Page images
PDF
EPUB

is, that those who are perfected by Christ, enjoy uninterrupted spiritual life. It requires little discernment to see that this word cannot be properly applied to punishment. The effort Mr. Austin makes to give these words the precedence of aion, in their a laptation to express ideas of duration, can have no other effect than to expose him to the ridicule of all Greek and Biblical scholars.

After many glaring and inexcusable instances of misrepresentation, to which it were useless to reply, since the same thing will be done again, the first opportunity; and after much offensive language to me personally, which it were degrading to notice as it deserves, the gentleman makes another assertion, entirely unsupported by any thing I have said. He says that I insist that the Greek word eis, in connection with aion, adds to its duration.” Mr. Austin knows I have not said, nor intended to say, any such thing. My language is, that eis marks the scope and extent of meaning. Nor have I said, as Mr. Austin would have you believe, that eis is found in every place where aion must mean eternal. The fact to which I alluded, and which is worthy of attention, is, that eis is usually found in those sentences where alon means eternal, but that it is not found where the signification is clearly limited. I have not said, however, that aion is clearly limitel in its signification in every place where eis is not found, as Mr. Austin asserts. This is another of his perversions, I hope inadvertent. If Mr. Austin had been as willing to unders' and my argument, as he seems to be to pervert and misapply it, he would have seen that I claim only 60 instances in which this construction is found. while the instances in which aion must have the unlimited signification, are much more numerous. The force of this argument is as follows:-The word eis is never found in connection with aion, except where this term has the endless signification. But it is found repeatedly where aion is applied to future punishment, and this particular construction strengthens the argument for endless punishment.

[ocr errors]

In language so unworthy of the gentleman, and of the place he occupies during this discussion, that I know not how fitly to characterize it, Mr. Austin charges me with a "mean attempt to cast disparagement upon one of the most learned and worthy authors of our country What is the matter? Why, I quoted from the Universalist Almanac, language which the editor, A. B. Grosh, gives to his rea lers, on the authority of I. Ballou, 2d, author of The Ancient History of Universalism," in which he says-- A. D. 415, Augustine, a latinist, was the first writer who asserted that the Greek word aion and its derivatives, forever, everlasting, &c., meant endless duration "-(Universalist Almanac, 1848, page 34.) Did Mr. Ballou say this, or anything like it? If not, then Mr. Grosh has misrepresented his friend, and is wo.thy of cen

Sure.

Did Mr. Austin know of this passage? If so, why that

groundless assertion, and those off nsive terms? I leave the subject to work its own explanation.

Mr. Austin says it is ridiculous for me to quote Dr. Clarke. Well, it is equally ri ticulous for him to quote Goodwin and others interested in sustaining Universalism, sometimes giving them credit and sometimes not. I have as much confidence in several other Methodist authors as I have in Clarke, but I have not quoted them. I should rarely have quoted Clarke, perhaps not at all, if Mr Austin had not taken so much pains to parade him before the audience. Under the circumstances, it was perfectly proper for me to quote him. 1. To show that my opponent has garbled and misrepresente i his views. 2. To show that Clarke makes no concessions to Universalism. 3. To fortify my own positions by the testimony of a man of such acknowledged ability and extensive erudition—whose mind was infinitely above that low trickery by which the system of Universalism is generally supported. It is not wonderful that the gentleman is displeased in being able to make so little capital of Dr. Clarke. In regard to the close of my eleventh speech, Mr. Austin boils over with very rage, and indulges in a stram of railing, truly humiliating. I wondered at first what I had said to stir up the sedement of the gentleman's nature, and give such a savage aspect to his language On recurring to my remarks, I find I have only turned his 13th negative argument against his own theory, and shown that Universalism "dishonors God and disgraces Christ." In doing this. I have made a few plain statements of plain facts, which are the more offensive to my friend, because they are so very plain, and, withal, so true The charge of falshood, which the gentleman has repeated so often, recently, does not disturb me at all. I have no idea that any disinterested man will dissent from the statem nts I have made, who knows any thing of the system of modern Universalism, or has heard, or shall read this discussion. The charge of falsehood will, in due time, find its true paternity. Does the gentleman think the merits of this discussion depend upon such spasmodic tirades as he has here given us? If this be his notion, it may answer as an apology for becoming more rabid, as we approach the close of

the debate.

On the parable of the sheep and goats, Mr. Austin says, "I seek to shed no new light as to its import, or the design of the Savior in uttering it." I answer, the subject needs no light- it is perfectly plain in itself. That which is explained by Christ, cannot be improved upon by men. He farther states that faith bas no connection with the rewards and punishments mentioned in this parable, but they proceed on the ground of moral desert. But does not the gentleman know, without faith it is impossible to please God," and can we have moral desert without pleasing Goi? The works rewarded in this case were the fruit of faith, without which they would have had no moral desert whatever. Nothing

is taught in the scriptures with greater plainness, than that no service is acceptable to God, unless it spring from faith. The apostle says, "whatsoever is not of faith is sin." Moral desert without faith, and consequently, without pleasing God!! What sort of religion is the gentleman contending for?-how unlike to the religion of Christ! Mr. Austin says the distribution of rewards and punishments, here described, takes place in this world, and that "the Son of man comes into this world to administer" them. But you will look in vain for any such declaration in the chapter. We know not where this distribution will take place. Our Lord does not inform us; he only says, " when the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him,"

etc.

Mr. Austin next gives us a long farrago, the object of which seems to be, to show that Christ gave a prophetic description of the destruction of Jerusalem in the 24th chapter of Matt. And with wonderful eclat, he announces that Dr. Clarke was compelled to acknowledge that the question, “what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?" had reference to the Jewish economy or age. But Dr. Clarke never thought of doubting this, nor any other orthodox commentator that I have ever consulted. There is no motive for denying this, any more than for denying the resurrection of Christ. The harangue of the gentleman on this point is evidently designed as a make-weight, with which to prepare the way and give more plausibility to his unauthorized, unnatural, and senseless explanation of the last of the 25th chapter. But any one who reads both these chapters through with attention, will see that there is no more connection between the destruction of Jerusalem, as described in the first part of the 24th, and this description of Christ's coming in his glory, to distribute rewards and punishments, in the last part of the 25th chap., than between this last event, and another signal display of vengeance against nations or cities. The account of the destruction of Jerusalem closes with the 41st verse of the 24th chapter. The remainder of the chapter is the application which our Lord makes of it to his disciples, in which he admonishes them to be ready, not merely for the calamities of that age, but for the final account that must be rendered to God, the Judge of all.

The 25th chap. commences with the parable of the "ten virgins," in which Christ represents the state of the church, then denominated the "kingdom of heaven," including both Jews and Gentiles, from the time of the dissolution of the Jewish polity to the period when the gospel dispensation shall terminate, and men shall be rewarded or otherwise, according to the improvement they have made of its blessings: when the faithful shall be allowed to enter the heavenly state, and those who have spent their lives in the sleep of sin and carnal security, will say in vain, “Lord, Lord, open unto us." The same subject is still

farther illustrated from the 14th to the 30th verse, by the parable of the "talents." The man travelling into a far country, represents the Lord Jesus Christ, who, having accomplished the object of his mission to our world, returned to his original kingdom and glory. The servants to whom talents are distributed, are those to whom the gospel is preached, and who are held responsible for the improvement of the blessings conferred, according to their ability. The return of the Lord of those servants "to reckon with them," "after a long time," represents the final coming of Christ to judge the world. The result to the "wicked and slothful," is described in the 30th verse: "Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."

Having given this general view of the gospel kingdom on earth, of the nature of his moral administration, and of the principles which will govern the subject of final retribution, he proceeds in the 31st verse to a more minute description of the scenes of that day, which is to try every man's work of what sort it is, and give to every man according as his work shall be. 1. The Son of man shall come in his glory, with all his holy angels. 2. He shall sit upon the throne of his glory. 3. Before him shall be gathered all nations—the whole world. 4. He shall separate them according to moral character, as a shepherd divideth the sheep from the goats, placing the righteous upon his right hand, and the unrighteous on the left. 5. He shall address himself to those on his right, pronounce them blessed-invite them to inherit the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world, and give the grounds of their justification, which is found in that faith in his character and word, and devotion to his cause, of which they had given proof in a life of piety and usefulness. 6. He shall then address himself to those on the left-"Depart, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels," and give the reason, which is directly the opposite of that named in regard to the righteous. The description closes with these remarkable words :- "These (the wicked) shall go away into ever!asting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal."Mr. Austin says it means "age-lasting chastisement." I answer, then the other part of the verse means age-lasting life. But he says he has shown that eternal life has no reference to the duration of happiness in another world. I answer, he has shown no such thing, nor can he, any more than he can make a world.— When the scriptures speak of eternal life" as enjoyed in this world, as in John xvii. 3, they point out that life which arises from the true knowledge of God, which exists in the soul of the true believer, is transferred with him to heaven, and is participated in by the heavenly host. But when they speak, as in this case, of going into life eternal, or, as in other places, of inherit

ing or receiving eternal life, as a reward of faith and piety on

.

earth, they always refer to that state and place of happiness into which the righteous enter after this life. This I have abun dantly demonstrated in other places.

All that the gentleman says in regard to the ephemerial nature of fire-the meaning of kolasin, the Latin definition of it-and the reformatory design of certain kinds of punishment, is mere trash, and has no sort of bearing upon the doctrine of that portion of scriptrue under consideration He knows very well that kolasis means punishment as well as chastisement, and I have repeatedly shown that all punishment is not reformatory. Nor is it reformatory in this case.

I have now given what time I have to spare to this long essay (probably an old sermon) of Mr. Austin, on the parable of the sheep and goats, as he styles it, thrown into the discussion at the close of his eleventh speech, when my opportunity to consider it must necessarily be limited. But with the remarks I have made I cheerfully leave it, confident that every honest and intelligent mind will see the perfect futility of the gentleman's theory.

A few words now in regard to my friend's corroborative facts. 1. He says the words "everlasting punishment," "everlasting fire," "eternal punishment," are not found in the gospel by St. John. Answer. John does not give the genealogy of Christ, his miraculous conception or birth, or his baptism. He does not give the Lord's Prayer, and if I mistake not, he leaves out the account of the transfiguration. What, then, are not these things true and important? But though St. John does not use the precise language in regard to future and endless punishment which is found in other parts of the scriptures, yet he taught the doctrine as clearly as any other one of the inspired writers. Many of my proofs have been taken from John's writings, and need not now be repeated. 2. Mr. Austin wishes to know why the term hell is used so seldom by the apostles, and is not found in some of the epistles at all? I might with equal propriety ask, why the term heaven, the place of endless bliss, is used so seldom in some of the epistles, and in others not mentioned at all. It is used but three or four times in both the epistles of Peter, once in Philip, twice in Collos., in reference to the future state; in I and 2 Thess. it is not mentioned at all in connection with the future happiness of the righteous. The word is not found at all in 1 and 2 Tim.; nor in Titus; nor in Philemon; nor in reference to the future state is it found in the epistle of James; nor is it found more than once in the three epistles of St. John, and that is 1 John v. 7, supposed by some to be spurious; nor is it found in Jude; or, if I mistake not, in the epistle to the Romans: and from how many other books it is, absent I am not now prepared to say. What think you of this, respected auditors? Shall we conclude there is no endless happiness for the righteous? If Mr. Austin's reasoning be correct, we must. But the truth is, the words heaven and hell,

« PreviousContinue »