Established Points in the Life and death Question.
By Hudson
1. THE eternal sinfulness of wicked beings would involve perplexing relations to the Divine Government, and give a kind of dignity to the wicked themselves. And eternal wickedness, though in punishment, and however overruled for good, would be an eternal evil. This must be either God's choice, or his necessity; and either view brings insuperable difficulties into our theology. But temporary evil may be neither God's choice nor his necessity, being simply permitted, in a system of probation or of recovery. The distinction between evil temporary and evil eternal appears important from such facts as these: A learned writer closes an account of the dispute between Bayle and his opponents by saying, "No one can deny that the very great difficulties which press the doctrine of the origin of evil and its reconciliation with the justice and goodness of God, could be more easily overcome if an end of hell-punishments is supposed, and not their eternity." And Dr. Muller concludes his work on "The Christian Doctrine of Sin" thus: "A solution of the problem of the world would be possible, if the evil were not,—the evil which . . . is capable of being maintained, by the will of the personal creature, persistently hardening itself, through endless ages." 2. The scriptural doctrine of a Future Life is, endless life for the righteous. "The doctrine of the 'immortality of the soul' and the name are alike unknown to the entire Bible." (Olshausen, on 1 Cor. xv, 19, 20.) This supposed fundamental truth is treated with profound silence in the Scriptures, while the Divine Existence, with which it is often compared, is named continually. The phrase "everlasting punishment," put in contrast with "eternal life," does not imply immortal life in suffering. This is shown from the terms used, from Jewish opinions, and from the concession of orthodox divines that eternal extinction would be eternal punishment. The phrase "their worm dieth not," etc., (Isa. lxvi, 24; Mark ix, 44,) as much proves the immortality of carcasses as of souls. The phrase "unquenchable fire" was used by Eusebius in speaking of the martyrdom of Christians. These and other like expressions properly denote a complete and utter destruction of that to which they are applied. 3. The phrase "immortal soul" is not found in a Christian document until A. D. 135; nor such phrases as "eternal misery" until a later period. Such expressions resulted from the combination of Christian doctrine with Platonic opinions. This combination is apparent in the earlier writings of Justin Martyr, A. D. 140; but his later writings warrant the statement of Giesler, that he "appeared to regard it as possible that the souls of the ungodly will at some time be wholly annihilated." Irenæus, (A. D. 178,) opposing the Rationalism of his day, speaks very plainly of "continuance for ever and ever to those who are saved;" and of others as "depriving themselves of the gift of duration to all eternity." It would be easier to show that even Athanasius, the "Father of Orthodoxy," held this, than that he held the now orthodox view. The results of the above named combination were, Manichæan difficulty on the one hand, and Restorationism on the other. The latter, unknown before, soon prevailed extensively, produced the doctrine of Purgatory, and continues to this day. 4. The practical tendency of the view here offered is suggested by the last statement. A punishment too fearful—is unfeared. This is illustrated in the history of the English criminal code, ere its reform by the efforts of Romilly and his coadjutors. And the history of the Church goes to show that the new—rather, old and forgotten—doctrine of Life in Christ only, would give the Gospel new energy and power.—Hudson.