But it is possible that the faithful, after receiving the grace of Christ and fellowship of the Spirit, may by unrighteous conduct "grieve the Holy Spirit" (Eph. iv. 80), and even by persistence in sin defile the gift of the Spirit which had been imparted to them. In the foregoing passage from St. Matthew xii., it is said that there is forgiveness for one who "speaketh against the Son of man," which expression may signify, generally, wilful and overt opposition to "the law of Christ" (Gal. vi. 2); but that there is no forgiveness for one who speaks against the Holy Spirit, i.e. one who by wilful and overt conduct does violence to the sanctifying influence of the Holy Spirit which he has already partaken of. Of such an one it is written in Heb. x. 29, "he hath trodden underfoot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant wherewith he was sanctified an unholy thing, and hath done despite to the Spirit of grace." But not every sin committed after faith and the baptism of repentance has this effect. The apostle John tells us that although all unrighteousness {87} (adikia, transgression of the strict law of Christ) is sin, there is sin of a believing brother which is not unto death, and may be repented of in this world; and there is sin unto death, respecting which prayer for repentance would be unavailing (1 Epist. v. 16, 17). This is "the blasphemy of the Spirit," which is not forgiven in this world, because forgiveness implies repentance; neither is it forgiven in the world to come, because beyond the grave there is no repentance. What remains for such sinners is the "[oe]onian judgment" (see p. 69) mentioned in St. Mark iii. 29, and "the sorer punishment" spoken of in Heb. x. 29, which is the same as the condemnation to the second death consequent upon that judgment. (I take occasion to remark that in Mark iii. 29, instead of kriseôs, some early manuscripts have amaritêmatos, which, as far as I can see, does not admit of being interpreted consistently with the context and the usage of enochos.)
There is still another passage—Mark ix. 42-50—which, on account of its peculiar significance, it is necessary to discuss with reference to the Scriptural argument for immortality. It will suffice for conducting the discussion to cite vv. 43 and 44, the literal translation of which is as follows:—"If thy hand cause thee to offend, cut it off: it is well for thee to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands to go into geenna, into the unquenchable fire, where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not {88} quenched." The concluding part of this text is evidently derived from Isaiah lxvi. 24, where the prophet reveals that the Lord has said respecting the worshippers, consisting of "all flesh," that shall come before him when "the new heavens and the new earth" are established, that "they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched: and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh." This passage has so important a bearing on the sense of that quoted above from St. Mark, that we must by all means endeavour to find out its interpretation. Respecting Biblical Interpretation, Burnet in one of his treatises has enunciated two principles, which cannot but be assented to: first, that besides the portions of Scripture which have a literal or historical meaning, there are others which must be taken allegorically; and, secondly, that an allegorical meaning, is to be admitted when the literal sense involves an absurdity, or contradiction to the nature of things.[2] The right application of these principles may be said to constitute a large portion of the science of Scripture. But in applying them it is often difficult to decide, respecting a particular passage, whether it is to be {89} taken literally or allegorically; and again, after deciding that the passage must be allegorical, there is generally the still greater difficulty of discovering what the true sense is. In illustration of the second of the above principles Burnet cites, apart from the context, vermem nunquam moriturum, and admits that these words have an allegorical signification. This plainly follows from the single consideration that the worm (skôlêx) here spoken of is literally that which is seen to feed on dead bodies, and to say of it that it does not die is contradictory to experience. When, however, the same author goes on to give as the allegorical sense nothing more definite than "extremam miseriam," it may well be asked, By what kind of induction has this conclusion been reached? The feeble worm which feeds on mortal remains presents to our sight nothing capable of causing pain or misery. Rather it may, I think, be asserted that Scripture here adverts to this natural fact for the purpose of indicating by a distinct and visible emblem that there is a living principle which destroys mortality, and which for that reason alone is not itself subject to death. If we be guided solely by what we see with our eyes, this appears to be the only allegorical sense that can be attributed to the first clause of Mark ix. 44.[3] We have next to inquire as to the {90} interpretation of the other clause, and what is the mutual relation between the two clauses.
Although the worm which devours dead bodies is not emblematic of anything that causes pain, the case is quite otherwise with respect to the emblematic meaning of fire. It is evident that fire which is "unquenchable" is not natural fire, and consequently may be taken to be, as has already been assumed, the devouring fire of judgment and of condemnation consequent upon violation of the law of righteousness (see p. 88). The destruction of the impenitent unrighteous by the operation of this law (which is their second death), is attended with pain and woe such as will not have been before, nor will be after. It was inferred (p. 84) from our Lord's teaching in Matt. xviii. 6, that any form of death of which the body is susceptible in this world is rather to be endured than falling under condemnation in the world to come. In Mark ix. 42-48, we are taught that any form of bodily pain, as that of losing a hand, a foot, or an eye, is to be preferred to entering with the body whole into the "geenna of fire." This is, in fact, at once the greatest and the last of human suffering and tribulation. For it should be noticed that at the end of this very passage (v. 49) it is said that "every one shall be salted [made 'good,' v. 50] with fire," signifying the effect finally produced by the unquenchable fire. And with this agrees the emblem {91} of the worm that "dieth not," taken as indicating that the final effect of the torment of the judgment is to swallow up death, and to bring in, by establishing the reign of righteousness, life and immortality. The signification of one emblem must be taken in conjunction with that of the other.
Moreover, by giving particular attention to the context of Isa. lxvi. 24, it will be seen that what is there revealed is quite in accordance with the above interpretation. For, first, in v. 16 we have, "By fire and by his sword [the sword of the Word of God spoken of in Rev. xix. 15] will the Lord plead with all flesh," that is, in the judgment which has been appointed for the trial and tribulation of all men. Then, by taking into account what is said in vv. 22 and 23, we may gather that "all flesh," having become denizens of "the new heavens and the new earth" in which, as St. Peter declares (2 Epist. iii. 13), righteousness dwells, "come to worship the Lord." Of these worshippers, consisting of "all flesh," it is affirmed that "they shall go forth and look upon the carcases of the transgressors," which, on account of the ill savour coming up from them, will be "an abhorring to all flesh" (compare Isa. xxxiv. 3). Thus there is here represented, but by a different figure, the same truth as that which has already been deduced from the ascending up for ever and ever of the brimstone smoke of torment (see pp. 61 and 65); namely, {92} that the subjecting of all the deeds and secrets of the present life to the scrutiny of judgment, and the consequent condemnation of all the unredeemed to the pains of a second death, will have the effect of making sin against a "faithful Creator" to be seen and felt to be so hateful and abominable a thing, that such sin will cease to be possible, notwithstanding that all men will retain individuality and volition. For all will thus at length be made new creatures incapable of sinning. This remark may serve to introduce the final stage of the general argument, which I now proceed to enter upon.
I have been endeavouring to show that the symbolic assertions in Rev. xx. respecting "the lake of fire" and its "burning with brimstone," the casting therein of the devil, the beast, and the false prophet, and their being tormented "day and night for ever and ever," the judgment of all the dead, small and great, according to their recorded deeds, "the second death," and the casting into the lake of fire of "any one not found written in the book of life," do not necessitate, as is commonly thought, the conclusion that evil, which had a beginning, fulfils no purpose and has no ending. As to this question the seer gives, in Rev. xxi. 1-4, the following explicit revelation: "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth passed away; and there is no more sea. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, {93} coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice from the throne, saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself will be with them, their God. And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and death shall be no more, neither sorrow nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the first things passed away." Now, it seems hardly possible that the announcement of the termination of evil could be made in terms more direct and more intelligible than these. Hence, according to acknowledged principles of Biblical interpretation, we must not attribute to the above-mentioned symbolic and less intelligible passages any meaning inconsistent with that announcement. The arguments I have adduced respecting the interpretation of the figurative statements contained in the latter half of chap. xx. are directed to showing that these figures do, in fact, admit of meanings consistent with the gospel revelations given in chap. xxi. 1-4. It is of so much importance, as regards the Scriptural doctrine of immortality, to establish this point, that I propose now to supplement the former arguments by additional considerations.
In the Book of Daniel (xii. 6, 7) we read of "a man clothed in linen, who was upon the water of a river, and held up his right hand and his left hand unto {94} heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for ever," that at the end of an appointed time a certain purpose would be accomplished, and "all these things be finished." This refers, as the context shows, to "the time of the end" of the present age (aiôn). The announcement made in this manner by the man clothed in linen indicates that he is the precursor of the angel of whom, in vv. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 of Rev. x., the apostle John relates as follows: "I saw a mighty angel come down from heaven, clothed with a cloud, and a rainbow upon his head, and his face as the sun, and his feet as pillars of fire; and, having in his hand a little book open, he set his right foot upon the sea, and his left foot upon the earth…. and lifted up his hand to heaven, and sware by Him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven and the things therein, and the earth and the things therein, and the sea and the things therein, that time shall be no more; but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, in the time when he is about to sound his trumpet, also [kai, merely indicating the apodosis] the mystery of God is finished (etelesthê, aor. ind.), according to the gospel He made known to His servants the prophets." The soundings of the seven trumpets are significant of progressive steps in the general judgment; the days pertaining to the voice of the seventh angel are those immediately preceding the actual sounding of his trumpet, which announces the {95} completion (as indicated by the number seven) of the mystery of God's creation in time, and marks the end of the age (ho aiôn ho mellôn) following upon the conclusion of the present age. When all that pertains to this final interval "is finished," there is no more succession of events whereby time is cognizable, and therefore time is no more. The might, and glorious investiture, and majestic attitude of the angel who proclaims this truth, conspire to point out its great significance. The little book in his hand is the word of prophecy by which we learn these mysteries.
It is, no doubt, beyond the limit of our thoughts, conditioned as we are by time, to conceive of a state of things in which time is no more. Apparently for this reason commentators have proposed to translate, chronos ouk estai eti, "the time shall not be yet," or "time shall no more intervene." The former of these translations is excluded by the usage of ouk eti in the analogous affirmations in Rev. xxi. 1, 4, and the other, which is an arbitrary comment rather than a translation, is for the same reason excluded. (I have preferred ouk estai eti to ouketi estai, because the words occur in the former order in each of the three instances in Rev. xxi.) There can be no question as to the philological correctness of the translation, "time shall be no more." The unwillingness to admit it appears to have arisen solely from a fixed persuasion, gratuitously and very generally entertained, that time {96} has a necessary existence, and therefore cannot come to an end. Some have affirmed that when time ends, eternity begins; which is a self-contradictory dogma, because eternity (from [oe]tas) is essentially time. The teaching of Scripture on this point is directly opposed to these views; for the apostle Peter tells those for whose sake he wrote his second Epistle, to bear in mind "this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day" (2 Epist. iii. 8). This is equivalent to saying that time is not an independent entity, but that both its existence and its quality are determined by the will of the Creator of all things. It is in virtue of our being made in His image, and partaking intellectually of the divine nature, that we are capable in thought of giving indefinite and arbitrary extension to time, whether it be past time or time to come. This faculty, as I have already argued in p. 80, is to be placed in the category of the different conditions, whether depending on experience of the course of time, or on affections of our bodily and mental constitutions, under which the spirit of man is formed for immortality. All such conditions are determined by the purpose for which they are imposed, and when that purpose is fulfilled in the perfection of humanity the conditions come to an end. It is thus that the being conditioned by time eventually ceases.
It will be proper here to meet an objection to the {97} doctrine that time will have an end which might be drawn from the expression, eis tous aiônas tôn aiônôn, which frequently occurs in Scripture, and seems to be indicative of an unlimited succession of ages. So far as time is under human cognizance, and has relation to human experience, Scripture speaks in express terms of only two ages—the present one, which lasts to the end of the generations of men in the existing order of things; and the age to come, which embraces the course of the judgment of all who lived in the first age, and terminates with the second death of those who had no part in the first resurrection. When it is said of the Creator of heaven and earth, that He is "from everlasting to everlasting" (apo tou aiônos meôs tou aiônos su ei, Ps. xc. 2), and that "He liveth for ever and ever" (ho zôn eis tous aiônas tôn aiônôn, Rev. x. 6), the word aiôn is not used to signify, as in the instances of the two "ages" just mentioned, an interval having beginning and ending, but is to be taken in an abstract sense, derived from our ordinary perception of the existence and quality of time, and from the faculty which, as said before, we possess of thinking of time as indefinitely extended. The first of the cited passages affirms what in these days we should express by saying that God is necessarily and essentially self-existent, and the other, what we mean by saying that He is necessarily and essentially a living God. But {98} Scripture uses no such terms as these, because it is written on the principle of employing in an abstract sense only such terms as are rendered intelligible by personal sensation and observation, and by experience drawn under actual conditions from the outer world. It is thus that the word "age" acquired its primary meaning, before it was susceptible of the abstract application just mentioned.
There is also to be said, as a reason for accepting this doctrine respecting our relation to time, that Scripture teaches analogous doctrine respecting our relation to space. When our Lord astonished his disciples by saying that the passage of a camel through the eye of a needle is not an impossibility, he explained that "this is impossible with men, but not with God; for with God all things are possible" (Mark x. 25-27). By this saying he asserted that space, and the mutual relations of body and space, are such as they are by the will and power of God, and by the same power might be changed. Considering, therefore, that "the new heavens and the new earth" constitute a "new creation," it is quite in accordance with the above inference from our Lord's words to find it said of "the new Jerusalem, the holy city," that "the length, and the breadth, and the height of it are equal" (Rev. xxi. 16). For a city to be such as to conform to this description, it is plain that material substance and space must {99} be related to each other in an entirely new manner, unrecognizable by present experience. The apostle Paul adverts to the eventual status of the spirit of man with respect to time and space where he says, "I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. viii. 38, 39). (In this sentence the recognized passage of time, the powers [dynameis] of nature, and the measurable qualities of space, seem all to be regarded as things created.) Also corresponding to the change in the external creation it is revealed that there will be a change of the outward man, the natural body giving place to the "spiritual body." It would appear, therefore, from the whole of the foregoing argument that our spirits, after being bound by earthly and temporal conditions, undergo complete transformation, being conjoined with bodily essence related in a new manner to space, and being also released from the condition of time. But although this mode of existence may be a necessary condition of the immortal state, especially as such state embraces associated members, it is not the sole, nor the principal, condition of immortality, as the remainder of the argument will show.
It has already been noticed that St. Peter {100} characterizes "the new heavens and the new earth" by saying that "righteousness dwells therein." This is as much as to say that it is a perfect social state, whose end is at once the glory of God and the happiness of man. The words of the apostle (2 Epist. iii. 13) signify that the new creation, by satisfying this condition, is the fulfilment of an antecedent promise. Now, the argument of this Essay is in entire agreement with this doctrine, inasmuch as it was from the first assumed (p. 9) that immortality cannot consist with any other than a state of righteousness, and then (pp. 19 and 20) it was argued that after Adam's transgression a promise was made that himself and his race would eventually be exempt from the power of Satan and attain to immortality. The passage Rev. xxi. 1-4, quoted in p. 92, seems to certify the complete fulfilment of this promise and to indicate the manner of its fulfilment. But there are other passages in this concluding portion of the Apocalypse, which might be thought to bear a contrary signification, to which, therefore, our attention must now be directed.