The Immortality of the Soul: A Protest
by Joseph Agar Beet D.D.
August 25th, 1901
Chapter Four
Immortality In Modern Theology
WE shall now consider the doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul as treated by representative modern theologians.
My first reference shall be to an excellent work well known in all Protestant Churches and nations, the Christian Dogmatics of DR. VAN OOSTERZEE.
In §§ 66-71 the writer discusses "Man's original nature." But he nowhere asserts the endless permanence of the soul. On the contrary, he says in § 68. 4, "Of the soul we know too little to find, by an appeal to its constitution, sufficient ground for our demonstration; we cannot even represent to ourselves this soul, or its independent continuance separated from the bodily life; and the uncertain can hardly be proved by the unknown. Throughout § 68 he speaks of "the hope of immortality" and of "the immortality of man." This last phrase he defines to mean "not merely the continuance of life, but also of the sense of life." Dr. Oosterzee asserts clearly that the soul of man is designed by God for immortal life, and that retribution beyond the grave awaits all men, good and bad. But he does not attempt to prove that all human souls will exist and think and feel for ever.
In § 69 the writer discusses the image of God in man; and asserts that it was not destroyed, though sadly marred, by sin. He says in art. 7: "While we must regard this image as natural and capable of propagation, we must deny that it is, as something accidental, even in the least degree capable of being lost. It was not merely an ideal after which man was to strive, but actually a treasure which he was to keep, and hand over to posterity unimpaired. 'The image of God in man cannot be destroyed. Even in hell it can burn, but cannot be consumed: it may be tormented, but cannot be extirpated' (Bernard of Clairvaux). Certainly, for it forms an original element of our human nature; and if we were wholly despoiled of it, we should then be as little men as the bird when deprived of the means of flying can bear the name of bird." This comparison leaves open the question whether the soul may ever cease to exist: for indisputably a bird may both lose its wings and by dissipation into inorganic matter cease to be in any sense a bird. Moreover, a treasure which we are bound "to keep and to hand over to posterity unimpaired" may nevertheless be lost. Yet Dr. Oosterzee seems to believe in the endless permanence of all human souls. But this is not plainly stated; and no attempt is made to prove it.
In § 149 the theory of the final restoration of all men is discussed; and we have a few words about annihilation. In art. 2 we read: "Annihilation of the incurably evil would, we readily confess; appear most acceptable to us, if we should give to our thoughts the highest authority in this province. For it is very difficult to conceive of an endless existence in connection with one who is entirely separated from God, the source of life, on which account accordingly Scripture has described this condition as the second death." But this theory, ifI rightly understand him, Dr. Oosterzee rejects as disproved by Rev. 6:16, 14:11.
On the whole, the important doctrine of the immortality of the soul, i.e. the essential permanence of all human souls, though apparently assumed, is no part of the definite teaching of this volume; and the writer does nothing whatever in any way to prove it.
We come now to a work marked by deep and loving insight into the things of God and by great beauty of diction, DR. POPE'S Compendium of Theology. In vol. 1:p. 423 we read, in reference to "the image of God in man" that "it was Essential and Indestructible: the self-conscious and self-determining personality of man, as a spirit bearing the stamp of likeness to God and capable of immortality, was the reflection in the creature of the Divine nature. . . . From beginning to end the holy record regards this image as uneffaced and ineffaceable, and still existing in every human being." This language is further explained on p. 426: "No clearer evidence of the indestructibility of the Divine likeness could be given than that of the sanction thrown around human life; it is inviolate, for in the image of God made He man. Of course this does not decide the question whether or not immortality was part of the indestructible image, though it might seem that we affirm it by using the term indestructible." On this last important question the writer says nothing whatever. He seems to be unwilling to state his own opinion.
Dr. Pope returns to the immortality of the soul in vol. 3:p. 372. He says, "The immortality or continued conscious existence of man's spirit is everywhere assumed in Scripture and nowhere proved." That the spirit will survive the body is assumed or stated throughout the New Testament in terms as decisive as the clearest categorical assertion; e.g. in 2 Cor. 5:10, where Paul asserts that we must all be manifested before the judgment seat of Christ in order that each may receive according to his conduct on earth; similarly John 5:28,29, Heb. 9:27, etc. But this is very different from assuming the endless existence of all human souls. Our author says that the immortality of man's spirit is in Scripture nowhere proved. Is the divinity of Christ proved there? It is: for in the New Testament we find decisive documentary evidence that Christ on earth claimed a superiority to men and a unique and close relation to God involving, in contrast to all mere creatures, a share of the Divine nature. But throughout the Bible we have no such proof, direct or indirect, or any clear suggestion, of the endless permanence of all human spirits. Dr. Pope adds: "The absolute immortality of the human spirit is not in question as yet." And it does not come into question throughout his work.
On p. 403, after a quotation of John 5:24-29, the writer adds: "The fuller revelation of immortality and eternal life includes, therefore, the foreannouncement of a resurrection of the whole man, and of the whole race of man to an endless existence." But of this last all important statement no shadow of proof is given. On p. 421 we read of "the misery of the conscious eternal exclusion from" the vision of God; and that whatever the word eternal in Matt. 25:46 "means to the righteous it means also to the wicked."
On pp. 435-44 Dr. Pope discusses the theory of the annihilation of the wicked. He says: "1. The question of man's natural immortality is not allowed to be absolutely decisive; and perhaps more has been made to depend on this in the controversy than it will bear. Those who maintain that in the image of God, impressed upon man, there was a reflection in the creature of His eternity, and that this natural image was not destroyed by the Fall, are in possession of an argument which settles the matter at once. This is undoubtedly the view of Scripture, which nowhere asserts or proves the deathlessness of the human spirit any more than it asserts or proves the being of God. To us, therefore, the question is determined at the outset." Now, in Gen. i., are thirty statements which imply decisively the existence of an intelligent Creator who speaks and acts, and are therefore equivalent to categorical assertions of the existence of God: and these are followed by innumerable similar statements throughout the Bible. But no such statements implying the deathlessness of the human spirit are to be found there.
On p. 437 we read, "It may be added that annihilation is to all intents and purposes an eternal punishment of sin committed in time. On p. 442 we read, "It must be admitted that the theologians of this new school (annihilation) have steadfastly asserted some fundamental principles. They hold fast the doctrine of the eternal punishment of sin." This is a most important admission. For the phrase eternal punishment, solemnly used by Christ in Mt. 25:46 in awful contrast to the eternal life awaiting the righteous, is the strongest argument from the Bible for the endless suffering of the lost. This argument is surrendered by Dr. Pope, who anticipated my volume on The Last Things by asserting that final extinction of men created by God for endless blessedness would be eternal punishment. (See on p. 70, a quotation from Irenaeus.) He also anticipated me by endeavouring to prove that extinction of the lost is not taught in the Bible.
On p. 443 he quotes with disapproval the Rev. E. White as saying that "Christ comes not to save an immortal sinner; but to give a mortal sinner, who had sinned, the offer of immortality. But I do not see that he has brought any serious objection to the doctrine of annihilation except by overturning, as I do, arguments in its favour. Certainly he has done nothing to prove the immortality of the soul.
Much more definite and valuable, in reference to the subject before us, than either of the works quoted above, is DR. LAIDLAW'S admirable book on The Bible Doctrine of Man. In lecture 6:he discusses "Man's nature and a future life." On pp. 224ff we read: "During most of the Christian centuries, the Scripture doctrine concerning the life to come has been held as bound up with and based upon that of the indestructibility of the human soul. Man is a being who must live after death, must live for ever. Conscience declares that present conduct and character are to influence an eternal hereafter. Nay, the very make of the soul tells of the timeless and changeless sphere to which it belongs. The doctrine of the natural and necessary immortality of the human soul has been religiously cherished as of the very essence of the scriptural or Christian belief in a life to come. . . . More cautious Christian opponents of the prevailing method of identifying divine revelation as to a future life with the tenet of the soul's indestructibility have preferred to rest the doctrine of survival on the resurrection of Jesus and the affirmations of Scripture, without insisting on the soul's natural immortality. . . . The Bible does not affirm the immortality of the soul in any abstract or general form. Much less does it define the constitution of the soul as involving its necessary indestructibility. So much we may freely concede." This last is a most important concession. Throughout the volume Dr. Laidlaw does not appeal to the Bible in proof of the popular doctrine of the endless permanence of all human souls. Nor does he assert plainly that he accepts this doctrine.
The writer continues: "But when it is said that the notion of a separable soul or spirit in man is unscriptural, is nothing but a philosophical figment, and that the soul's separate existence is no necessary part of Christian belief, we are prepared on the strongest grounds to demur. . . . The personal existence of human beings after death is a doctrine that pervades the whole system of Scripture. The Bible sustains and illumines, in the most remarkable and varied ways, man's instinctive belief that he was made for an everlasting existence. . . . It would be wrong to import into these terms (breath and spirit) themetaphysical idea of an indissoluble substance, and thus commit the Scripture to the philosophical argument that the soul cannot die because it cannot be dissolved or dissipated. But the author of the Book of Wisdom seems to be fairly following the doctrine of Genesis when he says, 'For God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own peculiar nature.'" With all this I heartily agree.
Dr. Laidlaw then (on page 229) distinguishes between "the Bible mode of affirming man's future existence and the methods of other religions and philosophies," especially that of Plato, "which has such close affinities with scriptural doctrine as to have been greatly identified with Christian eschatology, elaborated by the schoolmen as the foundation of the faith, and often preached from the Christian pulpit as a substitute for the fuller light of the gospel on life and immortality." So on p. 233: "Gradually, in Christian schools, the Greek influence prevailed, and even in the Christian Church the idea of the soul's immortality for long took the place of the Scripture doctrine of a future life." In other words, our author admits, as is proved by me in ch. i., that the popular doctrine of the immortality of the soul was derived from Plato.
Dr. Laidlaw writes, on p. 240 This theory of 'conditional immortality,' or of the ultimate annihilation of the wicked, may claim one advantage over its rival, the theory of universal restoration. In its appeal to the certainty of future punishment and to the irrevocably character of future destiny, it is somewhat more in accordance than the other with the findings at once of conscience and of Scripture. But both theories are incompetent solutions of the awful problem which they attempt. It is obvious that neither of them can be made to consist with the whole doctrine of Scripture as to the future of man." But the writer does not discuss the popular theory of the endless suffering of the lost, nor does he give his own interpretation of the teaching of the Bible about the future punishment of sin.
By asserting that the popular doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul - i.e. of the necessary and endless permanence of all human souls - has no place in the Bible, and differs from the teaching of the New Testament, and that it was derived from Plato, and by his own rejection of this doctrine as destitute of adequate proof, Dr. Laidlaw has anticipated my teaching in this volume. It is worthy of note that, while rejecting, as not taught in the Bible, the theory of conditional immortality, he does not quote any passage of Holy Scripture as contradicting it. We come now to DR. SALMOND'S volume on The Christian Doctrine of Immortality. This title he appropriately explains in the preface, ed. 1: "It will be seen that the word 'Immortality' is used in the large sense which Paul gives it when he speaks of 'this mortal' putting on 'immortality.' Life, eternal life, the immortality of the man, not the immortality of the soul, is the message of the Bible, alike in Old Testament and in New, in Christ and in Apostle, in John and in Paul." The writer expounds, in general agreement with the present work, the opinions of the Jews and of various ancient nations about a future life; and indicates correctly the essential difference between the teaching of Plato and that of the New Testament. He adds, on p. 126, (The references are to the fourth edition, just published.) that "when Christ came, Hellenic thought ruled the world."
Dr. Salmond expounds also the teaching of Christ, the general apostolic doctrine, and the Pauline doctrine. Of Christ he says, on p. 316, "His gift to men is not the inculcation of the truth of an endless existence, not any dogma of the soul's deathless perpetuity, but the revelation of a higher life, and the inspiration of a hope stronger than any speculation, sacredly governing conduct, and accessible to the humblest soul." Of Paul he says, on p. 458, "He never contemplates a simple immortality of soul; he never argues for man's survival merely on the ground that there is a mind or spirit in him." It is quite clear that, in Dr. Salmond's view, the Bible does not teach the endless permanence of all human souls. This last doctrine, which has occupied so large a place in popular theology he passes over almost in silence.
Of "the doctrine of Annihilation" our author says, on p. 473, that, "It had a large and well-understood place in pre-Christian speculation. It assumed different shapes, and was taught in different interests in the faiths and philosophies of the old world." He thus admits, in harmony with ch. 2:of this book, that Plato's doctrine of the immortality of the soul was far from universal in the ancient world.
On p. 474 Dr. Salmond says, in my opinion justly, that the advocates of conditional immortality have overstated their case by claiming as on their side the earliest Christian writers. But he mistranslates his most important quotation in proof of the endless suffering or the lost, viz. words attributed to Polycarp in ch. 11:of the Epistle of the Church at Smyrna, which should be, not "perpetual torment of eternal fire," but "the fire of the coming judgment and eternal punishment;" same words as in Mt. 25:46. The same mistranslation is given in Dr. Pusey's Eternal Punishment, p. 153.
Our author says, on p. 475, that Irenaeus "speaks also of 'immortal souls' and of the 'eternal' duration of punishments." But unfortunately Dr. Salmond does not say where Irenaeus uses these phrases. Possibly he refers to the two passages mentioned on p. 42 of this book. Irenaeus frequently quotes Mt. 25:41, "Perpetual" or "eternal fire;" eg. bks. 4:28. 2, 3:23. 3; but so far as I have noticed he does not expound the meaning of the word eternal in this verse or in 5:46. On the other hand, he argues, in bk. 5:27. 2, as I do on p 176 of my Last Things, that "the good things from God being eternal and endless, the privation of them also is, for this reason, eternal and endless:" aionios kai ateleutetos. Notice that here the word endless is added to the word eternal as a description of the loss of endless blessing.
This suggests strongly that the words were not synonymous; for otherwise the addition would be meaningless tautology.
In contending against the theory of conditional immortality, Dr. Salmond sometimes betrays a disposition to accept the doctrine of the endless permanence of all human souls. He quotes with approval, on p. 487, a writer who says that, the notion of a soul immortal enough to live through death, but not immortal enough to live for ever, is too childish to be entertained beyond the little school of literalists who delight in it." Again, on p. 497, he asks: "If man is not inherently immortal, why should the sinful man subsist at all after death ? "The answer to this question is easy. God has decreed that, whatever a man sows, this he shall also reap. And, because for this reaping there is not space in the present life, He has decreed that after death comes judgment, this last involving conscious existence at least for a time. But this moral necessity for the survival of the wicked affords no proof or presumption that they will abide for ever in suffering. For, though we can see a moral necessity for judgment after death, we can conceive no moral ends to be served by endless permanence of evil in this awful form, an irremovable blemish on the rescued and glorified universe of God. Certainly the above suggestion is not absurd. It has been vindicated as legitimate by not a few modern theologians who cannot be dismissed as "childish."
An all-important point in Dr. Salmond's book is that while evidently disliking the doctrine of the ultimate extinction of the wicked, and apparently favouring the traditional doctrine of the endless permanence of all human souls, this involving endless suffering of the lost, he does not state plainly his own belief. Certainly he brings no proof from the Bible or elsewhere for the popular doctrine of the immortality of the soul. He thus affords strong presumption that it is not taught there, and that it does not rest on any reliable evidence.
That in a work on "The Christian Doctrine of Immortality "the writer does not discuss or mention the doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul, which has exerted so remarkable an influence on all Christian thought, is a serious defect in this interesting volume.
DR. WELLDON, bishop of Calcutta, in his attractive book on The Hope of Immortality, endeavours to say something for the immortality of the soul without appealing to the Bible. But he is not very sure of his ground. For, on p. 3, he writes: "I do not aspire to prove Immortality, but to make it probable." His doubt is far-reaching. For, on p. 5, he says: "No historical fact is certain." And he fears (see p. 10) that his book may leave his readers "in some uncertainty;" a probable consequence which, strange to say, he does not regret.
Dr. Welldon defines clearly, on p. 57, the opinion he endeavours to make probable. "The soul is immortal, i.e. everlasting. It does not merely survive death; it survives everlastingly. It survives in virtue of the character which distinguishes it from all that is dissoluble and destructible." Again, on p. 63 he writes: "The soul which lives after death is not only spiritual but emotional and rational. It is the whole immaterial part of man. It survives and survives eternally in the fulness of its intellectual, moral, and spiritual powers.
The third chapter, on "The Value of the Belief," is an able and beautiful statement of the moral worth of a belief that beyond the grave endless reward awaits the righteous. In chs. 4:and 5:the writer adduces the evidences, external and internal, for immortality. Unfortunately, in so doing, he omits, as outside the scope of his work, the one ground on which the Christian hope rests securely, viz. the promise of life in Christ Jesus with its historical and experimental credentials. This omission is most serious. For Dr. Welldon's book leaves the impression that this hope rests only on what he admits to be the uncertain grounds here adduced. Whenever these outlying proofs are brought forward, they ought to be supplemented by the more solid proof given to us in Christ. The evidence adduced is halting and uncertain. So far as it goes it affords a probability that man will survive death. And this survival the writer accepts as proof or presumption of the truth of his main thesis, viz, that all human souls will in virtue of their nature, survive for ever; thus confounding survival with endless survival.
The last chapter discusses "The Christian Amplification of the Belief in Immortality." Like some other writers, Dr. Welldon says Christianity does not prove immortality. It assumes immortality; or to speak exactly, it breathes a spiritual atmosphere in which the assumption of immortality is felt to be natural or even necessary." This is a terrible understatement. For Christ and His Apostles asserted again and again in plainest language that eternal life awaits all who put faith in Him: and in proof of this assertion God raised Him from the dead. Consequently the Christian hope of immortality rests, not on the uncertain grounds adduced in this book, but on the sure word of our risen Lord.
On p. 342 we read: "OfHell, as it is called, and of the disciplinary process to which unhallowed souls are subjected when this life is ended, it is impossible to form a conception save through the contrast in which it stands to the beatific state; for it has not been the will of God to reveal more than its mere shadowy outline." Dr. Welldon suggests the hope that "when the soul stands at the judgment-bar, the misery of sin, the pain of loss, the burning sense of all that might have been and yet is not and may never be, above all the ever present consciousness of alienation from Him to whom man's spiritual being tends unceasingly, will be an agony so sharp and subtle as to extort all exceeding bitter cry for the pardon and peace of Heaven."
Although Dr. Welldon asserts, eg. on p.349, that "immortality is the inalienable prerogative of man," his essay affords fair presumptive proof that this is not taught in the Bible; which is my contention in this volume. What degree of probability he has claimed for his assertion, his readers will judge.
The last book to which I shall refer, as defending the immortality of the soul, is a most attractive and in many respects excellent volume on Christian Theology recently published by an American theologian, DR. W. N. CLARKE. He asserts, on p. 192, that "MAN IS IMMORTAL, that is to say, the human personality is undying. The spirit is the person, and what is here affirmed is that the human spirit, with its essential powers in which it resembles God, is destined to live on endlessly. A human being will never cease to be a human being." But, for this statement, he does not quote Holy Scripture. On p. 198 he writes: "The influence of Jesus certainly has supported in Christians the conviction that all men live for ever; for among Christians this belief has been held, with only occasional variations, not merely as a natural conviction but as a Christian certainty. Christ does not affirm in so many words that all men live for ever, but He powerfully teaches it by His attitude and mode of appeal to men."
On pp. 450-453 Dr. Clarke refers to the doctrine of conditional immortality; but without approval. He denies a bodily return of Christ and a judgment at the end of the world. So p. 458: "If the coming of Christ is conceived as spiritual, not visible, and as a process, not an event, a change in one's idea of the resurrection will necessarily follow. If no visible descent of Christ is looked for, no simultaneous resurrection of humanity on the earth will be expected. If we accept the view of Christ's coming that has been expressed on previous pages, we shall naturally think that each human being's resurrection takes place at his death, and consists in the rising of the man from death to life in another realm of life. . . . According to this view resurrection is not simultaneous for all, but continuous, or successive; and for no human being is there any intervening period of disembodiment." How far removed this teaching is from that of the New Testament, I have in my volume on The Last Things endeavoured to prove.
In his discussion of final destinies, on pp. 474 - 480, Dr. Clarke expresses a hope that for most or for all men there may be probation and salvation beyond the grave. On p. 477 he reminds us that "there are passages in the New Testament in which there seems to be hope that God will yet gain the love and devotion of all souls. There arises also the question whether God would not be just so far defeated if an endless dualism were established in His universe by the endless sway of sin over a part of His intelligent creatures. From such considerations comes the hope of many that God will finally bring all souls from sin to holiness." So on p. 478: "It is hard to believe that God indefinitely perpetuates suffering that, is not useful."
These two volumes, by Bishop Welldon and Dr. Clarke, reveal the natural tendency of the doctrine of the immortality of all human souls. They who believe that to every man God has given an intelligence which, whatever he may do, will for an endless succession of ages know and feel, may well be pardoned if they cherish a hope that this imperishable gift will be to him, not an endless curse, but ultimately an endless blessing. Thus, as with Origen in the third century, so with many now, Plato's doctrine of the immortality of the soul has been the parent of a doctrine of universal salvation. They also illustrate the danger involved in adding to the theology of the Church, even in the supposed interests of the Christian life, doctrines not taught in the Bible. We have no right to go beyond the plain and abundant teaching of the Sacred Book. And, to do so, is perilous in the extreme.
To sum up. Of the six modern works quoted in this chapter, not one attempts to prove from the Bible, although some of them endeavour to prove in other ways, or assume without proof, the endless permanence of all human souls. This affords a presumption hardly distinguishable from certainty that this doctrine is not directly or indirectly taught in the Holy Scriptures. And in a matter pertaining altogether to the unseen world, other proof is worthless. It may therefore be dismissed as no part of the Gospel of Christ.
The most conspicuous protest in our time against the doctrine of. the immortality of the soul, in the sense of the endless survival of all human souls, is that made by the REV. EDWARD WHITE in his Life in Christ, published in 1875, a third edition, revised and enlarged, in 1877. This bold protest rendered great service by claiming a reconsideration of the whole subject. It was, however, in my view, weakened by the writer's endeavour to prove that the Bible teaches the ultimate extinction of the lost, thus himself going, as I think, beyond the teaching of Holy Scripture in another direction. Mr. White's book also lies open to objection on sundry matters of detail. But, in spite of all this, it remains a most honourable protest against prevalent and popular error.
The teaching of Mr. White is ably supported by DR. E. PETAVEL, of Lausanne, in a very useful volume entitled The Problem of Immortality.
A very remarkable and valuable protest against the same doctrine is found in GLADSTONE'S Studies subservient to the works of Bishop Butler. On p. 142 the writer calls attention to the two meanings, frequently confused or identified, eg. by Bishop Welldon quoted above, of the phrase immortality of the soul, viz. its survival of death or its endless survival. He points out that Butler's argument in his Analogy, pt. 1:ch. 7, "is a plea not for immortality, properly so called, but for persistence of life as against the special occasion of death. . . . There are those who say these two things, survival and immortality, are but one; and who seem to suppose that the case of surmounting death is like that of obtaining a passport which will carry us over the frontier of some foreign country; where, this once done, we have no other impediment to apprehend. But, on such an assumption of the identity of survival with immortality, it is to be observed that it is a pure assumption, and nothing more. We have no title to postulate in limine that powers, which may be so adjusted or equipped as to face the contingency of death, must therefore be in all respects such as to be certain of facing with a like impunity every other contingency which, for aught we know, the dimness of the future may enfold in its ample bosom. Such questions may remain open, and without prejudice for independent discussion."
Mr. Gladstone denies strongly, and again and again, that the Bible ever teaches, in the proper sense of the phrase, the immortality of the soul. So, on p. 197f: "Another consideration of the highest importance is that the natural immortality of the soul is a doctrine wholly unknown to the Holy Scriptures, and standing on no higher plane than that of an ingeniously sustained, but gravely and formidably contested, philosophical opinion.
And surely there is nothing, as to which we ought to be more on our guard, than the entrance into the precinct of Christian doctrine, either without authority or by an abuse of authority, of philosophical speculations disguised as truths of Divine Revelation. They bring with them a grave restraint on mental liberty; but what is worse is, that their basis is a pretension essentially false, and productive by rational retribution of other falsehoods. Under these two heads, we may perhaps find that we have ample warrant for declining to accept the tenet of natural immortality as a truth of Divine Revelation."
Contrast this plain statement, which, if untrue, may be disproved by one quotation from the Bible, with the equivocal language quoted above from writers who assert, or assume, or do not deny, the doctrine in question.
The venerable statesman denies that this doctrine was taught in the earliest age of the Church. So on p. 184: "The secret of this mental freedom, the condition which made it possible, was the absence from the scene of any doctrine of a natural immortality inherent to the soul. Absent it may be termed, for all practical purposes, until the third century; for though it was taught by Tertullian in connexion with the Platonic ideas, it was not given forth as belonging to the doctrine of Christ or His Apostles. . . . It seems to me as if it were from the time of Origen that we are to regard the idea of natural, as opposed to that of Christian, immortality as beginning to gain a firm foothold in the Christian Church." This is an important confirmation of ch. 3:of this volume.
On p. 188f. we read, "It seems indisputable that the materials for the opinion that the soul is by nature immortal, whether we call it dogma or hypothesis, were for a long period in course of steady accumulation; though this was not so from the first. After some, generations, however, the mental temper and disposition of Christians inclined more and more to its reception. Without these assumptions it would be impossible to account for the wholesale change which has taken place in the mind of Christendom with regard to the subject of natural immortality. It would be difficult, I think, to name any other subject connected with religious belief (though not properly belonging to it) on which we can point to so sweeping and absolute a revolution of opinion, from the period before Origen, when the idea of an immortality properly natural was unknown or nearly hidden, to the centuries of the later Middle Ages and of modern time, when, at least in the West, it had become practically undisputed and universal."
In further agreement with p. 52 of this book, Mr. Gladstone says on p. 191: "It seems, however, to be generally felt that the determining epoch in the history of seminal Christian thought upon this Subject was the life of St. Augustine, together with that period following closely upon it, when the Western Church became rapidly imbued with his theology in almost its entire compass."
CANON GORE, in vol. 2:pp. 210-214 of his recent work on The Epistle to the Romans, acceptswithout modification the teaching in Gladstone's Studies and in my own volume on The Last Things in reference both to the future punishment of sin and the immortality of the soul. On p. 212 he writes: "Careful attention to the origin of the doctrine of the necessary immortality or indestructibility of each human soul, as stated for instance by Augustine or Aquinas, will probably convince us that it was no part of the original Christian message, or of really catholic doctrine. It was rather a speculation of Platonism taking possession of the Church. And this consideration leaves open possibilities of the ultimate extinction of personal consciousness in the lost, which Augustinianism somewhat rudely closed."
The writer protests, as I do, against the assertion "that the souls of the lost will be at the last extinguished. These positive positions are no more justified than those of our forefathers which we have deprecated. We must recognize the limits of positive knowledge."
This confirmation, by a theologian so eminent as Canon Gore, of the protest now restated and amplified in this book is of utmost value. And against it I know nothing. So far as I have read, no modern writer has done anything whatever to prove, from the Bible or in any other way, the endless permanence of the human soul.
This is strong presumptive evidence that no valid proof of this doctrine can be brought; and thus confirms my contention in ch. 2:that it was not taught by Christ.
in the cup of His anger," suggests a combination of different elements together with undiluted intensity. This terrible description of suffering is then strengthened by a change of metaphor they shall be tormented with fire and sulphur." A visible memento of suffering is seen in "the smoke of their torment;" and we are told that "for ages of ages" it "goes up." Even this does not close the awful picture. A few more words take us almost into that sulphurous flame, and reveal the ceaseless unrest of the sufferers there: "and they have no rest day and night." An announcement of suffering so terrible requires careful specification of the sufferers: "who worship the wild beast and his image, and if any one receives the mark of his name."
This passage suggests perhaps, but does not expressly assert, the endless suffering of the persons whose doom is thus described. For the smoke may go up even when the suffering of which it is a visible memento has ceased.
Age-lasting torment is asserted in Rev. 20:10, "The devil was cast into the lake of fire and sulphur, where are the wild beast and the false prophet: and they shall be tormented day and night for the ages of the ages." But these words refer not to men, but to persons or abstractions whose active sin has been age-lasting. These two passages, in highly figurative language, from the most obscure book in the Bible, a book whose origin is veiled in insoluble mystery, are a very unsafe foundation for important Christian doctrine.
It may be admitted that the above passages, or some of them, suggest, if they do not assert, the endless suffering of the lost. We now ask, Are they sufficient to justify a confident assertion that those excluded from the City of God will undergo endless suffering? For the following reasons, I think not.
We find in the New Testament other passages which, taken by themselves, suggest, or seem to assert, doctrines which we are compelled to reject. To thousands of devout men Rom. 8:29, 9:14-23, Eph. 1:4, 5, John 15:16, have seemed to assert the doctrine of unconditional election and predestination, now almost universally repudiated. And Mt. 16:27, 28, 24:34, seem to assert that Christ would come to judge the world during the lifetime of those around Him. These passages are quite as clear, in a sense we cannot accept, as are any which seem to assert the endless suffering of the lost. They warn us not to accept, especially in proof of a doctrine open to serious objection, a few texts from the Bible. All the great doctrines of the Gospel are supported by abundant and decisive teaching of Holy Scripture. And no doctrine ought to be asserted with confidence unless thus supported.
Moreover, against this doctrine may be set other passages as clear and as numerous as those quoted above.
In Mt. 3:12, the Baptist says, "The chaff He will burn-up with fire unquenchable:" similarly 5:10, "cast into the fire." This teaching is confirmed by Christ, who says in ch. 13:30, "At the time of the harvest I shall say to the reapers, Gather first the tares and bind them into bundles to burn them up." Notice here twice and again in 5:40 the strong word katakausei. It suggests irresistibly the extinction of the objects burnt-up. For no process known to us is more like annihilation than is the destruction of vegetable matter by fire; whereas it has nothing in common with endless suffering. The same metaphor is found in John 15:6, Heb. 6:8. These passages, I do not quote in proof of the ultimate extinction of the lost; but only to show how serious are the consequences of building important doctrine on a few verses of the Bible.
Equally opposed to the traditional doctrine of the endless suffering of the lost is another group of passages, viz. those which assert or imply the universal reign of Christ. So Isa. 45:23, quoted in Rom. 14:11 as including both Jews and Gentiles: "As I live, says the Lord, to Me every knee shall bow; and every tongue shall confess to God." This great prophecy, a categorical and solemn assertion, refers evidently to the willing homage of happy souls. It cannot be fulfilled in the endless wail of the lost. The same may be said of the purpose expressed in Ph. 2:10: "That at the name of Jesus every knee may bow, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth; and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Similarly 1 Cor. 15:28: "The Son Himself shall be subjected to Him who subjected all things to Him, in order that God may be all things in all." These two passages describe the ultimate aim of the work of Christ. And, although the accomplishment of this purpose of infinite blessing is contingent, in reference to each individual, on his own personal submission to Christ, it is in the last degree unlikely that this Divine purpose of universal homage to Christ will be for ever frustrated.
Certainly these two groups of passages, from all four Gospels and from the undisputed epistles of Paul, are equal in number and weight to the passages from the Synoptist Gospels only and the Book of Revelation which suggest or seem to imply the endless suffering of the lost. Viewed in the light of the two other groups, this last group is an altogether unsafe foundation for confident assertion in God's name that those condemned in the great day will undergo endless suffering.
Notice now the extreme seriousness of the popular doctrine which in this book I have discussed. If we accept as indisputable truth, as it has been accepted during fifteen centuries, the doctrine of the endless permanence of all human souls, the few and uncertain passages, quoted above, which suggest or seem to assert the endless suffering of the lost are reinforced by the more numerous and much more decisive passages which assert or imply the finality of their doom, e.g. Ph. 3:19, 2 Cor. 11:15, Heb. 6:8, 1 Pet. 4:17, Mt. 26:24, Mark 14:21, and those which compare the doom of the lost to the destruction of vegetable matter by fire. In other words, the doctrine before us leaves open only one alternative, either the endless suffering of the lost or their ultimate restoration to the favour of God and eternal life.
Not only against the endless torment of the lost, as our fathers taught it, but against any form of endless suffering, or of an endless prolongation of all existence which is only a helpless consciousness of utter ruin, the moral sense of thousands of intelligent and devout men and women is in stern revolt. The more carefully they consider it, the less are they able to harmonize it with the infinite love, or even with the justice, of God. To such persons, it is useless to say that they are unable to estimate the evil of sin, and the punishment it deserves. For, amid human fallibility and error, there is in man an inborn sense of justice and of the due proportion of sin and punishment which, in all ages, has been recognized as a reflection, imperfect but real, of the justice of God. There are children of ten years old who, if told that their father had punished another child, however naughty, by burning him to death, would at once and justly repudiate the statement with indignation. Moreover, the picture of Christ in the New Testament, and His teaching as recorded there, claim and secure the homage of the moral sense of man, and this homage paid by that in us which is noblest and best to the teaching and character of Christ is the most powerful proof of His divine excellence. A doctrine which, instead of gaining the homage of our moral sense, drives it into revolt, has no moral authority over us. Man's sense of right and wrong needs to be educated; and at best is fallible. But, as taught by Paul in Rom. 2:14, 15, it is a divine transcript of the Law of God; and as such, it cannot be silenced even by quotation from the Holy Scriptures.
The practical consequence is that not a few, assuming as not open to question, that every human soul will think and feel for ever, have been driven to hope and expect that all men will ultimately be received into the abode of the blessed. Thus, as with Origen, the doctrine of the immortality of the soul has been the parent of universalism. In other words, this doctrine closes a way of escape from serious difficulty which the Bible leaves open to us. By so doing, it has driven many to force a way violently through a door which the Sacred Writers do not leave open.
We will now, after eliminating the doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul, restate briefly the teaching of the New Testament about the future punishment of sin.
The various writers of the New Testament and Christ as His words are there recorded divide the human race at the last judgment into two widely separated classes. The one class will be received into a glory on which falls no shadow; the other will be banished into a darkness in which we look in vain for one ray of light. Between these classes stands an impassable barrier. To our view, this dual division presents serious difficulties. It finds no place for a large number of persons who seem to us unworthy of either blessedness or destruction. This difficulty, the New Testament does nothing to remove or mitigate. Christ promises to all who put faith in Him eternal happiness; but, having said all that is needful for our salvation, He does nothing to satisfy our curiosity about the destiny of the persons just referred to. We must leave them to the wisdom and love of our Father in heaven.
The various writers of the New Testament describe the punishment to be inflicted on the great day as ruin, utter, hopeless, and final. The Synoptist Gospels also represent Christ as teaching, and the Book of Revelation teaches, in plain and awful language, that the lost will suffer acute and continuous pain. This actual suffering is implied in the teaching, by Paul and other writers, that retribution will be according to works. For proportionate retribution involves degrees of punishment: and degrees of punishment imply consciousness; for unconsciousness is alike to all. Moreover, consciousness of endless and glorious life forfeited through our own inexcusable folly and sin involves remorse and mental anguish beyond conception. To be compelled, in the unsparing light of eternity, to contemplate our own past sins, when all fascination of sin has worn away, and our rejection of the infinite love of God and our consequent and deserved loss of the glories of heaven, and this without room for amendment or hope of restoration, will be an undying worm and unquenchable fire. In other words, the vivid pictures in the Synoptist Gospels and in the Book of Revelation do but delineate a necessary inference from teaching permeating the entire New Testament.
Of this acute suffering, the writers of the New Testament see no end; nor do they teach anything which logically implies that it will ever end. On the other hand, they do not go so far as expressly and indisputably to assert the endless permanence of these ruined and wretched ones, and the consequent endlessness of their torment. The curtain is raised for a moment, revealing the anguish of the lost; and then falls, hiding them from our view.
This picture of judgment reveals to us intelligent persons created by God in order that they may share His endless blessedness, yet, through their own sin and their rejection of salvation from sin, shut out, without hope of return, from the glory and happiness for which they were created.
To this teaching, no objection can be made on the ground of the character of God. It cannot be objected that His purpose will be defeated. For His purpose in creating man was to surround the eternal Son with later born sons who by their own free choice have accepted Him as their Lord. This purpose will find eternal and glorious realization. Nor can we object to the doom of the lost as unjust. For of no one case are all the facts before us. We know not the greatness of the sins which will be punished by exclusion from the glory of God; and therefore cannot compare the sin and punishment. The analogy of parental and royal love forbids us to say that the love of God is inconsistent with severe punishment of sin, or indeed with the final exclusion of sinners from the happy family of God. On the other hand, the principles of human justice warn us not to put into the threatenings of the New Testament more than its words legitimately convey.
The above teaching may be traced by decisive documentary evidence to the pen of the Apostles and Evangelists and to the lips of Christ.
This teaching has, in ancient and modern times, been supplemented or limited in three directions by other teaching about the ultimate destiny of the wicked.
1. To the pictures of actual suffering found in the New Testament, the traditional teaching of the Church has added the assertion that this suffering will be endless. This addition is a necessary consequence of the doctrine of the immortality of the soul unconsciously borrowed, as we have seen, from Greek philosophy.
From the days of Tertullian to days remembered by men still living, imagination ran riot in depicting the physical sufferings of the lost and comparing them to the excruciating bodily pain caused by fire. In recent days, others have recoiled from bodily torment and have put the word suffering in its place. But the word torment is found in the New Testament as a description of the future punishment of sin. Moreover, it is difficult or impossible to conceive a lost and ruined soul, in full possession of consciousness, knowing itself to be finally shut out from the City of God in just punishment of inexcusable sin, otherwise than as in unspeakable misery.
Now all will admit that no theory about the future punishment of sin ought to be put forth as revealed truth unless supported by clear and abundant teaching of the Bible. This theory, which in many minds lies open to most serious objection, has, as I have endeavoured to show, no adequate support in Holy Scripture. And, from the nature of the case, it can have no adequate support elsewhere.
2. Others, especially In recent times, have added to, and limited, the teaching of the New Testament by endeavouring to prove that the suffering therein depicted will ultimately, after different degrees of suffering in proportion to different degrees of guilt, be lost in unconsciousness. This theory maintains the finality of the punishment of the wicked, and at the same time avoids the difficulties involved in the endlessness of their suffering and the consequently endless permanence of evil. It finds some support in the metaphor, not uncommon in the New Testament of the destruction of vegetable matter by fire to describe the doom of the ungodly, and indeed in the word destruction, frequently used by Plato to describe the extinction of the soul, which he denies. But this metaphor and this use of the word destruction seem to me an altogether insufficient ground for definite assertion. This second theory is but a human attempt to remove a difficulty which the New Testament leaves unsolved.
3. Others have not only gone beyond the New Testament, but have as I think contradicted it by asserting with more or less confidence that all men will ultimately be saved. This last theory has found some support in passages which speak of the ultimate and universal triumph of good, taken in connection with the traditional assumption of the indestructibility of the human soul. But, as we have seen, this assumption is without foundation. And this theory, destitute of solid foundation, is, in various ways, directly and indirectly contradicted in the New Testament.
The theory of a probation beyond death, of which we have no reliable indication in the Bible, has no practical bearing on the ultimate destiny of those who die in sin. For a further probation involves a possibility of further failure. And this brings back, in full force, the old difficulties.
Retribution beyond the grave and especially the future punishment of sin are to us, reason about them as we may, insoluble mysteries. The entire teaching of the Bible, abundantly sufficient as it is to guide us safely along the way of life, is altogether insufficient to enable us to anticipate the sentence which the great Judge will pronounce on the men and women around us.
But to every careful student of the New Testament two doctrines stand out as clearly and frequently taught there: (1) that eternal life in infinite blessing awaits all who put trust in Christ and walk in His Steps (2) that ruin, complete and final, awaits those who reject the salvation He offers and persist in what they know to be sin. These doctrines may be traced by decisive documentary evidence to His lips as part of the message from God which He announced to men. As His servants, we are bound, especially those who are recognized teachers in His Church, to announce these solemn truths to all who will hear us. To go further, is to overstep the limits of the revelation given to us in Christ, and to announce in His name that which He has not spoken. To add to, is as perilous as to take away from, "the words of the prophecy of this Book." We have no right to assert in God's name anything more than we can trace by abundant and decisive evidence to the lips of Christ and the pen of the Apostles and Evangelists. And the teaching which can be so traced is all we need.
Add Comment
Comments