A Treatise on Atonement, by Hosea Ballou
Part III. -- Consequences of Atonement to Mankind.
Chapter 3. Reasons for Believing in Universal Salvation
Having answered, as I hope to the reader's satisfaction, some of the most important objections against God's universal goodness to his creatures, I shall now turn on the other hand, and give the reader some of my evidences for believing in the so-much-despised doctrine of universal holiness and happiness. First, I reason from the nature of divine goodness, in which all pretend to believe, and none dare in a direct sense to deny, that God could not, consistently with himself, create a being that would experience more misery than happiness. Secondly, if God be infinitely good, his goodness is commensurate with his power and knowledge; then all beings whom his power produced are the objects of his goodness; and to prove that any being was destitute of it would prove that Deity's knowledge did not comprehend such being. Thirdly, there is as much propriety in saying that God is infinite in power, but that he did not create all things, as there is in saying, though God be infinite in goodness, yet part of his creatures will never be the partakers of it. It might as well be said that God is infinite in knowledge, and yet ignorant of the most part of events which are daily and hourly taking place, as to say that he is infinitely good, and yet only a few of his creatures were designed for happiness. Fourthly, if the Almighty, as we believe him to be, did not possess power sufficient to make all his creatures happy, it was not an act of goodness in him to create them. If he have that power, but possess no will for it, it makes a bad matter as much worse as is possible. I then reduce my opponent to the necessity of telling me if those whom he believes will be endlessly lost, be those whom God could save, but would not, or those whom he would save, but could not. If it be granted that God has both power and will to save all men, it is granting all I want for a foundation of my faith.
I would further argue that, as man is constituted to enjoy happiness, on moral principles (to the knowledge of which principles we come by degrees), it is as reasonable to believe that all men were in tended to obtain a consummate knowledge of the moral principles of their nature as that any of Adam's race were. There is not an individual of the whole family of man who is perfectly satisfied with those enjoyments which earth and time afford him; the soul is constituted for nobler pleasures, which to me is an evidence that God has provided for all men some better things than can be found in earthly enjoyments, where we find but little except vanity and disappointment. There is an immortal desire in every soul for future existence and happiness. For the truth of this assertion I appeal to the consciences of my readers. Why should the Almighty implant this desire in us if he never intended to satisfy it? Supposing a mother has the power of modifying the desires and appetite of her child, would she cause it to want that which she could not get for it? Would she take pleasure in seeing her child pine for fruits which did not grow in the country where she lived, and which she could not get? Or would she prefer the anguish of the child to its happiness, when it was in her power to grant all it wanted If such a mother were to be found, who would call her a godly woman? Could her child, thus tormented, rise up and call her blessed? No, surely it could not.
I further argue that all wise, good, and exemplary men wish for the truth of the doctrine for which I contend; they earnestly pray for the salvation of all men, and do all in their power, by the grace of God, to dissuade men from sin, to the obedience of the gospel; they enlist willingly into the service of virtue, to endeavor to win proselytes to holiness; their object is the destruction of sin, and the advancement of righteousness, and they believe, and I think justly, that God will bless their labors.
None but wicked men would wish for the endless duration of sin. Were it left to the carnal mind, it would wish for nothing but the privilege of drinking in iniquity forever. But those who truly love God and holiness desire night and day to overcome the vile propensities of their own deceitful hearts, and pray for the reconciliation of others to holiness and happiness. Now, why should we suppose that God is more of the mind of the wicked than of the righteous? If it be God's spirit in us which causes us to pray for the destruction of sin, is it reasonable to say that this same spirit has determined that sin shall always exist? Are we not right in judging of the nature and character of God from the dictates of his spirit in us? If so, does this spirit teach us the necessity of endless transgression and misery? I wish the reader to keep in mind that I hold sin and misery inseparably connected, and holiness and happiness so likewise.
I further argue, if any of the human race be endlessly miserable, the whole must be, providing they all know it; for, reasoning from that spirit of benevolence which is necessary to a conformity to the principles of holiness, I prove it impossible for a well-disposed man to see another in misery, without bearing a very sensible proportion of such misery. If it be argued that this idea is wrong, and that the spirit which dictates it is of the evil one; I say, in answer, all good men in the world feel it to be a truth; and no man ever exhibited more of it than the Saviour of the world. Man is constituted with powers of sympathy; and, while these principles last, he cannot enjoy complete happiness and see one of his fellow-creatures in torment. I mistrust some one will say, then Christ is not completely happy, nor the saints who have gone before us. I have no objection to the observation; but think I see a divine beauty in the idea. I will query a little on the subject. It is generally believed that Christ existed before he was born in Bethlehem; and it is evident from the scriptures that he did. But I would inquire, what was his situation? Was it a state of complete happiness ? I think likely this question will generally be answered in the affirmative. Then I further ask, had he no desire for the salvation of sinners before he came into our world? Here the question must be answered in the affirmative, let the other question be answered as it may; for, if that were not the case, why did he come for the express purpose of saving them? If he willed and intended the salvation of mankind, and also determined to encounter all the sufferings that were finally laid upon him in favor of so worthy an object, it is evident his happiness was not complete; neither do I believe it will be until he shall see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied.
If any one should be so particular as to query, asking, if the Almighty himself be not desirous of the salvation of sinners; and if so, how can his happiness be complete? I answer, a being, to whom events do not take place in succession, nor time pass away, with whom an eternity is a present now, whose knowledge is intuitive, and who can neither hope nor anticipate, can neither increase nor decrease in happiness. But when we speak of God, abstractedly, our words ought to be few and chosen.
I have, I think, sufficiently proved in this work that Jesus Christ is a created, dependent being, and that he stands at the head of the creation of man, etc. If I be right in that idea, I think I may reasonably argue that he is a being to whom events take place in succession, who hopes and anticipates, and who, for the joy set before him, endured the cross, and despised the shame. Therefore, until the great work of his mission is completed, I cannot conceive that his happiness will he complete. If it be argued that Christ, when on the cross, said it was finished, and that, in a moral sense, he felt no more pain for sinners, I have a right to object, for I do not know what warrant the scripture gives for believing all this argument. That the sufferings of Christ, as to answer the type of a sin-offering, were then ended, is a reasonable idea; but to suppose that Christ was then dispossessed of that principle which caused him to feel for the woe of mankind, does not appear reasonable. I have no idea that the glorious Captain of our salvation now suffers as he did, when he said, " My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" But I believe that he whose soul travailed for the redemption of man, now increases in joy as the work of reconciliation is going on, to the destruction of sin and the conversion of sinners. He has told us that there is more joy in the presence of the angels over one sinner that repenteth than over ninety and nine just persons who need no repentance. I do not conceive that one part of human nature can be made perfectly happy while the rest are in misery. When St. Paul spake of those who died in faith, not having obtained the promise, he said, "God having provided some better things for us, that they, without us, could not be made perfect."
Those who are the most devout on earth are the most desirous for the advancement of the Redeemer's kingdom, and the deliverance of themselves and their fellow-men by sin, from sin and misery. For the sake of a case, I will suppose a Christian, to-day, is exercised with fervent desires for the reconciliation of sinners; at night, he dies. Do all those holy desires cease at death? If they do not, but do continue, though the happiness of the soul be great, yet it is, at least, capable of being enlarged, or increased, by the prosperity of the Redeemer's cause among men.
How the idea ever got place in the human mind, that even fathers and mothers, in the world to come, would rejoice to see their own offspring in endless flames and hopeless torments, I can hardly conceive; though the probability is, it was first invented to shun, in theory, those difficulties not otherwise to be avoided. I wish to use this error as prudently as possible; but I wish to have it rightfully understood, and judged of impartially. Will perfect reconciliation to God have this effect? I know it is contended that it will; but what evidence have we of it? Was not Christ reconciled, or in a state of conformity to God's law? Did he manifest joy at the sufferings of mankind? When he looked on Jerusalem, that abominable city, and knew that its chiefs would be his murderers, when he spake of the dreadful calamities just ready to burst on their devoted heads, how did he feel? Streams of sorrow broke from the eye of innocence; in his grief, he spake of their destruction, but prophesies of seeing him again, when they should welcome him, saying, "Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord !"
If perfect reconciliation to God will effect complete happiness at the sight of human misery, the more we are reconciled to God the more satisfaction we should take in seeing our fellow-creatures miserable! Then, those who can look on men in distress with the least sorrow are the most reconciled to divine goodness; and those who feel the most sorrow at the afflictions of their fellow-men are the most perverse and wicked! Some may say, heaven is entirely different from this world, and when we get there we shall be totally changed from what we now are; therefore, it will not do to argue what we shall be there from what we ought to be here. Then the awful fact is, all we call goodness here will be called badness there; and that which we call badness here will be goodness there!
If the effects of moral holiness in the world to come should be different from what they are here, I wish to be informed on what moral principle the change is made. If these things be so, the souls of the cruel need but little alteration to prepare them for heaven, and that little laid out in making them what we should call worse. Such a heaven as this does not, I hope, exist in the universe. My opponent will urge his argument still further on this subject, and say, it is not the misery of the wicked that affords so much pleasure to those who are in heaven, but their joy is increased in consequence of the execution of justice. This, however, is giving up what is contended for, namely, that every degree of misery will create thousands of degrees of happiness, because, could divine justice be as well understood without this misery as with it, the misery itself would do no good. I am willing to grant that a good man will prefer the execution of justice to his own private ease, or the partial happiness of a criminal. But how would a judge appear who should manifest joy and gladness on pronouncing the sentence of death upon one of his fellow-men? Who would not turn from such a court with disgust and deep abhorrence? To call such a circumstance an instance in which men have an occasion to rejoice is a violation of our senses. I will say for myself, I neither expect nor desire perfect happiness while I see my fellow-men in misery; I had rather be possessed of that sympathy which causes me to feel for another than to enjoy an unsocial pleasure in a frosty heaven of misanthropy? Is it possible that we should be completely happy and see those in misery whom we love? No one will say we can. Are we not commanded to love our enemies? Can we be truly happy and not love them? Surely we cannot; then how can we be completely happy and see them miserable? A parent may be persuaded to attend his child while a surgeon performs an amputation; but with what acute feelings his heart is agitated! How eagerly would he inhale the pain and make it his own were it possible? But there is something in all this that is tolerable; he is in hopes of saving the life of his child: were it not for his hopes could he endure the sight? But what is all this compared with a parent viewing his child in endless flames! O parents, what a blessed circumstance it is that when we are called to part with our children on earth, we can mingle a little joy with the sorrow in hoping that they belong to the deathless family in heaven! If the good desires which are found in the Christian heart are ever to be satisfied universal subjection to the government of Christ will surely take place; if virtue ever gains an universal victory over sin and vice, universal holiness and happiness will be the consequence. Man exists on such a principle as renders him capable of improving in knowledge and happiness, which he obtains by experience ; and it is very evident that as the wheels of time move man is fast advancing which favors the idea that at some period known to Deity the desired haven will be obtained in the acquisition of that wisdom which is from above.
When we send our children to school it is for the purpose of learning that of which they are ignorant; and it is by degrees that those sciences are obtained which constitute them learned. When a child first takes a quill in hand to write, he blunders, but does not blunder so as to imitate the copy, neither will two out of a thousand imitate each other.
Men begin their moral existence in their separate capacity in the same way; unacquainted with the skill of their divine preceptor, they err from sacred rules and differ from their fellow-pupils. Jars and broils ensue, and sorrow and woe are the consequences. But as they become taught they conform to the divine rules of their master, and learn that their happiness consists in being united. Happiness is the greatest object of all rational beings, and no one will follow any particular object any longer than he thinks it subservient to his main one. The reason why men sin is, they think, and think erroneously, that they shall obtain more happiness in so doing than in following the dictates of truth. But is it reasonable to suppose that the error will never be discovered? Will the sinner never find his mistake? 0 yes, says my opposer, to his eternal confusion and endless misery! But stop a moment; if he find his mistake he will abandon the object; and when he ceases to sin he begins to reform and approximate towards holiness and happiness. I have sufficiently argued that man cannot be miserable, in consequence of moral condemnation, any longer than he is, in a moral sense, a sinner. Then he must sin endlessly in order to be miserable so long; which if so, he will never find his mistake, he will never learn that righteousness and truth are more productive of happiness than sin. But I think it erroneous to suppose that a being who is capable of learning anything cannot learn some time short of eternity that it is better to do right than wrong. Should we argue, however, that that might in some cases be true, it would destroy the idea of complete and positive misery for which my opponent contends. Complete misery would not admit of a prospect which could administer the smallest hope; in which case, the soul would have no object which could possibly induce it to action; then would the soul become inert, and its existence would be destroyed, and become not a subject of happiness or misery.
I would argue again, from a reasonable idea, admitted by all, namely, that mankind, in their moral existence, originated in God. Why, then, do we deny his final assimilation with the fountain from whence he sprang? The streams and rivulets which water the hill-country run in every direction, as the make of land occasions. They are stained with various mines and soils through which they pass; hut at last they find their entrance into the ocean, where their different courses are at an end, and they are tempered like the fountain which receives them. Though man, at present, forms an aspect similar to the waters in their various courses, yet, in the end of his race, I hope he will enjoy an union with his God, and with his fellows.
Having given a few hints, from the nature of moral beings, in favor of my general plan, I shall beg the attention of the reader to some evidences, from the Scriptures of truth, in favor of universal holiness and happiness. The method I intend to pursue will be conclusive; for I am determined to admit no Scripture as evidence, in this case, that needs any interpretation to cause it to mean what I wish to prove; therefore I shall produce but a small part of the Scriptures which I conceive have a direct meaning in favor of Universalism.
It will not be doubted that man was created in Christ, who, the apostle says, is the head of every man. To this point I have already attended in this work, and sufficiently proved it. I have also argued that the formation of man was after his creation, as appears from the account given in Genesis. Now, what I wish to prove from Scripture is a complete deliverance of the whole of humanity from morality, and the governing power of the law of sin which is found in our members, to a reinstatement in the heavenly Adam of immortality, where the law of the spirit of life will be the whole governing power to which man will be subjected. It seems reasonable to conclude that man in a spiritual sense was created in Christ, the heavenly nature, as his body was formed in Adam, the earthly. And as all our bodies came from that one formation, so all our spirits came from that one creation. As it is by the nature of this one formed creature that we are all brought into a state of moral death, so it must be by the spirit of this one created man that all will be brought finally to the enjoyment of spiritual life and peace. There is a passage in Acts iii. 20, 21, which reads very literally in proof of my argument. "And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: whom the heaven bust 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." Can there be any dispute, in the reader's mind, respecting the nature of this restitution? Will any one pretend that this restitution is only reinstating man in a state of probation? If that were the object of Christ's coming into our world, if that were intended by his death and resurrection, was not the work already done when Peter spake these words? Why then does he speak of the times of restitution yet to come? Or, if this restitution of all things only meant the restitution of honor to the law, by the sufferings of Christ, I ask, again, was this not also past, when Peter spake these words? I cannot conceive that a restitution of man to any state which he has occupied in flesh and blood is worthy of the Gospel plan; for it is said of man, in his earthly nature, his best estate is vanity. But if we view the plan of the restitution of all things, which is to be accomplished in the fulness of times, a restitution or restoration from mortality and sin to a state of immortality and righteousness, it is consistent with Scriptures, and worthy of God. If my opponent, in his struggles, should say, things do not refer to men, I would ask, what the word things does mean in Scripture when used as it is in the passage quoted? I cannot guess to what he would apply it. I will quote two passages more where the word is used. (See Col. i. 20.) "And (having made peace through the blood of his cross) by him to reconcile all things to himself, by him, I say, whether they be things in earth or things in heaven." That the things to be reconciled are men may be seen by verse 21. "And you that were sometimes alienated and enemies in your minds by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled." The way in which Christ effected this work is expressed in the 22nd verse, "in the body of his flesh, through death, to present you holy, and unblamable, and unreprovable in his sight." (Eph. 1. 10.) "That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all thing in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth." The reader will do well to observe the similarity between the last quoted passage and that in Acts. There, it is said, "until the times of the restitution of all things," and here, it is said, "that in the dispensation of the fulness of times, he might gather together in one all things in Christ." The 11th verse says, "in whom also we have obtained an inheritance." No doubt can be entertained respecting the things to be restored and reconciled and gathered together in Christ. There is part of the words of Peter which I quoted from Acts which ought to be particularly noticed in order to cause those who have said the doctrine for which I contend is a new doctrine, to consider whether they are right in that matter. The words are these, "Which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began." If all God's prophets believed in the doctrine of the restitution of all things, I hardly think it is so modern as some pretend.
I will next call the attention of the reader to what the holy prophets have said in support of the doctrine of the restitution of all things. But as their testimony stands on the promise of God to Abraham, which contains the fullness of the doctrine for which I contend, I will notice it, in the first place, as the sum of all which the prophets have said, concerning the coming of the Just One and the glory of his kingdom. (See Gen. xii. 3.) "And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee, and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." This promise is expressed in chapter xxii. verse 18, thus, "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." That there may be no dispute what this blessing is, and that the reader may see it to be justification through faith, see Gal. iii. 8. "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." What a glorious foundation for hope is here. How blessed was Abraham when he rejoiced in the day of Jesus. How blessed were the prophets of the Lord who saw these things, though afar off; the sight weaned their affections from all earthly things; they sought a city which hath foundation, whose builder and maker is God. Oh, thanks be to my God, since I can call thee so; the belief of this, thy promise, produces as much heaven as I am able to bear while in the body. When Jacob blessed his sons, he spake of the coming of Shiloh, unto whom, saith he, shall the gathering of the people be. (See Gen. xlix. 10.) How exactly does this testimony of the patriarch agree with that of the apostle; "Unto him shall the gathering of the people be," "That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ." We will hear what the prophet David says concerning the kingdom of Christ, Psalm lxxii. 11. "Yea, all kinds shall fall down before him; all nations shall serve him." (Verse 14.) "He shall redeem their sould from deceit and violence." (Verse 17.) "And men shall be blessed in him, all nations shall call him blessed." If any wish to argue that David meant no other than Solomon by the King's son, let them take notice of the 7th and 8th verse. "In his days shall the righteousness flourish; and abundance of peace so long as the moon endureth. He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth." The moon yet endures, but the reign of Solomon does not. The kingdom spoken of in the text was to be universal; but Solomon's was not. Let us take particular notice of the 11th verse. "Yea, all kings shall fall down before him." Shall all the cruel tyrants of the earth bow down to him who was born in a stable? Shall all the haughty kings of proud and wealthy nations bow down to him whose chosen companions when on earth were poor fishermen? Will you, my opponent, say this is a pleasing doctrine to the carnal mind? Herod who cause the massacre in Bethlehem, in order to murder Christ in infancy, could hardly be persuaded that it was agreeable to his carnal mind to bow before Jesus, at the head of this little band of martyrs. No, carnal mind must be crucified before all this can be done.
Would it please the present kings of Europe to tell them to beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks, and to learn war no more? Would it be agreeable to their carnal, proud and haughty minds to submit to the religion of their Saviour? Which of them would, in order to gratify carnal-mindedness, abandon all his equipage, his horses and chariots of state, mount a forlorn ass, ride into an enemy's land, preach peace and salvation to his inveterate foes, and pray for his murderers in death? And can you believe that all the kings of the earth can bow down before the Saviour, with any more gratification to carnal-mindedness, than they could imitate him in his life and death? "All nations shall serve him." If all nations serve Christ, will they not all be blessed in him according to the promise? I do not argue that any will be blessed in Christ who do not serve him; but the text says all nations shall serve him. (Psa. xxxvii. 10.) "For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be, yea, thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be." (Verse 36.) "Yet he passed away, and he was not, yes I sought him, but he could not be found." If the wicked continue in sin as long as God exists, it appears to me to be improper to say, "Yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be." And if God has prepared a place of endless torments for the wicked, and that in sight of the righteous in heaven, it is hardly proper to say, "Thou shalt diligently consider his place, and it shall not be." And if the wicked are to be tormented forever, in sight of the righteous, why is it said, "I sought him but he could not be found"? (Psa. xxii. 27.) "All the ends of the world shall remember and turn unto the Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations shall worship before thee." Who will doubt the salvation of those who turn unto the Lord and worship before him? (See Psa. ii. 7, 8.) "I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession." Compare this beautiful passage with one like it in Col. i. 19. "For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell." In what a capacious Saviour did David believe! Should a preacher at the present day recite the words which I have just quoted he would immediately be accused of holding the heretical doctrine of universal salvation, as his hearers might be pleased to call it; or should he communicate the doctrine half as clearly as it is communicated in those quotations, that part of his audience who were warmly opposed to the doctrine would grow uneasy, while those who favored the doctrine would be satisfied their speaker did so likewise. Some method must be used to explain those Scriptures differently from what they say, or the doctrine for which I contend is fairly proved by them.
Let us pass to the prophecies of Isaiah; se chap. xxv. 6, 7, 8. "And in this mountain shall the Lord of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined. And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all the nations. He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall be taken from off all the earth: for the Lord hath spoken it." No one will doubt that the provisions here spoken of are those which are provided in the gospel of salvation.
In the first place, then, observe it is made for all people; this proves that it was the intention of him who made the feast that all people should share in its divine benefits.
Secondly. It is testified that the veil of darkness which was over all people shall finally be taken away.
Thirdly. That death is to be swallowed up in victory, and tears wiped away from off all faces. And,
Lastly. That the rebuke of God's people should be taken from off all the earth. And the evidence given to prove it all would be done, is, the Lord hath spoken it.
It is of no avail for any to pretend that though the provisions of the gospel were provided for all people yet all will not partake of them, let the reasons be what they may; for if God wipe tears from off all faces, all must receive the benefits of gospel grace and peace. Compare this testimony with 1 Cor. xv. 54. "So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, death is swallowed up in victory." Again, with Rev. xxi. 4. "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes, and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away." How can it be justly said that death is swallowed up in victory when the fact is death will reign as long as God exists? Or, how can it be said that God shall wipe away all tears from the eyes of men, if millions are to mourn to an endless eternity? Or, why is it said there shall be no more sorrow, crying nor pain, if sorrow, crying and infinite pain are never to come? Isaiah ix. 6, 7, the Saviour is prophesied of as possessing a kingdom, the increase of which should have no end. To the same purpose, see, also, Daniel vii. 14. "And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed."
Observe, "All people, nations, and languages shall serve him." If a great part of the human race are to exist in endless rebellion against Christ and his kingdom, it seems that the prophet was not only ignorant of it but believed the reverse. (Isaiah xlix. 6.) "And he said, it is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant, to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the ends of the earth." (Verse 8.) "I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people," etc.
For the strength of this covenant, see Jer. xxxiii. 20. "Thus saith the Lord; if ye can break my covenant of the day, and my covenant of the night, and that there should not be day and night in their season; then may also my covenant be broken with David my servant," etc.
When men are possessed of sufficient energy to stop the wheels of time, to silence the motion of the solar system, and to disannul God's covenant with day and night, then day and night will depend on the will of man. So likewise, when he has agency to disannul that covenant which is orderd, and in all things sure, then his eternal salvation will depend on himself, and not on his God.
Attend to the similitude of the Redeemer's glory, from the prophecy of Ezek. xvii., last paragraph: "Thus saith the Lord God, I will also take of the highest branch of the high cedar, and will set it; I will crop off from the top of his young twigs a tender one, and will plant it upon a high mountain and eminent: in the mountain of the height of Israel will I plant it: and it shall bring forth boughs and bear fruit and be a goodly cedar; and under it shall dwell all fowl of every wing; in the shadow of the branches thereof shall they dwell. And all the trees of the field shall know that I the Lord have brought down the high tree, and have made the dry tree to flourish: I the Lord have spoken, and have done it." Time would fail me to write one-half that might be quoted from prophets on this subject. I ask for no explanation on their testimony; if what they say do not prove my doctrine, I will not have recourse to explanations.
I have reasoned from the goodness of God to prove that it is his will that all men should finally be holy and happy; I will now call proof from divine revelation to the same idea. See St. Paul's 1st Epistle to Timothy, ii. 4: "Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth." What could induce St. Paul to write this sentence if he did not believe it? My opponent will say he believes it himself. Then, I say, all for which I argue is granted. But my opponent has a method by which he can explain this passage so that it may be true, and yet God may will the endless misery of millions. It is only to say that the passage is expressive of God's revealed will, but not of his secret will, arguing that his revealed will is in direct opposition to a will which he has seen fit not to reveal!
Though much use is made of this method in order to shun the force of this passage and many others, if there be any propriety in it it is out of my sight; of if it would not betray a want of good sense in any other case I will leave my reader to judge.
To say God's revealed will is contrary to his eternal and unrevealed will, would in me be blasphemy of the first magnitude; yet I do not doubt the sincerity of those who frequently say it. But is it not in a direct sense charging God with hypocrisy? However shocking it may seem, I know of no other light in which to view it.
Again, if God have a will which he has not revealed, and my opponent knows what it is, I would ask how he came by this knowledge? God's revealed will is that all men should be saved, but his secret will is that most of them should be eternally miserable! I would ask when this will was a secret? It has been openly talked of by limitarians ever since the light of the gospel advanced so as to discover the apostacy of Christians.
St. Paul speaks of the mystery of God's will which he proposed in himself, which the apostle says God has made known. See Eph. i. 9: "Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in himself." And in verse 10 he tells what this will is, but it is very different from what my opposer says the hidden will of God is: "That in the dispensation of the fullness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in Heaven and which are on earth, even in him." St. Peter says God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come unto repentance.
In short, I cannot see the propriety of saying that God will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth, if he predestinated from all eternity millions for eternal misery; and if he created any to glorify him in endless torments, I cannot see why he should not be willing for them to perish, and answer the end for which he made them.
Again, what is that truth which God wills all men to know? According to the words of the text, it must be a truth consonant to their salvation, or they could not be saved and yet believe the truth. For instance, suppose out of the whole alphabet all are to endlessly miserable except the vowel letters, and the whole alphabet was brought to the knowledge of the truth; surely the vowels would believe they were to be saved, but all the consonants would believe they were going into endless torments; and the faith of the consonants would be as true a faith as that of the vowels. But how could the consonants enjoy salvation while possessing this faith?
There are some who do not admit my general system who will admit this part of it, namely, that it is the will of God that all men should finally be holy and happy, but say at the same time that it depends on the creature's accepting of offered mercy on the rational conditions of gospel obedience, making gospel obedience a prerequisition to salvation; while I contend that gospel obedience is, in fact, gospel salvation.
To be saved from sin is surely gospel salvation, and to be obedient, according to the dictates of gospel grace, is salvation from sin. There is just as much propriety in making obedience a condition on which salvation is granted, as there would be for a physician to propose to a patient in a fit of the asthma that he would afford relief on condition the patient should first breathe easily. However, if it be granted that it is God's will that all men should be finally holy and happy, I will more directly answer the supposition that this will may fail by the words of St. Paul. See Eph. i. 11: "In whom we also have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated, according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will." If God will have all men to be saved, and worketh all things after the counsel of his own will, it proves that for which I contend as fully as anything can be proved from Scripture. My opponent, perhaps, will say (as many have said to me in conversation) after meeting with much difficulty in arguing, "Anything may be proved by Scripture." To which I reply there is one thing that the Scriptures do not prove, neither can all the ingenuity of man make them substantiate it, and that is, the endless misery of a moral being.
If any of my opposers can prove, by Scripture, the endless duration of sin and misery, as plainly as the two passages above recited prove universal holiness and happiness, I will never content any more on the subject.
I will take further notice of Paul's communication to Timothy. He goes on, in the 5th and 6th verses, to give Timothy a reason for what he had asserted; "For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." The apostle's reasoning is evidently good and plain; for God would not have given his Son a ransom for all, if it were not his will that all should be saved; and if it be God's will it ought to be ours, therefore it is right to pray for all. If the ransom were paid for all, it argues that it was the intention of the Ransomer that all should be benefitted.
What would have been the astonishment of the world, after the immortal Washington had caused to be paid a ransom for all the American prisoners who were in Algerine slavery, if he had told the Dey that he did not want more than one quarter of those captives sent home to the land of liberty and to the enjoyment of their families, for which they had so long sighed in bondage; and that he might wear out the rest with fatigue and whips? But the good man's soul was never satisfied until they all came home, and with songs of joyous liberty hailed the land of their nativity! And blessed be the Captain of our salvation; he, also, shall see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied, when all the "ransomed of the Lord shall return and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joys upon their heads, when they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away."
The reader's attention is now invited to those Scriptures which, in expression, are more particularly applicable to the deliverance of mankind from this bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
The whole of the 15th chapter of the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians was intended to refute those who denied the resurrection; but as that doctrine in not denied by my opponent, I shall take notice only of those parts which affect the argument between us. (See verse 20.) "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept." Christ, as the first fruits of them who slept, is represented by the heave-offering under the law. (See Num. xv. 19, 20.) "Then it shall be that, when ye eat of the bread of the land, ye shall offer up an heave-offering unto the Lord. Ye shall offer up a cake of the first of your dough, for an heave-offering: as ye do the heave-offering of the threshing-floor, so shall ye heave it." (Exod. xxii. 29.) "Thou shalt not delay to offer the first of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors; the first born of thy sons shalt thou give unto me." (See, also, Num. xviii. 15.) By the offering of the first ripe fruits, the whole of the succeeding harvest was sanctified; and in the first born which were redeemed, the succeeding fruits of the womb were considered holy. (See Acts xxvi. 23.) "That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead." Christ being the first who rose from the dead, and rising as the first fruits, sanctifies all the rest, as did the first fruits under the law. St. Paul's comment on the first fruits is very illustrative of the scriptural meaning thereof. (See Rom. ix. 16.) "For if the first fruits be holy, so are the branches."
In the heave-offering under the law there is a beautiful representation of our Saviour. The sheaf taken from the field, being separated from all the rest of the same growth, represents the separation of Jesus Christ from mankind to be holy unto the Lord; and the sanctification of the whole harvest, being by the first ripe fruits, is to show us that our sanctification is in Jesus, the first fruits of them that slept. The same may be clearly seen in the instance of the dough; a certain part of it was to be separated from the rest for an offering unto the Lord in which the remaining part of the lump (as the apostle calls it) was considered holy.
These observations are made here in order to draw the reader's attention more closely to the labors of the apostle which we have now under consideration; for he goes on immediately to show what he means by the lump spoken of in Romans. (See verse 21.) "For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead."
Let me here observe that death came by the earthly man, and the resurrection came by the heavenly man, which is in point to prove that the plan of the gospel is to deliver mankind from the earthly Adam to the immortality of heaven.
Perhaps none would dispute what I here contend for, provided I did not extend the cure as extensively as the malady; but I shall also contend for this, and will clearly prove it by the apostle's testimony. (See verse 22.) "For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive." It is not possible for me to state the doctrine more concise and positive than the apostle has done so in the passage quoted. But I am willing to attend to my opponent's objections as I proceed. He will say he does not dispute that the apostle here meant all mankind, but that he only intended they would all be raised from the dead, not that all would be delivered from condemnation and sin. But I will rest my argument on the words themselves; I say, if all men are made alive in Christ, they cannot be said to be out of Christ dead or alive, sinful or holy.
The present state of our being is derived from Adam, the earthly nature; and, in a natural sense, we are all in him. Our future state of existence we derive entirely from the heavenly nature; and, therefore, it is said all shall be made alive in Christ. The apostle goes on still further to show the order of the before-mentioned work, arguing, from the first fruits the whole family of mankind. (See 1 Cor. xv. 23, 24, 25.) "But every man in his own order: Christ the first fruits; afterwards that that are Christ's at his coming. Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father: when he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and power. For he must reign till he hath put all enemies under his feet." Christ is here again spoken of as the first fruits, in the order of the resurrection, which consists of three parts.
First. Of Christ himself, who was the first that rose from the dead.
Secondly. Those who are Christ's at his coming, which coming I will not endeavor to point out, as it makes nothing in respect to the particular argument in which I am presently engaged.
Thirdly. The coming of the end, which cannot be until he hath put down all rule, authority, and power, and every enemy has submitted; at which time the Mediator delivers up the kingdom to God the Father.
Then shall the great work of reconciliation be finished, and the labors of the Redeemer completed with immortal honor. Then shall all the millions of the human race be reconciled to God through Christ, and shall sing; see Rev. v. 11, 12, 13, 14. "And I beheld, and i heard the voice of many angels round about the throne, and the beasts, and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; singing with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessings. And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I, saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb, forever and ever. And the fours beasts said, amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down, and worshipped him that liveth forever and ever."
The reader will observe that ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands of angels, beasts and elders, first declare the Lamb, who had been slain, to be worthy to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honor, and glory, and blessings; then every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, say, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto him who sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever. Then the elders and beasts, who first pronounced him thus worthy, fell down and worshipped him who liveth forever and ever.
There is nothing in all the sacred writings more astonishingly beautiful than this account; neither do I think it possible for the imagination to paint anything half so grand and sublime. I am all astonishment. To realize by faith the accomplishment of this glorious prediction transcends every other thought or idea of which the mind is susceptible.
There is no room for my opponent to argue against the doctrine of universal holiness and happiness while this passage of divine truth lies in sight. There are no expressions left out of this passage that would make it more extensive.
May I not ask the opposer if he be not willing to acknowledge what mysterious powers have acknowledged, that Christ, the dear Lamb who hath been slain, is worthy to receive as extensive worship as is declared in the passage quoted?
When the four beasts and the elders saw universal nature bending before the object of their worship, the immediately fell down, anxious to excel, and worshipped him who liveth forever and ever. If my opponent thinks Christ is not worthy of so much worship, he thinks less of him than I do, and less than I wish he did.
There are yet remaining many passages in the 15th of Corinthians which are in point o prove what I am contending for even more than is at this time necessary to introduce. A few more, however, may be proper, with some few remarks. (See verse 28.) "And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject to him that did put all things under him, that God may be all in all."
What must we understand by all things being subdued unto him? Will any one say all that is meant by it is that Christ will then have power over all men whereby he can reward the righteous and torment the wicked? When did he not possess this power? When were not all things in subjection to Christ enough for these purposes? the subjection of all things to Christ must mean something, and it is reasonable to believe that it means the reconciliation of the heart to holiness. Can a soul in sin, employed in blaspheming the Incommunicable Name, be said to be in subjection to Christ in any way that answers to the text? I do not think any will contend for it.
The only subjection which is acceptable to Christ is a broken and contrite heart, which he will not despise. The plan, then, of the gospel is universal submission to Christ in holiness and happiness.
The delivery of the kingdom of Christ to the Father is declared in the last clause of the passage quoted, of which I have before taken notice in this work, in order to show the dependence of Christ on the Eternal and Self-existent. The, it is said, "God shall be all in all." In what sense will God be all in all at the close of the Redeemer's process that he is not now, or always was? Answer, he that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in him. When all men are brought to love God supremely, and their fellow-creatures as themselves, it will then be manifest that we are nothing only as we exist in God; therefore, God will be all. And as the eternal spirit of love, which is the governing principle of the heavenly man, will be the governing principle of each soul thus reconciled to the law of love, it my be justly said that God is all in all. (See verses 47, 48, 49.) "The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." As we have all been partakers of the earthy Adam, so, the apostle argues, we shall be partakers, in the resurrection, of the Second Adam, whom he calls the Lord from heaven. (See verses 51, 52, 53, 54.) "Behold, I will show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible shall put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, death is swallowed up in victory."
If death, sin and sorrow are to remain as long as God exists, how can it be said death is swallowed up in victory? If the apostle believed any part of the family of man would finally be excluded from the blessings of the gospel, why did he not just hint something of it in this account of the close of the Mediatorial kingdom? Did he consider it a matter of too small a moment to mention? If he did, he is inexcusable for precluding the idea by plain and positive testimony. See his conclusion, "O death! where is thy sting? O grave! where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, who giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." If sin remain without end, it being the sting of death, when the question is asked, "O death, where is thy sting?" sin may answer, "Here I am and here I will be in spite of him who undertook to destroy the works of the devil, and here I will boast of my power as long as he does of his, whom angels adore, and I hate!" (Phil. iii. 21.) "Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." Observe, "Who shall change our vile body." In a former quotation it is said, "we shall all be changed;" and in the present passage it is said, "whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." In a former quotation it is said, "And when all things shall be subdued unto him."
Let us hear what our blessed Lord himself says in respect to his mission. (St. John v. 22, 23.) "For the Father judgeth no man; but hath committed all judgment unto the Son; that all men should honor the Son, even as they honor the Father. He that honoreth not the Son honoreth not the Father which hath sent him." In the sense in which this passage was spoken, it is evident that the sinner does neither honor the Father nor the Son, and the plain testimony of the text is that all men should honor both. Compare this with Phil. ii. 9, 10, 11. "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name; that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." As in the other passage the exaltation of the Saviour is first spoken of, and then the grand intention in his exaltation shown; so in this; there it is for the purpose that all men should honor him; and here it is that unto him every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in the earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Of this glorious and soul-reviving truth the prophet Isaiah was not ignorant, but speaks of it most clearly (see chap. xlv. 22, 23, 24, 25.) "Look unto me and be ye saved all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return, that unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear. Surely, shall say, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall come; and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed. In the Lord shall all the seen of Israel be justified, and shall glory." The reader will observe I have left out some supplied words in the above quotation, by which the passage reads without ambiguity.
Had the prophet been possessed of an accurate knowledge of the dispute in which I am engaged, I do not see how he could have written a sentence more pertinently to my argument; and I have not a doubt but the Spirit intended the passage for the same purpose for which I have used it.
St. Paul, in the eighth chapter of Romans, shows the extent of redemption in so strong terms as to admit of no possible evasion (v. 22, 23). "For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body."
If the reader will be at the trouble of examining this passage with its connection, that for which I contend will appear plainly proved by it.
There is no end to proofs of universal reconciliation to God; for everything of a moral nature testifies to it, and all material nature is a figure of it. The ministry of reconciliation, which, St. Paul says, was committed to himself and others, is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing unto them their trespasses. The truth of Christ's dying for all is the foundation of the apostle's argument on this subject; which truth, the apostle says, he was constrained to believe by the love of Christ; for thus saith he, "The love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead; and that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again." (2 Cor. v. 14, etc.)
I may as well stop here as anywhere, for as I just said, there is no end; and if those Scriptures which I have quoted be true, that which I have endeavored to prove is proved; but if they be not, more of the same testimony would prove nothing.
There is but one method left for my opponent by which he can further oppose me; and that is, by denying the whole system of divine revelation and man's susceptibility of rational ideas. But as that would equally destroy all for which he would contend, he will undoubtedly be cautious.
We now see clearly that it is God's will, according to his eternal purpose, purposed in himself, that all men should finally be holy and happy; that it was the intention of the Saviour's mission; that the prophets, by the spirit of prophecy, long foresaw this universal and godlike glorious plan of grace; that every good principle in man stands up in testimony of so divine a system, that the happiness of all moral beings is wrapped up in the glorious issue of the ministration of reconciliation, and that it is, in reality, opposed by none, but by unreconciled being, unholy principles, and unlawful desires. And shall we say that the eternal good will of him who dwelt in the bush must fail at last? Must the testimony of the prophets fall to the ground? Must the captain of our salvation, who warred in righteousness, who reddened his garments in his own blood, who bore the sins of the world, and suffered death in agony, to obtain his lawful inheritance, be robbed of them at last? Were this believed in heaven the royal diadem would fall from the head of him whom all the heaven adores, and the highest archangel would faint away! But, blessed be the Lord, and blessed be his truth, its divine power shall cause the Leviathan of infidelity to bite the ground, shall rend the veil which is cast over all nations, and shall more and more manifest divine righteousness and the name in which it is found, in which name alone is salvation. In the days of the apostles, the greatest object in preaching the gospel of Christ was to prove him to be the Saviour of the world, the true Messiah of the law, urging that he died for all, that he made no distinction between Jew and Gentile, but had broken down the partition-wall between them, for the glorious purpose of making of the twain one new man in everlasting fellowship and eternal peace. But how hath the gold changed, how hath the most fine gold become dim? The main apparent object, at the present day, is to prove the object of the Saviour's mission, as it respects the salvation of sinners, extremely limited, and that but few of the human race will finally be the redeemed of the Lord to the praise of his glory; that the great adversary of righteousness will obtain a much larger conquest of souls than Christ himself; and, oh, shocking to name, eternal justice is profaned by being called to assist the serpent's designs in the endless duration of sin and rebellion against God! Those whom the Lord hath blessed with a belief of universal holiness and happiness are proscribed as heretics, infidels, offscourings of the earth, friends to nothing but sin, and enemies to nothing but God and holiness; opening a door to licentiousness of every abominable species, destroyers of the pure religion of Christ, and nuisances to society. But is it, in reality, manifesting a love to sin to argue its total destruction by the power of divine righteousness? Is it manifesting enmity against God and the religion of Jesus to contend for the propriety of all men's serving him in holiness and happiness? And are we nuisances to society because we endeavor to persuade all men to love God and one another? Can these things be displeasing to him who was born in Bethlehem? Will he not rather greatly bless such labors, though performed by those as little esteemed in the world as the poor fishermen who left their nets and followed the despised Nazarene?
Let us ask a few questions. Which reflects the most honor on the divine character, to contend it was necessary for him to create millions of rational creatures to hate him and every divine communication he makes to them to all eternity, to live in endless rebellion against him, and endure inconceivable torments as long as God exists, or to suppose him able and willing to make all his rational creatures love and adore him, yield obedience to his divine law, and exist in union and happiness with himself?
Which reflects most honor on the Saviour, to say that but few will obtain salvation by him, and though he died for all men, yet his death will benefit but few, or to say with the prophet, "He shall see of the travail of the soul and be satisfied, having reconciled all things to God, through the peace made by the blood of the cross"?
If there be joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons who need no repentance, which would yield the most joy to the heavenly hosts, the repentance of one-fourth of mankind or the whole? If the servants of Christ here on earth desire the increase of holiness and the decrease of sin, which would be most agreeable to such a desire, the belief that the greatest part of mankind will grow more and more sinful to all eternity, or to believe that sin will continually decrease, and righteousness increase, until the former is wholly destroyed and the latter becomes universal?
[Incomplete (pp. 228-267; original to p. 286). Typist, Dan Harper]
If you find typographical or other errors, please notify Dan Harper (danrharperATaolDOTcom).