavenly Father, if he would do no such thing, would not be in accordance with truth.

Some, to avoid this difficulty, say that the passage means merely that God can destroy life. But so can they who kill the body. There is something more which God alone can do, and which we need rather to fear. Others, knowing that the original word for hell in this passage cannot mean the grave, propose to render the warning thus, that God can cast those whom he kills, into the valley of Hinnom. But so could assassins, or judicial executioners. We still look for that which God alone can do. Some say it must be annihilation. But the valley of Hinnom is notoriously symbolical of perpetuity, the fire always burning, the worm ever breeding. Why, moreover, should any place be specified in which the annihilation, which is the same thing every where, should occur ? Or what appropriateness is there in speaking of the soul as being annihilated there ? Destroying both soul and body in hell seems to be equivalent to that expression — '^everlasting destruction," — an apparent contradiction of terms, but conveying the idea of perpetual loss and misery.

We get no relief from these difficulties with the passage if we turn to the milder form in which the idea is expressed in Luke xii. 5. '' Fear him which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell ; yea, I say unto you, Fear him." For Gehenna, understood literally as the valley of Hinnom, presents to the mind the most terrific image of positive misery. Nothing can be more revolting or fearful. Let those who are jealous at imputations cast upon the character of God by the doctrine of endless punishment, explain how Jesus could even suggest the idea of the Father casting his offspring into a place, the name of which was borrowed from the most fearful object then known to his hearers. Until this passage is shown to imply no punishment from the hand of God, we must regard it as an impregnable proof of future visitations of misery upon the wicked.

Some who believe in future punishment seek to mitigate the influence of the dread truth upon their feelings by the theory that future punishment will consist only in the natural effects of sin. This relieves them of the necessity to think that God will inflict any thing directly upon the wicked.

One thing seems incontrovertible, viz. : The Bible does not teach us that sin is its own complete punishment. It is true that without the elements of misery in themselves, the Bible tells us, sinners could not be made miserable ; nor would outward inflictions constitute punishment unless there were something within for the fire to kindle. But it admits of a question Mdiether if the sinner should be left entirely to himself, undisturbed by any external power, adding new energy to sorrow, or opening new sources of it, he could not in time adjust himself, as in this world, to any circumstances. Even in this world, trouble or the infliction of pain and sorrow, are necessary to rouse the conscience. To some extent God punishes men in this world, for this purpose. ^' Because they have no changes, therefore they fear not God.'' *^ Moab hath been at ease from his youth, and he hath settled on his lees, and hath not been emptied from vessel to vessel." The seventy third Psalm describes the wicked who ^^ are not in trouble as other men ; neither are they plagued like other men." Hence

^^ their strength is firm. But even tribulation is powerless in many cases, and the sinner is either emboldened b}^ temporary respite, or provoked by the rod to further opposition. Pharaoh is an eminent example of this. It is said of another: "And in the time of his distress did he trespass yet more against the Lord : this is that king Ahaz." Other passages in accordance with these, to prove the positions just laid down, might easily be cited.

So that however terrible and bitter the condition of the sinner might be at first, it is not inconceivable that he should at last say, with Satan in Paradise Lost, — " Hail I horrors, hail ! and thou profoundest hell ! " if God would but depart from him. Sinking into a torpid, brutish state, or rousing themselves into defiant forms of hatred and blasphemy, occupying themselves with plots and counterplots in their strife with each other, the wicked in hell, like bad or abandoned people hero, might make their condition tolerable. They would, for example, feel the need of subordination among themselves for their own protection ; selfishness would suggest many alleviations of misery by mutual forbearance ; and as the worst of men — pirates, gamblers, debauchees, have codes of honor, and ambition its fawning flatteries, and pride smothers its resentment, and selfishness in all its forms is compelled to put on the mask of submission and obeisance, so the wicked, if left to themselves even with their wickedness festering and their crimes becoming gigantic, might manage, by selfcontrol, to reduce things into a system which to their wretched natures might in very many cases be even tolerable. Sin itself is no misery to a sinner ; it must meet with ill success, it must be compelled to feel a superior power acting contrary to itself; then indeed it is the occasion of misery. It is no sorrow to wicked men here for God to depart from them ; it is L'ather their desire ; " therefore they say unto God, Depart from us, for w~e desire not the knowledge of thy ways," Saul never would have uttered that bitter cry, ^^ God is departed from me and is become my enemy," if the Philistines had not pursued hard after him. God and he had been for a long time far apart, but very little did Saul care for this, until the day of his calamity made haste.

If, therefore, there is to be, in the strict sense of the term, punishment after death, it would seem that there must in the nature of things, be visitations upon the wicked of that which the Bible calls ^^ indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish." While there must be in the sinner himself a state of things which will make these inflictions punishment, there must also be a mighty hand stretched out forever to make the future condition of the wicked one of retribution. There is both error and truth in the common saying with many that future misery will proceed from conscience : — error, if it be supposed that conscience left to itself will occasion torment; for, if in this world with so much to stimulate conscience, it so easily falls asleep, the provocations, and the necessity of self defence, and redress, and all the bad influences of hell^ must have the power totally to sear it ; — but there is truth in the saying, if it be allowed that God is to visit the wicked in ways that will excite conscience against them ; this would be ^^ infliction/'' compared with which fire and brimstone, though the most appalling images of torture, we can easily conceive, do not convey more terrible ideas of retribution.

Now the Bible is continually representing the wicked as receiving from God positive inflictions, and not merely as being abandoned to themselves. Even when it speaks of many sources of misery which might seem to be the natural consequences of their sin, it often represents these consequences as being administered by the direct agency of the Almighty. So that the two things seem to be conbined. " Upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone, and a horrible tempest; this shall be the portion of their cup." " Now consider this, ye that forget God, lest I tear you in pieces and there be none to deliver." ^^ God is angry with the wicked every day. If he turn not, he will whet his sword ; he hath bent his bow and made it ready.*' These passages teach that sinners will not merely be left to the natural consequences of sin. The ideas of arrest, and of execution, are here presented ; the transgressor is not left to himself, with merely his sin for his punishment. Then again we read — " Woe unto the wicked, it shall be ill with him ; for the reward of his hands shall be given him." " Yea, v/oe unto them also when I depart from them." Even though the wicked should not sufl'er otherwise; nor to a greater degree.