made in Scripture respecting blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. In St.
Matt. xii. 31, 82, it is recorded that our Lord said, "All sin and
blasphemy shall be forgiven to men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit
shall not be forgiven to men. And whoever speaketh a word against the
Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whoever speaketh against the
Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, {85} neither in this world,
nor in the world to come." The same doctrine is thus expressed in St.
Mark iii. 28, 29: "Verily I say to you, all sins shall be forgiven to
the sons of men, and all blasphemies whatever wherewith they may
blaspheme. But whoever shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath
never forgiveness," but is subject to the judgment in the future _aiôn_
(_enochos estin aiôniou kriseôs_). From the latter evangelist we also
learn that our Lord spoke these words because the scribes from
Jerusalem had said, "He hath an unclean spirit." It is particularly to
be noticed that both passages declare in the fullest manner that all
manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven to men, at the same time
that they pronounce that blasphemy (not sin, _amartia_) against the
Holy Ghost is not forgiven. To account for this apparent
contradiction, it must be remembered that the forgiveness, or
_remission_ (_aphesis_) of sin, necessarily implies antecedence of law
and transgression of the law; and whereas St. Paul teaches that "the
law entered that transgression might abound" (Rom. v. 20), it is quite
consistent with this doctrine to find that in the gospel of Christ
provision is made for the remission of all sin and blasphemy. Now,
such remission consists in "repentance towards God and faith towards
our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts xx. 21); and therefore, when the gift of
righteousness (i.e. the grace of Christ) is received, the believer
begins to partake {86} of a spirit such as that which was "without
measure" in Christ. This is essentially a _holy_ spirit, the
antecedent of which in Jesus Christ was perfect righteousness.
Therefore the scribes blasphemed when they said of Christ, "He hath an
unclean spirit," it not being possible that a perfectly righteous body
can be the vessel of an unclean spirit.
But it is possible that the faithful, after receiving the grace of
Christ and fellowship of the Spirit, may by unrighteous conduct "grieve
the Holy Spirit" (Eph. iv. 80), and even by persistence in sin defile
the gift of the Spirit which had been imparted to them. In the
foregoing passage from St. Matthew xii., it is said that there is
forgiveness for one who "speaketh against the Son of man," which
expression may signify, generally, wilful and overt opposition to "the
law of Christ" (Gal. vi. 2); but that there is no forgiveness for one
who _speaks_ against the Holy Spirit, i.e. one who by wilful and
_overt_ conduct does violence to the sanctifying influence of the Holy
Spirit which he has already partaken of. Of such an one it is written
in Heb. x. 29, "he hath trodden underfoot the Son of God, and hath
counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy
thing, and hath done despite to the Spirit of grace." But not every
sin committed after faith and the baptism of repentance has this
effect. The apostle John tells us that although all unrighteousness
{87} (_adikia_, transgression of the strict law of Christ) is sin,
there is sin of a believing brother which is not unto death, and may be
repented of in this world; and there is sin unto death, respecting
which prayer for repentance would be unavailing (1 Epist. v. 16, 17).
This is "the blasphemy of the Spirit," which is not forgiven in this
world, because forgiveness implies repentance; neither is it forgiven
in the world to come, because beyond the grave there is no repentance.
What remains for such sinners is the "[oe]onian judgment" (see p. 69)
mentioned in St. Mark iii. 29, and "the sorer punishment" spoken of in
Heb. x. 29, which is the same as the condemnation to the second death
consequent upon that judgment. (I take occasion to remark that in Mark
iii. 29, instead of _kriseôs_, some early manuscripts have
_amaritêmatos_, which, as far as I can see, does not admit of being
interpreted consistently with the context and the usage of _enochos_.)
There is still another passage--Mark ix. 42-50--which, on account of
its peculiar significance, it is necessary to discuss with reference to
the Scriptural argument for immortality. It will suffice for
conducting the discussion to cite _vv._ 43 and 44, the literal
translation of which is as follows:--"If thy hand cause thee to offend,
cut it off: it is well for thee to enter into life maimed, rather than
having two hands to go into geenna, into the unquenchable fire, where
their worm dieth not, and the fire is not {88} quenched." The
concluding part of this text is evidently derived from Isaiah lxvi. 24,
where the prophet reveals that the Lord has said respecting the
worshippers, consisting of "all flesh," that shall come before him when
"the new heavens and the new earth" are established, that "they shall
go forth and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed
against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be
quenched: and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." This passage
has so important a bearing on the sense of that quoted above from St.
Mark, that we must by all means endeavour to find out its
interpretation. Respecting Biblical Interpretation, Burnet in one of
his treatises has enunciated two principles, which cannot but be
assented to: first, that besides the portions of Scripture which have a
literal or historical meaning, there are others which must be taken
allegorically; and, secondly, that an allegorical meaning, is to be
admitted when the literal sense involves an absurdity, or contradiction
to the nature of things.[2] The right application of these principles
may be said to constitute a large portion of the science of Scripture.
But in applying them it is often difficult to decide, respecting a
particular passage, whether it is to be {89} taken literally or
allegorically; and again, after deciding that the passage must be
allegorical, there is generally the still greater difficulty of
discovering what the true sense is. In illustration of the second of
the above principles Burnet cites, apart from the context, _vermem
nunquam moriturum_, and admits that these words have an allegorical
signification. This plainly follows from the single consideration that
the worm (_skôlêx_) here spoken of is literally that which is seen to
feed on dead bodies, and to say of it that it does not die is
contradictory to experience. When, however, the same author goes on to
give as the allegorical sense nothing more definite than "_extremam
miseriam_," it may well be asked, By what kind of induction has this
conclusion been reached? The feeble worm which feeds on mortal remains
presents to our sight nothing capable of causing pain or misery.
Rather it may, I think, be asserted that Scripture here adverts to this
natural fact for the purpose of indicating by a distinct and visible
emblem that there is a living principle which destroys mortality, and
which for that reason alone is not itself subject to death. If we be
guided solely by what _we see with our eyes_, this appears to be the
only allegorical sense that can be attributed to the first clause of
Mark ix. 44.[3] We have next to inquire as to the {90} interpretation
of the other clause, and what is the mutual relation between the two
clauses.
Although the worm which devours dead bodies is not emblematic of
anything that causes pain, the case is quite otherwise with respect to
the emblematic meaning of _fire_. It is evident that fire which is
"unquenchable" is not natural fire, and consequently may be taken to
be, as has already been assumed, the devouring fire of judgment and of
condemnation consequent upon violation of the law of righteousness (see
p. 88). The destruction of the impenitent unrighteous by the operation
of this law (which is their second death), is attended with pain and
woe such as will not have been before, nor will be after. It was
inferred (p. 84) from our Lord's teaching in Matt. xviii. 6, that any
form of _death_ of which the body is susceptible in this world is
rather to be endured than falling under condemnation in the world to
come. In Mark ix. 42-48, we are taught that any form of bodily _pain_,
as that of losing a hand, a foot, or an eye, is to be preferred to
entering with the body whole into the "_geenna_ of fire." This is, in
fact, at once the greatest and the _last_ of human suffering and
tribulation. For it should be noticed that at the end of this very
passage (v. 49) it is said that "every one shall be salted [made
'good,' _v._ 50] with fire," signifying the effect finally produced by
the unquenchable fire. And with this agrees the emblem {91} of the
worm that "dieth not," taken as indicating that the final effect of the
torment of the judgment is to swallow up death, and to bring in, by
establishing the reign of righteousness, life and immortality. The
signification of one emblem must be taken in conjunction with that of
the other.
Moreover, by giving particular attention to the context of Isa. lxvi.
24, it will be seen that what is there revealed is quite in accordance
with the above interpretation. For, first, in _v._ 16 we have, "By
fire and by his sword [the sword of the Word of God spoken of in Rev.
xix. 15] will the Lord plead with all flesh," that is, in the judgment
which has been appointed for the trial and tribulation of all men.
Then, by taking into account what is said in _vv._ 22 and 23, we may
gather that "all flesh," having become denizens of "the new heavens and
the new earth" in which, as St. Peter declares (2 Epist. iii. 13),
righteousness dwells, "come to worship the Lord." Of _these
worshippers_, consisting of "all flesh," it is affirmed that "they
shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the transgressors," which,
on account of the ill savour coming up from them, will be "an abhorring
to all flesh" (compare Isa. xxxiv. 3). Thus there is here represented,
but by a different figure, the same truth as that which has already
been deduced from the ascending up for ever and ever of the brimstone
smoke of torment (see pp. 61 and 65); namely, {92} that the subjecting
of all the deeds and secrets of the present life to the scrutiny of
judgment, and the consequent condemnation of all the unredeemed to the
pains of a second death, will have the effect of making sin against a
"faithful Creator" to be seen and felt to be so hateful and abominable
a thing, that such sin will cease to be possible, notwithstanding that
all men will retain individuality and volition. For all will thus at
length be made new creatures incapable of sinning. This remark may
serve to introduce the final stage of the general argument, which I now
proceed to enter upon.
I have been endeavouring to show that the symbolic assertions in Rev.
xx. respecting "the lake of fire" and its "burning with brimstone," the
casting therein of the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, and
their being tormented "day and night for ever and ever," the judgment
of all the dead, small and great, according to their recorded deeds,
"the second death," and the casting into the lake of fire of "any one
not found written in the book of life," do not necessitate, as is
commonly thought, the conclusion that evil, which had a beginning,
fulfils no purpose and has no ending. As to this question the seer
gives, in Rev. xxi. 1-4, the following explicit revelation: "And I saw
a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth
passed away; and there is no more sea. And I saw the holy city, new
Jerusalem, {93} coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride
adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice from the throne,
saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell
with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be with
them, their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes;
and death shall be no more, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall
there be any more pain: for the first things passed away." Now, it
seems hardly possible that the announcement of the termination of evil
could be made in terms more direct and more intelligible than these.
Hence, according to acknowledged principles of Biblical interpretation,
we must not attribute to the above-mentioned symbolic and less
intelligible passages any meaning inconsistent with that announcement.
The arguments I have adduced respecting the interpretation of the
figurative statements contained in the latter half of chap. xx. are
directed to showing that these figures do, in fact, admit of meanings
consistent with the gospel revelations given in chap. xxi. 1-4. It is
of so much importance, as regards the Scriptural doctrine of
immortality, to establish this point, that I propose now to supplement
the former arguments by additional considerations.
In the Book of Daniel (xii. 6, 7) we read of "a man clothed in linen,
who was upon the water of a river, and held up his right hand and his
left hand unto {94} heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for ever,"
that at the end of an appointed time a certain purpose would be
accomplished, and "all these things be finished." This refers, as the
context shows, to "the time of the end" of the present age (_aiôn_).
The announcement made in this manner by the man clothed in linen
indicates that he is the precursor of the angel of whom, in _vv._ 1, 2,
5, 6, 7 of Rev. x., the apostle John relates as follows: "I saw a
mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud, and a rainbow
upon his head, and his face as the sun, and his feet as pillars of
fire; and, having in his hand a little book open, he set his right foot
upon the sea, and his left foot upon the earth.... and lifted up his
hand to heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for ever and ever, who
created heaven and the things therein, and the earth and the things
therein, and the sea and the things therein, that time shall be no
more; but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, in the time
when he is about to sound his trumpet, also [_kai_, merely indicating
the apodosis] the mystery of God is finished (_etelesthê_, aor. ind.),
according to the gospel He made known to His servants the prophets."
The soundings of the seven trumpets are significant of progressive
steps in the general judgment; the days pertaining to the voice of the
seventh angel are those immediately preceding the actual sounding of
his trumpet, which announces the {95} completion (as indicated by the
number seven) of the mystery of God's creation in time, and marks the
end of the age (_ho aiôn ho mellôn_) following upon the conclusion of
the present age. When all that pertains to this final interval "is
finished," there is no more succession of events whereby time is
cognizable, and therefore time is no more. The might, and glorious
investiture, and majestic attitude of the angel who proclaims this
truth, conspire to point out its great significance. The little book
in his hand is the word of prophecy by which we learn these mysteries.
It is, no doubt, beyond the limit of our thoughts, conditioned as we
are by time, to conceive of a state of things in which time is no more.
Apparently for this reason commentators have proposed to translate,
_chronos ouk estai eti_, "the time shall not be yet," or "time shall no
more intervene." The former of these translations is excluded by the
usage of _ouk eti_ in the analogous affirmations in Rev. xxi. 1, 4, and
the other, which is an arbitrary comment rather than a translation, is
for the same reason excluded. (I have preferred _ouk estai eti_ to
_ouketi estai_, because the words occur in the former order in each of
the three instances in Rev. xxi.) There can be no question as to the
philological correctness of the translation, "time shall be no more."
The unwillingness to admit it appears to have arisen solely from a
fixed persuasion, gratuitously and very generally entertained, that
time {96} has a _necessary_ existence, and therefore cannot come to an
end. Some have affirmed that when time ends, eternity begins; which is
a self-contradictory dogma, because eternity (from _[oe]tas_) is
essentially time. The teaching of Scripture on this point is directly
opposed to these views; for the apostle Peter tells those for whose
sake he wrote his second Epistle, to bear in mind "this one thing, that
one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as
one day" (2 Epist. iii. 8). This is equivalent to saying that time is
not an independent entity, but that both its existence and its quality
are determined by the _will_ of the Creator of all things. It is in
virtue of our being made in His image, and partaking intellectually of
the divine nature, that we are capable _in thought_ of giving
indefinite and arbitrary extension to time, whether it be past time or
time to come. This faculty, as I have already argued in p. 80, is to
be placed in the category of the different conditions, whether
depending on experience of the course of time, or on affections of our
bodily and mental constitutions, under which the spirit of man is
formed for immortality. All such conditions are determined by the
purpose for which they are imposed, and when that purpose is fulfilled
in the perfection of humanity the conditions come to an end. It is
thus that the being conditioned by time eventually ceases.
It will be proper here to meet an objection to the {97} doctrine that
time will have an end which might be drawn from the expression, _eis
tous aiônas tôn aiônôn_, which frequently occurs in Scripture, and
seems to be indicative of an unlimited succession of ages. So far as
time is under human cognizance, and has relation to human experience,
Scripture speaks in express terms of only _two_ ages--the present one,
which lasts to the end of the _generations_ of men in the existing
order of things; and the age to come, which embraces the course of the
judgment of all who lived in the first age, and terminates with the
second death of those who had no part in the first resurrection. When
it is said of the Creator of heaven and earth, that He is "from
everlasting to everlasting" (_apo tou aiônos meôs tou aiônos su ei_,
Ps. xc. 2), and that "He liveth for ever and ever" (_ho zôn eis tous
aiônas tôn aiônôn_, Rev. x. 6), the word _aiôn_ is not used to signify,
as in the instances of the two "ages" just mentioned, an interval
having beginning and ending, but is to be taken in an abstract sense,
derived from our ordinary perception of the existence and quality of
time, and from the faculty which, as said before, we possess of
thinking of time as indefinitely extended. The first of the cited
passages affirms what in these days we should express by saying that
God is necessarily and essentially self-existent, and the other, what
we mean by saying that He is necessarily and essentially a _living_
God. But {98} Scripture uses no such terms as these, because it is
written on the principle of employing in an abstract sense only such
terms as are rendered intelligible by personal sensation and
observation, and by experience drawn under actual conditions from the
outer world. It is thus that the word "age" acquired its primary
meaning, before it was susceptible of the abstract application just
mentioned.
There is also to be said, as a reason for accepting this doctrine
respecting our relation to time, that Scripture teaches analogous
doctrine respecting our relation to _space_. When our Lord astonished
his disciples by saying that the passage of a camel through the eye of
a needle is not an impossibility, he explained that "this is impossible
with men, but not with God; for with God all things are possible" (Mark
x. 25-27). By this saying he asserted that space, and the mutual
relations of body and space, are such as they are by the will and power
of God, and by the same power might be changed. Considering,
therefore, that "the new heavens and the new earth" constitute a "new
creation," it is quite in accordance with the above inference from our
Lord's words to find it said of "the new Jerusalem, the holy city,"
that "the length, and the breadth, and the height of it are equal"
(Rev. xxi. 16). For a city to be such as to conform to this
description, it is plain that material substance and space must {99} be
related to each other in an entirely new manner, unrecognizable by
present experience. The apostle Paul adverts to the eventual status of
the spirit of man with respect to time and space where he says, "I am
persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities,
nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor
depth, nor any other creation, will be able to separate us from the
love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. viii. 38, 39).
(In this sentence the recognized passage of time, the powers
[_dynameis_] of nature, and the measurable qualities of space, seem all
to be regarded as things _created_.) Also corresponding to the change
in the external creation it is revealed that there will be a change of
the outward man, the natural body giving place to the "spiritual body."
It would appear, therefore, from the whole of the foregoing argument
that our spirits, after being bound by earthly and temporal conditions,
undergo complete transformation, being conjoined with bodily essence
related in a new manner to _space_, and being also released from the
condition of _time_. But although this mode of existence may be a
necessary condition of the immortal state, especially as such state
embraces associated members, it is not the sole, nor the principal,
condition of immortality, as the remainder of the argument will show.
It has already been noticed that St. Peter {100} characterizes "the new
heavens and the new earth" by saying that "righteousness dwells
therein." This is as much as to say that it is a perfect _social_
state, whose end is at once the glory of God and the happiness of man.
The words of the apostle (2 Epist. iii. 13) signify that the new
creation, by satisfying this condition, is the fulfilment of an
antecedent promise. Now, the argument of this Essay is in entire
agreement with this doctrine, inasmuch as it was from the first assumed
(p. 9) that immortality cannot consist with any other than a state of
righteousness, and then (pp. 19 and 20) it was argued that after Adam's
transgression a _promise_ was made that himself and his race would
eventually be exempt from the power of Satan and attain to immortality.
The passage Rev. xxi. 1-4, quoted in p. 92, seems to certify the
complete fulfilment of this promise and to indicate the manner of its
fulfilment. But there are other passages in this concluding portion of
the Apocalypse, which might be thought to bear a contrary
signification, to which, therefore, our attention must now be directed.
In xxi. 8 we have, "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the
abominable, and murderers, and fornicators, and sorcerers, and
idolaters, and all lies, shall have their part in the lake which
burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." If we
give to this symbolism, as consistency requires, {101} an
interpretation analogous to that applied to Rev. xx. 10, we shall
conclude that sinners of all classes will eventually have no cognizable
existence, transgression being brought to an end by the effect of the
general judgment and the pains of the second death. This may explain
why it is added, "which is the second death." It is worthy of remark
that "all lies" are said to have their part in "the lake" although the
casting of lies into a lake is objectively an impossibility. But this
variation of the designation ("lies" being put for "liars") may be
intended to signify generally that all transgression disappears,
because transgressors cease to be cognizable _as transgressors_.
There is another thing to be noticed respecting the same passage: it
contains no such clause as, "They shall be tormented day and night to
the ages of ages," which occurs at the end of Rev. xx. 10. This
omission may be accounted for on the principle stated in p. 96,
according to which expressions involving time are not applicable to the
condition of things in the new creation, in which time exists no more.