Слике страница

paragraph, in a single instance, convey the definite idea of a future state? If not, the theory of endless suffering must be relinquished, or sought from some other source.

"In the New Testament we read of those who shall be severed from the just; who shall be cast into outer darkness; who shall depart into everlasting fire; who shall lose their souls; who shall be destroyed soul and body in hell; who shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on them; they shall be shut out from Abraham and all the prophets; the Judge at the END of the world [aion, age, the Jewish dispensation] shall send forth his angels, and gather them out of his kingdom, and cast them into a furnace of fire; they are reserved unto the day of Judgment to be punished; who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his power; the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever; they are bound hand and foot and cast into outer darkness; they receive their good things, their portion in this life, and are tormented in the life to come; an impassable gulf is placed between them and the blessed; they die in their sins; where Christ is gone they cannot come; they never have forgiveness; they shall come out of their graves unto the resurrection of damnation; the mist of darkness is reserved to them for ever; the heavens and the earth which now are, are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of Judgment and perdition of ungodly men; God shall send them strong delusions that they should believe a lie, that they all might be damned who have pleasure in unrighteousness; there is a sin unto death for which we are not to pray, and which shall not be forgiven, neither in this world nor in the world, to come; their names shall be blotted out of the book of life; they are clouds, carried with a tempest, for which is re

served the blackness of darkness for ever; the devil that deceived them shall be cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and they shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever; and these shall go away into everlasting punishment."

By a recurrence to the preceding number, the reader will perceive that all the strength of these passages which is predicated on the words everlasting, for ever, and for ever and ever, is perfect impotence. That the term hell does not convey the idea of endless misery has also been shown in part, from the most unquestionable authority. Every careful reader of his Bible even in our vague and sometimes very imperfect translation, must see that this cannot be the meaning of this word, or certainly, not its uniform meaning. If he examines the use of the term damnation, he will find that equally indefinite. No scholar of credit will deny that the same word which is translated damnation, is also rendered judgment. To as-. certain how much importance is attached to the use. of this word in the original, and how much people: are deceived by the signification generally attached to it, a few examples are annexed.

"For judgment I am come into this world." John 9: 39. Read "for damnation," and let your own ear judge. "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God.”

1 Pet. 4: 17.

Now say, damnation must begin at the house of God, and make your own commentary. Let every reader of the Bible carefully attend to the passages in which judgment and damnation are found, and further illustion will be unnecessary.

Without entering at the present time more fully into the value or understanding of any of those quotations which prove, extra controversia, that, either with or without intent, you have handled the word of God

deceitfully, the subject will be left with a pledge, that when you or any other person, will attempt to prove by any one citation, that the system of endless mysery is true, the subject shall receive the most respectful attention.

Passing in silence over a vast number of tortured quotations, and much disgraceful sophistry and false assertion, I come to the case of Judas-a case which seems sufficient to glut the omniverous appetite of even an Edwards. In dwelling on this theme, it seems that the ears of the orthodox are almost ravished with the yells of the damned, and that their eyes are feasted in imagination, with the sight of one at least, who is placed in a state of torment from which can be no release, and to whom hope can never come. A short quotation from Letter VI. will serve as a specimen of what you say respecting him, and Universalits.

"Before I close the testimony from scripture, let me request you to consider attentively the case of Judas who was denominated by our Saviour, the son of perdition, and who having betrayed his Lord, was driven by remorse, not by true repentance, as some Universalists affirm, to hang himself that he might go to his own place.

[ocr errors]

Among other misrepresentations noticed in the Inquirer, two years ago, this is one; and you seem to come under the denomination of those, who, being often reproved, and hardening the neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy. The following is a transcript from the piece to which I allude: "Judas, alas! poor Judas, the strong case in proof of endless misery, also came in for his share of abuse. Besides being fixed in hell for ever (or endlessly) he was also misquoted. Now as it is not said that he "hanged himself and went to his own place," in the scriptures, we will just inquire whether he hanged

himself at all. It is hoped Mr. H. will examine his Greek Testament in this instance." As you utterly rejected the hint here given, and others which were offered with a view to set you right, every reader has a right to conclude, that truth is not your object.— Were you as fully disposed to know and propagate the truth, as you are to dissemminate error by its falsification, we should not witness the repetition of a misstatement, which must revert on your own head. If you know no better, your ignorance is equalled only by the insolence with which you reiterate an assertion, for which you have already been rebuked by a layman, possessing not a fiftieth part of your opportu- · nity for a knowledge of the Greek. I profess not a general acquaintance with the language; but, as far as the present subject is concerned, I fear not an appeal to the literary public.

That the criticism relating to Judas may come before us in the most unambiguous manner, the only two places which speak of his death will be given and compared. That found in Mat. 27: 3, 4, 5, in the common version, reads as follows:

"Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, what is that to us? see thou to that. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself."

It is obvious that the translators here say that he hanged himself. In Acts. 1: 18, 19, the account stands thus :

"Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity, and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch

as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, the field of blood."

Admitting this to be all that we could know on the subject, still your deduction would be a palpable absurdity. How an evident conclusion can be drawn from two statements so manifestly different, is not easy to imagine, and far less can we determine that Judas " was driven by remorse, not by true repentance," to return the wages of iniquity. As to his repentance, I think few will be found either in or out of churches, whose actions more clearly demonstrate the sincerity of their regret for an act which has resulted in evil. As to the terms remorse and repentance, you have made a distinction without a material difference. If remorse is the pain of guilt, it is most obviously sorrow for sin, and the first step towards newness of life. We may be said to regret the doing of wrong, though it were committed in ignorance, while repentance for transgression of a known rule of right, must evidently be accompanied by remorse. But the malversation is too obvious to escape any rational mind, not fettered down to ignorance by the thraldom of tradition.

Perhaps a careful survey of the conduct of the disciples will tend to remove some prejudices from the minds of those who are not "willingly ignorant."They were all perjured. After affirming with much confidence that they would sooner perish with Jesus than forsake him, they all forsook him and fled, Christ called Peter Satan, and Judas a devil. True. Peter "went out and wept bitterly," and Judas returned the money, which was most certainly as true a mark of sincerity as was displayed by Peter. If he wept bitterly, why not place him with Judas, and insist, that instead of being true repentance, the weeping was occasioned by remorse! But besides this, Judas is said to have repented himself, of which not a word is said respecting Peter. But, do you really

« ПретходнаНастави »