Page images
PDF
EPUB

juxta-positions, combinations, and relations, however numerous and distinct the modifications which work themselves out into phenomena may be, there can be no variableness in the primitive constituent elements of nature. Grant that this is so, how does the changeless become the changeable? how does the infinite reality transform itself into that immense collection of finite appearances which constitute the universe? The mode in which this is effected is the weak point of Anaximander's philosophic scheme. The primitive chaos of which the infinite in its manifestations was made up, works itself into phenomena by the gradual disengagement of like and unlike elements; thereafter the like cohere either with the like or with the unlike, in various proportions and degrees, and thus all things become, in the long process of ages, forth-formed and manifest.

mena.

The interpretation of Nature is possible only when an hypothesis is adopted which will satisfy the conditions of thought: but it is only really interpretable when that hypothesis fully complies with, and is faithful to the conditions of thought, and the facts of phenoOf all possible hypotheses that only is the true and real "interpretatio natura" which conforms, not only to the rigorous laws of the reason, but also to the no less rigorous laws of phenomenal being. The laws of the reason, as they are within ourselves, are more readily subject to conscious experiment, and hence the ancient philosophers sought out in their own souls such solutions of the "all-encircling mysterious tide of force," which everywhere manifested its presence around them in phenomena; and as they were destitute of instruments of experimentation, they were little capable of finding out the agreements or disagreements between their thoughts, i. e., hypotheses and phenomenal nature. This, however, they did do, they helped to exhaust the methods of solution, and thus economized our labours. I look upon Anaximander as starting an hypothesis, conditioned by the laws of thought, though not conditioned by the laws of things. Hence its inefficiency and unsatisfactoriness.

Thales conceived that "all things were full of gods;" Anaximander regarded this as an unnecessary complication of the question; as a merely cosmological philosopher, all that he required to project and effect was accomplished when he accounted for the phenomena the cosmos exhibited, without accounting for the pre-ordinating cause, or the intelligence which moved and wrought either beyond or within the Infinite. To aspire to know the universe, and our relations to it, philosophy may venture; to know ourselves, is neeedful to know our relations: to know ourselves and the universe is all that philosophy may hopefully attempt. If we cannot know the Infinite, except in its manifestations, how can we hope to know, by the agency of philosophy, the nature of those powers, intelligent or otherwise, by which the Infinite exists, and is as it exists? There is no repugnance between this system and a belief in the gods; but the gods are not by him made active agents in the outworking of his speculations. There is certainly here the appearance of Pantheism, but that is inferred from his silence, or rather on the silence of the reporters whose evidence is now attainable on the point, regarding his religious belief. There is nothing in the speculations themselves to necessitate Pantheism.

REMARKS.-The line of exposition hereintofore given is, so far as we know, novel. We quote the words of the most popular expositor of the history of philosophy of our day, as our justification as well as his:-"No two historians are agreed in their interpretation of Anaximander's doctrines; few, indeed, are agreed in the historical position he is to occupy.

In offering a new view of the character of his philosophy, we call the reader's attention to this point, as a warrant for the attempt, and as an excuse for failure, if we fail."*

We cannot endorse the fundamental proposition upon which Mr. Lewes's opinion proceeds, viz., “in Greek philosophy, as we shall repeatedly notice, distinctions in words were generally equivalent to distinctions in things." The Greeks were too acute, and philosophers were yet too ardent in the pursuit of truth, to justify us in imagining that, in this early age, sophistry had acquired dominion over the world's greatest minds. When philosophy had become fashionable and lucrative, Sophists did arise, but what temptation had its early followers to deceive themselves, or strive to deceive others? In Anaximander we perceive a strong mind grappling with mysteries, working out the formula of cosmologic science, and probing speculation to its depths. The Infinite! truly that is the solution, could he but know, by the double teaching of reason and fact what the Infinite really is. In this stage of thought that was impossible; mayhap he did not take the surest method of attaining a solution of that important point; or did he rather, blinded by amazement, shrink from attempting to unveil the mystery of mysteries?

To us who live in happier times, to whom the Infinite images forth thoughts too deep for utterance, let us not ridicule the apparently trivial steps with which human thought advanced. "On the beaten road there is tolerable travelling; but it is sore work, and many have to perish; fashioning a path through the impassable." They required to conquer whatsoever truth they attained by persevering invasion of the domain of ignorance. We have had our truth given us by a conqueror-even THE MIGHTIEST. Do we value our truth aright; do we seek to know and to practise what we have within our reach? do we exhibit in our lives the energy, the enthusiasm, the worship of wisdom which they exhibited? We go forth with the gift of a New Year in our possession. Shall we devote it to the search after wisdom or to-what? "There is a danger of the soul's becoming wed to pleasure, and forgetful of its high vocation." Pleasure or wisdom; which shall we choose? The latter is the more noble and the more enduring; let it be our choice, and let us pursue it eagerly, and use our time in its attainment, for though—

[blocks in formation]

COUNSEL TO AUTHORS.-It is vain for people to allege that they are naturally without gift, naturally stupid and sightless, and so can attain to no knowledge of anything; therefore, in writing of anything, must needs write falsehoods of it, there being in it no truth for them. Not so, good friends. The stupidest of you has a certain faculty- were it but that of articulate speech, and of physically discerning what lies under your nose. The stupidest of you would, perhaps, grudge to be compared with James Boswell-yet see what he has produced! You do not use your faculty honestly; your heart is shut up-full of greediness, malice, discontent; so your intellectual sense cannot be open. It is vain, also, to urge that James Boswell had opportunities, saw great men and great things, such as you can never hope to What make ye of Parson White, in Selborne? He had not only no great men to look on, but not even men-merely sparrows and cockchafers; yet has he left us a biography of these, which, under its title of "Natural History of Selborne," still remains valuable to us, which has copied a little sentence or two faithfully from the inspired volume of Nature, and so is itself not without inspiration. Go ye and do likewise.-Carlyle.

lock on.

* Lewes's "Biograph. Hist. Phil.," vol. i., p. 41.

Religion.

DO THE SCRIPTURES TEACH THAT THE PUNISHMENT OF THE WICKED WILL BE ETERNAL?

AFFIRMATIVE ARTICLE.-I.

"The punishment of the wicked in the future | mission, but with a reasoning, intelligent state will be an everlasting punishment, for that faith; and man's opinion upon it we regard as a reflected light, guiding us through the mists of our own ignorance and the bigotry of our own self-conceit.

state is an unalterable state. It can neither be thought that sinners should change their own natures, nor that God should give His grace to change them, when in this world the day of grace was misspent, the Spirit of grace resisted, and the means of grace abused and baffled."-Matthew Henry.

"Nam qui si vitiis humanis contaminarunt, et libidinibus se tradiderunt, iis devium quoddam iter est, seclusum à consilio deorum."-Cicero.

OUR present position has become, in modern times, rather an unpopular one, because by many it is considered to be unpleasant, and by others unfashionable; but no earnest searcher after truth will so judge of any manifestation of truth, much less of any portion of that revelation of truth which divine goodness has conferred upon man.

All the doctrines of scripture are equally true; but all are not equally important in their influence upon the character and condition of man; for while some doctrines affect man in his social relationship, others have regard to ceremonial observances during his continuance in the church militant, and some affect his entire views of the christian system of doctrine and duty, modifying his moral condition in time, and influencing his well-being in eternity. The doctrine now debated is of the latter kind;-repulsive, it may be, to the fastidious and falsely sentimental, but it is real, and must demand the serious attention of all earnest thinkers who seek their true interests.

The terms of the present question preclude any consideration of the cause of punishment to the wicked, its nature, the time of its commencement, or the locality where inflicted. We are limited to the simple duration of that punishment; and the only source of authority is the word of God. The opinions of good men may be beneficial in guiding our judgment, but they cannot be authoritative in demanding our acquiescence. God's word we take as our standard of authority; not with a blind, unreasoning, slavish sub

The evangelist Matthew has left on record, chap. xxv. ver. 46, the plain, emphatic declaration, from the lips of the blessed Jesus, that the wicked "shall go away into everlasting punishment." Were this the only passage of scripture affirming the eternal duration of punishment to the finally impenitent, it would appear to most persons conclusive, and they would listen to objections with evident surprise and dissatisfaction. But exception being taken by our opponents generally to the term "everlasting" (aiōnion in the original), we propose to examine the import of this term, with especial reference to its use in the scriptures. We would, however, remark in passing, that the general significance of the word, in its classic use, is that of permanence, continued or lasting duration; hence its application to life, time, eternity, &c.

God is said to be the "Creator blessed for evermore," Rom. i. 25; "the everlasting God," Gen. xxi. 33; Isa. xl. 28; Rom. xvi. 26; he "shall endure for ever," Psa. ix. 7; he "liveth for ever," Dan. iv. 34; xii. 7; he "from everlasting to everlasting" is God, Psa. xc. 2. Jesus Christ is "the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever," Heb. xiii. 8; he " abideth for ever," Jno. xii. 34; he is "over all, God blessed for ever," Rom. ix. 5; he "who liveth for ever," 1 Pet. i. 23; his "word endureth for ever," 1 Pet. i. 25; his "kingdom shall stand for ever," Dan. ii. 44. In all of these passages, which are only a small portion of what may be found in the scriptures, the personal being, the attributes and kingdom of the Godhead, are expressed by the same term (aiōnion) as the punishment of the wicked in a future world,—a term which refers to the duration of its subject merely, irrespective of any other idea

which may or may not be attached to, or in- | ever and ever.' In one of the remaining herent in the nature of the person or thing two, it is said of the impenitent, that is, of spoken of. These various subjects, respecting those among them who worship the beast which a certain duration, expressed by the and his image, that 'the smoke of their torwords ever and everlasting (aiōnion), are pre- ment ascendeth up for ever and ever.' In dicated, not only do not favour a limited pe- the remaining instance, it is said of the riod, however little the limit may fall short devil, who deceived the nations, of the beast, of infinity; but, on the contrary, they are op- and of the false prophet, that 'in the lake of posed, from their very nature, to any such fire and brimstone they shall be tormented, limit being imposed upon the permanent day and night, for ever and ever.' Now, let continuity of their existence. None believing me ask whether a man, even of moderate in the inspiration of the scriptures, or receiv- understanding, could be supposed to write ing the saving truths of the gospel as their with scrupulous integrity, and employ this hope of future happiness, ever questioned phrase sixteen times to denote an absolute either the infinite duration of the existence eternity, and twice to denote that which was of Deity, of his attributes, or of his king- infinitely different; while these were the only dom; why, then, should we force a different instances in which the phrase was applied construction upon the same term when to a given subject, and that of immeaapplied to another subject, which is equally surable importance to those for whom he free from limit, and with equal imperative- wrote? But if such a man cannot be supness demands continuity co-extensive with posed thus to use language, nor vindicate infinity in the only sense wherein the subject it when used in this manner, can such capable, or can endure that punishment conduct be attributed safely to the Spirit of which is predicated of it? The blessed Jesus, God?"* during his sojourn upon earth, expressed the will of his Father in these affecting words, "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life," Jno. iii. 16. Here the giver is the "everlasting God;" the gift, "everlasting life;" and the recipient, man, possessed of an immortal, ever-enduring soul.

Hence, from the scriptural use and significance of the term employed in all the cases cited, we conclude that to deny the eternal duration of the punishment inflicted upon the finally impenitent, involves a denial of the infinite duration of the Divine existence, in his person, attributes, and kingdom,-a denial of the perpetuity of the happiness of the blessed in heaven; and of the immortality of the soul. Such being the tremendous consequences of the rash act, we entreat the earnest soul to pause on the threshold of atheism, and consider ere he fall into the snare, and become irretrievably lost.

"The phrase (tous aiōnas eis tōn aiōnōn) commonly rendered 'for ever and ever' is used, if I mistake not, eighteen times in the New Testament! In fifteen instances it is applied to the continuance of the glory, perfection, government, and praise of God. In one, Rev. xxii. 5, it is said of the righteous in a future world, that they shall reign for

From the facts of every-day life, equally with the declarations of scripture, we know that the judicial punishment of the wicked does not commence until after the day of judgment; that is, until some pre-appointed period after the termination of man's present state of existence. That the present is the only state of trial or probation for man is a truth written on every page of the sacred record. "There is no work or device in the grave," Eccles. ix. 10; "The night cometh, when no man can work," Jno. ix. 4; "Therefore be ye also ready; for in such an hour as ye think not the Son of man cometh," Matt. xxiv. 44; "So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God," Rom. xiv. 12; "For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ," ver. 10. shall be judged according to the deeds done in the body, whether they be good or evil (passim), "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment," Heb. ix. 27. Seeing, then, that the punishment of the wicked commences after the present life, it has to do with the spiritual condition of man chiefly: we say chiefly with his spiritual condition, because it is evident, from man's nature and the scriptures, that the body must necessarily undergo a peculiar modifi

* Dr. Dwight, vol. vi., p. 404.

Man

cation before it is capacitated to exist in a future world. We also learn that it commences after the day of grace has been judicially terminated, and is, in reality, the execution of the sentence required by the broken law of justice and of grace. Such being the case, where do we find the warrant to suspend the execution of the sentence, " Depart from me, ye cursed," for I never knew you; "and these shall go away into everlasting punishment," Matt. xxv. 46? Who shall save them from this punishment, after the sentence is pronounced? Christ, in this passage, prophetically announces the immediate effect of the sentence; who shall gainsay his word? If the sentence be not executed, or only limited in its execution, do we not charge the Most High with folly? To affirm that sinners are capable of exercising repentance towards God, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, after having entered the precincts of hell, is perfectly gratuitous, and evidences the folly of the affirmer; yet even this is necessary, if the duration of the punishment of the finally impenitent is less than eternal. No sinner, suffering for his sins in a future world, can possibly be saved by any means differing from the means of grace here, "for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved," Acts iv. 12, but "the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth," ver. 10. Moreover, we may very fairly conclude, from the nature of the case, that there will never exist a disposition, or capacity even, in impenitent sinners, to exercise the necessary penitence and faith to secure acceptance after their judicial condemnation. One ingredient in their condemnation is the fact that they, at the time of the sentence, are unchanged as to their moral character and disposition as to their judge, the Lord Jesus, whom they have always despised; these sinful feelings, this character, passes with them into that future state of punishment. Their punishment may, not improbably, consist in the continued possession of the same character, and be aggravated by the knowledge that it has been the cause of their condemnation has purchased for them the wrath of an offended God. Under such circumstances as these, with the soul hateful in the sight of God at the time of its condemnation -the same character carried with it into a state of punishment resulting from the con

demnation-all hope of extraneous help cut off by the judicial close of the day of grace

where is the possibility of escape from eternal retribution? In such hopelessness reason and revelation leave the impenitent soul. May we all see the importance of the sacred injunction-" Flee from the wrath to come."

It may be replied that the terms, "ever" and "everlasting," are frequently so used in the Old Testament to convey the idea of limited duration, as to invalidate the argument founded upon them respecting the present question. We opine not; and refer to the generic significance of the term aionios, the word employed for the purpose, both in the Septuagint and in the New Testament. The generic idea presented in this term is that of continuity—permanent existence-duration; and any qualification which it may receive must arise from the essential nature of the subject to which it is attached in logical connection or grammatical collocation; thence it necessarily implies the longest period of which the subject is capable. In other words, the predicate with which it is associated is extended to the utmost limit of its subject. These remarks are fully borne out by passages such as the following: "The Lord said unto Abram land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever," Gen. xiii. 14, 15; "I will give unto thee and to thy seed after thee

all the

. . all the land of Canaan for an everlasting possession," Gen. xvii. 8. In both places, the reference of the terms "ever" and "everlasting" is to the existence of Abram's seed as the chosen nation-as the peculiar people of God, which existence is determined by the advent of Christ, and consequently these terms are truly applied to express the longest period of which the subject was capable. Of the same nature are the phrases, "Thy servant for ever," Deut. xv. 17; "He shall serve him for ever," Exod. xxi. 6; "The everlasting hills," Gen. xlix. 26; Everlasting priesthood," Exod. xl. 15; Numb. xxv. 13; and many others, all susceptible of the same subordination to the rules of interpretation, which warrant the duration of future punishment being assumed as a scripture doctrine, and yet, in these passages, limit the like expressions to a period far short of eternity.

66

In addition to, and in support of, our view

« PreviousContinue »