Page images
PDF
EPUB

does not enter the kingdom of God at one particular time, he cannot be allowed to at another time. Let him give the evidence that the principles on which men enter the kingdom of heaven in the world to come, are different from those on which that privilege is granted here. The Savior accused the Jews of seeking to shut the kingdom of heaven against men here; will he do the same himself hereafter? What worse is it to shut up that kingdom in this world, than it would be in the next? All men who do not from any cause, enter the kingdom of heaven in this world, will, on the clearest equitable and gospel principles, have the privilege of doing this, in the life to come, on complying with the stipulated terms. That they will in time avail themselves of so gracious a privilege, comply with the conditions, and be at length received into the kingdom of God, is the clearest deduction of reason and analogy. It is moreover supported by many declarations of the Bible, especially that most luminous passage in which Jesus declares that he will draw ALL MEN unto him!—(John xii. 32.)

The Sin against the Holy Ghost, (Matt. xii. 31, 32, and Mark iii. 28, 29,) is a portion of scripture upon which Elder Holmes relies for support of the affirmative of this question. I am constrained to express my conviction that he places his chief dependence for the aid this passage yields his doctrine, more upon the ignorance of people in regard to it, than their knowledge of its correct import. He calls the sin against the Holy Ghost, "the unpardonable sin," by which a false impression is conveyed of its nature. It is by the utterance of such phrases-by the indulgence of absurd conjectures, and groundless and unauthorized descriptions of this sin-that the partialist clergy have very effectually succeeded in darkening the public mind in respect to its true nature, and clothing it in robes so black, as to drive multitudes to insanity and suicide, in the fear that they have fallen under its dread anathema! Yet the intelligent portion of these clergymen know better than to make the use they do of this pas sage of scripture. Their own minds have been enlightened in regard to its genuine intent. Have they enlightened the minds of their hearers? They know there is a general misimpression in regard to the nature and consequences of this sin. Have they taken pains to disabuse the public mind of the false views under which it has so long labored upon this matter? When was a clergyman of a limitarian sect, ever known to preach upon the sin against the Holy Ghost, without falling into the old track in which his benighted predecessors walked centuries ago? When has one ever taken the pains really to instruct and enlighten his hearers in regard to this subject? The same questions may be asked respecting several other disputed passages of scripture. In truth, many of this class of preachers would seem to be laboring more to keep their people from the light, than to lead them into it, as in duty bound!

1. What is the Sin against the Holy Ghost? It consisted in ascribing the power by which Jesus performed his miracles, to an imaginary evil spirit-to Beelzebub, an idol which the heathen Ekronites worshipped as "the god of flies"-instead of ascribing it to God. That this alone constituted that sin, is the opinion of all commentators. Dr. Adam Clarke says-"The unpardonable sin, as some term it, is neither less nor more than ascribing the miracles of Christ, wrought by the power of God, to the spirit of the devil” i. e., to the idol Beelzebub, the devil of the Ekronites. Thus the sin was peculiarly a Jewish one. It was also a national sin. It was committed alone by those in whose midst Jesus performed his miracles. No other people-no other individuals-have committed it, or can.

2. What was to be the fate of those Jews who committed this sin? Elder Holmes would have you believe the guilt of this offence will never be remitted that no forgiveness ever will be extended to them, but throughout eternity they must be plunged into unmitigated torment. The passage, however, so far from countenancing an idea of this nature, affords proof directly against it. Matthew says "Verily I say unto you ALL MANNER of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men." In Luke it reads, "Verily I say unto you, ALL sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme." This language reveals the fundamental principle of the gospel, in regard to forgiveness. It declares that all manner of sin, of whatsoever name or nature--which assuredly includes the sin against the Holy Ghost-shall be forgiven unto men. This corresponds with the declaration of St. John-"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness."-(1 John i. 9.) Not that they shall be saved from the just punishment of sin; but when they allow the punishments of the Divine Government to bring them to genuine repentance of sin-to turn them from its practice and its love, into the paths of obedience and righteousness-then the guilt resting upon them shall be removed, and they shall be restored to the approbation of God, and the enjoyments of virtue and piety. But while all manner of sin shall thus be forgiven, there was one kind of sin-this national sin of the Jews, of ascribing the power by which Christ performed his miracles, to Beelzebub, instead of God-that would not be forgiven for a long space of time, viz. "neither in this world, [to aioni,] neither in the world to come," [to mellonti.] The word aioni in this place, evidently has the meaning of age or dispensation. Dr. Adam Clarke remarks in regard to this phraseology-"Though I follow the common translation, yet I am fully satisfied, the meaning of the words is, neither in this dispensation, (viz. the JEWISH,) nor in that which was to come, viz. the CHRISTIAN. The world to come is the constant phrase for the times of the Messiah,

in the Jewish writers." Thus Dr. Clarke supports the position I have taken on this subject, and flatly contradicts Elder Holmes, and all others who insist that "the world to come," refers to another state of existence. Has the Elder, has any Methodist clermen, ever given the people who look to them for instruction, the views of their own Dr. Clarke on this subject? Why do they withhold such information from them?

But Mark says, he that "shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness." Dr. Clarke assures us this word "never" is omitted in many of the oldest copies of the New Testament. He mentions ten different ancient copies where it is not found. Among others he says it is not in Bezae's New Testament, supposed to be written in the third century, or only about one hundred and fifty years after the death of the Apostles. It is also omitted in a copy by Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, who lived about two hundred years after St. John. But allowing the word "never," to be genuine, it is not a true rendering of the original Greek. The more proper translation of “eis ton aicna," is, hath not forgiveness to the age. The word "never" is frequently used in the scriptures in a limited sense. "The fire shall ever be burning upon the altar. It shall never go out."-(Lev. vi. 13.) Yet the fire on the Jewish altar of sacrifice, expired ages since. To David it was said "Now therefore, the sword shall never depart from thy house."-(2 Sam. xii. 10.) The sword departed from the house of David thousands of years ago. The word "never"-aiona-in these and many other instances signifies an indefinite, but not an endless, period of time.

In Mark, the passage under consideration, concludess by adding" But is in danger of eternal damnation"-[aioniou kriseos -age-lasting condemnation.] Dr. Clarke renders it, "everlasting judgment." He says that several ancient manuscript copies of the New Testament, have it-"shall be in danger of everlasting [age-lasting] sin or trespass."

The meaning of the whole passage is evidently this: That the sin of attributing Christ's miracles to the power of Beelzebub, is one in which the Jewish people would be involved for a long period of time-that from generation to generation, they would cling to the falsehood with the utmost pertinacity--that during the remainder of the Jewish age, its blindness would be upon them; and that in the Christian dispensation, as a nation they would still insist that Jesus was an impostor, and God was not with him in any of his great and marvellous works. While involved in this sin and clinging to it, they could not be forgiven, either under the Jewish or Christian era, but must suffer the punishment due their unbelief. But this is no evidence that Jews will not, in process of time, be brought to see their stubborn folly --repent of their sins, turn to Christ, and embrace his gospel. When that time comes-either in this world or the next--when

punishment has accomplished its work on that mysterious people, and due repentance has brought them to the foot of the cross then their blindness will be forgiven them, and they will be received by Christ into his kingdom, and become heirs of all its promises. That such a blessed era will yet dawn on the descendants of Abraham, is clearly foretold by St. Paul-"I would, brethren, that ye should not be ignorant of this mystery, [an ignorance in which my opponent and his school seem still involved,] lest ye should be wise in your own conceits, that blindness in part, is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved, as it is written: There shall come out of Zion a Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob. For this is my covenant unto them when I shall take away their sins."-(Rom. xi. 25.-27.) We will now advance to the consideration of other passages of scripture, which my opponent has introduced in support of the affirmative.

Heb. vi. 4--6" It is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift,

if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." In insisting this passage teaches that those who fall into sin, after once having been converted to God, can never be renewed again, the Elder denies one of the distinguishing traits of the religion of the Methodists. Their system teaches that men who "fall from grace," can be renewed again. And surely they have had experience enough in this matter, to test it thoroughly. Their Confession of Faith, lays down the following rule: Wherefore, the grant of repentance is not to be denied to such as fall into sin after justification. After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin, and by the grace of God, rise again and amend our lives." The class referred to by the passage under consideration, affords a case precisely in point to the words of the Methodist Discipline. They were not sceptics, infidels, scoffers of religion, and rejecters of Christianity; but were those who professed the Christian religion, but had in an evil moment, given way to temptation, and fallen into sin. In insisting that they cannot be renewed, the Elder violates his Confession of Faith, and lays himself open to the charge of heresy! The Confession of Faith is correct on this point. St Paul evidently did not design to convey the idea of the literal impossibility of renewing those who had fallen away from the path of christian rectitude. The Greek word rendered "impossible," is adunaton, which signifies weakness, infirmity, and sometimes impossibility. But in the latter case, it is evidently not understood in a strictly literal sense. Christ said to his disciples-" Nothing shall be impossible [aduna tesei] unto you.”—(Matt. xvii. 20.) The Savior could not have intended to use this word in its full and literal import.

So

in the passage before us. To construe "impossible," in its rigid and extreme sense, would do violence to reason, analogy, and the entire current of the Bible. That the most wicked can be reformed that it is an event within the reach of God's grace and power, cannot admit of a rational doubt. The Savior declares, in reference to a similar case, the supposed impossibility of a rich man being saved: "With God all things are POSSIBLE ! !”— (Matt. xix. 26.) At most we should understand the language of St. Paul as asserting that it is much more difficult to renew one who has fallen away from light and knowledge, than to bring those to repentance who had never made any profession of religion.

2 Thess. i. 6-10.-"Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you. And to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven, with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power." My friend applies this passage wholly to the scenes of another world. But there could not well be a more marked perversion of scripture.

1. Who were those that were troubled? They were the Christian converts in the city of Thessalonica, to whom the two epistles to the Thessalonians were addressed. 2. Who were their troublers? They were the Jewish residents in that city. By consulting the 17th chapter of Acts, it will be seen that the attempts of St. Paul to establish the gospel at Thessalonica, were most bitterly opposed by the Jews. In fact, the chief opposition to the gospel every where in that age, originated with the Jews. 3. What was the punishment denounced by the Apostle, upon these persecuting Jews? They were to be "punished with everlasting destruction, [olethron aionion,] from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power." It is only from an ignorance of the terms the Apostle used, that this language can be supposed to support the doctrine of endless woe. It has already been shown that aionion has the signification of indefinite time, more or less protracted in duration, in accordance with the nature of the subject with which it is connected. In this instance, there can be no better construction of aionion, than age-lasting. The word "olethron," translated destruction, signifies pain, suffering, of any description. That the scripture writers did not denote by this word the endless torment of the soul, is evident from the manner they used it." To deliver such a one unto Satan, [the adversary,] for the destruction [olethron] of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.”—(1 Cor. v. 5.) In scripture phraseology "destruction" usually denotes a state of punishment, but not a condition from which there is no redemp

« PreviousContinue »