objections, we now present reasons for holding the orthodox view.

Bear in mind, then, that man is immortal. It would be wandering from our subject to discuss the evidence by which the doctrine of man's deathlessness is established; we only remark, which is sufficient to our present purpose, that the immortality of the human soul cannot be disproved; hence, as a foundation for our reflections, it is an immovable basis. Being immortal, man will live for ever somewhere; and his moral character will determine his location and circumstances. Whither can an impenitent sinner go when he dies? Whatever death may do, or not do, it must lead to a very important change. When a man has persisted in vice during life, and is at last separated from the gracious influences experienced upon earth, what is there to restore him to virtue? There is moral causation in humanity and the universe. There are many effects in human society resulting from moral causes, and while moral causation is as certain in its operation as physical, where there is no intervention, habit strengthens the principle. A man under dominion of sin and satan to the last, dies in a hardened, impenitent condition. The eternal operation of moral causation must prevent a cessation of penalty, and bind the sinner to the termless effects of his sins.

It is undeniable that the effects of sin, when let alone, are eternal. Evil will never be thoroughly eradicated from the moral universe; the effects of human sin will in many cases be immortal. If God were to interpose, after Christ has mediated in vain for thousands, evil might be utterly destroyed; but as that would involve the destruction of moral agency, virtue in the proper sense could not follow; then, the very need of an interposition shows the effects of sin are eternal, as far as the sinner is concerned. Under certain conditions, a sinner at the very close of life may escape the effects of his own conduct, though others have been ruined by his influence. His sins through Christ may be forgiven. He may by grace be meetened for the world of light, and afterwards be taken thither; but this is an extraordinary case of salvation at the last hour. The mediation of Christ is available for man, even in such an extremity. Though late, he has fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before him, and thereby escaped the penalty of his sin. But to suppose that one who dies with an unrenewed nature and accumulated guilt will be allowed to escape, is, according to the foregoing reasoning, impossible. A profound thinker has wisely remarked, that "the lost spirit enters the future as the perpetual slave of sin." This utterance is sanctioned by the word of God: He that is unjust, let him be unjust still; and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still. As the tree falleth, so it must lie. This language indicates the removal of all restorative means, and

implies, that as the man is in his moral condition, so he will remain. What is there in that state of retribution to restore him? The tendency of everything in his condition is to confirm his wickedness. In the case of impenitent sinners there is a rebellious state of mind towards God when they enter the state of retribution; in that condition their being is perpetuated for ever. It is unquestionable that sheer penalties have no tendency to produce penitence, reformation, or love. What, then, is more evident than that there is an endless perpetuation of hatred against God? If so, how can the penalties be otherwise than eternal? There is more certainty that impenitent sinners will continue to sin in hell than we at once perceive. In heaven men worship God; hell being its awful opposite, must be a place of sin. Can we imagine a world of spirits, divested of all goodness, with their vicious passions loose, and a thousand circumstances to increase their strength, living an eternity, or even a day, yet committing no sin? The thing is impossible. Bearing in mind the deathlessness of the human soul and the continuance of sinfulness, must not the penalties be eternal?

There is nothing remedial in hell; it is a place of unmixed retribution. Between it and any remedial agency a great gulf is fixed. No remedy being in hell, what remains but "everlasting destruction" for the lost? No redemption nor redeemer is in hell, no God in mercy beckoning the sinner's return, no Holy Spirit to give newness of life and meetness for heaven. Dissociate a planet from all the controlling influences of its central orb, propel it in a given direction when thus isolated, and it will move in that direction for ever. So with a lost spirit; all restraints, human and divine, all gospel agencies are far away, they do not touch him, therefore he must depart further from God.

The Bible teaches the endless duration of future punishment. To cite all its testimony on this point would be to copy a large portion of its contents. In Isaiah we read, "The strong shall be as tow, the maker of it as a spark; they shall both burn together, and none shall quench them." "Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?" Daniel declares, "Many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt." The New Testament invariably confirms this view of the doctrine, but never favours the opposite. It declares, "Their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." John said that Christ would "burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire." Christ declared, "These shall go away into everlasting punishment." Every word burns with a terrible emphasis. The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that know not God and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ; who shall be

punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power." Souls now in hell are suffering the vengeance of eternal fire; "the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever, and they have no rest day nor night." To these passages, and others of like terrible import, exception has been taken. Objections have arisen in different quarters; by answering these our remarks must close.

It is said, "Well, annihilation will be eternal punishment. When a man is executed for crime he suffers eternal punishment, because he is never restored." This is not correct. Annihilation would be relief from punishment, not "suffering the vengeance of eternal fire," "dwelling with everlasting burnings," "tormented day and night;" but the lost suffer all these. "But the words eternal and everlasting do not invariably mean unending duration. In the Old Testament they sometimes mean to the end of a period, dispensation, the end of time, or the end of the world, as also in the New Testament." We reply, first,-When such is the case it is evident that the expression means limited duration by the subject or the nature of the case, which exceptions confirm the rule; but in other cases, where no restriction is intended or intimated, but the words used in their full and proper sense, they mean duration without end. Now, when the words are applied to the duration of final punishment there is no restriction whatever; but endless duration affirmed. Second. The terms must mean as long as their subjects endure. If the Jubilee be spoken of, the expressions mean to its dawn; if an age, to its completion; if a dispensation, to its end; if to all time, as long as it endures; if the earth, as long as it continues. In the same way, when the subjects are immortal, the terms are applied to their endless existence, that is, for ever. Human souls being immortal, and moral character being eternal, in case of final impenitence, men must eternally suffer the penal consequences of their sins. Third. The same terms are employed to indicate the duration of future happiness, the ages ever coming, the existence of humanity, heaven, and the lifetime of God, as are used to denote the duration of future punishment. If in these cases they signify duration without end, we are shut up to the conclusion that the punishment of unforgiven sinners is also unending. Fourth. Scholars and divines aver, in the most positive manner, that the words translated eternal and everlasting, cannot mean less than duration without end; unless by a violation of the canons of just interpretation. The following extracts will suffice: "To proceed, then, to an examination of the argument in question. It consists of two parts. The first is, that the terms by which future punishment is set forth in the Bible do not demand the belief of its perpetuity. Now, in opposition to this, I contend that they do. I will confine myself to the principal

terms which are employed. They are derivations and combinations of the Greek word AION, chiefly the adverbial form EIS TON AIONA, or EIS TOUS AIONAS TON AIONON, which our translators have rendered "for ever," and "for ever and ever;" and its adjective form, AIONION, which they have always rendered "eternal," or "everlasting." Now it is impossible for me to go into a minute examination of a hundred passages in justification of this rendering; but I will adduce the two first and the two last instances of the use of the terms, which I think decisive of the question.

:

The first two instances I select from Gen. iii. 22, and xxi. 33:"Lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat and live for ever." "And Abraham planted a grove in Beersheba, and called there on the name of the Lord, the everlasting God." In the Greek translation the "for ever" is EIS TON AIONA, the "everlasting" AIONION. There can be no mistake here in the conclusion that the adverb in the first instance implies immortality, and that in the second instance the adjective asserts proper eternity. The two other instances which I select are from the book of Revelation, xxii. 5, and xx. 10:-"The servants of God shall reign for ever and ever," "The devil shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." In these passages we have the adverbial form of the expression, and that in its intensest form, EIS TOUS AIONAS TON And it is clear as light that the reign and the torment are of equal duration, and that duration eternity. Now there are several passages where the future punishment of the wicked is thus set forth; but if there were none other than the one before us, it would be decisive: "They shall go away into everlasting (AIONION) punishment, but the righteous into life (AIONION) eternal."

AIONON.

The following remarks are from Professor Stuart, quoted by Dr. Pye Smith in his first lines of Christian Theology, pp. 407-8:"I trust it will not be questioned, in regard to the nine cases where AION is applied to the happiness of the righteous in another world, and the fifty-one cases where AIONIOS is applied to the same, that a happiness without limits, without end, is intended to be designated. Can it be reasonably doubted, then, that the five cases in which AION is applied to the future punishment of the wicked, and the seven cases in which AIONIOS is applied to the same subject, have a meaning like that of the preceding cases? The time designated in both is future; the world is future. The intention of the writers seems very apparently to have been similar in both cases. The invariable laws of interpretation, therefore, would seem to demand a like exegesis. I take it to be a rule, in construing all antithetic forms of expression, that where you can perceive the force of one side of the antithesis, you do of course

* Lectures on Theology, by Rev. G. Legge, LL.D.

Q

come to a knowledge of the force of the other side. If life eternal is promised on one side, and death eternal is threatened on the other and opposite one, is it not to be supposed that the word eternal, which qualifies death, is a word of equal force and import with the word eternal, which qualifies life? In no other case could a doubt be raised with regard to such a principle. I venture to say that the exception here (if such a one must be made) is without any parallel in the just principles of interpretation. If, then, the words AION and AIONIOS are applied sixty times-which is the fact in the New Testament to designate the continuance of the future happiness of the righteous, and some twelve times to designate the continuance of the future misery of the wicked, by what principles of interpreting language does it become possible for us to avoid the conclusion that AION and AIONIOS have the same sense in both cases? It does most plainly and indubitably follow that, if the Scriptures have not asserted the endless punishment of the wicked, neither have they asserted the endless happiness of the righteous nor the endless glory and existence of the Godhead. The result seems to me to be plain, and philosophically and exegetically certain. It is this either the declarations of the Scriptures do not establish the facts that God and his glory, and praise, and happiness are endless, nor the happiness of the righteous in a future world is endless, or else they establish the fact that the punishment of the wicked is endless." Fifth: If the duration of the penalties of unforgiven sin be not endless, God has alarmed us with needless fears; but this supposition cannot be entertained; hence we must conclude that the penalties of sin are absolutely termless. This conclusion is not shocking unless we forget that such a result is perfectly right, and essential to the welfare of the universe, and also that God has in Christ made ample provision for the complete salvation of every person, now and for ever, upon terms with which each responsible human being may comply; and as for the irresponsible portion of humanity, an ever-gracious God will take care of them.

A. C.