What do you think?
Rate this book
A Debate on the Doctrines of Atonement, Universal Salvation, and Endless Punishment: Held in Genoa, Cayuga, Co., N. Y., From December 28th, 1847, to January 5th, 1848
Excerpt from A Debate on the Doctrines of Atonement, Universal Salvation, and Endless Held in Genoa, Cayuga, Co., N. Y., From December 28th, 1847, to January 5th, 1848
Before entering upon a direct examination of the question before us, I wish to offer a remark or two, of an introductory character. The proposition now to be discussed, is not one of my own selec tion. Lam frank to acknowledge r objected to it. When proposed.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Before entering upon a direct examination of the question before us, I wish to offer a remark or two, of an introductory character. The proposition now to be discussed, is not one of my own selec tion. Lam frank to acknowledge r objected to it. When proposed.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
818 pages, Hardcover
Published April 19, 2018
About the author
David Holmes
182 books11 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one entry in the Goodreads catalog with this name. This entry is for David ^ Holmes.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
July 5, 2024
A UNIVERSALIST AND AN EVANGELICAL DEBATE UNIVERSALISM/ENDLESS PUNISHMENT
For eight days (from December 28, 1847 to January 5, 1848) John M. Austin (Pastor of the Universalist Society of Auburn) and David Holmes (Presiding Elder of Cayuga District, Oneida Conference) met to debate the questions, “Does Gospel Salvation Embrace Deliverance from Just and Deserved Punishment?”; “Is there Sufficient Evidence for Believing that All Men Will be Finally Holy and Happy?”; and “Is there Sufficient Evidence for Believing that any Part of the Human Family will Suffer Endless Misery in a Future State?” Here are some excerpts from the exchange:
DH: The difference between Universalism and the Bible, is … Universalism makes justification the result of being punished all our sins deserve; the Bible makes it depend on our faith in Jesus Christ. (Pg. 31) the Bible nowhere speaks of salvation from punishment. The question is not whether the sinner is ever punished in this life or in a future life, not in regard to the duration of punishment; but whether there is any way for him to escape from the punishment he deserves on account of sin. (Pg. 32)
JA: Has he duly considered the moral tendency of quoting SCRIPTURE to prove to the young as well as old, that they may sin with impunity, to their hearts’ content, and escape all punishment whatever? What more do the inexperienced need as an inducement to sin? (Pg. 44) My brother opposite, maintains … that a man can do wickedly for forty years---a whole lifetime---and yet escape all punishment by repentance just before death. According to his doctrine, If I had the power, I might slay this entire congregation, run rioting in blood through the community, spreading devastation on every hand, killing men, women, and children---and at last be screened from every item of punishment, by becoming converted a day before I passed to another world! (Pg. 48)
DH: The deliberate calculation which he supposed he might make before hand in regard to repentance and escape from punishment, would itself operate a forfeiture of the grace of repentance and salvation. No man who forms a plan in his own mind to go and commit a crime, to which his depravity would lead him, on supposition that he will be able afterwards to repent, and obtain divine pardon, will be able to carry out his plan: he may commit the crime, but the very fact that he had calculated upon this way of escape beforehand, would deprive him of the power of repentance when he most wished to call it to his aid. The power of repentance, and grant of pardon under such circumstances would, and must be withheld. (Pg. 66)
JA: according to his logic, God desires them to be perfectly holy and happy IN THIS LIFE. But his desire in this respect is not accomplished---they are neither perfectly holy and happy here---hence his desire that they shall become perfectly holy and happy hereafter, cannot be accomplished---and my friend and all his evangelicals must be lost forever! …this species of logic … overlooks the fact that God’s desire in respect to man’s ultimate condition, does not imply that he desires the same for him now in the INCIPIENT stages of his being… (Pg. 138)
DH: it is not true that God OCCASIONS the misery of sinful men; they cause their own misery by assuming such an attitude to the law and government of God, as to make their own unhappiness a NATURAL and NECESSARY consequence; and continuing their attitude of hostility and rebellion in utter rejection of the terms of reconciliation, THEY ALONE are responsible for the consequence to themselves, though it be endless perdition. (Pg. 191)
JA: If Deity foresaw that a being, or any number of beings, would, if ushered into existence, become doomed to endless blasphemy and woe, why PERSIST in creating them, without even allowing them the opportunity of CHOOSING whether they would be formed or not? There was no power ABOVE God, COMPELLING him to form his creatures for such a dreadful fate!... If human beings cannot be created under such circumstances that their everlasting happiness can be secured, if it is clearly foreseen that their existence must terminate in endless night, and wickedness, and agony---then allow them to remain in the unconscious and harmless sleep of non-entity! Surely they can injure none there---they cannot infringe on the happiness of God, nor mar the felicity of angels! (Pg. 201)
DH: Mr. Austin may ask, why not withhold existence from those who it is foreseen would be miserable, and give existence ONLY to such as would be happy. I answer, this would be to violate the principles of his own government, and contravene the divine impartiality: and besides this, by withholding existence from those who would be miserable, were they allowed to exist, existence must also be withheld from those who would be happy. (Pg. 209)
JA: Mr. Holmes denies he ever prayed that the wicked might go down to hell. But why not? If there is a place of endless torment, and it is JUST and RIGHT for the wicked to go there, as he professes to believe, why should he not PRAY for such an event to take place? … There is not a professing Christian in the world, having the slightest regard for his reputation, who would DARE to make such a prayer in public. Indeed there is no TRUE Christian who could have the slightest INCLINATION to put up such a prayer to the Throne of Infinite Love. (Pg. 376-377)
DH: Mr. Austin … [accuses] me of inconsistency, in preaching that a part of mankind will be lost, while I desire and believe all may be saved… While I maintain there is sufficient evidence for believing some will be lost, I also maintain and believe none need be lost---there is no NECESSITY imposed on any human being, to forfeit heaven and happiness; but, on the contrary, advantages are furnished them, with the direct view to secure their salvation; and the whole responsibility of the failure, where a failure occurs, rests on man. (Pg. 444)
JA: But if God will not coerce men one way, why should he another? If he will not COERCE men into heaven, why should he COERCE them into hell? If he will not coerce them to a state of endless holiness, why should he coerce them to a condition of endless sin? And be assured they will not enter such a state, unless they are compelled by the omnipotent power of Jehovah! (Pg. 455)
DH: I argued, that as many sinners continue corrupt and miserable during their WHOLE LIFE, we have strong reason to believe they would continue so, were their earthly existence protracted to a much greater length. More than this: were their earthly existence to be ETERNAL, instead of being removed from this to another state to spend their eternity, we have not only no proof to the contrary, but the argument from analogy---the facts connected with the history of the antediluvians… and the fact developed in the history of thousands coming under our own observation, go to establish the conclusion, that many would, in that case, continue sinful and miserable ad infinitum. (Pg. 469)
JA: My friend agreeing … with the Calvinists as to … their doctrine of total depravity… must be considered with them an advocate of INFANT DAMNATION! … Infants possess no means to avail themselves of ‘the benefits of the atonement of Christ’… What becomes of them, when taken from the fond embrace of loving parents, by death? They are BORN depraved, they DIE depraved. Assuredly, depraved beings cannot enter heaven. Moreover, the Elder contends there is no CHANGE after death… and has repeatedly challenged me to show the slightest evidence that anything can be done to secure salvation, after passing the portals of the grave. (Pg. 533)
DH: As to the moral condition of infants, it is clearly a Bible doctrine, that they are born in a state of JUSTIFICATION… It was on this broad and general ground of the atonement, that Christ when on earth, took infants in his arms and blessed them, saying, ‘suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.’ (Pg. 554-555)
JA: He acknowledges that infants are saved. If on growing to adult years, men become exposed to eternal misery, would it not be much better for all to die in infancy! And should not parents pray that their children may be removed by death before they cross the dangerous line, that exposes them to an evil so terrible? (Pg. 565-566)
DH: He argues that on my principles men may resist the will of God; but says he, if men may resist the will of God HERE, they may HEREAFTER… On his own principles, it would follow, as thousands refuse to be Christians here, they will have the same power hereafter, and may REFUSE to go into heaven. (Pg. 609)
JA: Many wicked men do comply with the conditions of the gospel. This shows sinners have the power, the privilege, of complying with the stipulated terms… The difference between sinners, in regard to complying with the conditions of salvation, is entirely one of TIME. Some repent in youth, others in middle life, others still, not until old age; and some not at all, in this world. What then? Does the Elder say they will never repent? Where is his proof? … In that [future] world they will come under higher and better influences---will feel the consciousness of sin, and behold the beauty of righteousness more sensibly; and at length, all will turn to the Redeemer, embrace his gospel, and enjoy its light and love! (Pg. 624)
DH: Nor do I believe that the heathen will all be lost. On the declaration of St. Peter, ‘in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him’ [Acts 10:35], do I predicate my belief of the salvation of all heathen who fear God and work righteousness, according to the light and knowledge they possess of their relations and obligations to God… it is perfectly clear to my mind, that when the final results of God’s government shall be known, it will be found that a great majority of mankind are saved… (Pg. 645-647)
JA: What was the principle on which the REWARDS and PUNISHMENTS mentioned in this parable [of the sheep and the goats; Matt 25], were administered? Elder Holmes has strenuously maintained… that it is a man’s … belief or disbelief of certain doctrines---that decides his everlasting destiny… it will be seen that … the belief of any particular doctrines, had not the slightest connection with the rewards and punishments to which the parable alludes. The king does not say to those on his right hand---‘Come ye blessed,’ etc. because ye believed in the Trinity, or the Atonement, or Endless Punishment… Nor does he say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart ye cursed,’ because ye rejected those doctrines and believed in Universal Salvation. It is plain that both rewards and punishments were administered solely on the ground of MORAL desert… If this parable is to take place in the future world, and decide the destinies of man, a very DIFFERENT DIVISION will be seen from that which our friends on the other side, are anticipating! (Pg. 759)
If you are looking for a concise, brief and to-the-point debate on Universalism vs. Endless Punishment, this is not it; to my mind, the eight days of debate could easily have been cut to less than half, without losing much (except repetition again and again of the same arguments). But there is still a great deal of fascinating material contained herein, and this debate will be of interest to those seriously studying the doctrines of Universalism, Conditional Immortality, and Hell.
For eight days (from December 28, 1847 to January 5, 1848) John M. Austin (Pastor of the Universalist Society of Auburn) and David Holmes (Presiding Elder of Cayuga District, Oneida Conference) met to debate the questions, “Does Gospel Salvation Embrace Deliverance from Just and Deserved Punishment?”; “Is there Sufficient Evidence for Believing that All Men Will be Finally Holy and Happy?”; and “Is there Sufficient Evidence for Believing that any Part of the Human Family will Suffer Endless Misery in a Future State?” Here are some excerpts from the exchange:
DH: The difference between Universalism and the Bible, is … Universalism makes justification the result of being punished all our sins deserve; the Bible makes it depend on our faith in Jesus Christ. (Pg. 31) the Bible nowhere speaks of salvation from punishment. The question is not whether the sinner is ever punished in this life or in a future life, not in regard to the duration of punishment; but whether there is any way for him to escape from the punishment he deserves on account of sin. (Pg. 32)
JA: Has he duly considered the moral tendency of quoting SCRIPTURE to prove to the young as well as old, that they may sin with impunity, to their hearts’ content, and escape all punishment whatever? What more do the inexperienced need as an inducement to sin? (Pg. 44) My brother opposite, maintains … that a man can do wickedly for forty years---a whole lifetime---and yet escape all punishment by repentance just before death. According to his doctrine, If I had the power, I might slay this entire congregation, run rioting in blood through the community, spreading devastation on every hand, killing men, women, and children---and at last be screened from every item of punishment, by becoming converted a day before I passed to another world! (Pg. 48)
DH: The deliberate calculation which he supposed he might make before hand in regard to repentance and escape from punishment, would itself operate a forfeiture of the grace of repentance and salvation. No man who forms a plan in his own mind to go and commit a crime, to which his depravity would lead him, on supposition that he will be able afterwards to repent, and obtain divine pardon, will be able to carry out his plan: he may commit the crime, but the very fact that he had calculated upon this way of escape beforehand, would deprive him of the power of repentance when he most wished to call it to his aid. The power of repentance, and grant of pardon under such circumstances would, and must be withheld. (Pg. 66)
JA: according to his logic, God desires them to be perfectly holy and happy IN THIS LIFE. But his desire in this respect is not accomplished---they are neither perfectly holy and happy here---hence his desire that they shall become perfectly holy and happy hereafter, cannot be accomplished---and my friend and all his evangelicals must be lost forever! …this species of logic … overlooks the fact that God’s desire in respect to man’s ultimate condition, does not imply that he desires the same for him now in the INCIPIENT stages of his being… (Pg. 138)
DH: it is not true that God OCCASIONS the misery of sinful men; they cause their own misery by assuming such an attitude to the law and government of God, as to make their own unhappiness a NATURAL and NECESSARY consequence; and continuing their attitude of hostility and rebellion in utter rejection of the terms of reconciliation, THEY ALONE are responsible for the consequence to themselves, though it be endless perdition. (Pg. 191)
JA: If Deity foresaw that a being, or any number of beings, would, if ushered into existence, become doomed to endless blasphemy and woe, why PERSIST in creating them, without even allowing them the opportunity of CHOOSING whether they would be formed or not? There was no power ABOVE God, COMPELLING him to form his creatures for such a dreadful fate!... If human beings cannot be created under such circumstances that their everlasting happiness can be secured, if it is clearly foreseen that their existence must terminate in endless night, and wickedness, and agony---then allow them to remain in the unconscious and harmless sleep of non-entity! Surely they can injure none there---they cannot infringe on the happiness of God, nor mar the felicity of angels! (Pg. 201)
DH: Mr. Austin may ask, why not withhold existence from those who it is foreseen would be miserable, and give existence ONLY to such as would be happy. I answer, this would be to violate the principles of his own government, and contravene the divine impartiality: and besides this, by withholding existence from those who would be miserable, were they allowed to exist, existence must also be withheld from those who would be happy. (Pg. 209)
JA: Mr. Holmes denies he ever prayed that the wicked might go down to hell. But why not? If there is a place of endless torment, and it is JUST and RIGHT for the wicked to go there, as he professes to believe, why should he not PRAY for such an event to take place? … There is not a professing Christian in the world, having the slightest regard for his reputation, who would DARE to make such a prayer in public. Indeed there is no TRUE Christian who could have the slightest INCLINATION to put up such a prayer to the Throne of Infinite Love. (Pg. 376-377)
DH: Mr. Austin … [accuses] me of inconsistency, in preaching that a part of mankind will be lost, while I desire and believe all may be saved… While I maintain there is sufficient evidence for believing some will be lost, I also maintain and believe none need be lost---there is no NECESSITY imposed on any human being, to forfeit heaven and happiness; but, on the contrary, advantages are furnished them, with the direct view to secure their salvation; and the whole responsibility of the failure, where a failure occurs, rests on man. (Pg. 444)
JA: But if God will not coerce men one way, why should he another? If he will not COERCE men into heaven, why should he COERCE them into hell? If he will not coerce them to a state of endless holiness, why should he coerce them to a condition of endless sin? And be assured they will not enter such a state, unless they are compelled by the omnipotent power of Jehovah! (Pg. 455)
DH: I argued, that as many sinners continue corrupt and miserable during their WHOLE LIFE, we have strong reason to believe they would continue so, were their earthly existence protracted to a much greater length. More than this: were their earthly existence to be ETERNAL, instead of being removed from this to another state to spend their eternity, we have not only no proof to the contrary, but the argument from analogy---the facts connected with the history of the antediluvians… and the fact developed in the history of thousands coming under our own observation, go to establish the conclusion, that many would, in that case, continue sinful and miserable ad infinitum. (Pg. 469)
JA: My friend agreeing … with the Calvinists as to … their doctrine of total depravity… must be considered with them an advocate of INFANT DAMNATION! … Infants possess no means to avail themselves of ‘the benefits of the atonement of Christ’… What becomes of them, when taken from the fond embrace of loving parents, by death? They are BORN depraved, they DIE depraved. Assuredly, depraved beings cannot enter heaven. Moreover, the Elder contends there is no CHANGE after death… and has repeatedly challenged me to show the slightest evidence that anything can be done to secure salvation, after passing the portals of the grave. (Pg. 533)
DH: As to the moral condition of infants, it is clearly a Bible doctrine, that they are born in a state of JUSTIFICATION… It was on this broad and general ground of the atonement, that Christ when on earth, took infants in his arms and blessed them, saying, ‘suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven.’ (Pg. 554-555)
JA: He acknowledges that infants are saved. If on growing to adult years, men become exposed to eternal misery, would it not be much better for all to die in infancy! And should not parents pray that their children may be removed by death before they cross the dangerous line, that exposes them to an evil so terrible? (Pg. 565-566)
DH: He argues that on my principles men may resist the will of God; but says he, if men may resist the will of God HERE, they may HEREAFTER… On his own principles, it would follow, as thousands refuse to be Christians here, they will have the same power hereafter, and may REFUSE to go into heaven. (Pg. 609)
JA: Many wicked men do comply with the conditions of the gospel. This shows sinners have the power, the privilege, of complying with the stipulated terms… The difference between sinners, in regard to complying with the conditions of salvation, is entirely one of TIME. Some repent in youth, others in middle life, others still, not until old age; and some not at all, in this world. What then? Does the Elder say they will never repent? Where is his proof? … In that [future] world they will come under higher and better influences---will feel the consciousness of sin, and behold the beauty of righteousness more sensibly; and at length, all will turn to the Redeemer, embrace his gospel, and enjoy its light and love! (Pg. 624)
DH: Nor do I believe that the heathen will all be lost. On the declaration of St. Peter, ‘in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him’ [Acts 10:35], do I predicate my belief of the salvation of all heathen who fear God and work righteousness, according to the light and knowledge they possess of their relations and obligations to God… it is perfectly clear to my mind, that when the final results of God’s government shall be known, it will be found that a great majority of mankind are saved… (Pg. 645-647)
JA: What was the principle on which the REWARDS and PUNISHMENTS mentioned in this parable [of the sheep and the goats; Matt 25], were administered? Elder Holmes has strenuously maintained… that it is a man’s … belief or disbelief of certain doctrines---that decides his everlasting destiny… it will be seen that … the belief of any particular doctrines, had not the slightest connection with the rewards and punishments to which the parable alludes. The king does not say to those on his right hand---‘Come ye blessed,’ etc. because ye believed in the Trinity, or the Atonement, or Endless Punishment… Nor does he say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart ye cursed,’ because ye rejected those doctrines and believed in Universal Salvation. It is plain that both rewards and punishments were administered solely on the ground of MORAL desert… If this parable is to take place in the future world, and decide the destinies of man, a very DIFFERENT DIVISION will be seen from that which our friends on the other side, are anticipating! (Pg. 759)
If you are looking for a concise, brief and to-the-point debate on Universalism vs. Endless Punishment, this is not it; to my mind, the eight days of debate could easily have been cut to less than half, without losing much (except repetition again and again of the same arguments). But there is still a great deal of fascinating material contained herein, and this debate will be of interest to those seriously studying the doctrines of Universalism, Conditional Immortality, and Hell.
Displaying 1 of 1 review