The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1878-03-21
The Penalty Of Sin.

To the Editor Of the jackson Standard
This subject is being pretty thoroughly
ventilated just at this time, both through
the religious and secular press. It is to
be hoped that this discussion will be pro
ductive OF much good. Indeed the fair,
honest discussion OF any important topic
is not without beneficial results This
question of the punishment Of sin is one
in which all are concerned, and the dis
cussion of il should not be confined Who'll
ly to the ministry or the religious papers
Every one should aim TO have settled
intelligent views on so important a sub
ject.
Let us bear in mind, as fundamental
facts, that God is a moral governor. that
he has established moral government
in this world and that men are the sub
jacts OF this government. Government
implies law, and law implies punishment
Without some kind OF penalty attached
to the transgression Of law, all law
amounts to nothing This is true both
in relation to human and divine laws
The question then naturally arises, what
penalty has God connected with the vio.
lation of his law2 This question can be
answered only in the light of revelation.
1t cannot be settled by any mere human
authority
1t is conceded by all who believe in
divine sovereignty and human responsi-
bility that there Is some punishment at
tached to sin. 1t is also generally admit
ted that this punishm ent is not inflicted
Ia this life. This is not a world of pun
ishment but probation. The punishment
does not come till this probation does
All that we suffer here at the hand Of
God for wrong doing, is corrective and
reiormative, not punitive. Even Uni
versalism as generally taught at the pres
ent day, admits that there is a state OF
future punishment. The point in con.
troversy relates to the duration OF that
punishment. Universalism holds it to
limited. The Orthodox churches holds it
10 be eternal.
As already intimated. this question is
TO be decided on the authority OF the
scriptures IL may be denied that every
man has a right to interpret the Bible to
suit himself. But we are To take the
terms of the scriptures in their plain
simple significance Now every one who
Is at all familiar with the Bible knows
that the adjective applied to the future
punishment OF the impeuitent is "eter-
nal or its equivalent.
In the last verse OF the 2jth chapter OF
Matthew, we read that These (the wick.
ed) shall 90 away into everlasting pun.
ishment, but the righteous into life
eternal" In the Greek the same word
(ionian) is applied to both Of these elias
ses. In the new translation which is now
being the rendering will be the same in
both instances.
Now what right have we TO say thai
eternal does not mean forever. II IL i'm
plies endless duration as applied to the
righteous, it certainly has this signiii-
canoe as applied to the wicked. IL is
claimed by some that all future punish
ment is intended to be reformative. that
it should be so inflicted as to make the
subject better and that this end Is not
reached if the punishment is endless
This is surely a mistaken view OF the OBJ
iect Of punishment. \ man is not hung
for his good, but for the good OF society,
and the vndication Of law. Law j.
more sacred than life It is further
claimed that the doctrine Of endless suf
fering is inconsistent with the goodness
OF God. Ii may be inconsistent with our
r9Eoae of Divine goodness; S-t i Cod hes
declared tina; &c 10 good % cI. eEC
has also declared that the wicked shall .
20 away into everlasting punishment, .
this certainly settles the question We .
are To conform our view To TIA" Bible and F.
not distoIt the Bible TO suit our opinions. |
w. II. GIBBONS.