CHAPTER SEVENTEEN: White—Creates New Epoch of Understanding

I. Mid-century Begins Attainment of New Stature and Standing

We have seen how, with the stalwart declarations of such acknowledged scholars as Archbishop Whately and his A View of the Scripture Revelation concerning a Future State, the first half of the nineteenth century witnessed a testimony to Conditionalism that carried increasing weight. Whately’s popularity as a scholar and his high position as an ecclesiastic secured attention and wide circulation for his works and made many converts to his Conditionalist faith. But this was soon followed by a succession of other books from various ministers in England advocating similar views. It was a further period of seed sowing that was soon to bear much fruit.CFF2 316.1

However, it remained for the latter half of the century to witness a new awakening on the various questions involved in Christian eschatology, as well as to see much of the long-standing prejudice removed and a host of advocates rise up whose testimony and influence largely lifted the question of Conditionalism out of the assigned category of “heresy.” This awakening gave to Conditionalism a recognized place in Christian doctrine, as well as opening the doors for widespread investigation and open candid discussion.CFF2 316.2

1. CREDIT MUST BE GIVEN TO EDWARD WHITE

The beginning of this accelerated movement must unquestionably be dated from the issuance of Congregationalist Dr. Edward White’s Life in Christ, first appearing in 1846. White’s steadfast and consistent advocacy of the great positive truth he championed, in both oral and written form, forced a respectful hearing and succeeded in attracting advocates of influence. Thus was brought about a new epoch in Conditionalism.CFF2 316.3

2. PULPITEERS AND SCHOLARS GIVE MOMENTUM

In addition to Dr. White, of England, stalwarts like Prof. Charles Hudson, of America; Dr. Emmanuel Petavel, of Switzerland; and Prof. Richard Rothe, of Germany, together with scores of others of prominence, erelong gave Conditionalism a theological standing and secured for it an ever-widening acceptance heretofore denied. Although they differed on details, they were completely united in the fundamental principle that man is not immortal by virtue of his original constitution, but is made immortal by a special act, or gift, of grace, bestowed by Christ at the resurrection. They all held that the notion of inherent immortality came not from inspired revelation but was borrowed from Greek philosophy, and had prevented understanding of the full glory of Christ as the Life-giver, and the soundness and winsomeness of the Conditionalist faith.CFF2 317.1

Long confined to the thinker’s study, Conditionalism now became a subject of popular discussion, expounded not only in literally hundreds of books and pamphlets but in a number of journals likewise devoted to the advocacy of Conditional Immortality. Moreover, the concurrence of a number of eloquent pulpit apologists Dale, Minton-Senhouse, Constable, Row, Heard, Hobson, Warleigh, Tinling, and others, and renowned scholars like Hebrew specialist Dr. Perowne, Greek masters Drs. Weymouth and Mortimer, scientific authorities like Sir George G. Stokes, president of the Royal Society (treated elsewhere), Prof. T. G. Bonney, ^{11) Prof. T. G. BONNEY, D.Sc., F.R.S. (d. 1923) geologist president of the Geological Society, and author of The Inpuence of Science on Theology (Hulsean Lecture, 1884, on pages 50-54, refused to rest man s hope of immortality on “the law of his being.” After discussing the ancient Egyptian belief and that of the Hebrew nation, as well as the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, Bonney gives his explanation of Scripture teaching—that human immortality is only to be had by impartation to the individual of a new and divine life, made possible by the redemption wrought by Christ.} president of the Geological Society, Professor Tait, secretary of the Royal Society of Edinburgh—all gave definite impetus at this time.CFF2 317.2

But before we turn to Dr. White let us note two men who greatly influenced him—John Foster and Henry H. Dobney.CFF2 318.1