[OV158]
"When doctors disagree, the patient must decide."--Pastor Russell.
MR. EDITOR--I seek not your columns for strife, acrimony or defamation. It is mine to seek to set forth the Wisdom from above, which is the noblest science and the best instruction. Amongst my warm friends the world over are many most zealous Catholics and Protestants, and others of no earthly church affiliation. I strive to offend none, but to serve my God, His Truth and all who are truly His people. The Monitor (San Francisco), exercising its proper liberty, has sought to counteract the influence of my presentations on "What Say the Scriptures Respecting the Hereafter." No doubt the Monitor's editor is conscientious, and many of its readers as well, and no doubt they will all accredit me with similar honesty. The subject, approached from this standpoint of respect for each other's beliefs, is bound to do good--to stimulate thought. Figuratively, God is Light; in Him is no darkness. In proportion as we turn on the true light of His Word and order our minds and conduct in harmony therewith, we shall be blessed. The turning on of the light can never damage the Truth --only the darkness suffers and flees.
In its opening paragraph the Monitor introduces its side of the discussion by asking me the same question that the scribes and Pharisees of old asked of Jesus: By what authority doest Thou these things and who gave Thee this authority?--authority to teach and to do good. (Matt. 21:23.)
"As the Pastor of Brooklyn Tabernacle speaks with a show of authority, and asserts that the belief of Christians in general about eternal punishment is all wrong, we would politely ask him for his credentials and his documents. In whose name do you teach, Pastor Russell? Who sent you? Who made you the interpreter of God's Word? When was it said to you, mediately or immediately by Christ, 'Go teach?' Or when was given you the assurance, 'I am with you alway, even to the consummation of the world?' Can you trace back your pedigree in unbroken line to the Apostles? Where are your letters patent? Where are your documents? The burden of the proof, you know, lies on the accuser. You have accused Christians in general of being wrong on the point of everlasting punishment. Give us a real argument to sustain your accusation. Your teaching would be, O, so soothing to the sinner, Pastor Russell, were it only true. But it is not true, Pastor Russell."
All authority to speak in the name of God must come from Him, and He says, "He that hath My Word, let Him speak My Word." (Jer. 23:28.) This statement is made by way of showing that many are teaching and preaching their own dreams, imaginings or the dreams of their forefathers, in neglect of the Word of God--the Holy Scriptures. Jesus charged the religious rulers of His day, saying, "Ye do
The questions touching my authority, my right, to interpret the Bible and to speak in the name of the Lord are so nearly the same questions which the scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees asked of Jesus and the Apostles, that I may without impropriety, I hope, follow the same line of answer which they gave. The authority of our Lord Jesus, standing amongst those ecclesiastics of the Jewish Age, consisted in the fact that He had received the anointing of the Holy Spirit at the time of His baptism. In consequence, "the heavens were opened unto Him"--the higher things, the heavenly things, were clear to Him. This was the secret of His teaching power, because of which we read, "All the people bare Him witness and wondered at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth, for He taught them as One having authority (as One knowing what He was talking about), and not as the scribes" --the Doctors of the Law. In a word, our Redeemer's ability to teach came to Him through the anointing of the Holy Spirit. But so far as the public were concerned, they knew not of this; His right to teach consisted in the fact that He could teach--that He could make plain the Word of God, so that the common people heard Him gladly and said, "Never man spake like this man."--John 7:46.
Similarly the Apostles were commanded not to teach and told that they had no authority to teach--that all the chief priests and scribes and Pharisees condemned the Message they bore. But their answer was, Whether it be right to obey God or to obey man may be a question in your minds, but as for us, we cannot refrain from speaking the things which we have seen and heard and know.-- Acts 4:19,20.
We have seen that Jesus obtained Divine sanction and authority to speak in the Heavenly Father's name when He received the Holy Spirit. We note the same thing respecting the Apostles. Jesus told them not to preach the Gospel Message until they should be endued with power from on High. He bade them wait at Jerusalem for the Divine benediction of the Holy Spirit. This anointing or authority to preach came to them at Pentecost--and thenceforth they preached and taught, not human traditions, but the Word of God, the Holy Spirit enlightening them as to the proper interpretation of its symbols and prophecies.
Nothing in the Bible sanctions the view held by our Catholic brethren, to the effect that Apostolic authority and power have been handed down through the Bishops of the Catholic Church or any other. On the contrary, the Bible repeatedly speaks of "The twelve Apostles of the Lamb"--St. Paul taking the place of Judas. This is pictured also by the Master Himself. He symbolically represents the true Church as a woman clothed with the Sun--the light of Divine favor and Truth and grace--and on her head was a crown of twelve stars, representing the twelve Apostles--no more. The Lord pictures His Church in her future glory--at the close of this Gospel Age--when she will be complete and experience the First Resurrection and become God's holy Kingdom, the Messianic Kingdom. The picture is that of the New Jerusalem, whose dominion is to bring Divine blessing and uplifting to all the families of the earth. The New Jerusalem is declared to be a symbolical picture of the elect, saintly Church after her marriage with the Lord at His second coming. That symbolical City is represented as having twelve glorious foundation stones --and no more--and in those twelve foundation stones were the names of
It is thus seen that the authority to teach possessed by our Lord and by His twelve apostles has not descended to any others by human ordination. Of these twelve alone it is true that whatsoever they declared was binding in the sight of heaven, would be binding; and whatsoever they declared to be loosed, or not binding, would be so from the Divine standpoint. We are thus assured of the infallibility of the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.-- Matt. 18:18.
But the Apostle Paul declares that although all are not Apostles, all are not Prophets, yet there are teachers, ministers, servants, in the Church, placed there, not by Apostolic power, not by Apostolic laying on of hands, but, he says, "God hath set the various members in the Body as it hath pleased Him"--including teachers, evangelists and prophets or orators. But could these teach without an anointing somewhat similar to that received by Jesus at His baptism and by the Apostles at Pentecost? No; God's seal or mark which He places upon those whom He appoints to be special teachers is the same Holy Spirit.
St. John tells us of this, saying, "Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye all know it"--that is, whoever has the unction or anointing of the Holy Spirit of God is aware of the fact (1 John 2:20), and this unction or anointing of the Holy Spirit gives more or less ability to understand the deep things of God--in proportion to the measure of the Holy Spirit received and in proportion also to the natural talents of the person thus blessed. Every one thus anointed is commissioned or authorized to speak as a mouthpiece of the Lord in proportion to his talents and opportunities and privileges. He may speak only what he may understand, and not speak of himself nor expound the theories of others, but merely God's Word, the utterances of Jesus, the Apostles and the Prophets.
We may thus see who have the right and ability to teach God's Word. Sects and systems, Catholic and Protestant, claim this right, but without Scriptural authority. The Catholics, Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, Lutherans and other ecclesiastical systems each claim the right (the Divine right) to set apart, to authorize, to qualify, to empower, teachers of the Divine Word, mouthpieces and oracles of God. But none of them can show any scriptural authority. Their strongest claim is custom; but the very oldest wrong custom and misconception is without weight and without force when investigated. How many of the clergy of all denominations demonstrate that whatever came to them at their ordination has done them no good, but rather harm, in connection with ability to expound the Word of God! The attitude of all is described by the Lord and the Prophets.--Isaiah 29:11-14.
On the contrary, let us note the beautiful simplicity of the Divine ordination through the baptism of the Holy Spirit: St. Peter declares, in harmony with all the Apostles, that it is not a clerical class which constitutes the Church of Christ, but a saintly class. And all those saintly ones are Spirit-begotten, Spirit-anointed. They all, therefore, have the authority to preach and to teach as messengers from God to the extent of their opportunities. St. Peter, addressing all saints regardless of sectarian lines and names, regardless of sects, and ignoring any clergy class, says to the Spirit-begotten children of God, "Ye are a Royal Priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people, that ye should show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into His marvelous light." (1 Pet. 2:9.) The introduction of his Epistle shows that these words are addressed to the saints in general and not to the clergy, for he recognized no clerical orders, but, like the Master, said, "All ye are Brethren and one is your Master, even Christ."
The Church of Christ is pictured as a human Body of which Christ is the
Claiming this Divine authority to expound God's Word to the extent of my ability, let me proceed; for I am one of those specially mentioned in His prayer saying, "Neither pray I for these (Apostles) alone, but for all also who shall believe on Me through their word."--John 17:20.
The Monitor claims that the burden of furnishing proof that there is no purgatory, no eternal torture, rests upon me. This is strange! If the Monitor or anybody else had ever been to Purgatory or to eternal torment and could, therefore, testify to their claims as a matter of knowledge, those disputing their statements would not even then be called upon for proofs that there are no such places. It would still remain for those claiming to have seen Purgatory and hell and to have suffered there to give proofs of what they had seen and experienced. We are not accusing Christians, Catholic or Protestant, with being intentionally wrong. They are doubtless as honest as we were when we believed and taught the same heathenish doctrines, which St. Paul styles "doctrines of devils." (1 Tim. 4:1.) We are merely urging that all Christians, Catholic and Protestant, awake from the stupor of the dark past and go back to the simple and beautiful teachings of the Savior and His inspired twelve. We urge them to do this before they fall into the great gulf of modern infidelity which is rapidly swallowing up all the intelligent people of the world under the name of Higher Criticism, Evolution, Theosophy, New Theology, etc. The Bible is being discarded because it is misunderstood--because it is supposed to be in accord with and the real foundation for the horrible misconceptions of the Divine Character and the Divine Plan most thoroughly believed by our forefathers for centuries past.
The Monitor proceeds to give proofs (?) of a hell of fire and torture, but it says not a word respecting Purgatory --the very place which it, as a Catholic mouthpiece, claims will receive the great mass of humanity for roasting, sizzling and freezing its saints. Why this oversight? Ah! we think now! It may have been because the Monitor knows that nobody knows anything more about purgatory than does itself, which is--nothing. It knows that there is not a word of Scripture teaching that there is such a place as purgatory. It knows that it is merely human tradition concocted long after the death of the inspired Apostles--tending greatly to make void the Word of God.
Since the Monitor ignores purgatory we must assume that it takes the Protestant view of hell as being only alternative --the eternal-torturous abode of nearly all of Adam's posterity. We
"The gentlest heart that ever beat, the kindest lips that ever spoke, have clearly told us for our warning that there is a place where those who will not glorify God's mercy here and hereafter shall glorify His justice by the double pain of loss and sense forever."
With these words, the editor produces his weighty arguments and his proof that Jesus taught such a hell:
1. St. Luke 16:19-31--the account of the "Rich Man and Lazarus."
2. St. Matthew 25:31-46--the parable of the "Sheep and the Goats."
3. St. Mark 9:42-48--the Master's words respecting the cutting off of a displeasing hand or of a foot, rather than be cast into hell fire, where their worm dieth not and the fire is never quenched.
"That these and similar passages of Scripture touching the existence of hell and its two-fold everlasting pain of loss and sense are to be taken literally, there can be no doubt. For it is a rule of criticism, and of Biblical criticism in particular, always to take words in their literal meaning unless there is a good reason for doing otherwise. Now, there is no such reason in the present case. The only reason with any show of force about it that might be advanced is the difficulty of understanding with absolute clearness and certainty how material fire acts on immaterial or spiritual being like the angelic nature or the human soul."
We agree with the Monitor and all sensible people in the above statement, and we want to point to some reasons why this method of interpretation overthrows the Monitor's contention that these Scriptures are to be taken literally--as teaching that all except followers of Christ will suffer tortures everlastingly. Bear in mind that we are not discussing what the punishment for sin will be. We are not claiming that sinners will escape a just penalty for sin. We are claiming that eternal torture or purgatorial tortures for sinners would not be just, rational, sane punishments, but, on the contrary, would exemplify a brutality and devilishness which has no parallel in the most degraded of our fallen race. Let us examine the proof texts now in turn:
The Apostle records, as the Prophets had foretold, that Jesus opened His mouth in parables and in dark sayings and without a parable spake He not unto the people. (Matt. 13:34,35.) This has been a part of our difficulty. We have taken the words of Jesus literally when their very form should have shown us that they could not have been meant literally. Do we not use figures of speech to-day? For instance, if in conversation some one said to us, "When John Smith heard that, he burst into tears," would we understand literally that John Smith burst and became a shower of tears? A certain judge, addressing a colored woman who spoke of her husband's ill-treatment, asked her if she had tried the Apostle's remedy of heaping coals of fire on his head. She replied, "No," but that she had tried hot water without avail. An ignorant person might, perhaps, thus misunderstand the Apostle's figurative language. But is that an excuse for us, who claim to be more intelligent, to misunderstand it? Do we not remember St. Peter's words, "Think it not strange concerning the fiery trials which shall try you?" Who is foolish enough to suppose that St. Peter meant literal fire? Hear the Apostle Paul telling about the trials
St. Paul tells us that some will pass through that fire unscathed, and others will have their work destroyed, but will themselves be saved so as by fire. His intention clearly is that this Age will end with a great time of sifting along doctrinal lines. The false doctrines represented by wood, hay and stubble, are now taking fire and will be entirely consumed, whereas all the truths of God's Word symbolically represented by the Apostle as jewels of gold and silver and precious stones --these will stand the test and abide. Let us build our faith, then, with the proper materials which God's Word supplies. And let us remember the Apostle's words, to the effect that the Word of God is sufficient that the man of God may be thoroughly furnished. (2 Tim. 3:16.) And the implication of this is that the decisions of the councils of the "dark ages" are not only unnecessary for God's people of to-day, but are injurious in proportion as they are out of alignment with the words of Jesus and the Apostles.
Many of us in the past, like the Monitor, have viewed this as a literal account without noting the absurdity of so doing. According to the account, that rich man went to hell because he was rich, had plenty to eat every day, lived in a good house, wore some purple clothing and some fine linen. Not a word is said about his being profane or wicked. If these be grounds for going to eternal torment we should all begin to discard all purple-colored garments, to wear no fine linen, to fast and generally to get poor. Evidently the majority of people have not this view of matters, but are living as nearly like that rich man as they know how. Does such an interpretation seem rational? Or should we seek an interpretation that would not take these statements so literally as they read and as the Monitor advocates? Look at the other side of the parable--the poor beggar, foul, ulcerated, hungry, licked by dogs, was carried to Abraham's bosom--not a word about his saintship or any other qualification. Do the editors or any of the employees of the Monitor office hope ever to get to the future heavenly bliss, and are they striving to be just like that beggar in all particulars? And if they should reach Abraham's bosom, might it not be that the old gentleman's arms would be full of beggars after eighteen hundred years? This is the literal interpretation of our Lord's words which the Monitor advocates as so reasonable as not to require interpretation symbolically. Well, the Monitor has its right to its opinion, and it may be that we are obtuse. For the sake of other obtuse people, we will proceed to give an interpretation of our Lord's words as we believe they were meant to be understood--as a parable:
The rich man represents the Jewish nation. His favor with God was represented as riches. The rich man's bountiful table represented the Divine promises given, up to that time, exclusively to the Jew. Thus St. Paul interprets the Jewish "table" of blessing in Romans 11:9. The rich man's purple represented the royalty which belonged to the Jews under the Divine promise that Messiah's Kingdom should be established through the Seed of King David. The rich man's fine linen symbolized righteousness or justification imputed to the Jewish nation year by year through their atonement --sacrifices.
The beggar at the rich man's gate represented the reverent and devout of the Gentiles and the outcasts of the Jews who hungered and thirsted for a share in the Divine promises given to the Jews. They got only occasionally
The poor man represented a class who died to their estrangement from God and His promises and favors. This occurred three and a half years after the cross when Cornelius the Centurion, the first Gentile received into the Church, received his blessing, and when the door of opportunity opened before all honest and sincere Gentiles just as widely as to the Jew. There "the middle wall of partition was broken down." The humble and faithful, hungering and thirsting, were carried by the angels, the ministers of God not literally to Abraham's bosom, but to that which the expression symbolizes. Abraham is styled the father of the faithful. All the faithful in Christ Jesus are recognized Abraham's children, and as such are received figuratively to His bosom. Thus the Apostle writes the Gentiles (Eph. 2:12,13), Ye were aliens, strangers, foreigners to the commonwealth of Israel, but are now brought nigh and become children of God through faith --the children of Abraham, who typified the Heavenly Father, even as Isaac typified the Redeemer.--See Galatians 3:29.
All scholars are aware that in the Bible the Greek word hades in the New Testament is the equivalent of the Hebrew word sheol in the Old Testament. All are aware that these words signify the tomb, the state of death, and not a place of suffering or torture, at all. The word that is rendered hell fire in our English Bibles is a different word, namely, Gehenna, which we will consider later.
If hades signifies the state of death, the tomb, how could the "rich man" suffer there? We reply that the rich man is to be viewed from two different standpoints--national and individual. Nationally the Jew went into hades-- their kingdom and nationality have been buried for eighteen centuries; but individually the Jews are very much alive, and for all of these eighteen centuries that their nationality has been buried, they have been suffering injustices and tortures, and, alas, chiefly from those calling themselves Christians, but denying both the power and the spirit of Christianity. There is an impassable gulf between the saintly Lazarus class and the Jews. God has not wished that the Jewish nation should amalgamate with other nations nor with Christendom. He has a special work for the Jews to do in the near future, and for this very purpose He has preserved them as a people for now thirty-five hundred years. In his sufferings the Jew at times has made an appeal, desiring that the Lazarus class might give a symbolical drop of water --of comfort and refreshment; but this has been denied. As an illustration of such an appeal, many of us remember the Jewish protest against Russian persecutions and their request of Mr. Roosevelt, when President, that he intervene. President Roosevelt expressed sympathy, but declared compliance with the request impossible, as it would be a violation of the comity of nations.