::page 117::
STUDY VII
THE PERMISSION OF EVIL AND ITS RELATION TO GOD'S PLAN
Why Evil was Permitted--Right and Wrong as Principles--The Moral Sense--God Permitted Evil, and will Overrule it for Good--God not the Author of Sin--Adam's Trial not a Farce--His Temptation Severe --He Sinned Wilfully--The Penalty of Sin not Unjust, nor Too Severe--The Wisdom, Love and Justice Displayed in Condemning All in Adam--God's Law Universal.
EVIL is that which produces unhappiness; anything which either
directly or remotely causes suffering of any kind-- Webster.
This subject, therefore, not only inquires regarding human
ailments, sorrows, pains, weaknesses and death, but goes back of
all these to consider their primary cause--sin-- and its remedy.
Since sin is the cause of evil, its removal is the only method of
permanently curing the malady.
No difficulty, perhaps, more frequently presents
itself to the inquiring mind than the questions, Why did God
permit the present reign of evil? Why did he permit Satan to
present the temptation to our first parents, after having created
them perfect and upright? Or why did he allow the forbidden tree
to have a place among the good? Despite all attempts to turn it
aside, the question will obtrude itself-- Could not God have
prevented all possibility of man's fall?
The difficulty undoubtedly arises from a failure to
comprehend the plan of God. God could have prevented the entrance
of sin, but the fact that he did not should be sufficient proof
to us that its present permission is designed ultimately to work
out some greater good. God's plans, seen
::page 118::
in their completeness, will prove the wisdom of the course
pursued. Some inquire, Could not God, with whom all things are
possible, have interfered in season to prevent the full
accomplishment of Satan's design? Doubtless he could; but such
interference would have prevented the accomplishment of his own
purposes. His purpose was to make manifest the perfection,
majesty and righteous authority of his law, and to prove both to
men and to angels the evil consequences resulting from its
violation. Besides, in their very nature, some things are
impossible even with God, as the Scriptures state. It is
"impossible for God to lie." (`Heb. 6:18`) "He
cannot deny himself." (`2 Tim. 2:13`) He cannot do wrong,
and therefore he could not choose any but the wisest and best
plan for introducing his creatures into life, even though our
short-sighted vision might for a time fail to discern the hidden
springs of infinite wisdom.
The Scriptures declare that all things were created
for the Lord's pleasure (`Rev. 4:11`)--without doubt, for the
pleasure of dispensing his blessings, and of exercising the
attributes of his glorious being. And though, in the working out
of his benevolent designs, he permits evil and evildoers for a
time to play an active part, yet it is not for evil's sake, nor
because he is in league with sin; for he declares that he is
"not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness." (`Psa.
5:4`) Though opposed to evil in every sense, God permits
(i.e., does not hinder) it for a time, because his wisdom sees a
way in which it may be made a lasting and valuable lesson to his
creatures.
It is a self-evident truth that for every right
principle there is a corresponding wrong principle; as, for
instance, truth and falsity, love and hatred, justice and
injustice. We distinguish these opposite principles as right
and wrong, by their effects when put in action. That
principle the result of which, when active, is beneficial and
productive of ultimate
::page 119::
order, harmony and happiness, we call a right principle;
and the opposite, which is productive of discord, unhappiness and
destruction, we call a wrong principle. The results of
these principles in action we call good and evil;
and the intelligent being, capable of discerning the right
principle from the wrong, and voluntarily governed by the one or
the other, we call virtuous or sinful.
This faculty of discerning between right and wrong
principles is called the moral sense, or conscience.
It is by this moral sense which God has given to man that we are
able to judge of God and to recognize that he is good. It is to
this moral sense that God always appeals to prove his
righteousness or justice; and by the same moral sense Adam could
discern sin, or unrighteousness, to be evil, even before
he knew all its consequences. The lower orders of God's creatures
are not endowed with this moral sense. A dog has some
intelligence, but not to this degree, though he may learn that
certain actions bring the approval and reward of his master, and
certain others his disapproval. He might steal or take life, but
would not be termed a sinner; or he might protect property and
life, but would not be called virtuous--because he is ignorant of
the moral quality of his actions.
God could have made mankind devoid of ability to
discern between right and wrong, or able only to discern and to
do right; but to have made him so would have been to make merely
a living machine, and certainly not a mental image of his
Creator. Or he might have made man perfect and a free agent, as
he did, and have guarded him from Satan's temptation. In that
case, man's experience being limited to good, he would have been
continually liable to suggestions of evil from without, or to
ambitions from within, which would have made the everlasting
future uncertain, and an outbreak of disobedience and disorder
might always have been a possibility; besides which, good would
::page 120::
never have been so highly appreciated except by
its contrast with evil.
God first made his creatures acquainted with good,
surrounding them with it in Eden; and afterward, as a penalty for
disobedience, he gave them a severe knowledge of evil. Expelled
from Eden and deprived of fellowship with himself, God let them
experience sickness, pain and death, that they might thus forever
know evil and the inexpediency and exceeding sinfulness of sin.
By a comparison of results they came to an
appreciation and proper estimate of both; "And the Lord
said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and
evil." (`Gen. 3:22`) In this their posterity share, except
that they first obtain their knowledge of evil, and cannot fully
realize what good is until they experience it in the Millennium,
as a result of their redemption by him who will then be their
Judge and King.
The moral sense, or judgment of right and wrong, and
the liberty to use it, which Adam possessed, were important
features of his likeness to God. The law of right and wrong was
written in his natural constitution. It was a part of his nature,
just as it is a part of the divine nature. But let us not forget
that this image or likeness of God, this originally law-inscribed
nature of man, has lost much of its clear outline through the
erasing, degrading influence of sin; hence it is not now what it
was in the first man. Ability to love implies ability to hate;
hence we may reason that the Creator could not make man in his
own likeness, with power to love and to do right, without the
corresponding ability to hate and to do wrong. This liberty of
choice, termed free moral agency, or free will, is a part of
man's original endowment; and this, together with the full
measure of his mental and moral faculties, constituted him an
image of his Creator. Today, after six thousand years of
degradation, so much of the original
::page 121::
likeness has been erased by sin that we are not
free, being bound, to a greater or less extent, by sin and its
entailments, so that sin is now more easy and therefore more
agreeable to the fallen race than is righteousness.
That God could have given Adam such a vivid
impression of the many evil results of sin as would have deterred
him from it, we need not question, but we believe that God
foresaw that an actual experience of the evil would be the surest
and most lasting lesson to serve man eternally; and for that
reason God did not prevent but permitted man to take his choice,
and to feel the consequences of evil. Had opportunity to sin
never been permitted, man could not have resisted it,
consequently there would have been neither virtue nor merit in
his right-doing. God seeketh such to worship him as worship in
spirit and in truth. He desires intelligent and willing
obedience, rather than ignorant, mechanical service. He already
had in operation inanimate mechanical agencies accomplishing his
will, but his design was to make a nobler thing, an intelligent
creature in his own likeness, a lord for earth, whose loyalty and
righteousness would be based upon an appreciation of right and
wrong, of good and evil.
The principles of right and wrong, as principles,
have always existed, and must always exist; and all perfect,
intelligent creatures in God's likeness must be free to choose
either, though the right principle only will forever
continue to be active. The Scriptures inform us that when the
activity of the evil principle has been permitted long enough to
accomplish God's purpose, it will forever cease to be active, and
that all who continue to submit to its control shall forever
cease to exist. (`1 Cor. 15:25,26`; `Heb. 2:14`) Right-doing and
right-doers, only, shall continue forever.
But the question recurs in another form: Could not
man have been made acquainted with evil in some other way
::page 122::
than by experience? There are four ways of knowing things,
namely, by intuition, by observation, by experience, and by
information received through sources accepted as positively
truthful. An intuitive knowledge would be a direct apprehension,
without the process of reasoning, or the necessity for proof.
Such knowledge belongs only to the divine Jehovah, the eternal
fountain of all wisdom and truth, who, of necessity and in the
very nature of things, is superior to all his creatures.
Therefore, man's knowledge of good and evil could not be
intuitive. Man's knowledge might have come by observation, but in
that event there must needs have been some exhibition of evil and
its results for man to observe. This would imply the permission
of evil somewhere, among some beings, and why not as well among
men, and upon the earth, as among others elsewhere?
Why should not man be the illustration, and get his
knowledge by practical experience? It is so: man is gaining a
practical experience, and is furnishing an illustration to others
as well, being "made a spectacle to angels."
Adam already had a knowledge of evil by information,
but that was insufficient to restrain him from trying the
experiment. Adam and Eve knew God as their Creator, and hence as
the one who had the right to control and direct them; and God had
said of the forbidden tree, "In the day thou eatest thereof,
dying thou shalt die." They had, therefore, a theoretical
knowledge of evil, though they had never observed or experienced
its effects. Consequently, they did not appreciate their
Creator's loving authority and his beneficent law, nor the
dangers from which he thereby proposed to protect them. They
therefore yielded to the temptation which God wisely permitted,
the ultimate utility of which his wisdom had traced.
Few appreciate the severity of the temptation under
::page 123::
which our first parents fell, nor yet the justice of God in
attaching so severe a penalty to what seems to many so slight an
offense; but a little reflection will make all plain. The
Scriptures tell the simple story of how the woman, the weaker
one, was deceived, and thus became a transgressor. Her experience
and acquaintance with God were even more limited than Adam's, for
he was created first, and God had directly communicated to him
before her creation the knowledge of the penalty of sin, while
Eve probably received her information from Adam. When she had
partaken of the fruit, she, having put confidence in Satan's
deceptive misrepresentation, evidently did not realize the extent
of the transgression, though probably she had misgivings, and
slight apprehensions that all was not well. But, although
deceived, Paul says she was a transgressor-- though not so
culpable as if she had transgressed against greater light.
Adam, we are told, unlike Eve, was not deceived (`1
Tim. 2:14`), hence he must have transgressed with a fuller
realization of the sin, and with the penalty in view, knowing
certainly that he must die. We can readily see what was the
temptation which impelled him thus recklessly to incur the
pronounced penalty. Bearing in mind that they were perfect
beings, in the mental and moral likeness of their Maker, the
godlike element of love was displayed with marked prominence by
the perfect man toward his beloved companion, the perfect woman.
Realizing the sin and fearing Eve's death, and thus his loss (and
that without hope of recovery, for no such hope had been given),
Adam, in despair, recklessly concluded not to live without her.
Deeming his own life unhappy and worthless without her
companionship, he wilfully shared her act of disobedience in
order to share the death-penalty which he probably supposed
::page 124::
rested on her. Both were "in the
transgression," as the Apostle shows. (`Rom. 5:14`; `1 Tim.
2:14`) But Adam and Eve were one and not "twain"; hence
Eve shared the sentence which her conduct helped to bring upon
Adam. `Rom. 5:12,17-19`
God not only foresaw that, having given man freedom
of choice, he would, through lack of full appreciation
of sin and its results, accept it, but he also saw that, becoming
acquainted with it, he would still choose it, because that
acquaintance would so impair his moral nature that evil would
gradually become more agreeable and more desirable to him than
good. Still, God designed to permit evil, because,
having the remedy provided for man's release from its
consequences, he saw that the result would be to lead him,
through experience, to a full appreciation of "the exceeding
sinfulness of sin" and of the matchless brilliancy of virtue
in contrast with it--thus teaching him the more to love and honor
his Creator, who is the source and fountain of all goodness, and
forever to shun that which brought so much woe and misery. So the
final result will be greater love for God, and greater hatred of
all that is opposed to his will, and consequently the firm
establishment in everlasting righteousness of all such as shall
profit by the lessons God is now teaching through the permission
of sin and correlative evils. However, a wide distinction should
be observed between the indisputable fact that God has permitted
sin, and the serious error of some which charges God with being
the author and instigator of sin. The latter view is both
blasphemous and contradictory to the facts presented in the
Scriptures. Those who fall into this error generally do so in an
attempt to find another plan of salvation than that which God has
provided through the sacrifice of Christ as our
ransom-price. If they succeed in convincing themselves and others
that God is responsible for all sin and wickedness
::page 125::
and crime,* and that man as an innocent
tool in his hands was forced into sin, then they have cleared the
way for the theory that not a sacrifice for our sins, nor mercy
in any form, was needed, but simply and only JUSTICE. Thus, too,
they lay a foundation for another part of their false theory,
viz., universalism, claiming that as God caused all the sin and
wickedness and crime in all, he will also cause the deliverance
of all mankind from sin and death. And reasoning that God willed
and caused the sin, and that none could resist him, so they claim
that when he shall will righteousness all will likewise be
powerless to resist him. But in all such reasoning, man's noblest
quality, liberty of will or choice, the most striking
feature of his likeness to his Creator, is entirely set aside;
and man is theoretically degraded to a ----------
*Two texts of Scripture (`Isa.
45:7` and `Amos 3:6`) are used to sustain this theory, but by a
misinterpretation of the word evil in both texts. Sin is
always an evil, but an evil is not always a sin. An earthquake, a
conflagration, a flood or a pestilence would be a calamity, an evil;
but none of these would be sins. The word evil in the
texts cited signifies calamities. The same Hebrew word
is translated affliction in `Psa. 34:19; 107:39`; `Jer.
48:16`; `Zech. 1:15`. It is translated trouble in `Psa.
27:5; 41:1; 88:3; 107:26`; `Jer. 51:2`; `Lam. 1:21`. It is
translated calamities, adversity, and distress
in `1 Sam. 10:19`; `Psa. 10:6; 94:13; 141:5`; `Eccl. 7:14`; `Neh.
2:17`. And the same word is in very many places rendered harm,
mischief, sore, hurt, misery, grief and sorrow. In
`Isa. 45:7` and `Amos 3:6` the Lord would remind Israel of his
covenant made with them as a nation--that if they would obey his
laws he would bless them and protect them from the calamities
common to the world in general; but that if they would forsake
him he would bring calamities (evils) upon them as chastisements.
See `Deut. 28:1-14,15-32`; `Lev. 26:14-16`; `Josh.
23:6-11,12-16`. When calamities came upon them, however, they
were inclined to consider them as accidents and not as
chastisements. Hence God sent them word through the prophets,
reminding them of their covenant and telling them that their
calamities were from him and by his will for their correction. It
is absurd to use these texts to prove God the author of sin, for
they do not at all refer to sin.
::page 126::
mere machine which acts only as it is acted upon. If this were
the case, man, instead of being the lord of earth, would be
inferior even to insects; for they undoubtedly have a will or
power of choice. Even the little ant has been given a power of
will which man, though by his greater power he may oppose and
thwart, cannot destroy.
True, God has power to force man into either sin or
righteousness, but his Word declares that he has no such purpose.
He could not consistently force man into sin for the same reason
that "he cannot deny himself." Such a course would be
inconsistent with his righteous character, and therefore an
impossibility. And he seeks the worship and love of only such as
worship him in spirit and in truth. To this end he has given man
a liberty of will like unto his own, and desires him to choose
righteousness. Permitting man to choose for himself led
to his fall from divine fellowship and favor and blessings, into
death. By his experience in sin and death, man learns practically
what God offered to teach him theoretically, without his
experiencing sin and its results. God's foreknowledge of what man
would do is not used against him, as an excuse for degrading him
to a mere machine-being: on the contrary, it is used in man's
favor; for God, foreseeing the course man would take if left free
to choose for himself, did not hinder him from tasting sin and
its bitter results experimentally, but he began at once to
provide a means for his recovery from his first transgression by
providing a Redeemer, a great Savior, able to save to the
uttermost all who would return unto God through him. To
this end--that man might have a free will and yet be
enabled to profit by his first failure in its misuse, in
disobedience to the Lord's will--God has provided not only a ransom
for all, but also that a knowledge of the opportunity thus
offered of reconciliation with himself shall be testified to all
in due time. `1 Tim. 2:3-6`
::page 127::
The severity of the penalty was not a display of
hatred and malice on God's part, but the necessary and
inevitable, final result of evil, which God thus allowed man to
see and feel. God can sustain life as long as he sees fit, even
against the destructive power of actual evil; but it would be as
impossible for God to sustain such a life everlastingly, as it is
for God to lie. That is, it is morally impossible. Such
a life could only become more and more a source of unhappiness to
itself and others; therefore, God is too good to sustain an
existence so useless and injurious to itself and others, and, his
sustaining power being withdrawn, destruction, the natural result
of evil, would ensue. Life is a favor, a gift of God, and it will
be continued everlastingly only to the obedient.
No injustice has been done to Adam's posterity in
not affording them each an individual trial. Jehovah was in no
sense bound to bring us into existence; and, having brought us
into being, no law of equity or justice binds him to perpetuate
our being everlastingly, nor even to grant us a trial under
promise of everlasting life if obedient. Mark this point well.
The present life, which from the cradle to the tomb is but a
process of dying, is, notwithstanding all its evils and
disappointments, a boon, a favor, even if there were no
hereafter. The large majority so esteem it, the exceptions
(suicides) being comparatively few; and these our courts of
justice have repeatedly decided to be mentally unbalanced, as
otherwise they would not thus cut themselves off from present
blessings. Besides, the conduct of the perfect man, Adam, shows
us what the conduct of his children would have been under similar
circumstances.
Many have imbibed the erroneous idea that God placed
our race on trial for life with the alternative of eternal
torture, whereas nothing of the kind is even hinted at in
the penalty. The favor or blessing of God to his obedient
children is life--continuous life--free from pain, sickness and
every
::page 128::
other element of decay and death. Adam was given this blessing in
the full measure, but was warned that he would be deprived of
this "gift" if he failed to render obedience to
God--"In the day that thou eatest thereof, dying, thou shalt
die." He knew nothing of a life in torment, as the
penalty of sin. Life everlasting is nowhere promised to any but
the obedient. Life is God's gift, and death, the opposite of
life, is the penalty he prescribes.
Eternal torture is nowhere suggested in the Old
Testament Scriptures, and only a few statements in the New
Testament can be so misconstrued as to appear to teach it; and
these are found either among the symbolisms of Revelation, or
among the parables and dark sayings of our Lord, which were not
understood by the people who heard them (`Luke 8:10`), and
which seem to be but little better comprehended today. "The
wages of sin is death." (`Rom. 6:23`) "The soul that
sinneth, it shall die." `Ezek. 18:4`
Many have supposed God unjust in allowing Adam's
condemnation to be shared by his posterity, instead of granting
each one a trial and chance for everlasting life similar to that
which Adam enjoyed. But what will such say if it now be shown
that the world's opportunity and trial for life will be much more
favorable than was Adam's; and that, too, because God
adopted this plan of permitting Adam's race to share his penalty
in a natural way? We believe this to be the case, and will
endeavor to make it plain.
God assures us that as condemnation passed upon
all in Adam, so he has arranged for a new head, father
or life-giver for the race, into whom all may be transferred by
faith and obedience and that as all in Adam shared the
curse of death, so all in Christ will share the blessing
of restitution; the Church being an exception. (`Rom.
5:12,18,19`) Thus seen, the death of Jesus, the undefiled, the
sinless one, was a complete settlement toward God of the sin of
Adam. As one
::page 129::
man had sinned, and all in him had shared his curse, his penalty,
so Jesus, having paid the penalty of that one sinner, bought not
only Adam, but all his posterity--all men-- who by heredity
shared his weaknesses and sins and the penalty of these--death.
Our Lord, "the man Christ Jesus," himself
unblemished, approved, and with a perfect seed or race in him,
unborn, likewise untainted with sin, gave his all of
human life and title as the full ransom-price for Adam
and the race or seed in him when sentenced.
After fully purchasing the lives of Adam and his
race, Christ offers to adopt as his seed, his children, all of
Adam's race who will accept the terms of his New Covenant and
thus by faith and obedience come into the family of God and
receive everlasting life. Thus the Redeemer will "see his
seed [as many of Adam's seed as will accept adoption,
upon his conditions] and prolong his days [resurrection to a
higher than human plane, being granted him by the Father as a
reward for his obedience]," and all in the most unlikely
way; by the sacrifice of life and posterity. And thus it is
written: "As all in Adam die, even so all in Christ
shall be made alive." Corrected translation, `1
Cor. 15:22`
The injury we received through Adam's fall (we
suffered no injustice) is, by God's favor, to be more than offset
with favor through Christ; and all will sooner or later (in God's
"due time") have a full opportunity to be restored to
the same standing that Adam enjoyed before he sinned. Those who
do not receive a full knowledge and, by faith, an enjoyment of
this favor of God in the present time (and such are the great
majority, including children and heathen) will assuredly have
these privileges in the next age, or "world to come,"
the dispensation or age to follow the present. To this end,
"all that are in their graves...shall come forth." As
each one (whether in this age or the next) becomes fully aware of
the ransom-price given by our Lord Jesus, and of
::page 130::
his subsequent privileges, he is considered as on trial, as Adam
was; and obedience brings lasting life, and disobedience lasting
death--the "second death." Perfect obedience, however,
without perfect ability to render it, is not required of any.
Under the Covenant of Grace, members of the Church during the
Gospel age have had the righteousness of Christ imputed to them
by faith, to make up their unavoidable deficiencies through the
weakness of the flesh. Divine Grace will also operate toward
"whosoever will" of the world during the Millennial
age. Not until physical perfection is reached (which will be the privilege
of all before the close of the Millennial age) will absolute
moral perfection be expected. That new trial, the result of the
ransom and the New Covenant, will differ from the trial in Eden,
in that in it the acts of each one will affect only his own
future.
But would not this be giving some of the race a second
chance to gain everlasting life? We answer--The first
chance for everlasting life was lost for himself and all of his
race, "yet in his loins," by father Adam's
disobedience. Under that original trial "condemnation passed
upon all men"; and God's plan was that through Christ's
redemption-sacrifice Adam, and all who lost life in his
failure, should, after having tasted of the exceeding sinfulness
of sin and felt the weight of sin's penalty, be given the
opportunity to turn unto God through faith in the Redeemer. If
any one chooses to call this a "second chance," let him
do so: it must certainly be Adam's second chance, and in a sense
at least it is the same for all of the redeemed race, but it will
be the first individual opportunity of his descendants,
who, when born, were already under condemnation to death. Call it
what we please, the facts are the same; viz., all were sentenced
to death because of Adam's disobedience, and all will enjoy (in
the Millennial age) a full opportunity to gain
everlasting life under the favorable terms of the New Covenant.
::page 131::
This, as the angels declared, is "Good tidings of great joy
which shall be unto all people." And, as the Apostle
declared, this grace of God--that our Lord Jesus "gave
himself a ransom for all"--must be
"testified" to all "in due time." (`Rom.
5:17-19`; `1 Tim. 2:4-6`) Men, not God, have limited to the
Gospel age this chance or opportunity of attaining life. God, on
the contrary, tells us that the Gospel age is merely for the
selection of the Church, the royal priesthood, through whom,
during a succeeding age, all others shall be brought to an
accurate knowledge of the truth and granted full opportunity to
secure everlasting life under the New Covenant.
But what advantage is there in the method pursued?
Why not give all men an individual chance for life now, at once,
without the long process of Adam's trial and condemnation, the
share by his offspring in his condemnation, the redemption of all
by Christ's sacrifice, and the new offer to all of everlasting
life upon the New Covenant conditions? If evil must be permitted
because of man's free moral agency, why is its extermination
accomplished by such a peculiar and circuitous method? Why allow
so much misery to intervene, and to come upon many who will
ultimately receive the gift of life as obedient children of God?
Ah! that is the point on which interest in this
subject centers. Had God ordered differently the propagation of
our species, so that children would not partake of the results of
parental sins--weaknesses, mental, moral and physical-- and had
the Creator so arranged that all should have a favorable Edenic
condition for their testing, and that transgressors only should
be condemned and "cut off," how many might we presume
would, under all those favorable conditions, be found worthy, and
how many unworthy of life? If the one instance of Adam be taken
as a criterion (and
::page 132::
he certainly was in every respect a sample of perfect manhood),
the conclusion would be that none would have been found perfectly
obedient and worthy; because none would possess that clear
knowledge of and experience with God, which would develop in them
full confidence in his laws, beyond their personal judgment. We
are assured that it was Christ's knowledge of the Father that
enabled him to trust and obey implicitly. (`Isa. 53:11`) But let
us suppose that one-fourth would gain life; or even more, suppose
that one-half were found worthy, and that the other half would
suffer the wages of sin--death. Then what? Let us suppose the
other half, the obedient, had neither experienced nor witnessed
sin: might they not forever feel a curiosity toward things
forbidden, only restrained through fear of God and of the
penalty? Their service could not be so hearty as though they knew
good and evil; and hence had a full appreciation of the
benevolent designs of the Creator in making the laws which govern
his own course as well as the course of his creatures.
Then, too, consider the half that would thus go into
death as the result of their own wilful sin. They would be
lastingly cut off from life, and their only hope would be that
God would in love remember them as his creatures, the work of his
hands, and provide another trial for them. But why do so? The
only reason would be a hope that if they were re-awakened and
tried again, some of them, by reason of their larger experience,
might then choose obedience and live.
But even if such a plan were as good in its results
as the one God has adopted, there would be serious objections to
it. How much more like the wisdom of God to confine sin to
certain limits, as his plan does.
How much better even our finite minds can discern it
to be, to have but one perfect and impartial law, which declares
the wages of wilful sin to be
::page 133::
death--destruction--cutting off from life. God thus limits the
evil which he permits, by providing that the Millennial reign of
Christ shall accomplish the full extinction of evil and also of
wilful evil-doers, and usher in an eternity of righteousness,
based upon full knowledge and perfect free-will obedience by
perfect beings.
But there are two other objections to the plan
suggested, of trying each individual separately at first. One
Redeemer was quite sufficient in the plan which God adopted,
because only one had sinned, and only one had
been condemned. (Others shared his condemnation.) But if
the first trial had been an individual trial, and if one-half of
the race had sinned and been individually condemned, it would
have required the sacrifice of a redeemer for each condemned
individual. One unforfeited life could redeem one forfeited life,
but no more. The one perfect man, "the man Christ
Jesus," who redeems the fallen Adam (and our losses through
him), could not have been "a ransom [a corresponding price]
for ALL" under any other circumstances than those of the
plan which God chose.
If we should suppose the total number of human
beings since Adam to be one hundred billions, and that only
one-half of these had sinned, it would require all of the fifty
billions of obedient, perfect men to die in order to give a ransom
[a corresponding price] for all the fifty billions of
transgressors; and so by this plan also death would pass upon
all. And such a plan would involve no less suffering
than is at present experienced.
The other objection to such a plan is that it would
seriously disarrange God's plans relative to the selection and
exaltation to the divine nature of a "little flock,"
the body of Christ, a company of which Jesus is the Head and
Lord. God could not justly command the fifty billions of
obedient sons to give their rights, privileges and lives as
ransoms for the sinners; for under his own law their obedience
would
::page 134::
have won the right to lasting life. Hence, if those perfect men
were asked to become ransomers of the fallen ones, it would be
God's plan, as with our Lord Jesus, to set some special reward
before them, so that they, for the joy set before them, might
endure the penalty of their brethren. And if the same reward
should be given them that was given to our Lord Jesus, namely, to
partake of a new nature, the divine, and to be highly exalted
above angels and principalities and powers, and every name that
is named--next to Jehovah (`Eph. 1:20,21`), then there would be
an immense number on the divine plane, which the wisdom of God
evidently did not approve. Furthermore, these fifty billions,
under such circumstances, would all be on an equality,
and none among them chief or head, while the plan God has
adopted calls for but one Redeemer, one highly exalted
to the divine nature, and then a "little flock" of
those whom he redeemed, and who "walk in his footsteps"
of suffering and self-denial, to share his name, his honor, his
glory and his nature, even as the wife shares with the husband.
Those who can appreciate this feature of God's plan,
which, by condemning all in one representative, opened
the way for the ransom and restitution of all by one
Redeemer, will find in it the solution of many perplexities. They
will see that the condemnation of all in one was the
reverse of an injury: it was a great favor to all when
taken in connection with God's plan for providing justification
for all through another one's sacrifice. Evil will be
forever extinguished when God's purpose in permitting it shall
have been accomplished, and when the benefits of the ransom are
made co-extensive with the penalty of sin. It is impossible,
however, to appreciate rightly this feature of the plan of God
without a full recognition of the sinfulness of sin, the nature
of its penalty--death, the importance and value of the ransom
which our Lord Jesus gave, and the positive and complete
::page 135::
restoration of the individual to favorable conditions, conditions
under which he will have full and ample trial, before being
adjudged worthy of the reward (lasting life), or of the penalty
(lasting death).
In view of the great plan of redemption, and the
consequent "restitution of all things," through Christ,
we can see that blessings result through the permission of evil
which, probably, could not otherwise have been so fully realized.
Not only are men benefited to all eternity by the
experience gained, and angels by their observation of man's
experiences, but all are further advantaged by a fuller
acquaintance with God's character as manifested in his plan. When
his plan is fully accomplished, all will be able to read clearly
his wisdom, justice, love and power. They will see the justice
which could not violate the divine decree, nor save the justly
condemned race without a full cancellation of their penalty by a
willing redeemer. They will see the love which provided this
noble sacrifice and which highly exalted the Redeemer to God's
own right hand, giving him power and authority thereby to restore
to life those whom he had purchased with his precious blood. They
will also see the power and wisdom which were able to work out a
glorious destiny for his creatures, and so to overrule every
opposing influence as to make them either the willing or the
unwilling agents for the advancement and final accomplishment of
his grand designs. Had evil not been permitted and thus overruled
by divine providence, we cannot see how these results could have
been attained. The permission of evil for a time among men thus
displays a far-seeing wisdom, which grasped all the attendant
circumstances, devised the remedy, and marked the final outcome
through his power and grace.
During the Gospel dispensation sin and its attendant
::page 136::
evils have been further made use of for the discipline and
preparation of the Church. Had sin not been permitted, the
sacrifice of our Lord Jesus and of his Church, the reward of
which is the divine nature, would have been impossible.
It seems clear that substantially the same law of
God which is now over mankind, obedience to which has the reward
of life, and disobedience the penalty of death, must ultimately
govern all of God's intelligent creatures; and that law, as our
Lord defined it, is briefly comprehended in the one word, Love.
"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and
with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy
mind; and thy neighbor as thyself." (`Luke 10:27`)
Ultimately, when the purposes of God shall have been
accomplished, the glory of the divine character will be manifest
to all intelligent creatures, and the temporary permission of
evil will be seen by all to have been a wise feature in the
divine policy. Now, this can be seen only by the eye of faith,
looking onward through God's Word at the things spoken by the
mouth of all the holy prophets since the world began--the
restitution of all things.
The Day is at Hand
"Poor, fainting pilgrim, still hold on thy
way--the dawn is near!
True, thou art weary now; but yon bright ray becomes more clear.
Bear up a little longer; wait for rest;
Yield not to slumber, though with toil oppressed.
"The night of life is mournful, but look
on--the dawn is near!
Soon will earth's shadowed scenes and forms be gone; yield not to
fear!
The mountain's summit will, ere long, be gained,
And the bright world of joy and peace attained.
"'Joyful through hope' thy motto still
must be--the dawn is near!
What glories will that dawn unfold to thee! be of good cheer!
Gird up thy loins; bind sandals on thy feet:
The way is dark and long; the end is sweet."