Life Through Christ by Editor

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Feb 27, 1872

Life Through Christ.

By Editor

The question of life alone through Christ, and the utter destruction of the finally lost, is producing a daily-increasing agitation in the theological world. Whoever has access to the religious papers of the land, will be aware of this from the frequency with which this question comes to the surface. And the doctrine that there is no eternal life out of Christ, and that consequently the punishment of the wicked is not to be eternal misery, is now able to present an array of adherents so strong in numbers, so cultivated in intellect, and so correct at heart, that many of its opponents are changing their base of operations toward it, and, leaving their first position that it could be easily stamped out, and should be at once so disposed of, are now taking steps looking not only to a toleration of its existence, but to a compromise with its claims. Such indications do us good. We like to chronicle them. They are so far concessions to the truth; and the truth we rejoice to see prosper in any degree. Our sympathies are entirely with it; and with the heartiest God-speed we follow it always and everywhere.

The N. Y. Independent of Feb. 15, 1872, has an article on this subject containing some declarations or admissions which are worthy of note. From a position previously taken by the Independent on this question, the Chicago Advance dissented, which called out its present article. The position of the Independent, in its own language is, “that the fellowship of the churches may safely be extended to persons who do not believe in eternal punishment, provided they hold, with entire and cordial faith, the essential truths of the Evangelical system.”

A proposition that the churches should even fellowship those who deny eternal misery, is more than we ever expected to see; and the declaration that a belief in eternal punishment is not among the “essential truths of the Evangelical system,” is equally beyond what we had ever dared to hope in this direction.

The Advance holds that a disbelief in eternal punishment should be a bar to church fellowship; to which the Independent replies: “We had supposed that there was coming to be a pretty general agreement among intelligent Christians of all denominations that doctrinal tests should be sparingly applied to candidates for church membership.” The Advance further says:—

“If we find a person rejecting what we believe to be a fundamental and clearly-expressed truth among the doctrines which Christ taught, he will not seem to us to be a genuine follower of the Master.”

To which the Independent again responds:— “This appears to us a harsh judgment. It cannot be denied that multitudes of earnest and believing men in all the ages have doubted whether Christ taught this doctrine.”

This is a good admission of the important fact that there has been in “all ages” an earnest protest on the part of “multitudes,” against the idea that Christ or his disciples taught such an idea as eternal torture. The Independent continues:—

“There are many persons whom we could not refuse to recognize as ‘genuine followers of the Master,’ who differ with the editor of the Advance, and with ourselves, in their explanation of the teachings of the New Testament on this subject. We are sorry for the difference; but when in all other respects they prove themselves to be true and faithful Christian disciples, we do not find ourselves at liberty to refuse them admission to our churches. The position taken by the Standard (Baptist) of Chicago, upon this question, to which reference is made in our ‘Religious Intelligence,’ is one which the majority of Christians will regard as perfectly safe and tenable.”

The paragraph to which reference is here made, reads as follows:—

“The Chicago Standard has a correspondent who wants to know what should be done with a candidate for admission to the church, who in all other respects is sound and acceptable, but who hesitates to accept the doctrine of eternal punishment. The Standard sensibly quotes Paul’s advice: ‘Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations’; and adds: ‘We think the apostle’s rule has respect to precisely such a case.’”

These quotations show to some extent how the question is working in this country. In Germany the article from which we quote states that this test is not applied, and that even in England there is coming to be a degree of tolerance in regard to this matter which did not formerly exist. It then introduces the following “extract from a letter written by a well-informed and rigidly orthodox correspondent to the Christian Era, of Boston,” to show how the case stands in that country:—

“The whole question of future punishment was recently discussed in The Christian World, published in London. The orthodox view was defended by Dr. Angus, Baptist; the universal restoration theory, by a recognized Independent minister; and the ultimate annihilation of the lost, by the pastor of a Union church, himself a Baptist. My own conviction is, that many Independent and Baptist ministers in the United Kingdom have ceased to preach or to believe in the eternal misery of the lost; and have adopted chiefly the annihilation theory, in fewer instances the doctrine of universal restoration. About two years since, the Rev. W. Miall, of Dalston, London, a Baptist minister of recognized standing, and whose name still appears in our Baptist Handbook, published a work in defense of the universal restoration of the wicked.”

This correspondent would not be likely to overstate the matter; and hence we may safely count on the statement that “many Independent and Baptist ministers in the United Kingdom have ceased to preach or believe in the eternal misery of the lost,” as one which does not go any beyond the truth.

The Independent is opposed to this doctrine, though proposing to fellowship its believers, and thinks that if “let severely alone” it will “run to seed after a little,” and that this would be the best method of dealing with it.

If every one would let it alone, and no person agitate the question, perhaps this would be the result. But there are many friends of the doctrine, because they are friends of the Bible, and are sensitive for the honor of God and his word, who have taken hold of the subject and will not let it rest till they see thoroughly established in the land a religious belief, from which the foul blot of a doctrine so unscriptural and God-dishonoring as eternal misery is entirely expunged.

And now its opponents can elect which of two things they will do: They can let it alone; they can stand by and see these views promulgated and the doctrine spread; with which we shall be well pleased; for we court no controversy merely as such: or they can engage in open and active opposition; which will be better still for the doctrine; for agitation will certainly scatter the brands of truth, as persecution drove the disciples of Christ from Jerusalem and thus spread all over the land the very doctrine which it wished to destroy.