ART. IV.

The Effect of our present Conduct on our future State.

WHEN one is sensible that he is about to write on a subject of infinite importance, relative to the divine economy in regard to mankind, and that the ground which he intends to occupy, and the positions he is about to state and endeavor to defend, are not among the views of Christians generally, it is reasonable that he should feel no little concern for fear he may not discern the best method by which to bring his subject within the clear vision of his readers, and arrange his arguments in the best manner to

ensure success.

Whether the best or not, the method we propose, for our present purpose, is to assume as true a few positions which we feel confident will be admitted by all who acknowledge the Christian theology in any form; and by keeping these admitted positions clearly in sight, endeavor, by their assistance, to arrive at the final conclusions we have in view.

1. We assume that the Creator had a design, in his infinite mind, which reached to the final destiny of all the human family. 2. That one important attribute of this design of the Creator is impartial goodness. And, 3. That all events in time, which have any influence in determining the final state of men, are under the control and direction of that wisdom and power which designed and executed the work of creation, and must contribute to the accomplishment of the divine purpose.

It is possible that some, who profess the Christian theology, looking at the three assumed positions in the connection in which they are here placed, may apprehend that they necessarily lead to conclusions which conflict with some of the tenets of their faith. But we would ask such, if such there be, whether they can feel justified in denying either of the above positions, when candidly considered by itself? Now if these positions are true when considered separately, they must be equally true when viewed conjointly. Look at the first.

Can any

reasonable believer in the existence of that Creator, which divine revelation presents us, doubt that, in the creation of man, he had a design in his infinite mind, which reached to the final destiny of all the human family? None will deny that the divine knowledge extended thus far; or pretend that his purpose came short of what he knew. Look at the second. Can any one suppose, on any plausible ground, that impartial goodness is not, necessarily, an attribute of this divine purpose? If we exclude this attribute from this purpose of the Creator, we, of course, give him a character the most unlovely and revolting. We might deny all the other attributes of the Creator, as to their infinity, and limit them as our caprice might lead us; and yet if we should allow him the attribute of impartial goodness, we should have still an object to love and adore. Look at the third. Respecting this, all which is necessary to say, in this place, is to request the reader to examine it carefully in regard to its agreement with the two others. If the other two be acknowledged, and this be found in agreement with them, of course, it needs no other support.

Depending on the truth of these positions, and on the truth of all deductions which may be legitimately drawn from them, we shall proceed to comprise the subject to which this article is devoted in the following

Question: What effect will the conduct of men, in this mortal state, produce in relation to their portion of enjoyment, in their final, immortal state?

However various and conflicting may have been the opinions of Christian doctors on this question, they have generally agreed in using about the same language in reference to it; and have been quite uniform in their application of certain passages of Scripture as divine authority on this momentous subject. But although our clergy, who believe in the doctrine of particular election and reprobation, hold the same language, in reference to man's final state, as do those of the Arminian school, and apply the same Scriptures to that subject as do the last mentioned, it seems utterly impossible to reconcile either their manner of speaking, or their Scripture quotations equally and rationally to their widely different sentiments. The doctors of the first mentioned class believe, and profess to believe, that the final, eternal destiny of all men was fixed

and decreed, in the counsels of divine wisdom from all eternity, without any reference to faith or good works. But the last-mentioned doctors contend that man's final state depends on the condition of faith in Christ, and obedience to his precepts. Yet have these schools of doctors made the same use of 2 Cor. v. 10, where the apostle says, "For we must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." If we could find any way to reconcile this declaration of the apostle with the meaning which the Arminian attaches to it, is there any possible way to understand how that meaning agrees with the sentiment of the predestinarian? That this passage agrees, in substance, with all those numerous passages which speak of rewarding men according to their works, perhaps will not be doubted by

any.

It is, unquestionably, a fact, that neither of the beforementioned classes of divines understandingly believe either the passage in 2 Cor. v. 10, or any of those like passages, which evidently belong to the same general subject. What they all believe and teach concerning this subject of rewards and punishments in the immortal state, amounts simply to this, namely, Some men will be eternally rewarded for their good deeds, but not punished for their deeds which are evil; and some men will be endlessly punished for their evil deeds, but receive no reward for their good deeds. To understand the Scriptures thus, and so to explain them, is, evidently, to do them great injustice; and to modify the moral government of God, by the wisdom of man, contrary to man's sense of moral justice. All which is written in the volume of divine inspiration on the subject of rewards and punishments is, unquestionably, in agreement with Eccl. xii. 13, 14: "Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter; fear God and keep his commandments; for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.”

Our Creator has given us no evidence for believing that some of his moral beings are so privileged, that their transgressions will yield them no bitterness; and that others are not entitled to the happy effects of obedience to his parental

requirements. Nor does such doctrine find any support in the experience of man. "He that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong he hath done, and there is no respect of persons with God."

İn relation to our remarks thus far, there appears no danger of meeting with any opposition.

We come, then, to another important query, and that is, Are the rewards and punishments, of which we have assurance in the divine word, administered in this mortal state, or are they to be experienced in the future, immortal state? In the old schools, as we have seen, these rewards and punishments have been carried into the immortal world; though so managed that some are there to receive an infinite reward for their good deeds, but no retribution for their deeds which are evil; while others are to be forever punished for every evil work, but are to meet with no reward for doing well. But as we are compelled to reject this theory, on account of its utter and manifest impropriety, we may ask whether all men will not be rewarded and punished in the immortal state according to their good and evil deeds in this mortal life? If we take the affirmative of this question, meaning thereby that all rewards and punishments are to be administered in the immortal state, and that no such administration is known in this state, then surely we throw away all proof from man's experience here, that there is, in the divine government, any such thing as rewards and punishments. One might conjecture, that as there are no rewards nor punishments in this world, there must be in the future. So another may surmise, that as God does not, in this world, render to men according to their works, we may reasonably suppose he will not in the world to come. And this surmise, to say the least, is as plausible as that conjecture.

But is it said that we are not left to our speculations in regard to this weighty subject, and that God's written word must decide the matter? To this we shall not demur. We are in favor of using this rule, and no other. If it be asked whether our experience should not be allowed to bear testimony in the case, the right answer is, our expe rience can be of no authority in the matter only as it obtains its force from the divine word. That for which we here contend is made clear by the following Scripture,

Gen. xv. 13, 14: "And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years; and also that nation whom they shall serve, will I judge; and afterward shall they come. out with great substance." Here we learn that God judged that nation which afflicted the seed of Abram, before he brought them out of their bondage. Now if the Scriptures had informed us that God brought the oppressed Hebrews out of Egypt, and had given no account of any judgments having been sent on their oppressors, then, in this instance, human experience would not have borne witness. But look at Exodus ix. 13, 14: "And the Lord said unto Moses, Rise up early in the morning, and stand before Pharaoh, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord God of the Hebrews, Let my people go, that they may serve me. For I will at this time send all my plagues upon thy heart, and upon thy servants, and upon thy people: that thou mayest know that there is none like me in all the earth." By following the Scripture account, we find that all God's plagues were sent on Pharaoh and his people in judgment; and afterward the oppressed were delivered. If the Scriptures nowhere give us any account that Pharaoh and his people are to be judged and punished in the immortal state, do we render them that deference which is due to their authority by contending that the divine retribution on Pharaoh and his people, was not administered in this mortal state, but is in reserve for the immortal? We have an instance of divine retribution recorded in the 9th chapter of Judges, which we may consider as another example of Scripture doctrine on our subject. See verses 56, 57: "Thus God rendered the wickedness of Abimelech, which he did unto his father, in slaying his seventy brethren; and all the evil of the men of Shechem did God render upon their heads; and upon them came the curse of Jotham, the son of Jerubbaal." agreement with these examples we find the doctrine of rewards and punishments laid down in Lev. xxvi. and Deut. xxviii., in which account we are certified that justice should be duly administered, both in relation to obedience and disobedience. But in all these specified rewards and punishments we find all to relate to good and evil in this

In