 |
vol. title: Miscellaneous Scraps from January 1st 1878 vol. period: 1875-1878 pages in vol.: 153 |
< Is There an Endless Hell? (continued from page 5-84) >
...
An Explanation by Dr.Farrar
To the Editor of the Guardian—Sir: Since many complete misrepresentations of the language and purport of a sermon which I recently preached in Westminster Abbey, have found their way to public notice, I am reluctantly compelled to trespass upon your courtesy. I will, however, confine myself to the correction of one erroneous statement. To say, as these reports have done, that I “denounced the doctrine of eternal punishment,” or expressed a hope that the word eternal might not appear in the Revised Translation, is, as most of your readers will have seen at a glance, utter nonsense. The object of my sermon was to prove that the word eternal did not necessarily connote endlessness; and at the same time to vindicate that faith in the possible effects of Christ’s infinite redemption even beyond the grave, which seems to be most expressly stated in the text from which I preached (1 Pet., iv. 6). Neither the Anglican, nor even (I believe) the Romish Church, has dogmatically decided against the permissibility of such a hope; and, as is known to all students of church history, it has been widely held in different ages, both by very eminent Fathers and theologians, and by some of the holiest of the saints of God.
Dec. 2, 1877.
P. S.—Dr. Newman (Grammar of Assent, p. 407) quotes with approval the following passage of Petavius: “De hâc damnatorum saltem hominum respiratione nihil adhuc certi decretum est ab eclesia catholica; ut propterea, non temere, tanquam absurda, explodenda sit sanctissimorum Patrum hæc opinio: quamvis a communi sensu catholicorum hoc tempore sit aliena.” The “respiratio” obviously involves a possible hope, even for the “damnati,” beyond the grave.
Are Hell and the Devil Myths?
To the Editor of The Sun—Sir: Except in the free use of these words as expletives by some, they are very unpopular with unbelievers of every shade, and every age has produced learned and eloquent men who have endeavored to destroy the belief in them which, after all, somehow continues to exist among people generally. There are quite a variety of theories respecting the future life or death.
1. There are Annihilationists or Secularists, pure and simple, who deny the future life altogether. Man dies like a dog or an ox or a musquito, and that is a final end of him.
2. There are the Universalists, pure and simple, who send all men, however wicked, straight to heaven when they die, the Apostle Paul and Emperor Nero being on the same footing in the future life.
3. There are Restorationists, who admit the punishment of the wicked for an indefinite time in a future life, but who maintain that in some unrevealed and unexplained way God will bring all to salvation at last. This appears to be simply an extension of the doctrine of purgatory, so as to make all pass through it to bliss, instead of only a favored class.
4. There are those who hold to the annihilation of the wicked at death and the resurrection only of the just. A portion of this class, however, believe that all will have to rise at the last day to be judged, but after the judgment the wicked will be forthwith annihilated. These would change the Saviour’s words: “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels,” into “Depart from me into total annihilation.”
5. There is the doctrine of a purgatory reserved for all who are not sent direct to hell, and a few very exceptional cases of martyrs who go straight to heaven.
6. Lastly, there are the great body of orthodox or evangelical Christians, who believe just what the Bible says, without any attempt to twist its language or get away from its plain teaching, and who deem it essential to salvation that men should repent and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ in this present life, instead of putting off these prime duties to some future and unknown state of existence. Those who thus believe cannot see that the common charges against the Almighty of vindictive cruelty, if He punish the wicked, have any relevancy in view of this text:
God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Neither can they believe that Christ is a vindictive or cruel judge, who said:
Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
And who, when He was bearing “our sins in His own body on the tree,” prayed for those who had not only condemned Him unjustly to death, but mocked and insulted Him while dying,
Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.
Is it possible to conceive of greater love for mankind than we find embodied in the person and history of Jesus Christ?
Whatever difficulties there may be connected with the doctrines of eternal punishments, and of the existence of hell and the devil, we can well afford to leave them with the Judge of all the earth, who is sure to do right, and simply believe what He has revealed.
All except Spiritualists will acknowledge that we have no information concerning the future except what is revealed in Scripture, and that is not much. Any alleged knowledge on the subject developed from the inner consciousness of men, however great, good and learned, is only suitable for the latitude of ancient or modern Athens.
Your invitation in to-day’s paper has led to the foregoing remarks, and when you publish the sermons of Canon Farrar I will crave a little space for comment upon them.
Editor's notes