A discussion of the conjoint question : is the doctrine of endless punishment for any part or portion of the human family taught in the Scriptures ; or, is the doctrine of the final holiness and happiness of all mankind

Front matter

BX

.73

OF THE

Part I- No. I

5JJ THE USiv i aSALIST CKV^WH, -WEDNESDAY EVENING, P' i^RfS 1.5, 1843.

'3 Y F. Y A T E S.

Question Is the doctrine of enclle ss punishment for any part or portim of the human family taught in the Scrips tures ; or, is fh"- doctrine of the f nc J, holiness and happiness of all mankind ?

Questions more importance than these were never presented to the mind of man. Our race, of whatever clime, has ever looked towards the future \ eith deep interest, and most men, whether sage or savage, ha ,ve looked forward with expecitations of future existence.

The Bible comes to us from the hand of the Father of the Universe, dispelling the doubtf 5, and confirming the faith of those who receive it, by point ing them to a state of being beyond the confines of the pres ,ent world. To this holy Book we must turn, not only to learn \hefact of our future existence, but also the character of th at existence. The great body of those who regard the Bible as a revelation from God have believed that it teaches that man is a moral agent, governed by a moral law, the proper penalty of which is endless punishment. But some few, in these latter days, have risen up, and called in question the doctrine of endless punishment. They tell us that the world has been deceived altogether in reference to this subject. The Bible does not teach — what the most pious and learned men of all age^ of the Christian Church have believed — that " a part or portion of the human family" will be endlessly miserable, but directly the contrary, that " all mankind will be finally holy and happy." If this be the truth it is important that it should be known ; if biblical students for 1800 years have failed to discover this doctrine, u'hich, it is contended, was the doctrine taught by Christ and his apostles, — if this discovery was reserved for the wisdom of the present age, we may bless ourselves that we live in such aaspicir s times, that the lines have fallen to us in such pleasant placc.^ , for the discovery of truth should always be a matter of thanksgiving. But before we congratulate ourselves too highly, let us pause a few moments and examine the claims of such new teachers to our confidence in their doctrine. We are commanded in scripture to " try the spirits, and see if they be of God," for we are told that false teachers shall arise." If any man bring to us any other gospel than that preached by Christ and his apostles, we are bound to reject it. Let us examine, therefore, and see Vv'hat was taught by him who " spake as never man spake," and those who were instructed at his feet. Was there any such thing known in the time of Christ and his apostles as the doctrine of endless punishment? and what was the conduct of these teachers in reference to this subject ? Were they found opposing it, or did they take such a course as would lead the believers in endless punishment to conclude that this was their doctrine also ? These inquiries I shall endeavour to swer on this occasion,

I. Was the doctrine of endless jmnisliment believed by both Jews and Gentiles in the days of Christ and his apostles ? In answer to this question it is sufficient to say, that Universal ists themselves admit that the doctrine of endless punishment was extensively believed by Jews and Gentiles at the time of Christ's ministry. The following are some of their testimonies on this point. The Pharisees it is well knov/n believed in the endless punishment of human souls." Lectures by W. M. Fcrnald, p. 79. "It is generally admitted that the Jews, in our Savior's day, maintained the Pagan notion of immortal happiness for the righteous, and undying pain for the sinner." Letter in the

Trumpet Feb. 3, 1838. " That the Pharisees believed in a punishment after death we do not deny." Whittemorc's Notes on the Parables, p. 62. Jews and heathen believed in endless punishment. Balfour's Essays, p. 326.

We might enlarge these quotations from Universal ist authors, to show that the doctrine was generally received by both Jews and Gentiles. The following is given to show how extensively it prevailed among them at the time our Savior, the great teacher of truth and righteousness, was in their midst publishing his own gospel. Mr. Balfour, in his inquiry, p. 260, where he attempts to sh' '^at the Jews obtained their notions of endless punishment 'Vl the heathen, says — " The introduction of this and other heathen opinions among the Jews was gradual, but in the days of our Lord, had become general, with perhaps the exception of the sect of the Sadducees." This sect composed but a small pait of the Jewish nation. Having established this point by the te- jnony of Universalists, we will inquire,

II. Was Ckr'-' f; or his apostles, who lived and 'preached in the midst of beliei . s in endless punishment, ever known to oppose this doctrine : • , were they ever opposed by others for believing and preaching "ht contrary doctrine?

The doctrine nf endless punishment is either true or false. If it is false, it is the invention of wicked men got up for unhallowed purposes. It was designed by its originators to frighten the superstitious into obedience by exciting their fears, and threatening them with endless torments if they should dare to go contrary to their wishes. We are told by the opposers of this doctrine that it originated among the heathen, and the Jews received it from them ; and that in the time of our Lord and his apostles it had become general. This doctrine is regarded also by its opposers as the most destructive error that ever prevailed among men ; nay, worse than all others put together. We will hear how Universalists of the present day speak in reference to this doctrine. What heart-rending feelings they must have on account of this dreadful error." In the so called Gospel Banner of Feb. 20, 1841, the editor, speaking of the doctrine in question, says — " We believe it to be the greatest error of our times, — one fraught with the worst results to so-

'ciety." The Lord save us from an error that reflects so ingloriously upon tiie ever adorable perfections of Almighty God, our heavenly Father. We would not see his character traduced and slandered by such a reflection upon his nature and proceedings. Neither would we see our fellow men oppressed and made wretched by such a faith." " We believe its influence is decidedly bad — injurious to good morals, and destructive to human happiness. Put all the errors of the world into one, and this would not equal in magnitude the one to which we refer. Is it any longer a wonder in your mind, reader, that vve, as Universalists, should employ so much of our time in preaching and writing against this grand error N"ay, we must do it." Mr. Whittemore, in his Modern Histoi' of Universalism, says., *' It is an error pregnant with evil consequences above every otlier." Again, Guide, p. 245 — ''When we see the deep misery and heartfelt anguish which a sincere belief in the doctrine occasions, the heart bleeds for the unhappy sufferer."* These extracts are in perfect keeping with Universalist presses and pulpits everywhere. On the supposition that Christ and his aipostles had as much feeling for human woe as Universalists of the present time, and were as capable of judging of the effect 3 of this doctrine which prevailed to such an alarming •extent in their day, what would be expected of them 1 of him especially, whose heart was made of tenderness, and who needed not that any should teach him 1 Would it not be expected of Christ, who manifested such disinterested benevolence for the children of men, and whose great object was to secure hiaman happiness, that he would have opposed such an error as ithis in a manner which would have set the matter at rest with his followers at least? But did he, or his apostles ever come in collision with either Jew or Gentile on this subject 1 Where is it recorded ? Four of his disciples, who were his constant followers, have given all of his history that infinite wisdom s aw fit for the benefit of future generations, but they have not mentioned a single instance of the kind. He was often found exposing other errors, trifling indeed when compared

*These e xtracts are taken from an Essay written by Rev. N. D. George, of the Maine (Mt thodist) Conference, to wliich Essay I am indebted for some of the thoug^hts C( mtained in tliis discourse.

with the one of which we spealv, if it be an error, but no where do we read of his coming in contact with any one on this point; or warning his disciples against it, though he often warned them against other errors of the day. The Pharisees frequently met him with various objections, but we never read of their opposing him for believing and preaching that ail men would be saved.

We have a brief history of the acts of the apostles, giving frequent accounts of disputations with both Jews and Gentiles,, who were believers in endless misery, but no account of opposition on either hand in respect to this doctrine. We have twenty-two Epistles, written by the apostles and addressed to. believers in endless punishment, and while they name and expose numerous errors the correctness of this doctrine is never called in question.

" Is it not strange, passing strange, that the greatest teacher the world ever saw, or ever will see, whose heart was made of tenderness, should dwell in the midst of a people believing in an error which outweighs all others put together, and never once raised a warning voice against it, nor showed them its man-degrading, God-dishonoring character ? His apostles too, who received their theology from his own blessed lips, labored and reared Churches in the midst of believers in the hated doctrine, yet nowhere in their history do we learn that they raised a single note of alarm against it."

In view of the fact that the doctrine of endless punishment so extensively prevailed in the days of Christ and his apostles, would not their silence on this subject be enough to show that they held the same doctrine, and therefore, that it is the doctrine of the Bible 1 But,

III. / come now to a third inquiry. — Did Christ and his Apostles use such language in their discourses and writings as was used hy believers in endless punishment in reference to this subject 1

It will not be necessary for me to show that Christ or his apostles ever entered into any labored defence of the doctrine of endless punishment to prove that it was their doctrine. As this doctrine was almost universally believed, it was not necessary that they should take such a course. They did not spend their time in laboring to prove what every body admitted to be true. If I can show that they took the same course, and used the same language, in reference to this subject, as those who are admitted to be believers in endless punishment, my point will be gained.

First, I will inquire, what was the character of the Savior's teaching '? W as his manner of preaching calculated to confound the believers in endless punishment, or to confirm them in their belief? I will suppose a case. A clergyman comes into this village and seeks an introduction to my opponent as a brother in the ministry. On the following sabbath he is invited to officiate. He reads for his morning lesson the seventh chapter of Matthew, the concluding portion of our Lord's Sermon on the Mount. Such passages as the following are read without comment : " Enter ye in at the straight gate ; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat : because straight is the gate, and narrow is the way that leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it." " Not every one that saith unto me. Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many shall say to me in that day. Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils ? and in thy name done many wonderful works ? And then v/ill I profess unto them, I never knew you ; depart from me ye that work iniquity." " And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand ; and the rains descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house, and it fell ; and great was the fall of it."

The stranger reads for his text, Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish," {Luke xiii, 3.) He proceeds without any labored criticisms to explain away, and gives a plain and scriptural view of repentance. To show its necessity, he declares that all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." To show that men are pursuing a wrong course and ought to turn about, he exclaims with Ezekiel, turn ye, turn ye, from your evil ways, for why will ye die? and with Isaiah, " Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and he will have mercy upon him ; and to our God for he will abundantly pardon. For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord." He repeats his text, " Except ye repent ye shall all likewise perish." To enforce this doctrine, he speaks of the destruction of the old world by water, of the cities of the plain by fire, as did Christ, — of the burial of the hardened Egyptians in the Red Sea, and of the calamities of the Jews in consequence of their impenitence. He speaks of individuals, — of Lot's wife, of Belshazer, and of Herod who was smitten with worms. Again he repeats his text with still greater emph'dsis, " Except YE rtpc?it, ye shall all Ukeivise perish." The speaker closes with the language of Paul, God " now commandeth all men everywhere to rej)e?it, because he hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness, by that man whom he hath ordained." (Acts xvii. 30, 31.) Would you begin to conclude that the speaker had proved universal salvation ? or would you not at once declare that you had been imposed upon by a bigoted partialist ? And yet this is the manner in which Christ and his apostles preached.

I shall now introduce a few passages of scripture, which I regard as teaching the doctrine in question, and which the Jews and those addressed must have so understood.

Luke xvi. 22 — 28. " And it came to pass that the beggar died, and was carried by angels into Abraham's bosom : the rich man also died, and was buried : and in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom : and he cried and said. Father Abraham have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue ; for I am tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, son, remember that thou in thy life-time receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things ; but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed ; so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot ; neither can they pass to us that would come from thence."

The object of this quotation is to show that Christ used such language as was used by the Jews in reference to future and eternal punishment. This will be seen at once by a quotation from Joi>('pJiiis^ who lived and wrote in that age of the world. Let it be remembered that Josephus was a Jewish historian. The extracts are made from his discourse to the Greeks concerning Hades, which is the word that is rendered hell in the above passage. " Now as to Hades, wherein the souls of the righteous and the unrighteous are detained, it is necessary to speak of it. In this region there is a certain place set apart, as a lake of unquenchable fire, whereinto we suppose no one hath hitherto been cast, but it is prepared for a day afore determined of God, in which one righteous sentence shall be deservedly passed upon all men ; when the unjust, and those that have been disobedient to God, and have given honor to such idols as have been the vain operations of the hands of men, as to God himself, shall be adjudged to this everlasting punishment, as having been the cause of defilement ; while the just shall obtain an incorruptible and never fading kingdom. These are nov*' indeed confined in hades, but not in the same place wherein the unjust are confined." Speaking of the place of the just, he says, " This place we call the bosom of Abraham."

With these extracts, exhibiting the belief of the Jews, it is easy to see how they must have understood the language of Christ in the above passage. When he spoke of Lazarus being carried to Abraham's hosom, the mind would at once be carried to the world of departed souls, and to that part of it prepared for the just. " This place we call the bosom of Abraham." When he spoke of the rich man, lifting up his eyes in hades, they at once called to mind that part of the invisible world in which the souls of the unjust are " retained until the day afore determined of God, in which one righteous sentence shall be deservedly passed upon all men." If there is no such thing as future punishment, and consequently no such place as that mentioned by Josephus, how can this conduct of the Savior be accounted for ? Does he not appear to adopt the notion of the Jews ? and how will he escape the charge of deception ? Let my opponent attend to this matter.

Luke xii. 4, 5. " And I say unto you, my friends, be not afraid of them that kill the body, but after that have no more that they can do ; but I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear ; fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell : yea, I say unto you, fear him.." Mark ix. 43, 44. " And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off ; it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched; where their worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched." This last expression, (where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched) occurs three times in this connection. The question again comes up — How did the Jews understand this language of the Savior ? They could not have understood him as speaking of the grave, for two reasons. 1. Whatever is m.eant by hell here, it is a place into which man has no power to throw his victim, which is not true concerning the grave. 2. There is connected with this hell a worm that dletli not, and cijire that shall never he quenched, which is not true of the grave. How then would they be likely to understand this language 1 Suppose it to be language familiar to them, such as they were in the habit of using when speaking of endless punishment, would they not be very likely to understand it as speaking of the same doctrine ? I will here introduce one more extract from Josephus, to show that this was the very language employed by the Jews when speaking of endless punishment, and consequently they must have understood Christ as teaching this doctrine. Speaking of the judgment, (which he held to be after the resurrection,) and of the judge, he says, " at whose judgmentseat, when all men and angels, and demons shall stand, — they will send forth one voice, and say, just is thy judgment ; the rejoinder to which will bring a just sentence upon both parties, by giving justly to those who have done well, an everlasting fruition ; but allotting to the lovers of wicked works eternal punishment. To these belong the unquenchable fire^ and that without end, and a certain fiery icorm, never dying, and not destroying the body, but continuing its eruptions out of the body with never ceasing grief." Here we see that Christ employs their own phraseology, that with whish th©y were familiar ; and with what propriety or consistency, I ask, if he did not allow the doctrine 1 Let my opponent answer this question — if he can.

I will now call attention to Matthew xxv. 31 — 4G. " When the Son of Man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory, and before him shall be gathered all nations ; and he shall separate them one from the other, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats : and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come ye blessed of my Father ; inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world ; for I was an hungered and ye gave me meat," &.c. " Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat," &/C. *' And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal."

Now call to mind the fact that the Jews believed in a general judgment following the resurrection, and in the existence of a devil and evil angels, and in a hell burning with unquenchable fire, and that at the judgment, the wicked would go into everlasting punishment ; would they not be likely to understand Christ as teaching the same doctrine ? How otherwise could they have understood his language in this discourse ? Must not every candid man be constrained to admit that the Lord Jesus Christ not only countenanced these opinions of the Jews, but taught them clearly, and distinctly, as his own doctrine ? If then, he did not allow the doctrine of endless punishment, how can his conduct on this occasion be vindicated so as to clear him from the charge of gross hypocrisy and dishonesty ? It will avail nothing to attempt to show by criticism that the terms used here do not necessarily mean what they have generally been understood to mean. For instance, that the word everlasting in v. 46, does not strictly mean endlesSj for this is the term employed by the Jews to signify endless duration, and they must have so understood it in the a?feove passage.

As this is an important passage in this dicussion, I will offer a few remarks to show that it cannot be consistently intepreted so as to teach any thing short of future and endless punishment. I suppose the only question that will come up in this discussion in relation to this passage, is this, Does it relate in its fulfilment to this world, or must it have its accomplishment in the future state ? If 1 can show that it cannot be fufilled in this state of existence, it will then be applied, with common consent, to the resurrection state. And if the punishment threatened is to be inflicted in the future world, the controversy will be at an end.

We have already seen that the Jews must have understood the Savior as speaking of a general judgment at the end of this world, when he will receive his saints into his everlasting kingdom, and sentence the wicked to endless punishment. The following considerations I think sufficient to show that we must so understand it now.

1. The rewards and punishments here spoken of are to be distributed '^^ when the Son of Man shall come in his glory. This can mean nothing short of his personal appearance to our world, as will appear from a few passages of scripture which speak of his coming in such a manner as has never yet been witnessed. Matt. xxvi. 64. " Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven." — Acts i. 9, 10, 11. "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up ; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven, as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel ; which also said, ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven ? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner, as ye have seen him go into heaven." — 1 Thess. iv. 16, 17. " For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven, with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God : and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we which are alive and remain, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air ; and so shall we ever be with the Lord." — Rev. i. 7. "Behold, he

Cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also, which pierced him ; and all the kindred of the earth shall wail because of him."

These quotations are sufficient to establish the following points :

(1) The Son of man is to come again, — " this same Jesus — the Lord himself.''''

(2) He is to come '^^ in like maimer^'' as he ivent up in the clouds of heaven ivith the voice of the archangel, and ivith the trump of God.''

(3) His coming will be visible, — ''ye shall see him, every eye shall see him.''

(4) " The dead in Christ" ivill then have a resurrection.

I think it is now proved that the coming of the Son of Man in his glory" cannot refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, but to his coming to judge the world in their resurrection state. In farther support of this view, I remark,

2. That his coming is to be accompanied by " all the holy angels." When has Christ ever yet appeared with all the holy angels ? 3. ''He shall sit upon the throne of his glory" at his coming here spoken of How did Christ sit upon the throne of his glory at the destruction of Jerusalem, any more than he did at the fall of Babylon ?

4 " All nations shall be gathered" before Christ at his coming here referred to. Has this ever taken place ?

5. Christ shall " separate" the gathered nations at that time. This has never taken place, nor will it till the general judgment.

6. The righteous are to be rewarded at this coming of Christ, such as cannot take place in this world ; for the reward is in consideration of actions that are passed, and they are put in possession of a " kingdom" which they did not before possess ; which cannot, therefore, be the gospel dispensation.

7. At the coming of Christ described in the text, the wicked will be sentenced to " everlasting punishment.

As these considerations show conclusively that this passage must be applied to the resurrection state, it is therefore proved that " a part or portion of the human family" will endure " endlefwf punishment."

Having examined the character of Christ's preaching in reference to future and eternal punishment, we will now inquire into the manner in which the apostles preached and wrote in respect to this subject. It has already been remarked that not an instance can be found where they directly opposed the doctrine of endless punishment, though they travelled extensively among Jews and Gentiles, and held frequent controversies with them on various subjects. In all the twenty-two Epistles written by them under the inspiration of the Almighty, no instance of opposition to this doctrine can be found. How does this look when compared with the labors and productions of the opposers of this doctrine at the present day ? What would be thought of a Universalist Minister of the present day, who should publish a single sermon and not distinctly oppose the doctrine of endless punishment ? Would his people be satisfied with it.

But I am prepared to show that the apostles, like their divine teacher, employed language directly calculated to confirm the believers in endless misery, and which has led the brightest intellects that have ever adorned Christendom to believe that they taught this doctrine.