Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Universalism: God will bless the proud and give grace to the wicked, as all such shall be saved at the resurrection.

90 Bible: "And shall utterly perish in their own corruption.”` [2 Pet. 2. 12.]

Universalism: They shall be eternally saved out of all their corruption even if they die in it.

91. Bible; "Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you." [Jas. 4. 8.]

Universalism: God will draw nigh to you and save you whether you draw nigh to him or not.

92. Bible. "Be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace without spot and blameless." [2 Pet. 3. 14.]

Universalism: You shall all be found of him in peace, and shall not be blamed however spotted with sin.

93. Bible: "To declare, I say, at this time, his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus." [Rom. 3. 26.]

Universalism: God would be unjust and cruel, did he not justify unbelievers and save all without exception.

[ocr errors]

94. Bible: "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to for, give us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.' [1 John 1. 9.] Universalism: If we will not confess our sins, yet he would be unjust if he did not forgive them; and he will ultimately cleanse us from all unrighteousness let us do the very worst

we can.

95. Bible: "Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time.” [1 Pet. 5. 6.] Universalism: God will exalt you in due time to a seat in glory,

just as much without humbling yourselves as with, for the proud and the meek shall be saved and exalted to the same station at the resurrection.

96. Bible: "Shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of Spirits and live?" [Heb. 12. 9.]

Universalism: We shall all live, anyhow, and that too in endless felicity, whether we are in subjection to the Father of Spirits or not.

97. Bible: "If ye live after the flesh ye shall die; but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body ye shall live." [Rom. 8. 13.]

Universalism: If ye live after the flesh, God doth know that ye

shall not surely die, and if ye through the spirit of the devil do gratify the deeds of the body ye shall live at God's right hand. 98. Bible: "Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness forever." [Jude 13.]

Universalism: Those raging waves of the sea are rolling on toward heaven, and to those wandering stars is reserved the blissful presence of God and the Lamb forever.

99. Bible: "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure." [2 Pet. 1. 10.]

Universalism: You need give no diligence concerning your election, for that is unalterably fixed, as the whole human family are unconditionally elected for eternal life let them do as they may. No man therefore can make his election any surer by giving diligence.

100. Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophesy, and keep those things that are written therein.” [Rev. 1. 3.] Universalism: Blessed are they that will not read,-that will not hear, and that will not keep the commandments which are written in this book; for they shall all be made like unto the angels of God, whether they are counted worthy to obtain that world or not.

CHAPTER IX.

DEBATE ON THE PERFECTIONS AND ATTRIBUTES OF DEITY.
BETWEEN ALPHA AND OMEGA.

"Canst thou by Searching find out God? Canst thou find out the Almighty to Perfection ?-Job 11. 7.

[The following is a fair representation of the arguments adduced in the discussion referred to, in which the author took part. We express no opinion with regard to the merits of the discussion but let each reader decide for himself, after giving the matter a careful examination.]

ALPHA'S FIRST SPEECH.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS AND FELLOW-CITIZENS:

A question of deep and thrilling interest is about to elicit the attention of this intelligent audience: "Can Universal Salvation be proved from the attributes of God?" This is the question, and, as you perceive, your present speaker takes the affirmative. I profess to advocate the final holiness and happiness of all mankind, irrespective of conditions to be performed in this life. I feel strong in the question now pending, knowing the tenableness of the ground I occupy. I take the attributes and perfections of Deity as my exclusive source of evidence in this controversy; not, however, giving up the direct teaching of the scriptures in favor of universal salvation.

I start out upon the admitted position that God is unchangeable, the same yesterday, to-day and forever, without variableness or shadow of turning. This is the chief corner stone of the edifice I am about to erect; and as this is not only an axiomatic position, but one which my opponent will not call in question; I feel as though I had dug deep and laid my foundation upon a rock. I have no faith in limitarianism, as I take the liberty of terming the orthodox belief; for I believe that God is infinite in power, wisdom and goodness. The scriptures are plain and positive upon this point, and as my friend will no doubt admit it, there is no necessity for quoting much scripture. One of the principle sins of the children of Israel in the wilderness was, that they "limited the Holy One of Israel." [Ps. 78. 41.] Our opponents are daily guilty of committing the same sin; but we are not limitarians. We believe with the Saviour that "with God all things are possible." [Math. 19. 26.] Hence it is possible for God to save all men ; and we shall endeavor to prove from several considerations, before we close the present investigation, that such will be the glorious result. Before taking my seat (as I wish at present

[ocr errors]

merely to open the discussion,) I will present one direct, and as I think unanswerable argument, in favor of my position. God must have known before he created man what would be his destiny: and if he created him, knowing at the same time that he would be eternally lost, he must have willed his destruction, and as God's will is that all shall be saved, he must have created none, therefore, only such as he knew would be saved; and if he had foreseen that any one of his intelligent creatures would be finally lost, his omnipotence could, and his benevolence therefore would, have withheld his existence! Here is my first argument, and I confess in all frankness that I am unable to see how it can be met. In the meantime I will hear what can be said in reply.

OMEGA'S FIRST REPLY.

GENTLEMEN MODERATORS, AND RESPECTED AUDIENCE:

I feel truly the importance of the day's labor before us, and concur heartily with my friend, that this is a question of momentous importance; that is, provided I am on the right side of the question; but if my friend should succeed in proving his side to be the true ground, it is of but little consequence whether the question be debated or not; for it can be the means of saving no one, as all are as certain of salvation without this discussion as they can be with it. But if it be demonstrated that I occupy the correct ground, it may be the means of some person fleeing for refuge and laying hold on the hope set before him, who would otherwise have rested in the false security of a delusive error, thinking that all is safe and certain with respect to the future; and as regards the present short life it is but little difference. Hence the importance of this day's occasion is suspended mainly upon the fact of my side of the question being correct.

I agree with my friend with regard to the unchangeableness of God; but he will find this a poor support for Universalism, and may possibly be glad to take it back before this discussion comes to a close and wish that God were changeable! He is quite liberal in dealing out the term limitarian, and charging us with the sin of limiting the Holy One of Israel; and yet, in almost the same breath, he commences telling us what God must do and what he must not do! We shall see, doubtless, before long, who have best claims to the charge of limitarianism, they or us. My friend has been so long in the habit of garbling the word of God, that he cannot debate the present question without garbling also God's attributes. He takes power, wisdom and goodness, and says nothing about justice and vengeance. These five attributes should not be separated but taken together, as they are all necessary to the harmonious operations of the moral government of God. They each have a list of names in the scriptures signifying nearly the same thing, and are frequently used by inspired writers interchangeably. When classified they stand thus:

1. Power: To this belong "omnipotence," "might," "strength,"

and "ability!"

2. Wisdom:

and "discernment !"

66

66

knowledge," "understanding," "perception,"

66

3. Goodness: "loving-kindness," "mercy," 'long-suffering," compassion," "pity,” and “benevolence.”

4. Justice:

-“righteousness," equity," "judgment,” “truth,”

and "faithfulness."

5. Vengeance:

66

"wrath," " indignation,” “ hatred,” “ anger," "severity," "jealousy," and "fury.”

This fifth list is a stranger to my opponent's creed. I doubt exceedingly whether he has any faith in it at all, notwithstanding vengeance is more exclusively God's attribute than either of the other four; for whilst power, wisdom, goodness and justice are attributes of God, they are, at the same time, attributes of man; and essentially necessary for him to possess in order to comply with the demands of God's law. The relation which he sustains to God and to his fellow-men requires that he should possess to some extent the attributes of power, wisdom, goodness, and justice; but “ vengeance is mine I will repay saith the Lord." [Rom 12. 19.] The great apostle to the Gentiles has also in the same connection forbidden us to exercise this attribute in any case whatever, because God is the rightful and exclusive possessor of it. I am perfectly willing that my friend should proceed with his arguments; and I have no doubt but that I can prove a universal damnation by the same logic with which he tries to sustain the position he now assumes.

Having thus premised, I now take notice of the argument at the close of my friend's address. The gist of the argument is this: that God must have known before he made man what would be his destiny; and hence if man be finally lost, God wills his destruction; or, in other words, God must will or decree whatever he foreknows will take place. This being the real ground of my friend, let us look at a few logical conclusions. On that assumption, all manner of theft, emulation, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,—all carousing, gambling, drunkenness, profanity, murders, and even blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, are in exact accordance with the will of God; for, according to the premises assumed by my opponent, God must have known that all these abominations would be practiced, and hence he must have willed that they should occur; if not, why did he create those individuals knowing that they would be guilty of such abominations? Yes, the only legitimate conclusion deducible from these premises, is that all the covetous, proud, boasters, implacable and unmerciful; that all blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, ungodly, profane; that all truce breakers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God, murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers, man-stealers, liars, drunkards, sorcerers, and

:

« AnteriorContinuar »