The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1888-04-14
ion, and proposed that it should be


Jews John viii. 24) "Where go ye
cannot come" 1t was replied that Je-
sus did not say they should never come,
and that he used the same words to his
disciples John xiii. 33) GAS 1 said to
the Jews, so / say to you," ETC., and
when Mr.. Hall stated that Jesus added
to them, to his disciples, "Ye shall fol.
low me afterward,' he was reminded
that Jesus also said to the Jews: Eye
shall not see me till ye shall say Bless
ed is he who cometh in the name of the
Lord" Matt. xiii. 39).
Claiming that Judas went to Perdi-
ton at death meaning torment forever,
because he is called the 'Son of Perdi-
tion," it was replied that the same
Arkansaw logic would prove that James
and John who are called "Sons of thun-
del" when they died, went to thunder !
OF Judas it is not said he will be end
lessly lost, but SIS lost"
"A strong effort was made M
Hall to prove his doctrine by the use of
Gehenna, though all subsequent at
tempts we're defeated in advance by his
preliminary admission that Gehenna
was literal valley near Jerusalem,
where offal was thrown, and worms
and fire existed. Not the slightest effort
was made to prove his assumption that
it was ever transferred to the future
state, but that was assumed without
attempting proof and the language of
the Bible arbitrarily applied to the fu-
ture. "Soul and body in hell means
immortal spirit in endless torment he
assumed. 1t was replied that soul
(psuche) is the same word as in the text
in which it is said, she who will save
his life shall lose it," etc., and that it is
not said that any will be destroyed in
Gehenna, but that God is able to de-
stroy the entire being in Gehenna, while
man can only destroy the body, but not
the life. So God is said to be table to
raise up children to Abraham of the
stones" not that he will.
The position was taken by the mega
tive that some passages teach literal
destruction of human beings in Gehen-
ma, "How can ye escape, etc." as was
the case when Jerusalem was destroyed,
and that in other passages Gehenna is
made an analogue of the consequences
of sin, but never in the future world,
and a negative was proved by showing
that Gehenna is not place of endless
torment in the future for many reasons.
1. 1t was a we'll known locality on
earth; 2. 1t is described in the Old
Testament, as an earthly locality; 8. 1t
is not mentioned in the Apocrypha as
it would have been had it meant the
place Of post -mortem punishment in
which the Jews then believed; 4. No
Jewish writer at the time of Christ
ever located it hereafter; Josephus and
Philo believed in such place, but never
named it Gehenna; 5. No classic Greek
author ever names it, proving it Jew
ish locality; 6. No Jew mentions it till
Jonathan Ben Uzziel from I'd to 9Th
century, A. Do; Z. The first Christian
writer who named it was Justin Mar
tyr, A. D. $50, and as he believed inthe
humiliation of the wicked, it did not
mean "hell" then; s. Clement, an early
Father, Universalist, uses it to de-
scribe his ideas of future punishment,
and as he was Universalist, it did not
mean hell then; 8. Salvation is never
said to be from Gehenna; 10. Neither
Christ nor his apostles ever named it to
Gentiles, proving it Jewish locality;
IL. John, Paul, Peter, and Jude never
mention it; II. Paul in thirty years,
though he declared the whole counsel
of God, never announced the existence
of such a place; 10. Jesus only men
toned it four times; IA, and only warn
ed sinners against it once, and then ex-
planned it as about to come in this life;
Is. it is never said to be of endless du
ldIlOA' n lCUICl AAOLh AeCfs - w HlOOul-
vey. of Kentucky, was read, stating
that he had traversed the entire place,
and Rev. S. Cox (3aptist) testifes (''Doc-
trine of the Kons,'O that the worms
and the fire, and Gehenna are analo-
CUES of the work accomplished by lit
eral worms and fire, and denote "puri-
flying and vivifying correction" Thus
the negative disproved every assump-
ton relating to Gehenna.
During DR.. Hanson's review of his
opponent, he found time to introduce
several unanswerable negative argu-
ments.
1. Endless punishment cannot be true,
because every sin of every sinner soiH be
fully punished, lisa. iii. IL; Prov. XII. 81,
81; Col. iii. %; Elk. xxxiv. 6, Z; Cor.
v. 10; Ps. xcix. s; Rom. IL. 6; Ps. xii. |
II; Feel. xii. 10, IA.
2. Endless punishment cannot be true,
because 1t can neUer be erecatted. The
time can never come when justice will
be any nearer being executed than be-
fore the first stroke of'punishment was
inflicted, if endless punishment be the
inst DenaltV of sin