{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_27237/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_27237","id":"gutenberg_27237","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/27237","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Immortality"],"text":"Produced by Al Haines\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nAN ESSAY\n\nON THE\n\nSCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE\n\nOF\n\nIMMORTALITY\n\n\n\nBY THE REV.\n\nJAMES CHALLIS, M.A., F.R.S., F.R.A.S.\n\n\n\n\nPLUMIAN PROFESSOR OF ASTRONOMY AND EXPERIMENTAL PHILOSOPHY IN THE\nUNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE, AND FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE.\n\n\n\n\n  _Anagke gar moi epikeitai ouai gar moi estin, ean me euaggelzumai\n      --1 Cor. ix. 16\n\n\n\n\nRIVINGTONS\n\nLondon, Oxford, and Cambridge\n\nMDCCCLXXX\n\n\n\n\nRIVINGTONS\n\n\nLondon . . . . . . _Waterloo Place_\n\nOxford . . . . . . _Magdalen Street_\n\nCambridge  . . . . _Trinity Street_\n\n[_All rights reserved_]\n\n\n\n\n\n{1}\n\nAN ESSAY\n\nON THE\n\nSCRIPTURAL DOCTRINE OF IMMORTALITY.\n\n\nConsidering that under the existing conditions of humanity, disease,\nand decay, and death abound on every side, it is surprising that the\nword \"immortality\" obtained a place in systems of philosophy, the\nauthors of which must be supposed to have been unacquainted with divine\nrevelation.  It is not surprising that in the absence of such aid the\nbelief of immortality should not have been firmly held, or that by some\nphilosophers it should have been expressly disavowed.  Even in the\nCanonical Scriptures, the words \"immortal\" and \"immortality\" occur only\nin the Epistles of the Apostle Paul, and consequently not till \"life\nand immortality had been brought to light through the Gospel.\"  It is a\nremarkable circumstance that these words are met with more frequently\nin the Apocryphal Books, 2 Esdras, Wisdom of Solomon, and\nEcclesiasticus, than in the Canonical Scriptures.  The {2} explanation\nof the apparent silence of the Scriptures, especially those of the Old\nTestament, on so essential a doctrine, will, I think, be found to be\ngiven by the course of argument adopted in this essay.\n\nIt may, further, be noticed that, according to philosophical dogma not\nderived from the teaching of Scripture, immortality is regarded as a\nprinciple, or innate quality, in virtue of which the human soul is\nexempt from the experience of death or annihilation.  On this account\nGreek and Roman philosophers speak of \"the immortality of _the soul_,\"\nand even in the present day the same terms are used, the soul being\nregarded as _per se_ immortal.  But neither in the Scriptures, nor in\nthe Apocrypha, is \"immortality\" qualified by the adjunct \"of the soul;\"\nthe reason for which may be that since death, as far as our senses\ninform us, is an _objective_ reality, the writers judged that mortality\nand freedom from mortality could only be predicated of _body_.  It\nmust, however, be taken into account that according to the doctrine of\nScripture there is \"a spiritual body\" as well as \"a natural body,\" so\nthat while the natural body is, as we know, subject to the law of\ndeath, it may be true that the spiritual body is capable of\nimmortality.  This point will be farther discussed in the course of the\nessay.\n\nTo account for the absence of any direct announcement of man's\nimmortality in the Old Testament, and for its being sparingly mentioned\nin the New {3} Testament, the following argument seems legitimate and\nsufficient.  These Scriptures, as already intimated, give no\ncountenance to the idea that the soul of man possesses any innate\nprinciple of immortality; on the contrary, they reveal immortality by\nrevealing _the means_ by which the spirit of man is _made_ immortal.\nAs, according to natural science, the external world, both the animate\npart and the inanimate, has become such as we now perceive it to be by\nprocesses of generation and development, so there is reason from\nScripture to say that a spiritual world is being created in an\nanalogous manner, and that to this creation all other creations are\nsubordinate and contributory.  Moreover, we, the subjects of this\ncreation, are so constituted that we are conscious of, and can\nourselves take cognizance of, the means by which it is effected.  These\nconsiderations may be applied to account for the mode in which\nimmortality is treated of in the Bible.  It concerns us, above all\nthings, to discern and feel the operations whereby our spirits are\nformed both intellectually and morally for an immortal existence; and,\naccordingly, Scripture is full of instruction, addressed both to the\nunderstanding and the heart, concerning those means.  Thus, although\nthe final effect is not directly named till the scheme of the spiritual\ncreation is completely unfolded, it is yet true that the whole of the\nScriptures from beginning to end has relation to man's immortality.\n\n{4}\n\nNot only did the philosophy of Greece and Rome fail to substantiate the\nreality of an immortal existence; other philosophical systems, as well\nthe mystical conceptions of Eastern nations, as the metaphysical\nspeculations of modern Europe, have equally failed to arrive at\ncertainty respecting this verity.  Now, it will be found, I think, to\nbe established by the argument of this essay, that in all these\ninstances the cause of failure is the same.  The doctrine cannot, in\nfact, be understood and believed without an understanding of the means\nby which the immortal spirit is _formed_, and the ascertainment of\nthose means is beyond the power of unaided human intelligence.\nAlthough the evidences of an immortal destiny may be in us and around\nus, they cannot be discerned apart from enlightenment by a divine\nrevelation as to the purpose and end of the whole creation.\n\nThe Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments profess to be a revelation\nof the mind and will of the Creator of all things.  If they are really\nsuch, they must be capable of giving the information which, as said\nabove, is necessary for certifying the doctrine of man's immortality.\nI shall, therefore, with express reference to the title of the essay,\nfirst make the _hypothesis_ that the Scriptures are indeed a revelation\nfrom God, written to reveal His will and His acts, and on this ground I\nshall proceed to inquire what information can be derived from them\nrespecting the {5} _creation_ of the spirit of man for an immortal\ndestiny.  The character of the information obtained may possibly\nsuffice to establish both the truth of the hypothesis and the certainty\nof the doctrine of immortality.\n\nBefore commencing the argument, it will be well to state on what\nprinciples, and according to what rules, Scripture will be cited for\nconducting it.  It will be supposed that the Holy Scriptures, as a\nwhole, consist of words of God written for our sakes; and although they\nwere written by human authors, under diverse circumstances, and in\nvarious ages, the several parts are still to be regarded as having\nvirtually but _one author_, the Holy Spirit, and as constituting on\nthat account a consistent whole.  This view is almost necessitated by\nthe noticeable circumstance that very little information is given in\nthe Scriptures themselves respecting the authors of the writings, or\nthe time and place of their composition.  This is true, for instance,\nof such cardinal books as the four Gospels.  Respecting these matters\nenough is said to show that human hands have been employed to write the\nbooks of Scripture, while so much has been left unsaid that we must\ninfer that this kind of information is of little moment by reason of\nthe _internal_ evidence the Scriptures contain of their divine\nauthorship.  Such evidence, it seems to me, is especially given by the\nfact that the Scriptures present a faithful _transcript_ of {6} the\nworld as it has been and is, in respect to the calamities, wars, and\nrevolutions that have befallen nations, and those weaknesses and\nwickednesses of individuals and peoples, the accounts of which are so\ngreat a stumbling-block to the \"unstable and the unlearned.\"  These\nvery accounts, it is possible, may be intended to tell us, if rightly\ninquired into, why these things are so, why there is evil in the world,\nand what shall be the end of it.  The world has existed, it is\nbelieved, nearly six thousand years, and at this day we see that many\nsuffer from sorrow and pain, labour and poverty are the lot of a very\nlarge proportion of the populations, calamities by fire and water are\nfrequent, plague and pestilence still visit the earth, cruelty and\nmurders are rife, and so far from there being an end of wars, never\nbefore have men fabricated such potent implements for killing each\nother.  Such facts as these constitute, after all, the difficulties\nwhich beset humanity, and it may be presumed that, with the intent of\naccounting for their existence, they are put on record in the word of\nGod.  On the broad principle that the Author of a world like this will\nhave vouchsafed reasons for its being such as it is, I accept the\nScriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the word of God written for\nthis very purpose, and instead of cavilling, as some do, at\ndifficulties which probably have no other foundation than their own\nignorance, it will be my {7} endeavour to make use of Scripture for\nexplaining the perplexities and difficulties which actually surround\nthe facts of human experience.  The discussion of the particular\nquestion I have taken in hand will give occasion for employing the\nScriptures in this manner, and in doing so I shall quote from all parts\nindiscriminately, regarding the whole as sufficiently authoritative and\ntrustworthy for the purposes of the argument.\n\nThe above-mentioned general purpose the Scriptures may be supposed to\nbe adequate to fulfil, whether as expressed in the Hebrew tongue, or in\nthat of the Septuagint, or as translated in the English version,\nnotwithstanding that, as must be admitted, faults of transcription, or\ntranslation, or interpretation have given rise to many verbal errors.\nBut the difficulties produced by these imperfections are of slight\nimportance in comparison with the great difficulty of discovering how\nand on what principles to interpret the Scriptures so as to derive from\nthem the particular doctrines they are designed to teach.  Amid the\ngreat diversity of views that exists relative to modes of\ninterpretation, it may safely be maintained that the foremost and chief\nrequisite for making true deductions from the Scriptures is to have\n_confidence_ in them as being depositions of Divine wisdom.  Men of\nscience, in their endeavours to discover the secrets of Nature, are\nbaffled again and again, and yet by little and {8} little they obtain\naccessions to knowledge just because they never doubt but that Nature,\nif rightly interrogated, will give them true answers.  It seems,\ntherefore, reasonable to expect that the words of God, handled on\nprinciples analogous to those which have been successfully applied in\nacquiring knowledge of His works, might be found capable of answering\nthe hard questions which are now, more, perhaps, than in past times,\nagitating men's minds.  This philosophy, having a surer basis than that\nof any mere human intellectual system, might be expected to succeed\nwhere these have failed.  The bearing of these remarks on the main\nsubject of the essay will be seen as we go on.\n\nCommencing now, after the foregoing preliminaries, the general\nargument, I remark, in the first place, that since, as matter of fact,\nall men die, they cannot partake of immortality unless they are\nrestored to life after death.  We have, therefore, to inquire both as\nto what the Scriptures say concerning _death_, and what they reveal\nconcerning _resurrection_.  Again, it may be taken for granted that as\nin the natural world, so in the spiritual world, the Creator of all\nthings effects His purposes by operating according to _laws_.  On this\nprinciple St. Paul in Rom. viii. 2 speaks of \"the law of sin and\ndeath,\" meaning that sin and death are invariably related to each other\nas antecedent and consequent.  By an irrevocable law {9} death is\nordained to be \"the wages of sin\" (Rom. vi. 23).  Of ourselves we can\njudge that it does not consist with the power and wisdom of an\nomnipotent and omniscient Creator that the sinful should live for ever.\nBut if this be so, it must evidently be true also that immortality,\nbeing exemption from death, is the _consequence_ of freedom from sin,\nthat is, of perfect righteousness.  This is as necessary a law as the\nother.\n\nHence the inquiry respecting the means by which man is made immortal\nresolves itself into inquiring by what means he is made righteous; and,\nas the first step in this inquiry, we have to consider what Scripture\nsays concerning the entrance of sin and death into the world.  If sin\nbe defined to be doing what is contrary to the will of God, as\nexpressed by a command, righteousness, being its opposite, will consist\nin acting according to His will.  Hence sin and righteousness both\nimply that a revelation of the will of God has been antecedently made,\neither directly by a command or law, or by the voice of conscience.  It\nis on this principle that St. Paul says, \"apart from law sin is dead\"\n(Rom. vii. 8), and in another place speaks of \"the righteousness _of\nthe law_\" being fulfilled (Rom. viii. 4).  Accordingly, when Adam was\nplaced in the garden of Eden, a _command_ was expressly given him for\ntrial of his obedience.\n\n{10}\n\nThe narrative in Scripture of the circumstances under which sin was\nfirst committed is deserving of special consideration on account of the\ninstruction it conveys.  It states that Eve, knowing that God had\ncommanded Adam not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and\nevil, yet, being deceived by the serpent and enticed by her own\ndesires, \"took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also to her\nhusband with her, and he did eat\" (Gen. iii. 6).  Thus, as St. Paul\nwrites, \"Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the\ntransgression\" (1 Tim. ii. 14).  But both partook of the forbidden\nfruit, and by so doing both sinned alike against their Maker, the deed\nbeing sinful, not as considered by itself, but by reason of the\nantecedent command, which made it an act of _disobedience_.\n\nIf we assume that the account of Eve's temptation is to be taken as\nliterally true, so that the tempter had actually the form of a serpent\nand addressed to her _spoken_ words, these facts will have to be\nregarded as altogether _miraculous_.  There are good reasons for\nadmitting this view, when it is considered, first, that the information\nwhich this portion of Scripture gives equally concerns all of every\nage, and in order that it might be intelligible to all, it was\nnecessary that in the infancy of the world it should be conveyed by\n_objective_ representation; and, again, that various instances are met\nwith in the Bible of analogous {11} teaching of essential doctrine by\nmeans of miracles.  The translation of Enoch, the Deluge, the\ndestruction of Sodom, the plagues of Egypt and deliverance of Israel,\nthe giving of the law from Sinai, the passage of Jordan, the ascension\nof Elijah, and the resurrection of Christ, are all symbolic miracles,\nthe interpretations of which have intimate relation to the doctrine of\nman's immortality.  This being understood, I shall proceed to discuss\nparticularly the meaning of the Scriptural account of the beginning of\nsin through temptation by the serpent, and on the supposition that the\nfacts as recorded are real but symbolic, I shall endeavour to deduce\nfrom them their doctrinal signification.\n\nThe first question to consider is, Why is the tempting spirit called a\n_serpent_?  The Scripture affirms that \"the serpent was more subtil\n(_phronimoatos_) than any beast of the field\" (Gen. iii. 1); and our\nLord, addressing his apostles, said, \"Lo, I send you as sheep in the\nmidst of wolves; be ye, therefore, wise (_phronimoi_) as serpents, and\nharmless as doves.\"  Yet, as we know, the serpent is not endowed in any\nspecial manner with sagacity or reason.  The fact is, the epithet\n\"subtil\" is applied to the serpent with reference to its form and\nmovements, which convey the abstract idea of subtlety on the same\nprinciple that the words \"tortuous\" and \"twisting\" have an abstract\nmeaning when we speak of \"tortuous policy,\" {12} or \"twisting the\nmeaning of a sentence.\"  Now this subtle entity--this serpent--although\npresented to Eve in bodily form, was not the less that spirit of evil,\nthe personal existence of which, on the hypothesis that the Scriptures\nare true, as well as its influence on human minds, must be admitted.\nAccordingly our first parents were tempted by what St. Paul calls \"the\nwiles (_tas methodeias_) of the devil\" (Eph. vi. 11).\n\nAgain, the statement in Gen. iii. 6, that \"when the woman saw that the\ntree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a\ntree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and\ndid eat,\" is in accordance with what St. John teaches as to \"the lust\nof the flesh,\" \"the lust of the eyes,\" and \"the pride of life,\" being\nopposed to \"doing the will of God\" (1 John ii. 16, 17).  Also, as we\nhave seen, Adam was associated with a partner, who, having been\novercome, in consequence of such desires, by the wiles of Satan,\ncommitted sin, and then induced her husband to do the same.  Thus,\nsince the world at that time consisted of these two individuals, it is\nan obvious inference, as well as one of great significance, that Adam\nwas tempted just as all his offspring are--that is, by the world, the\nflesh, and the devil--and, as all his offspring do, yielded to the\ntemptation.\n\nAlthough Adam was created in the image of his Maker in respect to being\nendowed with powers of {13} understanding and reasoning, and although\nhe was made capable of learning and doing righteousness, he was not\noriginally _made righteous_, forasmuch as he sinned: but those whom God\nmakes righteous sin no more, because all the works of God are perfect.\n\"The first man Adam was made a living soul,\" the breath of life being\nbreathed into his nostrils (Gen. ii. 7).  He thus partook of natural\nlife, but not of spiritual life.  He was, as St. Paul says, \"of the\nearth, earthy,\" and all we who are descended from him \"bear the image\nof the earthy\" (1 Cor. xv. 47, 49).  The mind (_to phronema_) of this\nnatural man is at \"enmity with God,\" and \"neither is, nor can be,\nsubject to the law of God\" (Rom. viii. 7).  This accounts for our\nperceiving in children from their very infancy a spirit of\ndisobedience, this spirit being derived through natural descent from\nthat which our first parents exhibited in the infancy of the world.\nThe author of the Apocryphal Book, 2 Esdras, writes: \"The first man\nAdam, bearing a wicked heart, transgressed, and was overcome; and so be\nall they that are born of him\" (iii. 21).  In the Wisdom of Solomon\nthis passage occurs: \"Wisdom preserved the first formed father of the\nworld, that was created alone, and brought him out of his fall\" (x. 1).\nBut it is to be remarked that the word here translated \"fall\" is\n_paraptoma_, the same word that St. Paul uses in Rom. iv. 25 and v. 16,\nto designate \"_our_ transgressions.\" {14} Cruden in his Concordance\ngives under the word \"fall\" an elaborate statement of received views\nrespecting \"the fall of man,\" although that word, as the Concordance\nshows, does not once occur in the Canonical Scriptures in any relation\nto the sin of Adam.\n\nIt is very noteworthy that after the account of Adam's sin in Genesis,\nno express mention is made of it in subsequent Canonical Books, till we\ncome to the fifth chapter of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, where\nthe introduction of sin into the world by _one man_ is prominently\nadduced in an argumentative passage which appears to me to have been\nmuch misunderstood.[1]  The reason that a fact which is so essential an\nelement in theological systems is so little adverted to in the\nScriptures, I consider to be, that these systems have hitherto not\nrecognized an analogy which may be presumed to exist between God's\nnatural creation and His spiritual creation.  From what is stated in\nGenesis i. and ii. there is reason to say that the natural creation was\nat its beginning without form, and dark, and unfurnished, and that by\nthe power of the Creator, operating, we may presume, according to laws,\nit was brought into the state of order, light, and adornment (_kosmos_)\nwhich we now behold.  Hence, arguing from analogy, we {15} might infer\nthat the spiritual creation has its beginning in the reign of sin and\ndeath, and that by the power of the Spirit of God, operating according\nto law on our spirits, it has its consummation in the establishment of\nrighteousness and life.\n\nThis analogical inference suffices, I think, to explain why, after the\nbrief initial account of the entrance of sin and death into the world,\nthe purport of the whole of Scripture is to record the subsequent\nprevalence of sin, and to reveal by what means grace abounded in the\ngift of righteousness, and how it abounded all the more because the law\nof sin and death \"passed\" from one man \"upon all men\" (Rom. v. 12).\nThe apostle Paul argues that whereas \"_death_ reigned through one,\n_much rather_ shall they who receive the abundance of grace and of the\ngift of righteousness reign in _life_ through one Jesus Christ\" (Rom.\nv. 17); and in accordance with this doctrine he adds (v. 20), \"The law\nentered by the way (_pareiselen_) _in order that_ the offence might\nabound, but where sin abounded grace did much more abound.\"  It seems\nimpossible to draw from such sentences as these any other inference\nthan that, according to the scheme of the spiritual creation, the reign\nof sin and death is the necessary antecedent of the evolution of life\nfrom righteousness.\n\nThe apostle sums up his argument by saying (v. 19), \"For as by the\ndisobedience of one man the many were made sinners, so also by the\nobedience {16} of one shall the many be made righteous\" (_dikaioi\nkatastatesontai oi polloi_).  It is evident that \"the many\" here\nincludes all that are born in the world, in contradistinction to \"the\none,\" Adam, who was created, and from whom all have descended by\nnatural generation.  Now, considering that righteousness and life, as\nnecessarily as their opposites sin and death, are related to each other\nby law as antecedent and consequent, the above revelation that \"all\nwill be made righteous\" is as direct an assertion of the immortality of\nall men as could possibly be made.  It is, therefore, of the greatest\nmoment, as regards our argument, to ascertain on what grounds we are\ntold that all will eventually be \"made righteous\" through the obedience\nof Jesus Christ, and what is the exact meaning of this doctrine.  The\npurpose of this essay will be completely fulfilled if it should be\nshown that these questions admit of being satisfactorily answered.  But\nbefore attempting to do this, it is necessary to have a precise\nunderstanding of the previous assertion that through Adam's\ndisobedience \"the many were made sinners.\"  This preliminary inquiry I\nnow proceed to enter upon.\n\nIf we adopt the view expressed in a passage already quoted (2 Esdras\niii. 21), we shall, in effect, admit that the transgression of Adam was\n_the consequence_ of his \"bearing a wicked heart,\" and that all who are\nborn of him sin because by _natural generation_ they {17} have received\nfrom him the same wicked heart.  According to this view it must be\nsupposed that \"the wicked heart\" is in respect to goodness a _tabula\nrasa_, and that till goodness be formed in it, it is led by natural\ndesires to do evil.  Certainly the moral phenomena exhibited by very\nyoung children accord with this supposition; and it may reasonably be\npresumed that St. Paul, in giving to the Romans, to whom he had not\npersonally preached, a synoptical statement of the doctrines he was\naccustomed to teach, did not set before them the Scriptural account of\nthe introduction and prevalence of sin in any manner not intelligible\nto ordinary minds from common experience.\n\nWhat then are we to understand by the assertion that \"through the\ndisobedience of one man the many were made sinners\"?  In answer to this\nquestion it is to be said that the word _parakoe_ may be taken in this\npassage to signify \"disobedience\" abstractedly, and not a special act\nof disobedience, because _upakoe_ in the next clause does not require\nto be taken in a specific sense, but rather as referring to that holy\nspirit which was in Jesus Christ, in virtue of which his will was\nalways in subjection to the will of his heavenly Father, and he became\n\"obedient unto death.\"  According to this interpretation,\n\"disobedience\" is here put for that wickedness of heart the antecedent\nexistence of which the sin of Adam gave {18} evidence of, and which, by\nbeing transmitted from father to son through natural generation, has\nmade all men sinners, to the end that all may be eventually made\nrighteous by spiritual generation.\n\nIt is true that the sin of Adam, being the first violation of a command\nreceived from God, first made disobedience an objective reality, and\nthat thus sin entered into the world.  But although _actual_\ntransgression had this beginning, it does not follow that the\n_proneness_ of the heart of man to transgress was contingent on Adam's\nsin, or thereby came into existence.  On the other hand, it will\nprobably be urged that to ascribe its existence to any other cause is\n\"to make God the author of sin.\"  In answer to this objection it may be\nsaid that if it were valid as regards God's moral essence, one might\nwith as good reason urge that it was inconsistent with His power and\nintelligence that the natural creation should have its beginning in\ndarkness and chaos.  However, whether or not this view be accepted, I\nshall assume that the reality of the natural wickedness of the human\nheart is admitted, and consequently the remainder of the argument,\ninasmuch as it has reference to the means by which the wicked heart is\nsubdued and made righteous, will in either case be the same.\n\nThe relation of \"one\" to \"many,\" considered only as a natural fact, is\nso peculiar and essential an {19} element in the past history and\nprogressive development of the human race, that it might well be\nsupposed to be specially significant with respect to their future\ndestiny; and, in fact, St. Paul has taught us to draw the reasonable\ninference that whereas through the first Adam the many, by a law from\nwhich they cannot rid themselves, have been made sinners, _a fortiori_\nthrough a \"second Adam\" the many will be made righteous.  The course of\nour argument, consequently, now demands an inquiry as to the means by\nwhich the many will be made (_katastathesontai_) righteous through the\nobedience of Jesus Christ.  The future tense is particularly to be\nnoticed.\n\nAs soon as it was shown by the sin of Adam that the natural man is\nincapable of obedience to the will of God, a preordained dispensation\nwas begun, whereby the natural man is converted into the spiritual man\nand made fit for immortality.  This dispensation was introduced by a\n_promise_, the terms of which could be understood by Adam and Eve after\nthey had learned that the spirit of evil (in whom is \"the power of\ndeath\") through their disobedience brought death into the world.  The\npromise was given in the words \"he (_autos_, _Sept._) shall bruise thy\nhead, and thou shalt bruise his heel\" (Gen. iii. 15).  Hebrew\ncommentators have, I think, rightly taken this passage in the sense--he\n(\"the seed of the woman\") shall bruise thee at thy _ending_, and thou\nshalt bruise him at his {20} _beginning_.  The promise, accordingly,\nsignifies that the power of Satan would prevail _at first_, and for a\ntime, even to putting to death the Son of God (Luke xxii. 53), but that\n_in the end_ that power would by the Son of God be overcome (Luke x.\n18).  And since with the victory over the spirit of evil an end is put\nto evil itself, the promise is, in effect, that Adam and his race shall\neventually be exempt from death and evil, and partake of a happy\nimmortality.\n\nBut in the very next sentence _conditions_ are annexed (Gen. iii.\n16-19).  Because of the imperfection of the natural man, and his\nopposition, through the subtlety of Satan and the desires of the flesh,\nto the will of his Maker, labour and sorrow, pain and _death_, were\nordained to be his lot, in order that he may _thereby_ be made meet to\npartake of the promise.  It is by reason of these conditions that the\npromise becomes, in effect, a _covenant_, in which of necessity two\nparties are concerned: God on His part promises happiness and\nimmortality, but to be received only on the above-stated conditions;\nand man's part is to submit to the conditions, as being ordered by a\n\"faithful Creator,\" and to look in faith for the fulfilment of the\npromise.  Here, then, are all the essentials of a covenant, excepting\n_surety_ for its fulfilment, which on acknowledged principles of\njustice might be asked for by man, seeing that he has to satisfy the\nconditions before he enjoys the benefit.  Such security is amply {21}\ngiven by God, as will be shown in the sequel of the argument.  In\nshort, this covenant admits of being described in terms exactly suited\nto human covenants, because the providence of God has so ordered these,\nthat, together with other purposes, they answer this, the principal\none, of making intelligible the divine covenant.  This same covenant\nmight with more exactness be called a _will_, or _testament_, because\nfrom its very conditions the benefit it confers cannot be received till\nafter _death_ (see Heb. ix. 16, 17).  Also, because this covenanted\npromise runs through the whole of the Scriptures, they have been\nappropriately named the Scriptures of the Old Testament and of the New\nTestament, not, however, as signifying that the Old Testament is\nsuperseded by the New, but that it reveals an earlier stage of\ndevelopment of the same covenant.\n\nThe character and purpose of this covenant began to be unfolded at the\nthreshold of the world's history, on the occasion of offerings being\nbrought to God by Cain and Abel.  Abel's offering consisted of \"the\nfirstlings of his flock and the fat thereof,\" and was, therefore,\nproper for expressing, by visible tokens, the character of the covenant\nin three essential particulars: first, that it is a covenant of _life_,\nthe animals chosen affording _food_, and that of the choicest kind, for\nsupporting life; secondly, that the covenanted life is entered upon\nafter death, the animals being _slain_ {22} for food; thirdly, that\npain and death, although, according to law, consequent upon sin, were\nordained, not alone for the judicial punishment of sin, the animals\nthat were slain being \"_harmless_,\" but for rendering the spirit of man\nmeet to partake of the future life.  Abel was himself in his death the\nfirst witness (_martus_) to this truth, and by the same means many\nchosen servants of God have been \"purified and made white\" (Dan. xii.\n10).  The offering of Cain was also proper for food, but as consisting\nof \"fruits of the ground,\" it was not, like Abel's, susceptible of any\nmeaning relative to the covenant.  Grace was given to Abel to select an\noffering which, as being significant of the covenant, was accepted by\nGod; but the same grace was not given to Cain.  \"The Lord had respect\nto Abel and to his offering: but to Cain and to his offering He had not\nrespect.\"\n\nThe narrative goes on to say that because the Lord had not the same\nrespect to Cain's offering as to Abel's, Cain was \"very wroth, and his\ncountenance fell,\" and that on this account he was rebuked.  It should\nbe noticed that the terms of the rebuke have no reference to the choice\nof offering, but to \"doing well,\" implying that Cain's conduct was not\n\"righteous\" like that of Abel.  To quiet his troubled spirit, he is\ntold that it is God's pleasure that he should stand towards his brother\nin the relation of protector and ruler.  Cain repudiated this relation\n{23} and slew his brother, acting thus as the unrighteous world, of\nwhom he may be regarded as the representative, have always acted\ntowards God's elect, whom Abel typified.  These remarks will afterwards\nbe seen to bear on the general argument.\n\nThe distinction which God made between the offerings of Cain and Abel,\nand His express approval of Abel's offering, might serve to make known,\nat the time and in succeeding generations, the purport of the promise\nmade originally to Adam, and the ordained conditions of its fulfilment.\nIn fact, the special acceptance by God of Abel's offering may be looked\nupon as the primary institution of _sacrifice_.  The researches of men\nof learning have abundantly shown that the sacrificing of animals was a\nvery ancient and wide-spread religious practice, but have left\naltogether unexplained how it _originated_, and whence arose the custom\nof ratifying a covenant between man and man by _killing_ animals; for\nwhat reason also the slaying of _innocuous_ and _helpless_ victims came\nto be the principal act of religious worship among the Jews, and why it\nwas thought among the Gentiles that such sacrifices _pleased_ the gods.\nThese questions do not appear to admit of answers apart from\ninformation derived from Scripture.  The answers will, I think, be\nfound to be given by what, in reliance on such aid, has been already\nsaid, and by what remains to be said, {24} respecting the covenant of\nimmortality.  It is quite possible that, as has happened with respect\nto other practices, that of sacrificing animals was continued long\nafter its original signification ceased to be understood.  This may be\naffirmed of the ratifying of covenants by killing victims (which no\nsane person nowadays would think of doing), and generally of the\nsacrifices offered by Gentile nations in honour of their gods, which\neventually became mere matters of _custom_, without any distinct\nappreciation of their intrinsic meaning.  In such cases all clue from\ntradition or history fails, and the explanation of the sources of the\npractices can be looked for only in the records of Scripture.\n\nIt might, however, be questioned whether Abel himself, in making his\noffering, understood that it had the symbolic meanings ascribed to it\nabove.  The answer to this inquiry, given on the authority of what is\nsaid in Heb. xi. 4, would seem to be that he did so understand it,\ninasmuch as it is stated that he brought an acceptable offering _by\nfaith_, and, according to Heb. xi. 1, faith may be defined to be an\nintelligent belief and hopeful expectation of the covenanted life.\nAlso, as bearing on this question, it may be mentioned that in passages\nof Scripture where Abel is subsequently spoken of (as Matt. xxiii. 85,\nHeb. xi. 4, 1 John iii. 12), his _righteousness_ is specially referred\nto.  Now, since to do righteousness {25} is to do what is pleasing to\nGod, and, as we are told in Heb. xi. 6, \"without faith it is impossible\nto please God,\" it follows that Abel's righteousness was the\nconsequence of his faith.  In fact, according to St. Paul's teaching,\nfaith and righteousness are by law related to each other as antecedent\nand consequent (Rom. iii. 27, 28).  Consequently we may here draw an\ninference which forms an essential part of the general argument for\nimmortality.  For since we have admitted, as a necessary and\nself-evident principle, that righteousness is the foundation of\nimmortality, and Scripture presents to us in Abel an instance of the\nattainment of righteousness by faith, it follows that _faith is a means\nof partaking of immortality_.  This doctrine will be farther treated of\nin the sequel; but in the mean time it will be well to explain that I\nconsider \"righteousness\" to consist in obedience by word and deed to\nthe \"royal law\" according to which, in a perfect social state, every\none would do to others as he would that they should do to him.  This\nrelation between man and man should, I think, rather be called\n_righteousness_ than _morality_, because the latter word is derived\nfrom _mores_ (manners), and does not etymologically denote \"rectitude,\"\nwhereas the Greek word for righteousness (_dikaiosune_) refers to the\ndeciding of what is morally right by a judge, and the office of a\njudge, as respects social relations, is the {26} highest that men are\nappointed to discharge towards their fellow men.  It should also be\nnoticed that the \"faith\" I am speaking of does not consist in believing\nwhat is not understood, which seems to be a psychological\ncontradiction, but in believing _in consequence of_ understanding.  \"By\nfaith we _understand_ that the worlds [or ages (_tous aionas_)] were\nframed by the word of God\" (Heb. xi. 3).  In short, the faith spoken of\nin Scripture is the basis of all intellectual, as well as of all moral\nexcellence, and is inclusive of what is usually called \"talents,\" or\n\"gifts.\"\n\nThe same covenant, under different typical circumstances, was renewed,\nfirst with Noah (Gen. ix. 8-17), and afterwards with Abraham (Gen.\nxvii. 1-8).  The faith of Noah was exhibited not only in building an\nark in obedience to God's command, but also in sacrificing clean\nanimals on coming out of the ark.  These sacrifices, being offered\nimmediately after the world had been destroyed by the baptism of the\nFlood, were peculiarly significant of an understanding and acceptance\nof the covenant of a life to come.  After the mention made in the\nEpistle to the Hebrews of the faith and obedience of which Noah gave\nevidence by building the ark, it is said of him that \"he thereby became\nheir [inheritor] of the _righteousness_ which is according to faith\"\n(Heb. xi. 7).  Such righteousness, we have already argued, entitles the\npossessor of it to immortality.\n\n{27}\n\nSo also Abraham, when God promised that the land of Canaan should be\ngiven to his seed, \"builded an altar to the Lord\" (Gen. xii. 7, 8), for\nthe purpose, it may be presumed, of sacrificial worship, testifying\nthus not only belief of the fulfilment of the particular promise, but\nfaith also in the covenanted future life.  That Abraham's faith, while\nhe sojourned in Canaan, was directed towards the experience of the\nworld to come, is plainly declared in Heb. xi. 10, where it is asserted\nthat \"he looked for a city having foundations, whose builder and maker\nis God.\"  It was in consequence of such faith that the gift of\nrighteousness was reckoned to him as a _favour_, and \"he was called the\nfriend of God\" (James ii. 28).  Now, the above-mentioned renewal of the\ncovenant was made with Abraham, not solely in respect to his being\nfather of the Hebrew nation, but in respect also to his being typically\nfather of all that believe of all times and nations (compare Gen. xvii.\n1-8, with Rom. iv. 11, 16, 17).  And all this elect seed receive, in\ncommon with their spiritual father, the gift of righteousness through\nfaith--are saved by faith; so that the doctrine that faith is the means\nwhereby the elect are made meet for immortality, which was inferred\nfrom the history of Abel, is exemplified in a more comprehensive manner\nby what is recorded of Abraham.\n\nWe have argued above that the patriarchs Noah {28} and Abraham\ntestified their belief and acceptance of the covenant of life by\nsacrifice.  But in the patriarchal times the only surety for the\nfulfilment of the promise was the direct word of God.  With the\nexception of what is said of Melchisedek, who typified a High Priest to\ncome, no mention is made of the mediation of priests till the\npriesthood of Aaron was regularly constituted.  From that time the\npriest was mediator between God and the people, and in virtue of his\noffice gave assurance of the fulfilment of the covenant to those who,\nby offering clean animals for sacrifice, signified their acceptance of\nits conditions.  The priest gave such assurance by mediatorially\nreceiving the offerings, and representing, by sprinkling the blood of\nthe slain animals, _the purifying effect of the suffering of death_.\nAfter the ordinances of the law had been instituted, Moses said to the\npeople, \"I have set before you life and death: choose life\" (Deut. xxx.\n19).  Seeing that no one can escape the death which is the termination\nof the present life, this choice between life and death necessarily\nrefers to the covenanted life, the fulfilment of the conditions of\nwhich secures from death in the world to come.  The author of the\nApocryphal Book 2 Esdras, who was wiser, I think, than the author of\n\"The Divine Legation of Moses,\" has shown that he so understood the\npassage; for after saying (vii. 48, 44), \"The day of doom shall be the\nend of this time, and the {29} beginning of the immortality for to\ncome, wherein corruption is past, intemperance is at an end, infidelity\nis cut off, righteousness is grown, and truth is sprung up,\" he adds\n(in _v._ 59) with reference to this description of the life to come,\n\"This is the life whereof Moses spake unto the people while he lived,\nsaying, Choose thee life, that thou mayest live.\"\n\nSacrifice remained the chief symbol of religious faith up to the time\nof that great sacrifice of the Son of God, the acceptance of which by\nthe Father sealed the covenant of everlasting life, and made all other\nsureties sure.  The ground of assurance lies in the fact that Jesus\nChrist in his life and death went through all the experience whereby\n_our_ spirits are formed for immortality.  \"He learned obedience by the\nthings that he suffered\" (Heb. v. 8).  He was made perfect \"through\nsufferings\" (Heb. ii. 10).  \"He made him to be sin (_hamartian_;\ncompare Gal. iii. 13) for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made\nthe righteousness of God in Him\" (2 Cor. v. 21).  Joining with these\npassages that remarkable one in which Christ is spoken of as \"a priest\nwho is made according to the power of an indissoluble (_akatalytou_)\nlife\" (Heb. vii. 16), it is evident that our community with him in\nsuffering, in death, and, as we have reason to hope, in resurrection,\nis ample surety to us for the fulfilment of the covenant of\nimmortality.  For as death is the dissolution of life, indissoluble\n{30} life means exemption from death, and is, therefore, identical with\nimmortality.\n\nThat suffering in the flesh is efficacious, as is argued in the\nforegoing doctrine, towards doing away with sin, may be maintained on\nthe authority both of St. Paul and St. Peter, the former apostle having\nsaid, \"He that is dead has been justified from sin\" (Rom. vi. 7), and\nthe other, \"He that has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin\" (1\nPeter iv. 1).  But here it is particularly to be noted that this effect\nis not produced upon _all_ who suffer in the flesh.  These apostles are\nspeaking of such as have faith; and it is only when suffering is\naccompanied by a faith which apprehends the covenant of life, and\nespecially lays hold of the surety for its fulfilment given by the\nsuffering and death of the Son of God, that it avails to free from sin.\nThe elect, who through the grace of God have such faith, are drawn by\nthe perfect love, and the _sympathy_ in its strictest sense, which were\nmanifested by the obedience unto death of Jesus Christ, to follow the\nexample of his obedience, and thereby to attain to righteousness.  By\nthis reasoning it is shown, _but only so far as regards the elect_,\nthat \"the many are made righteous by the obedience of Christ.\"  It will\nin the sequel be argued that the death of Christ has another aspect and\na wider effect.\n\nAs there was no more occasion for signifying acceptance of the covenant\nby sacrifice after the sacrifice {31} of Jesus Christ, that form of\nreligious worship came to an end.  Thenceforth faith in the covenant\nwas to be expressed by means of symbols which pointed to the sacrifice\nmade once and for all time on the cross.  The ordained symbols are\n_bread_ and _wine_, taken in the Lord's Supper.  The minister of the\nGospel has succeeded to the Jewish priest in respect to giving _surety_\nofficially for the fulfilment of the covenant, and on that account may\nwith propriety be called a _priest_.  There is no longer an altar,\nbecause the acceptance of the covenant is not, as in the Jewish\nworship, indicated by sacrifice, but by partaking of _food_ in the\nforms of bread and wine at \"the _table_ of the Lord.\"  The Christian\nminister, in delivering these symbols to the worshippers, gives, in\nvirtue of his mediating office, sureties for the fulfilment of the\ncovenant of eternal life; the worshipper who partakes of them in faith\nreceives them as such sureties, and looks for the fulfilment of the\ncovenant.  No doubt this office should be discharged by a good and wise\nminister, who has been regularly appointed thereto; but for the\nefficacy of the ordinance the chief requisite is _faith_ on the part of\nthe recipient--an intelligent faith such as that which has just been\nmentioned.\n\nThe Sacrament of the Lord's Supper is justly regarded as the central\nordinance of the Christian religion, and, therefore, of necessity has\nrelation to the means whereby immortality is secured.  In fact, {32} in\neach of the four records of its institution given in Scripture, the\nword \"testament\" (_diatheke_) occurs: in St. Matthew and St. Mark we\nhave, \"This is my blood of the New Testament,\" and in St. Luke and 1\nCor. xi., \"This cup is the New Testament in my blood.\"  What is the\nmeaning of \"testament\" in these passages, and how is the testament\nrelated to the \"blood\" of Jesus Christ?  It is worthy of notice that\nthese questions have received no special consideration in the recent\ncontroversies respecting the Lord's Supper, although in order to arrive\nat the full signification of that ordinance it is clearly necessary to\nbe able to give answers to them.  As far as regards the general meaning\nof the testament, or covenant, its relation to our immortality, and the\nsurety for its fulfilment given by the blood (i.e. the death) of Jesus\nChrist, enough, I think, has been said in the foregoing arguments; it\nremains to inquire, for more complete understanding of the doctrine of\nthe Sacrament, what relations the symbols _bread_ and _wine_ have to\nthe _Body_ and _Blood_ of Christ.\n\n\"Bread strengthens man's heart,\" and \"wine makes it glad\" (Ps. civ.\n15).  To strengthen the _heart_ is to produce confidence.  Now, it may\nbe asserted that confidence and joy, being incorporeal entities, are\nthe same in essence under whatever external conditions they are\ngenerated.  They are the same whether experienced in consequence of\ntaking {33} bread and wine, or in consequence of understanding and\naccepting the covenant of life made sure by the body and blood of\nChrist.  Although physical science is wholly incapable of informing us\n_how_ the _corporeal_ elements bread and wine produce in those who\npartake of them _feelings_ of strength and gladness (the antecedents\nand consequents not being in the same category), we can yet understand\nthat the Creator of all things might by His immediate will attach to\nthose substances such effects, not alone for the sake of man's body,\nbut for the higher purpose of thereby informing his spirit that there\nis cause for confidence and joy in the broken body of the Lord, and his\npoured-out blood.  This view is justified by the language of St. Paul,\nwhere he says, speaking of the Son of God, that \"all things were\ncreated through him and _unto_ him\" (_eis auton_, Col. i. 16); from\nwhich doctrine it may be inferred that our Lord, having regard to the\ncognizable effects of bread and wine spoken of by the Psalmist, said of\nbread, \"This is my body,\" and of wine, \"This is my blood,\" because his\nbody and blood, when \"spiritually discerned,\" have _the very same\neffects_.\n\nBut why did Christ say, \"This _is_ my body,\" \"This _is_ my blood\"?  The\nanswer to this question may be given at once by pointing to a rule in\nScriptural teaching, according to which the symbol and the thing\nsymbolized are expressed in _identical_ terms.  {34} The Bible must\nhave been read to little purpose by those who have not discovered that\nthis characteristic pervades all parts both of the Old and the New\nTestament.  On this principle, when speaking to the Jews, our Lord made\nno distinction between his own body and the visible temple at\nJerusalem, just because his body was the proper habitation of the Holy\nSpirit antecedently to, and comprehensively of, the dwelling of the\nSpirit in any temple made with hands.  St. Paul also employs like\nteaching where he says, \"They are not all Israel that are of Israel\"\n(Rom. ix. 6), the first \"Israel\" meaning God's elect of all nations and\ntimes, and the other the Jewish people, by whom the elect are typified.\nThe rationale of this mode of teaching appears to be, that we could not\nspeak, or even think, of abstract verities, such as that Jesus Christ\nis to us the author of life, and strength, and joy, without perceptions\nand feelings antecedently derived from external realities; and the more\nclosely abstractions are viewed by the intervention of their necessary\nobjective antecedents, the more exact and effective will be our\nknowledge.  I venture here to express the opinion that all the\ncontention and diversity of views that have arisen about\nTransubstantiation and the Real Presence are referable to the\nnon-recognition of the above-mentioned principle of Scriptural teaching\nby symbols, and generally to an inability to understand and rightly\ninterpret the {35} concrete and symbolic language of Scripture.  Defect\nof knowledge in this respect has given occasion to many errors.  With\nregard to the doctrine of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, I am of\nopinion that the above-mentioned dogmas, and the forms of worship\nconnected with them, which appear to be rightly designated as\n_superstitious_, have had the effect of very much keeping out of view\nthe relation of that ordinance to the _covenant_ which, through the\ndeath of Jesus Christ, makes immortality sure.  Perhaps it should\nrather be said that the superstitious practices give evidence that \"the\nblood of the new covenant\" is not understood.\n\nFrom the preceding discussion I draw the conclusion that our Lord, in\nsaying of the wine, \"This is my blood of the New Testament,\" expressed\nthe doctrine that his blood (signifying his death) is both the _pledge_\nand the means, through faith, of partaking of the joy (signified by the\nwine) of a new and ever-lasting life.  The Testament is new because it\ncontains the promise of a future inheritance under better sureties than\nthose of the old covenant of the Law.\n\nAfter having thus considered what the Scriptures say concerning\n_death_, we have next to inquire what they reveal concerning\n_resurrection_.  As preliminary to this inquiry, it may be remarked\nthat the foregoing arguments relative to Christ's partaking with us in\ndeath, are such as point directly to the conclusion that {36} we shall\nparticipate with him in resurrection.  In St. Paul's teaching (1 Cor.\nxv. 12-19) Christ's resurrection and the resurrection of the dead are\nevents so necessarily related that, \"if the dead rise not, Christ was\nnot raised up.\"  But the fact of Christ's resurrection was\nsubstantiated by so many witnesses, who saw him alive after his death,\nthat we may with certainty infer, according to this doctrine, that the\ndead will rise.  It is, however, to be observed that the argument of\nthe apostle in the passage just quoted is expressly addressed to those\nwho have faith and knowledge, and cannot be adduced in proof of the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of all men.  For evidence as to the truth\nof this doctrine recourse must be had to other parts of Scripture.\n\nFor the present purpose it will suffice to cite two remarkable sayings\nof our Lord, recorded in St. John's Gospel.  He first says, \"The hour\nis coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of\nGod: and they that hear shall live\" (John v. 25); and then (in _vv._ 28\nand 29 of the same chapter) he says, \"The hour is coming in which all\nthat are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth;\nthey that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that\nhave done evil, unto the resurrection of judgment\" (_kriseos_).  The\nfirst passage refers to a _partial_ resurrection, inasmuch as it makes\nmention of those only who shall hear the voice of the Son of {37} God,\nand hearing shall live; whereas the other passage asserts that _all_\nwho are in sepulchres (_mnemeiois_) shall hear his voice, and divides\nthese into two classes--those that have done good, who rise to _live_\n(the class just before mentioned), and those that have done evil, who\nrise to be _judged_.  The assertion in _vv._ 28 and 29 is, accordingly,\na revelation respecting the resurrection of all the dead, and is to be\ntaken as comprehensive of the other; so that the class that will\npartake of \"the resurrection of life\" are the same as those of whom it\nis said in the first passage that they will hear the voice of the Son\nof God and will _live_.  As far as regards the distinction into two\nclasses, this doctrine agrees with that preached by St. Paul, where he\naffirms that his unbelieving countrymen \"themselves allowed that there\nwould be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust\"\n(Acts xxiv. 15).  It may here be remarked that it is not necessary to\ninfer from its being said in John v. 28, 29, that \"all that are in\ntheir graves shall hear his voice and come forth,\" that all will rise\n_simultaneously_.  Rather the separate mention in _v._ 25 of those that\nhear and live, and especially the assertion that the hour in which\n_these_ hear is not only coming, but \"_now is_,\" would seem to apply\nexclusively to the resurrection of \"the just,\" and to indicate that\nthis resurrection is antecedent to that of \"the unjust.\"  However, to\nsettle this question, {38} which is a very important one, recourse will\nnow be had to other passages of Scripture.\n\nOn the principle of regarding, for application in this argument, the\n_whole_ of the Canonical Scriptures as authoritative, it is legitimate\nto refer to the Book of Revelation for information respecting the\nresurrection of the dead.  Now, in Rev. xx. 5 we have in express terms,\n\"This is the first resurrection.\"  And again, in the next verse,\n\"Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on\nsuch the second death hath no power.\"  It is evident, therefore, that\nthis is the resurrection of the just, and that those who are thus\n\"blessed and holy\" are thenceforth exempt from mortality.  This\nconclusion has a very important bearing on our argument; for, on\nturning to _v._ 4 of the same chapter, we find that the partakers of\nthis resurrection are described as martyrs \"who were beheaded for the\nwitness of Jesus, and for the word of God,\" and generally as those who\n\"received not the mark of the beast on their forehead and on their\nhand,\" which may be interpreted as meaning that by intelligent faith\nand righteous deeds they overcame their spiritual adversaries.  It\nseems, therefore, allowable to infer that this is the company of those\nwho in Scripture are so often called \"the elect,\" who by suffering,\nexperience, and hope, are in this life \"sealed\" unto the day of\nredemption (Rev. vii. 2-8, and Eph. iv. 80).\n\n{39}\n\nIt is, besides, said of these chosen ones that they \"lived and reigned\nwith Christ a thousand years,\" but that \"the rest of the dead lived not\ntill the thousand years were finished.\"  It would thus appear that a\ndefinite interval of long duration is interposed between the\nresurrection of the just and the unjust.  It is also to be particularly\nnoticed that the seer, speaking of what pertains to that interval of a\nthousand years during which the spirit of evil is \"bound,\" says that he\n\"saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given to them\"\n(Rev. xx. 4).  This must refer to the judgment undergone by those who\nhave part in the _first_ resurrection, because the rest of the dead do\nnot rise to be judged till the thousand years are ended.  As to the\nelect being judged, the teaching of St. Paul is very explicit, where he\nsays, identifying himself with the general company of the faithful, \"We\nmust all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ; that every one may\nreceive the things done through the body, according to what he hath\ndone, whether good or bad\" (2 Cor. v. 10.  So also Rom. xiv. 10).  It\nis not expressly said in the passage above quoted who they are who sat\non thrones and had judgment given to them; but the information is\nsupplied in Matt. xix. 28, where we read, \"Jesus said to them [that is,\nas the context shows, to Peter and the other apostles], Verily I say to\nyou, that ye who have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of\nman shall sit on the {40} throne of his glory, ye also shall sit on\ntwelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.\"  A like\nrevelation, addressed exclusively to the apostles, is given in Luke\nxxii. 28-80.  \"The twelve tribes of Israel\" is the symbolic designation\nof the elect--those that are sealed (see Rev. vii. 3-8).\n\nIt must now be taken into account that the experience and the deeds of\n_the present life_ alone determine whether any individual is or is not\nof the number of the elect.  Those only who by the favour of God are\njustified in this life by works done through faith are reckoned among\n\"the just\" who partake of the first resurrection.  But Scripture\nnowhere asserts that their spiritual state differs at their\nresurrection from what it was at the time of their death; rather, it\nnegatives this assumption by describing their state in the interval as\nthat of \"_sleep_.\"  Consequently, not being yet \"made perfect,\" they\nhave need to pass through the judgment just spoken of (compare 1 Cor.\niii. 11-15), in order that by the completion of their _spiritual\ncreation_ they might be made meet for immortality.  To them, although\nthere is judgment, there is no \"_condemnation_,\" and, therefore, no\n\"second death.\"  Such, it seems to me, is the Scriptural doctrine of\nimmortality, as far as regards _the elect_.\n\nBefore proceeding to speak of the judgment of the whole world, it will\nbe appropriate to consider here what judgment is abstractedly, and what\nare its {41} purpose and effect.  These questions can only be answered\nby means of what is matter of human experience, and in terms derived\ntherefrom.  Now we all know that kings, judges, and magistrates\nadminister justice and judgment for the purpose of making righteousness\nand truth prevail, and that for the same end they inflict punishment on\nthe guilty.  Whatever is this is judgment, and what is not this is not\njudgment.  The portion of the Scriptures which speaks in plainest terms\nof the object and effect of judgment is, perhaps, that contained in\nPsalms xcvi., xcvii., xcviii., and xcix.  If the words of these Psalms\ndo not refer to the judgment that is to come upon the earth and the\nwhole world in the future age, they will require to be taken in a\nnon-natural sense.  But such a sense is here inadmissible, because\nconsistently with what may be inferred, as said above, from _human\nexperience_ respecting judgment, namely, that its purpose is to cause\nrighteousness and truth to prevail, this Scripture declares in terms\nexpressive of the highest joy and exultation that for this end the\nworld is judged.\n\nLet us, therefore, now inquire what Scripture reveals respecting the\njudgment and immortality of the rest of mankind--those who are not\nnumbered among the elect.  First, it is clearly implied in Rev. xx. 5,\nthat they live again at the end of the thousand years.  Next, as we\nhave already inferred from the words of {42} Christ recorded in John v.\n29, they rise to be _judged_.  If, as we have argued, it is needful\nthat even the elect should be judged, much rather must judgment\novertake the unbelieving and the unrighteous?  We are, moreover,\nexpressly told who is to be the righteous Judge: \"The Father hath\ncommitted all judgment to the Son\" (John v. 22).  The sinners who,\nacting \"through ignorance\" as agents of Satan, arraigned, condemned,\nand put to death the blameless Son of God, were not alone guilty,\ninasmuch as it was appointed that they should make manifest and\nconsummate the wickedness that reigns in the heart of the collective\nworld.  For this reason Jesus Christ, in fulfilment of a just\nretribution, is ordained to be Judge of all the world, and of Satan\nalso.\n\nRespecting the _outward means_ by which judgment is executed on the\nungodly, many things seem to be said in the Book of Revelation; but\nfrom being expressed in symbolic language, they are generally \"hard to\nbe understood.\"  I shall make no attempt to give explanations of the\ndetails of this symbolism, such an inquiry not being necessary for my\npresent purpose; but a few remarks on the contents of the Apocalypse\nwhich have a general relation to the purpose and effect of judgment may\nhere be appropriately introduced as bearing on the question of\nimmortality.  In the first place, it may be stated that its prophetic\nlanguage and symbols resemble in so many {43} particulars what we meet\nwith in various parts of the prophecies of the Old Testament, that it\nmight almost be regarded as an epitome of these prophecies.  This view\nis supported by the announcement made in Rev. x. 7, which affirms that,\n\"in the days of the voice of the seventh trumpet, when he shall begin\nto sound, the mystery of God shall be finished, according to the gospel\nHe declared (_os eueggelise_) unto His servants the prophets\" (see also\nRev. xxii. 6).  It is here to be particularly remarked that after the\nsounding of six trumpets severally significant of judgment, it is\nproclaimed that the mystery of God would be finished at the sounding of\nthe seventh and last, this consummation having been antecedently made\nknown as a _gospel_ to the Old Testament prophets.  This text\naccordingly agrees with the tenor of the argument previously adduced\nrespecting the final effect of judgment in establishing the reign, so\nmuch to be desired, of truth and righteousness.  At the end of the\njudgment \"the temple of God is opened in heaven, and there is seen in\nHis temple the ark of His covenant\" (Rev. xi. 19).  This is the\ncovenant of immortality, which, having been originally made (as has\nalready been indicated) with Adam after his transgression, was\nafterwards renewed with Noah and with Abraham, was represented by\nsymbols and proclaimed orally by Moses in the wilderness, and, finally,\nwas confirmed by the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.\n\n{44}\n\nEqually remarkable is another revelation, which tells us that the\nelect, the one hundred and forty-four thousand who have been made\nperfect by the experience they have gone through in the thousand years\nof the first resurrection, are joined with the Son of God in the\nexecution of the general judgment.  In Rev. xix. 14, it is said that\n\"the armies in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine\nlinen, white and clean.\"  This clothing proves that the attendant army\nconsisted of the saints made perfect in righteousness, as will be\nevident by comparing _vv._ 7 and 8 of the same chapter.  In _v._ 15 it\nis asserted respecting \"The Word of God,\" that \"he shall rule the\nnations with a rod of iron;\" and he says himself, speaking of his\nfaithful followers, \"To him that overcometh and keepeth my works unto\nthe end will I give power over the nations; and he shall rule them with\na rod of iron\" (Rev. ii. 26, 27).  Also we have in Psalm cxlix. 6-9,\n\"Let a two-edged sword be in their hand, to execute vengeance upon the\nnations, punishments upon the peoples; to bind their kings with chains,\nand their rulers with fetters of iron; to execute upon them the\njudgment written: this honour have all His saints.\"  Moreover, St. Paul\nwrites to the Corinthians: \"Do ye not know that the saints shall judge\nthe world?\"  \"Know ye not that we shall judge angels?\"  In short, the\ndoctrine of Scripture on this prerogative of the saints is very\nexplicit.\n\n{45}\n\nAgain, it is uniformly affirmed in Scripture that every one will be\njudged \"according to his works.\"  Of course, \"words\" are included in\n\"works;\" for our Lord said expressly, \"Every idle word that men shall\nspeak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment; for by\nthy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be\ncondemned\" (Matt. xii. 86, 87).  It would seem that the judgment, as\nbeing conducted by _external_ means, takes account of human _thoughts_\nonly so far as their consequences are manifested by overt deeds and\nspoken words.  It is not the less true, according to the doctrine of\nthe Lord himself (in Mark iv. 22, and Luke viii. 17), that in the day\nof judgment all secret and hidden things will be revealed.  The words\nin St. Mark, \"neither was anything kept secret but in order that\n(_hina_) it should come abroad,\" seem expressly to indicate the\nrelation in which things hidden in the present age stand to the\nrevelations of that day.  St. Paul also writes to the Romans, speaking\nof them who have not received the law by direct communication: \"They\nshow the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience\nbearing them witness, and their thoughts, one with another, accusing,\nor also excusing, in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men,\naccording to my gospel, through Jesus Christ\" (Rom. ii. 15, 16).\n(This, I think, should be the translation of the passage.)  It may be\nnoticed that {46} here again \"gospel\" is mentioned in connection with\n\"judgment.\"\n\nNow, the very terms, \"judgment according to works,\" imply that the\nworks brought into judgment are not all equally bad, and that there may\nbe both \"good and bad;\" which also may be inferred from the passage\njust quoted from the Epistle to the Romans.  In fact, it is not too\nmuch to assume that all the deeds and experience of the present life\nare contributory in different ways to the final purpose of the\njudgment.  We have already argued, in accordance with what is said in 2\nCor. v. 10, that the saints will be judged according to their works,\nand from 1 Cor. iii. 11-15, we learn that their works will be tried by\nfire, but they themselves will be saved, \"yet so as by fire.\"  We have\nnow to enter upon the important inquiry as to whether Scripture reveals\nan analogous dispensation with respect to the rest of mankind.\n\nHard as it may be for us to conceive by what means the deeds and\nexperience of all men, the living and the dead, will be brought under\nreview in the day of judgment, that so it will be is undoubtedly the\nteaching of Scripture.  Our understanding of this wonderful event may\nperhaps be assisted by taking into account what St. Paul said to the\nAthenians: \"In Him we live, and move, and have our being;\" whence it\nmay be inferred that all our works and {47} words, and even feelings\nand thoughts, are known to God.  With reference to this question, it\nwould, I think, be legitimate to call to our aid the knowledge of the\nexternal creation, which has been so largely extended in the present\nday.  After long attention given to the acquisition of such knowledge,\nI seem to see that it points to the conclusion that all the forces of\nnature are resident in a universal aetherial medium, extending through\nall space, and pervading all visible and tangible substances, by the\nintervention of which all power is exerted, whether it be by the\nimmediate will of God, or mediately, by that of angels or of men.  (I\nassume that there can be no exertion of power apart from the will and\nconsciousness of an agent.)  Consequently the Spirit of the Universe\nmust be cognizant of every exertion of power and of its effects.  To\nthis consideration another of peculiar significance is to be added.\nThe faculty which we possess to a limited extent, depending on bodily\nconditions and organization, of _remembering_ the consequences of\nexerted power, whether as operating ourselves, or being operated upon,\nmust be conceived of as pertaining, without any limitation, to the\nCreator of the aetherial substance and the Source of all power.  In\nthis manner it seems possible to understand how all actions and all\nevents may be written down (speaking metaphorically) in the Book of\nGod's _remembrance_, and so be brought into judgment.\n\n{48}\n\nThe universality and the character of the future judgment are declared\nin Rev. xx. 11-13, with particular reference to the presence and\nmajesty of \"One who sat on a great white throne,\" who, doubtless, is\nGod the Father, the Creator of heaven and earth.  The seer says in this\npassage, \"I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the\nbooks were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of\nlife: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written\nin the books, according to their works.\"  The mention made of \"the\nbooks\" indicates that what is here said of the general judgment\npertains exclusively to God the Father, by whose almighty power and\nomniscience, as I have endeavoured to show in the preceding paragraph,\nall the deeds and experience of the present life are held in\nremembrance to be brought under judgment.  But it would be an error to\nsuppose that this general judgment is different from that the process\nand results of which, as effected through the Son of man and his\nattendant armies, are symbolically described in previous parts of the\nApocalypse.  The judgment was ordained by decree of the Father, and\nprearranged by His wisdom, and in accordance therewith it is executed\nby the Son, who, apparently on this account, speaks thus of himself:\n\"To him that overcometh will I give to sit with me in my throne, as I\nalso overcame and sat with my Father in His throne\" (Rev. iii. 21).\nThis throne {49} which the Son shares with the Father may be presumed\nto be the seat of power exercised in judgment (compare Rev. ii. 26,\n27).  Why \"the book of life\" is mentioned in connection with the books\nfrom the contents of which the dead are judged, will be shown in the\nsequel of the argument.\n\nThere are other considerations relating to the future judgment which it\nis necessary to enter into in order to complete the argument for the\nimmortality of all men.  We live in a world in which sorrow and pain\nand death abound everywhere and at all times, and although these are\nactual consequences of sin, inasmuch as they would be non-existent if\nsin did not antecedently exist, it is not the less true that the _law_\nwhich in the present time of imperfection connects suffering with sin,\ntends in its operation towards bringing on eventually a state of\nperfection.  Thus there is a final cause for that law.  I have already\n(page 14) illustrated this doctrine by reference to the process whereby\nthe actual condition and adornment of this earth were elaborated by the\noperation of physical laws out of a state of darkness and chaos.  This\nview is corroborated by the noticeable fact that suffering in this\nlife, whether caused by the three scourges, war, pestilence, and\nfamine, or what we call accident, or by the injustice and cruelty of\nmen, by no means in proportion to guilt, since even the innocent\nthereby sometimes suffer.  Now, as all {50} human deeds and experience\nare taken cognizance of in the great day of judgment, it must be\nadmitted that sufferings of the kind just mentioned will be included in\nthe account.  In what way, and with what effect, will, I think, be to\nsome extent indicated by the following considerations.\n\nBesides the principle of animal life (_psyche_) which man partakes of\nin common with the creatures of a lower order, there is within him a\nspirit (_pneuma_) which is being formed, educated, and built up, all\nthe time that it is the tenant of a corporeal \"vessel.\"  On account of\nthis law of progressiveness, the spirit of a child, as we can all see,\ndiffers in its feelings and its understanding from that of a man.  In\nshort, spirit perfected is the principle of immortal life.  Now, during\nour waking hours our spirits are replete with consciousness and\nthought, which, however, at the moment of falling asleep depart from\nus.  The spirit is then taken into the keeping of the angels of God, to\nbe by them restored into its place in the body at the moment of waking\nup and of return to consciousness.  In like manner at death the spirits\nof all men, good and wicked, pass into the custody of the Creator of\nspirits, to wait for the return to consciousness by being on the\nmorning of their resurrection again united with body,--not, however,\nwith the same natural body, but with a spiritual body (1 Cor. xv. 44).\nThe union of spirit with bodily essence appears to be a {51} necessary\ncondition of human consciousness, and to have been ordained for the\nspecial reasons that we are destined to live hereafter not only\nindividually, but in _social_ relations also, and that only through the\nmedium of body is there communion between one man's spirit and that of\nanother.\n\nThis being understood, it is next to be observed that in the forming\nand building up (\"edification\") of spirit, the human _will_ is\nconcerned, and that, according to a man's choice of action, his spirit\nmay be educated for being good or for being wicked, may be sanctified\nor defiled.  There is, in short, no act or experience in human life\nwhich in this respect is indifferent.  But what the spirit is thus made\nduring its passage through this life, such it is when it is taken into\nthe hands of its Creator, and such, as we may conclude from the\nteaching of Scripture and from its having in the mean time existed\napart from body, it will be, with all its imperfections, on the day of\nits resurrection.  It has already been maintained that, because of\nimperfection, it is necessary that even the elect should be judged, to\nthe end that by this means their spirits may be made perfect.  But our\nconcern now is with the effect of judgment on those who are not of the\nnumber of the elect.  For the purpose of illustrating what I am about\nto say on this head, I shall begin with making an application of the\nargument in a particular instance.\n\n{52}\n\nI have recently seen it stated, among the news of the day, that it is\nthe practice of a barbarous African king to cut off the heads of twelve\nor more of his subjects, merely to pay a compliment to a distinguished\nvisitor.  Are we to think that this transaction both begins and ends\nhere?  Although we have no ground for asserting that the victims in\nthis case are to be counted among God's elect, inasmuch as they must be\nsupposed to be devoid of the faith and righteousness which are\nnecessary to constitute a title to that high privilege, we may yet\nbelieve that the bodily suffering they endured was contributory to the\nformation of their spirits for their future destiny.  If even those who\nhave \"understanding\"--elect saints--have undergone sufferings and been\n\"beheaded\" in order that thus they might be \"purified and made white,\"\n(compare Dan. xi. 33-35, and xii. 10, with Rev. xx. 4), why should we\nnot believe that the sufferings of those poor Africans, who are equally\nchildren of God, had like effect?  That suffering is in this manner\nefficacious is proved by the sacrifice of the Son of God on the cross,\nwho, after having proved by his miracles that he had all human ills\nunder control, _voluntarily_ submitted to be made perfect by enduring\nshame and pain, that thus he might both exemplify and justify the ways\nof God in the creation of immortal spirits.  This sacrifice is a full\nand sufficient explanation of all the evil in the world.  When,\ntherefore, in the time of the {53} resurrection of the unjust the\nslayer and the slain, in this instance, appear before the judgment-seat\nof God, and are condemned, as not being among those who are saved in\nthe first resurrection, to undergo the second death, is it not\nreasonable to conclude that the tribulation and pain of that event will\nfall much more heavily on the murderer than on those he slew, and that\nthe punishment and sufferings that have still to be endured in order\nthat the final purpose of the judgment may be accomplished, will be\ninflicted with far greater severity on him than on them?  (See on this\npoint what is said concerning the future judgment in the Wisdom of\nSolomon vi. 3-6.)\n\nOn this principle many apparent anomalies in the present age of the\nworld admit of explanation.  Why, for instance, is so large a\nproportion of mankind condemned, irrespective of their deserts, to be\npoor, and to labour with their hands in anxiety for the maintenance of\nthemselves and their families?  We have reason from Scripture to say\nthat such conditions of life, if united with the _faith_ that looks for\nbetter things to come, may be counted among means ordained by God for\npreparing the spirits of His elect for their destined inheritance\n(\"Hate not laborious work, neither husbandry, which the Most High hath\nordained\" [Ecclesiasticus vii. 15]).  And where such faith is absent,\nmay we not still say that conditions of the present life to which the\ngreat mass of mankind are {54} subject must be contributory to forming\ntheir spirits for their future existence?  Leaving out of consideration\nwho are the elect, and who not, which God only knows, can we think that\nthe patience of the labourer and artisan, the endurance of the\nseafaring man, and the devotedness of the soldier, who at the call of\nduty, and in spite of the promptings of self-preservation, exposes\nhimself to almost certain death on the field of battle, have no\nrelation to their future destiny?  As regards, especially, the spirit\nof self-sacrifice of the soldier, so opposed to all the calculations of\npersonal interest, it seems to me that the desire of glory, or the\nexpectation of reward, will not wholly account for it, but rather that\nit is indicative of there being in the warrior's breast an undefined\nconviction that he better fulfils the purpose of life by braving a\npainful death than by living at home in ease.  It is worthy of remark\nthat although in Scripture war is spoken of as a calamity, the\noccupation of a soldier is nowhere condemned, but is rather commended\non account of its disciplinary effect and abstractedness from the\naffairs of life (see 2 Tim. ii. 3, 4).  It should be observed that the\ndifferent kinds of human experience adverted to above are all supposed\nto stand apart from personal acts done in violation of the dictates of\n_conscience_.  Such acts will doubtless be tried by the course of the\ngeneral judgment, and will have effect in the condemnation of the\noffenders, and {55} in punishment awarded according to the guiltiness\nof their deeds.\n\nThe calamities of human life may be put generally under the two heads\nof \"tribulation\" and \"slaughter\"--different kinds of sorrow and\ntrouble, and different kinds of death.  These constitute the groaning\nand travailing of the whole creation unto the time being (_a chri tou\nnun_), spoken of by St. Paul in Rom. viii. 22 and called in St. Mark\nxiii. 8, the beginnings of sorrows (_odinon_).  But in the time of the\nworld to come, the same forms of suffering have their consummation and\nending.  In Rev. vii. 14, mention is made of \"_the_ great tribulation,\"\nand at the same time of \"a countless multitude who come out of it.\"\nThis can be no other than that \"great tribulation\" respecting which our\nLord said, according to St. Matt. xxiv. 21, that it will be \"such as\nwas not since the beginning of the world to this time, _nor ever shall\nbe_,\" and according to St. Mark xiii. 19, that \"those days shall be\naffliction such as was not from the beginning of the creation which God\ncreated unto this time, _neither shall be_.\"  The identity of the\nevents spoken of in the Gospels and in the Apocalypse may also be\ninferred from the words _cheimonos_ (tempest-time) and _sabbato_ (on\nthe sabbath) contained in Matt. xxiv. 20, the former referring to the\nstorm of indignation and wrath which proceeds from \"the Lamb\" when he\ncomes to execute Judgment, and the latter to the time in which the {56}\njudgment takes place, which is designated the sabbath, or seventh day,\nas following upon the termination of the present age of the world, and\nalso as being that sabbath of which, as said in Luke vi. 5, \"the Son of\nman is Lord.\"\n\nAgain, in proof of the doctrine that the process, or effect, of the\ngeneral judgment is characterized in Scripture as \"slaughter,\" Isa.\nxxxiv. 1-6 may be cited, it being said in that passage that \"the\nindignation of the Lord is upon all nations,\" that \"he hath delivered\nthem to the slaughter,\" and in connection therewith that \"all the host\nof heaven shall be dissolved, and the heaven shall be rolled together\nas a scroll\" (compare Rev. vi. 18-14).  Of the same import is the\nprophecy in Rev. xiv. 14-20, at the end of which the treading of \"the\ngreat winepress of the wrath of God\" is described in terms closely\nagreeing with those in Isa. lxiii. 1-4.  We have, besides, the\nremarkable passage, Rev. xix. 17-21, which represents the fowls of\nheaven as being called together to feast on the flesh of the slain,\nafter great slaughter had been wrought by \"the sharp sword\" which\nproceeds out of the mouth of him who is called \"The Word of God.\"  This\nsword represents the cutting and destructive effect of the words of\njudgment and condemnation which the Son of God will pronounce on\nsinners when he comes to judge the whole world.  It is not necessary\nfor my purpose to interpret particularly the symbolism {57} contained\nin the passages just quoted; it suffices to draw from them the general\ninference that, as regards _all_ men, trouble and pain and death in the\npresent age of the world are the beginnings of an [oe]conomy for\nforming spirits for immortality, which is destined to be consummated in\nthe age to come.\n\nTo complete the argument from Scripture it only remains now to take\ninto consideration those passages which expressly reveal the effect of\nthe general judgment, and to ascertain what relation the revelations\nhave to the question of immortality.  These passages are of two kinds,\nsome being composed entirely of symbolic language requiring\ninterpretation, while others are expressed in terms that may be readily\nunderstood.  The former must be supposed to admit of being interpreted\nconsistently with the plain meaning of the other kind.  Accordingly,\nfor the purpose above mentioned, I proceed now to offer an\ninterpretation of Rev. xx. 11-15, this passage evidently giving a\nsynoptical account, in symbolic terms, of the process and the effect of\nthe general judgment.\n\nI have already adverted (p. 48) to the contents of _vv._ 11 and 12, so\nfar as they refer to the Person of the Judge, and to His judging the\ndead, according to their works, \"out of the things written in the\n_books_.\"  \"The great _white_ throne\" (_v._ 11) is evidently the seat\nof righteous judgment.  The inspired writer, in order {58} to account\nfor his seeing in vision the dead, \"small and great, standing before\nthe throne,\" reveals, besides, that \"the sea gave up the dead that were\nin it, and Death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them\" (_v._\n13).  Now, the context hardly allows of taking \"the sea\" here in its\nliteral objective sense, requiring rather the interpretation that the\nnatural sea symbolizes by its invisible depths the incognizable state\nof the dead before resurrection.  In the \"new heaven and earth,\" which\nis the end of all creation, \"sea exists no longer\" (Rev. xxi. 1).\nHades, as apparently might be inferred from the proper sense of the\nword, signifies that invisible state of departed spirits which, as just\nsaid, is symbolized as being concealed in the depths of \"the sea,\" and\nalso, as I have already pointed out, has to death a necessary relation\nof sequence (\"Hades followed with him\" [Rev. vi. 8]).  This explains\nwhy Death and Hades are represented as a conjoint power having\npossession of the dead.  In Rev. i. 18, as well as in Rev. vi. 8, they\nare mentioned in close connection, and in the latter passage power is\nsaid to be given to them in common.\n\nI take occasion to make some remarks here on 1 Peter iii. 19, as the\nsense of this passage might be thought to be contradictory to the\nmeaning assigned above to Hades.  It affirms that \"in spirit Christ\nwent and preached to the spirits in custody {59} (_en phylake_).\"  Now,\nthe literal meaning of the concrete terms, \"went and preached\"\n(_poreutheis ekeruxen_), is _excluded_ by \"in spirit\" going before, and\nthey consequently require an abstract interpretation.  It has already\nbeen argued (p. 50) that the word \"custody\" applies to departed spirits\nin the sense of their being in the _keeping_ of the Creator of spirits;\nwhence it follows that \"spirits in custody\" and \"spirits in Hades\" have\nthe same meaning.  But neither of these expressions signifies anything\nas to _locality_, for the simple reason that locality cannot be\npredicated of spirit apart from body.  The abstract interpretation of\nthe passage of St. Peter may, I think, be reached by the following\nargument.  The word _ekeruxen_ above cited is not that ordinarily used\nwith respect to preaching the Gospel, and therefore it is the more to\nbe noticed that where Noah is called \"a preacher of righteousness\" (2\nPeter ii. 5), the Greek word is _keruka_.  May we not hence infer that\nNoah, by \"the spirit of Christ\" which was in him (compare 1 Peter i.\n11), preached to the unbelieving and \"disobedient\" of his day, and that\ntheir spirits, although the world in which they lived was so long since\ndestroyed by the Flood, are, together with all other departed spirits,\nstill in God's custody, to be hereafter raised up and judged?  We are\nfarther informed respecting Noah's preaching, which consisted\napparently of deeds rather than of words, that \"by preparing an ark for\nthe {60} saving of his house, he condemned the world, and became heir\nof the righteousness which is according to faith\" (Heb. xi. 7).\n\nWe have now to inquire what interpretation may be given to the symbolic\nlanguage (in Rev. xx. 14) which affirms that \"Death and Hades were cast\ninto the lake of fire,\" and that \"this is the second death, the lake of\nfire.\"  The first mention of the lake of fire occurs in Rev. xix. 20,\nwhere it is described as \"burning with brimstone,\" and both \"the\nbeast,\" and \"the false prophet\" associated with him (_ho met autou_),\nare said to be \"cast alive\" into this lake.  But the rest (_oi\nloipoi_), namely, \"the kings of the earth and their armies, gathered\ntogether to make war against him who sat on the horse and against his\narmy,\" were slain by the sword that proceeds out of his mouth, that is,\nby the sharp and searching words of righteousness and truth, whereby\nhe, \"The Word of God,\" judges and pronounces condemnation in the last\nday (compare John xii. 48).  In Rev. xx. 7-10, we are farther told that\nSatan, after being let loose from prison at the end of the thousand\nyears when \"the rest of the dead\" live again (v. 5), and after\ncollecting together all the _risen_ nations of the earth, \"the number\nof whom is as the sand of the sea\" (v. 8), leads them to their\ndestruction in battle against the God of heaven, and is himself \"cast\ninto the lake of fire and brimstone, where are the beast {61} and the\nfalse prophet\" (v. 10).  Consequently, \"Satan,\" who is opposed to God\nthe Father, the God of heaven, \"the beast,\" which, as signifying the\nspirit of the world, is opposed to the Holy Spirit, and \"the false\nprophet,\" who is the symbolic representative of all _anti-Christian_\npower objectively opposed to the Son of God, are all three cast into a\nlake of fire \"_burning with brimstone_.\"  But of Death and Hades it is\nonly said that they were cast into a lake of fire.  Their being cast\ninto the depths of \"a lake\" signifies that they become incognizable\nentities, and \"lake of fire\" indicates that they remain such by an\nirreversible law, fire being the symbol of force of law (see Deut.\nxxxiii. 2).  For this reason \"the lake of fire\" is put in apposition\n(in _v._ 14) with \"the second death,\" which is the extinction of death.\nNow, Satan, the beast, and the false prophet, being regarded as\n_personal_ existences motived by _will_, and in that respect unlike\nDeath and Hades, are cast not simply into a lake of fire, but into a\nlake burning with brimstone, which apparently signifies that from the\ntime these \"adversaries\" cease to have cognizable existence, their\nantecedent power and influence will be regarded by those who were once\nsubject to them with antipathy and abhorrence, so that any return to\nthe same subjection will (as we say) be morally impossible.  When in\nthe end God has become \"all in all,\" no antagonism remains; all {62}\nenemies have been subdued.  Any one who is unwilling to accept the\nforegoing interpretation might reasonably be asked in what other way he\ncan explain why, of all created things, _brimstone_ is specially\nmentioned with reference to this \"mystery\" (see Rev. xvii. 5, 16).\n\nIn the last verse of the passage under consideration we have, \"And if\nany one (_ei tis_) was not found written in the book of life, he was\ncast into the lake of fire\" (v. 15).  It is to be observed that the\nlake of fire is not here said to be burning with brimstone.  This\nsentence must accordingly receive an interpretation analogous to that\ngiven above with respect to Death and Hades.  When the final judgment\nhas had complete effect, there will no longer be objective existence of\nany whose names are not in the book of life, because all will have been\nmade meet for the inheritance of life.  For this reason \"the book of\nlife\" is mentioned (in _v._ 12) in immediate connection with the books\ncontaining the records according to which the judgment is transacted.\nI am well aware that the preceding interpretations do not accord with\nviews entertained by many in the present day.  I remember to have heard\na sermon on the text, \"This is the second death,\" in the course of\nwhich the preacher did not once advert to the word \"This,\" but gave a\ndescription, the most terrible his imagination could supply, of what he\njudged to be the second {63} death.  We find revealed in Scripture\nrespecting \"the terrors of the Lord\"--the anguish and tribulation, the\nslaughter and destruction, proceeding from His wrath in the day of\njudgment--quite enough to deter sinners from going on in sin, without\ngratuitously adding the doctrine of the perpetuity of evil, the\npreaching of which seems to have the effect of hindering the belief and\nexpectation of the impending realities of that great day.  Besides, it\nmay well be asked how such preaching can be reconciled with the Gospel\nrevelations, stated in language devoid of symbol, which are contained\nin Rev. xxi.; to which I shall afterwards have occasion to call\nattention.  But, first, it will be necessary to inquire what is the\ndoctrine of Scripture respecting future \"punishment\" and \"torment.\"\n\nOn proceeding to this part of the argument it will be proper to revert\nto a principle which has already been admitted as self-evident (p. 9),\nnamely, that a state of perfect righteousness and a happy immortality\nare so essentially and necessarily related that one cannot subsist\nwithout the other.  It is, however, to be said that this doctrine is\nnowhere expressed in such words in Scripture.  In fact, the abstract\nterms, \"essentially and necessarily related,\" are altogether unlike any\nScriptural mode of expression.  Yet it may be that the truth which we\nthink we understand when we express it in such terms may admit of being\n{64} _extracted_ in a more definite form from the concrete language of\nScripture; and, in order that our argument for immortality may be shown\nto rest entirely on a Scriptural foundation, I shall now endeavour to\nshow that this is the case with respect to the above-stated doctrine,\nby citing and discussing various passages of the Old and New Testament.\n\nIn the first place, I remark that righteousness and salvation,\nrighteousness and peace, are so often and in such manner mentioned\ntogether in the word of God, that we may thence infer that, according\nto a law of the Divine (Economy, personal righteousness is a condition\nnecessarily antecedent to salvation (safety) and peace (see Ps. xxiv.\n5, and lxxxv. 7-18; Isa. xlv. 7, 8, xlvi. 18, li. 5, lxii. 1, and many\nlike passages).  For, on the other hand, it is twice expressly declared\nthat God has said, \"There is no peace to the wicked\" (Isa. xlviii. 22,\nand lvii. 21).  So in Rev. xiv. it is affirmed respecting sinners (who\nare comprehensively described as those who worship the beast and his\nimage, and receive the mark of his name on the forehead or the hand--in\ntheir beliefs or their deeds) that \"they have no rest day nor night\"\n(_vv._ 9 and 11).  Of the same sinners it is also declared that \"they\nshall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out\nwithout mixture into the cup of his indignation; and shall be tormented\nwith fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in {65}\nthe presence of the Lamb\" (v. 10).  The fire of the torment is the\noperation of the holy law of righteousness which they have broken, and\nthe brimstone by the offensiveness of its smoke represents the\nself-condemnation and reproach of conscience with which they are\ntormented when their sins are laid bare in the presence of the holy\nangels and of the _Lamb_, who by reason of their sins was slain.\nLastly, we are told that \"the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for\never and ever.\"  The general signification of \"smoke,\" regarded as a\nsymbol, appears to be, effect or consequence.  Thus, in the remarkable\nsymbol of \"a smoking furnace\" seen in vision by Abraham (Gen. xv. 17),\nthe fire of the furnace may represent the operation of the law, and the\nsmoke may symbolize \"the abounding\" of the sins of mankind consequent\nupon that operation (see Rom. v. 20; also compare 2 Esdras iv. 48).\nBut in the passage before us we have \"smoke of torment,\" of which smoke\nit is said that it \"ascends up for ever and ever,\" signifying, it would\nseem, the perpetuity of the _effect_ of the torment.  This\ninterpretation accordingly agrees with that previously given (p. 61)\nrelative to \"the lake of fire burning with brimstone.\"  There is,\nhowever, this difference to be noted, that whereas the present passage\nrelates especially to the effect of the _pain and torment_ attendant\nupon the _process_ of being judged, the other speaks of the effect of\nthe second _death_ to {66} which the wicked, after being tried by the\njudgment, are condemned.\n\nThe portion of Scripture contained in Matt. xxv. 31-46, gives,\nconcerning the awards to be respectively adjudged to the righteous and\nunrighteous, and the final consequences of the judgment, certain\nrevelations, symbolically expressed, which are made by the Lord\nhimself, the future Judge.  In order to complete the argument from\nScripture respecting the effect of judgment, we must endeavour to\ninterpret these revelations.  \"When the Son of man shall come in his\nglory, and all the holy angels with him, he will sit on the throne of\nhis glory: and all nations will be gathered before him: and he will\nseparate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from\nthe goats; and he will place the sheep on his right hand, and the goats\non his left\" (_vv._ 31-33).  We are thus told that all of all nations\nwill come into the presence of the Judge, and that he will separate\nthem into two portions, as distinct the one from the other as sheep are\nfrom goats.  From what is said farther on we gather that one portion\nare \"the just\" (_oi dikaioi_, _v._ 37), and the other the unjust; but\nno mention is made of a particular process of separation.  Consequently\nthere is nothing here which contradicts the conclusion before arrived\nat (p. 38), that the just are separated from the unjust by partaking of\nthe first resurrection; rather, that conclusion is in {67} accordance\nwith this revelation respecting the place of honour \"on the right hand\"\nbeing assigned to the just, and their being prepared to receive it when\nthe whole assembly, just and unjust, are gathered together before the\nJudge.  In _v._ 34, as also in _v._ 40, the Judge is called \"the King\"\n(_ho Basileus_), forasmuch as he is \"the faithful and true\" One, who\n\"in righteousness judges and makes war,\" and to whom belongs in a\nspecial manner the title of \"King of kings and Lord of lords\" (see Rev.\nxix. 11, 16).\n\nWe have next to consider the statements of the grounds on which the\nawards are made, which are very remarkable.  \"Then shall the King say\nto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the\nkingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.  For I was\nhungry, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was\na stranger, and ye took me in; naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick,\nand ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came to me.  Then shall the\nrighteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, and fed\nthee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?  When saw we thee a stranger,\nand took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?  Or when saw we thee\nsick, or in prison, and came unto thee?  And the King shall answer and\nsay to them, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one\nof the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me\" {68} (_vv._\n84-40).  What is chiefly noteworthy in these words is, that the Judge\nidentifies himself with suffering humanity, and accounts as \"brethren\"\neven \"the least\" of those that suffer, having, when he \"dwelt among\nus,\" participated in the toils and afflictions to which sinful man is\nsubject (although \"in him was no sin),\" and submitted in the end to the\nshame and pain of dying on the cross, although he had shown by his\nmiracles that he had power over death and all the ills of humanity.  As\nis written in Isaiah liii. 4, \"He hath borne _our_ griefs and carried\n_our_ sorrows.\"  This the Son of God voluntarily took upon himself out\nof love and compassion towards us, knowing that, by ordinance of his\nFather, the Creator of spirits, \"we must through many tribulations\nenter into the kingdom of God\" (Acts xiv. 22), and be made heirs of\nimmortality, and that consequently we had need of such assurance of\nobtaining the appointed inheritance as that which is given by his\npartaking with us of life, death, and resurrection (see what is said on\nthis part of the subject in p. 29).  Besides this, the sympathy of\nJesus Christ with human suffering, which was also shown by his miracles\nof healing, is specially a reason for giving _practical_ proof, by acts\nof benevolence and mercy towards our fellow men, that we partake of the\nsame spirit.  It is with reference to such _outward_ evidence of faith\nand righteousness, that the decision of the Judge, given {69} in the\npassage above quoted, is pronounced.  It seems, too, from the questions\nput to the Judge by the company of the righteous, and the answer they\nreceived, that their acts of kindness and mercy, done in humility and\nfaith, were accepted by the Judge, out of his sympathy and community\nwith the sufferers, as done to himself, although the doers had not had\nprevious knowledge or expectation that their good deeds would be so\naccepted.\n\nThe sentence pronounced on the unrighteous, and the reasons for it, are\nthus stated in _vv._ 41-45: \"Then shall he say also to them on the left\nhand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the [oe]onian fire (_to pur to\naionion_, i.e. the fire of judgment in the future _aion_) prepared for\nthe devil and his angels: for I was hungry, and ye gave me no meat; I\nwas thirsty, and ye gave me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me\nnot in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye\nvisited me not.  Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when\nsaw we thee hungry, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in\nprison, and did not minister unto thee?  Then shall he answer them,\nsaying, Verily, I say to you, inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the\nleast of these, ye did it not to me.\"  It should be noticed that the\nterms of this award are the exact contraries of those of the award to\nthe righteous.  On the one hand, the King says, \"Come, ye blessed of my\nFather, inherit {70} the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation\nof the world;\" on the other, he says, \"Depart from me, ye cursed, into\nthe [oe]onian fire prepared for the devil and his angels;\" and the\naccount of what the Judge further says to the unrighteous, and of what\nthey say to him, although somewhat briefer than that relating to the\nrighteous, is made up of exactly opposite particulars.  On this\nprinciple, since the decision respecting the righteous is pronounced on\nthe grounds of positive works of righteousness done in humility and\nfaith, that respecting the unrighteous has regard only to the\n_omission_ to do such works through presumption and unbelief.  The same\nexhibition of opposite circumstances and qualities, and the same\nprinciple of condemnation for sins of omission exclusively of those of\ncommission, are observable in the two other symbolic representations\ncontained in the same chapter--the parable of the ten virgins, and the\nparable of the talents.  In short, the general purport of the chapter\nis to indicate, that in the sight of the righteous Judge sins of\nomission, not less than sins of commission, demand condemnation and\npunishment; the reasons for which appear to be that both kinds are\nequally violations of the royal law, \"Thou shalt love thy neighbour as\nthyself\" (James ii. 8), and perfect obedience to this law is the\nnecessary foundation of a _common_ immortality.\n\nIt only remains now to speak of the final issue of {71} the judgment\nstated thus in _v._ 46: \"And these shall go away into eternal\npunishment, but the righteous into external life.\"  It must be admitted\nthat the first clause of this sentence, taken as it is usually taken,\nexpresses the perpetuity of evil, inasmuch as \"punishment\" is an evil.\nBut after this has been conceded, there is still something more to be\nsaid on this doctrine.  It is evident from the context that by \"these\"\nis meant the ungodly just before spoken of, who, having shown, by their\nneglecting to give proof of love towards their neighbours, that the\nlove of God is not in them (see 1 John iv. 20), are counted as enemies,\nand as such must be punished.  For there is no neutral position: all\nwho do not obey the commands of Christ are opposed to him, and all that\nis opposed to him is destined to be brought under subjection.  Further,\nit is to be noticed that although the final decision is expressed\ngenerally in accordance with the before-mentioned principle of\nemploying exactly opposite terms relatively to the righteous and the\nwicked, here the opposite of \"eternal life\" is \"eternal punishment,\"\nand not \"eternal death,\" the latter expression being nowhere found in\nScripture.  May it not hence be argued that, as among men the\npunishment of the guilty has not for its purpose the infliction of pain\nand penalty, but rather is the means employed to the end that laws may\nbe obeyed, so the end of divine punishment is for correction, and for\n{72} giving effect to and establishing the law of universal\nrighteousness.  If it should hence be inferred that the word \"eternal\"\nis applied to future punishment with reference to that permanence of\n_effect_ which, as has already been indicated (p. 65), is symbolically\nrepresented by the perpetual ascent of \"the smoke of torment,\" against\nthis inference it might reasonably be urged that \"eternal\" ought to be\ntaken in the same sense relatively to the \"punishment\" of the wicked,\nas relatively to the \"life\" of the righteous, and eternity is here\npredicated of the one just as of the other.  Now, although this\nreasoning appears to be irrefragable, the additional arguments from\nScripture which I am about to adduce will, I think, show that there\nmust be some other way of regarding the doctrine of future punishment,\nwhich, although not inconsistent with that to which the foregoing\ninterpretation of Matt. xxv. 46 has conducted, differs from it either\nas to point of view or comprehensiveness.\n\nIn the first place, it is to be observed that in our Lord's discourses\ndoctrine was very generally taught by parables and symbolic language,\nwhich required to be interpreted in order that the abstract and\nspiritual truths thereby conveyed might be understood.  (This remark\napplies to the whole of the passage, Matt. xxv. 31-46, brought under\nreview in the foregoing discussion.)  In Mark iv. 34, it is said that\n\"without a parable he spake not to them,\" that is, {73} to the\nmultitude, and that \"in private he explained all things to his\ndisciples.\"  Being asked by the disciples, when he was preaching to a\ngreat multitude assembled together on the sea-shore to hear him, why he\nspake to them in parables, he answered, \"Because it is given to you to\nknow the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not\ngiven.  For whosoever hath, to him it shall be given, and he shall have\nmore abundance; but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away\neven that he hath.  Therefore speak I to them in parables, because\nseeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they\nunderstand\" (Matt. xiii. 10-13).  It is here affirmed that although\nparables from their very character are expressed in terms which the use\nof the senses renders intelligible, there are those who do not or will\nnot understand them, who for this reason, on the principle of not\ngiving to those who have not, are spoken to only in parables, so that\nthey continue in ignorance.  As every effect or consequence implies the\nantecedence of the _purpose_ of an agent, with respect to this\nconsequence we find it stated in Luke viii. 10, that our Lord expressly\naddressed the disciples in these words: \"Unto you it is given to know\nthe mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to the rest in parables, _that\nseeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand_.\"  To a\nselected few is granted the favour of being able to discern, _through\nthe objective sense_ of {74} parables, the interior signification\nwhereby mysteries of the kingdom of God are revealed, whilst from the\nrest--the multitude--although the objective sense is the same to them\nas to the others, the knowledge of the mysteries is withheld.  This is\nevidently a dispensation analogous to that according to which, as\nChrist declared, \"Many are called, but few are chosen\" (Matt. xxii.\n14).  It is also in accordance with views expressed in a previous part\nof this Essay respecting the distinction between \"the elect\" and the\nrest of mankind.\n\nIt is further to be considered that the Lord promised the apostles that\nafter his departure from them, \"the Holy Spirit would teach them all\nthings, and bring all things to their remembrance which he had said to\nthem\" (John xiv. 26), and it may be assumed that after the Day of\nPentecost this promise was fulfilled, and that they were then\nenlightened to discern the spiritual meaning of his doctrine.  In this\nway it may be accounted for that while Christian doctrine rests\nfundamentally on the words and deeds of Christ as recorded in the\nGospels, it is taught in the Acts of the Apostles and the apostolical\nEpistles in terms of a more abstract character, which, in fact, may be\nregarded as unfolding the spiritual import of the teaching, the life,\nand the death of Jesus Christ.  The apostle Paul, although he was not\none of the originally selected apostles, had special grace and {75}\npower given him for understanding fully and teaching the doctrine of\nChrist.  Now, this apostle, so gifted with understanding and knowledge,\nwrites in his Epistle to the Romans: \"By the obedience of one shall the\nmany be made righteous\" (v. 19); the context evidently showing that the\n\"one\" is Jesus Christ, and that \"the many\" are _all_ the sinful sons of\nAdam.  I have already adverted to this text (p. 19), and called\nattention to the significance of the future tense, \"shall be made\nrighteous.\"  According to our argument, when they have been made\nrighteous, they are _saved_.  Hence, quite consistently with this\npassage in the Epistle to the Romans, St. Paul has said in his first\nEpistle to Timothy (iv. 10), \"We trust in the living God, who is the\nSaviour of all men, especially of those that believe.\"  If this\nsentence had not contained the last clause, there might have been some\nexcuse for questioning whether St. Paul preached the doctrine of the\neventual salvation of all men; but inasmuch as he adds, \"especially of\nthose that believe,\" it is as clear as words can make anything clear,\nthat he taught that all are saved in the sense in which he taught that\nthose who believe are saved.  The reason for making the distinction\nexpressed by the word \"especially\" is, I think, sufficiently apparent\nfrom the doctrine, previously maintained in this Essay (pp. 88-40),\nthat the elect righteous are raised up first, and partake already of\nsalvation, honour, {76} and glory, during a certain interval preceding\nthe resurrection of the rest of mankind.\n\nNow, since all that are saved, as being at rest and in felicity, are\nfree from sin and evil, this teaching of St. Paul is directly opposed\nto the doctrine of the perpetuity of evil which is usually inferred\n(see p. 71) from the saying of our Lord in Matt. xxv. 46.  Thus\napparently there is irreconcilable contradiction between the teaching\nof Christ and the teaching of St. Paul on a most momentous subject.\nSince, however, the same spirit of wisdom was in the apostle as in his\nLord, it is not possible that there can really be such contradiction;\nand because, consequently, the seeming contradiction must be\nattributable to our defect of knowledge, or inability, to interpret\nrightly the allegorical teaching of Christ, we might do well, although\nno solution of the difficulty should be at hand, to accept this gospel\nof salvation, in the confidence that, as being declared by St. Paul in\nplain terms, it must be true Christian doctrine.\n\nI am not, however, prepared to grant that the solution of the\nabove-mentioned difficulty is not discoverable; and accordingly I make\nbold to indicate a line of argument by which, as it seems to me, a\nsolution is attainable.  The first step in this argument is to admit\nthe reality of that analogy between God's natural creation and His\nspiritual creation which has already been taken into consideration (see\np. 14), {77} and to infer therefrom that the spiritual creation is\nactually in progress towards a foreordained perfect consummation.  For\nthe purpose of illustrating this view by way of contrast, I may mention\nthat I once heard a sermon in which the preacher, who was regarded in\nhis day as a leader of religious thought, advanced the theory that the\nword \"remedy\" expressed the central idea of the divine scheme of\nsalvation.  According to this theology, which looks backwards rather\nthan forwards, the prevalence of sin and mortality, and the need of a\nremedy for the many ills and errors that beset humanity, were\ncontingent on Adam's transgression.  It may be granted that this is so\nfar true, that sin and death entered into the world because Adam was\nnot made incapable of sinning.  But this theory overlooks the\npossibility of there being a _final_ cause for the actual facts of\nhumanity, and seems to be a substitution of _propter hoc_ for _post\nhoc_.  The analogy of the natural creation points to a different, and\napparently a juster, view of the divine [oe]conomy, according to which\nthe reign of sin and death in Adam and all his posterity is a necessary\npart of a prearranged scheme, now actually in progress, which is\ndestined, by its completion hereafter, to make, not one man only, but a\ncountless multitude, incapable of sinning and meet for immortality.  On\nthis point, however, after what has been already said (see p. 57),\nthere is no occasion to say {78} more here.  I proceed, therefore, to\nthe next step, which is to indicate certain inferences that may be\ndrawn from the character of progressiveness which pertains at present\nto the spiritual creation.\n\nIt may, in the first place, be asserted that \"the law of opposites,\"\nreferred to in pp. 69 and 70, is a necessary accompaniment of that\ngeneral law of progression.  The author of the Book of Ecclesiasticus,\nwho certainly put on record many wise sayings, has thus stated the law\nof opposites: \"Good is set against evil, and life against death: so is\nthe sinner against the godly.  So look upon all the works of the Most\nHigh, and there are two and two, one against another\" (xxxiii. 14, 15).\nNow, evidently this duality will cease, and unity be universally\nestablished, when, as argued in the preceding paragraph, the\npredestined consummation is reached, and the purpose of the whole\ncreation, external and spiritual, is fulfilled.  This doctrine of the\ntermination of evil appears to have been understood and proclaimed by\nthe writer of the fourth Book of Esdras, in which we meet with the\nfollowing emphatic declaration: \"Take heaven and earth to witness; for\nI have broken the evil in pieces, and created the good: for I live,\nsaith the Lord\" (ii. 14).  In the mean while, as being subject to\nconditions of earth, and time, and space, we are also subject to this\nlaw of duality and antagonism, so that we have no knowledge or\nperception of anything of {79} which we do not also know the\n_opposite_.  For this reason it is not possible to make known the\nconditions under which men are saved without at the same time stating\nthe conditions under which they are _not_ saved.  This will account for\nthe _oppositeness_ and _parallelism_ of the statements in Matt. xxv.\n46, concerning the consequences to the wicked and the righteous of\ntheir respective deeds, as well as for many statements of like\ncharacter in other parts of Scripture.  But this does not explain why\nthe punishment of the wicked is said to be \"eternal.\"  Relatively to\nthis question I submit the following considerations.\n\nRecurring once more to the position, that the existing order of things\nis part of a progressive scheme, the purpose of which is to create\nimmortal souls, it may, I think, be reasonably assumed that there is\nnothing in human cognizance or experience, whether it be thought or\nfeeling, word or deed, which is not contributory in some manner to this\nend.  If a mechanist, after planning a machine for a certain purpose,\nintroduced in the execution of it parts which contributed nothing\ntowards effecting that purpose, would not this be considered to be an\nimperfection?  Such imperfection is wholly inadmissible in the\nworkmanship of an omniscient and omnipotent Creator.  Accordingly,\nsince, as being conditioned by _time_, we are capable of entertaining\nthe thought that the punishment of the wicked in the world to come may\n{80} be eternal, many, in fact, having professed their belief that so\nit will be, we must conclude, on the above principle, that even this\nthought is contributory towards the eventual bringing in of\nimmortality.  But it will be asked, in what way?  To this question we\nmay give the general answer, that as such thought is operative on human\naction, and implies the existence of _time_, it must be reckoned as\npart of the total of human thought and experience conditioned by time,\nwhich was ordained from the beginning to be the means, whether in this\nage or in the age to come (_aion ho mellon_), of forming spirits for\nimmortality.  Then, again, we have reason from Scripture to infer that\nthe immortal spirit is in effect \"spiritual _body_\" (1 Cor. xv. 44),\ncomposed of functional parts or qualities constituting it such a whole\nthat it is adapted for communion with other spirit; in which case the\n_temporal_ processes of creation above mentioned might be supposed to\nbe designed to give to immortal spirit a character appropriate to its\ndestiny.  And we may, at least, be certain that Jesus Christ knew what\nwas required for accomplishing his Father's purpose of creating spirits\nwhich, while retaining _individuality_ and _will_, would be incapable\nof sinning, and that in his wisdom he employed such manner of teaching\nas would either now or hereafter conduct to that end.\n\nI take occasion to observe here, parenthetically, that whereas,\naccording to the above argument, the {81} word \"eternal\" (from\n_[oe]etas_) is applicable to punishment because we can think of eternal\npunishment by thinking of time, the word \"endless\" is not in the same\nmanner applicable, simply because it does not explicitly indicate\nrelation to _time_.  The Greek equivalent of the English word\n\"everlasting,\" and of the Latin word \"_sempiternus_,\" namely _aidios_\nfrom _aei_, is used in Rom. i. 20, and in Jude 6, in the sense of\n_aionios_, and, as involving like the latter the conception of time, is\nsimilarly applicable to future punishment.  But besides \"_eternal_\nlife,\" we have in Scripture \"_indissoluble_ life\" (_xon akatalytos_,\nHeb. vii. 16), the remarkable epithet _akatalytos_ not being\netymologically expressive of time, and therefore not wrongly, although\nnot strictly, translated by \"endless\" in the Authorized Version.  No\nsuch epithet is applied in Scripture to \"punishment\" or \"torment.\"\n(See more on this question in an Appendix to the Essay.)\n\nReasoning analogous to that employed above relative to the assertion in\nMatt. xxv. 46, that the wicked \"go away into eternal punishment,\" is\napplicable to other declarations of like tenor in various portions of\nScripture.  One of these, recorded in Matt. xxvi. 24 as having been\nspoken by the Lord to the \"_twelve_,\" demands special notice.\nTranslated literally according to the tenses of the Greek, this passage\nis, \"Woe to that man through whom the Son of man has been betrayed!\ngood was it for him, if that man was not {82} born.\"  The translation\nin the Authorized Version, \"it had been good for that man if he had not\nbeen born,\" may be taken to convey, regard being had to difference of\nidiom, the true sense of the original.  Exactly the same passage occurs\nin Mark xiv. 21, where our translators have given, \"good were it for\nthat man if he had never been born.\"  Although this translation, as\ncontaining the word \"never,\" deviates still more than the other from\nthe literal rendering, it may be justified on the principle that the\ndeclaration, in whatever form it be made, is one in which _time_ enters\nas a necessary element, whereby alone it is within the reach of\nthought.  Accordingly, this saying of our Lord, regarded as having\nrelation to experience in the world to come, is in the same category as\nhis assertion of the eternity of future punishment, and would appear,\nby applying the argument already expounded (p. 80) with respect to that\ndoctrine, to be in like manner contributory towards generating in the\nspirit of man an incapability of sinning.  It is farther to be taken\ninto account that these words were addressed by the Lord to his\n_apostles_--to the elect of the elect--with particular reference to the\nsin of _betraying_ the Son of man, which was exemplified by the outward\nact of Judas, who also by his self-destruction exhibited the damnatory\npower of the inward consciousness of such guilt.  The exceeding\nsinfulness of such apostasy as that which Judas, chosen to be {83} an\napostle, was guilty of, may be assigned as the reason that it was\ndenounced by our Lord in terms which do not appear to have been applied\nto any other kind of \"transgression\" (compare Acts i. 17, 25).\n\nIn Heb. x. 26, 27, we are taught that \"if we sin wilfully after that we\nhave received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more\nsacrifice for sins, but a certain looking for of judgment and fiery\nindignation, which shall devour the adversaries.\"  This is apostasy not\nof the same degree and character as that of a chosen apostle, but still\nis such that \"the called\" are not exempt from falling into it, as is\nclearly implied by the tenor of this passage.  To those who thus fall\nand do not repent, is reserved \"the fiery indignation\" (_pyros zylos_),\nwhich is destined hereafter to devour the adversaries.  It may be\npresumed that the adversaries thus specially referred to are those of\nwhom it is said in Rev. xx. 9, that having been deceived by Satan,\nafter their resurrection at the end of the thousand years, and gathered\ntogether in warfare against the beloved city, they were _devoured by\nfire_ from God out of heaven.  Accordingly their destruction is\nidentical with the second death.\n\n2 Peter ii. 20, 21, is a passage of like import to that just\nconsidered.  It is therein asserted of those who are overcome by the\npollutions of the world after having escaped them through the knowledge\nof the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, that \"it had been {84} better for\nthem not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have\nknown it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered to them.\"  This\nmay be taken to signify that the punishment in the day of judgment\nconsequent upon sin and error arising out of ignorance, will be \"more\ntolerable\" than that which will be inflicted on those who have\nknowingly apostatized from the way of truth.\n\nWhat is said in Matt. xviii. 6, \"Whoso shall offend one of these little\nones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were\nhanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the\nsea,\" may be accounted for on the principle that any form of death of\nwhich the body is susceptible in this world is rather to be endured,\nand less to be feared, than the punishment which, through the judgment\nin the world to come, awaits the enemies of Christ who put a\nstumbling-block in the way of them that humble themselves as little\nchildren and believe on him.\n\nAnalogous principles may be applied to account for the declarations\nmade in Scripture respecting blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.  In St.\nMatt. xii. 31, 82, it is recorded that our Lord said, \"All sin and\nblasphemy shall be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit\nshall not be forgiven to men.  And whoever speaketh a word against the\nSon of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaketh against the\nHoly Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, {85} neither in this world,\nnor in the world to come.\"  The same doctrine is thus expressed in St.\nMark iii. 28, 29: \"Verily I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven to\nthe sons of men, and all blasphemies whatever wherewith they may\nblaspheme.  But whoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath\nnever forgiveness,\" but is subject to the judgment in the future _aion_\n(_enochos estin aioniou kriseos_).  From the latter evangelist we also\nlearn that our Lord spoke these words because the scribes from\nJerusalem had said, \"He hath an unclean spirit.\"  It is particularly to\nbe noticed that both passages declare in the fullest manner that all\nmanner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men, at the same time\nthat they pronounce that blasphemy (not sin, _amartia_) against the\nHoly Ghost is not forgiven.  To account for this apparent\ncontradiction, it must be remembered that the forgiveness, or\n_remission_ (_aphesis_) of sin, necessarily implies antecedence of law\nand transgression of the law; and whereas St. Paul teaches that \"the\nlaw entered that transgression might abound\" (Rom. v. 20), it is quite\nconsistent with this doctrine to find that in the gospel of Christ\nprovision is made for the remission of all sin and blasphemy.  Now,\nsuch remission consists in \"repentance towards God and faith towards\nour Lord Jesus Christ\" (Acts xx. 21); and therefore, when the gift of\nrighteousness (i.e. the grace of Christ) is received, the believer\nbegins to partake {86} of a spirit such as that which was \"without\nmeasure\" in Christ.  This is essentially a _holy_ spirit, the\nantecedent of which in Jesus Christ was perfect righteousness.\nTherefore the scribes blasphemed when they said of Christ, \"He hath an\nunclean spirit,\" it not being possible that a perfectly righteous body\ncan be the vessel of an unclean spirit.\n\nBut it is possible that the faithful, after receiving the grace of\nChrist and fellowship of the Spirit, may by unrighteous conduct \"grieve\nthe Holy Spirit\" (Eph. iv. 80), and even by persistence in sin defile\nthe gift of the Spirit which had been imparted to them.  In the\nforegoing passage from St. Matthew xii., it is said that there is\nforgiveness for one who \"speaketh against the Son of man,\" which\nexpression may signify, generally, wilful and overt opposition to \"the\nlaw of Christ\" (Gal. vi. 2); but that there is no forgiveness for one\nwho _speaks_ against the Holy Spirit, i.e. one who by wilful and\n_overt_ conduct does violence to the sanctifying influence of the Holy\nSpirit which he has already partaken of.  Of such an one it is written\nin Heb. x. 29, \"he hath trodden underfoot the Son of God, and hath\ncounted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy\nthing, and hath done despite to the Spirit of grace.\"  But not every\nsin committed after faith and the baptism of repentance has this\neffect.  The apostle John tells us that although all unrighteousness\n{87} (_adikia_, transgression of the strict law of Christ) is sin,\nthere is sin of a believing brother which is not unto death, and may be\nrepented of in this world; and there is sin unto death, respecting\nwhich prayer for repentance would be unavailing (1 Epist. v. 16, 17).\nThis is \"the blasphemy of the Spirit,\" which is not forgiven in this\nworld, because forgiveness implies repentance; neither is it forgiven\nin the world to come, because beyond the grave there is no repentance.\nWhat remains for such sinners is the \"[oe]onian judgment\" (see p. 69)\nmentioned in St. Mark iii. 29, and \"the sorer punishment\" spoken of in\nHeb. x. 29, which is the same as the condemnation to the second death\nconsequent upon that judgment.  (I take occasion to remark that in Mark\niii. 29, instead of _kriseos_, some early manuscripts have\n_amaritematos_, which, as far as I can see, does not admit of being\ninterpreted consistently with the context and the usage of _enochos_.)\n\nThere is still another passage--Mark ix. 42-50--which, on account of\nits peculiar significance, it is necessary to discuss with reference to\nthe Scriptural argument for immortality.  It will suffice for\nconducting the discussion to cite _vv._ 43 and 44, the literal\ntranslation of which is as follows:--\"If thy hand cause thee to offend,\ncut it off: it is well for thee to enter into life maimed, rather than\nhaving two hands to go into geenna, into the unquenchable fire, where\ntheir worm dieth not, and the fire is not {88} quenched.\"  The\nconcluding part of this text is evidently derived from Isaiah lxvi. 24,\nwhere the prophet reveals that the Lord has said respecting the\nworshippers, consisting of \"all flesh,\" that shall come before him when\n\"the new heavens and the new earth\" are established, that \"they shall\ngo forth and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed\nagainst me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be\nquenched: and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.\"  This passage\nhas so important a bearing on the sense of that quoted above from St.\nMark, that we must by all means endeavour to find out its\ninterpretation.  Respecting Biblical Interpretation, Burnet in one of\nhis treatises has enunciated two principles, which cannot but be\nassented to: first, that besides the portions of Scripture which have a\nliteral or historical meaning, there are others which must be taken\nallegorically; and, secondly, that an allegorical meaning, is to be\nadmitted when the literal sense involves an absurdity, or contradiction\nto the nature of things.[2]  The right application of these principles\nmay be said to constitute a large portion of the science of Scripture.\nBut in applying them it is often difficult to decide, respecting a\nparticular passage, whether it is to be {89} taken literally or\nallegorically; and again, after deciding that the passage must be\nallegorical, there is generally the still greater difficulty of\ndiscovering what the true sense is.  In illustration of the second of\nthe above principles Burnet cites, apart from the context, _vermem\nnunquam moriturum_, and admits that these words have an allegorical\nsignification.  This plainly follows from the single consideration that\nthe worm (_skolex_) here spoken of is literally that which is seen to\nfeed on dead bodies, and to say of it that it does not die is\ncontradictory to experience.  When, however, the same author goes on to\ngive as the allegorical sense nothing more definite than \"_extremam\nmiseriam_,\" it may well be asked, By what kind of induction has this\nconclusion been reached?  The feeble worm which feeds on mortal remains\npresents to our sight nothing capable of causing pain or misery.\nRather it may, I think, be asserted that Scripture here adverts to this\nnatural fact for the purpose of indicating by a distinct and visible\nemblem that there is a living principle which destroys mortality, and\nwhich for that reason alone is not itself subject to death.  If we be\nguided solely by what _we see with our eyes_, this appears to be the\nonly allegorical sense that can be attributed to the first clause of\nMark ix. 44.[3]  We have next to inquire as to the {90} interpretation\nof the other clause, and what is the mutual relation between the two\nclauses.\n\nAlthough the worm which devours dead bodies is not emblematic of\nanything that causes pain, the case is quite otherwise with respect to\nthe emblematic meaning of _fire_.  It is evident that fire which is\n\"unquenchable\" is not natural fire, and consequently may be taken to\nbe, as has already been assumed, the devouring fire of judgment and of\ncondemnation consequent upon violation of the law of righteousness (see\np. 88).  The destruction of the impenitent unrighteous by the operation\nof this law (which is their second death), is attended with pain and\nwoe such as will not have been before, nor will be after.  It was\ninferred (p. 84) from our Lord's teaching in Matt. xviii. 6, that any\nform of _death_ of which the body is susceptible in this world is\nrather to be endured than falling under condemnation in the world to\ncome.  In Mark ix. 42-48, we are taught that any form of bodily _pain_,\nas that of losing a hand, a foot, or an eye, is to be preferred to\nentering with the body whole into the \"_geenna_ of fire.\"  This is, in\nfact, at once the greatest and the _last_ of human suffering and\ntribulation.  For it should be noticed that at the end of this very\npassage (v. 49) it is said that \"every one shall be salted [made\n'good,' _v._ 50] with fire,\" signifying the effect finally produced by\nthe unquenchable fire.  And with this agrees the emblem {91} of the\nworm that \"dieth not,\" taken as indicating that the final effect of the\ntorment of the judgment is to swallow up death, and to bring in, by\nestablishing the reign of righteousness, life and immortality.  The\nsignification of one emblem must be taken in conjunction with that of\nthe other.\n\nMoreover, by giving particular attention to the context of Isa. lxvi.\n24, it will be seen that what is there revealed is quite in accordance\nwith the above interpretation.  For, first, in _v._ 16 we have, \"By\nfire and by his sword [the sword of the Word of God spoken of in Rev.\nxix. 15] will the Lord plead with all flesh,\" that is, in the judgment\nwhich has been appointed for the trial and tribulation of all men.\nThen, by taking into account what is said in _vv._ 22 and 23, we may\ngather that \"all flesh,\" having become denizens of \"the new heavens and\nthe new earth\" in which, as St. Peter declares (2 Epist. iii. 13),\nrighteousness dwells, \"come to worship the Lord.\"  Of _these\nworshippers_, consisting of \"all flesh,\" it is affirmed that \"they\nshall go forth and look upon the carcases of the transgressors,\" which,\non account of the ill savour coming up from them, will be \"an abhorring\nto all flesh\" (compare Isa. xxxiv. 3).  Thus there is here represented,\nbut by a different figure, the same truth as that which has already\nbeen deduced from the ascending up for ever and ever of the brimstone\nsmoke of torment (see pp. 61 and 65); namely, {92} that the subjecting\nof all the deeds and secrets of the present life to the scrutiny of\njudgment, and the consequent condemnation of all the unredeemed to the\npains of a second death, will have the effect of making sin against a\n\"faithful Creator\" to be seen and felt to be so hateful and abominable\na thing, that such sin will cease to be possible, notwithstanding that\nall men will retain individuality and volition.  For all will thus at\nlength be made new creatures incapable of sinning.  This remark may\nserve to introduce the final stage of the general argument, which I now\nproceed to enter upon.\n\nI have been endeavouring to show that the symbolic assertions in Rev.\nxx. respecting \"the lake of fire\" and its \"burning with brimstone,\" the\ncasting therein of the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, and\ntheir being tormented \"day and night for ever and ever,\" the judgment\nof all the dead, small and great, according to their recorded deeds,\n\"the second death,\" and the casting into the lake of fire of \"any one\nnot found written in the book of life,\" do not necessitate, as is\ncommonly thought, the conclusion that evil, which had a beginning,\nfulfils no purpose and has no ending.  As to this question the seer\ngives, in Rev. xxi. 1-4, the following explicit revelation: \"And I saw\na new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth\npassed away; and there is no more sea.  And I saw the holy city, new\nJerusalem, {93} coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride\nadorned for her husband.  And I heard a great voice from the throne,\nsaying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell\nwith them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be with\nthem, their God.  And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes;\nand death shall be no more, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall\nthere be any more pain: for the first things passed away.\"  Now, it\nseems hardly possible that the announcement of the termination of evil\ncould be made in terms more direct and more intelligible than these.\nHence, according to acknowledged principles of Biblical interpretation,\nwe must not attribute to the above-mentioned symbolic and less\nintelligible passages any meaning inconsistent with that announcement.\nThe arguments I have adduced respecting the interpretation of the\nfigurative statements contained in the latter half of chap. xx. are\ndirected to showing that these figures do, in fact, admit of meanings\nconsistent with the gospel revelations given in chap. xxi. 1-4.  It is\nof so much importance, as regards the Scriptural doctrine of\nimmortality, to establish this point, that I propose now to supplement\nthe former arguments by additional considerations.\n\nIn the Book of Daniel (xii. 6, 7) we read of \"a man clothed in linen,\nwho was upon the water of a river, and held up his right hand and his\nleft hand unto {94} heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for ever,\"\nthat at the end of an appointed time a certain purpose would be\naccomplished, and \"all these things be finished.\"  This refers, as the\ncontext shows, to \"the time of the end\" of the present age (_aion_).\nThe announcement made in this manner by the man clothed in linen\nindicates that he is the precursor of the angel of whom, in _vv._ 1, 2,\n5, 6, 7 of Rev. x., the apostle John relates as follows: \"I saw a\nmighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud, and a rainbow\nupon his head, and his face as the sun, and his feet as pillars of\nfire; and, having in his hand a little book open, he set his right foot\nupon the sea, and his left foot upon the earth.... and lifted up his\nhand to heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for ever and ever, who\ncreated heaven and the things therein, and the earth and the things\ntherein, and the sea and the things therein, that time shall be no\nmore; but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, in the time\nwhen he is about to sound his trumpet, also [_kai_, merely indicating\nthe apodosis] the mystery of God is finished (_etelesthe_, aor. ind.),\naccording to the gospel He made known to His servants the prophets.\"\nThe soundings of the seven trumpets are significant of progressive\nsteps in the general judgment; the days pertaining to the voice of the\nseventh angel are those immediately preceding the actual sounding of\nhis trumpet, which announces the {95} completion (as indicated by the\nnumber seven) of the mystery of God's creation in time, and marks the\nend of the age (_ho aion ho mellon_) following upon the conclusion of\nthe present age.  When all that pertains to this final interval \"is\nfinished,\" there is no more succession of events whereby time is\ncognizable, and therefore time is no more.  The might, and glorious\ninvestiture, and majestic attitude of the angel who proclaims this\ntruth, conspire to point out its great significance.  The little book\nin his hand is the word of prophecy by which we learn these mysteries.\n\nIt is, no doubt, beyond the limit of our thoughts, conditioned as we\nare by time, to conceive of a state of things in which time is no more.\nApparently for this reason commentators have proposed to translate,\n_chronos ouk estai eti_, \"the time shall not be yet,\" or \"time shall no\nmore intervene.\"  The former of these translations is excluded by the\nusage of _ouk eti_ in the analogous affirmations in Rev. xxi. 1, 4, and\nthe other, which is an arbitrary comment rather than a translation, is\nfor the same reason excluded.  (I have preferred _ouk estai eti_ to\n_ouketi estai_, because the words occur in the former order in each of\nthe three instances in Rev. xxi.)  There can be no question as to the\nphilological correctness of the translation, \"time shall be no more.\"\nThe unwillingness to admit it appears to have arisen solely from a\nfixed persuasion, gratuitously and very generally entertained, that\ntime {96} has a _necessary_ existence, and therefore cannot come to an\nend.  Some have affirmed that when time ends, eternity begins; which is\na self-contradictory dogma, because eternity (from _[oe]tas_) is\nessentially time.  The teaching of Scripture on this point is directly\nopposed to these views; for the apostle Peter tells those for whose\nsake he wrote his second Epistle, to bear in mind \"this one thing, that\none day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as\none day\" (2 Epist. iii. 8).  This is equivalent to saying that time is\nnot an independent entity, but that both its existence and its quality\nare determined by the _will_ of the Creator of all things.  It is in\nvirtue of our being made in His image, and partaking intellectually of\nthe divine nature, that we are capable _in thought_ of giving\nindefinite and arbitrary extension to time, whether it be past time or\ntime to come.  This faculty, as I have already argued in p. 80, is to\nbe placed in the category of the different conditions, whether\ndepending on experience of the course of time, or on affections of our\nbodily and mental constitutions, under which the spirit of man is\nformed for immortality.  All such conditions are determined by the\npurpose for which they are imposed, and when that purpose is fulfilled\nin the perfection of humanity the conditions come to an end.  It is\nthus that the being conditioned by time eventually ceases.\n\nIt will be proper here to meet an objection to the {97} doctrine that\ntime will have an end which might be drawn from the expression, _eis\ntous aionas ton aionon_, which frequently occurs in Scripture, and\nseems to be indicative of an unlimited succession of ages.  So far as\ntime is under human cognizance, and has relation to human experience,\nScripture speaks in express terms of only _two_ ages--the present one,\nwhich lasts to the end of the _generations_ of men in the existing\norder of things; and the age to come, which embraces the course of the\njudgment of all who lived in the first age, and terminates with the\nsecond death of those who had no part in the first resurrection.  When\nit is said of the Creator of heaven and earth, that He is \"from\neverlasting to everlasting\" (_apo tou aionos meos tou aionos su ei_,\nPs. xc. 2), and that \"He liveth for ever and ever\" (_ho zon eis tous\naionas ton aionon_, Rev. x. 6), the word _aion_ is not used to signify,\nas in the instances of the two \"ages\" just mentioned, an interval\nhaving beginning and ending, but is to be taken in an abstract sense,\nderived from our ordinary perception of the existence and quality of\ntime, and from the faculty which, as said before, we possess of\nthinking of time as indefinitely extended.  The first of the cited\npassages affirms what in these days we should express by saying that\nGod is necessarily and essentially self-existent, and the other, what\nwe mean by saying that He is necessarily and essentially a _living_\nGod.  But {98} Scripture uses no such terms as these, because it is\nwritten on the principle of employing in an abstract sense only such\nterms as are rendered intelligible by personal sensation and\nobservation, and by experience drawn under actual conditions from the\nouter world.  It is thus that the word \"age\" acquired its primary\nmeaning, before it was susceptible of the abstract application just\nmentioned.\n\nThere is also to be said, as a reason for accepting this doctrine\nrespecting our relation to time, that Scripture teaches analogous\ndoctrine respecting our relation to _space_.  When our Lord astonished\nhis disciples by saying that the passage of a camel through the eye of\na needle is not an impossibility, he explained that \"this is impossible\nwith men, but not with God; for with God all things are possible\" (Mark\nx. 25-27).  By this saying he asserted that space, and the mutual\nrelations of body and space, are such as they are by the will and power\nof God, and by the same power might be changed.  Considering,\ntherefore, that \"the new heavens and the new earth\" constitute a \"new\ncreation,\" it is quite in accordance with the above inference from our\nLord's words to find it said of \"the new Jerusalem, the holy city,\"\nthat \"the length, and the breadth, and the height of it are equal\"\n(Rev. xxi. 16).  For a city to be such as to conform to this\ndescription, it is plain that material substance and space must {99} be\nrelated to each other in an entirely new manner, unrecognizable by\npresent experience.  The apostle Paul adverts to the eventual status of\nthe spirit of man with respect to time and space where he says, \"I am\npersuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities,\nnor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor\ndepth, nor any other creation, will be able to separate us from the\nlove of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord\" (Rom. viii. 38, 39).\n(In this sentence the recognized passage of time, the powers\n[_dynameis_] of nature, and the measurable qualities of space, seem all\nto be regarded as things _created_.)  Also corresponding to the change\nin the external creation it is revealed that there will be a change of\nthe outward man, the natural body giving place to the \"spiritual body.\"\nIt would appear, therefore, from the whole of the foregoing argument\nthat our spirits, after being bound by earthly and temporal conditions,\nundergo complete transformation, being conjoined with bodily essence\nrelated in a new manner to _space_, and being also released from the\ncondition of _time_.  But although this mode of existence may be a\nnecessary condition of the immortal state, especially as such state\nembraces associated members, it is not the sole, nor the principal,\ncondition of immortality, as the remainder of the argument will show.\n\nIt has already been noticed that St. Peter {100} characterizes \"the new\nheavens and the new earth\" by saying that \"righteousness dwells\ntherein.\"  This is as much as to say that it is a perfect _social_\nstate, whose end is at once the glory of God and the happiness of man.\nThe words of the apostle (2 Epist. iii. 13) signify that the new\ncreation, by satisfying this condition, is the fulfilment of an\nantecedent promise.  Now, the argument of this Essay is in entire\nagreement with this doctrine, inasmuch as it was from the first assumed\n(p. 9) that immortality cannot consist with any other than a state of\nrighteousness, and then (pp. 19 and 20) it was argued that after Adam's\ntransgression a _promise_ was made that himself and his race would\neventually be exempt from the power of Satan and attain to immortality.\nThe passage Rev. xxi. 1-4, quoted in p. 92, seems to certify the\ncomplete fulfilment of this promise and to indicate the manner of its\nfulfilment.  But there are other passages in this concluding portion of\nthe Apocalypse, which might be thought to bear a contrary\nsignification, to which, therefore, our attention must now be directed.\n\nIn xxi. 8 we have, \"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the\nabominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and\nidolaters, and all lies, shall have their part in the lake which\nburneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.\"  If we\ngive to this symbolism, as consistency requires, {101} an\ninterpretation analogous to that applied to Rev. xx. 10, we shall\nconclude that sinners of all classes will eventually have no cognizable\nexistence, transgression being brought to an end by the effect of the\ngeneral judgment and the pains of the second death.  This may explain\nwhy it is added, \"which is the second death.\"  It is worthy of remark\nthat \"all lies\" are said to have their part in \"the lake\" although the\ncasting of lies into a lake is objectively an impossibility.  But this\nvariation of the designation (\"lies\" being put for \"liars\") may be\nintended to signify generally that all transgression disappears,\nbecause transgressors cease to be cognizable _as transgressors_.\n\nThere is another thing to be noticed respecting the same passage: it\ncontains no such clause as, \"They shall be tormented day and night to\nthe ages of ages,\" which occurs at the end of Rev. xx. 10.  This\nomission may be accounted for on the principle stated in p. 96,\naccording to which expressions involving time are not applicable to the\ncondition of things in the new creation, in which time exists no more.\n\nI take the occasion to remark here that the above-cited clause appears\nto be the only passage in the Apocalypse which asserts the perpetuity\nof _personal_ experience of torment, as distinct from the perpetuity of\nits effect; also that the personal subject of the verb\n_basanisthesontia_, according to grammatical rules, would be the devil,\nthe beast, and the {102} false prophet, each of which is represented as\npersonal, and endowed with volition and power.  But these, as I have\nmaintained in p. 61, are the powers which, according to the law of\nopposites, are antagonist to God the Father, the Holy Ghost, and the\nSon of God; and the assertion that they are tormented for ever and ever\nmay be taken to mean, according to the principle of interpretation\nexplained in p. 97, that they exist _necessarily_, but only as they\nexist, when subdued, in the contempt and hatred in which they are held\nby those who have felt their power and have overcome it, this spiritual\neffect being a condition of immortality.  (See end of p. 61.)\n\nIt remains to speak of one other subject connected with the revelations\nmade in the Apocalypse, which, understood as it respects our argument,\nis of very great moment, inasmuch as it has relation to the means by\nwhich the spirit of man is endowed with immortality.  The Son of God is\nnamed in the Apocalypse \"The Word of God\" (xix. 18), \"King of kings and\nLord of lords\" (xvii. 14, and xix. 16), \"the root and the offspring of\nDavid, the bright and morning star\" (xxii. 16), and by other titles\nexpressive of honour and dignity; but no name occurs so frequently, and\nin such various applications, as \"the Lamb.\"  What, it may be asked, is\nthe reason for this?  In order to answer this question let us take into\nconsideration some instances, specially {103} significant, in which\nthis name occurs.  From what is recorded in chap. v. 6-13 as having\nbeen seen in vision by the apostle, we are instructed as follows\nrespecting the character and office of the Lamb: \"In the midst of the\nthrone [the seat of the Lord God Almighty] and of the four living\nbeings, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been\nslain, having seven horns [emblematic of perfect power] and seven eyes\n[perfection of wisdom], which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth\ninto all the earth.\"  And he came and took out of the right hand of Him\nwho sat upon the throne a book \"sealed with seven seals.\"  \"And when he\nhad taken the book, the four living beings and four and twenty elders\nfell down before the Lamb....  And they sung a new song, saying, Thou\nart worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof; for thou\nwast slain.\"  Then \"an innumerable company of angels\" (Heb. xii. 22)\nwas heard to say with a loud voice, \"Worthy is the Lamb that was slain\nto receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and\nglory, and blessing.  And every created thing which is in heaven, and\non the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all\nthings in them, were heard to say, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and\npower be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for\never and ever.\"\n\nThen follows in chap. vi. the opening of the seven {104} seals, which,\nfrom the descriptions given at the successive openings, appear to\nsymbolize the various kinds of human experience, both good and evil,\nwhich mark the course of events in the present world, all centering in\nthe work of redemption by the sacrifice of the Son of God; on which\naccount the Lamb _slain_ can alone open the seven seals and disclose\ntheir meaning.  At the end of what is said relative to the sixth seal\nmention is made of \"the great day of the wrath of the Lamb,\" which,\nbecause by reason of the sins of men he was so unjustly slain, is\nordained to be seen and felt by the whole world after the termination\nof the present age (see Rev. i. 7).  The expectation of that wrath,\nalthough none can escape it, all but very few in the present day are\nunwilling, through terror or unbelief, to entertain.  The state of\nterror of all classes at the signs of the approach of that day appears\nto be described at the end of the chapter.  (See vi. _vv._ 15-17.)\n\nNext, in chap. vii., comes the sealing of all the elect, represented\nsymbolically by the sealing of twelve thousand of each of the twelve\ntribes of Israel, the number twelve specially signifying election.\nThen in _vv._ 9-17 is recorded a most wonderful vision.  The seer says,\n\"After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, whom no man could\nnumber, of all nations, and tribes, and peoples, and tongues, standing\nbefore the throne and before the Lamb, clothed with white {105} robes,\nand palms in their hands: and they cry with a loud voice, saying,\nSalvation to our God who sitteth upon the throne, and to the Lamb.\"\nThis multitude whom no man can number, the number of whom is elsewhere\nsaid to be as \"the sand of the sea,\" must embrace all that are not of\nthe number of the elected and sealed one hundred and forty-four\nthousand, and their ascription here of praise to God for salvation\naccords with the teaching of St. Paul, that \"God is the Saviour of all\nmen, especially of those that believe.\"  This is made still plainer by\nwhat is said respecting this multitude clothed in white robes in _vv._\n14-17.  The seer is told by one of the elders that \"These are they who\ncome out of the great tribulation, and washed their robes, and made\nthem white in the blood of the Lamb.  Therefore are they before the\nthrone of God, and serve Him day and night in His temple; and He that\nsitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.  And they shall hunger no\nmore, neither thirst any more; neither shall the sun light on them, nor\nany heat.  For the Lamb who is in the midst of the throne will feed\nthem, and will lead them to fountains of waters of life; and God will\nwipe away all tears from their eyes.\"  It is evident that the\nrevelation here made is _proleptical_, describing a state of things\nidentical with that which in Rev. xxi. 3, 4 (before quoted in p. 93),\nis said to pertain to the new heavens and the {106} new earth.  The\nexplanation that may be given of this anticipation of the subsequent\nrevelation is referable to a principle which governs much that is\ncontained in Scripture, although it has been generally overlooked--the\nprinciple, namely, of following sometimes an order determined by\n_relativity_, although it sets aside order as to time.  This, however,\nis not done except for some purpose.  In the present instance, the\neffect of declaring the salvation of all men in immediate sequence to\nthe sealing of the elect for salvation, is to indicate that the general\nscheme whereby all eventually partake of salvation consists of related\nand progressive parts to be unfolded by course of time.\n\nThe name of \"the Lamb\" is also given to our Lord in various other\npassages, which, with the view of contributing to the general argument,\nI proceed now to cite and make some remarks upon.  The accuser of the\nbrethren (Satan) is overcome by those who loved not their lives unto\ndeath, \"on account of the _blood_ of the Lamb\" (xii. 10, 11).  The\nbeast will be worshipped by all dwellers upon earth \"whose names are\nnot written in the book of life of the Lamb _slain_ from the foundation\nof the world\" (xiii. 8).  \"A Lamb stood on the mount Sion, and with him\nan hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written on\ntheir foreheads....  These are they who follow the Lamb wheresoever he\ngoeth.  {107} These were purchased from among men, the firstfruits to\nGod and to the Lamb\" (xiv. 1, 4).  The worshippers of the beast \"shall\nbe tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels\nand in the presence of the Lamb\" (xiv. 10).  Those who have gotten the\nvictory over the beast \"sing the song of Moses the servant of God, and\nthe song of the Lamb, saying, Great and marvellous are thy works, Lord\nGod Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of the nations.\nWho shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for thou only\nart holy: for all nations shall come and worship before thee, because\nthy judgments are made manifest\" (xv. 2-4).  The law given by Moses,\nand the gospel of Jesus Christ, constitute together a great and\nwonderful [oe]conomy, redounding to the praise and glory of God, and to\nthe salvation of man.  Kings of the earth \"shall make war with the\nLamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them, because he is Lord of lords and\nKing of kings, and they that are with him are called, and elect, and\nfaithful\" (xvii. 14).\n\nThe marriage of the Lamb and his bride--that is, the union of Christ\nwith the whole assembly of the redeemed--does not take place till \"the\nwife has made herself ready,\" till she has arrayed herself in the fine\nlinen, clean and white, which it was given her to put on, the fine\nlinen being \"the righteousness of saints\" (xix. 7, 8).  This doctrine\naccords well {108} with the view taken throughout this Essay, namely,\nthat righteousness (the \"unspeakable gift,\" 2 Cor. ix. 15) is necessary\nas an antecedent condition of salvation, and therefore of immortality.\nIt is further to be noticed that this union between the Lamb and the\nbride is not perfected while time lasts, requiring the condition of a\nnew creation.  For it was not till the first heaven and the first earth\npassed away that John \"saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down\nfrom God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband\"\n(xxi. 2), and that \"the Lamb's wife\" was shown to him by \"one of the\nseven angels that had the seven vials full of the last seven plagues\"\n(xxi. 9).  The performance of this office by an angel who in the\nantecedent judgment had been a minister of wrath and punishment, may be\ntaken to be significant of the _means_ by which the glorious\nconsummation is brought about.\n\nFinally, we have in the following concluding portions of apocalyptic\nprophecy a description of what may be said to constitute the joy of the\nmarriage supper, namely, the perfection through righteousness, not only\nof the union between Christ and the elect Church, but also of that\nbetween God and all peoples.  Speaking of \"the holy city Jerusalem,\"\nJohn says, \"I saw no temple therein; for the Lord God Almighty and the\nLamb are the temple of it.  And the city hath no need of the sun,\nneither of the {109} moon, to shine on it; for the glory of God gave\nlight to it, and the Lamb is the lamp thereof.  And the nations shall\nwalk by the light of it, and the kings of the earth bring their glory\ninto it.  And the gates of it shall not be shut by day, for there will\nnot be night there.  And they shall bring the glory and honour of the\nnations into it.  And there shall not enter into it anything unclean,\nand that worketh abomination and lying, but only they that are written\nin the Lamb's book of life\" (xxi. 22-27).  The seer goes on to say,\n\"And he showed me a river of water of life, bright as crystal, coming\nforth from the throne of God and of the Lamb.  In the midst of the\nstreet of it and of the river, on the one side and the other [the river\nbeing in the middle of the street, and the tree spreading from one side\nto the other], was the tree of life, producing twelve fruits, and\nyielding its fruit according to each month; and the leaves of the tree\nare for the healing of the nations.  And there shall be no more curse;\nand the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it, and His servants\nshall serve Him: and they shall see His face, and His name shall be on\ntheir foreheads.  And night shall be no more: and they shall have no\nneed of light of a lamp, and light of the sun; because the Lord God\nwill give them light, and they shall reign to the ages of ages\" (xxii.\n1-5).\n\nThe foregoing citations, and indeed the whole tenor of the contents of\nthe Apocalypse, clearly point to the {110} conclusion that what is\nsymbolized by \"the Lamb\" and \"the Lamb slain\" runs through all it\nteaches respecting the course of experience and future destination of\nthe race of man--is \"the lamp\" that enlightens the whole.  Now, I think\nI may assert that the reason this is so is given by the arguments\nadduced in this Essay.  It has been maintained that on the day that\nAdam fell into disobedience by the wiles of Satan, his Creator made a\npromise by covenant that he and his offspring should in the end be\nfreed from the power of Satan and evil, and partake of immortality.\nThe terms of the covenant were that man must pass through toil, and\npain, and death, that thereby his spirit might be formed for receiving\nthe gift of an immortal life.  Evidence of an intelligent belief of the\nefficacy of these conditions was given by the faithful of old by their\nsacrificing clean animals, and surety for the fulfilment of the\ncovenant was given on God's part by a favourable acceptance, either\ndirectly or mediately, of this expression of their faith.  In process\nof time the only begotten Son of God, out of sympathy with suffering\nhumanity, and from knowledge of his Father's purpose towards us,\nsatisfied in his own person the very same conditions, and thus at once\nexemplified and justified the means by which that purpose is\naccomplished.  At the same time he made sure the grounds for belief of\nthe fulfilment of the covenanted promise, first by marvellous {111}\nworks before he suffered, which showed that he had command over all the\nills of humanity, and after his death, by resurrection from the grave\nthe third day, which gave proof of the reality of a power that could\novercome death.  The miracles of Christ are an essential part of the\nwork of his ministry, inasmuch as they were needed to prove that he\npossessed power greater than that of his adversaries, and consequently\nthat he submitted _voluntarily_ to be \"led as a _lamb_ to the\nslaughter,\" and to endure all the pain and indignities of the cross.\nOut of love towards those whom he vouchsafes to call his brethren, he\nshowed how they must undergo physical suffering and the pains of death\nin order that their spirits might be formed for an endless life.  It\nwas with understanding and belief that the way to life was made sure by\nfellowship with Christ in suffering, that some of the most favoured of\nhis faithful followers, apostles and apostolic men, willingly suffered\nafter his example.\n\nBut pain and death are not in this way efficacious for salvation,\nunless they be accompanied by a faith which lays hold of the covenant\nand promise of life made and ratified from the beginning by God, and\nwhich looks for the fulfilment in the world to come.  Those who, having\nthis faith, do good works are God's elect, who live again at the first\nresurrection, to die no more.  The rest of mankind, although they go\nthrough suffering and death, and although their {112} sufferings are\nnot without effect in forming their spirits for immortality (such is\nthe virtue of the sacrifice of the Son of God \"for the sins of the\nwhole world\"), rise to be judged for their unbelief and\nunrighteousness, and to be condemned to undergo a second death.  The\nLamb slain is appointed to execute the judgment and take vengeance on\nthe unrighteous.  What better title could there be for his undertaking\nthis \"strange work\" (Isa. xxviii. 21), than his having so cruelly and\nunjustly suffered at the hands of sinful men?  Yet the portions of\nScripture we have had under consideration necessitate the conclusion\nthat the consecration of the way to life through death by the death of\nthe Son of God, which applies to the death of believers, applies also\nto the second death of unbelievers; so that this death also is followed\nby life.  But here a difficulty presents itself which needs\nexplanation.  Although Scripture speaks of a first resurrection and a\nsecond death, it makes no mention of a _second resurrection_.  This, I\nthink, may be accounted for as follows.\n\nBy considering the context, both preceding and following, of the\nclause, \"This is the first resurrection,\" in Rev. xx. 5, it will be\napparent that \"resurrection\" does not here mean simply returning to\nlife after death, but may be taken to embrace the whole period of the\nthousand years, together with all that concerns \"the happy and the\nholy\" who {113} have part therein.  This interpretation is in\naccordance with the sense in which our Lord speaks of resurrection\nwhere he says, \"In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in\nmarriage, but are as the angels, of God in heaven\" (Matt. xxii. 30).\nThat \"the resurrection\" (_he anastasis_) designates a state or\ncondition of life into which the elect of God are _introduced_ by\nreturning to life after death, is still more explicitly signified by\nthe following corresponding passage of St. Luke (xx. 34-36): \"The\nchildren of this world marry, and are given in marriage; but they who\nare accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from\nthe dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage: neither can they die\nany more; for they are equal to the angels, and are children of God,\nbeing children of the resurrection.\"  Now, it may certainly be inferred\nfrom what is said in Rev. xx. 5, that the rest of the dead, who have no\npart in this first resurrection, return to life at the end of the\nthousand years.  But they return to life to be judged, condemned, and\nsuffer death again.  This, therefore, is in no sense a resurrection\nanswering to the description above given of the first resurrection, and\naccordingly is not called in Scripture the second resurrection.  What\nreally corresponds to the holiness and happiness of the first\nresurrection state is the finally perfected and all-comprehending state\ncalled \"the new heaven and the new earth,\" life in which, according to\nour {114} argument, comes out of the second and last death, and is\nunconditioned by time.  This is the heavenly state which is described\nin Rev. vii. 11-17, xxi. 2-4, and 10-27.  Thus, although this may be\nregarded as that subsequent resurrection to which \"the first\nresurrection\" by its very designation points, it is not called \"the\nsecond resurrection,\" because it is not, like the first, limited or\nconditioned by _time_.\n\nThe portion of the Apocalypse which is strictly symbolical and\nprophetical begins at _v._ 1 of chap. iv. and ends with _v._ 5 of chap.\nxxii.  The first three chapters, including the epistles to the seven\nChurches, and the verses from chap. xxii. 5 to the end of the book, may\nbe taken to be respectively introduction and conclusion, the contents\nof which, although strictly related to those of the intermediate\nsymbolical part, are not of a character so exclusively figurative.\nThis circumstance has to be taken into account in proposing\ninterpretations of passages contained in them.  Now, there are certain\npassages in the concluding part which appear to be contradictory to the\ndoctrine of salvation maintained in this Essay, and accordingly, before\nbringing the argument to a close, I shall endeavour to ascertain the\ntrue interpretations of these passages.\n\nThe angel who showed John \"these things\" (xxii. 8) says of himself, \"I\nam the fellow-servant of thee, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of\nthose who {115} keep the words of this book;\" and yet this speaker is\nnot distinguished from him who afterwards says (_vv._ 12, 13), \"Lo, I\ncome quickly, and my reward is with me, to render to each according as\nhis work is.  I am the Alpha and the Omega, the first and the last, the\nbeginning and the end,\" who, without doubt, is the Lord himself.  This\nmay be accounted for by the following considerations.  This angel, of\nwhom it is twice asserted that he refused to receive worship proffered\nto him by the seer (xix. 10, and xxii. 9), is the same that is spoken\nof in Rev. i. 1, with reference to \"the revelation of Jesus Christ,\nwhich God gave to him, to shew to his servants things which must\nshortly come to pass,\" in these terms: \"He [Jesus Christ] by sending\nsignified it [the revelation] through his angel to his servant John.\"\nIn certain passages in the introductory part of the Apocalypse, as Rev.\ni. 8, 17-20, and throughout the epistles to the seven Churches, the\nLord speaks in his own person; and this again he does expressly in some\npassages in the concluding part, as xxii. 7, 12, 13, 16, 20; and\nalthough the speaker in _vv._ 10 and 11 appears to be the same as the\nspeaker in _v._ 9, who certainly is the angel, such words as those two\nverses contain could hardly have been uttered by any one but the Lord,\nand, at least, they may be attributed to him on the principle that what\nthe Lord does through his ministering angel may be said to be done by\nhimself.  It is as {116} ministering to Jesus Christ that the angel\ncalls himself a \"fellow-servant\" of prophets and apostles, and,\ngenerally, of those who keep the words of this revelation.  For these\nreasons in the following remarks I take _vv._ 10 and 11 as spoken by\nJesus Christ.\n\nThe words addressed by the speaker to John are (_vv._ 10, 11): \"Seal\nnot the sayings of the prophecy of this book; for the time is at hand.\nHe who is unrighteous, let him commit injustice still; and he who is\nfilthy, let him be filthy still; and he who is righteous, let him do\nrighteousness still; and he who is holy, let him be holy still.  Lo, I\ncome quickly; and my reward is with me, to render to each as his work\nis.\"  This passage has been interpreted as meaning that in the world to\ncome the conditions of the righteous and the wicked are irrevocably\nfixed.\n\nI would rather say, having regard to the precise opposition of the\nclauses of which it is composed, that the passage declares that in the\nend unrighteousness and filthiness are irrevocably separate from their\nopposites righteousness and holiness; and to account for the terms in\nwhich this statement is made, it may suffice to refer to the principle\nthat according to the concrete, or objective, teaching of the\nApocalypse, holiness and filthiness would not be spoken of\nabstractedly, that is, apart from holy and _filthy_ persons, and in\nlike manner righteousness and unrighteousness would not be mentioned\napart from their necessary {117} antecedents, _personal_ righteous and\nunrighteous _deeds_.  The expressions \"commit injustice\" and \"do\nrighteousness,\" which do not occur in the English version, are exact\nrenderings of the Greek.\n\nAnother passage which, as bearing on our argument, requires to be taken\ninto account, is _v._ 15 of the same chapter, which asserts that\n\"without are dogs, and sorcerers, and fornicators, and murderers, and\nidolaters, and every one that loveth and maketh a lie.\"  This is\nexpressing in concrete language, such as is constantly employed in\nScripture, that there is no unrighteousness in the city of God.  Such\nlanguage, being concerned only with _objective_ realities, cannot\nexpress a _negation_, and, consequently, cannot assert that\nunrighteousness is _not_ within the city.  Hence it is not possible,\nexcept by means of such terms as those actually employed, to express\nconcretely that the city of God is free from all unrighteousness.  By\ncomparing Rev. xxi. 8 with the interpretation here given of Rev. xxii.\n15, it will be seen that the exclusion from the city of God of all\nthings sinful and abominable is declared to be effected by \"the second\ndeath.\"\n\nI have now completed the argument respecting man's immortality which I\nproposed to found upon the words of Scripture.  I have argued on the\nhypothesis that for this purpose the Scriptures are trustworthy and\nsufficient, and I have admitted that we {118} can know nothing for\ncertain concerning our immortality apart from the declared will of \"Him\nwho alone hath immortality\" (1 Tim. vi. 16).  Accordingly, Scripture\nmust be consulted in order to learn what God has willed respecting the\ndestiny of man.  The principal result of this inquiry is, that by the\nwill of God righteousness and salvation are so inseparably connected\nthat only as being personally righteous can man be saved and partake of\nimmortality.  The question, therefore, as to the immortality of all men\nresolves itself into inquiring whether, and by what means, all men are\nmade righteous.  Arguments relating to this inquiry may be said to\nconstitute the whole of this Essay.  I am prepared to expect that it\nwill be objected to these arguments that they are _new_, and on this\naccount that the conclusions drawn from them are not _true_.  I admit\nthe validity of this inference if the arguments and conclusions are\nreally new, but I maintain that in so far as they are founded upon, and\ncorrectly supported by, Scripture, they cannot be new, because we must\nnot suppose that the Scriptural doctrine of man's salvation was not\nfully understood before these days--for instance, in the days of\nprimitive Christianity.  As the objection on the ground of newness\ncannot be sustained, the only course left to the objector is to examine\nthe arguments, for the purpose of ascertaining whether they are sound\nand strictly Scriptural.\n\n{119}\n\nI think, however, it is possible that Scriptural doctrine, as taught\noriginally by prophets, apostles, and apostolic men, may have become so\nobscured and mixed up with human traditions and accretions, that\nbringing it again to light would appear like promulgating new doctrine.\nThis remark leads me to state on what authorities I have chiefly relied\nin the composition of this Essay.  I may say at once that my views have\nbeen determined for the most part by long study of St. Paul's Epistle\nto the Romans, and the Apocalypse of the Apostle John.  I was not,\nhowever, able to accept St. Paul's Epistle as it is translated in the\nAuthorized Version, nor could I agree with any commentary upon it that\nhad come before me.  For these reasons I published a revised\nTranslation, with Introduction and Notes (Deighton, Bell, & Co., 1871),\nwhich may, perhaps, claim consideration, if on no other ground, because\nit is the production of a mind not unacquainted with classical studies,\nbut trained especially by mathematics and the pursuit of physical\nscience for inquiring respecting the method and laws of divine\noperation.  I have stated in the preface to that work (p. x.) the\nparticular bearing which, as it seemed to me, such studies have on the\ninterpretation of St. Paul's Epistle.  Under the influence of the same\nmental training, I was induced long since to direct my attention\ntowards the interpretation of the Apocalypse, and I purpose {120}\nshortly, if God be willing, to publish the fruits of my researches.\nAny reader of this Essay will perceive that it contains much which\ndepends on views which I entertain respecting the general scheme and\nthe symbolism of the Apocalypse.\n\nWith respect to the interpretation of symbolical Scripture, I have not\nabstained from having recourse to books which, although they are not\nincluded in the Canon of Scripture, are specially adapted to reveal\nprinciples on which the prophetical and symbolical parts of Canonical\nScripture may be interpreted.  I refer to three books in particular,\nthe fourth Book of Esdras, the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Shepherd of\nHermas.  There is historic evidence that these books were largely made\nuse of in the days of primitive Christianity.  The first has obtained\nan honourable place in the Articles of the Church of England, owing, no\ndoubt, to the traditional influence which the Church of Rome still had\nat the time of the Reformation.  In the midst of much error and\nsuperstition pervading that Church, she faithfully performed the part\nof keeper of the ancient sacred writings, and to her we are indebted\nfor the preservation for ecclesiastical use of that most instructive\nbook, although at the Council of Trent it was not admitted into the\nRomish Canon.  The other two books above mentioned were long regarded\nby the Primitive Church as being useful for instruction in doctrine,\nand of {121} authority little less than that of Scripture; in\nattestation of which assertion it may be stated that the Codex\nSinaiticus contains the whole of the Epistle of Barnabas, and a portion\nof the Shepherd of Hermas, although no other early Christian writings\nare in the same manner associated with the Canonical Books.\n\nIn drawing inferences from the above sources of information, I have\nendeavoured to keep closely to the rules of induction which have\nconducted to such signal discoveries in Natural Philosophy, and to\nrefrain from accepting any inference which the Scriptural data did not\njustify.  The modern advances in physical science, which have shown in\nwhat path we must proceed in order to reach a knowledge of God's works,\nindicate, it may be presumed, that an analogous method is to be pursued\nin order to gain a knowledge of His word.  But it will, perhaps, be\nsaid, that if the knowledge of what is revealed in Scripture be\nobtainable only by means such as those which have been exemplified in\nthis Essay, the considerations that must be entered into are so remote\nfrom common apprehension, that but very few can be supposed to be\nendowed with capacity for understanding them.  This, it must be\nadmitted, is actually the case, and, besides, is in conformity with the\narbitrament according to which God grants to an elected few gifts and\ngraces which He withholds from the many.\n\nYet it seems to be the will of God to vouchsafe at {122} certain times\nand places, and among certain peoples, a more than ordinary measure of\nknowledge; and perhaps we shall not err in believing that the prophecy\nin the Book of Daniel, \"Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall\nbe increased\" (xii. 4), is being fulfilled in our time and nation.\nThere is also a remarkable passage in the Apocalypse, which seems to\nreveal that before \"the time of the end\" (Dan. xii. 4), the gospel in\nits most comprehensive sense will be preached among all nations: \"And I\nsaw another angel flying in mid-heaven, having the [oe]onian gospel\n[i.e. the gospel pertaining to the future age] to preach to those that\ndwell upon the earth, and to every nation and tribe and tongue and\npeople, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give Him glory because\nthe hour of His judgment is come: and worship Him who made the heaven,\nand the earth, and the sea, and fountains of waters\" (Rev. xiv. 6, 7).\nI cannot forbear noticing the coincidence of the plain meaning of the\nwords of this prophecy with the views advocated in this Essay: first,\nin respect to calling the gospel \"[oe]onian\" and thus asserting its\napplicability to the future age; next, in its announcement of the\ngospel in connection with the advent of \"the hour of judgment;\" and,\nlastly, in the loud call the angel makes to the dwellers on earth to\ngive glory and worship to the Creator of heaven, earth, sea, and the\nfountains of waters.\n\n{123}\n\nBut the dulness of hearers and incapacity to understand the doctrine of\nScripture are not the only obstacles those will have to contend against\nwho undertake to preach \"the [oe]onian gospel.\"  There are the\ninterests and attractions of the present world, which, since the love\nof them is necessarily disturbed by the announcement that the world to\ncome offers what is much more to be desired, operate, sometimes it may\nbe in a manner which is not suspected, in hardening the heart against\nlistening to and receiving that gospel.  I think that in this way only\ncan it be accounted for that the passages of Scripture which\nunequivocally declare the salvation of all men are comparatively\nunattended to, whilst belief is generally expressed in those supposed\nto be of opposite import.  I am apprehensive that on the same accounts\nthe arguments by which I have endeavoured to show that the latter\npassages admit of being interpreted consistently with the others, will\nreceive little attention.\n\nThere exists, moreover, in the present day so long-standing and so\ngeneral an inability to discern the inner and true sense of Scripture,\n\"the letter which killeth\" having been preferred to \"the spirit which\nmaketh alive,\" that it has become a matter of much difficulty to\ncomprehend and explain the terms in which the gospel in its entirety is\ntherein proclaimed, and either to give, or to receive, instruction\nwhich may conduce to an intelligent acceptance of it.  {124} In\naddition to which there prevails a tendency to rely on traditional and\nformal doctrine, and to assign to it an authority co-ordinate with that\nof Scripture, although as having had its origin at times when primitive\nfaith and knowledge had in great measure declined, and \"the mystery of\niniquity\" was already working, it cannot but be mixed with a human\nelement of untruth.  This tendency, which appears to be attributable to\na consciousness of inability to form an independent judgment of the\ntruths of Scripture, operates at present in creating a prejudice\nagainst all attempts to go beyond the boundaries by which Scriptural\nknowledge is assumed to be circumscribed.  Nevertheless, regarding it\nas a duty to employ the opportunities and the ability which God has\ngiven me in making such an attempt, I have endeavoured to place the\ndoctrine of the salvation and immortality of all men on a Scriptural\nbasis, and I have now only to ask for an unprejudiced consideration of\nthe arguments I have adduced for that purpose.\n\n\n\n[1] See the notes to Rom. v. 12-20, given in pp. 36-38 of my\n\"Translation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans\" (Cambridge: Deighton\nand Co, 1871).\n\n[2] The treatise referred to is entitled \"De Fatura, Bestauratione,\"\nand the passage cited is very near the end of it.  This treatise is an\nappendix to another, the title of which is \"De Statu Mortuorum et\nResurgentium.\"\n\n[3] So far this explanation of Mark ix. 44 is the same as that which I\nhave given in a letter to the editor of the _Clerical Journal_, which\nis inserted in the number for June 5, 1862 (p. 526).\n\n\n\n\n{125}\n\nAPPENDIX.\n\nI have allowed to stand in the Essay (pp. 76-81) the views I held at\nthe time it was composed respecting the interpretation of Matt. xxv.\n46, because I considered that these views, although in certain respects\nthey are inconsistent with those I maintain in this Appendix, might\ncontribute, by comparison with the latter, towards an understanding of\nthe passage.  The interpretation which, after long consideration, I\nhave finally adopted, was first published in two letters, contained\nunder the head of \"Correspondence,\" in the numbers of the _Guardian_\nfor December 27, 1877, and January 16, 1878.  With the view of offering\nsome additional arguments in support of that interpretation, and making\nit more generally intelligible, I propose to begin with producing _in\nextenso_ the two letters referred to.\n\n\n\n\"ETERNAL PUNISHMENT.\n\n\"Sir,\n\n\"After reading attentively the letters of your correspondents to which\nthe sermon of Dr. Farrar has given occasion, it appeared to me that\nsome views in addition to those which have hitherto been proposed, and\nin certain respects controverting them, may be worthy of consideration.\nI beg, {126} therefore, to be allowed space for making the following\nremarks:--\n\n\"We are taught in the Scriptures that hereafter there will be a new\nconstitution of the universe, 'new heavens and a new earth wherein\ndwelleth righteousness' (2 Peter iii. 13), and that in this perfect\nsocial state 'there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying,\nneither shall there be any more pain' (Rev. xxi. 4).  To reconcile this\nrevelation, so intelligible and so comprehensive, with the meaning of\npassages which seem to say that the punishment of the wicked will be\n'endless,' presents a very great difficulty.  We are not at liberty in\nsuch cases to accept some parts of Scripture and reject others in order\nto get rid of the difficulty, but must believe that the truth, if it\nshould be reached, will establish the consistency of all, and that\nseeming contradictions are only due to our ignorance.  I propose for\nconsideration the following solution of the above-stated difficulty:--\n\n\"Jesus Christ in his ministration on earth said, in the course of\ngiving instruction to his _disciples_ (Matt. xxiv. 3), 'These [on the\nleft hand] shall go into eternal punishment, and the righteous into\neternal life' (Matt. xxv. 46).  Considering that in all he said and did\nhe had in view his Father's purpose of making the spirits of men meet\nfor immortality, it may be asked, In what way was such teaching\ncontributory to this end?  May we not conclude from our Lord's words,\napart from all other inferences, that eternal life is necessarily\npreceded by righteousness, and eternal punishment is as necessarily\nconsequent upon sin, and that the knowledge of these divine decrees\ncontributes to the formation of spirits for the life to come?  This\ninference might be accepted as abstractedly true; but then the question\narises, What is meant by _duration_ as signified by the word 'eternal'?\nIt should be remarked that in the statement of the doctrine I have\nemployed the word 'necessarily' in a sense that is not unusual, and is\ngenerally thought to be intelligible.  But it is to be taken into\naccount that no such use of the term occurs in Scripture, where, in\nfact, it would be wholly {127} incongruous.  The reason of this is that\nthe Scriptures contain no abstract truths which are not expressed, or\nexpressible, in terms understood from the facts and conditions of human\nexperience.  This may especially be said of the discourses of our Lord,\nin consequence of which they are much misunderstood by the many who are\nincapable of discerning the spiritual through the literal, who, as he\nsaid, 'have eyes and see not, and ears and hear not.'  Assuming,\ntherefore, that there is truth in speaking of righteousness and life as\nbeing _necessarily_ connected, as also of sin and punishment as being\nin like manner connected, we have to inquire in what way these abstract\ntruths are expressed in the language of Scripture.  I venture to make\nanswer that this is done by its recognition of a special faculty we are\nall conscious of possessing, that of thinking and speaking of time (and\nspace also) as indefinitely extended.  (The mathematician knows that\nwithout the supposition, whether as to greatness or smallness, of _ad\nlibitum_ extent of space and time, he is unable to conduct his\nreasoning.)  On this principle Scripture speaks of duration through\n'ages, and ages,' because by such emphatic reference to our capacity\nfor thinking of unlimited duration, the anterior necessity of certain\nabstract truths, as especially the being and attributes of Deity, and\nthe characters of divine judgment, is expressed in terms drawn from\ncommon thought and experience.\n\n\"But the omnipotent Creator, who, for purposes towards us, made time\nand space to be what we perceive them to be, has also the power to\nchange or _unmake_ them.  If it were not so, there would be a power\nabove that of the Creator, which is impossible.  The difficulty\nconcerning the duration of future punishment appears to be attributable\nto a preconception tacitly, perhaps unconsciously, entertained by most\npersons that time and space have an independent existence, although the\nteaching of Scripture is directly opposed to this view.  St. Paul\nspeaks of 'height' and 'depth' as of things _created_ (Rom. viii. 39);\nSt. Peter has, 'One day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a\nthousand years as one day' (2 Epist. iii. 8); and in {128} Rev. x. 6 it\nis expressly said that when the scheme of redemption is finished 'time\nshall be no more.'  The foregoing argument suffices, I think, to show\nthat 'endless' and eternal are not convertible terms, for the special\nreason that the latter is significant of time as being derived from\n_[oe]tas_, whereas the other has _per se_ no necessary relation to\ntime.  (For the same etymological reason I consider 'eternal' to be\npreferable to 'ever-lasting.')  I cannot forbear adverting here to a\nserious misstatement, as it seems to me, in Mr. Churton's letter in the\nGuardian of December 12 (p. 1714).  He says that the teaching of Holy\nScripture as to the matter of _duration_, is precisely the same with\nrespect to eternal life and eternal death, having apparently overlooked\nthe remarkable expression in Heb. vii. 16, 'indissoluble life' (_zoes\nakatalytou_), in which endlessness is signified by an epithet not\nexplicitly indicative of time.  No such epithet is applied in Scripture\nto future punishment.  This difference is of great importance when\ntaken with reference to the declaration in Scripture that time itself\nhas an end.\n\n\"It would certainly appear that the apostle Paul did not teach that the\nfuture punishment of the wicked will be endless; otherwise, how could\nhe have written, 'God is the Saviour of all men, specially of those\nthat believe' (1 Tim. iv. 10)?  Is not this to assert that all are\nsaved in the same sense that some who believe are saved, although there\nmay be difference as to the order or mode of the salvation?  We know\nthat in the present age faith avails to save if it rests on the\nassurance given by the suffering and death of Jesus Christ that by\npassing through the same gate of suffering we are prepared to enter\ninto life; for such faith yields the fruit of patience and\nrighteousness.  But _in the age to come_ there is neither faith, nor\nrepentance, nor _probation_, but 'a certain fearful looking for of\njudgment and fiery indignation' (Heb. x. 27).  The appointed Judge is\nthe Son of man, who, having suffered an unjust and painful death at the\nhands of sinful men, is entitled to execute the vengeance on sinners.\nAll men are judged; but the elect, {129} who have been sealed by faith\nand good works, escape condemnation, and are those that are 'specially'\nsaved.  The rest are condemned to undergo _the second death_.  This is\nthat 'threefold woe' and 'great tribulation' so plainly foretold in\nScripture.  It was by these 'terrors of the Lord' that St. Paul sought\nto 'persuade' men, and not, as it would seem, by saying that the misery\nwill be without end.  As matter of experience, the preaching of this\nhopeless destiny does not deter from sin, but only makes sad tender\nspirits whom God has not made sad.  Why should we not rather believe\nthat the purpose of avenging justice is fulfilled when that great and\nfinal tribulation (Mark xiii. 19) has availed, in virtue of the\nsuffering whereby the Son of God 'consecrated' the way to life, for the\n_purification_ and salvation of the condemned, seeing that even saints\nand martyrs have need to be purified by suffering (see Dan. xii. 10)?\nThis view reconciles all apparent contradictions, and accords with the\ngospel declared in Rev. xxi.  In making the foregoing statements I have\nnecessarily tried to be brief; but I hope, ere long, to be able to\npublish a justification of them by arguments drawn at greater length\nfrom Scripture.\n\n\"Cambridge, December 21, 1877.\"\n\n\n\n\"ETERNAL LIFE.\n\n\"After the publication of my letter in the _Guardian_ of December 27\n(p. 1786), I received from various quarters interrogations and\narguments, which led me to see that there was an omission in one part\nof my reasoning, by supplying which the whole of the argument might be\nmade much more complete.  In particular, it was maintained by my\ncorrespondents, I admit quite logically, that if eternal punishment in\nMatt. xxv. 4:6 could be taken to mean punishment which has an end, by\nparity of reasoning 'eternal life' must there mean life which has an\nend.  As I find that the same argument has been adduced in the\ncorrespondence of the _Guardian_, I hope I may {130} be allowed,\nnotwithstanding the length to which the discussion of the subject has\ngone, the opportunity of a supplementary letter for showing how, by\nrectifying the above-mentioned defect, the views I have proposed meet\nthis difficulty.\n\n\"In the Scriptures definite mention is made of only two ages, the\npresent age and the future age, or, in other words, 'this world and the\nworld to come' (Matt. xii. 32).  The plural ages (_aiones_) and 'ages\nof ages' are expressions to which we can by no mental effort attach a\ndefinite signification, and consequently, as I endeavoured to show in\nmy former letter, they admit of various abstract applications.  As in\nthe present age, so in the age to come, there is a _succession_ of\nevents which take place under conditions of time.  These events have\nreceived comparatively but small attention in the theology of the\npresent day, apparently because it is not generally seen that they are\nspoken of much more largely by the prophets of the Old Testament than\nin the New Testament, in which it is assumed that the old prophets are\nunderstood; and again, because the epitome given in the Book of\nRevelation (see Rev. x. 7) of the communications vouchsafed to the\nprophets is expressed in symbols which we find it hard to interpret.\nThere are, however, passages in the New Testament which expressly make\nknown the relation of deeds and events of the present age to those of\nthe age to come; as especially our Lord's discourse 'as he sat on the\nMount of Olives,' and the apostles 'Peter and James and John and\nAndrew' asked Him privately to tell them what would be the sign of his\ncoming, and of _the end of the world_ (_tes synteleias tou aionos_).\nThere is also that remarkable passage in which St. Matthew records that\nJesus said to Peter, 'Ye who have followed me, in the regeneration when\nthe Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit\non twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.'  The number\n'twelve' in Scripture symbolism always signifies 'election;' the judges\nmay be presumed to be of the order of prophets and apostles--the elect\nof the elect--and the twelve tribes of Israel the whole number of the\nelect (see Rev. vii. 4-8).  Now, these {131} twelve times twelve\nthousand, symbolizing the complete number of the redeemed of every age\nand nation, are 'the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb,' and being\nmade perfect by suffering and judgment, farther on in the events of\nthat age 'follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth,' and together with\nhim execute the final judgment on the whole world (Rev. xix. 14),\ninclusive even of the judgment on Satan and his angels.  This doctrine\nseems to have been generally taught in the days of the apostles,\ninasmuch as St. Paul writes to the Corinthians (1 Epist. vi. 2, 3),\n'Know ye not that the saints shall judge the world?'  'Know ye not that\nwe shall judge angels?'  Even in the Psalms we read, 'This honour have\nall His saints' (see Psalm cxlix. 6-9).\n\n\"On these premises, it seems to me, the following argument may be\nfounded relative to the interpretation of Matt. xxv. 46.  In that\nchapter the _separation_ between the sheep and the goats is spoken of\nas initiatory to the general judgment, and the chapter closes with an\nexposition of the principles on which the judgment is conducted as\nregards both the one class and the other.  The details and the\nprocesses of the judgment, together with its _results_, are to be\nsought for in the writings of the prophets and in the Book of\nRevelation.  Now, when account is taken of all events of that future\nlife, it may be said, I think, with truth, that the righteous who live\nand act in it throughout, when that life begins enter into 'eternal\nlife,' the word 'eternal' being applicable because that age has a\ntime-limit.  _This_ eternal life, the mention of which was omitted in\nthe former letter, merges into endless, or indissoluble, life, when\ntime is no more, and words expressive of time cease to have\napplication.  In an analogous manner the unrighteous may be said to go\ninto 'eternal punishment' when they enter upon the experience of the\nfuture age, the limit of the effects of the judgment and punishment\nwhich they are doomed to undergo being a 'second death.'  However great\nand terrible may be the woe and tribulation attendant on that event, we\nknow as matter of experience of life at present, that death, of itself,\nis but a passage into another state of existence.  We have, {132}\ntherefore, no right to affirm that after the effects of judgment and\npunishment are accomplished, the second death is not a transition into\nthat state of things in the new heavens and new earth which is\ndescribed in Rev. xxi.  Rather, may we not conclude that eternal life\nand eternal punishment terminate alike with the end of time, and that\nin the consummation of all things both are merged in indissoluble life,\nthat God may be all in all?  This conclusion appears to meet the\ndifficulty stated at the beginning of this letter.\n\n\"I take this opportunity for expressing my approval of the arrangement\nof the New Lectionary, by which chapters of the Book of Revelation are\nnow read more frequently than formerly before the people, this portion\nof Scripture being indispensable for communicating to them the doctrine\nof Jesus Christ in all its integrity.\n\n\"Cambridge, January 12,1878.\"\n\n\nThe difficulty experienced in the present day of rightly apprehending\nthe doctrine taught by our Lord in Matt. xxv. 46, and in like passages,\narises, according to the arguments contained in the Essay and in the\nforegoing letters, from the little attention that is paid in the\nChristian doctrine now generally accepted to what the Scriptures reveal\nrespecting \"the age to come\" (_aion ho mellon_) as distinguished from\n\"the present age\" (_aion outos, aion ho paron_).  The designation \"age\"\napplied in common to both, indicates that each has a beginning and an\nending.  The future age begins at the termination of the present age,\nthe separation between them being the epoch of a resurrection of the\ndead--not, however, of all the dead, but \"a resurrection of the just,\"\nthat is, of those who have been prepared and sealed by faith, and\nsuffering, and good works, in the present life, for immediate entrance\ninto a new state of life.  It is said of these that \"they cannot {133}\ndie any more, and are the children of God, being the children of the\nresurrection\" (Luke xx. 36).  These are they who \"have part in the\nfirst resurrection,\" of whom it is further said that \"they _lived_ and\nreigned with Christ a thousand years,\" whereas of \"the rest of the\ndead\" it is said that \"they _lived_ not till the thousand years were\nfinished\" (see Rev. xx. 4, 6).  It is plain, therefore, that there will\nbe a time of _separation_ of the one class from the other--the time of\n_threshing_, when the tares are separated from the wheat; and that\nwhilst the elect at that time enter into the _[oe]onian_ life (that is,\nthe life of the age to come), the rest of the dead when they live again\nenter into a state in which they undergo \"[oe]onian punishment\" (that\nis, punishment that pertains to the age to come), ending eventually in\nthe second death, which, however, in common with all divine punishment,\nis inflicted for producing a certain effect foreordained in the\ncounsels of the Almighty.  (Respecting this effect, see what I have\nsaid in the Essay and at the end of the first of the foregoing letters.)\n\nThat the words of the passage in St. Matthew might be understood, at\nleast by the disciples to whom they were addressed, in the sense above\nindicated, may be inferred from the knowledge of the religious Jews of\nthat time respecting the events of the future age, as conveyed to them\nby the writings of the prophets of the Old Testament, with which they\nwere familiar.  In proof of the general diffusion of such knowledge we\nmay cite the response of Martha to the Lord respecting the resurrection\nof Lazarus, \"I know that he shall rise again at the resurrection in the\nlast day\" (John xi. 24), and the common belief of a resurrection of the\ndead entertained by the numerous sect of the Pharisees, as well as the\nparticular character of the unbelief of the smaller body of Sadducees\n(see Acts {134} xxiii. 8, where it is stated that \"the Sadducees say\nthat there is no resurrection, neither angel, nor spirit: but the\nPharisees confess both\").  It is hard to perceive etymologically how\nthe word _aiouios_ could have received the meaning \"ever-_lasting_.\"\nThere is, in fact, a very remarkable passage of the Apocalypse in which\nthat meaning is quite excluded: \"And I saw another angel fly in the\nmidst of heaven, having the gospel of the age to come to preach\n(_euaggelion aionion euaggelisai_) unto them that dwell on the earth,\nand to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a\nloud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His\njudgment is come: and worship Him that made heaven, and earth, and the\nsea, and the fountains of waters\" (Rev. xiv. 6, 7).  It is evident that\nif _aionion euaggelion_ here meant an everlasting gospel, the event\nwhich the good news is intended to announce would never come.  It may,\nperhaps, be asserted that this passage of the Apocalypse refers to a\ngospel announcement taking place at the present time, considering that\na distinctive feature of this age is a large increase of the knowledge\nof the facts and laws of nature, and that possibly, contemporaneously\nwith such knowledge, God may vouchsafe a fuller understanding of the\nBook of Revelation, and a discernment of the [oe]onian gospel it\nproclaims (compare Dan. xii. 3, 4).  That the true interpretation of\nthe Apocalypse will eventually be reached is implied by the words,\n\"Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book\" (Rev. xxii. 10).\n\nOn reconsidering the arguments of the Essay it occurred to me that it\nwould be proper to take notice in the Appendix of one other subject.\nIn pages 9, 15, and 63 the doctrine that immortality is dependent on a\nstate of perfected righteousness is regarded as \"self-evident.\"  I\n{135} now think that the use of that term is objectionable, inasmuch\nas, according to the title of the Essay, every such statement ought to\nrest wholly on Scriptural ground.  I propose, therefore, to adduce here\npassages of Scripture which indicate an intimate relation between\nrighteousness and life.  Out of many texts which might be cited for\nthis purpose, I have selected two, as follows.  First, when under the\nlaw, Moses said to the Israelites, \"I have set before you life and\ndeath: choose life,\" they must have understood his words as signifying\nthat on condition of submission to the will of God and obedience to His\nrighteous laws, they might look forward in faith to the enjoyment of\nthe future covenanted life.  (See what is said on this text in p. 28.)\nAgain, the same dependence of life on righteousness forms an essential\npart of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, although taught in a different\nmanner.  St. Paul, for instance, has given in Rom. v. 18, the following\nsummary of Christian doctrine.  Therefore as through one transgression\n(__di henos paraptomatos_), unto all men, unto condemnation (_eis\nkatakrima_), so through one righteousness (_di henos dikaiomatos_, i.e.\nthe obedience unto death of Jesus Christ), unto all men, unto\nlife-justification (_eis dikaiosin zoes_), where, it should be noticed,\n_zoes_ is not a dependent genitive, but, as in many instances in New\nTestament Greek, a genitive of quality.  Thus this text declares that\nthe justification of all men, which is their being eventually made\nrighteous through the operation of the Son of God, has the quality of\nconferring _life_.\n\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's notes:\n\nThis book contains many fragments of Greek, so many that the convention\nof using \"[Greek:...] to indicate transliterated Greek passages was\nabandoned in favor of using underscores to indicate Greek material.\nTransliteration was done according to the Project Gutenberg Greek\nHow-To guidelines.\n\nUnderscores are also used to indicate italicized words, but in all\ncases such words are English words.\n\nThe sequence \"[oe]\" is used to indicate the Unicode oe-ligature\ncharacter.","title":"An Essay on the Scriptural Doctrine of Immortality","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":35011}