Page images
PDF
EPUB

diately put in operation a train of action which secures e final result.

NOTE. Mr. Hall predicates another argument in this ction on "the conjunction for"! which proves the rmer instance was not a mere slip of the pen but a istake of ignorance.

SECTION XXVII.

Rom. viii. 19, 23. For the creature was made subject to vanity not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope. Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groaneth, and travaileth in pain together until now: And not

only they but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption to wit: the redemption of our body!

Serious and important as the subject is on which we are engaged, nevertheless, in view of what is to follow, we cannot forbear exclaiming:

"Let those now laugh who never laughed before, And those who always laugh now laugh the more"! Alack! Alack! How much have these passages puzzled the brains of Partialist controversialists. Many the rich scene of amusement have we had at their fruitless attempts to explain and fritter away that which needs no explaining, and which, like a tower of adamant, resists all attempts to mutilate and destroy. Particularly have Campbellite controversialists brought to bear upon the subject that low cunning and ingenuity

for which they are especially celebrated; but, supreme above mysticism and the darkness of error, the refulgent light of truth has continued to shine with undiminished brightness. Well do we remember one poor fellow of this class, who, being badly pushed by his opponent, explained the term creature to mean "the heathen idols"! And a bitter time he had of it, you may be sure. The reader has only to substitute the explanation, for the present reading, to enjoy as rich a joke as language can be made to furnish. No wonder the audience, both friend and foe, did laugh heartily: And the poor selfvictimized fellow laughed too; and his opponent, of course, enjoyed a complete triumph!

This

Not a whit better is Mr. Hall's attempt to explain the text and involve Universalists in difficulty: He only involves himself in trouble and lays himself broadly open to severe ridicule. And it is very evident he is fully aware of this. We want no better evidence of the fact than the following, which occurs at the close of his exposition: "The whole fraternity of Universalists, with all their powers of mysticism and twisticism, are challenged to refute this exposition. They cannot do it: and they dare not try it! Reader, recollect this." is precisely the kind of breast-work with which Mr. Hall strengthens weak places in his arguments, all through his book. We have come to regard such kind of lingo as an advertisement that there is "something rotten in Denmark"-that the heap of flour contains something suspicious, or contraband in the custom-house of truth, beneath the surface! In this instance, such, in fact, is the case. You shall see, reader, what it is that Universalists dare not try to refute-and which they cannot refute if they do try. Here it follows:

"Ktisis, rendered creation, does, in my humble [!] judgment, signify the infant creation, or that part of the human family who never arrive at the age of accountability, and who are never in the scriptures styled either christians or sinners."

And this is what Universalists cannot refute, and dare not try to refute! Nay, verily the thing refutes itself! Nevertheless, it is possible that some person may be so purblind with error, that they may wish to see a bona fide refutation. Well, then, here it follows:

1. Infant, or infants, is not a correct rendering of the term creature, as used in the text; because the creature is represented, verse 19, as waiting with earnest expectation for the manifestation of the sons of God. Thus: "For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God." Are infants exercised with an earnest expectation for the manifestation of the sons of God? Do they know any thing about the gospel, the christian hope, or the destiny of the sons of God?

2. The "whole creation (ktisis) is represented as groaning and travailing in pain for the adoption, to wit: the redemption of our body. Is this true of infants? Have they any knowledge of future redemption, and adoption, and deliverance into the glorious liberty of the children of God?

3. The word ktisis (creature) is never once rendered infants in the whole Bible; and we presume not in any book or manuscript under heaven. Hence, there is not one particle of authority for such an exposition of the term, in existence. Brephos is the Greek word for infant-why was not that used if such was the apostle's meaning? Did the spirit of God intend to deceive, by

using a term which never has the meaning Mr. Hall ascribes to it in any Greek author that ever existed?

4. Mr. Hall frequently tries the soundness of an interpretation, by trying its adaptation elsewhere. We presume, therefore, he will not complain if we test him on his own ground. This same word ktisis, or ktisee, occurs in Mark xvi. 15, which reads thus: "Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature,” or, as Mr. Hall renders it: Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every infant! It occurs also in 1 Pet. ii. 13. "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man.:" Or, as it should be rendered, every human creature: Or, as Mr. Hall would render it-submit yourselves to every infant! Once more: The word occurs in Rev. v. 13. "And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, forever and ever"! Substitute infant for creature and the absurdity will be complete.

5. The commentators are against Mr. Hall. HENRY. "By the creature we here understand not as some do, the Gentile world, and their expectation of Christ and the gospel; but the compages of sensible creatures.— There is an impurity, a deformity, and infirmity, which the creature has contracted by the fall of man. The creature that is thus burthened, shall AT THE TIME OF THE 'RESTITUTION OF ALL THINGS,' be delivered from this bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God." Com. in loco.

ANNOTATIONS BY MATTHEW H. POOL.-"This word is used FOUR times, in this and the three following verses.

By the creature or creation, is meant ALL MANKIND, both Jews and Gentiles." Com. in loco.

We have not Macknight at hand, but his comment is essentially the same as the above. See Macknight on the Epistles.

Thus easily do we dispose of the profound [?] lucubrations of Alexander Hall. Perhaps he is still convinced Universalists "dare not try to do it"! We would just inform Mr. Hall, it is not necessary to try the thing can be done without trying!

Let us see now if he succeeds any better in his attempts to refute Universalism.

OBJC. 1. "Universalists contend that the Greek word ktisis, here translated 'creature,' and 'creation,' signifies the whole human family. This we deny, and we proceed in the first place to disprove it. The language which the apostle makes use of, forever excludes the idea that the whole creation means the entire posterity of Adam. This is clear without an argument, if we simply look at the language. For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now, and not only they but ourselves also, i. e. not only the whole creation, but ourselves also, showing most conclusively that ourselves was no part of this whole creation of which he was speaking. If this be not so, then there is no meaning in language."

ANS. It is not so; and still there is meaning in language. Hear the apostle: "He is the propitiation for OUR sins; and not for ours ONLY, but ALSo for the sins of THE WHOLE WORLD." 1 John, ii. 2. If Mr. Hall's critieism is just, then we may say in reference to this text, that "ours only" shows most conclusively that ours was no part of the whole world of which the apostle was

« PreviousContinue »