The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1888-04-14

destroying sin, error, death.
5. Endless punishment is consistent
Nth the relation betueen Gods la,c and
mans nature. Answer, Gods law de-
mands obedience, and must ultimately
secure it, for Goods law is perfect
converting the SOUL" Mans nature is
finite, Gods law was devised by in
finite love and wisdom to subdue mans
sin, and it must prevail.
6 The nature of sin proves the neces-
sity of endless punishment. 1t is tex
ceedingly sinful,' the word exceed
ingly" means infinite. Reply, if sin is
infinite it must have had an infinite
author, but man is its author, and as no
finite cause can produce an infinite
effect, sin like man, its author, must be
finite.
Z. The words ''everloSting," etc., denote
endless duration. No proof whatever
was offered, but assuming his construc-
ton he proceeded to quote and apply.
Everlasting punishment means endless
misery. Matt. XIV. As. "These shall
go away into everlasting punishment;
therefore a portion of mankind will
suffer endless punishment. Under this
head he quoted Jude. vi. Z. The reply
was, % that it was not man but angels
who were kept in eternal chains under
darkness, so that the text did not
apply to mankind, at all, and (2) their
duress was not endless, because
though word usually meaning end
less was applied to their Imprisonment
aidios, it was expressly limited, sever
lasting chains unto the judgment"
And Sodom was not to suffer forever,
Cd because the eternal fire was in this
world, Gen. xix. 24-2S, (2) because it
was an example seen by the contem-
poraries of Jude, and 60 because
Sodom is to be restored to her former
estate, Eek. xvi. 1856. A general
exposition of the use of the word
usually rendered everlasting, etc., and
quotations of lexicons were here
given, which show that the word never
means endless duration except when
the subject connected with it imparts
to it meaning it does not intrinsically
possess. In 652 times in the Old Tesla
ment the word means limited duration
in more than 900, and in the New Tes-
lament, generally it has the same
usage. Foster, (Baptist says "a linn
tied Interpretation is authorized"
Macknight, (Presbyterian) "the words
are ambiguous, and limited interpre-
tation is not forced" Farrar, (Epis-
copaD, "There is no authority whatever
for rendering it everlasting" And a
multitude of passages was quoted to
show that as the word has limited
meaning usually it must have when
connected with punishment: Gen. xvii.
8; Xviii. 4; xix. 26; Numb. XIV. 13;
Levitt. xvi. "a; Heb. iii. 6; III. Kings v.
81; Deut. XIV. II; Gen. xiii. Is; Jonah
ii. 6 (Jonah was in "hell forever'' he
says when he was in the fish three days,
etc. 1t was shown that the word
means duration without beginning and
without end, applied to God; without
end, when referring to the SOULS exist
ence; many ages, when connected with
the mountains; centuries, when re-
ferring to the Aaronic priesthood; a
few days or even hours, as in Jon. ii. g.,
and must be limited therefore, when
referring to the punishments of a living
God.
He quoted Dan Gii an oohich q resurrec-
ton to everlasting shame and contempt"
is spoken of. Reply, % this is not of all
men but is local and partial resurrec-
tion, many of Them" ETC., not all
men; ~ Jesus in Matt. xiv. expressly
declares that this was moral uprising
that was to take place in this world.
How long would this ''shame and con-
tempt" last? A similar judgment is
an everlasting reproach," utterly
forgotten" ''forsaken," destroyed, !"
and perpetual desolation" is explain
ed as lasting just seventy years, Jer.
xiii. 80, 40 Jer. XIV. g., 10. The
terms of Daniels resurrection ''dust, !"
etc., are explained as moral condition
in this world, in Ps. xiv. 25; lisa. XIV.
u; XVI. 5; Tim. v. 6; Rev. iii. l.
Other passages acre quoted, containing
words that Mr.. Hall assumed without
proof meant endless, and indeed he
confessed, in his next speech that he
had not attempted to prove that the
words meant endless, because the words
could mean nothing elsel
This effort was characterized by DIR.
Hanson, as stump speech; a power
full effort if addressed to those who be-
lieved its doctrines; who read into the
Bible their own creeds, but utterly des-
titute of argument, and so of no value
to this debate. And on the terms or
the debate, one rule of which allowed
the negative to ignore all texts that
were not explained to sustain the posi-
ton taken, the negative could have
passed most that he said without note
or comment; but DR.. Hanson claimed