An Essay on the Scriptural Doctrine of Immortality

by James Challis

We have now to inquire what interpretation may be given to the symbolic language (in Rev. xx. 14) which affirms that "Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire," and that "this is the second death, the lake of fire." The first mention of the lake of fire occurs in Rev. xix. 20, where it is described as "burning with brimstone," and both "the beast," and "the false prophet" associated with him (ho met autou), are said to be "cast alive" into this lake. But the rest (oi loipoi), namely, "the kings of the earth and their armies, gathered together to make war against him who sat on the horse and against his army," were slain by the sword that proceeds out of his mouth, that is, by the sharp and searching words of righteousness and truth, whereby he, "The Word of God," judges and pronounces condemnation in the last day (compare John xii. 48). In Rev. xx. 7-10, we are farther told that Satan, after being let loose from prison at the end of the thousand years when "the rest of the dead" live again (v. 5), and after collecting together all the risen nations of the earth, "the number of whom is as the sand of the sea" (v. 8), leads them to their destruction in battle against the God of heaven, and is himself "cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where are the beast {61} and the false prophet" (v. 10). Consequently, "Satan," who is opposed to God the Father, the God of heaven, "the beast," which, as signifying the spirit of the world, is opposed to the Holy Spirit, and "the false prophet," who is the symbolic representative of all anti-Christian power objectively opposed to the Son of God, are all three cast into a lake of fire "burning with brimstone." But of Death and Hades it is only said that they were cast into a lake of fire. Their being cast into the depths of "a lake" signifies that they become incognizable entities, and "lake of fire" indicates that they remain such by an irreversible law, fire being the symbol of force of law (see Deut. xxxiii. 2). For this reason "the lake of fire" is put in apposition (in v. 14) with "the second death," which is the extinction of death. Now, Satan, the beast, and the false prophet, being regarded as personal existences motived by will, and in that respect unlike Death and Hades, are cast not simply into a lake of fire, but into a lake burning with brimstone, which apparently signifies that from the time these "adversaries" cease to have cognizable existence, their antecedent power and influence will be regarded by those who were once subject to them with antipathy and abhorrence, so that any return to the same subjection will (as we say) be morally impossible. When in the end God has become "all in all," no antagonism remains; all {62} enemies have been subdued. Any one who is unwilling to accept the foregoing interpretation might reasonably be asked in what other way he can explain why, of all created things, brimstone is specially mentioned with reference to this "mystery" (see Rev. xvii. 5, 16).

In the last verse of the passage under consideration we have, "And if any one (ei tis) was not found written in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of fire" (v. 15). It is to be observed that the lake of fire is not here said to be burning with brimstone. This sentence must accordingly receive an interpretation analogous to that given above with respect to Death and Hades. When the final judgment has had complete effect, there will no longer be objective existence of any whose names are not in the book of life, because all will have been made meet for the inheritance of life. For this reason "the book of life" is mentioned (in v. 12) in immediate connection with the books containing the records according to which the judgment is transacted. I am well aware that the preceding interpretations do not accord with views entertained by many in the present day. I remember to have heard a sermon on the text, "This is the second death," in the course of which the preacher did not once advert to the word "This," but gave a description, the most terrible his imagination could supply, of what he judged to be the second {63} death. We find revealed in Scripture respecting "the terrors of the Lord"—the anguish and tribulation, the slaughter and destruction, proceeding from His wrath in the day of judgment—quite enough to deter sinners from going on in sin, without gratuitously adding the doctrine of the perpetuity of evil, the preaching of which seems to have the effect of hindering the belief and expectation of the impending realities of that great day. Besides, it may well be asked how such preaching can be reconciled with the Gospel revelations, stated in language devoid of symbol, which are contained in Rev. xxi.; to which I shall afterwards have occasion to call attention. But, first, it will be necessary to inquire what is the doctrine of Scripture respecting future "punishment" and "torment."

On proceeding to this part of the argument it will be proper to revert to a principle which has already been admitted as self-evident (p. 9), namely, that a state of perfect righteousness and a happy immortality are so essentially and necessarily related that one cannot subsist without the other. It is, however, to be said that this doctrine is nowhere expressed in such words in Scripture. In fact, the abstract terms, "essentially and necessarily related," are altogether unlike any Scriptural mode of expression. Yet it may be that the truth which we think we understand when we express it in such terms may admit of being {64} extracted in a more definite form from the concrete language of Scripture; and, in order that our argument for immortality may be shown to rest entirely on a Scriptural foundation, I shall now endeavour to show that this is the case with respect to the above-stated doctrine, by citing and discussing various passages of the Old and New Testament.

In the first place, I remark that righteousness and salvation, righteousness and peace, are so often and in such manner mentioned together in the word of God, that we may thence infer that, according to a law of the Divine (Economy, personal righteousness is a condition necessarily antecedent to salvation (safety) and peace (see Ps. xxiv. 5, and lxxxv. 7-18; Isa. xlv. 7, 8, xlvi. 18, li. 5, lxii. 1, and many like passages). For, on the other hand, it is twice expressly declared that God has said, "There is no peace to the wicked" (Isa. xlviii. 22, and lvii. 21). So in Rev. xiv. it is affirmed respecting sinners (who are comprehensively described as those who worship the beast and his image, and receive the mark of his name on the forehead or the hand—in their beliefs or their deeds) that "they have no rest day nor night" (vv. 9 and 11). Of the same sinners it is also declared that "they shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in {65} the presence of the Lamb" (v. 10). The fire of the torment is the operation of the holy law of righteousness which they have broken, and the brimstone by the offensiveness of its smoke represents the self-condemnation and reproach of conscience with which they are tormented when their sins are laid bare in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb, who by reason of their sins was slain. Lastly, we are told that "the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever." The general signification of "smoke," regarded as a symbol, appears to be, effect or consequence. Thus, in the remarkable symbol of "a smoking furnace" seen in vision by Abraham (Gen. xv. 17), the fire of the furnace may represent the operation of the law, and the smoke may symbolize "the abounding" of the sins of mankind consequent upon that operation (see Rom. v. 20; also compare 2 Esdras iv. 48). But in the passage before us we have "smoke of torment," of which smoke it is said that it "ascends up for ever and ever," signifying, it would seem, the perpetuity of the effect of the torment. This interpretation accordingly agrees with that previously given (p. 61) relative to "the lake of fire burning with brimstone." There is, however, this difference to be noted, that whereas the present passage relates especially to the effect of the pain and torment attendant upon the process of being judged, the other speaks of the effect of the second death to {66} which the wicked, after being tried by the judgment, are condemned.

The portion of Scripture contained in Matt. xxv. 31-46, gives, concerning the awards to be respectively adjudged to the righteous and unrighteous, and the final consequences of the judgment, certain revelations, symbolically expressed, which are made by the Lord himself, the future Judge. In order to complete the argument from Scripture respecting the effect of judgment, we must endeavour to interpret these revelations. "When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, he will sit on the throne of his glory: and all nations will be gathered before him: and he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; and he will place the sheep on his right hand, and the goats on his left" (vv. 31-33). We are thus told that all of all nations will come into the presence of the Judge, and that he will separate them into two portions, as distinct the one from the other as sheep are from goats. From what is said farther on we gather that one portion are "the just" (oi dikaioi, v. 37), and the other the unjust; but no mention is made of a particular process of separation. Consequently there is nothing here which contradicts the conclusion before arrived at (p. 38), that the just are separated from the unjust by partaking of the first resurrection; rather, that conclusion is in {67} accordance with this revelation respecting the place of honour "on the right hand" being assigned to the just, and their being prepared to receive it when the whole assembly, just and unjust, are gathered together before the Judge. In v. 34, as also in v. 40, the Judge is called "the King" (ho Basileus), forasmuch as he is "the faithful and true" One, who "in righteousness judges and makes war," and to whom belongs in a special manner the title of "King of kings and Lord of lords" (see Rev. xix. 11, 16).

We have next to consider the statements of the grounds on which the awards are made, which are very remarkable. "Then shall the King say to them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in; naked, and ye clothed me; I was sick, and ye visited me; I was in prison, and ye came to me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say to them, Verily I say to you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me" {68} (vv. 84-40). What is chiefly noteworthy in these words is, that the Judge identifies himself with suffering humanity, and accounts as "brethren" even "the least" of those that suffer, having, when he "dwelt among us," participated in the toils and afflictions to which sinful man is subject (although "in him was no sin)," and submitted in the end to the shame and pain of dying on the cross, although he had shown by his miracles that he had power over death and all the ills of humanity. As is written in Isaiah liii. 4, "He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows." This the Son of God voluntarily took upon himself out of love and compassion towards us, knowing that, by ordinance of his Father, the Creator of spirits, "we must through many tribulations enter into the kingdom of God" (Acts xiv. 22), and be made heirs of immortality, and that consequently we had need of such assurance of obtaining the appointed inheritance as that which is given by his partaking with us of life, death, and resurrection (see what is said on this part of the subject in p. 29). Besides this, the sympathy of Jesus Christ with human suffering, which was also shown by his miracles of healing, is specially a reason for giving practical proof, by acts of benevolence and mercy towards our fellow men, that we partake of the same spirit. It is with reference to such outward evidence of faith and righteousness, that the decision of the Judge, given {69} in the passage above quoted, is pronounced. It seems, too, from the questions put to the Judge by the company of the righteous, and the answer they received, that their acts of kindness and mercy, done in humility and faith, were accepted by the Judge, out of his sympathy and community with the sufferers, as done to himself, although the doers had not had previous knowledge or expectation that their good deeds would be so accepted.

The sentence pronounced on the unrighteous, and the reasons for it, are thus stated in vv. 41-45: "Then shall he say also to them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into the [oe]onian fire (to pur to aiônion, i.e. the fire of judgment in the future aiôn) prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry, and ye gave me no meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me not in; naked, and ye clothed me not; sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee hungry, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily, I say to you, inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me." It should be noticed that the terms of this award are the exact contraries of those of the award to the righteous. On the one hand, the King says, "Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit {70} the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world;" on the other, he says, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into the [oe]onian fire prepared for the devil and his angels;" and the account of what the Judge further says to the unrighteous, and of what they say to him, although somewhat briefer than that relating to the righteous, is made up of exactly opposite particulars. On this principle, since the decision respecting the righteous is pronounced on the grounds of positive works of righteousness done in humility and faith, that respecting the unrighteous has regard only to the omission to do such works through presumption and unbelief. The same exhibition of opposite circumstances and qualities, and the same principle of condemnation for sins of omission exclusively of those of commission, are observable in the two other symbolic representations contained in the same chapter—the parable of the ten virgins, and the parable of the talents. In short, the general purport of the chapter is to indicate, that in the sight of the righteous Judge sins of omission, not less than sins of commission, demand condemnation and punishment; the reasons for which appear to be that both kinds are equally violations of the royal law, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself" (James ii. 8), and perfect obedience to this law is the necessary foundation of a common immortality.

It only remains now to speak of the final issue of {71} the judgment stated thus in v. 46: "And these shall go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into external life." It must be admitted that the first clause of this sentence, taken as it is usually taken, expresses the perpetuity of evil, inasmuch as "punishment" is an evil. But after this has been conceded, there is still something more to be said on this doctrine. It is evident from the context that by "these" is meant the ungodly just before spoken of, who, having shown, by their neglecting to give proof of love towards their neighbours, that the love of God is not in them (see 1 John iv. 20), are counted as enemies, and as such must be punished. For there is no neutral position: all who do not obey the commands of Christ are opposed to him, and all that is opposed to him is destined to be brought under subjection. Further, it is to be noticed that although the final decision is expressed generally in accordance with the before-mentioned principle of employing exactly opposite terms relatively to the righteous and the wicked, here the opposite of "eternal life" is "eternal punishment," and not "eternal death," the latter expression being nowhere found in Scripture. May it not hence be argued that, as among men the punishment of the guilty has not for its purpose the infliction of pain and penalty, but rather is the means employed to the end that laws may be obeyed, so the end of divine punishment is for correction, and for {72} giving effect to and establishing the law of universal righteousness. If it should hence be inferred that the word "eternal" is applied to future punishment with reference to that permanence of effect which, as has already been indicated (p. 65), is symbolically represented by the perpetual ascent of "the smoke of torment," against this inference it might reasonably be urged that "eternal" ought to be taken in the same sense relatively to the "punishment" of the wicked, as relatively to the "life" of the righteous, and eternity is here predicated of the one just as of the other. Now, although this reasoning appears to be irrefragable, the additional arguments from Scripture which I am about to adduce will, I think, show that there must be some other way of regarding the doctrine of future punishment, which, although not inconsistent with that to which the foregoing interpretation of Matt. xxv. 46 has conducted, differs from it either as to point of view or comprehensiveness.

In the first place, it is to be observed that in our Lord's discourses doctrine was very generally taught by parables and symbolic language, which required to be interpreted in order that the abstract and spiritual truths thereby conveyed might be understood. (This remark applies to the whole of the passage, Matt. xxv. 31-46, brought under review in the foregoing discussion.) In Mark iv. 34, it is said that "without a parable he spake not to them," that is, {73} to the multitude, and that "in private he explained all things to his disciples." Being asked by the disciples, when he was preaching to a great multitude assembled together on the sea-shore to hear him, why he spake to them in parables, he answered, "Because it is given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. For whosoever hath, to him it shall be given, and he shall have more abundance; but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Therefore speak I to them in parables, because seeing they see not, and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand" (Matt. xiii. 10-13). It is here affirmed that although parables from their very character are expressed in terms which the use of the senses renders intelligible, there are those who do not or will not understand them, who for this reason, on the principle of not giving to those who have not, are spoken to only in parables, so that they continue in ignorance. As every effect or consequence implies the antecedence of the purpose of an agent, with respect to this consequence we find it stated in Luke viii. 10, that our Lord expressly addressed the disciples in these words: "Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but to the rest in parables, that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand." To a selected few is granted the favour of being able to discern, through the objective sense of {74} parables, the interior signification whereby mysteries of the kingdom of God are revealed, whilst from the rest—the multitude—although the objective sense is the same to them as to the others, the knowledge of the mysteries is withheld. This is evidently a dispensation analogous to that according to which, as Christ declared, "Many are called, but few are chosen" (Matt. xxii. 14). It is also in accordance with views expressed in a previous part of this Essay respecting the distinction between "the elect" and the rest of mankind.

It is further to be considered that the Lord promised the apostles that after his departure from them, "the Holy Spirit would teach them all things, and bring all things to their remembrance which he had said to them" (John xiv. 26), and it may be assumed that after the Day of Pentecost this promise was fulfilled, and that they were then enlightened to discern the spiritual meaning of his doctrine. In this way it may be accounted for that while Christian doctrine rests fundamentally on the words and deeds of Christ as recorded in the Gospels, it is taught in the Acts of the Apostles and the apostolical Epistles in terms of a more abstract character, which, in fact, may be regarded as unfolding the spiritual import of the teaching, the life, and the death of Jesus Christ. The apostle Paul, although he was not one of the originally selected apostles, had special grace and {75} power given him for understanding fully and teaching the doctrine of Christ. Now, this apostle, so gifted with understanding and knowledge, writes in his Epistle to the Romans: "By the obedience of one shall the many be made righteous" (v. 19); the context evidently showing that the "one" is Jesus Christ, and that "the many" are all the sinful sons of Adam. I have already adverted to this text (p. 19), and called attention to the significance of the future tense, "shall be made righteous." According to our argument, when they have been made righteous, they are saved. Hence, quite consistently with this passage in the Epistle to the Romans, St. Paul has said in his first Epistle to Timothy (iv. 10), "We trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, especially of those that believe." If this sentence had not contained the last clause, there might have been some excuse for questioning whether St. Paul preached the doctrine of the eventual salvation of all men; but inasmuch as he adds, "especially of those that believe," it is as clear as words can make anything clear, that he taught that all are saved in the sense in which he taught that those who believe are saved. The reason for making the distinction expressed by the word "especially" is, I think, sufficiently apparent from the doctrine, previously maintained in this Essay (pp. 88-40), that the elect righteous are raised up first, and partake already of salvation, honour, {76} and glory, during a certain interval preceding the resurrection of the rest of mankind.