ignorance of the good works one has done, but rather with the full consciousness of them, coupled with the deep-felt acknowledgment that they are God's, or owing to his grace. Its language is, "Not unto us, O Lord, but unto thy great name; Not I, but the grace of God, which was with me." Again, our author rejects the idea that this passage treats of all men, and consequently of believers and the righteous, because the New Testament directly opposes this view, by teaching that believers shall not come into judgment.13 Nor does the interpretation which confines the passage to believers, and excludes unbelievers, appear more grateful to our author. The expression all nations cannot be limited to all nations of Christendom; nor can it be justified by saying that the body of believers will be made up out of all nations. Hence the passage cannot be otherwise taken than as referring to all unbelievers. The phrase all nations is used in the Jewish sense, as expressive of the mass of men, the people of Israel alone excepted. But the true Israel is the body of Christian believers. They come not into judgment, but, at the resurrection of the just, enter immediately into the joys of the divine kingdom. Idle and unfaithful servants will, indeed, be excluded; but this act is not to be confounded with the general judgment. From the unbelievers who appear before the judgment seat, the brethren of Christ will be separated. If it be asked, who among unbelievers can be called righteous, the answer is furnished in the Epistle to the Romans,14 where the apostle teaches that there are heathen who obey the inward law, and to whom he ascribes a righteousness which springs from their doing the works of the law. An example of this is furnished us in the case of Cornelius, whose prayers were heard in heaven, and whose alms were well pleasing to God. No people on earth are to be thought entirely wanting in such noble souls: even among the most degraded, individuals may be found who walk truly according to their light. But since, in God's providence, the gospel of salvation has not 14 Chap. ii. 14. 13 John iii. 18; v. 24; 1 Cor. xi. 31. yet reached many nations, such persons remain excluded from the household of faith on earth, and are not participants of that higher religious and moral element which the gospel contains; but the spark of a better life, which stirs within them, cannot be lost; and, in the separation which is to be made between the elements of good and evil, they will be introduced into the brotherhood of believers. With this brief statement of our author's views on the general character of the passage before us, we are prepared for his comment and observations upon verse 46, which more particularly relates to our subject. "The moment which secures to the Sixao [righteous] eternal life, becomes to the adinaio [wicked] the ground of consigning them to rólaσis alávios, [everlasting punishment.] As he who can love may also become the recipient of love, yea, as love is felicity and eternal life, so the privation of love is to be considered as infelicity and the incapacity for happiness. Hence the discourse here is not of arbitrary, positive punishment; it relates to the punishment of being without love,-being alone with the loveless in the disturbed harmony of the outward and inward life, which ever flows from the deprivation of love. Hence also the xóλaois alóvios [everlasting punishment] is not identical with exclusion from the wedding: 15 the expression rather indicates everlasting damnation. Nor can the force of the contrast be lessened, owing to go alovios, [eternal life.] But should we go back to the opposition of good and evil generally, and avail ourselves of the circumstance that good alone is eternal, and rests in the nature of God himself, but that evil is something that began to exist, and is by no means substantial, and hence that the consequences of evil also, as of something temporal, can themselves be only temporal, these considerations, it is certain, are not without truth; only it must not be overlooked that the mode of representation adopted by the Scriptures nowhere favors by positive declarations the view of the ἀποκαταστάσις τῶν πάντων, [restitution of all things;] and hence upon this question, in which every thing at last falls back upon our views of free self-deter 15 Matt. xxv. 13. mination, and its relation to the divine efficiency, it is best for one to abide by the mode of expression which the Scriptures have fixed for it. But the doctrine of kóλaσis alóvios must not be sought everywhere where punishment for sin is mentioned; which, indeed, has been done long enough already. "Everywhere in the New Testament the view of salvation predominates; therefore, as always, so here, the Lord concludes his discourse, not with damnation, but with eternal happiness. And, with our eye upon this, we will also pass to the consideration of the gospel of love, which constitutes us disciples of that love in which are disclosed the secrets of God, and with them the depths of his purposes of grace. In order to bring the lost to the joys of life everlasting, the eternal Word, who came from the bosom of the Father, fathomed the abyss of all sins and of all suffering, and sealed with his own sacred blood the bond of peace, that he might discover for all an eternal salvation." 16 In our author's commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans, we meet with several passages which throw light upon his views relative to the extent of salvation. In the contrast which the apostle has so pointedly drawn between Adam and Christ, and their influence for evil and for good on the human race," Dr. Olshausen cannot fail to recognize the elements of a better faith than that commonly held at the present day, although he manifests a little unwillingness to receive it. He adopts Augustine's mode of interpretation, in opposition to that of Pelagius; consequently, mankind is considered, not as a number of individuals, who stand or fall each for himself, but as a whole, of which the individuals constitute integral parts. To this whole, Adam and Christ sustain corresponding relations, the former to the outward, and the latter to the inward, life. They are the hinges on which the gates of the powers of the universe turn; the poles from which life and death, light and darkness, are streaming forth, which manifest themselves, in their all-controlling power, alike in the totality and in the individual. Hence be 18 Vol. i. pp. 17 Rom. v. 12-21. tween Adam and Christ oscillates the life of the great whole, which we call mankind; yea, the life of the whole universe; for Adam's fall and Christ's resurrection are turning points in the developement of the whole creation. Adam, by his sin, opened to this world the kingdom of darkness, and in a moment cast the lot of his race for thousands of years. Christ, on the other hand, unclosed the kingdom of light to mankind, and called forth its lifegiving beams, and scattered the shades of night, which had overspread the world from the day of man's transgression. Thus was the influence of both alike universal. Adam's sin and Christ's righteousness passed over upon all; but Christ's power seems the greater, for Adam wrought out an effect merely negative, while that of Christ was positive, producing not only the forgiveness of "many offences," 18 but also imparting a new and higher life. The doctrinal tendency of this mode of representation is sufficiently obvious; and it is quite certain that our author himself was not unconscious of it. Under verse 15 he tells us, in a note, that the apostle's "whole representation here given can be employed in favor of the restoration. For, since Adam's sin became actual to all, its power would appear greater than the power of Christ, if the wicked were able to resist the latter, while the former affected all. But that, he adds, would lead to irresistible grace, which the apostle does not teach." We shall not here stop to inquire how our author avoids the doctrine of irresistible grace,—a doctrine that, in the system of Augustine, seems quite indispensable; but we may be permitted to ask how this obnoxious doctrine is more necessary on the supposition of a universal than of a partial salvation. If one soul can be so influenced by the grace of God as freely to accept of Christ's salvation, why may not another, and all, without any infringement of their moral freedom? Besides, it is worthy of remark, that the apostle's language was not designed to express the peculiar mode by which this influence was to operate; he rather intended merely to state facts, and contrast those of an 18 Rom. v. 16. opposite character. The universality of sin he asserted as a well-known and demonstrable fact, and assigned for the cause of its existence the sin of Adam. So, also, on the other hand, he asserted the universality of salvation as a fact existing in the domain of revealed truth, and to be realized under the gospel; and this fact he predicated on the righteousness of Christ. It is absurd to understand the apostle as contrasting facts with fictions, realities with mere suppositions. If it is a fact that, "by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation," it is equally a fact that, "by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life." This conclusion seems the more obvious from our author's own concessions. He acknowledges, in a note under verse 18, that of mollo [the many] is equivalent to TάVTES [all.] Now the apostle expressly asserts that as by one man's disobedience the many, i. e. all, were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall the many, i. e. all, be made righteous. Dr. Olshausen seems fully aware of the consequences, and tells us very cautiously that in order to avoid the doctrine of universal restoration, one must assert that the apostle is here speaking of the divine purpose in the work of salvation, and not of its results. Our author does not say, however, that he adopts this rather questionable expedient himself, but assures us that this is the only mode by which the Universalism of the passage can be shunned. In this we think him quite right; but we doubt whether any man who will examine the passage, can feel satisfied with such a mode of exposition. In what the apostle teaches of the final deliverance of the creature, or creation, from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God,19 Dr. Olshausen apparently recognizes a doctrine which, for extensiveness, far transcends Universalism itself, as commonly understood and preached among us. The great question that arises in considering the passage relates to the sense in which kilos, creature or creation, here several times used, shall be taken. Among the commentators, 19 Rom. viii. 18-23. |