Life and death eternal; a refutation of the theory of annihilation

Front matter

pee) iehcal os

“ee eapee oe fre read: Fs

— snes a ame eee eee eth;

Chapter I. The Doctrine Of Annihilation Stated

The doctrine of eternal punishment generally admitted to be in the Bible. A few deniers, who are in threefold conflict with each other,— Universalists, Restorationists, Annihilationists. The latter differ. The whole question one of fact and testimony. God the only witness, and the Scriptures his testimony. Annihilation appeals only subordinately to Scripture, and with a narrow range. It depends on a few perverted phrases...... 15

Chapter II. The Fundamental Vice Of The Scripture Argument For Annihilation

The Bible speaks in the idioms of the common people: figurative on all subjects. On one subject, annihilationism materializes. Jacob Blain. The process of human speech: first, outward and physical. Spiritual phenomena symbolized by material. Examples from common life. Material interpretation contradicts the real meaning. Examples of Scripture phraseology; never misunderstood by common readers; fully recognized

on all other subjects; wrenched out of all analogy on this. The same process would find a material God, and did find an earthly Messianic kingdom

THE SCRIPTURE ARGUMENT FOR ANNIHILATION EXAMINED. — DEATH AND LIFE.

The words “ death’ and “ life’? comprehensively describe the two destinies ;

therefore are frequently, but not exclusively employed. Every such in: Vii

Vill CONTENTS.

stance is quoted by annihilationists to prove extinction of the sinner. 1. But they do not even literally, and in the lower sense, signify the continuance or cessation of existence. 2. They also have in all languages a higher or pregnant sense. Instances from common life, classical usage, and the Scriptures. All involve a common element of meaning; only the Scriptures propose a higher aim of living. 8. In the Scriptures, the terms denote spiritual conditions, with their adjuncts and issues. The terms singularly appropriate and natural. Philo Judeus. The origin of the usage found in Gen. iii. The passage interprets itself. This mode of utterance runs through the Bible; life, eternal life, death, the second death. Indisputable instances considered: Luke xv. 24, 32; 1 Tim. v..6; Matt. viii. 22; Rev. iii, 1; Eph. ii. 1-6; Col. ii. 13 (modified use of Eph. iii. 3; Rom. vi. 1,11); John v.24: 1 John iii. 14,15; John vi. 47; Gal. ii. 19, 20; John xi. 25, 26; vili. 51; 1 Tim. vi. 19; Johniii. 386. Life begins at regeneration (Rom. vi. 4,14; Eph. v. 14). Consists in the true knowledge of God (John xvii. 3). Scholarly commentators of all classes accept this interpretation. Life may be viewed in its beginning or its consummation, therefore under variant aspects. The whole usage sustained by the phrase “kingdom of heaven,’ in all respects. Analagous representations of a present sonship — a union to Christ or separation from him — health and disease —liberty and slavery. This usage of life and death abundant in the Bible. The states are very often viewed in their consummation, as states of pre-eminent blessedness or woe. No objection that the words are used also in the lower sense of physical life and death. Sarcasms of Blain and Hudson superfluous. Their evasive assumptions, that “life” is made merely synonymous with happiness, and “death’’ merely the punishment of sin by sin. Chief method of evasion, prolepsis. Alleged instances examined, and the argument refuted. Hudson involves himself in contradictions, and virtually yields the point. The case summed Up... 63 Seele els ae 1 pales Sie se alae ste ecane Give ¢ als gan « wieie' Seen oe sees y eee

Chapter IV

THE SCRIPTURE ARGUMENT EXAMINED. —‘“ DESTRUCTION”? AND OTHER TERMS.

Annihilationists attempt to press several other words and phrases to their support. The attempt refuted in the following instances: destroy and destruction; perish and perdition; lose and lost; consume and devour; tear in pieces, break in pieces; grind to powder; cut off; blot out; not be; be as nothing; be nought; end; burn; burn up; put under his feet. The futility of the annihilationist argument shown by numerous quotations from the mouth of Job, who, while uttering them, should have been extinct more than twenty times OVEr........seccecceccecesccecaccnce 92

CONTENTS. ix

Chapter V

THE SCRIPTURE ARGUMENT EXAMINED.— THE RESURRECTION AND THE SECOND DEATH.

Promises of a blessed resurrection perverted into promises of a “ resurrection state”? (John vi. 39, 40; Luke xx. 85; Phil. iii. 11). The fallacy refuted, and the tables turned. The fact of any resurrection for the “wicked an ominous difficulty to annihilationists. Confession of Mr. Hudson. Confusion among the advocates: some deny the fact. Hudson reduces it toa minimum. An unsuccessful attempt to rise. The second death. Alleged literal sense. Hudson resorts to the Rabbins of later date, with no clear usage nor definite result. The New Testament capable of explaining itself. The phrase occurs four times, in one of which (Rev. xxi. 8), it is explained as “ having their part ’’ in the lake of fire; elsewhere described as a place of perpetual torment. This view sustained by Rev. xx. 14,15. The latter passage discussed.............0... 117

Chapter VI The Rational Argument Examined

The chief reliance of the system. Quotations from Hudson and Hastings. Arguments from the nature of evil, and the nature of God. Evil alleged to be (1) not necessary in God’s universe, (2) frail in its own nature. Fallaciousness of the positions. The argument from God's attributes answered negatively from our incompetency to decide for him; and positively from existing facts: sin is and has been here from the creation. Its eternal continuance involves no different principle. Common misapprehension refuted by Dr. Whately, —not the amount of evil, but its existence, constitutes the difficulty. Its continuance for a time proves its continuance for eternity to be compatible with God’s pertections, if sufficient reasons exist. Will the reasons cease? What are they? The present aspect of the case an overwhelming refutation. ‘The triumph over sin. John Foster quoted, and refuted by himself....... eivele wees caweat cn lao

PART IL.

POSITIVE DISPROOF OF THE DOCTRINE OF ANNIHILATION. CHAPTER I.

BELIEF OF A FUTURE EXISTENCE AMONG THE EARLIER JEWS.

The inquiry mportant. Belief of another state of existence familiar to the Jews trom ancient times. 1. Their residence in Egypt must have made them conversant with it. It existed in Egypt. Proof not alone x CONTENTS.

from historic testimony, but from the surviving records,— papyrus-rolls, mummy-cases, tombs. Wilkinson, Bunsen, Lepsius, Roth. 2. The Hebrew doctrine of the soul lays a foundation for it. The animating spirit everywhere distinguished from the earthly body. Quotations. 8. Another sphere of existence early indicated in the translation of Enoch; the testimony repeated in the case of Elijah. 4. The patriarchs are gathered to their fathers. The meaning of the statement proved by incontrovertible cases. Admitted by scholars of allschools. Baumgarten, Gerlach, Knobel, Delitzsch. 5. The present life was reckoned a pilgrimage. 6. The practice of invoking the dead required to be forbidden by law. A monarch violates the law of his kingdom. 7. Distinct references are made to the other world as a scene of retribution. Clear instances. — Ps. Xvi., xvii., Ixviii., xlix.; Eccl. xii. 13,14; Dan. xii. 2,3,and others. 148

CHAPTER ILI.

BELIEF OF A FUTURE EXISTENCE AMONG THE JEWS AT CHRIST’S COMING.

The fact susceptible of clear proof by secular and sacred writers. Josephus on the Pharisees, Essenes, and Sadducees. His own remonstrance with his comrades, and other passages. The attempt to impeach the testimony of Josephus refuted at large. The testimony of Tacitus imperfectly given by Hudson. The testimony of Philo, very full and explicit. Paul’s allusion to the Jewish doctrine (Acts xxiv. 15). Other implications in the New Testament of the general admission of a future existence for all (Luke xx. 27-33; Acts xxiii. 5-8; Matt. xxii. 23; John xi. 24).. John the Baptist “risen ’’ (Matt. xiv. 2)....... ARTA See. vetjeces ee sieeuauS

CHAPTER III.

NEW TESTAMENT TEACHINGS. — IMMORTALITY. — IMMEDIATE DESTINY.

The Saviour and his apostles, finding the doctrine of twofold retribution, were not called upon to announce the fact as a new teaching. Naturally dwelt on the characters to which these retributions should be assigned. Had no occasion to dilate on an abstract immortality, but only on a concrete retribution. “ The immortal soul:” cavil of Hastings and Hudson answered. The Scripture view and mode of speech; deals with the actual fate of men hereafter. The Scriptures affirm the conscious existence of both classes after death, and prior to the resurrection. 1. The righteous (1) might enjoy celestial glories without the body (2 Cor. xii. 3); (2) would enjoy them if separated from the body (Phil. i. 21-24; 2 Cor. v. 1-9); (3) and do enter on them at once after death (Luke xxiii. 42, 43). Perversions refuted (Acts vii. 55-60); (4) spirits of departed believers are with God (Heb. xii. 28; vi. 12; Rev. xiv. 18; vi. 9-11). 2. The wicked

CONTENTS. xi pass immediately to their doom. Analogy from the fate of fallen angels. Specific indications (Acts i. 25; 1 Pet. iii. 18-20; Luke xvi. 19-31). Objections and evasions. Hudson, Hastings, Blain, Burnham, Storrs, By eintely |) bebe i. Ooms Maceo s ewe ee ees i ecteas gers we cane Loo

CHAPTER IV.

NEW TESTAMENT TEACHINGS. —A RESURRECTION AND A JUDGMENT FOR THE WICKED.

Death leaves both classes of men in a state of existence and of consciousness. The Scriptures follow them further, to the judgment and the final retribution. The doctrine of a general judgment. Hinted atin the Old Testament; revealed in the New. The last day universal; the wicked will be present. The judgment. preceded by the resurrection of the wicked as wellas the good. Proofs. Cavils. The momentous significance of the resurrection. Embarrasses the annihilationists. Hastings admits the difficulty. Others deny the fact. Some evade. Hudson’s res- TIPECCHIONG. ©. oes. 5 0’ He wiaaeia sees wacice ewe seec eigen eaece cae’ IOEED, OREE

CHAPTER V.

NEW TESTAMENT TEACHINGS.—-SHARING THE DOOM OF SATAN.

Companions in the doom of the wicked; the fallen angels. Scriptures decisive. The doom of fallen angels is suffering, incessant and endless. Proof-texts. Replies of Dobney, Blain, Ellis and Read, Hudson. Marvelous interpretations, — “ dramatic”? annihilation. Satan’s doom. Bruising the serpent’s head. The utterances of the Apocalypse sustained by the gospels. The abyss; deep; bottomless-pit; lake of fire. Result. 249

CHAPTER VI.

NEW TESTAMENT TEACHINGS.— DIRECT DECLARATIONS. — FUTURE PUNISHMENT CONSISTS IN SUFFERING.

The question is not left to inference. The Scriptures unfold in detail the meaning of their own threats. Degrees of punishment involve the fact of conscious suffering. The difficulty felt. Reply of Dobney, Hastings, and others. Its insufficiency and inconsistency. The sufferings of the wicked vary like the joys of the righteous. The direct statements of the New Testament lay the whole emphasis of the punishment on the suffering involved. Instances. Whatever the figure, the suffering is the main feature. “Outer darkness ”’ attended with ‘ gnashing of teeth.” The “furnace of fire ;’’ the “ portion with hypocrites; ’’ exclusion from the kingdom; all coupled with the same description. ‘‘ Torment ’’ in the lake of fire. Evasions. The unquenchable fire. Various evasions considered. Everlasting punishment. The words vacated of their proper meaning by annihilationists. Their devices examined. Other passages........ 264 xii CONTENTS.

Chapter VII. New Testament Teachings. — Sufferings Protracted And Endless

The Scriptures teach not only suffering in the future, but that suffering protracted and endless. In various modes, 1. Passages which involve the representation without using the words “ everlasting,” etc. (Matt. v. 25; xviii. 84, 35; xii. 31, 32). 2. Passages which employ the terms ‘‘eternal,’’ etc. (Matt. iii. 12; Mark ix. 48-48; Matt. xxv. 41,46; xviii. 8; Jude 7; 2 Thes.i.9; Jude6; Mark iii. 29; Heb. vi. 1,2; Jude 13; 2 Pet. ii. 17; Rev. xiv. 11; xix. 8; xx. 10). The terms discussed, and evasions refuted at length. Limited duration, eternity of effect, or finality, alleged instances of “ finality” (Heb. v. 9; vi. 2; ix. 12; xiii. 20; Philem. 15; Rev. xiv. 6). 3. The suffering of the wicked coeval and co-eternal with the happiness of the righteous. Simultaneous with it (Luke xiii. 24-80; Matt. viii. 11,12; Rev. xxii. 14,15; and other passages). Co-eternal (Matt. xxv. 34-41, 46; 2 Thess. i. 7-11)............ 3's a eeeaet eee kn ses

Chapter VIII. Tendencies And Affinities Of Thf System Of Annihilation

Theories show their character in their.influences and affinities. Time is requisite, and freedom from outer restraint. This system too young to have a history. But its tendencies already betray themselves. 1. Rationalism: a disposition to disparage and over-ride God’s Word. Quotations from Hudson, EHilis and Read, Blain, Hastings, Burnham. 2. Sympathy with the Universalist and infidel, and concessions to them. Employing their modes of argument. Conceding the validity of their positions as against orthodoxy. Quotations. 8. Materialism: the denial of the spirit’s existence. Storrs, Blain, Ellis and Read, openly renounce the belief of any soul distinct from the body and its functions. Quotations. The fact deprecated by Hudson. 4. Gross sensualism. Conclusion......... 384

APPHNDIX

Note A. Extracts on Life and Death........ cet evcecs se ch atte intt ne Nore B. The meaning of Phil. i. 21-24.............. o's 9 0.0 a Sie Ren OEE INOTEY Gr Hades eee so vee reas k REE AY Sk ates Ek ee Nore: D. Misinterpretation of-Dan.. xii: '2......7.0...¢. 0 eee veetouG Note fi. SPerversion of Revisxs10/ 6. 60) 2 3 eee oo ee game 868 Nore F. Unquenchable Fire ...... ARE rect ieee ushers xgsie ae Nore G. The meaning of xéAaoic.......... tere te): 36 tg aniaeee NOTE H. “Gphennar tee tock ene. caliccee Peete odeend epee 881

Nore I. The Book of Enoch on future punishment. .... cceeveceees BOG

LIFE AND DEATH ETERNAL.

eee Cha i \ é } a nah '¢ t ; \ : : 7! i yo pit P i . 1 f Mey “Thy 4 y n ey. ee a 2 * t oe ate : ) ‘ aS ' av : 1 i ea ~ re ( a ’ 2 = os ay i , idan eae a: a ae é vi rc F oF i ‘ ee se f ; \ t came 4 ‘ ’

a i . af -) as ‘ t ty af ‘ . hee . Pi?

‘ fn Bs = Ae | : ws ; Pe a} 9 hy \ Ta, OR an a | + pikes 4 Cd ‘ ! b on e we. 4% ‘

LIFE AND DEATH ETERNAL.

aS) age Se eB

Chapter I. The Doctrine Of Annihilation Stated

F\UE great mass of believers in the divine inspiration and authority of the Bible, in all ages, have understood that book plainly to assert the endless misery of the wicked. Open rejecters of the divine authority of the volume, men of scholarship and ability, priding themselves upon accepting no man’s statement at second hand, have also declared that doctrine to be among the things that “Jesus taught.’ *

By the general admission of friend and foe, that: doctrine is in the Scriptures. It is there, not as the central doctrine of the scheme of grace, nor as the vital truth on which depends the soul’s regeneration and sanctification, but as the dark back-ground of that scheme of grace, —a solemn feature of God’s government, and a fact of momentous import to the human

* “T believe that Jesus Christ taught eternal torment: ...I do not accept it on his authority.””—— THxoporE PaRKER’s ‘Two Sermons,” p. 14.

race. Its aspect is confessedly terrific. The thought of it is appalling, and sometimes confounding, even to those who are safe from its power; while those who claim no such protection can not fail to look upon it with dread and aversion. If the fact could be set aside from God’s government by the vote of his sin- ~ ning subjects, it would at once be stricken out by an overwhelming majority. It is not surprising that the doctrine should be resisted ; that some should reject the volume that contains it; and that others, constrained to receive the book, should labor hard to clear it of the doctrine. Accordingly, in the midst of this general agreement, there have arisen from time to time individuals and bodies of men who have denied that the doctrine of endless misery is in the word of God. |

But here appears a singular phenomenon: the opposers can not agree among themselves. They are at irreconcilable odds. They say, ‘‘The Bible does not teach that the destiny of the wicked is endless suffering.”’ Weask them, ‘ What, then, does it declare to be their future destiny ?”? And the first and largest body of them answer, “Suffering, we know not how protracted and severe, but final restoration to holiness and happiness.” Another portion boldly say, ‘‘ No punishment at all hereafter ; but all men at death enter on a state of happiness.” And here comes a third section, who, with equal boldness and positiveness, aver that God’s word teaches neither the future suffering and recovery, nor the immediate blessedness, of the wicked, but their complete extinction. Antagonism could not - be more total than it is between the advocates of final

THE DOCTRINE OF ANNIHILATION STATED. 17

Restoration, of extreme Universalism, and of Annihilation. The fact is significant: the great body of interpreters, friend and foe, agreeing as to the clear teaching of the Bible on this subject; a minority denying, but propounding instead three separate doctrines, as contradictory to each other as to that which they deny!

The present discussion concerns only the third of these three errors, — the theory which teaches the annihilation of the impenitent wicked. The fundamental doctrine common to the advocates of the theory is this: The death with which God threatened sin, and which actually became -the doom of the sinful race, was absolute extinction of being. Only believers in Christ are delivered from this doom; and immortality is the “eternal life’? which was promised to his followers.

In the subordinate doctrines, the advocates of annihilation are not agreed. Most of their writers hold that this extinction of being takes place when the body dies; the soul or spirit being nothing more than the life of the man. ‘Thus says Jacob Blain, “The Bible plainly tells us that men and beasts are made of the same material, ‘dust;’ and that both have the ‘same breath ;’ and that they both die alike, —hbut, mark, a resurrection is not told for both.” Again: “ The existence of a soul or spirit as an entity within us is only inferred from a few uncertain texts, which can be explained another way; while numerous plain texts and the sense of the Bible are against it.’ * Thomas Read lays down as one of his main positions,

* Death, not Life, pp. 39, 42.

‘The corporeal being and mortality of the soul, and the nature of the spirit of man; which spirit, not being a living entity, is neither mortal nor immortal; and affirms, that ‘‘no conscious spirit or soul survives the death of man.”’* George Storrs, in discussing the . question, ‘Does the Bible teach that the creature, man. which the Lord God formed of the dust of the ground, has a superadded entity called the soul?” says, ‘* We take the negative ;”’ + and again: “I regard the phrase ‘immaterial,’ as one which properly belongs to the things which are not; a sound without sense or meaning; a mere cloak to hide the nakedness of the theory of an immortal soul in man.” = Zenas Campbell declares that “no Scripture or philosophy has ever yet been shown to prove the mind any thing more than an attribute of the living, organized dust; and if so, it must cease with the life of the body.” § Thus the whole being becomes extinct at death. At the resurrection, God re-organizes the body, and endows it with its former active and thinking powers: the righteous then live on for ever; and the wicked are again blotted out of existence, — which is the second death. Some of the writers speak doubtfully about the resurrection of the wicked, or even deny it.

H. L. Hastings not only holds to the resurrection of the wicked, but intimates that their complete extinction may occupy a protracted and unknown period thereafter. ||

* Bible vs. Tradition, pp. 18, 121.

| Discussion between Prof, H. Mattison and George Storrs, p. 4. } Six Sermons, by George Storrs, p. 29.

§ The Age of Gospel Light.

| Retribution, or The Doom of the Ungodly, pp. 77, 158.

THE DOCTRINE OF ANNIHILATION STATED. 19

C. F. Hudson teaches that the sentence is executed in two installments, — the dissolution of the body first, then the extinction of the soul at the time of resurrection. Rejecting the extreme materialism of his coadjutors, he holds that the soul may require the body as the necessary means of its activity. An intermediate state or ‘“‘ detention”? receives all souls on parting from the body, — a state of inaction, which, at its close, may seem to have been but momentary, and to which, in the case of the righteous, he applies the phrase “ fallen asleep” in Christ; from which,at the resurrection, the just are called forth to be clothed with a glorified body, and to enter on immortal activity; and from which, like a damaged seed that exhausts its vitality and perishes in the act of germination, the unjust start up at the voice of God to become extinct in the very act.*

The whole question thus at issue is a question of fact. The only valid testimony concerning it must be the declaration of Him who holds the destiny of the ‘ soul in his hands. For as no being on earth can pretend to have witnessed events that lie still in the future, so none can testify what they shall be, except Him on whose sole decision they depend. Nor can any man, from his general estimate of God’s character, affirm what definite thing God will do. It would require a knowledge of God’s whole being, resources, views, intentions, of his entire plan of government, with all its necessities and peculiarities, more thoroughly exhaustive than one man ever yet possessed concerning a fellow-man, his equal. To declare con-

—-—

* Debt and Grace, pp. 263-4.

fidently what God will do with the finally impenitent, aside from his own declaration, is to put ourselves in the place of God. In the absence of all communications from him, the judgments of our reason and the anticipations of our moral nature would be entitled to some respect, more or less. Reason has expressed her apprehensions of a coming retribution. But to give positive testimony as to the facts or methods of the case is beyond her province; much more, to speak in opposition to God’s testimony.

We repeat it, God is the only competent witness on this subject. If therefore we accept the Scriptures as the word of God, and if the Scriptures have spoken on this subject, it is in the highest degree reprehensible to draw our decisive views on this subject from any other source, or to override their fair testimony by any other considerations. Against sound testimony mere speculations are never of any account: against the testimony of God they are preposterous.

Our appeal, then, is to the Scriptures. The advocates of annihilation profess to make this appeal, but often in such a way as to show that the decisive consideration lies elsewhere. ‘Thus Mr. Hudson, who has written far the most elaborate treatise in defense of the doctrine, in a volume of four hundred and seventy pages devotes but sixty-seven to the scriptural argument, which les embedded in a great mass of other matter, and seems to form but a limited part of his reliance. Stimulated, however, by the remark of a reviewer who called attention to this circumstance, thie same writer subsequently published a separate volume of Scripture arguments “to meet the convenience of

THE DOCTRINE OF ANNIHILATION STATED. Dat those who rely, for ther views of future life, upon their reading and interpretation of the Scriptures.” In the preface, from which we quote, he also adds, that he *‘ doubts if an exclusively scriptural argument will prove satisfactory to very many, however clearly it may appear to be made out.” * This is a confession indeed. The treatises of Blain and others, though in form more scriptural, are sprinkled with remarks which indicate that certain rational considerations are allowed great weight in determining the question. These considerations will receive some attention in the course of this discussion. But the first business is to examine the testimony of the Scriptures.

Now, all the plausibility there is in the scriptural argument for annihilation consists of two main features: first, the constant restriction of the phrase “ eternal life,’ with its opposite, “‘ death,’’ to denote simply continued existence and cessation of existence respectively, in violation alike of the common use and the clear Scripture use of the words; and, secondly, the attempt to confine certain other expressions, setting forth the ... punitive anger of God in vivid and terrific material imagery, down to the lowest sensual aspect of those figurative expressions. Among these phrases are the following: to be destroyed or lost, to perish, to be devoured, to be consumed, slain, cut off, torn in pieces, broken to pieces, dashed in pieces, crushed, ground to powder, burned, or burned up, cut in sunder, to be as nothing, to be as ashes, to be put away as dross ; perdition, end, corruption. All these diverse, and, if literally taken, conflicting modes of representation are

* Christ our Life, preface, p. 3.

cited as conveying the one meaning of annihilation, These several modes of expression will be examined in due time. Meanwhile it becomes necessary to say something concerning the genuine methods of representation employed in the Scriptures, and concerning the radical fallacy with which those representations are treated by the advocates of annihilation.

Chapter II. The Fundamental Vice Of The Scripture Argument For Annihilation

HE Scriptures everywhere speak in the language

of the people. They never employ metaphysical terms, but constantly set forth the most thoroughly spiritual facts by means of such sense images as the common people always use and understand. It is a book not for the metaphysicians, but for the millions. Its language and idioms throughout are conformed to those of the multitude. As it is the universal custom to speak of men as elevated, cast down, sunk, overthrown, wounded, stung, cut to the heart, broken, broken down, broken up, devoured, consumed, eaten up, shattered, crushed, and the like, to denote purely spiritual phenomena, which leave the entire being of the man unimpaired ; precisely so the Scriptures speak in the language of men. Abundant expressions of this general nature are found extending through the Old and New Testaments. Indeed, it is mostly by such figurative expressions, — and that too, as will presently be shown, from the necessity of the case,— that all the leading truths concerning God’s dealings and man’s destiny are communicated. They are employed, not alone respecting the destiny of the wicked, but concerning the enjoyments of the righteous, and all the other themes of the word of God. 23

Now, the grand mistake of the system under discussion is, that its advocates single out one topic from the whole mass of themes, and violate here the whole usage of the Bible to maintain their tenet. Men who see in a moment the folly of understanding literally -the statement that David’s soul ‘‘thirsteth,” “ panteth,” “melteth,” and is ‘ poured out,” or that the righteous are to attend a great wedding-feast, where they shall eat and drink, and recline in Abraham’s bosom, lay aside all the settled laws of speech when they reach this one subject, — the future destiny of the wicked. Terms that are plainly metaphorical, or terms that are used in a secondary or pregnant sense, they insist on _ forcing down to a narrow and sensuous meaning, which is inconsistent alike with the general tenor of Scripture phraseology, and with the use of these very phrases in other passages. On this one subject, the future destiny of the wicked, they persistently degrade all phraseology to a gross, material meaning. Ifa term has botha lower and a higher signification, in this connection they insist upon the lower. Ifa term significant of spiritual facts had a sensuous origin, —as nearly all such terms have had, — they maintain that the sensuous meaning must still cling toit. Ifa figure of speech vividly presenting the vehemence of God’s vengeance, and the intensity of its impression, be drawn —as from the nature of the case it must be—from objects and scenes in which intensity of action produces disorganization, the system seizes on that mere material and incidental feature, the disorganization, and refuses to see all the deeper significance of the description. It takes nothing but the husk. No language, much less an oriental tongue, will bear such treatment. It is simply a materializing of human speech; rather it takes away the life, and leaves but the carcass.

A notable, though somewhat extreme illustration of this process appears in the argument of Mr. Blain in regard to the nature of the spirit, or soul. He finds that the Hebrew and Greek words meaning spirit (one of which he invariably misspells) have an original meaning of “ breath,’ that the Greek word “soul,” sometimes means life; and on this basis, in defiance of the insuperable evidence to the contrary, and with a heavy rebuke of our “ careless translators,’ and the ‘“¢ folly of our popular expositions,” he boldly maintains that the Bible declares the spirit to be but the breath, and the soul but the life, of the body.* The argument, of course,is precisely the same as if one should maintain, that, because the English words “ spirit’? and “ soul ”’ are derived from words signifying to breathe and to blow, therefore the whole body of English theologians believe. the soul, or spirit, to be but the breath; and that, when the heart is spoken of as the fountain of sin and the seat of holiness, we mean to refer those qualities to that physical organ in the human body which carries on the circulation of the blood.