You'll Be Judged.

 When do you think you will be judged? When is your judgment day? Do we all have the same judgment day? 

When you die you no longer have an opportunity to accept Jesus Christ as your Savior. At that point your eternal life has been decided but you will not receive the actual sentence based on that decision until our Savior returns for us. The outcome of the judgment made isn't immediate. The Bible tells us clearly that we do not reunite with our Savior (if we've died in Christ) until He returns and calls us from our graves to meet Him in the air. (1 Thess. 4:16) Those who die not in Christ remain in their graves then they are raised only to die yet again, this time permanently. 

Joh 5:28  Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 

Joh 5:29  And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. 

There is a resurrection of damnation, this is Biblical fact.

For those alive when Christ returns, those who belong to Christ will rise to meet Him in the air- their bodies changed to immortal, to incorruptible. For those who don't belong to Christ when He returns they will die.

We have to comprehend that there are two choices life with Christ, or death without Christ.

You will have your judgment day- those living when Christ returns will be judged before then, they will be sealed as His or marked as belonging to the beast. Truth be told- we don't know when our eternal life is judged because we don't know when we will die and we don't know the date of Christ's return. What we do know is… we are judged. I want Christ as my advocate when my time of judgment comes, I want to be found in Him and He in me!

All by the mercy and grace of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ! Now and forever! AMEN!!!!!!

*******

(EXCERPT)

A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Unjust (continued)

By J.H. Waggoner

"WHAT SAY THE SCRIPTURES?" (Continued)

In examining the Scriptures, I will arrange the texts under certain propositions, to give a better view of my objections to the non-resurrection theory…

Our relation to the judgment of God is a most solemn and important matter, and we cannot be too careful how we reason upon it, or to what conclusions we come in regard to it. If our errors do not result disastrously to ourselves, they may yet prove stumbling-blocks to others, by leading them to presume upon the mercy of God, and to detract from that judgment and justice which is the habitation of his throne. Such, and so dangerous, I think, is the tendency of this non-resurrection theory.

Other texts of like import might be adduced, but the design is to prove the positions taken, not to try to exhaust the proofs thereon.

(Objections to the non-resurrection theory---)

III. It ignores a "day of judgment" in which actions shall be weighed and punishment awarded.

That this proposition is true in regard to that theory, cannot be denied; for, according to that view, every person is fully punished when he is dead. Every day is a day of judgment and execution. That this is not a scriptural view I now offer proof.

Acts 17:31: "Because he hath appointed a day in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead."

I am firmly of the belief, in reference to the judgment and destiny of the wicked, that the day of judgment is a definite, appointed time, and succeeds "the day of salvation." Our Saviour made known his mission by reading from the prophet, as recorded in Luke 4:16-21: "And he came to Nazareth, where he had been been brought up; and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the Sabbath-day, and stood up for to read. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath

anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears." By turning to Isa. 61, from which the Saviour read, we find that verse 3 reads thus: "To proclaim the acceptable year of theLord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn." Why did the Saviour stop his reading so abruptly, without reading the sentence following, so closely connected with that which he read? Evidently because no more was that day fulfilled than he read. "The acceptable year of the

Lord" was then existing; "the day of vengeance" was a future time, and could not then be proclaimed. So the apostles preached. Paul quoted from another part of Isaiah's prophecy respecting this time, and added, "Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation." 2 Cor. 6:2. The accepted time, or acceptable year of the Lord, and day of salvation, are evidently the same. Not a period of definite, or given, length; not a literal day or year; for these terms, as well as "hour" in Rev. 14:7, and other places, are used to denote periods without regard to length. The "day of salvation" has now continued over one thousand eight hundred years. Speaking of this day, Paul said it is "now;" but referring to

the judgment day he said it was a day appointed in the which he will judge-in the future. And so again, in Acts 24:25: Felix trembled when Paul reasoned of "judgment to come." He could not have trembled to hear it announced that he would not be raised from the dead; for he had never believed in a resurrection. And it is hard to believe that he would tremble that Paul should tell him he would die; for he had always known that. Paul must certainly have reasoned of a future judgment-the day of judgment-to make this heathen king tremble. In the remarks of those who deny the resurrection of the unjust, on the day of judgment, as well as in their expositions of particular texts, they harmonize with the Universalists. Every day is the execution of judgment to somebody. Besides this, there have been several particular days of judgment. But the Scriptures do not so speak. In Acts 17:31, Paul says God has appointed a day in the which he will judge. He says "a day," because there are other days beside that; but he, and all other Bible writers, say "THE day of judgment," because there is but one day of that kind. When "a day" is appointed for judgment, it then becomes "the day"-the only day set apart for that purpose. Let this be borne in mind as we

examine the texts. The testimony of Peter is so clear and decisive on this point as to leave no room for doubt. He says, "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptation, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished." 2 Pet. ii, 9. 

On this Eld. Storrs remarks: 

"We may be sure Peter had reference only to the living wicked, who should no more escape the judgment of death than the old world or Sodom did. God would reserve, hold, or keep them to that judgment, and they 'shall be brought to the grave and remain in the tomb,' after the 'ensample' Peter spoke of." Life from the Dead, p. 69.

This is not according to the expression of this and other texts, and cannot be the truth concerning these Scriptures. Peter does not merely say they shall be held to judgment, to death, but they shall be reserved "unto the day of judgment." The whole question turns on this: whether Peter refers to indefinite times, as the day of each man's death, or to a definite future time, when all the unjust shall be punished. The latter appears to be true, from the reading of the text, and is shown to be certainly true by chap. 3 of this same letter; for, fortunately, he has clearly set forth in the latter chapter what he means by the day of judgment. In chap. 3:7, he says; "The heavens and the earth which are now, by the same

word are kept in store, reserved unto fire, against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men." Here a fact is stated concerning the heavens and the earth in the very same terms that are used concerning the unjust, in chap. 2:9.

The earth is reserved unto fire, and the unjust are reserved to be punished, and both alike unto the day of  judgment; and to make it sure beyond all dispute, the day of judgment, against which the heavens and the earth are reserved unto fire, is also declared to be the

day of perdition of ungodly men. But again, he not only defines "the day of judgment" to be that day in the which the heavens and the earth shall be dissolved with fire, or melted with

fervent heat, but he proceeds to give a reason why that day is delayed, which would not be required if Mr. Storrs' view were correct; for, according to that view, there is no delay; that day is every day whenever an unjust man dies! In giving this reason Peter makes "the day of the Lord" to coincide with "the day of judgment." And the whole is introduced by the subject of the second advent, or rather, these remarks fall under an argument on that subject. This phrase, the  day of the Lord, is often used in the prophetic writings, and always in such manner as to show its application to a definite time, immediately subsequent to "the day of salvation." It is used by Paul in 1 Thess. 5:2, in an argument concerning the coming of the Lord. He says, "Of the times and seasons ye have no need that I write unto you, for yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night." This proves that the coming of Christ and the coming of the day of the Lord are so closely related that one naturally suggests the other. This, together with the words of Peter, who makes the day of the Lord synonymous with the day of judgment, fixes to a certainty

this fact, that "the day of judgment" is a definite time-a future day, the day of perdition of ungodly men, not a part of ungodly men, but of every soul that doeth evil, Jew and Gentile. 

The uniform use of the phrase, "the day of the Lord," in both Testaments, proves the correctness of this exposition. A few instances of its use by the prophets, I notice:

"Thus saith the Lord God: Howl ye, Woe worth the day! For the day is near, even the day of the Lord is near, a cloudy day; it shall be the time of the heathen." Eze. 30:2, 3.

"Alas for the day! for the day of the Lord is at hand, and as a destruction from the Almighty shall it come." Joel 1:15.

"Blow ye the trumpet in Zion, and sound an alarm in my holy mountain; let all the inhabitants of the land tremble: for the day of the Lord cometh, for it is nigh at hand." Chap. 2:1.

"And the Lord shall utter his voice before his army; for his camp is very great: for he is strong that executeth his word; for the day of the Lord is great, and very terrible; and who can abide it?" Verse 11.  

"Howl ye; for the day of the Lord is at hand; it shall come as a destruction from the Almighty." Isa. 13:6.

"Enter into the rock, and hide thee in the dust, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty. The lofty looks of man shall be humbled, and the haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, and the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day. For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up, and they shall be brought low." Isa. 2:10-12.

"In that day shall a man cast his idols of silver and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; to go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth." Verses 20, 21.

This last quotation from the prophet Isaiah is exactly parallel with Rev. 6:14-17, which relate to the events of that great day under the opening of the sixth seal. In that day they endeavor to hide "from the face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb," saying, "For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"

No one can doubt that the expressions, day of the Lord, day of wrath, day of perdition, and day of judgment, refer to the same period, to which day the unjust are reserved to be punished; and the wicked who prospered in his way in this life, and died in peace and quiet, shall be brought forth to the day of wrath; for every soul of man that doeth evil shall suffer tribulation and anguish, indignation and wrath, in that day. If anything can be clearly proved by the Scriptures, it seems to me that this is proved, that the unjust are reserved to be punished, not to the day of the death of each individual, but to the day in which the heavens and earth shall melt with fervent heat, which is the day of the Lord, the day of judgment, the day of perdition of ungodly men. 

TO BE CONTINUED….

One Day Soon.

 Act_24:15  And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust.

2Pe_2:9  The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished

Mat_5:45  That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust

Rev_22:11  He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.

One day, we won't know what day it is, but one day these words will be uttered. I believe it is very soon they will be spoken, and what a day that will be. Mankind may not realize what's happened, but probation is over. The time to accept Christ as your Savior is ended. The time to ask for forgiveness is over. The time to make choices for eternal life are no more.

We ALL know that our probation is over upon our deaths. How do we all know this? Because once you are dead you are no longer able to think, or reason, or know anything at all. Ecc_9:5  For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward; for the memory of them is forgotten

There is no second, third, fourth, fifth chance after death to do anything at all in connection to your eternal life. You don't enter into that eternal life right away either, you are dead, you know nothing. You won't know anything again until you are raised - just or unjust.  

There is a resurrection of the unjust after they've died, and this resurrection is so they can face the second death and this death includes the punishment for their unrepentant sins. They will suffer the punishment and then be blotted completely out of existence to be no more.

One day soon all the living - just and unjust - will live in a time when probation is up and it's not their death which ends the probation. 

Let us seek truth and only truth in God's word. Let us put aside all of mankind's boasting and lies and dig deep into the study of the Bible, and do it prayerfully, asking for wisdom, understanding, guidance by the Holy Spirit.

May we all be among those who will be JUST, through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, now and forever! Amen!!!!!!!

*******

A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Unjust (continued)

By J.H. Waggoner

"WHAT SAY THE SCRIPTURES?"

Not one of the "principles" that I have yet seen laid down by the advocates of the non-resurrection theory, on which that theory is made to depend, is so evident as to be beyond dispute; on the contrary, I think they are materially defective. Where a dispute arises in regard to principles, by what shall the principles be tested? Most certainly by the plain and positive testimony of Scripture. But in this case another difficulty arises: the most positive expressions of Scripture are also subjects of dispute, each party claiming that the texts which seem to favor their respective views are positive, and that the texts which the opposing parties respectively claim are not positive, but figurative or irrelevant. And therefore the settlement of the whole question, after all, turns upon a correct exposition of the Scriptures, and not, as has been so often claimed, upon the bearing of a few "principles," so called. 

Entering upon an examination of the Scriptures, I would remark, 

1. It is difficult to show that the texts quoted from the Old Testament to deny the resurrection of the wicked have any reference whatever to the subject of a personal resurrection. But, if it could be shown that they do, it could not yet be proved that they belong to the present time, or that they are not spoken prospectively, in view of a future and utter destruction of the wicked.

2. The texts claimed as positive in favor of the resurrection of the wicked, speak of the future resurrection as the subject of remark, and specify the wicked as one class to be raised; and therefore they must determine the signification of texts which are not equally explicit and unmistakable in their terms. In all cases the definite must determine the indefinite, otherwise questions of evidence could never be settled.

3. The texts quoted as proving they shall not see life, are irrelevant, as the context proves that such texts refer to eternal or immortal life, for which we do not contend in behalf of the wicked. For, if they must be taken without being so qualified by their connection, then the connection is left to prove that the wicked do not now live, and the righteous will not die. And if it be shown that such is the tendency of that claim, the absurdity of the claim will be evident.

Besides these classes of texts, there are some that speak of the resurrection of the just, but do not speak of the resurrection of the unjust. From these it has been inferred that a resurrection of the unjust is not taught in the Scriptures. But that does not follow. Entire silence of the Scriptures on a given subject is overwhelming evidence against it; but the silence of any one text on a certain doctrine is no evidence against it while it is mentioned in another. Otherwise any doctrine could be disproved by merely quoting a sufficient number of texts which make no mention of it, which would be easy to do.

In examining the Scriptures, I will arrange the texts under certain propositions, to give a better view of my objections to the non-resurrection theory; giving, however, as my first serious objection, that, 

I. It denies the gospel doctrine of the forgiveness of sin. This, I think, has been fully proved, and should of itself be sufficient to refute the theory in the minds of all who claim forgiveness in Jesus' name, and recognize the justice of God in justifying the believer. Rom. 3. That I have not misconstrued the teachings of the Scriptures on this subject, is

evident, for Paul says "there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus." Rom. 8:1. That I do not misrepresent that theory in saying it denies forgiveness, is evident; for they have the justified pay the same forfeit to the law that the unjustified pay. Where there is no condemnation there is innocence; but the innocent cannot justly be required to pay a forfeit to the law. The law requires obedience of them as of others, but it cannot inflict the penalty upon them as it does upon the condemned, without manifest injustice.

II. It contradicts all those texts which threaten pain and anguish to the sinner. I say it contradicts them, because God is just; and that theory places all these texts in opposition to justice. It is asserted that, 1. Death only is the penalty. 2. Pain or agony is no part of death; therefore, no part of the penalty. 3. To inflict anything outside of, or more than, the penalty, is injustice. The conclusion is evident to all: God would, therefore, be unjust to inflict pain, or agony, or torment, upon the sinner, because these are no part of the "clearly-expressed penalty." If we could find but one text in the Bible clearly expressing the fact that pain or torment would be inflicted, as an infliction (not as a mere attendant upon the threatened infliction), then my proposition is true; and that theory stands condemned.

Rev. 14: 10, 11, says that "if any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup; of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb; and the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever and ever; and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image,! and whosoever receiveth the

mark of his name."

The most that can be said to evade the force of this passage is, that the phrase, "forever and ever," is of necessity limited, and does not mean unending duration; and that the passage refers only to a certain class, and not to sinners in general. To which I reply, to the first, It is admitted that the duration expressed is limited; but that does not affect the argument. The proposition requires two things, which are found in the text:

1. A threatening: and, 2. Torment; therefore, the torment is an infliction upon a certain action-it is punishment, or penalty. That it results in death, is admitted; but it is more than "to be dead," it is to "be tormented." It is a painful death-the process of dying (which is embraced in the expression, "shall die,") under tormenting circumstances. And whatever limitation is assumed in regard to the time, it is evident that some time is required; for

torment cannot be inflicted without time; and, in this case, it is "day" and "night." Though the phrase, "forever and ever," is limited, it must convey to every mind the idea of more than a sudden transition from life to a state of death. And to the second, I say that it cannot make any difference whether it refers to all, to a party or even to a single individual, so far as the principle under consideration is concerned. For if the addition of anguish or torment to death were unjust, as the theory avers, then the justice of God would be compromised by inflicting it upon one man, and certainly by its infliction on a class. It must be evident to the reader that this threat can never be executed, and at the same time God be just and Mr. Storrs' "principles" be correct. To say that God will not be strictly just, were to blaspheme; to say the threat will never be executed, were to deny the word of God. Therefore we must set aside Mr. Storrs' reasoning as a fallacy.

I say that to deny the infliction of this threat is to deny the word; for we find in Rev. 16:2, a prophetic record of its fulfillment. When the "seven last plagues" are poured upon a guilty world, the first is poured upon the very characters against whom the threat is pronounced in Rev. 14; 10, 11, as quoted; "There fell a noisome and grievous sore upon the men which had the mark of the beast, and them which worshiped his image." Again, the fourth plague gave the sun power to scorch men with fire; but, that it did not instantly kill them, is evident; for "men were scorched with great heat, and blasphemed the name of God." And the fifth was poured out on the seat of the beast, "and his kingdom was full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues for pain." It is impossible that these should be considered mere figures of speech, where no real torment or pain is intended; for in these plagues is "filled up the wrath of God." It is much better to "tremble at his word," than to invent theories to neutralize its force.

But I will now refer to a scripture which exactly agrees with the foregoing, where no figures are used. It is Rom. 2:8, 9. It reads; "But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish." I am well aware of the effort made to put this tribulation in this life, which will be noticed in its proper place. So far as the proposition now under consideration is concerned, it makes no difference when nor where it is fulfilled. If it is fulfilled at all, and there is pain or anguish in the fulfillment of it, then it stamps the non-resurrection theory of penalty as a 

fallacy.

 

Our relation to the judgment of God is a most solemn and important matter, and we cannot be too careful how we reason upon it, or to what conclusions we come in regard to it. If our errors do not result disastrously to ourselves, they may yet prove stumbling-blocks to others, by leading them to presume upon the mercy of God, and to detract from that judgment and justice which is the habitation of his throne. Such, and so dangerous, I think, is the tendency of this non-resurrection theory.

Other texts of like import might be adduced, but the design is to prove the positions taken, not to try to exhaust the proofs thereon. (To be continued…)

Are You Living Hopeless?

 Adam and Eve sinned, the penalty for that was death. God told them-

Gen 2:16  And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 

Gen 2:17  But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. 

They disobeyed God and ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and when they did that, they did something irrevocable. They gained the knowledge of good and evil together. They chose to know evil. They chose to take on all that evil is- in all its forms. To choose to know evil was a decision made by a bite into forbidden fruit. They knew they'd die, God told them beforehand. They were told of an action and the ultimate result of that action. Do this and then this will happen. 

I believe it was because Satan used his influence on Eve that God did not simply irradicate humanity. This was one of probably other contingencies put in place for mankind.  If man does this then this is the result, if man does that then this is what will happen, and so on. We know this-

1Pe 1:19  But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 

1Pe 1:20  Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 

Foreordained BEFORE the foundation of the world. Part of the whole plan of mankind was a Savior if the Savior was needed, if mankind were worth the opportunity of redemption. Eve was beguiled, Adam listened to Eve- Satan was the beguiler. Satan used his influence on Eve urging her to do something she would not have done on her own. 

Mankind needed a Savior and was worthy of that opportunity. Mankind hadn't chosen to disobey God's command all on their own, all of their own accord. That mankind could be influenced to disobey was in and of itself warranting the penalty they knew they'd have to pay. For even when Satan beguiled Eve and told her they wouldn't die, Eve knew God had told them they would. Death was on the table. They disobeyed and death became the penalty. 

Because Adam and Eve had the knowledge of good and evil from the moment they ate the forbidden fruit they could not unknow the evil and any children they would have would eventually learn evil as well. So much of man changed upon ingesting the fruit of knowledge. That knowledge brought instant alteration to man's form inside and out- physically, mentally, spiritually, emotionally, everything changed. Nothing about man was left untouched by the evil knowledge they'd chosen. Because they no longer had access to the tree of life they no longer had the attributes the tree of life gave them. Everything altered, it  had to because evil was unleashed. No, not every single bit of mankind was instantly changed, time ravaged what man was originally even more. The long slow decay of the first of mankind went on for hundreds of years, eventually to the point a mere 70 some years is the average lifespan and for the majority of those people there is a lot of pain in those years of living. 

God knew mankind would survive as creatures knowing good and evil, and that each of mankind as individuals would make choices throughout the life they were allotted and the sum of those choices would determine what course their ultimate existence would hold. Man would have the power of choosing. That power of choosing was given to Adam and Eve upon their creation and that wasn't taken away from them. They brought death to all of mankind there was no changing that fact. God brought them another chance to live after that death. Jesus, the Savior! And Jesus told mankind that He would return for them and bring them back to life. Some would be brought back to eternal life, others to eventual eternal nothingness. 

Our lives right now are spent locked in this spiritual warfare and we are either living for Christ, with Christ in us -our hope, or we are living hopeless.

God help us to be living in hope! All through Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior now and forever! Amen!!!!!!!

*******

A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Unjust (continued)

By J.H. Waggoner

DOUBLE INFLICTION OF THE PENALTY

Mr. Storrs claims that it would be unjust to inflict the same penalty a second time; and so much stress is laid on this idea that it demands a notice, though the objection really ceases to be of any force when it is shown that all now die by virtue of their relation to Adam, and that our probation is for a life and death beyond the present. 

Mr. Storrs says:

"Is a revival into life not a reversal, or abrogation, of the penalty? If abrogated, can it be inflicted a second time without a second trial and sin repeated." Life from the Dead, p. 8.

To this I reply, 

1. A revival to life is not a reversal of the penalty; for the penalty has not yet been inflicted. It is only a reversal of the inevitable consequence of Adam's fall, to which consequence our probation does not reach. 

2.There is "a second trial and sin repeated," in the case of every individual transgressor; and

Mr. Storrs' remarks on the judgment of Adam present that fact in a striking view.

He says:

"Adam stood under a law, in a dispensation peculiar to himself. . . . It admitted of no repentance or renewed obedience by which the punishment could be remitted; for one transgression the transgressor must die. Under that law Adam was placed. He transgressed-his

dispensation ended, and God set in judgment on him; arraigned Adam at the judgment-seat-heard the testimony-found him guilty-proceeded solemnly to pronounce the penalty of the law, but saw fit to keep the day of execution of the sentence in his own power, and hidden from the knowledge of the criminal; but ultimately he was executed."

And then he asks: 

"Why is Adam to be made alive, to be judged over again, and die a second time? We discover no Scripture warrant for such an idea." Id., p. 75.

Now, according to Mr. Storrs' own showing, that dispensation or probation ended with that "one transgression," and judgment set, and sentence was pronounced on the act; but the sentence was not executed for nearly one thousand years after that judgment. Then, I inquire, was Adam on probation during the many hundred years that he lived after that sentence was

pronounced? I think he was; but if so, he was, of course, under a new probation. But if not, then there were over nine hundred years of Adam's life for which he was not held accountable! I cannot discover any warrant, either in Scripture or reason, for his being "made alive to be judged over again," so far as that "one transgression "is concerned for which he was judged, but I do discover an evident reason why he should be judged for the actions of a long life that he lived after that first judgment. And they must admit the conclusion, or deny that Adam had a second [original illegible] But such a denial is attended with further difficulty, it being equivalent to a denial that [original illegible] children after him had any probation. For, if [original illegible] be inquired where the probation was introduced under which his children

were placed, everyone will point to the promise given to Adam that "the seed of the woman" should bruise the serpent' head. Here commenced the gospel system. But it was revealed to Adam, and through him to [original illegible] posterity. And if a new probation was not there introduced to Adam, when and where was it introduced? Will the believers in the non-resurrection theory point to the scripture giving information on this point, that is, if they deny that Adam had another probation granted to him? We find but one revelation of the bringing in of a gospel hope to Adam and his immediate descendants-that in the third chapter of Genesis concerning" the seed" of the woman. But if that was the introduction of a new dispensation, of a probation under which repentance and faith in "the seed" would procure remission, it then follows that Adam had a second trial in this new system. And, of course, for transgressions under this new probation there must be another judgment; and if this transgression was not forgiven, the penalty must be inflicted for this, as well as for the other. Otherwise the penalty of one of these dispensations and judgments will never be executed. And now, as Adam died under that transgression without any possibility of remission by repentance or renewed obedience, so do all his posterity-all who share in that "Adamic condition;" no degree of repentance, faith, nor obedience, will avert this death; because they were not under that dispensation which was "peculiar" to Adam, as Mr. Storrs correctly says. We had no trial of obedience or disobedience in that first judgment, though we fall under its consequences by virtue of our nature-our "Adamic condition." On this point Mr. Storrs says again:

"Adam's posterity were made subject to corruption by being excluded from the tree of life, not as a penal infliction on them," etc. Life from the Dead, p. 11. 

And it is just as true that they die for Adam's sin, as that they were made subject to corruption thereby; for exclusion from the tree of life has the same effect on them that it had on him, to wit: it prevents their living forever. And this, says Mr. Storrs, was "not a penal infliction on them." True; a penal infliction can only relate to an act under probation; but our probation does not relate to the exclusion from the tree of life, and consequent death; and therefore this death

cannot be the penalty of our personal transgressions; but the "second death" is that penalty.

On this point I will only add: 

1. We are never exhorted to repent of Adam's sin, nor to avert its consequences. Here is where the Pedobaptists err. Infants have no personal sins to be remitted; therefore if they are baptized for the reason given in the gospel, that is, for the remission of sin, it must be Adam's sin, not

their own. But such an idea is never hinted in the Scriptures; it is contrary to the facts and reasons given in the case. Yet according to the non-resurrection views it is the only chance for the salvation of children, Infant-baptismal regeneration and this non-resurrectionism should go together.

2. Christ is to be the judge of men, for the Father has put all judgment in his hands, and the secrets of men are to be judged by him. And into that judgment "every work" shall be brought, evil as well as good. And it is in view of that judgment that the exhortations are given, and threatenings made, in the Bible. But there is no intimation that Adam's sin will come into that judgment. The judgment for that is far in the past; with that we, as probationers, have nothing to do.

I Didn't Always Believe.

 All of us die. Adam and Eve were given the opportunity to never die, to be immortal. As the first of mankind they were given a lot of responsibility. When the tempter, Satan deceived them by saying the words, 'Ye shall not surely die.' He lied. Did Adam and Eve jump up and down in joy upon sinning and not being struck instantly dead? No. They didn't have time to celebrate their escape of instant death, they were too busy trying to comprehend their life without God. They were instantly stripped of His glorious covering of light and realizing a life without their protector. They wanted to know evil, and they were instantly feeling its affects. Fear. They'd never known fear, they'd never known wrong doing. The awfulness of what they'd done was apparent to them and their regret, their sorrow was very real. No, they didn't have time to celebrate living when living was filled with terror, shame, and regret. The life they were still being allowed to live wasn't going to be the life filled with the glory of God, it was going to be a life of horror and hardship. They'd done wrong. They made the wrong choice and they knew it. It's almost safe to imagine they were never truly happy again having known a perfect love and lost it by their own doing. They also knew that they were going to die, and dying wasn't going to be an easy thing. They were going to live through their bodies degrading over time, it was going to be a very slow dying, ultimately they breathed no more, their heart beats stopped and their corruptible bodies began to know corruption, rapid corruption. The first death they knew was the death of beloved animals they'd named. Those animals were suddenly lifeless, their skins stripped from their bodies, and those skins given to Adam and Eve to wear in place of the glorious light of God's covering. They saw death. Those animals that were killed didn't get up and start living again without their skins. Those animals lay there decaying. This they knew would eventually be their own end. They were going to be gone. Before that, they had to experience the death of their son, Abel. Murdered by his own brother. The very first son born to mankind was a murderer. Seeing the lifeless body of their son, Abel, Adam and Eve did not celebrate his transition to another life, they knew that wasn't what was happening. They knew their son's life was completely and utterly over. This was the death that Satan lied about telling them they would not die. The tragedy was beyond anything they'd known, death. The end. God did NOT tell them if they sinned they would struggle for a while then die only to be given a glorious life after death. No. Death was an end. Their hope was in the future, in a Savior who would destroy Satan and along with Satan all the evil in existence. We all die. Our lives truly come to an end. All that makes us who we are is reserved in death's sleep. And what we are will not be awakened from death's sleep individually but all at once when our Savior returns and calls us to Him in His miraculous way.  This is BIBLICAL, this is TRUTH. If we believe Satan's lie that we won't die- we do not accept the truth that we do. And by death I mean death, not death and instant new life- that is a lie. Some people console themselves and others with the lie that they are going to a better place as soon as they die, in effect they are telling others and themselves that they aren't really dead, just moving on to another plane of existence. Lies. Delusions. Deception. And none of that is of God, none. How many millions of people are going to be lost to eternal life because they cherish lies and refuse truth?  Don't pat yourself on the back right now and say that I'm the deluded one and I'll understand in time, I'm just a little confused, no harm no foul. The truth is, if I'm believing lies, I'm not following God's truth, and if I'm not following God's truth then I will not be God's. I have to seek truth and nothing else. I have had to give up MANY of my cherished beliefs in the face of truth, I wasn't raised with the things I believe now. I was shown truth in the word of God, the Holy Spirit opened my heart to truth and I was given a choice to either believe the truth, or believe lies. I praise God, I am eternally grateful to my Lord and Savior, for truth!

*******

A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Unjust (continued)

By J.H. Waggoner

DISTINCTION OF "BLOOD-LIFE" A FALLACY

Both Mr. Storrs and Mr. Curry make a point and lay much stress on the supposed distinction between the "blood-life" and "spirit-life;" their position being that the blood-life is forfeited to the law, and that the law, as a matter of justice, holds it forever; that the life that is laid down in death is not taken up again in the resurrection, but another or spirit-life is conferred in its stead. The fallacy of this has already been shown in that it makes the justified pay the same forfeit as the condemned, which is unjust. To further show its erroneousness, I will compare their statements with those of the Scriptures. 

Said Mr. Curry:

"How was it with Christ? He laid down his blood-life, made an atonement, but he never took it up again. That was the purchase, the forfeit." Debate with Grant, p. 91. 

And Mr. Storrs says: "It was the price paid; his blood-life is laid down forever, and is never taken again." Life from the Dead, p. 92. 

But the words of the Saviour stand directly opposed to these assumptions. He says: "I lay down my life that I might take it again. . . I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father." John 10:17, 18. This expression-"take it again"-shows that no such distinction obtains in the Scriptures. If he laid down one life and never took it again, but took another in its stead, as they assert, then this language of the Saviour is most unhappily chosen. And as the Saviour's statement is as plain and explicit as theirs, and directly contradicts theirs, I must conclude that their view was never drawn from the Bible, but was gotten up to meet the necessity of their theory.

THEIR THEORY OF THE TWO RESURRECTIONS

The fact that there are two "orders" of the resurrection, or two resurrections in point of time, seems to stand out so prominently in the Scriptures that they are constrained to admit it; but they will not admit that the last, or second, is of "the unjust;" of them "that have done evil;" of the "rest" in distinction from the "blessed and holy." But admitting the fact of a second resurrection, they have had to contradict themselves and deny their own  invulnerable principles to maintain their denial that this resurrection is of the wicked. See the following statements. 

Says Mr. Storrs:

"Apart from Christ, when a man dies, he dies in his sins, and has lost his life never to find it again." Life from the Dead, p. 33.

"Thus the resurrection of the dead to life belongs to Christ and his body, the church-all true believers, under whatever dispensation they may have lived; and from this revival into life all others, it seems to us, are absolutely excluded." Id., p. 35.

"Life from the dead is a peculiarity of the gospel-a gospel benefit-and believers only live again." Id., p. 27.

But in commenting on Rev. 20:5, he says:

"If the text were a genuine one, it would be easy to show that it may not embrace the unholy at all. It might refer to the living again of the virtuous heathen, who had never heard of Christ, and therefore had not suffered for the witness of Jesus and for the word of God; hence, were not embraced in the 'first resurrection,' but are to have life afterwards; for surely, 'in every nation he that feareth God and worketh righteousness'-according to the light he has-'is accepted with him,' and will have life through Jesus, though he had never heard of him." Id., pp. 70, 71. 

Dropping the paradoxical idea of the heathen who fear God and work righteousness! we notice that, according to Eld. Storrs, (1) A resurrection is a peculiarity of the gospel, and of course is inadmissible outside the gospel. (2) It belongs to the church-to believers in Christ, only, and all others are absolutely excluded. But (3), The second resurrection "may embrace" a class who were not believers in Christ, who never heard of him. Peter's testimony in Acts 10, clearly proves that the faithfully obedient in all nations-Jews and Gentiles-are accepted with God; but Cornelius had the gospel message sent to him to teach him what he ought to do. To refer to these facts and circumstances to prove the salvation of those who have no faith, is a manifest perversion of the Scriptures. That any one of Mr. Storrs' ability and power of discrimination should put forth sentiments so unscriptural and self-contradictory, is strong evidence of the weakness of the theory he advocates. And Mr. Curry, who seemed to closely follow Mr. Storrs, is equally unfortunate in his expressions on this subject. He laid down the following as an "unanswerable principle:"

"There is no future life without justification, and justification comes by faith alone." Debate, p. 106. 

And again he said:

"That is the true, Christian, orthodox, Protestant doctrine-justification by faith; and I contend that there is no other justification in the Bible, and without justification there can be no future life." Id., p. 77.

After thus emphatically confining a future life to those who are justified by faith in Christ, he says: 

"May it not be that he will save a great many righteous heathen, though they are not saved at his coming? That there will be a second resurrection of the righteous? Is it not possible? It has no difficulty with me. And I believe the resurrection will be one of the virtuous heathen, but not of the wicked dead. And so I preach it." Id., p. 75.

But of the heathen he says, in another place:

"The gospel does not address itself to the heathen. They come under a law peculiar to themselves." Id., p. 89.

Here again we notice that, (1) There is no justification in the Bible, except by faith. (2) There is no future life without justification. But (3), There is a future life to those who have no faith. And it is no relief from the contradiction to say the gospel does not address itself to them; for then I inquire, Where does he get his knowledge of a resurrection unto life outside the gospel? His declaration admits that it is not "in the Bible." Then by what authority does he "preach it?" It is certainly no recommendation to the non-resurrection theory that its advocates have to invent "another gospel" to accommodate it!

I read that "all the world" stand condemned-"guilty before God;" and that God "now commandeth all men everywhere to repent;" and that "without faith it is impossible to please God." Jesus also said, "No man cometh to the Father but by me." But in the above quotations there is a system of salvation taught which ignores these truths; and, this being the case, it is comparatively a small matter that they have contradicted their much-cherished "principles" to sustain it. The same facts which led them to make the above statements, we have also discovered in the Scriptures. We see that the conclusion is unavoidable that there is more than one "order," or class, in the resurrection. But we never thought necessary to refer a righteous resurrection, or resurrection to eternal life, to "them that know not God," nor to devise a justification or system of salvation not taught in the Bible. We find a more easy, because a more scriptural, solution in referring it to the "resurrection of the unjust"-of "them that have done evil." We learn that all now die in Adam without regard to character; but they are on probation, the result of which is life or death. And as they do not now die in view of that probation, as is proved by the fact that they die without any regard to the character formed under that probation, they must be raised to die "the second death," which is the only death to which their probation relates. This only meets the demands of justice. And this is the teaching of the Bible.

Resurrected Wicked.

 Resurrection of the UNJUST. (You'll want to read this lengthy article if you are a serious student of the Bible. If you are not a serious student of the Bible, and prefer to be given milk fit only for babies, and not meat for adults, then you won't like the following. Only the serious Bible students are willing to study, searching scripture for truth, contemplating all they are learning, praying, seeking spiritual guidance from the Holy Spirit Himself. Only the serious Bible students want truth as if it were a hidden treasure! Seeking it, finding it, holding fast to all the knowledge God desires to give to them. Those who aren't serious about their eternal life, will not seek God's truths as treasures, but will ignore the weighty matters of the Word, preferring simple things, preferring to be spoon fed with as little chewing as possible. If you're a serious Bible Student, pray right now, pray that God only allows you to know His truth, that God will give you the wisdom you need. God help us all!)

*******

A Vindication of the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Unjust (Excerpt 1)

By J.H. Waggoner

"And have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust."- Acts 24:15.

The following pages contain a clear, concise, and able argument in vindication of the doctrine of the resurrection of the wicked. It is proper to state that an earnest effort is being made by a considerable portion of the first-day Adventists to promulgate the doctrine that the wicked dead are never to be resurrected. No thoughtful reader of the Bible will pronounce this question one of small consequence. It involves the interpretation of a very large part of the Bible.

The doctrine of the judgment, and of final retribution, of which the Scriptures say so much, is entirely changed in character according as we decide that the wicked shall or shall not be resurrected. 

We can hardly imagine what special good would grow out of the doctrine could its truthfulness be established. For the doctrine that the wicked shall be resurrected that they may each receive such measure of indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, as their crimes severally deserve, satisfies our sense of justice. And the doctrine that this torment, or anguish, shall result in death, relieves the subject of all sense of disproportion between the crime and the punishment that burdens the doctrine of endless torment. But this theory of the non-resurrection of the wicked leaves our sense of justice on the part of God toward impenitent men entirely unsatisfied, and is no measure called for as our only escape from the unreasonable doctrine of endless torment.

But, if this doctrine be false, it is certainly a very serious error. To teach wicked men that they shall never be called forth from their graves to receive the second death, will prove to such persons an awful mistake should the Son of God actually call them forth to final retribution. The fact, therefore, that the doctrine of the non-resurrection of the wicked is

being extensively and zealously promulgated at the present time, makes it a matter of great importance that this subject should be fairly and thoroughly canvassed. We commend the following work as an able vindication of the doctrine of the resurrection of the unjust.

THE RESURRECTION OF THE UNJUST

Will the wicked dead be raised? This question is exciting considerable interest in certain localities; and some are embracing the view that the wicked will not have a resurrection. The opinions of the parties for and against this view may be briefly stated, as follows:

I. For: 

1) The wages of sin being death, when the wicked die, the full penalty of the law is inflicted upon them; and it would not be just for God to raise them up to execute the same penalty upon them a second time. 

(2) Life is promised only through Christ, and obtained only by faith; and therefore those who reject Christ will not have life given to them in a resurrection. 

(3) The Scriptures say they shall not see light; shall not see life; shall not rise; etc.

The first two points embrace the principles on which they profess to base their faith. The third embraces the facts or Scripture declarations supposed to sustain the principles.

II. Against:

(1) All mankind die on account of Adam's transgression, and not on account of their personal sins.

(2) Justice demands a resurrection of the wicked, in order to the infliction of the penalty of their personal sins.

(3) The Scriptures declare that there will be a resurrection of the unjust; of them that have done evil; all shall be made alive; they shall die the second death.

Eld. George Storrs, of New York, who has in a manner led off in the nonresurrection  theory, being the only one who has published any considerable work on the subject, commences his argument with an effort to establish a "principle." To this no one would object; indeed, it is the best of all methods of reasoning to first establish the principles of a doctrine. But in reasoning upon the Bible, we must be careful that our principles are in harmony with its plain teachings; for it is frequently the case that men announce as "principles" the mere expression of their own ideas. So Prof. Finney, of Ohio, in his discussion with Charles Fitch, laid down principles to prove the millennium, by which he endeavored to make that doctrine a necessity to vindicate the benevolence of God; but in so doing he contradicted some of the plainest declarations of the Bible. So Calvinists or fatalists found their "principles" on their own limited ideas of God's foreknowledge and decrees, and thereby set aside the abundance of Scripture testimony which shows the freedom of the human will in choosing or rejecting eternal life. I think Mr. Storrs has erred in precisely the same manner, allowing him to be the expositor of his own principle. To understand his exposition, we must read his principle. It is as follows: "Gifts may exceed the promise; but punishment cannot justly exceed the threatening. Thus, a prince may give to a worthy subject ten thousand dollars as a gratuity; but a just prince cannot, and will not, inflict a punishment more severe than the clearly expressed penalty, or inflict a thousand stripes gratuitously. So God may give a revival into life, and make that life eternal to a faithful servant, even though he had never clearly informed him that he would do so; but he could not, in punishing, justly exceed some known penalty, or penalty clearly indicated."

With this I find no fault; but unfortunately he has not reasoned in harmony with it, but has assumed a penalty never indicated in the Scriptures; and his conclusions are drawn, not from any just principle, but from his own assumption in regard to the penalty. In his argument he says: "The wages of sin, then, is not suffering, but death. It is not dying, but death. It is not the pain of dying, but to have life extinguished-to be dead: that only is

death. . . . No pangs, no struggles, nor agonies, connected with dying, are death, or any part of death." In this I think Mr. Storrs has departed widely from Bible truth; and in his effort

to prove what God must or ought to do, in order to be just, he has directly contradicted what God says he will do. And if it shall appear that his exposition is thus defective, the conclusion drawn therefrom may well be called in question. Let us consider it: 1. Our ideas of the penalty of the law must always stand corrected by the exposition and practice of the divine Lawgiver. His first announcement of the penalty was this: "Thou shalt surely die." But Mr. Storrs says it is not dying, but "to be dead." If so, it should read, Thou shalt surely be dead. The soul that sinneth, it shall be dead. The wages of sin is to be dead. But such terms are never used in the Scriptures. The phrase, shalt die, clearly points to the process

whereby he should become dead. I am aware that this statement of Mr. Storrs' is often reiterated in controversies on the subject of life and death; but it is erroneous nevertheless. "The soul that sinneth, it shall die"-not shall be dead. Now if Mr. Storrs could devise some means whereby the sinner can be dead without undergoing the process of dying, then with more show of reason might he endeavor to disconnect the "pangs, struggles, and agonies, connected with dying," from the penalty. But the divine expressions include the process of dying- shalt die-and his assertion contradicts both reason and Scripture. I do not deny that the penalty reaches to the state of being dead; for there is no such thing as death, unless that consummation be reached. But I do deny that it excludes the act of dying, with its pangs and agonies. Both are included in the penalty.

2. If "to be dead" were alone the penalty, and the pangs, etc, of death, were "not the penalty or any part of it," then all the "pangs, struggles, and agonies, connected with" the infliction of the penalty, death, are so much over and above the penalty, and of course, according to Mr. Storrs' showing, so much of manifest injustice on the part of the Being who inflicts the penalty! And it would therefore be necessary for God to insure an easy, peaceful death, to the sinner, in order that he might be dead, in accordance with justice, that is, without having added to the "penalty clearly indicated," "pangs, struggles, or agonies," which are no part of the penalty, and cannot, therefore, be justly inflicted! But against this I say,

3. God has not only threatened death to the evil-doer, but he has also threatened "tribulation and anguish," torment with fire and brimstone, plagues, with grievous sores and pains. And all the illustrations given in the Scriptures, of the justice and wrath of God against sin, include such ideas as these. Now these are the desert of sin, and part of its penalty, or they are not. If they are, then Mr. Storrs' exposition of principles is without foundation in truth. But if they are not, as Mr. Storrs asserts, then, according to his theory, these threats can never be fulfilled without God thereby proving himself unjust!

Such is the tendency of Mr. Storrs' position on which he bases his nonresurrection theory. As said before, we may well call in question any argument based on such premises, or conclusion drawn from them. In regard to principles, the question first to be settled in this controversy is this: Do mankind now die because of their own sins, or because of the sin of their representative head, Adam? There are, I think, weighty reasons to be offered on both branches of this question; that is, that they do not die on account of their own sins, and that they do die on account of Adam's transgression. And this conclusion is deducible from the principles of just reasoning, from the statements of the Scriptures, and from the admissions of those opposing. "In Adam all die," are the words of inspiration. This certainly does not admit of any exceptions. All men stood in Adam, their representative. So says Mr. Curry, a

leading advocate of that faith; "Every one having this Adamic nature, dies. In Adam: every one who has that Adamic condition must necessarily die by virtue of that condition." Debate with Grant, p. 24.

 But all classes and ages have that Adamic condition; hence, all classes and ages "die by virtue of that condition;" and this, of course, without any regard to their character. Mr. Storrs denies that 1 Cor. 15:22, has any reference to "all men;" yet he does not deny the fact that all men do actually die in Adam, but states it in the following words: "And though it is

a truth that all men die by a connection with the first Adam, yet that is not the truth the apostle now proceeds to state." Life from the Dead, p. 48. And again, the same is admitted on page 49, as follows: "It is by connection with Adam, as descendants from him, that death came to those whose personal sins are forgiven." In these statements, both Mr. Curry and Mr. Storrs admit that mankind do not now die on account of their personal sins. For if

the present prevailing death is the penalty of personal sin, by what principle of justice do they suffer that penalty after their personal sins are forgiven? Do they really believe that God executes the penalty of sins after they are forgiven? If so, in what consists their forgiveness? And here, against this non-resurrection theory, I bring this charge, that it entirely ignores the gospel doctrine of the remission of sins, and contradicts every statement of the Scriptures in regard to forgiveness. In this it stands in direct opposition to the gospel system. In some States, the death penalty stands against murder; but do they ever hang a man after he is pardoned? The words, or offer, of pardon in such a case would be senseless, cruel mockery. According to the theory we call in question, the righteous, or justified, suffer the same penalty that the wicked suffer. Do they first receive the pardon, or forgiveness, of their sins, and then suffer, to the full extent, their penalty? Is this the manner in which justice is administered in the divine government? That this is no misapprehension of the non-resurrection dogma, no unjust conclusion drawn from the premises of an opponent, will appear by a quotation from Mr. Curry, "Debate with Grant," page 101: "The life that now is, is under the law, goes down under the law; the law holds it. There is no way to escape the penalty." And therefore, if this penalty is the penalty of personal sins, as he elsewhere avers, there is no way to escape from the penalty of personal sins; and therefore, again, there is no such thing as forgiveness. And so it is in direct antagonism to the gospel. But, it may he objected, the penitent believer does not remain dead; he is

resuscitated, and eternal life is given to him. But that does not meet the case; that result comes under another head. The question now before us is this: Is there any forgiveness in the gospel? Mr. Curry said, "There is no way to escape from the penalty;" which is equivalent to declaring that there is no way to obtain forgiveness. For I assert, without any fear of contradiction, that the forgiveness of sin and the execution of its penalty cannot exist together. Whatever may be granted by way of gift after the penalty is executed, cannot interfere with the statements here made; for such gift is not mercy, not forgiveness-it is benevolence. "The soul that sinneth it shall die;" the soul that is forgiven its sin shall also die. And it does also die, and very often under far more agonizing circumstances than the other. How can the Scriptures be reconciled, and the justice of God's government be vindicated, if the same death is threatened to the sinner that the justified saints are daily suffering? The full penalty of the law is executed upon both alike. There is no forgiveness to any. Conceding that faith will procure a revivifying after the penalty is inflicted, it yet remains that faith and repentance will not avert the infliction of the penalty. Such is the tendency and unavoidable result of this doctrine of the non-resurrection of the unjust.

In justice to Eld. Rufus Wendell, of Salem, Mass., editor of the Bible Repository, I ought to say, that when, by request, I presented this objection to a company in the "Life Tent," on the Springfield Camp Ground, he promptly repudiated the view held by Elders Storrs and Curry on this point. In so doing he made the proper distinction between benevolence and mercy. I hope all of that party will soon do themselves the justice to renounce a theory so utterly subversive of the essential characteristics of the gospel of Christ.

The points of the argument on the reason of the present death may be stated as follows:

1. Present or "first death" is not the penalty of personal transgression to infants, as they have no personal sin to die for; they die "in Adam," or by virtue of their relation to him.

2. Present or "first death" is not the penalty of personal sins to the justified, their transgressions having been forgiven, and, of course, are not punishable. Therefore this death is to them also solely the result of their relation to Adam.

3. All the wicked sustain the same relation to Adam that do infants and saints; they are subject to the same "Adamic condition." This is conceded. And therefore they die "by virtue of that relation," as do infants and saints, and not on account of their personal sins.

They who deny this third point, or maintain the contrary, are justly held to prove that the wicked do not sustain that same relation to Adam, and are not subject to its consequences, as are infants and saints. This we do not think they will undertake. But they must see that a failure on their part here involves their whole system.

4. Present or "first death" cannot be both the penalty of personal sins, and the result of our relation to Adam; for we are offered the remission of personal sins through repentance and faith in Christ, but never the remission of that Adamic condition-no degree of repentance and faith will change that relation, or avert its consequences. This, all will and must admit. But the punishment of personal sins may be averted, according to the plain declarations and promises of the gospel. What may be predicated of one cannot be predicated of the other; therefore one death cannot stand for both. Any effort on their part to avoid our conclusion on this point, must involve them in the following contradiction: That which is visited upon all men by reason of a certain relation, is visited upon one class solely by reason of that relation, and upon another class not by virtue of that relation at all, but for an entirely different reason! Mr. Curry, as well as Mr. Storrs, professed to place his first and chief reliance on "principles." The following is one laid down by him: "God cannot be just and restore to man his animal or blood life, as that life is forfeited to the law." Debate, p. 91.

The same idea is held out by Mr. Storrs. But they must certainly have singular ideas of justice, as announced in such a "principle;" for they have every one of the justified paying the same forfeit that the condemned have to pay! Now "justification" and "condemnation" are terms expressing different relations to law; and I assert that where there is no condemnation there can be no forfeit required according to justice. This must be granted-it is self-evident. Therefore those who advocate this non-resurrection theory, must admit that this forfeit is not because of personal sins, or, otherwise, maintain that a person is both justified and condemned at the same time, which is an evident absurdity. I do not see how the "Judge of all the earth" can be honored by the announcement of such a "principle," subversive as it is of the plainest principles of justice. For let it be remembered, that God is just in justifying the believer (Rom. 3:26), but not according to their position. There can be no justice in the infliction of penalties without discrimination; visiting the same judgment upon the condemned and the justified; upon those accountable and guilty; and upon those unaccountable and those whose sins have been pardoned. But if all die-old and young, just and unjust-on account of their relation to Adam, and all personal sins are referred to that day when "God shall bring every work into judgment," then all is clear, and God's justice is vindicated. And if, as I think is clearly the truth, the present or "first death" is the result of our relation to Adam, and not the penalty of personal sins, then it follows that the penalty of personal sins will never be inflicted if there shall be no revival or resurrection of the wicked, who have exposed themselves to divine justice by their actions. And so justice points unmistakably to a "resurrection of damnation," and to a "second death," to such as have neither sought for immortality, nor died for their own personal sins. So far as a dispute on "principles" is concerned, I claim precedence for those advanced in favor of the resurrection of the wicked. And the admissions of opponents that all now die by reason of their relation to Adam are, virtually, admissions that the justice of God remains to be vindicated in regard to their personal sins. (TO BE CONTINUED)

Resurrected.

 What does the word resurrection mean to you personally? What image does it provoke when you hear the word resurrection? Most Christians will answer the thought of Jesus comes to mind and His resurrection. I'm not surprised, it is the most important resurrection ever. Without belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ, God's only begotten Son, there is no hope for mankind at all whatsoever. All you can be assured of is a life filled with a mixture of misery and joy, and not always in equal measure, and an ending of nothing whatsoever.

Jesus was resurrected from the dead, brought to life after being crucified. A resurrection from the dead.  With Jesus' resurrection came the hope for the resurrection of mankind. Jesus rising from the dead was miraculous, why? Because people were not resurrected! Being resurrected from the dead was NOT something that was automatic upon death. 

IF being resurrected from the dead was commonly believed then Jesus being resurrected would have been no surprise. That's logic, so take a moment to let it sink in. The resurrection was so incredible because it was not something that happens to dead people.

I know you're sitting there thinking that Jesus would have just had his spirit separate from his body like everyone else upon death, if he weren't resurrected. So let's discuss that for a moment. 

WHY did Jesus need a body if His spirit was going to separate from His body upon death and just live on? He was still going to be alive with all His faculties so why did He need a body? Wouldn't have appearing to people without His body, but in a recognizable form that was His have been enough? 

For that matter, why was Enoch taken bodily to heaven without seeing death? Didn't he need to die to let his spirit body escape to do all the spirit things a body can't do? 

There is so much that is illogical when you come right down to it when you believe we live on right after we die. Being resurrected holds no allure when you are already living. 

God created us with all the amazing things that make us who we are. You say you need a body to taste things, what if you didn't? You truly don't know what a spirit body is capable of. We do know angels who are spirits could take the form of a man and eat food. God is spirit, and as such He is capable of things so much greater than any we can dream of. If tasting things is only possible with a body, if pleasure is only with a body, then why do so many believe dead loved ones can experience happiness, that's a form of pleasure? Do you see what's happening? Truly, see? We get any ability for pleasure from God, and we cherish that ability now, and no one ever thinks they lose that ability when they supposedly die and go to heaven in spirit, they treat that as a joyous release from all pain. 

When the dead are resurrected, and we are told they are, what a glorious day for those dead who have died with Christ as their Savior and salvation their hope. We are RESURRECTED, not separated from our bodies with an intelligent spirit us just living on in heaven with access to everything on earth below. That is ridiculous on so many levels. Jesus is PREPARING a place for us, all of us.  David, Abraham, Jacob none of those who belonged to God are in heaven right now! None of them! How do I know this? The BIBLE tells me so!  READ IT! ALL OF IT!

Heb 11:1  Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 

Heb 11:2  For by it the elders obtained a good report. 

Heb 11:3  Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. 

Heb 11:4  By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh. 

Heb 11:5  By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. 

Heb 11:6  But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. 

Heb 11:7  By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. 

Heb 11:8  By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. 

Heb 11:9  By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: 

Heb 11:10  For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. 

Heb 11:11  Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed, and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promised. 

Heb 11:12  Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable. 

Heb 11:13  THESE ALL DIED IN FAITH, NOT HAVING RECEIVED THE PROMISES, BUT HAVING SEEN THEM AFAR OFF, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 

Heb 11:14  For they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country. 

Heb 11:15  And truly, if they had been mindful of that country from whence they came out, they might have had opportunity to have returned. 

Heb 11:16  But now they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly: wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city. 

Heb 11:17  By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son, 

Heb 11:18  Of whom it was said, That in Isaac shall thy seed be called: 

Heb 11:19  Accounting that God was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure. 

Heb 11:20  By faith Isaac blessed Jacob and Esau concerning things to come. 

Heb 11:21  By faith Jacob, when he was a DYING, blessed both the sons of Joseph; and worshipped, leaning upon the top of his staff. 

Heb 11:22  By faith Joseph, when he DIED, made mention of the departing of the children of Israel; and gave commandment concerning his bones. 

Heb 11:23  By faith Moses, when he was born, was hid three months of his parents, because they saw he was a proper child; and they were not afraid of the king's commandment. 

Heb 11:24  By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; 

Heb 11:25  Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season; 

Heb 11:26  Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward. 

Heb 11:27  By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king: for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible. 

Heb 11:28  Through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them. 

Heb 11:29  By faith they passed through the Red sea as by dry land: which the Egyptians assaying to do were drowned. 

Heb 11:30  By faith the walls of Jericho fell down, after they were compassed about seven days. 

Heb 11:31  By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace. 

Heb 11:32  And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: 

Heb 11:33  Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 

Heb 11:34  Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. 

Heb 11:35  Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: 

Heb 11:36  And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: 

Heb 11:37  They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; 

Heb 11:38  (Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. 

Heb 11:39  And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, RECEIVED NOT THE PROMISE: 

Heb 11:40  God having provided some better thing for us,  THAT THEY WITHOUT US SHOULD NOT BE MADE PERFECT.

Act 2:29  Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day. 

Act 2:30  Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; 

Act 2:31  He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 

Act 2:32  This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 

Act 2:33  Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. 

Act 2:34  FOR DAVID IS NOT ASCENDED INTO THE HEAVEN but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand

1Co 15:12  Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? 

1Co 15:13  But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: 

1Co 15:14  And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. 

1Co 15:15  Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that he raised up Christ: whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. 

1Co 15:16  For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: 

1Co 15:17  And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. 

1Co 15:18  Then they also which ARE FALLEN ASLEEP in Christ are perished. 

1Co 15:19  If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 

1Co 15:20  But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. 

1Co 15:21  For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 

1Co 15:22  For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 

1Co 15:23  But EVERY MAN IN HIS OWN ORDER: Christ the firstfruits; AFTERWARDS THEY THAT ARE CHRIST'S AT HIS COMING. 

1Co 15:24  Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. 

1Co 15:25  For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 

1Co 15:26  The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 

1Co 15:27  For he hath put all things under his feet. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him. 

1Co 15:28  And when all things shall be subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all. 

Joh 5:28  Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which ALL that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 

Joh 5:29  And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. 

Rev 20:6  Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. 

FIRST resurrection-  there are not a multitude of resurrections… First, second…. No more, no less. 

More tomorrow by the grace of our LORD JESUS CHRIST!

Always Existed.

 Man can only work with created things. Think about that. Man can manipulate any created matter, break it down, build it up, alter it in numerous ways, and destroy it. Scientists are all the time taking created matter and studying it down to its smallest form. Scientists make it a lifelong career of trying to discover new things. New cures, new forms, new things all from things already created. When man does succeed in creating new things, it's from manipulating old things into the new. Yes, mankind loves to believe that their science is everything, that spiritual matters have little to nothing at all to do with scientific things. So many scientists embrace atheism so they may believe that created things, created themselves. They want to imagine the origin of things - such as a big bang, the colliding of…. WAIT… a colliding of things created, things in existence already in order to collide. The explosion, the big bang, had to have created matter to make the explosion, the big bang. Nothing, absolutely nothing, CANNOT create something- that's an impossibility. While that is an impossibility, it is one that scientists refuse to believe. A big bang… of what? Nothing banging against nothing? Nothing exploding with nothing? You introduce elements that come together to explode you introduce created elements. Such a vicious circle for those who lack faith in the CREATOR of those elements. 

Personally, by the GRACE of my Creator, my Father in Heaven, my God, I have been blessed with comprehending that something cannot come from nothing, that something had to come from someone- my CREATOR, THE CREATOR, the Great I AM. The from EVERLASTING TO EVERLASTING. 

You say my logic is faulty because who created the Creator? I say my faith comprehends the CREATOR is the all of all. 

My body, and the body of another created my two children. If my body had not had an essence from another body it could not have created my two children. The mysteries of pregnancy have been taken down to their smallest forms and in doing so mankind has been able to extract the essence of male and females and join them even outside of the bodies of those who created the essence. They've picked at the essence itself and isolated microscopic particles of that essence and have manipulated that too in order to change what might have been if left without manipulation. And still, they needed created things to do all that, down to the tiniest of forms. They say they are playing god, that they have the abilities of gods in their work. Not all say this of course, but there are those who do. There are those whose ego is so huge they take credit for things they have no business taking credit for. We all need to humble ourselves before our CREATOR and entrust to Him our very thoughts, anything we call our brilliant thoughts, our ideas that lead to brilliant discoveries come from our CREATOR. 

If you want to delve into the evil that exists, which perverts the beauty of God, you can do so. Read the following excerpt, the last in a series of excerpts I've posted lately. 

May God bless us with truth, only truth, give us the wisdom we need, the faith we need, all we need through our SAVIOR, Jesus Christ our LORD, now and forever!!!!!!!

Amen. 

*******

(Excerpt) 

REDEMPTION OF THE EARTH

But all the fruit of sin would not be destroyed if the earth were not redeemed from the curse. 

Peter says that as the earth once perished with water, so it will once again be changed by fire. After saying that the heavens and earth which are now, are reserved unto fire, against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men, and that the elements shall melt with fervent heat, and the works that are in the earth shall be burned up, he continues: "Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." 2 Peter 3:13.

Jesus says, "Blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth." Matt. 5:5. In Ps. 37:11 the same statement is made with an important addition: "But the  meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace." And this proves that they do not inherit the earth in its present state, for Jesus said, "In the world ye shall have tribulation." John 16:33.

Were the curse never removed from the earth, the works of the devil would not all be destroyed.

Paul says that the saints now have the seal of the Spirit, which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession. Eph. 1:14. Both man and his dominion were brought under the curse of sin. Jesus died to redeem them both; the inheritance has been purchased, as well as man, and, as man, waits to be redeemed. But this cannot be while there is a sinner, or a remnant of sin, in it. 

For six thousand years the earth has been polluted by Satan and his works, sin and sinners. But all these will be burned up; then the earth will be once more pure as it was when it first came from the hands of its Maker. The lake of fire which destroys the wicked is the same that burns up the last remains of sin and the curse, and purifies the earth. 

In Revelation 20 this lake of fire is introduced: "And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

The next chapter continues the scene: "And I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea." 

Then will Adam be restored to his own Paradise, in his own dominion, given to him at the beginning. He lost them by sin; the second Adam restored them by His obedience and sacrifice. Then all the saints possess the earth, their long-lost home. Then, and not till then, will they appreciate the full force of the Saviour's words, "Blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth." This time will surely come. 

We have so long lived amid sin and rebellion, have so long been accustomed to vice and wickedness, have so long been shut away from heaven and God, that we cannot realize that it will ever be otherwise. 

Now, upon this earth, unrighteousness is popular, and "he that departeth from evil maketh himself a prey." Isa. 59:15. Here the righteous are vastly in the minority; but it is only here. When we remember the "innumerable company of angels," who are yet loyal to their God, we see that the righteous are really in the majority.

For a short time the devil has succeeded in defiling a small part, a very small part, of God's creation. God has permitted him for a time to go on with impunity, till he has fully developed the awful consequences of sin and rebellion against the all-wise Creator. He will serve as an example to all the intelligent creatures of God, that they may see the utter folly of disobeying the Almighty. 

God will soon wipe out the blot which Satan has made on His universe, by the utter destruction of Satan and all his works. Then will be fulfilled what God has spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. God "shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you; whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things." Acts 3:20, 21. 

As righteous men and loyal angels behold the punishment of wicked men and devils, they can sing, "Great and marvelous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints." Rev. 15:3. 

When we look upon the awful condition of the world, we are sometimes tempted to question the wisdom of God in permitting such a state of things to continue so long. But we must remember that God is from everlasting to everlasting, the eternal One. Our world has existed but about six thousand years. Here is a man sixty years of age. It seems but a short time since he was a little boy; yet he has lived a one-hundredth part of the time that the world has stood. One hundred such men in succession would reach from the foundation of the world to the present time. Then how brief a period is the world's history! At the longest it is but a moment compared with eternity.

Think of the eternity that is past. Imagine the eternity to come. Remember that God's purposes reach from eternity to eternity. 

Then why should it be thought a thing incredible by us that God should permit the devil to continue in his rebellion so short a time, till he has fully developed his character and the consequences of sin? Again, this earth, as compared with all the worlds of God, is no more than a grain of sand in comparison with the whole universe. The sun alone is as large as thirteen hundred thousand worlds like ours. At the rate of thirty miles a day, it would take a man over two hundred and forty years to travel around it. The planet Jupiter is four hundred and ninety millions of miles distant from the sun. Its diameter is eighty-nine thousand miles, it being fourteen hundred times larger than the earth. The nearest fixed star is so far distant that it would require a ball moving at the rate of five hundred miles an hour, over four million five hundred thousand years, or seven hundred and fifty times the period which has elapsed since the foundation of the world, to reach it from this earth; many of these stars are thousands of times larger than our earth, and, probably, are all inhabited.

"Some astronomers have computed that there are not less than seventy-five million suns in the universe. The fixed stars are all suns, having, like our sun, numerous planets revolving around them. The solar system, or that to which we belong, has over thirty planets, primary and secondary, belonging to it. The circular field, or space which it occupies, is, in diameter, three billion six hundred million of miles, and that which it controls is much greater. The sun which is nearest neighbor to ours is called Sirius, distant from our sun about eight hundred and fifty-two millions of miles. Now if all the fixed stars are as distant from each other as Sirius is from our sun, or if our solar system be the average magnitude of those of all the seventy-five millions of suns, what imagination can grasp the immensity of creation? Who can survey a plantation containing seventy-five million of circular fields, each three billion six hundred million of miles in diameter? Such, however, is one of the plantations of Him who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, meted out heaven with a span, comprehended the dust in a measure, and 

weighed out the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance,-He who, sitting upon the orbit of the earth, stretches out heaven as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in. Nations to Him are as a drop in a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance."-Christian Almanac. 

When we view the subject in this light, considering the infinitely small portion of creation which this earth really occupies, and the brief period of its history in sin, and remember that Satan's work has been confined to this small sphere, and that even this will soon be restored to its original condition, and that the devil will be punished for his crimes, all is reasonable, plain, and consistent. It is only when we take a narrow, contracted view of the matter that we are led to question the wisdom of God's dealings with this world. 

Happy day! May it soon dawn! Then will be realized the glorious scene described in Rev. 5:13: "And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, be unto Him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever." 

Dear reader, when the present unhappy state of our world has passed away, when sin and wickedness are no more, when devils and wicked men have been destroyed for their crimes, when the earth shall bloom as the garden of Eden, "when the times of restitution of all things" come, may it be our happy lot to have a part in this joyful song of praise to God and the Lamb. Amen

Angels: Their Nature and Ministry-  (Excerpt - Ended) Revised by J.H. Waggoner.  1891 by Pacific Press Publishing Co.)