On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
if it asserted only that a few hundred , or a few thousand , or even a few millions were to be destroyed for the sake of the greater order aud happiness of the whole , something of its absurdity along with its horror might be abated 5 but when the proposition is so
unlimited and sweeping , ( and this it must be , if it be taken at all , ) as to include the immense majority of mankind , of millions piled upon millions , so that the head becomes giddy with attempting to count them—I am utterly astonished that any one in his right mind can for a moment believe
it . The doctrine of eternal punishment may be so modified and expressed as to render it in comparison with this , quite rational and merciful ; and if I were compelled , by the gripe of evidence , to relinquish my present conviction in that of the final happiness of all men , I should certainly have recourse to the modified
doctrine of eternal punishment . A man may be continually growing better and happier , and yet be everlastingly the worse for the sins which he has committed . The doctrine of eternal
punishment explained and modified somewhat in this way , as 1 / wwe known it done by some very moderate Calvinists , I hold to be infinitely preferable to that of total destruction .
The remarks which Cantabrigiensis has made upon the analogy to be drawn between the destruction of the lower animals and the destruction of man , appear to me to bear very little upon the question . * ' The spirit of a
beast goeth downward , but the spirit of a man goeth upward . " Man possesses a higher life than that of the brutes around him , and it is of this higher and better life that the Scriptures speak when they declare that it shall not be subject to death . " The body with its life shall return to the deist
from whence it came , but the spirit with its life to God who gave it . " When the Scriptures declare that death shall be destroyed , that over his empire a complete and final victory shall one day be obtained , they , of
course , speak only with reference to maa— -to man as created in the image of God , as a being breathing thoughtful breath , a creature of large discourse , looking before and after , and with thoughts arid hopes that " wander into eternity * *
Untitled Article
3 . The last objection made by Cantabrigiensis to my argument , proceeds upon a misapprehension of my meaning . I do , indeed , lay great stress upon the plain language of Scripture , and the necessity of 4 * taking it in its common , accepted signification , ' but
only , as 1 before remarked , where the language is such as to convey but one idea , one sentiment , and when it cannot possibly be construed into a metaphor . This part of the sentence , which so qualifies its meaning , Cantabrigiensis must have overlooked . I knew well
enough that to take every expression in its plain literal sense would be often absurd ; and , permit me to say , that it is equal ] v absurd to torture a plain , simple , unfigurative expression , ( if I may so term it , ) into a meaning totally foreign from that which its obvious
construction bears . One of my reasons for not resting the doctrine of final restitution on the express language of Scripture is , that I am not certain that the words- usually appealed to for this purpose , must
necessarily bear the sense which is attempted to be fixed upon them . I , therefore , lay down certain premises which are supported ^ by the plain , uniform , unfigurative language of Scripture , and from which I think the
doctrine itself is directly and clearly deducible . Will Cantabrigiensis deny that man is the object of God * s tender love and care , or that this love is expressed in Scripture , in language which it is impossible to
misunderstand ? That Cod is good to all , and that he delightcth in mercy , is so often asserted , and in so many various forms of expression , that no Christian has , in so many words , ventured to
deny it . It is founder ! on language which conveys to us only ** one idea , and which cannot possibly be construed into a metaphor- " This is the kind of language which I insist upon being taken in its common , accepted
signification . It is upon this kind of language that 1 lay so much stress ; it is upon this kind of language that my premises are founded , and hence the relevancy and the importance of the observation at which
Cautabrigiensis expresses his surprise . 1 will illustrate my meaning by an observation on the controverted doe * trine of the atonement- The advocates of this doctrine bring" forward ,
Untitled Article
i 4 Q Mr . Madges Reply to Cantahrigienns on " Final Restitutio " n"
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Dec. 2, 1818, page 742, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2483/page/14/
-