DESTINY OF THE WICKED.
THE controversy in reference to the eternal punishment of the wicked, like many other controversies, has been greatly prolonged, by the want of system with which it has been conducted. This want betrays itself in reference both to the sources from which evidence is drawn and the arrangement of the points in dispute. The two great sources from which evidence is drawn, are speculative philosophy and the Bible; and the disputants often pass rapidly from one of these to the other without proper discrimination between them. When both parties are believers in the inspiration of the Scriptures, the testimony of the latter should be regarded as all sufficient; for no speculative conclusion, however potent the logic from which it springs, can invalidate the testimony of God’s word, nor is any such conclusion needed by the believer to confirm the testimony of the Scriptures. A man shows his faith in the word of God by relying implicitly upon its statements. But if one of the parties is an unbeliever, the question which they ought first to discuss is not whether reason teaches the fate of the sinner; for the believer is little concerned about the teachings of reason upon such a subject; but whether the Bible is the word of God. Only when both debátante are unbelievers, and have, therefore, nothing more certain to rely upon, is it proper to discuss the question by the light of speculative philosophy. These observations are made, not because truth has any thing really to fear from speculative philosophy, but because she has no use for it in the presence of a safer guide. She can defend herself against all assaults which come from that quarter; but she chooses to arm herself with better weapons than the armory of speculation can furnish. A strict observance of this necessary distinction would narrow the ground of controversy, and bring the parties into closer conflict, so that error would have less room in which to play, and the triumph of truth would be more decisive.
A similar discrimination is necessary in reference to the points at issue. It is idle to dispute about the duration or severity of future punishment, until it is first decided that some future punishment will be inflicted. It is idle, too, to discuss the meaning of the word eternal, until you first ascertain definitely to what punishment that term is applied. So in reference to all the facts which constitute the different stages in the progress of the sinner’s future history. Each should be made a separate subject of thought, and the issue upon each should be separately decided. We should decide, first, whether there is any punishment at all after death. If not, the whole discussion ends at its beginning. If there is, then it is proper to make it a subject of inquiry in reference to all its characteristics, and each of these separately. We should inquire when it begins, what is its degree of severity, what changes will it undergo, and how long will it continue.
Our present inquiry is designed primarily for those who believe that the Scriptures are inspired of God. We have nothing to do, therefore, with any facts, real or supposed, not mentioned in the Bible. If, when the testimony of this book is exhibited, any one should assert that a book containing such testimony can not be the word of God, it would be proper to open with him a discussion as to the authenticity of the Bible, thus defending the doctrine, by defending the book which announces it. But we will not anticipate such a circumstance in the present essay.
We will endeavor, while prosecuting our inquiry, to bear in mind the arrangement of thought above indicated. We will advance by progressive steps, and let each step we take be such, that if it rest not on solid ground it shall be the last, or if it be sustained, it shall prepare the way for the next. These steps shall be marked by six distinct propositions, each one of which shall stand upon its own merits, and shall be demonstrated by unambiguous statements of the word of God, while the whole of them shall constitute a complete statement of the future destiny of the wicked.
PROPOSITION 1. There is punishment for sin after death.
We do not affirm, in this proposition, that all sins are punished after death; for sins which are forgiven are necessarily excluded. Of these God declares in the New Covenant: “I will remember them no more.” In all our propositions we shall have in view only those whose sins remain unforgiven at the close of the present life. Neither does our present proposition deny that then? is punishment for sin before death. Of this we now have nothing to say. Nor do we now affirm any thing at all in reference to the nature or duration of punishment after death. We simply assert that there is some kind of punishment for sin after the death of the unforgiven sinner. If this proposition is not sustained, our inquiry terminates right here. If it is, we may then proceed to make some ether inquiries in reference to that punishment. Here the parties to the controversy should join issue, and remain here till this issue is settled.
For proof of this proposition, we select a single statement of Jesus, in which its truth is declared without the slightest ambiguity or obscurity. We quote it as expressed by both Matthew and Mark:
“Fear not them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matt. x., 28.)
“Fear not them that kill the body, but after that have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn you whom you shall fear: fear him, who after he has killed, has authority to cast into hell. Yes, I say to you, fear him.” (Luke xii., 4, 5.)
It concerns us not in the least, at present, to inquire what precisely is meant by Luke’s expression “cast into hell,” and Matthew’s equivalent expression “destroy both soul and body in hell.” All that concerns us now is, that it is something· to fear, and that it comes after death. These two facts are as plainly declared in the passage as human speech can utter them. It is also perfectly certain that this which is after death is to be feared as the consequence of sin; for by the expression “them that kill the body” is evidently meant human beings, and by “him who has authority to cast into hell,” is meant God. The fear of man, which leads to sin, is put in contrast with the fear of God, which leads to righteousness; and the command to fear God is enforced by the consequence of not fearing him, which is to be cast into hell after death.
All attempts to evade the full force of this proof are utterly fruitless and frivolous. If it be urged that while it is true that God has authority to cast into hell after death, he certainly will not do so; we answer, then it is not a thing to be feared; for man can not fear that which he knows will not take place. Moreover, in that case, Jesus knew that what he was bidding them to fear could not possibly have any real existence, and was therefore guilty of deception, while mocking the fears of his ignorant disciples. But this is contrary to the assumption with which we set out, that the word of God is true and Jesus divine. He bids us fear this punishment after death, or fear God on account of it, and this is proof to every believer that it will certainly be inflicted on all who comply not with the conditions of escape. We now hold that our first proposition is demonstrated, and its truth will be again involved in’ the truth of every proposition yet to be presented.
PROP. 2. There is punishment for sin in hades.
At death the souls of all men leave the body. Their presence can no longer be detected by sight or by sound, and the state into which they have gone is invisible. To that state the Greeks gave the name hades. This term means, etymologically, the unseen, but is used in an appropriated sense for the unseen abode of spirits. They so called it, because the spirits which had entered there, were gone beyond the reach of human sense, and whether far or near no man could tell. Whether above the sky or beneath the ground, or far beyond the ocean’s wave, they knew not. They only knew that it was invisible, that it was, in the familiar language of our own poet, an “undiscovered country, from whose bourne no traveler returns.” In our common English version, this term is incorrectly rendered hell, and once the grave. In our quotations we shall render it hades.
In this state the condition of the righteous is represented by various expressions indicative of tranquil enjoyment. The dying thief went into “Paradise;” the spirit of Lazarus was borne into “Abraham’s bosom,” where he was “comforted the departed saints are “asleep in Jesus they “rest from their labors.” All these expressions belong to the disembodied state; none of them except the first to the state which follows the resurrection.
In the same state the wicked suffer punishment. For proof of this, we refer, first, to the case of the rich man and Lazarus. It is said: “The rich man died, and was buried, and in hade? he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.” It is here positively asserted that the rich man died, and the other events are located after his death. One of these events is his burial. This refers necessarily to his body alone, for the spirit is never buried. It is said, that in hades he was in torments.· But the spirit alone enters hades, seeing that hades is the abode of disembodied spirits; hence, it is as certain as the words of Jesus, that the rich man’s spirit suffered torments in hades. It is equally certain that these torments were in consequence of sin, and that others who do not repent will meet the same fate; for the rich man begs: “I beseech you, father, that you send Lazarus to my father’s house; for I have five brothers; that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment; if one should go to them from the dead, they will repent.” Abraham said to him: “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded though one should rise from the dead.”
There is only one possible method of evading the force of this proof, and that is, to deny that the incident represents the actual condition of a disembodied spirit. This is sometimes attempted. It is urged that the phraseology is inconsistent with the nature of disembodied spirits; for the rich man is represented as lifting up his eyes, and calling for water to cool his tongue, while Lazarus is represented as resting in Abraham’s bosom, and is requested to dip his finger in water. But this objection is frivolous in the extreme; for we are compelled, whether we would or not, to conceive and speak of spirits as possessing such members as belong to us in this life. This necessity is so imperious, that the Scriptures even speak of the finger and hand and arm, and ear and mouth and eye- of God. It would have been impossible for the Saviour to convey in words a vivid idea of the sufferings of a spirit without using this very phraseology.
But those who urge this objection insist that the account of the rich man and Lazarus is a parable drawn from the imagination to illustrate the dealings of God with the Jews and the Gentiles. The rich man, in this rich interpretation, represents the Jews while they were the chosen people of God, his death their rejection by God, and his torments in hades the humiliation and dispersion of the Jews. The beggar at the rich man’s gate represents the Gentiles before the church was opened to them, his death their passage into the church, and his resting in Abraham’s bosom their comfort in the church of Christ. But see in what absurdities this assumption involves the narrative. The Gentiles, in the person of Lazarus, die in order to get into the church; they are then borne into it by angels, instead of being brought in by preachers. After they are in the church they can give no relief, not even a drop of water, to the poor Jews out of the church, for an impassable gulf is placed between those in the church and those out of it. Then they are entreated to leave the church and go back to their unconverted state again, to warn certain unconverted Jews. In the mean time, the Jews, in the person of the rich man, are playing antics quite as ludicrous. They die and are buried in order to get out of the church. There is then an impassable gulf between them and the church, so that neither can they get back into the church, nor can those already in it get out. Then, to cap the climax of their misery, they are greatly concerned about their five brothers, lest they should get out of the church, though they are already out, and the impassable gulf so fixed that they can never get in. Such is the confusion in which the hapless Universalist finds himself involved while seeking to evade the plain words of Jesus. Truly the way of the transgressor is hard.
It is difficult to believe that an honest soul could accept this absurd evasion. Even if its absurdities could be removed, and it could be admitted that the story is used to illustrate the case of the Jews and Gentiles, still the facts of the story remain unchanged. That certain facts are used to illustrate certain others does not in the least affect the reality of the former. On the Universalist’s own hypothesis, therefore, we still have the fact that the rich man, after his death and the burial of his body, was in torments in hades, sought relief which he could not obtain, and held a conversation in reference to the effect upon living sinners of the return of one from the dead to testify of the torments awaiting them in hades. Such is the indisputable import of the narrative itself; and when we come to understand the real proposition which it was intended to sustain, we shall find that no other meaning could possibly have answered the Saviour’s purpose. That proposition is stated in the 13th verse of the chapter, in these words: “You can not serve God and Mammon.” The covetous Pharisees derided the saying. Seeing that they were servants of Mammon, yet highly esteemed among men, he turned upon them and amended his proposition by this addition to it: “That which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.” To prove, now, that the successful servant of Mammon, though highly esteemed among men, is an abomination in the eight of God, the story of Lazarus and the rich man is introduced. One of the characters is the successful and highly-esteemed servant of Mammon—“a rich man, clothed in purple and fine linen, and feasting sumptuously every day.” Never was the picture drawn, in so few words as these, of that which the world most admires and strives most to imitate. The other character is he who, of all human beings, is least esteemed among men—“a poor man, full of sores, laid at the rich man’s gate, and begging for the crumbs that fell from his table.” Any man on earth, knowing nothing more of the two characters than these visible circumstances, would say that the former is the delight of God—an honorable and virtuous man, whose labors God has delighted to bless. He would say of the latter, that the curse of God rests upon him, and he is now enduring the wretched consequences of a misspent life. Thus far, then, the cases presented contain no proof of the Saviour’s proposition, for as yet, the one highly esteemed among men appears also to be the favored of God. Jesus follows their history till each of them dies; but here, so far as their bodies are concerned, the case remains the same, for the rich man is buried with all the respect that he commanded in life, while the curse of God seems to follow the very dust of the beggar, which is trundled away like the carcase of a beast. Of necessity Jesus must follow their history further still, before it can at all answer the demands of his argument; but when he draws aside the curtain which hides from us the invisible world, the dread truthfulness of his proposition flashes suddenly and irresistibly upon us. Here the condition of men declares the esteem in which they are held by God alone.; for no human praise or blame can follow the spirit through the gates of death. And here we behold the highly esteemed rich man crying for help amid unspeakable torments, while the despised beggar is escorted by angels into a place of comfort.
The proposition of Jesus stands demonstrated, and the world is told in unmistakable terms that the wicked suffer torments in hades.
We find another proof of our second proposition in the figurative use of the term hades and its corresponding Hebrew word. It is frequently used figuratively in the Old Testament, and sometimes in the New. When David sings of the deep troubles in which he bad been engulphed, he expresses himself thus: “When the waves of death compassed me, the floods of ungodly men made me afraid, the sorrows of hades compassed me about, the snares of death prevented me.” (Psalm cxvi., 3.) Here hades and death are distinguished, and the “sorrows of hades” is one of the images to represent his sufferings. But if the conception of hades had nothing of suffering in it, he could not possibly have so expressed himself. If the disembodied state is to all men a state of rest and enjoyment, it would be as incongruous to speak of the sorrows of hades as of the torments of heaven.
Jonah uses the term in the same way when describing the intensity of his agony while shut up in the bowels of the great fish for three days and nights. His physical suffering must have been great, besides the mental agony consequent upon the remembrance of his sin, and the consciousness that he was floating about in the great depths of the sea. Nothing experienced in this life could adequately portray his wretchedness; hence he borrows an image of horror from the spirit world, and exclaims: “I cried by reason of my affliction to the Lord, and he heard me; out of the belly of hades I cried, and thou didst hear my voice.” The Saviour, when depicting the wretchedness that would come upon the city of Capernaum, expresses himself in the same style: “Thou, Capernaum, who art exalted to heaven, shalt be “brought down to hades.” Here the high privileges which this wicked city had enjoyed are represented by the term heaven, while the miserable contrast yet before it is depicted by the term hades.
This usage, found on the lips of inspired men throughout the Jewish ages, shows that the idea Of indescribable misery was deeply engraven upon the Hebrew idea of hades, so that the darkest of all images were those taken from the disembodied state. But it is only of the condition of the wicked there that this is true. To the righteous this same abode is represented by Job as a place “where the wicked cease from troubling and the weary are at rest.” To Lazarus it was a place of comfort; to the thief on the cross it was paradise; and to all the dead who die in the Lord it is a Sabbath-keeping, where they rest from their labors. We dismiss, then, our second proposition, with all the assurance of its truth that the word of God can give. There is no certainty in human speech, and no reliance to be placed in the words of inspiration, if the unforgiven wicked do not suffer punishment in the disembodied state.
PROP. 3. There will be a universal judgment at the end of the world.
There have been many special judgments in this world, and to these the term, judgment frequently refers in the Scriptures. Jesus once said: “Now is the judgment of this world; now is the prince of this world cast out. And I, if I be lifted up from the world, will draw all men to myself.” This judgment is clearly that by which the sentence of death passed upon Jesus by the world was reversed in heaven, and the issue formed between him and the world was settled in his favor by his resurrection from the dead. But besides this, and all the judgments of this life, there is a judgment of which men are to be the subjects after their death. This is positively asserted by the apostle Paul. He says: “And as it is appointed to men once to die, and after this the judgment, so the Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and to those who look for him he will appear the second time, without a sin-offering, in order to salvation.” (Heb. ix., 27, 28.) Here is a parallel between two events in the history of men, and two in the history of Christ. The latter are the facts that Christ once died for the sins of many, and that he will return to this earth in order to the final salvation of those who look for him. The parallel facts are those appointed to men once to die, and after, this the judgment. That Christ died, is compared with the fact that it is appointed to men to die ; and this is equally appointed for all men. The fact that after his death he will come again, is compared with the fact that to men is appointed a judgment after death.
A silly subterfuge has been invented, by which the men here spoken of are declared to be the Jewish priests ; and the judgment after death, that of their fellow-men upon their characters. I mention this, not for the purpose of gravely discussing its merits, for a child can see that the men to whom it is appointed once to die are all the men on earth; but for the purpose of showing that those who make the most desperate efforts to destroy the meaning of the passage are still unable to even obscure the fact that there is a judgment after death.
This passage does not inform us, in positive terms, at what time after death this judgment takes place, though its being made parallel to the fact that Jesus will come to the earth a second time, would, at least, suggest the thought that it will occur at his second coming. But we are not left to inference on this point; for other statements of the Scriptures in reference to it are distinct and positive. Jesus says : “ The men of Nineveh shall rise in the judgment with this generation and condemn it; for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here. The Queen of the South shall rise in the judgment with this generation, and condemn it ; for she came from, the most distant part of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon ; and behold, something greater than Solomon is here.” (Matt, xii., 41, 42.) Now, the men of Nineveh and the Queen of the South had long been dead, and as they were yet to rise in the judgment, here is another proof that the judgment is after death. Moreover, as they were to rise in the judgment, and to rise with that generation, the judgment must take place when both they and the generation which lived with Jesus shall rise from the dead. When they rise, they will “rise in the judgment.” But all other men will rise when they do ; hence the judgment after death is also after the resurrection of the dead.
The time of the judgment is fixed with equal precision by the Apostle Peter, though in connection with another event. He says : “ The heavens and the earth that now are, by the same word are kept in store, reserved for fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” (2 Peter iii., 7.) Here “the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men” is identified with the day to which this earth is reserved for fire, as for final destruction. Referring to the same day in a subsequent verse, he says: “The day of the Lord will come as a thief, in which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, and the earth and the works that are in it shall be burned up.” This is an expansion of the thought previously expressed, that the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire; and the day is the same, for it is the day of the same event, called interchangeably “the day of the Lord,” and “the day of judgment.” Here, then, the very day of the judgment after death is again fixed, and is the day in which this earth and these heavens are to pass away. This harmonizes with the preceding fact, that it is to occur at the resurrection of the dead; for it is certain that the dead will rise immediately previous to the destruction of the world.
We have now only one more point to establish, in order to the complete demonstration of our present proposition. It is, that the judgment now spoken of will be universal. For proof of this we turn to Matt. xxv., 31. “When the Son of man shall come in his own glory, and all the holy angels with him, then will he sit on the throne of his own glory, and all nations shall be gathered before him; and he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates his sheep from the goats.” A weak attempt is sometimes made by Universalists to find the fulfillment of this statement in the siege of Jerusalem; but no amount of ingenuity can torture the words into harmony with such an interpretation. There was no incident of that siege which can answer to the coming of the Son of man in his own glory, in company with all the holy angels. He came to the earth, then, in no sense adequate to the demands of this language. Much less can it be made to appear that all nations were gathered before him, and that be separated them one from another as a shepherd does his sheep from the goats. Not till those nations which have perished shall arise from the dead, so as to stand before him with the living, can all nations be gathered before him. Neither will he come in his own glory, attended by all the holy angels, and sit upon the throne of his own glory, till the final resurrection of the dead, and the day of judgment; for the scene here described is the scene of the final judgment, as is manifest both from the facts just noted, and from the nature of the separation which here takes place. The judge says that the one class shall go away into everlasting punishment, and the other into everlasting life. It will be a universal judgment, for “all nations” are to be subjects of it.
We have now demonstrated, by statements of the Scriptures which admit of no question as to their meaning, that there is a judgment after death; that it occurs immediately subsequent to the resurrection of the dead and the destruction of this earth; and that it will be a universal judgment of the human race.
Against this proposition one or two objections are sometimes urged, which are based, not upon Scripture statements, but upon the fitness of things. It is objected, that there is no necessity for such a judgment, because God, by his omniscience, already knows the character of every human being·, and the destiny due to each. And again, that there can be no propriety in judging men at the end of the world, after some of them have already been punished for thousands of years in hades; either the judgment ought to occur at the death of each man, before he is punished, thus making a continual judgment, or all punishment ought to be postponed till after the final judgment.
Both of these objections are based upon a misconception of the nature and design of the judgment. It is nowhere represented as a day of trial, in which God, by the evidence presented, may determine the deserts of men, for, as the objection insists, His omniscience precludes all necessity for this. On the contrary, it is a day for the public announcement to the universe of the decisions already formed, together with the reasons therefore. This appears from the description of the judgment given in the last passage under consideration. The King says to those on his right hand: “Come, you blessed, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the earth; for I was hungry, and you fed me; I was thirsty, and you gave me drink; I was a stranger, and you took me in; naked, and you clothed me; I was sick, and you visited me; I, was in prison, and you came to me.” And to those on the left he says: “Depart, you cursed; for I was hungry, and you fed me not,” etc. Here is a decision announced, not formed; and as it is announced, the reason for it is given. It must be observed, too, that this reason has exclusive reference to things done or left undone during the present life. This accords with Paul’s statement that “we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in the body, according to that he has done, whether it be good or bad.” Inasmuch, then, as the decision is based upon the things done in the body, it is necessarily completed when the last deed in the body is done. It is fitting, therefore, that the suffering of the guilty should then begin, and it is equally fitting that the Judge should choose for the public announcement and vindication of that decision, a time when all men who have been and who are to be subjects of his judgment, together with all heavenly beings who take interest in it, could be assembled together to hear it at once. But no such time is possible except the one already chosen,’ the day which closes the earthly existence of man, after which no human being will be born, and none will die. There is no valid objection, then, to the universal judgment at the end of the world; but it harmonizes with the fitness of things, while it is a fixed fact in the government of God.
PROP. 4. At the judgment, the wicked will be condemned to punishment which lies beyond it in eternity.
We have traced the history of wicked spirits to the judgment of the great day, and have found that they suffer punishment in hades. But hades is not an eternal state. Being the state of disembodied spirits, it necessarily terminates with the resurrection: hence Paul represents the rising saints as exclaiming, “0 death, where is thy sting? O hades, where is thy victory?” And in his vision of the judgment, John saw “the sea give up the dead which were in it; and death and hades gave up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hades were cast into the lake of fire: this is the second death.” (Rev. xx., 13, 14.) When death and hades give up all the dead that are in them, they themselves must necessarily die; for there will be no more death, and therefore no more disembodiment of spirits. The end of these two states is represented in the vision by their being cast into the lake of fire.
When wicked spirits shall have passed through the punishment of hades, and shall have appeared, after reunion with their bodies, before the judgment-seat of Christ, their history will still be incomplete, and our present proposition covers another chapter in its progress. It affirms, first, that at the judgment they will be condemned. Of the truth of this affirmation v e have an express declaration of Jesus himself. He says: “The hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.” Here is an assertion of the universal resurrection of the dead; not of those dead in trespasses and sins; but of “all that are in the graves and a declaration that the resurrection of that portion of them who have done evil is a resurrection of condemnation. But condemnation implies a judgment in which it is pronounced; and we have already seen that the judgment follows immediately upon the resurrection. The condemnation, therefore, to which the wicked shall rise is a condemnation at the judgment. But condemnation necessarily implies punishment; hence we might assume that in this single statement of Jesus we have proof of our entire proposition. We have, however, more specific testimony to the punishment which follows the judgment in such passages as these: “The Lord knows how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to keep the ungodly for the day of judgment to be punished.” (2 Peter ii., 9.) “The heavens and the earth that now are, are reserved for fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” (2 Peter iii., T.) By these three statements o£ the word of God we hold it to be settled beyond all question that the ungodly will be condemned to punishment which lies beyond the final judgment. This proposition will be proved again and again in the proof of those yet to be submitted.
PROP. 5. The punishment after the judgment is represented by words and phrases expressive of the utmost pain and desolation.
There is nothing which produces so intense physical pain as the application of fire to the flesh. When savage cruelty has exhausted every other method of torture, a resort to this always produces fresh pain. From this circumstance it arises that fire is the most terrific symbol of pain, both mental and physical, known to the human mind. It is frequently used as a symbol for the punishment of men, and for great mental agony. David exclaims, in reference to a period of intense suffering through which he had passed: “I was dumb with silence; I held my peace even from good, and my sorrow was stirred. My heart was hot within me; while I was musing the fire burned; then I spoke with my tongue, Lord, make me to know my end, and the measure of my days, what it is, that I may know how frail I am.” (Psalm xxxix., 3.) Again: he says of the murmurings of Israel in the wilderness, and their punishment for it: “The Lord heard this and was wroth: so a fire was kindled against Jacob, and anger also came up against Israel.” (Psalm lxxviii., 21.)
Of the many passages in which this term is applied to the final punishment of the wicked, we select the following as entirely sufficient for our present purpose. In his own description of the judgment, which we have already proved to be such, Jesus represents’ himself as saying to those on his left hand: “Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels.” (Matt. xxv., 41.) The Apostle Paul, referring to the same event, uses the intensified expression “flaming fire.” He says: “It is a righteous thing with God to repay affliction to those who afflict you, and to you that are afflicted, rest with us, at the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ from heaven, with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those who know not God, and who obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (2 Thess. i., 6-8.) The preposition in is here used before “flaming fire,” rather than with, which we might expect, to harmonize strictly with the fact that the wicked are to be cast into the fire. That this punishment in flaming fire is to begin at the period demanded by our proposition, is manifest from the fact that it takes place “at the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ from heaven with his mighty angels,” an event which, as we have already proved, constitutes a part of the judgment scene.
The vision of John presents the same punishment in a still more appalling light, by spreading the fire into a vast lake, and intermingling it with brimstone. He says: “The fearful, and the unbelieving, and the detestable, and murderers, and lewd persons, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.” (Rev. xxi., 5-8.)
Whether these expressions be regarded as literal descriptions, or as merely symbolic representations of final punishment, affects not our proposition. It is sufficient that they are the most intense expressions of pain which human language furnishes. It is impossible to express more; and as God has expressed this much, it is vain for the wicked to expect less.
But these are not the only terms employed to describe that punishment. These are enough to indicate the external pain that will be inflicted; but there are other aspects of the sufferer’s condition, which demand the use of other expressions. If the human imagination were taxed to its utmost for a picture of desolation and anguish, it could not do more than to conceive a person enveloped in darkness, where not a single object could be seen, not even his own person, and surrounded continually with weeping from invisible sufferers, and the gnashing of invisible teeth. Yet, such is the Saviour’s portraiture of the desolation and anguish which shall characterize the last state of the unforgiven sinner. We find it in the parable of the talents. There are three circumstances which prove incontestably that the settlement with the servants in this parable represents the final judgment. 1. There is nothing in the mediatorial reign analogous to the return of the master of the servants, after a long time, to settle with them, except the Lord’s return to judgment. 2. The master says to each of the faithful servants: “You have been faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many.” This implies a great exaltation of the faithful servants, but there is no exaltation of the servants of God above their earthly condition, until they are exalted to heaven. 3. The Master says to each of the faithful servants: “Enter into the joy of thy Lord.” But the joy of the Christian’s Lord, as described by Paul, is the joy of taking his seat at the right hand of the throne of God (Heb. xii., 2); and when his faithful servants enter into his joy, it will be to sit down with him on his Father’s throne. (Rev. iii., 21.) Now while these things, which can but refer to the final judgment, are said to the faithful servants; at the same time, it is said of the other: “Cast the unprofitable servant into outer darkness. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matt. xxv., 30.) Such desolation, then, as wandering in outer darkness; such sorrow as is indicated by the weeping of a vast multitude, for multitudes will be there, and such indications of remorse as the gnashing of teeth by unseen companions, will be the portion of the unforgiven when this world shall be no more. By a bold and majestic metaphor the Apostle Judas calls one class of these doomed and miserable beings, “wandering stars, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever.” They have broken away from their proper orbit, and, like blazing comets, are darting swiftly away from the great centre of light, to which they shall return no more. Growing dimmer as they pass away, they quench their light at last in that outer darkness which lies beyond the sun’s most distant ray; for they “shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of his power.”
This abode of the lost, whose pain is a lake of fire and brimstone, and whose desolation is blackness of darkness, while its anguish is weeping and gnashing of teeth, must have a name. In applying names to things of the unseen universe, the Holy Spirit has not invented a new vocabulary, but has selected from human speech such existing terms as could, with as little change of meaning as possible, be transferred to the new objects. Thus, the term fire, as we have seen, and the terms darkness, weeping, and gnashing of teeth, have been transferred to the future state of the wicked without any change of meaning. The term messenger, in Greek, became the name of angels, who are sent on messages of mercy to the world. The term heaven has undergone a similar transfer. Originally, as in the first chapter of Genesis, and many other places in the Bible, it meant the visible dome of air above us. In that usage, it was the most lofty and glorious term in human speech, because it was the name of the most glorious object which human eyes ever beheld. When, therefore, a place of infinite and eternal glory was to be revealed, where the sun never sets, and where no storms nor darkness are ever known, there was just one word, and only one in human speech, which had already a meaning analogous to it, and it was called heaven.
In the same way originated the name by which the final abode of the wicked is distinguished. Near Jerusalem there was a deep narrow gorge in the mountains, called Gehenna, or the Valley of Hinnom. In the times of Jewish idolatry this valley was stained with the blood of their innocent children, which “were burned with fire for burnt offerings to Baal.” (Jer. xix., 1-6.) The deepest depths of human guilt and misery were here combined; the guilt of men who compelled the sacrifice, and the misery of the children who were burned, and of the mothers from whose breasts they were tom to be cast into the fiery furnace. When these abominations were suppressed, the most horrible associations were connected with that place. To the superstitious Jew it was a resort of ghosts and hobgoblins, and to the pious it was a place of unspeakable horror. There was no other word in Jewish speech so full of this meaning, and this word Jesus seized upon as the name of that final state where the wicked are enveloped in fire and darkness and continual weeping. He called it gehenna, and this, when translated into English, is hell.
That the term is thus employed by Jesus is susceptible of the clearest proof, without much multiplication of words. Jesus says: “Fear not them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matt. x.,’ 28.) Now the soul and body are separated at death; the soul entering hades, the body the grave. They are then in different states. But when they are both destroyed in hell they must be in the same state, for they share the same fate. This can not be till after the resurrection, when the soul returns from hades, and the body from the grave, and the two are reunited. The destruction of both soul and body in hell, then, must take place after the resurrection of the dead, and can be no other than the punishment to which the unforgiven are then to be condemned. The conclusion is irresistible, hell is the name of that state of punishment.
This conclusion springs with equal necessity from another statement of Jesus. He says to his own disciples: “It is better for you to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go away into hell, into the fire that is not quenched, where their worm dies not, and their fire is not quenched.” (Mark ix., 43-48.) Here, going away into hell is the antithesis of entering into life, and is made the alternative. But the disciples had already entered into life in the only sense true of this world and of hades. They enjoyed that relation of spirit to God, which constitutes Christian life in this world, and the rest of the soul in the disembodied state. The only life which they had not yet entered is that which follows the resurrection of the body, a life of both soul and body, which shall never end. As the alternative is to enter that life, or go into hell, the latter expression must necessarily refer to that condemnation to punishment, which, at the judgment, will be the doom of those who enter not into eternal life.
Such is the usage of the term gehenna, the only word properly translated hell. This application of it originated with Jesus, and had significance, at first, only among the Jews. But the publication of the narratives of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, in which alone it occurs, throughout the Gentile world, soon made it familiar to all the nations who heard the gospel. That which once was a name of terror only to the heart of the Jew has thus become a tocsin of alarm to every soul that sins, in almost every quarter of the globe. The infidel and the skeptic affect to smile at the terror which it inspires, as a result of superstition; but while the readers of the New Testament hear it-emphasized by the lips of Jesus, who alternately wraps it in flame, clothes it in darkness, and fills it with weeping and gnashing of teeth, they will still believe that it is better to lose an eye, a hand, a foot, and all that a man has, rather than “go away into hell.” With this most terrific of all the words in human speech still trembling on our lips, we dismiss our fifth proposition, assured that it will not be questioned by one who believes the Bible.
PROP. 6. The punishment after the judgment will be endless.
In the progress of our investigation, we have found two distinct states of suffering after death, separated from each other by the judgment; one of them in hades, this side the judgment; the other in eternity, beyond the judgment. They differ, in that the former is confined to the disembodied spirit, while the latter involves both soul and body. They differ, also, as to some of the epithets applied to them, and they differ in duration. The former necessarily terminates with the resurrection; we now affirm of the latter, that it will never end. We have reserved the question of duration to this stage of the inquiry, because it is naturally and logically the last question in the series. If there is no punishment after the final judgment, then the question of duration is excluded, and all debate upon it is labor lost. If there is, still the question of duration is comparatively of little value, unless the punishment possess some degree of severity. But having settled both of these questions, the question of duration properly comes in to close the inquiry.
The best way to test the exact meaning of a word in familiar use, is to write it, or pronounce it by itself, and note what idea it conveys to the mind. We write down, then, the word everlasting. We leave a space on each side of it, and put it in different type, that it may be perfectly isolated; EVERLASTING. There it stands, connected with no other words which might modify its meaning, but speaking simply the idea which it contains within itself. What idea is this? It may be safely ventured, that to every single mind acquainted with the English language it conveys instantaneously one and the same idea, the idea of endless duration. Even with men who have trained themselves to attach to it some other signification, the first impulse of the mind is the same, and it requires a second thought to reach another meaning. No more invariably does the pendulum, when disturbed, drop back to a perpendicular than the mind drops upon this meaning, when the eye or the ear catches this word. It may, like the pendulum, vibrate afterward to other points, but this is invariably its first motion. This statement met with a very striking illustration a few years since, in the course of a public discussion in the West, on Universalism. The gentleman opposing this system, had observed how frequently Universalists themselves use the terms everlasting and eternal in their proper sense, when they are not on their guard. He determined, therefore, to take full advantage of this circumstance in the discussion. He laid aside a piece of paper, on which to note down, if possible, one or more instances of this usage in every speech his opponent delivered. The device proved a complete success. Near the close of the debate, when the issue upon the meaning of this term had been distinctly joined, he addressed the audience somewhat as follows: “My opponent is now laboring to prove that the word everlasting has not the meaning which is commonly attached to it; that it designates no definite period, but may mean as short a period as three days and three nights. Such is his position while he is before the audience to maintain his favorite dogma. But there is a secret here which I must now disclose. You are aware that when a man has committed murder, he hides the dread secret effectually in the presence of others. But if you could stand by his bedside at night, and listen to his mutterings amid the visions which disturb his rest, that terrible secret would be divulged; for there the spirit unconsciously speaks itself. Well, I have been standing by the bedside of my opponent, paper in hand, and have noted some of the truthful mutterings of his soul, while he was unconscious of my presence. By this means, I have discovered a secret of his thoughts, which he is carefully concealing from you. It is this: in his secret soul he knows that the meaning which we attach to ‘the terms eternal and everlasting is their true meaning. In proof of this, listen to some sentences which I have written down as they fell from his lips.” He then read to the audience two sentences from each speech which the Universalist had delivered, in which the term was used in its proper sense. The effect was overwhelming. It shows that there is a meaning fixed in the word which can not be divorced from it, but will continue to reassert itself whenever the attempt is made.
We deem it unnecessary to say more upon the literal meaning of the term everlasting, except to remark that its etymology stamps its meaning upon it unmistakably. Compounded of two most familiar terms, ever and lasting, it reads out its meaning to every child that has learned to pronounce these terms. The same is true of the Greek original, which is compounded of aei, always, and oon, being—always being.
We now proceed to show that this term is applied to the punishment which lies beyond the judgment. In the twenty-fifth chapter of Matthew, where we have already proved that the Saviour speaks of the last judgment, he represents himself as saying to the wicked: “Depart, you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels.” And at the close of that description, he says of the same parties: “These shall go away into everlasting punishment.” Here, now, is the same punishment of which we spoke in our fourth and fifth propositions, a punishment to which the wicked are sentenced at the final judgment, and which, therefore, lies beyond it; and to this punishment is applied the term everlasting. If this term, then, as here employed, has its literal moaning, there is an end of controversy on our present proposition. How shall this be determined?
It is a law of language, as fixed and unchangeable as any law of nature, that words must be understood literally, except where there is something in the context to indicate that they are employed figuratively. Is there any thing to require this in the present instance? It is sometimes urged that the term punishment so requires, from the fact that all just punishment must be corrective, and therefore can not be unending. We admit that some just punishment is corrective, but it is not asserted in the Scriptures that such is the design of the punishment beyond the judgment, nor can we possibly know any thing of it except what the Scriptures teach. To assume, therefore, that it is corrective, is to settle the question by assumption instead of proof. The punishment called everlasting may be, for aught that we know, and for aught that the Scriptures declare, simply punitive, like the execution of a murderer, or the destruction of Sodom. There is nothing in this term, therefore, to limit the meaning of the word everlasting; but the latter term gives to the former the idea of endless continuance.
The term everlasting is sometimes applied, by hyperbole, to things which will come to an end; as “the everlasting-hills,” the “everlasting covenant” with Abraham. But in all such cases we learn the fact, not by the nature of the term, but by other statements of the word of God; and but for these other statements we could not possibly suppose that these things would be less than ever lasting. In the case before us there are no statements to thus modify the meaning of the term, and therefore it must stand unlimited.
It is urged that the term sometimes means age-lasting. But what is an age? In its narrower sense it is the period in which a generation of men exists on earth; and in its wider sense it means the same of a nation. It is measured by the birth and the death of individuals or. of nations. But in that state beyond the final judgment, where we have located the punishment in question, there are no ages. There will never be another individual born, nor will another die. Nations will rise and fall no more. There are no alternating nights and days, nor months and years, for time itself shall expire as that period is ushered in. The term age-lasting, therefore, in its temporal sense, can not apply to that state. In another sense, it is possible that it may. If the birth from the grave, with which that state begins, and the duration without end, in which it continues, may be styled an age, then all that belongs to it may be styled age-lasting. But in this sense age-lasting would be but another expression for everlasting. In the only sense, therefore, in which the term could possibly apply to the punishment beyond the judgment, the meaning is everlasting, and our proposition is established.
It is now clear that, whatever may be the other uses or senses of the word everlasting, when applied to things beyond the end of time it can have but one meaning. There are no temporal things there, and there is only one word of duration employed to project thought into that period. All things that are there, both the things of heaven and the things of hell, are stamped with the one word, everlasting, and then the curtain of revelation drops, leaving the human mind to ponder the deep significance of that word, until the gates of heaven or the pit of perdition shall open to receive it forever.
We have now traversed the entire compass of our subject, and delineated the entire future destiny of the wicked. We have not drawn upon conjecture or imagination for a single thought. We have not drawn our conclusions from doubtful premises. But the reader will bear witness that we have allowed plain and unambiguous statements of the word of God to settle every issue, without straining their meaning or obscuring the exact force of their terms. The conclusions deduced, or rather the divine statements made, are the most fearful which human speech was ever employed to communicate. They tell us that those who die without obtaining the pardon of sins committed here will enter immediately, in hades, into punishment the intensity of which is represented by flames of fire. This state of punishment is followed by a resurrection from the dead. The sinner stands-before the judgment-seat of Christ, in the presence of all men and all angels, where his iniquities are enumerated, and he is condemned to punishment yet in the future. He goes away into hell, where the fire of his burning is never quenched; where the worm which feeds upon him never dies; where the darkness is relieved by no ray of light, and where the presence of many companions, weeping and gnashing their teeth, increases the misery which is already beyond endurance. The wretchedness of this state no tongue can exaggerate, for Jesus has described it in words which defy exaggeration. It will never, never end.
It is only when we contemplate this fearful destiny of the unforgiven sinner that we can properly appreciate the efforts which have been made to redeem man from sin. If there is no reality in it, then the death of Jesus, as scripturally presented, was a waste of tears and blood; while the toils and sorrows of saints and martyrs have had no adequate design. But admitting this dark reality, we have a fact to justify every groan and every prayer, every drop of blood, and every life-long struggle to bring the guilty to pardon. Only pardon can release the guilty from punishment. To release them from such punishment, it was becoming that even Jesus should die; and it is proper that saints should labor, and pray, and exhort, and entreat, with all long-suffering and endurance, not willing that any should perish, but that all should turn and live.