THE SECOND DEATH | AdventAI

Publishing Committee · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jan 20, 1859

THE SECOND DEATH.

(Continued.) "Depart ye cursed into everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels." Matt. xxv, 41. The word everlasting applied to the fire alluded to, if taken in its unlimited sense, according to remarks already made, will not prove the endless continuance of misery, but the contrary. This fire, said to be prepared for the Devil and his angels, is plainly what is referred to, when the following inquiry was put to our Saviour: "Art thou come to destroy us before the time?" It was, therefore, not prepared to render them indestructible, but to destroy them. And the dreadful prospect made them tremble, sturdy and hardened as they were. Besides, Christ came expressly to "destroy him that had the power of death, that is the Devil." Heb. ii, 14. The word destroy, in this passage, is translated from a Greek verb, which signifies to abolish or annihilate. The Devil, therefore, and his angels will be destroyed by the fire which is prepared for them—yea, abolished or annihilated. And, of course, the sinners of mankind who are placed on the left hand of the Judge being cast into the same fire will share the same fate. There is not even an intimation of endless misery here. The universe is eventually to be rid of the devils and all their adherents by means of an utter extermination. Not only their works, but themselves, are to be destroyed, and that perpetually. "And these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal." Matt. xxv, 46. It is conceded that everlasting and eternal are translated from the same word in the original Greek. But, if it were necessary, it might be here shown that this term has a qualified or restricted meaning when applied to future punishment, although it be taken without such limitation as applied to the life of the righteous. For it surely has a limited as well as an unlimited meaning. It is even used in these different senses in the same text, as where it is said, "The everlasting mountains were scattered, the perpetual hills did bow; his ways are everlasting." The punishment of the wicked, so far as positive misery is respected, must, of necessity, be limited, for reasons already given. A consumable object, if the consuming cause continues, cannot always be consuming. It would imply a contradiction. But we are under no necessity in this case of resorting to the different senses in which this term is used. The unlimited sense of it may be freely admitted, without implying the endlessness of misery. For punishment is not necessarily positive, and that only, and hence it may be strictly everlasting—absolutely without end, and yet not imply endless misery. It may terminate as to positive misery, and be succeeded by a perpetual death. It must be obvious to every reflecting mind that punishment may be positive or negative, or both. In this case it will be partly positive, and partly negative—positive as to future deserved pains, and negative as to the subsequent loss of life and being from which they will never recover. The second death, as above explained, is properly termed an everlasting punishment. Hence, the apostle Paul has given us an inspired comment on this tremendous passage in the following words: "Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power." 2 Thess. i, 9. Observe, it is not everlasting indestructibility which is threatened, but everlasting destruction. We may therefore say, without hesitation, that the aforesaid concluding remark in the Saviour's description of the final judgment, fails to teach the doctrine of endless misery. "And some to shame and everlasting contempt." Dan. xii, 2. These results are truly predicated of the resurrection of the wicked without implying that they will suffer unceasing misery. To shame they will obviously rise, and this will unquestionably be attended with pain; but it is not qualified with everlasting pain. And the everlasting contempt which they will inherit is on the part of the righteous, and hence does not imply endless misery. The righteous will indeed hold them in utter abhorrence. While under the full dominion of the second death, they will be remembered with just indignation and holy displeasure. Give, therefore, the word everlasting its full scope, and it proves nothing for the theory of endless misery. "Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?" Isa. xxxiii, 14. This passage plainly imports that none shall be able to do it. "Can thine heart endure, or can thine hands be strong in the day that I shall deal with thee?" Thus God inquires. But the popular theory maintains that all the wicked can endure—that they will be rendered able to withstand the violence of the fiercest flames, and endure infinite wrath. Which theory is the most worthy of credit? "And again they said, Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever." Rev. xix, 3. This is a description of the fearful destiny of the great whore—the corrupt, anti-Christian church. But the smoke here referred to, is the smoke of the fire which is to consume her. This, therefore, proves at most merely the perpetuity of the fire which will envelope her. And surely if it be strictly for ever and ever, it will eventually burn her up, so as to leave neither root nor branch. It is not necessary to limit the fire here, to avoid the inference of never-ending misery, though this might be done, in accordance with the obvious use of this phraseology in several other places. "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever." Rev. xiv, 11. This is affirmed of such as worship the beast, or mystical Babylon. But the smoke of their torment manifestly means no more than the smoke of the fire which produces their torment. For torment surely has no smoke. But the smoke is a known property, or an accompaniment of fire. The ascending, therefore, of the smoke in the manner described, pertains only to the fire, which, though it should be unending, will not prove endless misery, but the reverse. "And the Devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." Rev. xx, 10. This is the first passage which we have as yet found which requires a limited construction of the phrase, "for ever and ever;" and it is the only one which requires it in all the Bible. In every other instance, where future punishment is the subject, it may be taken in its primary and fullest sense without implying the doctrine of endless misery. But in this instance, it is conceded that it must be taken in a limited sense, if the doctrine of destruction, as before stated, be true. This is the most intense form of the Greek word, "aioon." But it may be easily shown that aioon and aioonios, translated ever and eternal, or everlasting, are frequently used in a limited sense. The covenant of circumcision is denominated "an everlasting covenant," and the Aaronic priesthood "an everlasting priesthood;" but their duration is obviously limited. We read also of "the old way," and "of the ancient landmarks," where the Hebrew word for old, and ancient, is olam, answerable to the Greek word aioonios, which is translated everlasting and eternal. It is moreover conceded by the most learned critics, that the words for ever, everlasting and eternal, are often used to denote a long, indefinite and unknown period than absolute eternity. And even the double and most intense form of aioon, viz., "for ever and ever," is evidently used sometimes to denote a limited period, and hence I infer that it may be so used in the passage last quoted. There are several weighty considerations in favor of adopting the limited construction here. 1. In two instances besides this text it is manifest that this phraseology is used in a limited sense, i. e., to describe a limited period and nothing more. The first pertains to the desolation of the land of Idumea, and reads thus, "The smoke thereof shall go up for ever—none shall pass through it for ever and ever." "For ever and ever," here cannot mean an unlimited period, because the next chapter predicts a restoration of the same country to prosperity and fruitfulness under the reign of the Messiah. And eventually the first heaven and earth are to pass away, and a new heaven and a new earth succeed, wherein dwelleth righteousness. The second passage teaches what would have been the duration of Israel's prosperity, if they had been obedient. "Then I will cause you to dwell in this place, in the land that I gave to your fathers, for ever and ever." Jer. vii, 7. In this case, also, the phrase, for ever and ever, means, at most, no longer than the end of the world; for the earth is to be burnt up and pass away. The possession of the land of Canaan was, at best, but a temporary portion. If, therefore, the phrase in question describes, in these cases, merely a limited duration, it may describe no other in Rev. xx, 10. 2. The Greek of this phrase in the above passage is eis tous aioonas toon aioonoon, which literally means, "for or into the ages of the ages." Hence, aioon, from which this plural and double form is derived, does not necessarily mean endless duration; otherwise, it would not need to be expressed in the plural, and then doubled. The term aioon, is, in fact, used with great latitude in the Greek language, as the word for ever is in the English. There are three senses given to it by the learned, yes, three by the translators of the Bible, viz., eternity, the world and an age. And it is several times represented as having an end, and as being succeeded by another aioon. "So shall it be in the end of this world." Matt. xiii, 40. Here world is translated from the Greek word aioon, which, of course, describes a limited period. If it be insisted that it always means eternity strictly, it would make the Saviour say, in the

end of this eternity. Again, "The children of this world marry, and are given in marriage, but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world," &c. Luke xx, 34, 35. World in both these instances is translated from the Greek word aioon. If, therefore, we affix the meaning of eternity exclusively to it, we shall have this eternity and that eternity, i. e., two eternities, the one succeeding the other. It is clear, therefore, that it is not used here to describe endless duration; but denotes simply world or age. The unlearned reader may be startled at these statements, but they are undeniably true, and show conclusively that aioon is used to describe a limited, as well as an unlimited duration. And if it may mean a limited duration, its multiplication, and even remodification may mean nothing more than a very long and unknown limited period, especially when the nature of the subject does, of necessity, limit it. If it be objected that this interpretation of the matter militates against the unending happiness of the righteous—yes, against the unending existence of Jehovah, I answer that it does not; for in those cases, there is nothing to limit aioon either in its double or single form, as in the case of future punishment. Hence it is to be taken in its primary and unrestricted sense. Moreover, the proof of the endless happiness of the righteous does not depend on the import of eternal, for ever and ever, but is described by other terms which definitely and unequivocally denote endless duration. Even the very word endless, or indissoluble, is applied to their future life. But this is never applied to the misery of the wicked. And the unending existence of God is determined by his nature and perfections. From the necessity of his being, he is strictly "from everlasting to everlasting." So that when the phraseology in question is applied to him it must have its primary import. 3. There is a limiting clause in this passage, viz., "day and night." The duration hereby described pertains to time, for eventually day and night will have an end. Therefore, the duration of the torment spoken of is not necessarily endless. 4. The failure of the proof of unending misery, which we have found to pertain to the all other passages that have been cited, together with the multiplied evidence which has been adduced, and will hereafter be adduced, that the fire of hell will consume the damned and terminate their existence, forbids us to take the phraseology in this case in the sense of endless duration. The threatening to destroy or abolish the Devil, in particular, forbids that we should here understand for ever and ever to mean duration without end. The punishment of the Devil is described by a word in Greek (katargeoo) which signifies to abolish or annihilate. This is the definite, classic import of the term. This same word is also applied to the destruction of the man of sin. "Whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy (gr. katargeesei, from katargeoo.) with the brightness of his coming." 1 Thess. ii, 8. If, therefore, the Devil and the man of sin (with whom the whole mass of fallen angels and wicked men must evidently be connected) are to be abolished or annihilated, for ever and ever, or the ages of the ages, here mentioned, cannot mean ceaseless duration. In that case the two representations would palpably conflict. The unlimited sense of the phrase which is here found would also contradict a multitude of other express passages, as we have already seen, and shall hereafter more fully see. And hence it cannot reasonably be adopted. And this case being fairly disposed of, every other text throughout both testaments will well comport with the doctrine of limited pains and absolute destruction; yes, every other text naturally teaches it. Hence, to place this single passage, the terms of which, at best, are indefinite, above the whole remaining declarations of the Bible, is manifestly unreasonable. (To be Continued)