LECTURE III.

THE FUTURE RETRIBUTION.

ISAIAH lvii. 16.

"For I will not contend for ever, neither will I be always wroth for the spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I have made."*

THE design of these lectures is professedly, but humbly, to indicate what I believe to be fundamental errors in the popular religious belief concerning certain portions of the Christian revelation; I shall therefore confine my attention in this lecture exclusively to one branch of the doctrine of future retribution. The Bible gives definite and unmistakeable answers to the anxious inquiries of the believer in Jesus

* It is possible that some may object to this appropriation of this passage of scripture, that it does not refer to future punishment, but to the merciful consideration of God for his people in their present earthly condition. This view I believe to be correct, but it does not affect the use which I make of this passage, which is only as an argument against the theory of everlasting torture. Some persons avail themselves of this text in support of the theory of a limited future punishment, and a final restoration of the wicked. The text, however, as we have admitted above, does not refer to the future punishment of the wicked, and therefore is of no value as an argument in support of this theory. Although its reference is to the present dealings of God with mankind, it involves a principle destructive of the doctrine of endless misery as the future punishment of the wicked. Whether it refers to the present or the future is of no moment, since it does not affect the sentiment of the passage; for man will be man,—the same being constitutionally hereafter that he is now: and, therefore, if "the spirit should fail," &c., now, what is to qualify it to sustain the mighty pressure of God's everlasting wrath hereafter?

66

Christ, and assures him that "verily there is a reward for the righteous;" and although "it doth not yet appear what we shall be," yet, says the Apostle, when he shall appear we shall be like him;" and therefore, in joyful anticipation of this distinguished honour, each may declare with the Psalmist, "I shall be satisfied when I awake with thy likeness."

In entering upon the important and painfully interesting inquiry, relative to the future retribution of the wicked, and purposing to lay before you the results of my own inquiries concerning what I believe to be the teaching of the Bible on this subject, and which, in some respects, will differ materially from the popular creed of the professing church, I cannot but feel, as I have felt throughout these discourses, that I occupy a position of the most solemn responsibility, a position which I am justified in taking only after a prayerful and mature deliberation, and with a firm persuasion that it is at the call of sacred duty. I hope also that I attach due importance to the fact, that the opinions which I am about to call in question, have been long embraced by many famous for their learning and piety, and whose opportunities and ability, very far beyond my own, qualify them much better to ascertain the real teaching of the Word of God on this subject. But it is not presumption to say, that even the wisest and best of men are no more free than their humbler brethren from the dominion of customary modes of thought, and conventional belief. Indeed, in some respects they are more exposed to this species of tyranny, on account of the reverence which sympathy begets for the opinions of kindred intellects; and because they are apt to be diverted by the wide and ever-expanding sphere of their mental operations.

Duty has its claims upon the simple as well as upon the profound, its obligations are not circumscribed, but only modified by talents and learning. I have

therefore done what it is every man's duty to do, that is, to enquire "what is truth?"—in a spirit of meekness, and without discourtesy to the labours of great and good men,-at the Bible, the only authoritative source of religious instruction. And if, after much anxiety and earnest prayer, I have reached conclusions which appear to me to be more in harmony with the Divine character and glory, and with the complete system of his revealed truth, than those which are popularly received, what remains to me, but either to keep my conclusions to myself, or, in my capacity as a preacher of truth and righteousness, to make them known to others? The former course I could not adopt, as being incompatible with moral honesty and obligation, I can only say, therefore, in explanation of my present course, "I have believed, and therefore have I spoken."

66

Sir James Stephen, in the epilogue to his "Essays in Ecclesiastical Biography," has some remarks, which so suitably express the purport of the present lecture, that I cannot do better than introduce here the paragraph in which they occur. "Nothing" he observes, can be more remote from the design with which these pages are written, than to suggest a doubt, whether penal retribution in the future state, does really await the many who are called,' but who throng the broad way which leadeth to destruction.' Neither does the writer of these pages presume to intimate, that either the nature or the continuance of that penalty, are such as to be fitly contemplated by any soul of man, without the most profound awe, and the most lively alarm. To propagate or to entertain such opinions, would be to question the truth of Him, who is emphatically himself the Truth.' The questions proposed for inquiry, are, whether he, or any one of his inspired apostles, has really affirmed in express words, that the retribution shall be endured eternally by those on whom it shall fall?-whether

all the words employed by him, or by them, on the subject, are not satisfied by understanding that the punishment is eternal only, inasmuch as it involves the ultimate destruction, or annihilation, of those on whom it is to be inflicted?—whether the sense usually ascribed to this part of holy Scripture, is congruous with the spirit of the rest of the revealed will of God?-whether it is not really derived from ecclesiastical traditions, rather than from any sound and unbiassed criticism ?-and whether our own translators have not been induced, by those traditions, to enhance the real force of our Saviour's words, by a forced and exaggerated version of them? "*

Before addressing myself more immediately to the questions before us, I must offer some preliminary observations, for the sake of preparing the way, in an inquiry which I feel is encumbered with no small amount of difficulty, arising, not so much from the discussion of the subject itself, as from the mental condition of many, who, in an assembly like the present, and upon such a theme, can scarcely be expected to be free from the operation of strong and interested feelings. I can conscientiously say, in the presence of a heart-searching God, and before this congregation, that I have been stimulated to this inquiry by the anxiety to know the truth, believing that error, and especially religious error, cannot be otherwise than pernicious to the best interests of mankind. I have to request, then, as well for your own sakes as for mine, that you will grant me your patient and candid attention; and that, in the disposition of seekers after truth, you will, so far as you are enabled, hold your feelings and pre-judgments in complete abeyance. My hope is, that in the exercise of a prayerful and independent spirit, you will calmly contemplate the scriptural evidence which I shall endeavour to bring before you; for it is only in this * Vol. ii. pp. 496, 497.

temper of mind, that this, or indeed any religious question, can be properly approached.

There are those, and some such I may be now addressing, who are absolutely afraid to think,-whose mental operations, if they may be so dignified, have ever been directed by others rather than by themselves; and who are impatient at being disturbed in their ignoble ease. Their minds are rather passive than active; recipient than energetic; and who dread nothing more than being put into a condition demanding mental activity, and self-decision. This puerile dependence and self-diffidence,—the fruit oftener of mental indolence than incapacity, -is frequently associated with a morbid fear of the truth, which necessarily closes up every avenue by which truth can alone reach the understanding and the heart. I would fain believe, however, that there are few of this class among those I now address; and that I may presume upon a reasonable share of intelligence and moral magnanimity in the majority now present.

There are others, and by no means a small class, who consider it a part of religious obedience, and inseparable from Christian humility, to receive the doctrines of the Bible as they are populary taught; and would esteem it an act of dishonour done to the Divine Word to adventure an independent inquiry into its meaning. There is a proneness to imagine that, in proportion to the antiquity and universality of an opinion, must be its truthfulness; and to question it, the height of extravagance and presumption. Even when evidence the most palpable is presented against any venerable belief, the prestige which attaches to the ancient faith, if it cannot altogether neutralize the force of opposing evidence, will often act as a paralysis upon the independent energies of the mind.

But let such remember, that they most honour God and his truth when they receive the law at his mouth, and derive thence the articles of their