p486 [Mons. Eynard] [To the same.] VERY DEAR BROTHER, - I have had a great deal to do with the doctrine of poor B., both in New York and in Boston and in the West. I had four regular interviews on the question with persons who taught this doctrine, as well as other interviews during my present visit. Thanks be to God; the word, for it was it only, reduced them all to silence. Here, and at Boston, more than one soul has been delivered from the snare. I had no idea how entirely this doctrine was of the enemy, until I had discussed it. I had never received it, but I was not aware of all that it involved.

As to the passage of which you spoke to me (Matt. 13:42), the explanation shews that the thought is not extinction, which is but a conclusion drawn from the effect of fire upon weeds. The effect of the fire, as of the outer darkness, is weeping and gnashing of teeth. So that the effect indicated is not a cessation of existence, as they pretend, but suffering - suffering called everlasting (Matt. 25:46), in contrast with everlasting life. The fire is a figure, the habitual figure of judgment: we shall be all "salted with fire;" the day will be "revealed by fire," &c. They shall be tormented "for ever and ever;" words employed for the duration of the existence of God.

As for the word αἰώνιος, it is certain that the ordinary sense of the word, when it is employed in an absolute manner with regard to duration, is 'eternal,' 'that which will never cease.' Thus, "the eternal Spirit," "eternal redemption," "the eternal God," "the eternal inheritance," and that passage: "The things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal." These last expressions determine the signification of the word in an incontrovertible manner. Aristotle derives it from ἀεὶ ὤν, and Philo, of the apostles' time, says that the word signifies, not a past nor a future, but 'present perpetual subsistence.' I have found other passages, but I have not my memoranda here to give them to you.

But what, to my mind, gives such seriousness to this doctrine, is that in it there is no immortality of the soul, no responsibility, really no expiation. Death, with them, is the cessation of existence; if not, all their system falls through. They make that which does not exist at all to rise again; and that has forced some among them (here, a great number) to deny all existence after death. But then, there is no sense in judgment after death (Heb. 9:27), and to raise that which does not exist, has no sense either. Now, if the human soul is like that of a beast, which, of itself, ceases to exist with the body, responsibility falls to the ground; Christ has died for that which is nothing.

Nevertheless, every believer knows very well that when he was converted he, as responsible, took account of all that he had done previously, and he believes that Christ died for that. Now, if one had only a living soul like a beast, it could not be so. They say that the wages of sin is death; but if I die before the Lord returns, I shall pay the wages myself. And indeed, I have never found among them one single person who had not lost the doctrine of the atonement. Those who had been Christians would not have denied it when they were questioned: but, they had lost it. Christ, they say, died to obtain eternal life for us, never for what we had done, not having an immortal soul. This would in fact be nonsense. A beast, receiving eternal life, could not hold itself responsible for its previous life. Hence, all appeals to man, what is said to Cain, all the reasonings, all the ways, all the invitations of God, as well as His law, become a great divine action which is more than to no purpose; it is a deception. Now, if the soul is immortal, the question is settled.

They cite this passage: "God only has immortality," an evident proof that they are not straightforward, for they are forced to confess that the angels do not die, and, more than this, Paul himself, from their own point of view, had immortality when he wrote that. But "mortal" is applied only to the body: "In this mortal body," "This mortal shall put on immortality," &c. It is also said in Luke 20:38, "For all live unto him." And "Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do." (Luke 12:4.)

They do not accept annihilation; nothing, say they, perishes; but for them, the soul is dissolved, loses its individuality like a branch that is burned. Now God has breathed into our nostrils the breath of life. "We are the offspring of God;" sons of Adam, son of God. (Luke 3:38.) The threat of death addressed to Adam if he ate of the tree, was but a brutum fulmen if he was to die in any case.

They found much upon the Old Testament; thus, "The soul that sinneth it shall die." (Ezek. 18:4-20.) But, when we examine these passages, we find that what is in question is always a judgment that is to come upon this earth. Death never signifies cessation of existence, never; not even the second death, for that is the lake of fire. Then, the picture of Lazarus and of the wicked rich man shews it, in an indisputable manner.

But that which, to me, renders the thing so important, what to the Christian is even a moral demonstration, is that all the ways of God towards sinners are but a lie if we have not an immortal soul, and the atonement is no more true for us, than for those that perish. If I have nothing but the soul of a beast (the measure of intelligence matters little), Christ could not really have died for my sins, nor say that He was the propitiation for the whole world.

If you were to see the practical effect of this doctrine, it would be a striking confirmation to you of the truth. We had three interviews at Boston. My opponent was an honest man; he could not reply to the word; he owned it; but his wife (who, as it appears, rules him) would not hear of this, and at the third interview, he undertook to defend the doctrine; his prevarications and deception (which was not at all his character) did more, painful as it was, than the two first interviews. Thank God, those who were not in it with will have been delivered, for which I bless God with all my heart.

Only read the first and second chapters of Genesis. On the sixth day God created the mammals, then God saw that it was good. The creation, as such, was ended; then comes the solemn consultation, and man is created in the image of God. To say that man is but a superior species of mammal, is to deny all the solemnity of these verses. Man is "the image and glory of God", it is said. (1 Cor. 11:7.) How can that be, if he has nothing better than the soul of a beast, even though his faculties should surpass those of other animals, as the faculties of an elephant surpass those of a worm? He can hate God, alas! he can be in relationship with God: he is called to love Him; but the beast?

"Destruction" does not signify ceasing to exist, but ruin, as to the state in which one subsisted. We find the same word in such passages as these: "The lost sheep of the house of Israel." "Master, we perish." "O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself, but in me is thy help." "The world that then was … perished." "Destroy not him with thy meat." "Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord." What is meant by "punished with everlasting destruction"? All destruction is everlasting, if the thing destroyed ceases to exist. And this case is the more striking that, according to them, this passage treating of the judgment at the commencement of the millennium, the destruction there mentioned is not eternal in the sense which they give to the word, for those who are punished subsist afterwards. I quote from memory, but a concordance will furnish you with many other passages. Here I only speak of some words which they misuse, and of the points that render this question a capital one for me.

These doctrines are very general here, but I think that God is raising a barrier against them. The persons who taught them believed in the coming of the Lord wrongly; but they believed in it, and had far more light than those who were orthodox. That attracted souls who were seeking light, and they drank in the poison at the same time with the truth. Now, those whom I have met have not been able to withstand the word, and that which had the vain glory of possessing the light, is rejected as an abominable heresy by those who are certainly more enlightened upon older truths than themselves.

Before God, when Satan is treated as Satan, half the work is done; and more, for then God acts, although He exercises faith. … The fact that judgment comes after death, shews the folly of the idea that death is the wages of sin, in the sense of a complete punishment.

March, 1867.

[51290E]