Is Sin Eternal?

THERE is no support for the theory of "Eternal Hope" in claiming the paternal relation of God to the sinners, in their punishment; for as we have just seen, that relationship does not exist until they accept Christ. If I understand correctly Canon Wilberforce's discourses, he claims that the sinner is to be punished for the full extent of his sins, and that it is this punishment which is to so soften and subdue the sinner that he will accept Christ. With this view, then, his sonship commences after his punishment is ended. How then is his punishment the "chastisement" of a son for correction before he is a son?

As a sample of proof texts used to substantiate this theory of "remedial punishment" to the ungodly, we instance one used by the Canon in his first discourse: "And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors till he should pay all that was due unto him." Matt. 18:34. In commenting on this he said: "The duration of the sufferings of the wicked in hell shall be commensurate only with the burden of their willful sin and when they have paid the uttermost farthing, or, in other words, when the will is conquered, hell will have done its work, and its souls shall be admitted into the regions of the blessed."

After reading the above, the following thoughts crowd upon the mind. The Canon claims that the sinner by actual suffering has paid the "uttermost farthing" due for his sins. If the debt is fully paid and he still alive, he must then be free from debt, free from sin, and of course no longer is a condemned sinner, but a subject of Heaven. A question now arises, to whom, or to what is he to ascribe his salvation? Not surely to forgiveness in the blood of Christ. If he has himself paid the debt there is no forgiveness about it. A paid debt is not a forgiven debt. The claim is that he has paid the debt by sufferings; if so, then the sufferings canceled the debt, but the sufferings were the powers of hell that got hold upon him; as stated above, "hell will have done its work." Is he to ascribe the glory of his salvation to the torments of hell? It is he that has endured the torments, shall he then ascribe the glory of his salvation to himself, and glory in his power to endure the torments of hell? If he is to ascribe the glory of his salvation to Christ, it seems to me with the above theory it would be giving thanks to Christ for permitting him to go to hell and work out his own salvation by enduring its pains.

The question arises on the text itself, Was this parable of Christ given to illustrate the torments of hell in their remedial and purifying character, or for some other purpose? If we turn to verse 21, we shall learn just what called it forth: "Then came Peter to him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother trespass against me and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, until seven times; but until seventy times seven." Then follows the parable, telling that the lord of the servant committed him to prison for a debt of £1,875,000 that had once been forgiven, because he would not forgive his fellow-servant in distress a debt of about £3 2s. 6d. Our Saviour's own application is, "So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trespasses." St. Matt. 18:35. We see, then, the subject in the dealing of brother with brother; the spirit they should possess in the church of Christ to forgive wrongs when confessed by the erring. The statement of the case seems to be that if we do not possess a forgiving spirit toward a repenting brother we shall lose the forgiveness we may already have obtained from God. This seems also to quite agree with the statement of the prophet Ezekiel, "When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousness shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it." Eze. 33:13.

This parable, then, while it shows the certainty of God rejecting at last even those who once enjoyed his favor, if they foster an unforgiving spirit, is nevertheless silent as to the result of that final punishment. As already shown by other scriptures, they shall "not be," and "be as though they had not been."

While commenting on this text (Matt. 18) the Rev. Canon incidentally referred to another scripture as favoring his theory. It is that speaking of "paying the uttermost farthing." We will look at these words of our Saviour as recorded by St. Luke. We read: "When thou goest with thine adversary to the magistrate, as thou art in the way, give diligence that thou mayest be delivered from him; lest he hale thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and the officer cast thee into prison. I tell thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid the very last mite." St. Luke 12:58, 59. The same occurs in St. Matthew's record of Christ's discourse upon the mount. He calls it agreeing with the adversary, and calls it the payment of "the uttermost farthing."

If we accept the Canon's interpretation of these texts and call the magistrate in this case "God the judge of all," to whose bar we are hastening, who is the adversary with whom we are to "agree." I read in St. Peter's epistle, "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:" 1 Peter 5:8. Am I to understand Christ to advise us to agree with the groat adversary of souls, while on our way to God's judgment, lest he deliver us up to God? Every candid reader says, nay, and so say I; still if the sequel of the case relates to the final Judgment the advice would seem to be with reference to our greatest adversary while we are in the way.

I would suggest that the text does not refer directly to future punishment or its results, but that it is one of our Saviour's lessons for practical every-day life here. In this case, as upon many other occasions, he instructed his hearers to pursue that course of action which would be the source of the least trouble to them, and make for peace. The burden, then, of this text with its corresponding one in St. Matthew is to show us the importance of making all due concessions to those who would bring us before magistrates, seeking thus to be released from them, rather than be involved in perplexing suits at law which might result in our adversary—the prosecutor—committing us to prison until his claim was fully satisfied. The principle of this case is the same as in St. Matt. 5:40, "And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also." That is, meet his claim if at a sacrifice, rather than be involved in contentious lawsuits. I see not how the text can be made to prove that the fires of hell are to purify sinners at last, and fit them for Heaven, for that is not the subject of our Saviour's remarks.

Those who maintain the theory of "Eternal Hope" seek support for their doctrine of the final salvation of all in what the Scriptures say of the "restitution," especially the words of St. Peter: "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.” Acts 3:19-21.

One would most readily conclude, on reading the above scripture, that whatever may be comprehended in the "restitution" it is necessary to repent, and be converted in this world in order to be a partaker of the benefits of that restitution. It should also be borne in mind that the text does not say, the restitution of all men, or of all beings, but "restitution of all things". Some have said, if it is the restitution of all things of course that will include all men, even if it does not say all men. We must observe with care, it does not say that "all things," indiscriminately, are to be restored, but it is to be "the restitution of all things which God has spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." The question as to what is to be restored must then be limited by that concerning which all the prophets have spoken. There is a work of restitution concerning which they have spoken, but it is not the restitution to God's favor of those found in rebellion and sin against him at the Judgment, but a removing from the earth of the curse which has been brought upon it in consequence of sin. It is well expressed by St. Peter in his epistle: "Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." 2 Peter 3:12, 13.

Here is a restoring of the earth to its Eden beauty, to become, the final abode of the saints. Such a restitution has been spoken of by the prophets in clear and explicit terms. They have not told us that the ungodly shall be made partakers in that restitution, but, as expressed by St. Peter, "It shall come to pass, that every soul which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people." Acts 3:23.

In the fifth of his eight discourses, Canon Wilberforce gave us what he undoubtedly regarded one of his strongest arguments, based upon the words of St. Paul, "As in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." 1 Cor. 15:22. He said, "We should be doing violence to the word of God if we ascribed a lower and less extensive potency to the death of the second Adam than to the disobedience of the first, that it was in accordance not only with all God's dealings, but also with the indications of an enlightened reason that the recovery of all men through Christ should be analogous to, and co-extensive with, the ruin of all men through Adam." He quoted, to give strength to his position, the words of St. Paul to the Galatians: "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed." (Gal. 3:8), and said he asked them to dwell only on the closeness of the parallel and the sharpness of the antithesis in the words selected as his text, and to judge whether, by every rule of honest criticism and unbiased common sense, the word all in one case does not mean the same as the word all in the other. This wonderful and comprehensive passage predicated of all, without exception, that they should be made alive; and in its true and highest sense to be made alive was to be brought into conscious fellowship with God, by the spirit of his love, power and wisdom.

It is undoubtedly true, as stated by the Canon, that the word all used with reference to the second Adam is the same as the all used with reference to the first Adam, and that all mankind are in some way affected by the death of Christ. How they are affected is the real point of interest before us.

The meaning of being "made alive" must be gained by a correct understanding of the death that men die in Adam. If the death is a spiritual one, then the making alive from that death would be quickening into a spiritual life, and bringing into "conscious fellowship with God," as claimed by the Canon; but if the death in Adam is a literal death and dissolution of the body, then the making alive in Christ would have direct reference to a literal resurrection from the dead. That the latter is the real meaning of the text appears from the fact that the words are found in a chapter devoted entirely to the subject of the literal resurrection of Christ and the benefit to be derived therefrom, and especially the literal resurrection of his people from their graves, from a condition into which they went as mortal, corruptible beings, but from which they come forth incorruptible and immortal.