« PreviousContinue »
shall be destroyed. The kind of enemies to be put under his feet, is indicated by the nature of the last enemy, DEATH-Death of every kind, spiritual, moral and natural. All things shall be subdued to Christ. This subjection will not be forced, but willing, cheerful, and glad. What glory could there be to Christ or God in an arbitrary, forced subjection! That this subjection is a cheeriut and willing one, is evident from the fact that all men will become subject to Christ, in the same manner that Christ became subject 10 God. It is the same original Greek word in both places. “When all things shall be subdued (upotage) unto him, (Christ,),then shall the Son also himself be subject (upotagesetai) unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.” 2. This passage also teaches us, that when all things—all men-sball have been brought into willing subjection to Christ, and made memhers of his mediatorial kingdom, then Christ shall deliver up his kingdom composed of all mankind, into the hands of God the Father. 3. That all men having thus through the influences of Christ's reign, become fitted for the residence of God's holy spirit, God himself shall then dwell in the hearts of all men. 4. That God shall not only dwell in all men, but he shall be ALL in all MEN. No opposing spirit, principle or will, shall be there. All within ALL MEN, shall be in unity with God's spirit,
2. When God thus dwells in all men, then all will be holy and happy. This is self-evident. Twelfth Argument :
THE WILL OF GOD. PROPOSITION-1. It is God's Will that all men shall be saved, andcome to the knowledge of the Truth. 2. The Will of God must become perfectly accomplished.
Proor-1. It is God's Will that all men shall be saved. “ Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he hath proposed in himself: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times, he might gather together in one, all things in Christ; both which are in heaven, and which are on earth, even in him.”--(Eph. i. 9, 10.) God “ WILL HAVE ALL MEN to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the Truth.” -(1 Tim. ij. 4.)
This language is plain, emphatic and decisive. It assserts in so many words, as distinctly as language can utter thoughts, that God will have all men to be saved. I deem this perfectly decisive of the question before us. It places it beyond controversy. There is absolutely no ground left for debate. The Apostle emphatically declares precisely what this question affirms, that all men will finally be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth! This testimony is not uttered in figurative or parabolical language, but in plain, literal words, which are perfectly understood by all intelligent minds. Every man who places more confidence in the Bible, than in human creeds,—who gives more weight 10 Jehovah's word than to erring man's—all who will" let God be true though it makes every
man a LIAR,” will bow in acknowledgment of the testimony of ihe Apostle, and believe God will have all men to be saved."
As God has willed the salvation of all men he must necessarily have willed the means to accomplish that salvation; and means too, that are perfectly adapted to the end designed. Otherwise he has not acted on the common principles of intelligence. No wise being deliberately wills or determines to achieve an enterprise, without willing, or in other words, providing such means as are adequate to the undertaking:
2. The will of God must ultimately become perfectly accomplished. If Jehovah is the being we worship as GOD-i. e. if he is Infinite in Wisdom and Omnipotent in Power-if his resources are unbounded, his knowledge and skill without limit-if, in fine, he is a Perfect God-then his deliberately formed Will, that all men shall be saved, must in due time, become perfectly fulfilled. To deny this, is to deny his attributes. To take any other ground, is virtually to insist that he is not a perfect God.
Either God can save all men, but will not, or he would save all, but cannot, or he can and will save all. One of these three positions must necessarily be true. To affirm the first, conflicts with his Goodness. The second destroys his Wisdom and Power. The third accords to him
Goodness, Wisdom and Power, and makes him a PERFECT DEITY.
An appeal to the Scriptures will abundantly support this decision of Reason. There is not a truth more distinctly taught, or one more emphatically expressed, than that the Will of God is Supreme in the Universe, and that all its purposes and designs must be completely accomplished. Christ came to do the Will of God—“ I came down from Heaven not to do mine own Will, but the Will of him that sent me.”—(John vi. 38.) “My meat is to do the Will of Him that sent me, and to finish his work.”—(John iv. 34.) Would Christ come to do God's Will if it cannot be done? Is not the fact that he come expressly to do the Will of God, and that it is his meat (pleasure) to acaccomplish it, positive evidence that it both can and will be done? Besides how can he finish his Father's work, if he does not complete his Will? Jesus prayed, “ Thy Will be done in earth as itis in heaven.”--(Matt. vi. 10.) Will not the prayer of Christ be answered ? Or was Christ ignorant, and did not understand his own words, or did not know what God's Will was, and prayed for what never could take place? But Jesus knew for what he prayed. His prayer was heard, and will be answered." Father I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I know that thou hearest me always.”—(John xi. 41, 42.) Rev. Dr. Olin, in a sermon preached before the Oneida Methodist Conference, at its last session, said of Christ-" His prayers will PREVAIL,” for he says, “I know that thou hearest me always.” God's Will is that all men shall be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. If Christ prays that God's Will may be done, and his prayers always prevail, and are always an
swered, then all men must eventually be saved !! “ He doeth ac. cording to his Will in the army of heaven, and among the irhabitants of the earth : and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, what does thou?"-(Dan. iv. 35.) « Who worketh ALL THINGS after the counsel of his own Will."—(Eph. i. 11.) Can language be more positive or decisive than this?
Here then, is the argument: God Wills (it is immaterial whether it is a will of desire or of determination) that ALL MEN shall be saved, and come to the knowledge of the Truth. The Scriptures distinctly assert, that he doeth according to his Will in heaven and carth and that he worketh all things after the counsel of his own will! The conclusion is plain !-emphatic !-irresistible !!!—[ Time expired.
[MR. HOLMES' SEVENTH REPLY.] The remark made by Mr. Austin, at the close of his speech, overturns the whole of his argument. After arguing at length, thai God's will is absolute, in regard to the final salvation of men, be closes by saying—it matters not, whether it be the will of desire or determination.
Mr. Austin.--As to final results.
MR. HOLMES.—That does not alter the case. Final results cannot be made sure, without the absolute and unconditional will of God. If the will of God respecting human salvation be a will of desire --not of positive determination, it falls infinitely short of the point at which the gentleman aims. Positive determination admits no contingencies whatever: but a will of desire may admit moral agency, and the free and unrestrained operation of moral government, both of which are utterly irreconcilable with positive determination.
The audience have now, other proof besides my assertion, that Mr. Austin is a critic in the Greek language. The Greek word, or words, found in the New Testament, in various forms, according to the mood and tense of the verb in which they are used, and employed to express the desire, wish, or will of God, are from “theloo,” signifying to will, to wish, to be wont, or accustomed--and sometimes, to be able. “ Thelema,” the noun, is defined--will, wish, desire. The adjective form, “ theletos" is defined, “wished for, willed, agreeable, desirable.” The form of this word employed in 1 Tim. ii. 4, is “ thelei.” Leusden translates it by the Latin word “ vult," from the neuter "volo," which, says Ainsworth, means “ to be will ing, to wish, to desire, to mean, to wish one well.” In this form it stands in the Latin vulgate, “ vult" being in the present tense; and this answers to the form of the Greek " thelei," which is also in the present tense. The literal rendering of the passage, therefore, is, that God wills, wishes or desires that all men should be saved
and come to the knowledge of the truth, now, at the present time.
The idea of absoluteness, or positive determination, with respect to final salvation, cannot, by possibility, be tortured from this passage in Tim., without perverting the plainly expressed meaning of words, and doing violence to the established rules of philology. Now, as we have already argued, if the will of God be absolute, it is so now, respecting the present moral condition of men; but it does not produce present salvation, hence cannot, in itself, give any assurance of future or final salvation.
Moreover, this word, translated will, desire, wish, is used in various forms in the scriptures, where, to give it the absolute signification, would be absurd to the last degree. For example, Matt. xxvi. 39—"not as I will, (thelo) but as thou wilt.” According to my friend's argument and criticism it should read, not as I absolutely and positively will, but as thou absolutely and positively wilt. Here we should have, according to the Universalist criticism, one absolute will submitting to another will; not more positive and absolute than itself. 1 Thess. iv. 3, “ It is the will (thelema) of God, even your sanctification.” That is, it was the absolute, positive determination of God, at that time, that they should be sanctified. Here the word is in the substanlive form, and the verb connected with it is in the present tense. And yet many of those to whom the Apostle was writing, were not sanctified-did not "abstain from fornication.” Hence, according to Mr. Austin's principles of interpretation, they resisted the absolute, omnipotent will of God. Another form of the same word is used by our Lord in Matt. xxiii. 37, _"how oft would (ethelesa) I have gathered you, &c., -and ye would (ethelesate) not.” In this case, the absolute will of the Jews resisted and overcame the absolute will of Christ.
The sophistry in Mr. Austin's argument on the will of God is, that it is based upon a mere assumption that it is absolute ; and he attempts to press the Greek word, just considered, into his service; and to effect his purpose, he assumes again, that the word means just what he wants it to; and thus, by assuming a principle or fact as often as he needs one to make out his case, he manages to draw out a long harangue, on the will of God. But one touch of sound criticism, demolishes the whole superstructure. Of what avail is all this declamation, so long as the starting points are all assumed ? And this is true also of his definitions. They are arbitrarily framed with direct reference to the principles of Universalism, and in direct contravention to acknowledged standards, both literary and theological. He wishes to use a word, the meaning of which has been established for ages-he frames a definition for it to suit the “sui generis” character of Universalism, and then, assuming that it bears just the sense he has affixed to it, starts off upon a gallop, with a long lurry, written before he came here, for the express purpose of producing popular effect. The gentleman is welcome to all the capital he can make out of such baseless and bombastic efforts.
One word more respecting the verse quoted from Timothy—“who will have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth." Few, if any, passages are quoted to sustain Universalism more frequently than this; and yet, as we have seen, it not only does not afford any proof in support of that theory, but it really furnishes an argument against it. It was the will of God then that all men should be saved ; but all men were not saved then, nor have they been since, though, as my friend would i have it, his will has been absolute during the whole intervening period. Here is a palpable fact. The will of God does not produce the salvation of all men. We need not go back to the Antediluvians —nor to the heathen world, for examples—they are around us in every direction, they are in this assembly. If that view of the will of God contended for by my opponent, be correct, why are we not all saved now? If our only dependence is on the will of God, our conclusion must be, that God does not will or desire our salvation now, or, that the will of God does not unconditionally assure us of salvation in the future. And this latter is the correct conclusion, agreeing as well with conscience and reason, as with the word of God, which makes hunan salvation depend on faith in Christ, who is the “author of eternal salvation” to all such as believe. Christ said to the Jews, “ Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.” If men miss of salvation here, by resisting the will of Christ, they may miss of heaven for the same reason : indeed, this agrees with his own words—"he that believeth not, shall be damned.” To harmonize with the gentleman's doctrine, these passages ought to read—“Ye will not come to me that ye might have lite-nevertheless, ye shall have life, whether you will come lo me or not"_" he that believeth shall be saved, and he that believeth not, shall be saved.” What will my friend do with these plain cases of resistance offered to the will of Christ, and the consequent forfeiture of spiritual blessings? Will he take the ground occupied by Mr. Skinner, that Christ was liable to mistake, and hence his will is not to be depended on, as the will of God? This ground he must take, or admit the will of God is not absolute. The foregoing may suflice as an answer to the argument from the will of God, until something more shall be presented by Mr. Austin.
The gentleman says, that though men were subjected to vanity, not willingly,” yet it was not necessary that they should sin. In this my friend has placed himself in a position, anything but enviable. He is under the necessity of doing something to extricate himself from a serious difficulty, and the very effort he makes, only entangles him more. He comes in contact, first, with the standard writers on Universalism. Ballou's Lectures, page 74-on Atonement, pages 31, 32, 34, 35. Balfour's 2d Inquiry, page 27. Roger's Pro and Con of Universalism, page 255, affirms that "sin proceeds wholly and altogether from our animal nature.” Such is the doctrine taught by all these writers, and Mr. Ballou ridiculos