REMARKS by Uriah Smith

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Aug 12, 1873

REMARKS

By Uriah Smith

As Bro. G. has stated, the proposition discussed in the foregoing paper does not belong to the Adventist theory of the Judgment exclusively. He might have gone further, and said that his controversy in this proposition is principally with the orthodox view; for the great inconsistency involved in that theory, that all, as fast as they die, enter upon a state of conscious suffering or happiness, but are all finally to be summoned to Judgment to have their cases decided, is so great as to overshadow all other portions of this proposition. An inconsistency so glaring and palpable must in time produce its effect. That God should hold a soul in the agonies of the lake of fire, or permit it to bask in the bliss of Heaven for ages upon ages, and then bring it to the Judgment to see if this was the right treatment to be rendered to it, or to go through the farce of re-affirming decisions already made, is so unlike all the revelation we have of his attributes and character, that it cannot be entertained by any one who will both honestly and seriously consider the subject. And many will thus consider it; for this question is destined to have a hearing. Then what will be the tendency? So long as the different denominations hold the views that now generally prevail respecting the future resurrection of the dead and the Judgment, they will be logically driven to the ground taken by Adventists, which is the only ground that makes throughout a scriptural harmony on these questions. We rejoice in the certainty of the progress of truth in this direction; and we shall neither be surprised nor sorry to see the day draw rapidly on when many of our Seventh-day Baptist brethren will be influenced by it in the manner indicated by Bro. G. Certainly one or the other of these positions must be taken: that the soul is not conscious from death to the resurrection, or that it is judged as soon as it leaves the body; but the moment we attempt to locate the Judgment at death, we find ourselves in conflict with the Scriptures at every step; for they everywhere represent the Judgment as an event to take place, in its execution at the end of all human probation, and the conclusion of all human mortal history.

Respecting the present paper of Bro. G.'s, we heartily second his efforts to show the absurdity of the position of the orthodox party that the soul is conscious, happy or miserable, according to character in death, and yet that the Judgment is future. We accept his statement of the agreement and difference between ourselves and the orthodox, as substantially correct, excepting the idea of the end in the sense of the annihilation of the mundane system which we do not hold. We take issue with him, on the proposition, which is the only one that need be noticed in this article, that the Judgment is a continuous event, to be eternally in progress, and not a definite and future one, to be finally completed upon all the human race.

The resurrection and the Judgment are so plainly taught in the Scriptures that they cannot be ignored, but must have a place in every religious system founded thereon. But the resurrection, we are told in the present instance, is simply our future existence, continued uninterruptedly from this, and the Judgment is constantly going on. We hardly know how to make an application of Scripture to Eld. G.'s theories; for we have come to regard it as a matter of complete uncertainty what unaccountable explanation he would give of their testimony. We have tried to grasp some of his positions, but with about the same result, we must confess, that would attend an effort to grasp a ray of moonshine. The fogs of mysticism, and the chilling blankets of vacuity seem to hold about equal place in his system. So we are at a loss to know what scriptures he will accept, and what explain away in a manner virtually to reject. We have the testimony that Enoch and Elijah were translated to Heaven without seeing death. What construction he would put upon this narrative, whether he would call it veritable history or an allegory, we know not. But if the resurrection means simply a future existence, beyond this present state, we would like an answer to the question whether Enoch and Elijah are ever represented in the Scriptures as having had a resurrection, having been raised from the dead. Is this the way they speak of them? They certainly have a continued existence in a higher sphere, which Bro. G. says is the resurrection. Then they should be spoken of as having been raised from the dead. That the Scriptures do nowhere thus speak of them, and instead of saying that they were raised from the dead, say that they did not see death, shows that the resurrection from the dead is not simply future existence.

Again, if the resurrection is constantly going on, how could Christ say, as is recorded four times in the sixth of John, speaking of those who believe in him, that he will raise them up at the last day; for there is to be no time which can be called the last day, and they are raised up all the time. Or how could he say to Martha, “Thy brother shall rise again”? for according to the continuous-state theory, he had risen already.

We understand Bro. G. that the day of Judgment which God appointed, Acts 17, is the gospel day. How, then, with those who died before the introduction of this day? Cain and Abel died ages before the first advent of Christ. How and by whom were they judged? Peter says of the present heavens and earth that they are reserved unto fire against the day of Judgment and perdition of ungodly men. The day of Judgment had not then commenced when he wrote. The angels that fell are reserved to the Judgment of the great day. Jude 6. The Judgment had not then, any part of it, taken place when Jude wrote. Daniel and John both saw a specific time when the Judgment was set, and the books were opened, and the dead were judged out of those things written in the books. And to the same effect testimony might be multiplied to almost any extent.

Into the particular events of the Judgment, as we view it, it is not necessary for us here to enter, as they were so fully set forth in the REVIEW, some time since, in the series of articles entitled, “Order of Events in the Judgment,” by Bro. Andrews, which we hope soon to see in book form. That a Judgment, investigative in its nature, must take place before Christ comes, is evident. And if, at the final perdition of the ungodly, who are raised one thousand years after the righteous, Rev. 20, they are judged out of those things written in the books, it is evident that an examination of the books must have been made; and in no other place can the thousand years' work of Judgment committed to the saints, Rev. 20:4, have its application. This is not because God needs evidence in the matter, but that all interested intelligences may see and understand the principles upon which he acts. Giving each person a view of his deeds is not the execution of the Judgment; for that would be no punishment to the wicked. They boast of their deeds of fraud and violence, and glory in their shame. And to say that in the future state they are going to look with abhorrence on their own characters, is to say that a work of reformation will be wrought for every one of them by which their moral natures will be purified and quickened; which is absurd.

Looking over the whole field, how harmonious and consistent the view that in death we lose the consciousness of life; that Christ, who has undertaken our redemption, will raise us up from death; that this event is left till the probation of all the race is finished; that then those who are judged worthy of eternal life, will be saved to live forever, while those who have thrown away the proffered boon, will perish everlastingly. And for these positions the Scriptures give the most abundant evidence. But how disjointed and irreconcilable with the Scriptures is the view that there is no death, that the resurrection and Judgment begun with Abel, and will last forever. This view robs Christ of the glory of his work, and leads to the logical conclusion that as those who enter the other world in a state of sin, are far more numerous than the righteous, the time will eventually come when the wicked will infinitely exceed in number all the good of the whole universe, when the principle that shall be enthroned as the ruler of all, shall be a principle of evil, and the whole creation of God be turned into one vast and unmitigated hell.

God will not thus be overcome. Evil, with its author, and its abettors, will be rooted out. Truth and righteousness alone will live, and their friends alone will behold their everlasting triumph.

Whatever view we may take of the “science of last things,” may He who has undertaken the redemption of our fallen race, have compassion upon us in our low estate, and help us to make that preparation that will secure to us at last all the blessings and privileges contemplated in his glorious plan for our salvation.

U. S.