diff options
| author | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-06 23:35:33 -0800 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | nfenwick <nfenwick@pglaf.org> | 2025-02-06 23:35:33 -0800 |
| commit | ef59bdd22e238e0320f866f1126b34c4cf05b21b (patch) | |
| tree | 1ab218d174713a67609aedf9109a4328dc18ec37 | |
| parent | e998c7723a618048aae2a5f415d07ff3d3da533c (diff) | |
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 4 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/54373-0.txt | 10296 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/54373-0.zip | bin | 204798 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/54373-h.zip | bin | 476939 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/54373-h/54373-h.htm | 15610 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/54373-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 195172 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/54373-h/images/i_0344.jpg | bin | 4217 -> 0 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/54373-h/images/i_title.jpg | bin | 58844 -> 0 bytes |
10 files changed, 17 insertions, 25906 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7b82bc --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ +*.txt text eol=lf +*.htm text eol=lf +*.html text eol=lf +*.md text eol=lf diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4a6211a --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #54373 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/54373) diff --git a/old/54373-0.txt b/old/54373-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 167a9f1..0000000 --- a/old/54373-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,10296 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg EBook of The state of the dead and the destiny of -the wicked, by Uriah Smith - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: The state of the dead and the destiny of the wicked - -Author: Uriah Smith - -Release Date: March 22, 2017 [EBook #54373] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE STATE OF THE DEAD *** - - - - -Produced by KD Weeks, MFR, Bryan Ness and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note: - -This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical effects. -Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_. - -Footnotes have been moved to follow the paragraphs in which they are -referenced. - -Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please -see the transcriber’s note at the end of this text for details regarding -the handling of any textual issues encountered during its preparation. - - THE - STATE OF THE DEAD - AND THE - DESTINY OF THE WICKED. - - ---------- - - BY URIAH SMITH. - - ---------- - - - - - ---------- - - - - - STEAM PRESS - OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION, - BATTLE CREEK, MICH.: - - --- - - 1873. - - PREFACE. - - ---------- - - -Questions of such absorbing interest to the human race as “The State of -the Dead,” and “The Destiny of the Wicked,” should command the candid -attention of all serious and thoughtful men. The Bible alone can answer -the inquiries of the human mind on these important subjects; and if the -Bible is the full and complete revelation which it claims to be, we must -believe that it has answered them. What that answer is, the following -pages undertake to show. - -On the questions here discussed there is at the present time a -daily-increasing agitation in the theological world. The frequency with -which these topics come to the surface in the religious papers of the -land, is evidence of this. Not only in this country, but in England and -Germany, the views of Bible students on these points are in a state of -transition. The doctrine that there is no eternal life out of Christ, -and that consequently the punishment of the wicked is not to be eternal -misery, is now able to present an array of adherents so strong in -numbers, so cultivated in intellect, and so correct at heart, that many -of its opponents are changing their base of operations toward it, and -taking steps looking not only to a toleration of its existence, but to a -compromise with its claims. - -In adding another book to the many which have been written on this -subject, the object has been to give in a concise manner a more general -view of the teaching of the word of God, the ultimate source of -authority, on this question, than has heretofore been presented. A -chapter on the Claims of Philosophy is appended to the Biblical -argument, more to answer the queries of those who attach importance to -such considerations, than because they are entitled to any real weight -in the determination of this controversy. - -The interest that has of late years arisen on the subject of the state -of the dead, is timely. Spiritualism, with its foul embrace and -pestilential breath, is seeking to spread its pollutions over all the -land; and it appeals to the popular views of the condition of man in -death as a foundation for its claims. The teaching of the Bible on this -point is the most effectual antidote to that unhallowed delusion. Before -the true light on the intermediate state, and the destiny of the wicked, -not only spiritualism with its foul brood flees away, but purgatory, -saint worship, universalism, and a host of other errors all go down. - -In this period of agitation and transition, let no man blindly commit -himself to predetermined views, but hold himself ready to follow truth -always and everywhere. Let him hold his sympathies entirely at its -disposal. This is the course of safety; for truth has angels, Christ and -God upon its side; and though it had but one adherent on the earth, it -would triumph all the same. So while truth can receive no detriment from -the combined opposition of all the world, its adherents, few in number -though they may be, will secure in the end an everlasting gain. - - U. S. - -BATTLE CREEK, _May 2, 1873_. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - MAN’S NATURE AND DESTINY. - - -------------- - - - - - CHAPTER I. - PRIMARY QUESTIONS. - - -Gradually the mind awakes to the mystery of life. Excepting only the -first pair, every adult member of the human race has come up through the -helplessness of infancy and the limited acquirements of childhood. All -have reached their full capacity to think and do, only by the slow -development of their mental and physical powers. Without either counsel -or co-operation of our own, we find ourselves on the plane of human -existence, subject to all the conditions of the race, and hastening -forward to its destiny, whatever it may be. - -A retinue of mysterious inquiries throng our steps. Whence came this -order of things? Who ordained this arrangement? For what purpose are we -here? What is our nature? What are our obligations? And whither are we -bound? Life, what a mystery! Having commenced, will it ever end? Once we -did not exist; are we destined to that condition again? Death we see -everywhere around us. Its victims are silent, cold, and still. They give -no outward evidence of retaining any of those faculties, mental, -emotional, or physical, which distinguished them when living. Is death -the end of all these? And is death the extinction of the race? These are -questions which have ever excited in the human mind an intensity of -thought, and a strength of feeling, which no other subjects can produce. - -To these questions, so well-defined, so definite in their demands, and -of such all-absorbing interest, where shall we look for an answer? Have -we any means within our reach by which to solve these problems? We look -abroad upon the earth and admire its multiplied forms of life and -beauty; we mark the revolving seasons and the uniform and beneficent -operations of nature; we look to the heavenly bodies and behold their -glory, and the regularity of their mighty motions--do these answer our -questions? They tell us something, but not all. They tell us of the -great Creator and upholder of all things; for, as the apostle says, “The -invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, -being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and -Godhead.” They tell us upon whom our existence depends and to whom we -are amenable. - -But this only intensifies our anxiety a thousand fold. For now we want -to know upon what conditions his favor is suspended. What must we do to -meet his requirements? How may we secure his approbation? He surely is a -being who will reward virtue and punish sin. Sometime our deeds must be -compared with his requirements, and sentence be rendered in accordance -therewith. How will this affect our future existence? Deriving it from -him, does he suspend its continuance on our obedience? or has he made us -self-existent beings, so that we must live forever, if not in his favor, -then the conscious recipients of his wrath? - -With what intense anxiety the mind turns to the future. What is to be -the issue of this mysterious problem of life? Who can tell? Nature is -silent. We appeal to those who are entering the dark valley. But who can -reveal the mysteries of those hidden regions till he has explored them? -and the “curtain of the tent into which they enter, never outward -swings.” Sternly the grave closes its heavy portals against every -attempt to catch a glimpse of the unknown beyond. Science proves itself -a fool on this momentous question. The imagination breaks down; and the -human mind, unaided, sinks into a melancholy, but well-grounded, -despair. - -God must tell us, or we can never know what lies beyond this state of -existence, till we experience it for ourselves. He who has placed us -here, must himself make known to us his purposes and his will, or we are -forever in the dark. Of this, all reverent and thoughtful minds are well -assured. - -Professor Stuart, in his “Exegetical Essays on Several Words Relating to -Future Punishment,” says:-- - -“The light of nature can never scatter the darkness in question. This -light has never yet sufficed to make the question clear to any portion -of our benighted race, whether the soul is immortal. Cicero, -incomparably the most able defender of the soul’s immortality of which -the heathen world can yet boast, very ingenuously confesses that, after -all the arguments which he had adduced in order to confirm the doctrine -in question, it so fell out that his mind was satisfied of it only when -directly employed in contemplating the arguments adduced in its favor. -At all other times he fell unconsciously into a state of doubt and -darkness. It is notorious, also, that Socrates, the next most able -advocate, among the heathen, of the same doctrine, has adduced arguments -to establish the never-ceasing existence of the soul which will not bear -the test of examination. If there be any satisfactory light, then, on -the momentous question of a future state, it must be sought from the -word of God.” - -H. H. Dobney, Baptist minister, of England (Future Punishment, p. 107), -says:-- - -“Reason cannot prove man to be immortal. We may devoutly enter the -temple of nature, we may reverently tread her emerald floor, and gaze on -her blue, ‘star-pictured ceiling,’ but to our anxious inquiry, though -proposed with heart-breaking intensity, the oracle is dumb, or like -those of Delphi and Dodona, mutters only an ambitious reply that leaves -us in utter bewilderment.” - -And what information have they been able to give us, who have either -been ignorant of divine revelation, or, having the light, have turned -their backs upon it? Listen to a little of what they have told us, which -sufficiently indicates the character of the knowledge they possessed. - -Socrates, when about to drink the fatal hemlock, said:-- - -“I am going out of the world, and you are to continue in it; but which -of us has the better part, is a secret to every one but God.” - -Cicero, after recounting the various opinions of philosophers on this -subject, levels all their systems to the ground by this ingenuous -confession:-- - -“Which of these is true, God alone knows, and which is the most -probable, is a very great question.” - -Seneca, reviewing the arguments of the ancients on this subject, said:-- - -“Immortality, however desirable, was rather promised than proved by -these great men.” - -And the skeptic Hobbs, when death was forcing him from this state of -existence, could only exclaim, with dread uncertainty, “I am taking a -leap in the dark!”--dying words not calculated to inspire any great -degree of comfort and assurance in the hearts of those who are inclined -to follow in his steps. - -With a full sense of our need, we turn, then, to the revelation which -God has given us in his word. Will this answer our inquiries? It is not -a revelation if it does not; for this must be the very object of a -revelation. Logicians tell us that there is “an antecedent probability -in favor of a divine revelation, arising from the nature of the Deity -and the moral condition of man.” On the same ground, there must be an -equal probability that, if we are immortal, never-dying beings, that -revelation will plainly tell us so. - -To the Bible alone, we look for correct views on the important subjects -of the character of God, the nature of life and death, the resurrection, -Heaven, and hell. But our views upon all these, must be, to a great -extent, governed by our views of the nature and destiny of man. On this -subject, therefore, the teachings of the Bible must, of consistency, be -sufficiently clear and full. - -Prominent upon the pages of inspiration, we see pointed out the great -distinction which God has put between right and wrong, the rewards he -has promised to virtue, and the punishment he has threatened against -sin; we find it revealed that but few, comparatively, will be saved, -while the great majority of our race will be lost; and as the means by -which the perdition of ungodly men is accomplished, we find described in -fearfully ominous terms, a lake of fire burning with brimstone, intense -and unquenchable. - -How these facts intensify the importance of the question, Are all men -immortal? Are these wicked immortal? Is their portion an eternity of -incomprehensible, conscious torture, and unutterable woe? Have they in -their nature a principle so tenacious of life that the severest -implements of destruction with which the Almighty can assail it, an -eternity of his intensest devouring fire can make no inroads upon its -inviolate vitality? Fearful questions!--questions in reference to which -it cannot be that the word of God will leave us in darkness, or perplex -us with doubt, or deceive us with falsehood. - -In commending the reader to the word of God on this great theme, it is -unnecessary to suggest to any candid mind the spirit in which we should -present our inquiries. Prejudice or passion should not come within the -sacred precincts of such an investigation. If God has plainly revealed -that all the finally impenitent of our race are doomed to an eternity of -conscious misery, we must accept that fact, however hard it may be to -find any correspondence between the magnitude of the guilt and the -infinitude of the punishment, and however hard it may be to reconcile -such treatment with the character of a God who has declared himself to -be “LOVE.” If, on the other hand, the record shows that God’s government -can be vindicated, sin meet its just deserts, and at the same time such -disposition be finally made of the lost, as to relieve the universe from -the horrid spectacle of a hell forever burning, filled with sensitive -beings, frenzied with fire and flame, and blaspheming in their -ever-strengthening agony--can any one be the less ready to accept this -fact, or hesitate, on this account, to join in the ascription, “Great -and marvelous are thy works, Lord God Almighty; _just and true_ are thy -ways, thou King of saints”? - - - - - CHAPTER II. - IMMORTAL AND IMMORTALITY. - - -In turning to the Bible, our only source of information on this -question, to learn whether or not man is immortal, the first and most -natural step in the inquiry is to ascertain what use the Bible makes of -the terms “immortal” and “immortality.” How frequently does it use them? -To whom does it apply them? Of whom does it make immortality an -attribute? Does it affirm it of man or any part of him? - -Should we, without opening the Bible, endeavor to form an opinion of its -teachings from the current phraseology of modern theology, we should -conclude it to be full of declarations in the most explicit terms that -man is in possession of an immortal soul and deathless spirit; for the -popular religious literature of to-day, which claims to be a true -reflection of the declarations of God’s word, is full of these -expressions. Glibly they fall from the lips of the religious teacher. -Broadcast they go forth from the religious press. Into orthodox sermons -and prayers they enter as essential elements. They are appealed to as -the all-prolific source of comfort and consolation in case of those who -mourn the loss of friends by death. We are told that they are not dead; -for “there is no death; what seems so is transition;” they have only -changed to another state of being, only gone before; for the soul is -immortal, the spirit never dying; and it cannot for a moment cease its -conscious existence. - -This is all right provided the Bible warrants such declarations. But it -is far from safe to conclude without examination that the Bible does -warrant them; for whoever has read church history knows that it is -little more than a record of the unceasing attempts of the great enemy -of all truth to corrupt the practices of the professors of Christianity, -and to pervert and obscure the simple teachings of God’s word with the -absurdities and mysticisms of heathen mythology. It has been only by the -utmost vigilance that any Christian institution has been preserved, or -any Christian doctrine saved, free from some of the corruptions of the -great systems of false religion which have always held by far the -greater portion of our race in their chains of darkness and -superstition. And if we arraign the creeds of the six hundred Protestant -sects, as containing many unscriptural dogmas, it is only what every one -of them does, in reference to the other five hundred and ninety-nine. - -To the law, then, and to the testimony. What say the Scriptures on the -subject of immortality? - -FACT 1. The terms “immortal” and “immortality” are not found in the Old -Testament, either in our English version or in the original Hebrew. -There is, however, one expression, in Gen. 3:4, which is, perhaps, -equivalent in meaning, and was spoken in reference to the human race; -namely, “Thou shalt not surely die.” But unfortunately for believers in -natural immortality, this declaration came from one whom no person would -like to acknowledge as the author of his creed. It is what the devil -said to Eve, the terrible deception by means of which he accomplished -her fall, and so “brought death into the world and all our woe.” But -does not the New Testament supply this seemingly unpardonable omission -of the Old, by many times affirming that all men have immortality? - -Remembering the many times you have heard and read from Biblical -expositors that you were in possession of an immortal soul, how many -times do you think that declaration is made in the New Testament? One -hundred times? Fifty? Thirty? Twenty? Ten? No. Five? No. Twice? _No._ -ONCE? NO! Does not the New Testament then apply the term immortal to -anything? Yes; and this brings us to - -FACT 2. The term immortal is used but once in the New Testament, in the -English version, and is then applied to God. The following is the -passage: 1 Tim. 1:17: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, -the only wise God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.” - -The original word, however, αφθαρτος (_aphthartos_) from which immortal -is here translated, occurs in six other instances in the New Testament, -in every one of which it is rendered incorruptible. The word is defined -by Greenfield, “Incorruptible, immortal, imperishable, undying, -enduring.” - -It is used, first, to describe God, in Rom. 1:23, “And changed the glory -of the _uncorruptible_ God into an image made like to corruptible man, -and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.” - -It is used in 1 Cor. 9:25, to describe the heavenly crown of the -overcomer: “And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in -all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown, but we an -_incorruptible_.” - -It is used in 1 Cor. 15:52, to describe the immortal bodies of the -redeemed: “In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; -for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised -_incorruptible_, and we shall be changed.” - -It is used in 1 Tim. 1:17, to describe God as already quoted. - -It is used in 1 Pet. 1:4, to describe the inheritance reserved in Heaven -for the overcomer: “To an inheritance _incorruptible_ and undefiled, -that fadeth not away, reserved in Heaven for you.” - -It is used in 1 Pet. 1:23, to describe the principle by which -regeneration is wrought in us: “Being born again, not of corruptible -seed, but of _incorruptible_, by the word of God, which liveth and -abideth forever.” - -It is used in 1 Pet. 3:4, to describe the heavenly adorning which we are -to labor to secure: “But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that -which is _not corruptible_, even the ornament of a meek and quiet -spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.” - -And these are all the instances of its use. In no one of them is it -applied to man or any part of him, as a natural possession. But does not -the last text affirm that man is in possession of a deathless spirit? -The words “incorruptible” and “spirit” both occur, it is true, in the -same verse; but they do not stand together, another noun and its -adjectives coming in between them; they are not in the same case, -incorruptible being in the dative, and spirit, in the genitive; they are -not of the same gender, incorruptible being masculine or feminine, and -spirit, neuter. What is it which is in the sight of God of great price? -The ornament of a meek and quiet spirit. What is the nature of this -ornament? It is not destructible like the laurel wreath, the rich -apparel, the gold and gems with which the unsanctified man seeks to -adorn himself; but it is incorruptible, a disposition molded by the -Spirit of God, some of the fruit of that heavenly tree which God values. -Does man by nature possess this incorruptible ornament, this meek and -quiet spirit? No; for we are exhorted to procure and adopt this instead -of the other. This, and this only, the text affirms. To say that this -text proves that man is in possession of a deathless spirit, is no more -consistent nor logical than it would be to say that Paul declares that -man has an immortal soul, because in his first epistle to Timothy -(1:17), he uses the word immortal, and in his first epistle to the -Thessalonians (5:23), he uses the word soul. The argument would be the -same in both cases. - -FACT 3. The word “immortality” occurs but five times in the New -Testament, in our English version. The following are the instances:-- - -In Rom. 2:7, it is set forth as something for which we are to seek by -patient continuance in well-doing: “To them who by patient continuance -in well-doing seek for glory and honor and _immortality_, [God will -render] eternal life.” - -In 1 Cor. 15:53, 54, it is twice used to describe what this mortal must -put on before we can inherit the kingdom of God: “For this corruptible -must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on _immortality_. So -when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal -shall have put on _immortality_, then shall be brought to pass the -saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.” - -In 1 Tim. 6:16, it is applied to God, and the sweeping declaration is -made that he alone has it: “Who only hath _immortality_, dwelling in the -light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can -see: to whom be honor and power everlasting. Amen.” - -In 2 Tim. 1:10, we are told from what source we receive the true light -concerning it, which forever cuts off the claim that reason or science -can demonstrate it, or that the oracles of heathenism can make it known -to us: “But now is made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus -Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and -_immortality_ to light through the gospel.” - -How has Christ brought life and immortality to light? Answer: By -abolishing death. There could have been no life nor immortality without -this; for the race were hopelessly doomed to death through sin. Then by -what means and for whom has he abolished death? Answer: By dying for man -and rising again, a victor over death; and he has wrought this work only -for those who will accept of it through him; for all who reject his -proffered aid will meet at last the same fate that would have been the -lot of all, had Christ never undertaken in our behalf. Thus through the -gospel, the good news of salvation through him, he has brought to light -the fact, not that all men are by nature already in possession of -immortality, but that a way is opened whereby we may at last gain -possession of this inestimable boon. - -As with the word immortal, so with immortality: the original from which -it comes, occurs a few more times than it is so translated in the -English version. There are two words translated immortality. These are -ἀθανασία (_athanasia_) and ἀφθαρσία (_aphtharsia_). The former is -defined by Greenfield and Robinson simply “immortality,” and is so -translated in every instance. It occurs three times, in 1 Cor. 15:53, -54; 1 Tim. 6:16, as noticed above. The latter is defined, by the same -authorities, “incorruptibility, incorruptness; by implication, -immortality.” In addition to the instances above cited, it occurs in the -following passages; in all eight times:-- - -1 Cor. 15:42: “So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in -corruption; it is raised in _incorruption_.” In verses 50, 53 and 54, of -the same chapter, it is that _incorruption_ which corruption [our -present mortal condition] does not inherit, and which this corruptible -must put on before we can enter into the kingdom of God. In Eph. 6:24, -it is used to describe the love we should bear to Christ, and in Titus -2:7, the quality of the doctrine we should hold, in both which instances -it is translated “sincerity.” - -We now have before us all the testimony of the Bible relative to -immortality. So far from being applied to man, the term is used as in -Rom. 1:23, to point out the contrast between God and man. God is -incorruptible or immortal. Man is corruptible or mortal. But if the real -man, the essential being, consists of an undecaying soul, a deathless -spirit, he, too, is incorruptible, and this contrast could not be drawn. -It is placed before us as an object of hope for which we are to seek: -declarations which would be a fraud and deception if we already have it. -It is used to distinguish between heavenly and eternal objects, and -those that are earthly and decaying. In view of these facts, no candid -mind can dissent from the following - -CONCLUSION: So far as its use of the terms “immortal” and “immortality” -is concerned, the Bible contains no proof that man is in possession of -an undying nature. - - - - - CHAPTER III. - THE IMAGE OF GOD. - - -If man is immortal, we should naturally suppose that the Bible would -make known so weighty a truth in some of the instances where it has had -occasion to use the words immortal and immortality. Where else could it -more properly be revealed? And the fact that its use of those terms -affords no proof that man is in possession of this great attribute, but -rather that it belongs to God alone, should cause a person to receive -with great allowance the positive assertions of popular theology on this -question. Nevertheless it is supposed that there are other sources from -which proof can be drawn that man has a hold on life equal with that of -Jehovah himself; so that he will live as long as God exists. - -The first of these is the opening testimony of the Bible concerning man, -which asserts that he was to be made in the image of God. Gen. 1:26, 27: -“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let -them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the -air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every -creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his -own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created -he them.” - -The first impulse of a person unacquainted with this controversy would -be to ask in astonishment what this has to do with the immortality of -man; nor would his astonishment be in any wise diminished when he heard -the reply that as God is immortal, man, made in his image, must be -immortal also. Has God, then, no other attribute but immortality, that -we must confine it to this? Is not God omnipotent? Yes. Is man? No. Is -not God omnipresent? Yes. Is man? No. Is not God omniscient? Yes. Is -man? No. Is not God independent and self-existent? Yes. Is man? No. Is -not God infallible? Yes. Is man? No. Then why single out the one -attribute of immortality, and make the likeness of man to God consist -wholly in this? In the form of a syllogism the popular argument stands -thus:-- - -_Major Premise_: God is immortal. 1 Tim. 1:17. - -_Minor Premise_: Man is created in the image of God. Gen. 1:27. - -_Conclusion_: Therefore man is immortal. - -This is easily quashed by another equally good, thus:-- - -1. God is omnipotent. - -2. Man is made in the image of God. - -3. Therefore man is omnipotent. - -This conclusion, by being brought within the cognizance of our senses, -becomes more obviously, though it is not more essentially, absurd. It -shows either that the argument for immortality drawn from the image of -God, is unqualified assumption, or that puny and finite man is clothed -with all the attributes of the deity. - -In what respect, then, is man in the image of his Maker? A universal -rule of interpretation, applying to Bible language as well as any other, -is to allow every word its most obvious and literal import, unless some -plain reason exists for giving it a mystical or figurative meaning. The -plain and literal definition of image is, as given by Webster, “An -imitation, representation or similitude of any person or thing, -sculptured, drawn, painted, or otherwise made _perceptible to the -sight_; a _visible_ presentation; a copy; a likeness; an effigy.” We -have italicized a portion of this definition as containing an essential -idea. An image must be something that is visible to the eye. How can we -conceive of an image of anything that is not perceptible to the sight, -and which we cannot take cognizance of by any of the senses? Even an -image formed in the mind must be conceived of as having some sort of -outward shape or form. In this sense, of having outward form, the word -is used in each of the thirty-one times of its occurrence elsewhere in -the Old Testament. - -The second time the word image is used, it is used to show the relation -existing between son and father, and is a good comment on the relation -which Gen. 1:26, 27, asserts to exist between man and God. Gen. 5:3: -“And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years and begat a son in his own -likeness, after his image.” No one would think of referring this to -anything but physical resemblance. Now put the two passages together. -Moses first asserts that God made man in his own image, after his -likeness, and a few chapters farther on asserts that this same man begat -a son in his own likeness, after his image. And, while all must admit -that this latter refers to bodily form or physical shape, the -theological schools tell us that the former, from the same writer, and -with no intimation that it is used in any other sense, must refer solely -to the attribute of immortality. Is not this taking unwarrantable -liberty with the inspired testimony? There is no room for any other -conclusion than that just as a son is, in outward appearance, the image -of his father, so man possesses, not the nature and attributes of God in -all their perfection, but a likeness or image of him in his physical -form. - -It may be said that the word image is used in a different sense in the -New Testament, as, for example, in Col. 3:9, 10: “Lie not one to -another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds, and -have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image -of him that created him.” Let it ever be borne in mind that the point -which popular theology has to prove is that man is immortal because in -the image of God. This text is against that view; for that which is here -said to be in the image of Him that created him, is not the natural man -himself, but the new man which is put on, implying that the image had -been destroyed, and could be restored only in Christ. If, therefore, it -meant immortality as used by Moses, this text would show that that -immortality was not absolute, but contingent, and, having been lost by -the race, can be regained only through Christ. - -Eph. 4:24, shows how this new man is created: “And that ye put on the -new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.” -Nothing is said about immortality even in connection with the new man. - -Again: The word here translated image (ἐικων) is defined by Greenfield, -as meaning by metonymy, “an exemplar, model, pattern, standard, Col. -3:10.” No such definition as this is given by Gesenius to the word in -Genesis. So, though this Greek word may here have this sense, it affords -no evidence that the Hebrew word in Gen. 1:26, 27, can refer to anything -else but the outward form. - -The same reasoning will apply to 1 Cor. 15:49, where the “image of the -heavenly,” which is promised to the righteous, is something which is not -in possession of the natural man, but will be attained through the -resurrection: “we _shall_ bear the image of the heavenly.” It cannot -therefore refer to the image stamped upon man at his creation, unless it -be admitted that that image, with all its included privileges, has been -lost by the human race--an admission fatal to the hypothesis of the -believers in the natural immortality of man. - -In 1 Cor. 11:7, we read that man, as contrasted with the woman, is “the -image and glory of God.” To make the expression “image of God” here mean -immortality, is to confine it to man, and rob the better part of the -human race of this high prerogative. - -In Gen. 9:6, we read: “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his -blood be shed; for in the image of God made he man.” Substituting what -the image is here claimed to mean, we should have this very singular -reading: “Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed; -for he made him immortal, and his life cannot be taken.” Evidently the -reference in all such passages is, not only to “the human face divine,” -but to the whole physical frame, which, in comparison with all other -forms of animated existence, is upright and godlike. - -But here the mystical interpretation of our current theology has thrown -up what is considered an insuperable objection to this view; for how can -man be physically in the image of God, when God is not a person, is -without form, and has neither body nor parts? In reply, we ask, Where -does the Bible say that God is a formless, impersonal being, having -neither body nor parts? Does it not say that he is a spirit? John 4:24. -Yes; and we inquire again, Does it not say that the angels are spirits? -Heb. 1:7, 14. And are not the angels, saying nothing of those instances -in which they have appeared to men in bodily form, and always in human -shape (Gen. 18:1-8, 16-22; 32:24; Hos. 12:4; Num. 22:31; Judges 13:6, -13; Luke 1:11, 13, 28, 29; Acts 12:7-9; &c., &c.), always spoken of as -beings having bodily form? A spirit, or spiritual being, as God is, in -the highest sense, so far from not having a bodily form, must possess -it, as the instrumentality for the manifestation of his powers. 1 Cor. -15:44. - -Again, it is urged that God is omnipresent; and how can this be, if he -is a person? Answer: He has a representative, his Holy Spirit, by which -he is ever present and ever felt in all his universe. “Whither shall I -go,” asks David, “from thy Spirit? or whither shall I flee from thy -presence?” Ps. 139:7. And John saw standing before the throne of God -seven Spirits, which are declared to be “the seven Spirits of God,” and -which are “sent forth into all the earth.” Rev. 4:5; 5:6. - -We now invite the attention of the reader to a little of the evidence -that may be presented to show that God is a person, and so that man, -though of course in an imperfect and finite degree, may be an image, or -likeness of him, as to his bodily form. - -1. God has made visible to mortal eyes parts of his person. Moses saw -the God of Israel. Ex. 33:21-23. An immaterial being, if such a thing -can be conceived of, without body or parts, cannot be seen with mortal -eyes. To say that God assumed a body and shape for this occasion, places -the common view in a worse light still; for it is virtually charging -upon God a double deception: first, giving Moses to understand that he -was a being with body and parts, and, secondly, under the promise of -showing himself, showing him something that was _not_ himself. And he -told Moses that he would put his hand over him as he passed by, and then -take it away, that he might see his back parts, but not his face. Has he -hands? has he back parts? has he a face? If not, why try to convey ideas -by means of language? - -Again, Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and seventy of the elders, saw the -God of Israel. Ex. 24:9-11. “And there was under his feet as it were a -paved work of a sapphire stone.” Has he feet? Or is the record that -these persons saw them, a fabrication? No man, to be sure, has seen his -face, nor could he do it and live, as God has declared. Ex. 33:20; John -1:18. - -2. Christ, as manifested among men, is declared to be the image of God, -and in his form. Christ showed, after his resurrection, that his -immortal, though not then glorified, body, had flesh and bones. Luke -24:29. Bodily he ascended into Heaven where none can presume to deny him -a local habitation. Acts 1:9-11; Eph. 1:20; Heb. 8:1. But Paul, speaking -of this same Jesus, says, “Who is the image of the invisible God, the -firstborn of every creature.” Col. 1:15. Here the antithesis expressed -is between God who is invisible, and his image in the person of Christ -which was visible. It follows, therefore, that what of Christ the -disciples could see, which was his bodily form, was the image, to give -them an idea of God, whom they could not see. - -Again: “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, -being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” -Phil. 2:5, 6. It remains to be told how Christ could be in the form of -God, and yet God have no form. - -Once more: “God who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in -time past unto the fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days -spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by -whom also he made the worlds; who being the brightness of his glory, and -the _express image of his person_,” &c. Heb. 1:1-3. This testimony is -conclusive. It is an inspired declaration that God has a personal form; -and to give an idea of what that form is, it declares that Christ, just -as we conceive of him as ascended up bodily on high, is the express -image thereof. - -The evidence already presented shows that there is no necessity for -making the image of God in which man was created to consist of anything -else but bodily form. But to whatever else persons may be inclined to -apply it, Paul in his testimony to the Romans, forever destroys the -possibility of making it apply to immortality. He says, Rom. 1:22, 23: -“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the -glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible -man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.” The word -here rendered uncorruptible is the same word that is translated immortal -and applied to God in 1 Tim. 1:17. Now if God by making man in his image -stamped him with immortality, man is just as incorruptible as God -himself. But Paul says that he is not so; that while God is -uncorruptible or immortal, man is corruptible or mortal. The image of -God does not therefore, confer immortality. - - - - - CHAPTER IV. - THE BREATH OF LIFE. - - -Gen. 1:27, states, in general terms, the form in which man was created, -as contrasted with other orders of animal life. In Gen. 2:7, the process -is described by which this creation was accomplished. Finding no proof -in the former passage that man was put in possession of immortality (see -preceding chapter) we turn to the latter text to examine the claims -based upon that. The verse reads: “And the Lord God formed man of the -dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life: -and man became a living soul.” - -Here the advocates of man’s natural immortality endeavor to make a -strong stand, as it is very proper they should do; for certainly if in -that inspired record which describes the building up of man, the putting -together of the different parts or constituent elements of which he is -composed, there is no testimony that he was clothed with immortality, -and no hook furnished upon which an argument for such an attribute can -be hung, their whole system is shaken to its very foundation. - -The claim based upon this passage is that man is composed of two parts: -the body formed of the dust of the ground, and an immortal soul placed -therein by God’s breathing into the nostrils of that dust-formed body -the breath of life. We will let two representative men speak on this -point, and state the popular view. Thomas Scott, D. D., on Gen. 2:7, -says:-- - -“The Lord not only gave man life in common with the other animals which -had bodies formed of the same materials; but immediately communicated -from himself the _rational soul_, here denoted by the _expression of -breathing into his nostrils the breath of life_.” - -Adam Clarke, LL. D., on Gen. 2:7, says:-- - -“In the most distinct manner God shows us that man is a compound being, -having a body and soul distinctly and separately created, the body out -of the dust of the earth, _the soul immediately breathed from God -himself_.” - -Critics speak of this expression in a different manner from theologians; -for whereas the latter make it confer immortality, and raise man in this -respect to the same plane with his Maker, the former speak of it as -suggestive of man’s frail nature, and his precarious tenure of life -itself. Thus Dr. Conant says:-- - -“In whose nostrils is breath. Only breath, so frail a principle of life, -and so easily extinguished.” - -And in a note on Isa. 2:22, where the prophet says, “Cease ye from man -whose breath is in his nostrils; for wherein is he to be accounted of?” -he adds:-- - -“Not as in the common English version, ‘whose breath is in his -nostrils;’ for where else should it be? The objection is not to its -place in the body, which is the proper one for it, but to its _frail and -perishable nature_.” - -To the same intent the psalmist speaks, Ps. 146:3, 4: “Put not your -trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help. _His -breath goeth forth_, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his -thoughts perish.” - -But let us examine the claim that the “breath of life” which God -breathed into man conferred upon him the attribute of immortality. There -was nothing naturally immortal, certainly, in the dust of which Adam was -composed. Whatever of immortality he had, therefore, after receiving the -breath of life, must have existed in that breath in itself considered. -Hence, it must follow that the “breath of life” confers immortality upon -any creature to which it is given. Will our friends accept this issue? -If not, they abandon the argument; for certainly it can confer no more -upon man than upon any other being. And if they do accept it, we will -introduce to them a class of immortal associates not very flattering to -their vanity nor to their argument; for Moses applies the very same -expression to all the lower orders of the animal creation. - -In Gen. 7:15, we read: “And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and -two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.” It must be evident to -every one, at a glance, that the whole animal creation, including man, -is comprehended in the phrase “all flesh.” But verses 21 and 22 contain -stronger expressions still: “And all flesh died that moved upon the -earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping -thing that creepeth upon the face of the earth, and every man. _All in -whose nostrils was the breath of life_, of all that was in the dry land, -died.” - -Here the different orders of animals are named, and man is expressly -mentioned with them; and all alike are said to have had in their -nostrils the breath of life. It matters not that we are not told in the -case of the lower animals how this breath was conferred, as in the case -of man; for the immortality, if there is any in this matter, must -reside, as we have seen, in the breath itself, not in the manner of its -bestowal; and here it is affirmed that all creatures possess it; and of -the animals, it is declared, as well as of man, that it resides in their -nostrils. - -It is objected that in Gen. 2:7, the “breath of life” as applied to man -is plural, “breath of lives” (see Clarke), meaning both animal life, and -that immortality which is the subject of our investigation. But, we -reply, it is the same form in Gen. 7:22, where it is applied to all -animals; and if the reader will look at the margin of this latter text -he will see that the expression is stronger still, “the breath of the -spirit of life” or of lives. - -The language which Solomon uses respecting both men and beasts strongly -expresses their common mortality: “For that which befalleth the sons of -men, befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, -so dieth the other; yea, _they have all one breath_; so that a man [in -this respect] hath no pre-eminence above a beast; for all is vanity. All -go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again.” -Eccl. 3:19, 20. - -Thus the advocates of natural immortality by appealing to Moses’ record -respecting the breath of life, are crushed beneath the weight of their -own arguments; for if “the breath of life” proves immortality for man, -it must prove the same for every creature to which it is given. The -Bible affirms that all orders of the animal creation that live upon the -land, possess it. Hence our opponents are bound to concede the -immortality of birds, beasts, bugs, beetles, and every creeping thing. -We are sometimes accused of bringing man down by our argument to a level -with the beast. What better is this argument of our friends which brings -beasts and reptiles up to a level with man? We deny the charge that we -are doing the one, and shall be pardoned for declining to do the other. - - - - - CHAPTER V. - THE LIVING SOUL. - - -Finding no immortality for man in the breath of life which God breathed -into man’s nostrils at the commencement of his mysterious existence, it -remains to inquire if it resides in the “living soul,” which man, as the -result of that action, immediately became. “And the Lord God formed man -of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of -life, and man became a living soul.” Gen. 2:7. - -On this point also it is proper to let the representatives of the -popular view define their position. Prof. H. Mattison, on the verse just -quoted, says:-- - -“That this act was the infusion of a spiritual nature into the body of -Adam, is evident from the following considerations: The phrase, -‘breath of life,’ is rendered breath of lives by all Hebrew scholars. -Not only did animal life then begin, but another and higher life which -constituted him not only a mere animal, but a ‘living soul.’ He was a -body before,--he is now more than a body, a soul and body united. If -he was a ‘soul’ before, then how could he become such by the last act -of creation? And if he was not a soul before, but now became one, then -the soul must have been superadded to his former material -nature.”--_Discussion with Storrs_, p. 14. - -Dr. Clarke, on Gen. 2:7, says:-- - -“In the most distinct manner God shows us that man is a _compound_ -being, having a body and soul distinctly and separately created; the -body out of the dust of the earth, the soul immediately breathed from -God himself.” - -To the same end see the reasonings of Landis, Clark (D. W.), and others. -Aware of the importance to their system of maintaining this -interpretation, they very consistently rally to its support the flower -of their strength. It is the redan of their works, and they cannot be -blamed for being unwilling to surrender it without a decisive struggle. -For if there is nothing in the inspired record of the formation of man, -that record which undertakes to give us a correct view of his nature, to -show that he is endowed with immortality, their system is not only -shaken to its foundation, but even the foundation itself is swept -entirely away. - -The vital point, to which they bend all their energies, is somehow to -show that a distinct entity, an intelligent part, an immortal soul, was -brought near to that body as it lay there perfect in its organization, -and thrust therein, which immediately began through the eyes of that -body to see, through its ears to hear, through its lips to speak, and -through its nerves to feel. Query: Was this soul capable of performing -all these functions before it entered the body? If it was, why thrust it -within this prison house? If it was not, will it be capable of -performing them after it leaves the body? - -Heavy drafts are made on rhetoric in favor of this superadded soul. -Figures of beauty are summoned to lend to the argument their aid. An -avalanche of flowers is thrown upon it, to adorn its strength, or -perchance to hide its weakness. But when we search for the logic, we -find it a chain of sand. Right at the critical point, the argument fails -to connect; and so after all their expenditure of effort, after all -their lofty flights, and sweating toil, their conclusion comes -out--blank assumption. Why? Because they are endeavoring to reach a -result which they are dependent upon the text to establish, but which -the text directly contradicts. The record does not say that God formed a -body, and put therein a superadded soul, to use that body as an -instrument; but he formed _man_ of the dust. That which was formed of -the dust was the man himself, not simply an instrument for the man to -use when he should be put therein. Adam was just as essentially a man -before the breath of life was imparted, as after that event. This was -the difference: before, he was a dead man; afterward, a living one. The -organs were all there ready for their proper action. It only needed the -vitalizing principle of the breath of life to set them in motion. That -came, and the lungs began to expand, the heart to beat, the blood to -flow, and the limbs to move; then was exhibited all the phenomena of -physical action; then, too, the brain began to act, and there was -exhibited all the phenomena of mental action, perception, thought, -memory, will, &c. - -The engine is an engine before the motive power is applied. The bolts, -bars, pistons, cranks, shafts, and wheels, are all there. The parts -designed to move are ready for action. But all is silent and still. -Apply the steam, and it springs, as it were, into a thing of life, and -gives forth all its marvelous exhibitions of celerity and power. - -So with man. When the breath of life was imparted, which, as we have -seen was given in common to all the animal creation, that simply was -applied which set the machine in motion. No separate and independent -organization was added, but a change took place in the man himself. The -man _became_ something, or reached a condition which before he had not -attained. The verb “became” is defined by Webster, “to pass from one -state to another; to enter into some state or condition, by a change -from another state or condition, or by assuming or receiving new -properties or qualities, additional matter or a new character.” And Gen. -2:7, is then cited as an illustration of this definition. But it will be -seen that none of these will fit the popular idea of the superadded -soul; for that is not held to be simply a change in Adam’s condition, or -a new property or quality of his being, or an addition of matter, or a -new character; but a separate and independent entity, capable, without -the body, of a higher existence than with it. The boy becomes a man; the -acorn, an oak; the egg, an eagle; the chrysalis, a butterfly; but the -capabilities of the change all inhere in the object which experiences -it. A superadded, independent soul could not have been put into man, and -be said to have _become_ that soul. Yet it is said of Adam, that he, on -receiving the breath of life, _became_ a living soul. An engine is put -into a ship, and by its power propels it over the face of the deep; but -the ship, by receiving the engine, does not become the engine, nor the -engine the ship. No sophistry, even from the darkest depths of its -alchemy, can bring up and attach to the word “become” a definition which -will make it mean, as applied to any body, the addition of a distinct -and separate organization to that body. - -To the inquiry of Prof. Mattison, “If he was ‘a soul’ before, then how -could he become such by the last act of creation,” it may be replied, -The antithesis is not based upon the word soul, but upon the word -living. This will become evident by trying to read the passage without -this word: “And the Lord God breathed into his nostrils the breath of -life, and man became a soul.” That is not it. He became a _living_ soul. -He was a soul before, but not a living soul. To thus speak of a dead -soul, may provoke from some a sneer; nevertheless, the Hebrews so used -the terms. See Num. 6:6: “He shall come at no dead body,” on which -Cruden says, “in Hebrew, dead soul.” - -Kitto, in his Relig. Encyclopedia, under the term Adam, says:-- - -“And Jehovah God formed the man (Heb., the Adam) dust from the ground, -and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a _living -animal_. Some of our readers may be surprised at our having translated -_nephesh chaiyah_ by living animal. There are good interpreters and -preachers who, confiding in the common translation, living soul, have -maintained that here is intimated a distinctive pre-eminence above the -inferior animals, as possessed of an immaterial and immortal spirit. -But, however true that distinction is, and supported by abundant -argument from both philosophy and the Scriptures, we should be acting -unfaithfully if we were to assume its being _contained_ or _implied_ in -this passage.” - -The “abundant argument from both philosophy and the Scriptures” for -man’s immortal spirit, may be more difficult to find than many suppose. -But this admission that nothing of the kind is implied in this passage, -is a gratifying triumph of fair and candid criticism over what has been -almost universally believed and taught. - -But we are not left to our own reasoning on this point; for inspiration -itself has given us a comment upon the passage in question; and -certainly it is safe to let one inspired writer explain the words of -another. - -Paul, in 1 Cor. 15:44, and onward, is contrasting the first Adam with -the second, and our present state with the future. He says: “There is a -natural body and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The -first man Adam was made a living soul, the last Adam was made a -quickening spirit.” Here Paul refers directly to the facts recorded in -Gen. 2:7. In verse 47, he tells us the nature of this man that was made -a living soul: “The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is -the Lord from Heaven.” In verse 49, he says, “And as we have borne the -image of the earthy,” have been, like Adam, living souls, “we shall also -bear the image of the heavenly,” when our bodies are fashioned like unto -his glorious body. Phil. 3:21. In verses 50 and 53, he tells us why it -is necessary that this should be done, and how it will be accomplished: -“Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the -kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. For this -corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on -immortality.” - -Putting these declarations all together, what do we have? We have a very -explicit statement that this first man, this living soul which Adam was -made, was of the earth, earthy, did not bear the image of the heavenly -in its freedom from a decaying nature, did not possess that incorruption -without which we cannot inherit the kingdom of God, but was wholly -mortal and corruptible. Would people allow these plain and weighty words -of the apostle their true meaning upon this question, it would not only -summarily arrest all controversy over the particular text under -consideration, but leave small ground, at least from the teachings of -the Scriptures, to argue for the natural immortality of man. - -But the terms “living soul” like the breath of life, are applied to all -orders of the animate creation, to beasts and reptiles, as well as to -man. The Hebrew words are _nephesh chaiyah_; and these words are in the -very first chapter of Genesis four times applied to the lower orders of -animals: Gen. 1:20, 21, 24, 30. On Gen. 1:21, Dr. A. Clarke offers this -comment:-- - -“_Nephesh chaiyah_; a general term to express all creatures endued with -animal life, in any of its infinitely varied gradations, from the -half-reasoning elephant down to the stupid potto, or lower still, to the -polype, which seems equally to share the vegetable and animal life.” - -This is a valuable comment on the meaning of these words. He would have -greatly enhanced the utility of that information, if he had told us that -the same words are applied to man in Gen. 2:7. - -Prof. Bush, in his notes on this latter text, says:-- - -“The phrase living soul is in the foregoing narrative repeatedly applied -to the inferior orders of animals which are not considered to be -possessed of a ‘soul’ in the sense in which that term is applied to man. -It would seem to mean the same, therefore, when spoken of man, that it -does when spoken of beasts, viz.: an animated being, a creature -possessed of life and sensation, and capable of performing all the -physical functions by which animals are distinguished, as eating, -drinking, walking, &c.... Indeed it may be remarked that the Scriptures -generally afford much less _explicit_ evidence of the existence of a -sentient immaterial principle in man, capable of living and acting -separate from the body, than is usually supposed.” - -And there is nothing in the term “living” to imply that the life with -which Adam was then endowed would continue forever; for these living -souls are said to die. Rev. 16:3: “And every living soul died in the -sea.” Whether this means men navigating its surface or the animals -living in its waters, it is equally to the point as showing that that -which is designated by the terms “living soul,” whatever it is, is -subject to death. - -Staggered by the fact (and unable to conceal it) that the terms “living -soul” are applied to all animals, the advocates of man’s immortality -then undertake to make the word “became” the pivot of their argument. -Man “became” a living soul, but it is not said of the beasts that they -became such; hence this must denote the addition of something to man -which the animals did not receive. And in their anxiety to make this -appear, they surreptitiously insert the idea that the animal life of man -is derived from the dust of the ground, and that something of a higher -nature was imparted to man by the breath of life which was breathed into -him, and the living soul which he became. Thus Mr. Landis, in his work, -“The Immortality of the Soul,”[A] p. 141, says: “Hence something was to -be added to the mere animal life derived from the dust of the ground.” -Now Mr. L. ought to know, and knowing, ought to have the candor to -admit, that no life at all is derived from the dust of the ground. All -the life that Adam had was imparted by the breath of life which God -breathed into his nostrils, which breath all breathing animals, no -matter how they obtained it, possessed as well as he. - -Footnote A: - - “The Immortality of the Soul and the Final Condition of the Wicked - Carefully Considered. By Robert W. Landis. New York: Published by - Carlton and Porter.” This is a work of 518 pages, and being issued - under the patronage of the great Methodist Book Concern, we take it to - be a representative work, and shall occasionally refer to its - positions. - -No emphasis can be attached to the word “became:” for everything that is -called a living soul must by some process have become such. “Whatever -was or is first _became_ what it was or is.” - -Take the case of Eve. She was formed of a rib of Adam, made of -pre-existent matter. It is not said of her that God breathed into her -nostrils the breath of life, or that she became a living soul; yet no -one claims that her nature was essentially different from that of Adam -with whom she was associated, as a fitting companion. - -And it will be further seen that this word “became” can have no value in -the argument, unless the absurd principle be first set up as truth, that -whatever becomes anything must forever remain what it has become. - -Defenders of the popular view, by such reasoning reduce their argument -to its last degree of attenuation; but here its assumption becomes so -transparent that it has no longer power to mislead, and needs no further -reply. - - - - - CHAPTER VI. - WHAT IS SOUL? WHAT IS SPIRIT? - - -The discussion of Gen. 2:7 (as in the preceding chapter), brings -directly before us for solution the question, What is meant by the terms -soul and spirit, as applied to man? Some believers in unconditional -immortality point triumphantly to the fact that the terms soul and -spirit are used in reference to the human race, as though that settled -the question, and placed an insuperable embargo upon all further -discussion. This arises simply from their not looking into this matter -with sufficient thoroughness to see that all we question in the case is -the popular definition that is given to these terms. We do not deny that -man has a soul and spirit; we only say that if our friends will show -that the Bible anywhere attaches to them the meaning with which modern -theology has invested them, they will supply what has thus far been a -perpetual lack, and forever settle this controversy. - -What do theologians tell us these terms signify? Buck, in his -Theological Dictionary, says: “Soul, that vital, immaterial, active -substance or principle in man whereby he perceives, remembers, reasons, -and wills.” On spirit, he says: “An incorporeal being or intelligence; -in which sense God is said to be a spirit, as are the angels and the -human soul.” On man, he says: “The constituent and essential parts of -man created by God are two: body and soul. The one was made out of dust; -the other was breathed into him.” This soul, he further says, “is a -spiritual substance;” and then, apparently feeling not exactly safe in -calling that a _substance_ which he claims to be _immaterial_, he -bewilders it by saying “subsistence,” and then adds, “immaterial, -immortal.” - -This position strikes us as considerably open to criticism. On this -definition of “soul,” how can we deny it to the lower animals? for they -“perceive, remember, reason, and will.” And, if spirit means the “human -soul,” the question arises, Has man two immortal elements in his nature? -for the Bible applies both terms to him at the same time. Paul, to the -Thessalonians, says: “And I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body -be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Does -Paul here use tautology, by applying to man two terms meaning the same -thing? That would be a serious charge against his inspiration. Then has -man two immortal parts, soul and spirit both? This would evidently be -overdoing the matter; for, where one is enough, two are a burden. And -further, on this hypothesis, would these two immortal parts exist -hereafter as two independent and separate beings? - -This idea being preposterous, one question more remains: Which of these -two is the immortal part? Is it the soul or the spirit? It cannot be -both; and it matters not to us which is the one chosen. But we want to -know what the decision is between the two. If they say that what we call -the soul is the immortal part, then they give up such texts as Eccl. -12:7: “The spirit shall return to God who gave it;” and Luke 23:46, -“Into thy hands I commend my spirit,” &c. On the other hand, if they -claim that it is the spirit which is the immortal part, then they give -up such texts as Gen. 35:18: “And it came to pass as her soul was in -departing (for she died);” and 1 Kings 17:21, “Let this child’s soul -come into him again.” - -And, further, if the body and soul are both _essential_ parts of man, as -Mr. B. affirms, how can either exist as a distinct, conscious, and -perfect being without the other? - -Foreseeing these difficulties, Smith, in his Bible Dictionary, -distinguishes between soul and spirit thus: “Soul (Heb. _nephesh_, Gr. -ψυχὴ). One of three parts of which man was anciently believed to -consist. The term ψυχὴ, is sometimes used to denote the vital principle, -sometimes the sentient principle, or seat of the senses, desires, -affections, appetites, passions. In the latter sense, it is -distinguished from πνευμα [_pneuma_], the higher rational nature. This -distinction appears in the Septuagint, and sometimes in the New -Testament. 1 Thess. 5:23.” Then he quotes Olshausen on 1 Thess. 5:23, as -saying: “For whilst the ψυχὴ [soul] denotes the lower region of the -spiritual man,--comprises, therefore, the powers to which analogous ones -are found in _animal_ life also, as understanding, appetitive faculty, -memory, fancy,--the πνευμα [_pneuma_] includes those capacities which -constitute the true human life.” - -So it seems that, according to these expositors, while the Hebrew -_nephesh_, and Greek _psuche_, usually translated soul, denote powers -common to all animal life, the Hebrew _ruach_, and the corresponding -Greek _pneuma_, signify the higher powers, and consequently that part -which is supposed to be immortal. - -Now let us inquire what meaning the sacred writers attach to these -terms. As already stated, the original words from which soul and spirit -are translated, are, for soul, _nephesh_ in the Hebrew, and _psuche_ in -the Greek, and for spirit, _ruach_ in the Hebrew, and _pneuma_ in the -Greek. To these no one is at liberty to attach any arbitrary meaning. We -must determine their signification by the sense in which they are used -in the sacred record; and whoever goes beyond that, does violence to the -word of God. - -The word _nephesh_ occurs 745 times in the Old Testament, and is -translated by the term soul about 473 times. In every instance in the -Old Testament where the word soul occurs, it is from _nephesh_, with the -exception of Job 30:15, where it comes from _n’dee-vah_, and Isa. 57:16, -where it is from _n’shah-mah_. But the mere use of the word soul -determines nothing; for it cannot be claimed to signify an immortal -part, until we somewhere find immortality affirmed of it. - -Besides the word soul, _nephesh_, is translated life and lives, as in -Gen. 1:20, 30, in all 118 times. It is translated person, as in Gen. -14:21, in all 29 times. It is translated mind, as in Gen. 23:8, in all -15 times. It is translated heart, as in Ex. 23:9, in all 15 times. It is -translated body, or dead body, as in Num. 6:6, in all 11 times. It is -translated will, as in Ps. 27:12, in all 4 times. It is translated -appetite, as in Prov. 23:2, twice; lust, as in Ps. 78:18, twice; thing, -as in Lev. 11:10, twice. - -Besides the foregoing, it is rendered by the various pronouns, and by -the words, breath, beast, fish, creature, ghost, pleasure, desire, &c., -in all forty-three different ways. _Nephesh_ is never rendered spirit. - -This soul (_nephesh_) is represented as in danger of the grave, Ps. -49:14, 15; 89:88; Job 33:18, 20, 22; Isa. 38:17. It is also spoken of as -liable to be destroyed, killed, &c., Gen. 17:14; Ex. 31:14; Josh. 10:30, -32, 35, 37, 39, &c. - -Parkhurst, author of a Greek and a Hebrew Lexicon, says:-- - -“As a noun, _neh-phesh_ hath been supposed to signify the spiritual part -of man, or what we commonly call his soul. I must for myself confess -that I can find no passage where it hath undoubtedly this meaning. Gen. -35:18; 1 Kings 17:21, 22; Ps. 16:10, seem fairest for this -signification. But may not _neh-phesh_, in the three former passages, be -most properly rendered _breath_, and in the last, a breathing, or animal -frame?” - -Taylor, author of a Hebrew Concordance, says that _neh-phesh_ “signifies -the animal life, or that principle by which every animal, according to -its kind, lives. Gen. 1:20, 24, 30; Lev. 11:40. Which animal life, so -far as we know anything of the manner of its existence, or so far as the -Scriptures lead our thoughts, consists in the _breath_, Job. 41:21; -31:39, and in the _blood_. Lev. 17:11, 14.” - -Gesenius, the standard Hebrew lexicographer, defines _nephesh_ as -follows:-- - -“1. Breath. 2. The vital spirit, as the Greek _psuche_, and Latin -_anima_, through which the body lives, _i. e._, the principle of life -manifested in the breath.” To this he also ascribes “whatever has -respect to the sustenance of life by food and drink, and the contrary.” -“3. The rational soul, mind, _animus_, as the seat of feelings, -affections, and emotions. 4. Concr. living thing, animal in which is the -_nephesh_, life.” - -The word soul in the New Testament comes invariably from the Greek ψυχή -(_psuche_); which word occurs 105 times. It is translated soul 58 times; -life, 40 times; mind, 3 times; heart, twice; us, once; and you, once. - -Spirit in the Old Testament is from two Hebrew words _n’shah-mah_ and -_ruach_. - -The former occurs 24 times. It is 17 times rendered breath, 3 times, -blast, twice, spirit, once, soul, and once, inspiration. It is defined -by Gesenius, “Breath, spirit, spoken of the breath of God, _i. e._, _a_) -the wind, _b_) the breath, breathing of his anger. 2. Breath, life of -man and beasts. 3. The mind, the intellect. 4. Concr. living thing, -animals.” - -The latter, _ruach_, occurs 442 times. Spirit in every instance in the -Old Testament is from this word, except Job 26:4, and Prov. 20:27; where -it is from _n’shah-mah_. Besides spirit it is translated wind 97 times, -breath, 28 times, smell, 8 times, mind, 6 times, blast, 4 times; also -anger, courage, smell, air, &c., in all sixteen different ways. - -Spirit in the New Testament is from the Greek, πνεῦμα (_pneuma_) in -every instance. The original word occurs 385 times, and besides spirit -is rendered ghost 92 times, wind, once, and life, once. Parkhurst in his -Greek Lexicon, says: “It may be worth remarking that the leading sense -of the old English word ghost is breath; ... that ghost is evidently of -the same root with _gust_ of wind; and that both these words are plain -derivatives from the Hebrew, to move with violence; whence also _gush_, -&c.” - -_Pneuma_ is defined by Robinson in his Greek Lexicon of the New -Testament, to mean, primarily, “1. A breathing, breath, breath of air, -air in motion. 2. The spirit of man, _i. e._, the vital spirit, life, -soul, the principle of life residing in the breath breathed into men -from God, and again returning to God.” - -We now have before us the use and definitions of the words from which -soul and spirit are translated. From the facts presented we learn that a -large variety of meanings attaches to them; and that we are at liberty -wherever they occur to give them that definition which the sense of the -context requires. But when a certain meaning is attached to either of -these words in one place, it is not saying that it has the same meaning -in every other place. - -By a dishonorable perversion on this point some have tried to hold up to -ridicule the advocates of the view we here defend. Thus, when we read in -Gen. 2:7, that Adam became a living soul, the sense demands, and the -meaning of the word soul will warrant, that we then apply it to the -whole person; Adam, as a complete being, was a living soul. But when we -read in Gen. 35:18, “And it came to pass, as her soul was in departing, -for she died,” we give the word, according to another of its -definitions, a more limited signification, and apply it, with Parkhurst, -to the breath of life. - -But some have met us here in this manner: “Materialists tell us that -soul means the whole man, then let us see how it will read in Gen. -35:18; ‘And it came to pass as the whole man was in departing; for she -died.’” Or they will say, “Materialists tell us that soul means the -breath; then let us try it in Gen. 2:7: ‘And Adam became a living -breath.’” - -Such a course, while it is no credit to their mental acumen, is utterly -disastrous to all their claims of candor and honesty in their treatment -of this important subject. While we are not at liberty to go beyond the -latitude of meaning which is attached to the words soul and spirit, we -are at liberty to use whatever definition the circumstances of the case -require, varying of course in different passages. But in the whole list -of definitions, and in the entire use of the words, we find nothing -answering to that immaterial, independent, immortal part, capable of a -conscious, intelligent, active existence out of the body as well as in, -of which the popular religious teachers of the day endeavor to make -these words the vehicle. - -And now we would commend to the attention of the reader another -stupendous fact, the bearing of which he cannot fail to appreciate. We -want to know if this soul, or spirit, is immortal. The Hebrew and Greek -words from which they are translated, occur in the Bible, as we have -seen, _seventeen hundred times_. Surely, once at least in that long list -we shall be told that the soul is immortal, if this is its high -prerogative. Seventeen hundred times we inquire if the soul is once said -to be immortal, or the spirit deathless. And the invariable and -overwhelming response we meet is, _Not Once!_ Nowhere, though used so -many hundred times, is the soul said to be undying in its nature, or the -spirit deathless. Strange and unaccountable fact, if immortality is an -inseparable attribute of the soul and spirit! - -An attempt is sometimes made to parry the force of this fact by saying -that the immortality of the soul, like that of God, is taken for -granted. We reply, The immortality of God is not taken for granted. -Although this might be taken for granted if anything could be so taken, -yet it is directly asserted that God is immortal. Let now the advocates -of the soul’s natural immortality produce one text where it is said to -have immortality, as God is said to have it, 1 Tim. 6:16, or where it is -said to be immortal, as God is said to be, 1 Tim. 1:17, and the question -is settled. But this cannot be done; and the ignoble shift of the -taken-for-granted argument falls dead to the floor. - - - - - CHAPTER VII. - THE SPIRIT RETURNS TO GOD. - - -Ecclesiastes 12:7: “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was, -and the spirit shall return to God who gave it.” It is natural for men -to appeal first and most directly to those sources from which they -expect the most efficient help. So the advocates of man’s natural -immortality, when put to the task of showing what scriptures they regard -as containing proof of their position, almost invariably make their -first appeal to the text here quoted. - -In the examination of this text, and all others of a like nature, let it -ever be remembered that the question at issue is, Has man in his nature -a constituent element, which is an independent entity, and which, when -the body dies, keeps right on in uninterrupted consciousness, being -capable of exercising in a still higher degree out of the body the -functions of intelligence and activity which it manifested through the -body, and destined, whether a subject of God’s favor, or of his -threatened and merited wrath, to live so long as God himself exists. - -Does this text assert anything of this kind? Does it state that from -which even such an inference can be drawn? We invite the reader to go -with us, while we endeavor to consider carefully what the text really -teaches. Our opponents appeal to it as direct testimony. Let us see how -far we can go with them. - -1. Solomon, under a series of beautiful figures, speaks in Eccl. 12:1-7, -of the lying down of man in death. Granted. - -2. Dust, or the body, and spirit are spoken of as two distinct things. -Granted. - -3. At death, the spirit leaves the body. Granted. - -4. The spirit is disposed of in a different manner from the body. -Granted. - -5. This spirit returns to God, and is therefore conscious, after the -dissolution of the body. Not granted. Where is the proof of this? Here -our paths begin to diverge from each other. But how could it return to -God if it was not conscious? Answer: In the manner Job describes. “If he -[God] set his heart upon man, if he gather unto himself his spirit and -his breath, all flesh shall perish together, and man shall turn again to -dust.” Job 34:14, 15. This text speaks of God’s gathering to himself the -“breath” of man; something which no one supposes to be capable of a -separate conscious existence. Over against this proposition we are -compelled to mark, Assumption. - -6. This spirit is therefore to exist forever. This conclusion also we -fail to see, either expressed, or even in the remotest manner, implied. -Thus the vital points in the evidence are wholly assumed. - -But if the spirit here does not mean what it is popularly supposed to -mean, what is its signification? What is it that returns to God? It will -be noticed that it is something which God “gave” to man. And Solomon -introduces it in a familiar manner, as if alluding to something already -recorded and well understood. He makes evident reference to the creation -of man in the beginning. His body was formed of the dust; and in -addition to this, what did God do for man or give unto him? He breathed -into his nostrils the _breath of life_. This is the only spirit that is -distinctly spoken of as having been given by God to man. No one claims -that this, like the body, was from the dust, or returns to dust; but it -does not therefore follow that it is conscious or immortal. - -Landis, p. 133, falls into this wrong method of reasoning. He says:-- - -“If the soul were mortal, it too would be given up to the dust, it would -return also to the earth. But God affirms that it does not return to the -earth; and therefore it is distinct from the mortal and perishable part -of man.” - -The breath of life is distinct from the body, and did not come from the -dust of the ground; but to say that it can exist in a conscious state -independent of the body, and that it must live forever, is groundless -assumption. - -If spirit here means “the breath of life,” how, or in what sense, does -it return to God? Landis, p. 150, thus falsely treats this point also: -“How can the air we breathe,” he asks, “return to God?” Between the -breath of life as imparted to man by God, vitalizing the animal frame, -and air considered simply as an element, we apprehend there is a broad -distinction. Solomon is showing the dissolution of man by tracing back -the steps taken in his formation. The breath of life was breathed into -Adam in the beginning; by which he became a living soul. That is -withdrawn from man, and as a consequence he becomes inanimate. Then the -body, deprived of its vitalizing principle, having been formed of the -dust, goes back to dust again. - -That the breath of life came from God to man, none will deny. Do they -ask how it returns to him? Tell us how it came from him, and we will -tell how it returns. In the same sense in which God gave it to man, in -that sense it returns to him. That is all there is of it. The -explanation is perfectly simple, because one division of the problem is -comprehended just as easily as the other. It is an easy thing to turn -off with a flippant sneer an explanation which if allowed to stand, -takes the very breath of life out of a cherished theory. - -But there is a grave objection lying against the popular exposition of -this text, which must not pass unnoticed. It is involved in the -question, What was the state or condition of this spirit before God gave -it to man? Was it an independent, conscious, and intelligent being, -before it was put into Adam, as it is claimed that it was after Adam got -through with it, and it returned to God? Solomon evidently designs to -state respecting all the elements of which man is composed, as is -expressly stated of the body, that they resume the original condition in -which they were, before they came together to form the component parts -of man. We know it is argued that the expression respecting the body, -that it returns to the dust “as it was,” is good ground for an inference -that the spirit returns not as it was. Every principle of logic requires -the very opposite conclusion. For, having set the mind upon that idea of -sameness of condition, and then referring us to the source from whence -the spirit came, and stating that it goes back to that source, the -language is as good as an affirmation that it goes back to its original -condition also, and must be so understood unless an express affirmation -is made to the contrary. The question is therefore pertinent, Was this -spirit before it came into man, a conscious being, as it is claimed to -be after it leaves him? In other words, have we all had a conscious -pre-existence? Is the mystery of our Lord’s incarnation repeated in -every member of the human race? Yes! if popular theologians rightly -explain this text. And the more daring or reckless spirits among them, -seeing the logical sequence of their reasoning, boldly avow this -position. - -Mr. Landis (to whom we make occasional reference as an exponent of the -popular theory) recoils at the idea of pre-existence, and claims (p. -147) that the spirit does not return as it was, but acquires “a moral -character, and so is changed from what it was when first created and -given to man”! Oh! then, when Adam’s body was formed of the dust of the -ground a spirit _was created_ (from what?) and put into it. Where did he -learn this? To what new revelation has he had access to become -acquainted with so remarkable a fact? Or whence derives he his authority -to manufacture statements of this kind? His soul swells with indignation -over some whom he styles materialists, and whom he accuses of -manufacturing scripture. Thou that sayest a man should not, dost thou? -Nothing is said of the “creation of a spirit” in connection with the -formation of Adam’s body. The body having been formed, God, by an -agency, not created for the purpose, but already existing with himself, -endowed it with life, and Adam became a living soul. - -Having thus artfully introduced the idea that the spirit was created for -the occasion, Mr. L. takes up this reasoning which shows that if the -spirit is conscious after leaving the body, it must have been before it -entered it, and, applying to it a term doubtless suggested by his own -feelings in view of the assumptions to which he was himself obliged to -resort, calls it silly. Nevertheless here is the rock on which their -exposition of this text inevitably and hopelessly founders. - -There is another consideration not without its bearing on this question. -The words, “And the spirit shall return to God who gave it,” are spoken -promiscuously of all mankind. They apply alike to the righteous and -wicked. If the spirit survives the death of the body, the spirits of the -righteous would, as a natural consequence, ascend to God, in whose -presence they are promised fullness of joy. But do the spirits of the -wicked go to God also? For what purpose? The immediate destination -usually assigned to them is the lake of fire. Is it said that they first -go to God to be judged? Then we ask, Where does the Bible once affirm -that a person is judged when he dies? On the contrary, the Scriptures -invariably place the Judgment in the future, and assert in the most -explicit terms that God has appointed a day for that purpose. Acts -17:31. - -Thus the Bible doctrine of the Judgment is directly contradicted by this -view. According to the Scriptures no man has yet received his final -judgment; yet, according to the view under examination, the spirits of -all who have ever died, good and bad, righteous and wicked, have gone to -God. For what purpose have the spirits of the wicked gone to him? Are -they there still? Does God so deal with rebels against his -government--give them Heaven from one to six thousand years, more or -less, and hell afterward? Away with a view which introduces such -inconsistencies into God’s dealings with his creatures. - -How infinitely preferable that view which alone the record warrants; -that is, that the spirit that returns to God who gave it is the breath -of life, that agency by which God vivifies and sustains these physical -frames; since this, so far as the record goes, is just what God did give -to man in the beginning, since the definition of the term sustains such -an application, since this spirit, without doing violence to either -thought or language, can return to God in the same sense in which it -came from him, and, above all, since this view harmonizes all the -record, and avoids those inconsistencies and contradictions in which we -find ourselves inevitably involved the very moment we undertake to make -the spirit mean a separate entity, conscious in death and immortal in -its nature. - - - - - CHAPTER VIII. - THE FORMATION OF THE SPIRIT. - - -In a search for testimony relative to the nature of man, with the -purpose of ascertaining whether or not he is immortal, those texts first -demand attention which are claimed as proof that he is above and beyond -the power of death. Zech. 12:1, is introduced as positive testimony on -this side of the question: - -“The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which -stretcheth forth the heavens and layeth the foundations of the earth, -and formeth the spirit of man within him.” - -With an immense flourish this text is introduced by Mr. Landis, p. 152; -and with an air of triumph he adds that materialists are in the habit of -passing it in silence. We think we can answer for them that they have -seen in it nothing to answer, and hence have declined to spend their -time beating the air. As to the nature of the spirit which God forms in -man, its characteristics and attributes, this text affirms nothing. -Above all, respecting the main inquiry, Is this spirit immortal? the -text is entirely silent. Why then is it introduced? Because it contains -the word spirit. But, as has been shown (chapter vi), nothing is proved -by the mere use of the words soul and spirit, till some affirmation can -be found in the Scriptures that these terms signify an independent -entity, which has the power of uninterrupted consciousness, and the -endowment of immortality. For men to take these terms and give them -definitions and clothe them with attributes which are the offspring of -pagan philosophy, or figments of their own imagination, and then claim -that because the Bible uses these terms it sustains their views, is to -us, at least, a very unsatisfactory method of settling this question. -But, from the persistency with which it is followed by those of the -opposite view, one might conclude that it is the only way they have of -sustaining their position. - -God formeth the spirit of man within him. So the text asserts. The word, -form, is in the Septuagint, _plasso_. The definition of this word, as -given by Liddell and Scott, is, “To form, mould, shape, Lat. _fingere_, -strictly used of the artist who works in soft substances, such as earth, -clay, wax.” The word, then, signifies giving shape and form to something -already in existence; for the artist does not create his clay, wax, &c., -but only changes its form. The second definition seems, however, to be -more applicable to the case in hand. Thus, “II. generally, to bring into -shape or form, πλ. τὴν ψυχὴν τὸ σῶμα, to mould and form the mind or body -by care, diet, and exercise.” Thus God makes man the crown of creation -by forming in him (through a superior organization of the brain) an -intellectual or mental nature, and we can still further form or mold it, -by care and cultivation. There is nothing here to favor the idea of the -creation of a separate immaterial and immortal entity, and its insertion -into the human frame. - -This text is illustrated by Job 32:8: “But there is a spirit in man; and -the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding;” not “giveth -it [the spirit] understanding,” as we heard an immaterialist in debate -not long since read it; but “giveth them [the men] understanding.” That -is, men are endowed with a superior mental organization; and by means of -that God gives them understanding. - -Since, however, Zech. 12:1, is used by immaterialists, to prove that -souls are specially created, it raises the question, which may as well -be considered in this connection as any other, whence the spirit, -whatever it is, is derived. In the text under consideration, the present -tense is evidently used for the past; and hence it might be read, “The -burden of the word of the Lord ... which stretched forth the heavens, -and laid the foundations of the earth, and _formed_ the spirit of man -within him.” If now this means the creation of an immortal entity to be -added to man, called his spirit, it applies only to the first man, the -man formed at the creation of the world. The question then remains, How -do all succeeding members of the human race, how do we, get an immortal -spirit? Is it by a special act of creation on the part of God, or is it -by generation from father to son? Has God, for every member of the human -race since Adam, by special act created a soul or spirit? They who say -he has, contradict Gen. 2:2, which declares that all God’s work of -creation, so far as it pertains to this world, was finished in the first -week of time. If this testimony is true, it is certain that God has not -been at work ever since creating human souls as fast as bodies were -brought into existence to need them, the greater part of the time -thousands of them every day. - -Has God thus made himself the servant of the human race, to wait upon -their will, caprice, and passions? for how many of the inhabitants of -this earth are the offspring of the foulest iniquity and the most -unbridled lust! Does God hold himself in readiness to create souls which -must come from his hand immaculate and pure, to be thrust into such vile -tenements, at the bidding of godless lust? The reader will pardon the -irreverence of the question, for the sake of an exposure of the -absurdity of that theory which prompts it. - -But if we say that the soul is transmitted with the body, then what -becomes of its incorruptibility and immortality? for “that which is born -of the flesh is flesh.” John 3:6. And Peter says (1 Pet. 1:23-25): -“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the -word of God which liveth and abideth forever. For all flesh is as grass, -and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, -and the flower thereof falleth away; but the word of the Lord endureth -forever.” - -There could hardly be a plainer testimony that man as a whole is mortal -and perishable. He is born of corruptible seed. But more than this, it -is added, “All flesh is as grass.” Should it be said that this means -simply the body, we reply that the term flesh is frequently used in the -New Testament to signify the whole man. Thus, Rom. 3:20: “By the deeds -of the law there shall no flesh be justified.” Paul does not here talk -about the justification of bones, sinews, nerves and muscles; he refers -to the whole responsible man. In the same sense the term is used in many -other passages. But Peter himself, in the passage just quoted, cuts off -its application exclusively to the body; for after saying that “all -flesh is as grass,” he continues, “and all the glory of man as the -flower of grass.” The glory of man must include all that there is noble -and exalted about his nature. If the soul is the highest and most -godlike part of man, it is included in this glory; but lo! it is all -like the flower of the grass, transitory and perishable. - -The word mortal, which means liable to death, occurs five times in our -English version, and in every instance is used to describe the nature of -the real man. Rom. 6:12; 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54; 2 Cor. 4:11. It occurs -in the original in one other instance (2 Cor. 5:4) where it is rendered -“mortality.” - -The texts usually relied on to prove that souls are immediately created -are Eccl. 12:7; Isa. 57:16; Zech. 12:1. The first of these was examined -in the last chapter. The word translated “form” in the last of these -passages, as shown in this present chapter, is not a word that signifies -to create, but only to put into form, mold, and fashion. Isa. 57:16, -speaks of the souls which God has made. But there are numerous other -texts, as Job 10:8-11; Isa. 44:2; 64:8; Jer. 1:5, &c., which speak in -the same manner of the body. But if such expressions can be used with -respect to the body, produced by the natural process of generation, the -same expression with reference to the soul contains no proof that that -is not also transmitted with the body. - -God said to our first parents, and the commission was repeated to Noah -after the flood, “Be fruitful and multiply.” Multiply what? Themselves, -of course. Did that mean that they should multiply bodies, and God would -multiply souls to fit them? Nothing of the kind; but they were to -multiply beings having all the characteristics, endowments, and -attributes of themselves. So Adam, Gen. 5:3, “begat a son in his own -likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth.” This son was like -Adam in all respects, having all the natures that Adam possessed; and -that which was begotten by Adam was called Seth. But according to the -doctrine of creationism, Adam begat only a body, and God created a soul, -which is the real man, and called his name Seth, and put it into that -body. Neither this text nor any other gives countenance to any such -absurdity. - -Some prominent theologians, both ancient and modern, have adopted the -doctrine of traduction as opposed to that of creationism, believing the -latter to be contrary to philosophy and revelation, but the former to be -in harmony with both. In Wesley’s Journal, Vol. v., p. 10, is found the -following entry:-- - -“I read and abridged an old work on the origin of the soul. I never -before saw anything on the subject so satisfactory. I think the author -proves to a demonstration that God has enabled man, as all other -creatures, to propagate his whole specie, consisting of soul and body.” - -The testimony of Richard Watson (Institutes, pp. 362, 3) is equally -explicit. He says:-- - -“A question as to the transmission of this corruption of nature from -parents to children has been debated among those who, nevertheless, -admit the fact; some contending that the soul is _ex traduce_; others -that it is by immediate creation. It is certain that, as to the -metaphysical part of this question, we can come to no satisfactory -conclusion. The Scriptures, however, appear to be more in favor of -traduction. ‘Adam begat a son in his own likeness.’ ‘That which is born -of the flesh is flesh,’ which refers certainly to the soul as well as to -the body.... The tenet of the soul’s descent appears to have most -countenance from the language of Scripture, and it is no small -confirmation of it, that when God designed to incarnate his own Son, he -stepped out of the ordinary course, and formed a sinless human nature -immediately by the power of the Holy Ghost.” - -The evidence is thus rendered conclusive from both reason and Scripture, -that the soul is transmitted through the process of generation with the -body. What then, we ask again, becomes of its immortality? For “that -which is born of the flesh is flesh,” and mortality cannot generate -itself to a higher plane and beget immortality. This is not saying that -mind is matter; for the results of organization are not to be confounded -with the matter of which the organization is composed. - - - - - CHAPTER IX. - WHO KNOWETH? - - -With these words Solomon introduces, in Eccl. 3:21, a very important -question respecting the spirit of man. He says: “Who knoweth the spirit -of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth -downward to the earth?” Deeming this a good foundation, the advocates of -natural immortality proceed to build thereon. They take it to be, first, -a positive declaration that the spirit of man does go up, and the spirit -of the beast downward to the earth. Then the superstructure is easily -erected: Thus, Solomon must have believed that man had a spirit capable -of a separate and conscious existence in death; and this spirit, in the -hour of dissolution, ascends up on high, and goes into the presence of -God. It therefore survives the stroke of death, and is consequently -immortal. - -Here they rest their argument; but we would like to have them proceed; -for the text speaks of the spirit of the beast, which must also be -disposed of. If the spirit of man, because it separates from him and -goes up, is conscious, is not the spirit of the beast, because it -separates from it and goes down, conscious also? There is nothing in the -man’s spirit going up which can by any means show it to be conscious, -any more than there is in the spirit of the beast going down, to show it -to be conscious. But, if the spirit of the beast survives the stroke of -death, it has just as much immortality as that of man. This line of -argument, therefore, proves too much, and must be abandoned. - -But is not the word spirit as applied to the beast a different word in -the original from the one translated spirit and applied to man? No; they -are both from the same original word; and that word is _ruach_, the word -from which spirit is translated in the Old Testament in every instance -with two exceptions. The beast has the same spirit that man has. - -Landis (p. 146) feels the weight of the stunning blow which this fact -gives to the popular view, and endeavors to parry its force by the -following desperate resort: He says that Solomon is here describing the -state of doubt and perplexity through which he had formerly passed; and, -to use Mr. L.’s own words, “in this perplexity he attributes to both man -and beast a _ruach_.” But he says that Solomon got over this state of -doubt and uncertainty, and “never again attributed a _ruach_ to beasts.” -What we regard as the Bible view of man’s nature is not unfrequently -denominated infidelity by the popular theologians of the present day; -but it strikes us as rather a bold position to go back and accuse the -sacred writers of laboring under a spirit of infidelity when they penned -these sentiments. - -But if we take Solomon’s words to be a declaration that the spirit of -man does go up, his question, even then, would imply a strong -affirmation that we are ignorant of its essential qualities. Who knoweth -this spirit? Who can tell its nature? Who can describe its inherent -characteristics? Who can tell how long it shall continue to exist? On -these vital points, the text is entirely silent, granting all that is -claimed for it. - -But, further, if this text asserts that the spirit of man goes up to -God, it will be noticed that it is spoken promiscuously of all mankind. -Then the same queries would arise respecting the spirits of the wicked, -for what purpose they go to God, and the same objections would lie -against that view that were stated in the examination of Eccl. 12:7, in -chapter vii. - -To arrive, however, at the correct meaning of Eccl. 3:21, a brief -examination of the context is necessary. In verse 18, Solomon expresses -a desire that the sons of men may see that they themselves are beasts. -Not that he intended to be understood that man is in no respect superior -to a beast; for no one, inspired or not, above the level of an idiot, -would make such an assertion, in view of man’s more perfect -organization, his reasoning faculties, and, above all, his future -prospects, if righteous. He simply means, as plainly expressed in the -next verse, that in one respect, namely, their dissolution in death, man -possesses no superiority over the other orders of animated existence. -“For,” he says, “that which befalleth the sons of men, befalleth beasts; -even one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth [here is the point of -similarity], so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath [_ruach_, -the same word that is rendered spirit in verse 21]; so that a man [in -this respect] hath no pre-eminence above a beast. All go unto one place -[is that place Heaven? and is this a declaration that all, men and -beasts alike, go there?] all are of the dust, and all turn to dust -again.” - -Thus definite and positive is the teaching of Solomon that in respect to -their life here upon earth, and their condition in death, men and beasts -are exactly alike; and now can we suppose that, after having thus -clearly expressed his views of this matter, he proceeds in the very next -sentence to contradict it all, and assert that in death there is a -difference between men and beasts, that men do have a pre-eminence, that -all do _not_ go to one place, that the spirit of man goes up conscious -to God, and the spirit of the beast goes down to perish in the earth? -This would be to make the wisest man that ever lived, the most stupid -reasoner that ever put pen to paper. - -How, then, is his language in verse 21 to be understood? Answer: -Understand it as a question whether the spirit of man goes up, and the -spirit of the beast down, as some asserted in opposition to the views -which he taught. John Milton, author of Paradise Lost, so translates it: -“Who knoweth the spirit of man [_an sursum ascendat_] _whether_ it goeth -upward?” &c. The Douay Bible renders the passage thus: “Who knoweth _if_ -the spirit of the children of Adam ascend upward, and _if_ the spirit of -the beasts descend downward?” The Septuagint, the Vulgate, the Chaldee -Paraphrase, the Syriac, and the German of Luther, give the same reading. - -This puts the matter in quite a different light, and saves Solomon from -self-contradiction; but, alas for the immaterialist! it completely -overturns the structure of immortality built thereon. - -The notion prevailed in the heathen world that man’s spirit ascended up -to be with the gods, but the spirit of the beast went down to the earth. -It was the old lesson taught by that unreliable character. in Eden, “Ye -shall not surely die,” but “ye shall be as gods.” Solomon contradicts -this by stating the truth in the case, that death reduces man and beast -alike to one common condition. Then he asks, Who knows that the opposite -heathen doctrine is true, that the spirit of man goes up, and that of -the beast down? He had declared that they all went to one place, in -accordance with God’s original sentence, “Thou shalt surely die;” now he -calls for evidence, if there be any, to show that the opposite doctrine -is true. Thus he smites to the ground this pagan notion by putting it to -the proof of its claims, for which no proof exists. - -There is another class of expressions respecting the word spirit, which -properly come under consideration at this point. The first is Ps. 31:5, -where David says: “Into thine hand I commit my spirit.” Our Lord used -similar language, perhaps borrowed from this expression of David, when, -expiring on the cross, he said, “Father, into thy hands I commend my -spirit.” Luke 23:46. And Stephen, the martyr, in the same line of -thought, put up this expiring prayer: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” -Acts 7:59. What was it which David and our Lord wished to commit into -the hands of God, and Stephen, into the hands of Christ? A conscious -entity it is claimed, the living and immortal part of man; for nothing -less could properly be committed to God. Thus Mr. Landis (p. 131) asks: -“What was it then? The mere life which passed into nonentity at death? -And can any one suppose they would have commended to God a nonentity? -This would be a shameless trifling with sacred things.” But David, on -one occasion (1 Sam. 26:24), prayed that his life might be much set by, -or be precious, in the eyes of the Lord. That which is precious in his -sight, it seems might very properly be commended to his keeping, -especially when passing, for his sake, out of our immediate control. And -in the very psalm (31) in which he commits his spirit to God, he does it -in view of the fact that his enemies had “devised to take away his -_life_.” Verse 13. - -It is a fact that the same or similar acts are spoken of frequently as -done in reference to the life that are said to be done in reference to -the spirit. Can a person commit his spirit to God? So he can commit to -him the preservation of his life. Thus David says, Ps. 64:1: “Preserve -my life.” What! Mr. Landis would exclaim, preserve a nonentity? Jonah -prayed (4:3), “O Lord, take, I beseech thee, my life from me.” Christ -says, John 10:15: “I lay down my life for the sheep;” and in John 13:38, -he asks Peter, “Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake?” - -Thus our life is something that we can commit to another for safe -keeping; it can be taken away from us; we can give it up, or lay it -down. Is it, therefore, a distinct entity, conscious in death? If it is -not, then equivalent expressions applied to the spirit do not prove that -to be conscious in death and immortal; for they prove the same in the -one case as in the other; and whatever they fail to prove in the one -case, they fail to prove also in the other. - -But if the spirit, as is claimed, lives right along after death, just as -conscious as before, and a hundred-fold more active, capable, -intelligent, and free, where would be the propriety of committing it to -God in the hour of death, any more than at any point during its earthly -existence? There would be none whatever. Entering upon that permanent -higher life, it would be much more capable of caring for itself than in -this earthly condition. The expression bears upon its very face evidence -that those who used it desired to commit something into the care of -their Maker which was about to pass out of their possession; to commit -something into his hands for safe keeping until they should be brought -back from the state of unconsciousness and inactivity into which they -were then falling. And what was that? It was what they were then losing, -namely, their life, their _pneuma_, which Robinson defines as meaning, -among other things, “The principle of life residing in the breath, -breathed into man from God, and again returning to God.” And when the -life is thus given up to God by his people, where is it? “Hid with -Christ in God.” Col. 3:3. And when will the believer receive it again? -“When Christ who is our life shall appear.” Verse 4. Then Stephen will -receive from his Lord that which while dying he besought him to receive. -Then they who for Christ’s sake have lost their life (not merely their -bodies while their life continued right on) will have that life restored -to them again. - - - - - CHAPTER X. - THE SPIRITS OF JUST MEN MADE PERFECT. - -“But ye are come,” says Paul, “unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the -living God, the Heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of -angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn which are -written in Heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of -just men made perfect, and to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, -and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of -Abel.” Heb. 12:22-24. - - -With a great show of confidence, either pretended or real, the advocates -of man’s immortality bring forward this text in proof of their position. -That portion of the forgoing quotation upon which they hang their theory -is the expression, “the spirits of just men made perfect,” which they -take to be both a declaration and proof thereof, that the spirits of men -are released by death, and thereupon are made perfect or glorified in -the presence of God in Heaven. A little further examination of the -language will, we think, show that such an assertion is not made in the -text and that even such an inference cannot justly be drawn. - -That Paul is here contrasting the blessings and privileges enjoyed by -believers under the gospel dispensation with those possessed by the Jews -under the former dispensation, will probably not be questioned on either -side. Ye are not come to the mount that might be touched [Mount Sinai] -and the sound of a trumpet, &c., that is, to that system of types and -ceremonies instituted through Moses at Sinai, of which an outward -priesthood were the ministers, and Old Jerusalem the representative -city; but ye are come to Mount Zion, to the New Jerusalem, to Jesus, and -to his better sacrifice. These things to which we are come are the -superior blessings of the gospel, over what was enjoyed under the former -dispensation. But where or how does the fact come in, as one of these -blessings, that man has a spirit which is conscious in death, and is -made perfect by the dissolution of the body? It will be seen that if -this be a fact, it is brought in, at best, only incidentally. There is -no proof of it in the expression, “spirits of just men made perfect,” in -itself considered; for they could be made perfect at some future time, -without supposing them conscious from death to the resurrection. The -only proof that can here be found, then, lies in the fact that we are -said to have _come_ to these spirits. This is supposed to prove that -they must be spirits out of the body, and that they must also be -conscious. Then we inquire, How do we come to the spirits of just men -made perfect, and what is meant by the expression? - -It is not difficult to determine how we come to all the other objects -mentioned by Paul in the three verses quoted; but how we come to the -spirits of just men made perfect, according to the popular view of that -expression, is not so clear. If we mistake not, the common view will -have to be modified, or the explanation remain ungiven. - -Let us see: “Ye are come [or, putting it in the first person, since Paul -brings these to view as present blessings all through the gospel -dispensation, we are come] unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the -living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.” That is, we in this dispensation no -longer look to Old Jerusalem as the center of our worship, but we look -above, to the New Jerusalem, where the sanctuary and Priest of this -dispensation are. In this sense we are come to them. - -“And to an innumerable company of angels.” Angels are the assistants of -our Lord in his work, who now mediates for his people individually. Dan. -7:10. They are sent forth to minister to those who shall be heirs of -salvation. Heb. 1:14. They are therefore more intimately concerned in -the believer’s welfare in this dispensation than in the old. We have -thus come to their presence and ministration. - -“To the general assembly and church of the firstborn which are written -in Heaven.” That is, we have now come to the time when believers of -whatever nationality, whose names are recorded in the Lamb’s book of -life in Heaven, constitute a general assembly, or compose one church. We -do not now look to Jewish genealogies to find the people of God, but we -look to the record in Heaven. And God now takes his people into covenant -relation with himself as individuals, and not as a nation. Thus we are -come in this dispensation to the general assembly, the church of the -firstborn. - -“And to God the Judge of all.” Directly, through the mediation of his -Son, we draw near to God. Passing over for a time the expression under -discussion, the spirits of just men made perfect, we read on:-- - -“And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant.” We now come to Jesus, -the real mediator, instead of to the typical priesthood of the former -dispensation. - -“And to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh better things than that of -Abel.” That is, there is now ministered for us the blood of Jesus, the -better sacrifice, which takes away from us sin in fact, instead of the -blood of beasts, which took it away only in figure. - -It can readily be seen how we come to all these things under this -dispensation; how these are all privileges and blessings under the -gospel, beyond what was enjoyed in the former dispensation. But now, if -the spirits of just men made perfect mean disembodied spirits in the -popular sense, how do we come to these as a gospel blessing? This is -what we would like to have our friends tell us. In what respect is our -relation to our dead friends, the supposed spirits of the departed, -changed by the gospel? If there is any sense in which we may be said to -have come to these, we would like to know it. - -But again, when do we come into closest contact with a man’s spirit? Is -it when that spirit is disembodied, and has gone far away to dwell in -the presence of God, and is to have no more to do forever with anything -that is done under the sun? Eccl. 9:6. Is it not rather when the spirit -of a man through the eyes of that man looks upon us, through his mouth -speaks to us, and through his hands handles us? Outside the hell-doomed -hosts of spiritualists, will any one say that we enjoy more intimate -relations with a spirit when it is out of the body than we do while it -is in the body? A consideration of this point must convince any one that -the idea of _coming_ to the spirits of just men made perfect cannot -possibly be applied to spirits out of the body. - -It will be noticed further that the text does not speak of spirits made -perfect, but of men made perfect. The Greek (και πνεύμασι δικαίων -τετελειωμένων) shows that the participle, “made perfect,” agrees with -“the just,” or “just men,” and not with “spirits.” When, then, we -inquire, are men made perfect? There is a certain sense in which they -are made perfect in this life through the justification of the blood of -Christ, and sanctification of his Spirit; and they are made perfect in -an absolute sense, as in Heb. 11:40, when they experience the final -glorification, and their vile bodies are made like unto Christ’s most -glorious body. Phil. 3:21. - -If it is said that the text refers to this latter perfection, then it is -placed beyond the resurrection, and affords no proof of a conscious -disembodied spirit. If it refers to the former, then it applies to -persons still in this state, and not in death. To one or the other it -must refer; and apply it which way we may, it does not bring to view a -spirit conscious in death. Therefore it fails entirely to prove the -point in favor of which our friends produce it. - -In harmony with the context, we apply it to the present state, to men in -this life, to a blessing peculiar to the gospel, to the justification -and sanctification which the believer now enjoys through Christ. And in -this sense we see how we come to it, as to all the other things -mentioned by Paul. We come to the enjoyment of this blessing ourselves, -and to communion and fellowship with those who are also in possession of -it. - -Finally, to show that this not a view devised to meet any exigency of -our position, we will bring to its support a name which with all will -have great weight, and with many will be final authority. Dr. Adam -Clarke, on this passage, says:-- - -“In several parts of this epistle [to the Hebrews], τελειος, the just -man, signifies one who has a full knowledge of the Christian system, who -is justified and saved by Christ Jesus; and τετελειωμενοι are the _adult -Christians_, who are opposed to the νεπιοι or babes in knowledge and -grace. See chap. 5:12-14; 8:11; Gal. 4:1-3. _The spirits of just men -made perfect_, or the _righteous perfect_, are the full-grown -Christians; those who are justified by the blood and sanctified by the -Spirit of Christ. Being _come_ to such implies that spiritual union -which the disciples of Christ have with each other, and which they -possess how far soever separate; for they are all joined in one Spirit, -Eph. 2:18; they are in the unity of the Spirit, Eph. 4:3, 4; and of one -soul, Acts 4:32. This is a unity which was never possessed even by the -Jews themselves, in their best state; it is peculiar to real -Christianity; as to _nominal_ Christianity, wars and desolations between -man and his fellows are quite consistent with _its_ spirit.” - -The reader is also referred to Dr. C.’s note at the end of Heb. 12. - - - - - CHAPTER XI. - THE SPIRITS IN PRISON. - -“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, -that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but -quickened by the Spirit; by which also he went and preached unto the -spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient, when once the -longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a -preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water.” 1 -Pet. 3:18-20. - - -The advocates of natural immortality are not long in finding their way -to this passage. Here, it is claimed, are spirits brought to view, out -of the body; for they were the spirits of the antediluvians: and they -were conscious and intelligent; for they could listen to the preaching -of Christ, who, by his conscious spirit, while his body lay in the -grave, went and preached to them. - -Let us see just what conclusions the popular interpretation of this -passage involves, that we may test their claims by the Scriptures. 1. -The spirits were the spirits of wicked men; for they were disobedient in -the days of Noah, and perished in the flood. 2. They were consequently -in their place of punishment, the place to which popular theology -assigns all such spirits immediately on their passing from this state of -existence. 3. The spirit of Christ went into hell to preach to them. -These are the facts that are to be cleared of improbabilities, and -harmonized with the Scriptures, before the passage can be made available -for the popular view. - -But the bare suggestion of so singular a transaction as Christ’s going -to preach to these spirits, immediately gives rise to the query for what -purpose Christ should take pains to go down into hell, to preach to -damned spirits there; and what message he could possibly bear to them. -The day of their probation was past; they could not be helped by any -gospel message; then why preach to them? Would Christ go to taunt them -by describing before them blessings which they could never receive, or -raising in their bosoms hopes of a release from damnation, which he -never designed to grant? - -These considerations fall like a mighty avalanche across the way of the -common interpretation. The thought is felt to be almost an insuperable -objection, and many are the shifts devised to get around it. One thinks -that the word preached does not necessarily mean to preach the gospel, -notwithstanding almost every instance of the use of the word in the New -Testament describes the preaching of the gospel by Christ or his -apostles; but that Christ went there to announce to them that his -sufferings had been accomplished, and the prophecies concerning him -fulfilled. But what object could there be in that? How would that affect -their condition? Was it to add poignancy to their pain by rendering -their misery doubly sure? And were there not devils enough in hell to -perform that work, without making it necessary that Christ should -perform such a ghostly task, and that, too, right between those points -of time when he laid down his life for our sins and was raised again for -our justification? - -Another thinks these were the spirits of such as repented during the -forty days’ rain of the flood; that they were with the saved in -Paradise, a department of the under world where the spirits of the good -are kept (the elysium, in fact, of ancient heathen mythology), but that -they “still felt uneasy on account of having perished [that is, lost -their bodies] under a divine judgment,” and “were now assured by Jesus -that their repentance had been accepted.” - -Such resorts show the desperate extremities to which the popular -exposition of this passage is driven. - -Others frankly acknowledge that they cannot tell what, nor for what -purpose, Christ preached to the lost in hell. So Landis, p. 236. But he -says it makes no difference if we cannot tell what he preached nor why -he preached, since we have the assurance that he did go there and -preach. Profound conclusion! Would it not be better, since we have the -assurance that he preached, to conclude that he preached at a time when -preaching could benefit them, rather than at a time when we know that it -could not profit them, and there could be no occasion for it whatever? - -The whole issue thus turns on the question, When was this work of -preaching performed? Some will say, “While they were in prison, and that -means the state of death, and shows that the dead are conscious and can -be preached to.” Then, we reply, the dead also can be benefited by -preaching, and led to repentance; and the doctrine of purgatory springs -in full blossom into our creed. - -But does the text affirm that the preaching was done to these spirits -while they were in prison? May it not be that the preaching was done at -some previous time to persons who were, when Peter wrote, in prison, or, -if you please, in a state of death? So it would be true that the spirits -were in prison when Peter makes mention of them, and yet the preaching -might have been done to them at a former period, while they were still -in the flesh and could be benefited by it. This is the view taken of the -passage by Dr. Clarke. He says:-- - -“_He went and preached_] By the ministry of Noah one hundred and twenty -years.” - -Thus he places Christ’s going and preaching by his Spirit in the days of -Noah, and not during the time his body lay in the grave. - -Again, he says:-- - -“The word πνευμασι, _spirits_, is supposed to render this view of the -subject improbable, because this must mean _disembodied_ spirits; but -this certainly does not follow; for the _spirits of just men made -perfect_, Heb. 12:23, certainly means righteous men, and men _still in -the church militant_; and the Father of _spirits_, Heb. 12:9, means men -_still in the body_; and the God of the _spirits_ of all flesh, Num. -16:22, and 27:16, means _men_, _not_ in a disembodied state.” - -The preaching was certainly to the antediluvians. But why should Christ -single out that class to preach to, about twenty-four hundred years -afterward, in hell? The whole idea is forced, unnatural, and absurd. The -preaching that was given to them was through Noah, who, by the power of -the Holy Ghost (1 Pet. 1:12), delivered to them the message of warning. -Let this be the preaching referred to, and all is harmonious and clear; -and this interpretation the construction of the original demands; for -the word rendered in our version, “were disobedient,” is simply the -aorist participle; and the dependent sentence, “when once the -long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah,” limits the verb -“preached” rather than the participle. The whole passage might be -translated thus: “In which also, having gone to the spirits in prison, -he preached to the then disobedient ones, when once [or at the time -when] the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah.” - -But how were they in prison? In the same sense in which persons in error -and darkness are said to be in prison. Isa. 42:7: “To open the blind -eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in -darkness out of the prison house.” Also Isa. 61:1: “The Spirit of the -Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good -tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the broken-hearted, to -proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them -that are bound.” Christ himself declared, Luke 4:18-21, that this -scripture was fulfilled in his mission to those here on earth who sat in -darkness and error, and under the dominion of sin. So the antediluvians -were shut up under the sentence of condemnation. Their days were limited -to a hundred and twenty years; and their only way of escape from -impending destruction was through the preaching of Noah. - -So much with reference to the spirits to whom the preaching was given. -Now we affirm further that Christ’s spirit did not go anywhere to preach -to anybody, while he lay in the grave. If Christ’s spirit, the real -being, the divine part, did survive the death of the cross, then - -1. We have only a human offering for our sacrifice; and the claim of the -spiritualists is true that the blood of Christ is no more than that of -any man. - -2. Then Christ did not pour out his soul unto death and make it an -offering for sin, as the prophet declared that he would, Isa. 53:10, 12; -and his soul was not sorrowful even unto death, as he himself affirmed. -Matt. 26:38. - -3. The text says Christ was quickened by the Spirit; and between his -death and quickening no action is affirmed of him; and hence any such -affirmation on the part of man is assumption. There can be no doubt but -the quickening here brought to view was his resurrection. The Greek word -is a very strong one, ζωοποιέω, to impart life, to make alive. He was -put to death in the flesh, but made alive by the Spirit. Landis, p. 232, -labors hard to turn this word from its natural meaning and make it -signify, not giving life, but continuing alive. It is impossible to -regard this as anything less than unmitigated sophistry. The verb is a -regular active verb. In the passive voice it expresses an action -received. Christ did not continue alive, but _was made alive_ by the -Spirit. Then he was for a time dead. How long? From the cross to the -resurrection. Rom. 1:4. So he says himself in Rev. 1:18, I am he that -liveth and was dead. Yet men will stand up, and for the purpose of -sustaining a pet theory, rob the world’s Offering of all its virtue, and -nullify the whole plan of salvation, by declaring that Christ never was -dead. - -The word quicken is the same that is used in Rom. 8:11: “But if the -Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you, He that -raised up Christ from the dead, shall also quicken your mortal bodies by -his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” God brought again our Lord from the -dead by the Holy Spirit; and by the same Spirit are his followers to be -raised up at the last day. But that Christ went anywhere in spirit, or -did any action between his death and quickening, is what the Scriptures -nowhere affirm, and no man has a right to claim. - -Mr. Landis, p. 235, argues that this preaching could not have been in -the days of Noah, because the events narrated took place this side the -death of Christ. Why did he not say this side the resurrection of -Christ? Oh! that would spoil it all. But the record shows upon its very -face that if it refers to a time subsequent to Christ’s death, it was -also subsequent to his resurrection; for if events are here stated in -chronological order, the resurrection of Christ as well as his death -comes before his preaching. Thus, 1. He was put to death in the flesh. -2. Was quickened by the Spirit, which was his resurrection, as no man -with any show of reason can dispute; and 3. Went and preached to the -spirits in prison. So the preaching does not come in, on this ground, -till after Christ was made alive from the dead. - -Some people seem to treat the Scriptures as if they were given to man -that he might exercise his inventive powers in trying to get around -them. But no inventive power that the human mind has yet developed will -enable a man, let him plan, contrive, devise, and arrange, as he may, to -fix this preaching of Christ between his death and resurrection. If he -could fix it there, what would it prove? The man of sin would rise up -and bless him from his papal throne, for proving his darling purgatory. -Such a position may do for Mormons, Mohammedans, Pagans, and Papists; -but let no Protestant try to defend it, and not hang his head for shame. -Mr. Landis says that “Mr. Dobney and the rest of the fraternity -conveniently forget that there is any such passage [as 1 Pet. 3:19] in -the word of God.” But we cannot help thinking that it would have been -well for him, and saved a pitiful display of distorted logic, if he had -been prudent enough to forget it too. - -THE WORD SPIRIT IN OTHER TEXTS. - -There are a few other texts which contain the word spirit an explanation -of which may be properly introduced at this point:-- - -Luke 24:39: “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me -and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have.” These -are the words of Christ as on one occasion he met with his disciples -after his resurrection; and as he then possessed a spiritual body which -is given by the resurrection, it is claimed that his words prove the -existence of spirits utterly disembodied in the popular sense. But we -inquire, What did the disciples suppose they saw? Verse 37 states: “They -supposed they had seen a spirit;” and on this verse Greenfield puts in -the margin the word _phantasma_ instead of _pneuma_, and marks it as a -reading adopted by Griesbach. They supposed they had seen a phantom, -apparition, specter. This exactly corresponds with their action when on -another occasion Christ came to them walking on the sea, Matt. 14:26; -Mark 6:49, and they were affrighted and cried out, supposing it was a -spirit, where the Greek uses phantom in both instances. The Bible -nowhere countenances the idea that phantoms or specters have any real -existence; but the imagination and superstition of the human mind have -ever been prolific in such conceptions. The disciples were of course -familiar with the popular notions on this question; and when the Saviour -suddenly appeared in their midst, coming in without lifting the latch, -or making any visible opening, as spiritual bodies are able to do, their -first idea was the superstitious one of an apparition or specter, and -they were affrighted. - -Now when Jesus, to allay their fears, told them that a spirit had not -flesh and bones as he had, he evidently used the word spirit in the -sense of the idea which they then had in their minds, namely, that of a -phantom; and though the word _pneuma_ is used, which in its very great -variety of meanings may be employed, perhaps, to express such a -conception, we are not to understand that the word cannot be used to -describe bodies like that which Christ then possessed. He was not such a -spirit as they supposed; for a _pneuma_, such as they then conceived of, -in the sense of a phantom, had not flesh and bones as he had. -Bloomfield, on verse 37, says:-- - -“It may be added that our Lord meant not to countenance those notions, -but to show his hearers that, according to their _own_ notions of -spirits, he was not one.” - -Acts 23:8: “For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, neither -angel nor spirit, but the Pharisees confess both.” Paul declared himself -in verse 6 to be a Pharisee; and in telling what they believed, in verse -8, it is claimed that Paul plainly ranged himself on the side of those -who believe in the separate conscious existence of the spirit of man. -But does this text say that the Pharisees believed any such thing? Three -terms are used in expressing what the Sadducees did not believe, -“resurrection, angel, and spirit.” But when the faith of the Pharisees -is stated, these three are reduced to _two_: “The Pharisees confess -_both_.” Both means only two, not three. Now what two of the three terms -before employed unite to express one branch of the faith of the -Pharisees? The word angel could not be one; for angels are a distinct -race of beings from the human family. Then we have left, resurrection -and spirit. The Pharisees believed in angels and in the resurrection of -the human race. Then all the spirit they believed in, as pertaining to -man, according to this testimony, is what is connected with the -resurrection; and that, of course, is the spiritual body with which we -are then endowed. “It is sown,” says this same apostle, “a natural body, -it is raised a _spiritual_ body.” 1 Cor. 15:44. That the term spirit is -applied to those beings which possess a spiritual body is evident from -Heb. 1:7, which reads, “Who maketh his angels spirits.” Angels are -personal beings, but their bodies are spiritual bodies, invisible, under -ordinary circumstances, to mortal eyes. Hence they are called spirits. -So of God, John 4:24: “God is a Spirit;” that is, a spiritual being; not -an impersonal one, as much in one place as another. - -1 Cor. 5:5: “To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of -the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.” -Although this text is quoted to prove the separate conscious existence -of a part of man between death and the resurrection, the reader cannot -fail to notice that the time when the spirit is saved is in the day of -the Lord Jesus, when the resurrection takes place. This text proves -nothing, therefore, respecting the condition of the spirit previous to -that time; and, so far as our present purpose is concerned, we might -dismiss it with this remark; but a word or two more may serve to free -the text still further from difficulty. What is meant by delivering the -person to Satan? and what is the destruction of the flesh? Satan is the -God of this world; and if any man is a friend of the world, he is on the -side of Satan and an enemy of God. The church is the body of Christ, and -belongs to him. A person committing the deeds spoken of in this chapter -must be separated from that body, and given back to the world. He is -thus delivered unto Satan. This is for the destruction of the flesh. The -flesh is often used to mean the carnal mind. Gal. 5:19-21. The -spiritually-minded man has crucified, or destroyed, the flesh. Now, a -person who desires eternal life, when he finds himself set aside from -the church, and placed back in the world, the kingdom of Satan, on -account of his having the carnal mind, understands that to gain eternal -life he must then put away the carnal mind, or crucify and destroy the -flesh. If he does this, he becomes spiritually minded, joined again to -the body of Christ, and the old man, the flesh, being destroyed, he, as -a spiritually-minded man, will be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. -Spirit we understand to be used in contrast with the flesh, the one -denoting a person in a carnal state, the other, in a spiritual. To deal -with a person as the apostle here directs, set him aside from the church -till he sees, and repents of, his sins, is often the only way to save -him. In the day of the Lord Jesus, a person is saved by having his body -fashioned like unto Christ’s glorious body, not destroyed. Phil. 3:21. -The destruction spoken of in the text cannot therefore be the literal -destruction of the body in contrast with the disembodied spirit. - - - - - CHAPTER XII. - DEPARTURE AND RETURN OF THE SOUL. - - -We have now examined all those passages in which the word spirit is used -in such a manner as to furnish what is claimed to be evidence of its -uninterrupted consciousness after the death of the body. We have found -them all easily explainable in harmony with other positive and literal -declarations of the Scriptures that the dead know not any thing, that -when a man’s breath goeth forth and he returneth to his earth, his very -thoughts perish, and that there is no wisdom nor knowledge nor device in -the grave to which we go. And so far the unity of the Bible system of -truth on this point is unimpaired, and the harmony of the testimony of -the Scriptures is maintained. - -We will now examine those scriptures in which the term soul is supposed -to be used in a manner to favor the popular view. The first of these is -Gen. 35:18: “And it came to pass as her soul was in departing (for she -died), that she called his name Benoni.” This is adduced as evidence -that the soul departs when the body dies, and lives on in an active, -conscious condition. - -Luther Lee remarks on this passage:-- - -“Her body did not depart. Her brains did not depart. There was nothing -which departed which could consistently be called her soul, only on the -supposition that there is in man an immaterial spirit which leaves the -body at death.” - -We may offset this assertion of Luther Lee’s with the following -criticism from Prof. Bush:-- - -“_As her soul was in departing._ Heb. _betzeth naphshah, in the going -out of her soul_, or _life_. Gr., ἐν τω ἀφιεναι ἀυτην την ψυχην, _in her -sending out her life_. The language legitimately implies no more than -the departing or ceasing of the vital principle, whatever that be. In -like manner when the prophet Elijah stretched himself upon the dead -child, 1 Kings 17:21, and cried three times, saying, ‘O Lord my God, let -this child’s soul come into him again,’ he merely prays for the return -of his physical vitality.”--_Note on Gen. 35:18._ - -The Hebrew word here translated soul is _nephesh_, rendered in the -Septuagint by _psuche_; and it is unnecessary to remind those who have -read the chapter on Soul and Spirit that these words mean something -besides body and brains. They often signify that which can be said to -leave the body, as we shall presently see, rendering entirely uncalled -for the supposition of an immaterial spirit which Mr. Lee makes such -haste to adopt. - -What then did depart, and what is the plain, simple import of the -declaration? We call the reader’s attention again to the criticism of -Parkhurst, the lexicographer, on this passage:-- - -“As a noun, _nephesh_ hath been supposed to signify the spiritual part -of man, or what we commonly call his soul. I must for myself confess -that I can find no passage where it hath undoubtedly this meaning. Gen. -35:18; 1 Kings 17:21, 22; Ps. 16:10, seem fairest for this -signification. But may not _nephesh_, in the three former passages, be -most properly rendered _breath_, and in the last, a breathing or animal -frame?” - -Thus, while Mr. Parkhurst admits that Gen. 35:18, is the fairest -instance that can be found where _nephesh_ could be supposed to mean the -spiritual part of man, yet he will not so far hazard his reputation, as -a scholar and critic as to give it that meaning in this or any other -instance, declaring that here it may most properly be rendered “breath.” -And this is in harmony with the account of man’s creation, where it is -seen that the imparting of the breath of life is what made Adam a living -soul; and the loss of that breath, of course, reduces man again to a -state of death. - -1 Kings 17:21, 22: “And the Lord heard the voice of Elijah, and the soul -of the child came into him again, and he revived.” In the light of the -foregoing criticism on Gen. 35:18, this text scarcely needs a passing -remark. The same principle of interpretation applies to this as to the -former. But one can hardly read such passages as this without noticing -how at variance they read with the popular view. The child, as a whole, -is the object with which the text deals. The child was dead. Something -called the soul, which the child is spoken of as having in possession, -had gone from him, which caused his death. This element, not the child -itself, but what belonged to the child, as a living being, came into him -again, and _the child_ revived. - -But according to the immaterialist view, this passage should not so read -at all. For that makes the soul to be the child proper; and the passage -should read something like this: “And the Lord heard the voice of -Elijah, and the child came and took possession of his body again, and -the body revived.” This is the popular view. Mark the chasm between it -and the Scripture record. - -Verse 17 tells what had left the child, and what it was therefore -necessary for the child to recover before he could live again. “His -sickness was so sore,” says the record, “that there was no _breath_ left -in him.” That was the trouble: the breath of life was gone from the -child. And when Elijah comes to pray for his restoration, he asks, in -the most natural manner possible, that the very thing that had left the -child, and thereby caused his death, might come into him again, and -cause him to live; and that was simply what verse 17 states, the breath -of life. - -Thus in neither of these passages do we find any evidence of the -existence of an immaterial, immortal soul, which so confidently claims -the throne of honor in the temple of modern orthodoxy. - - - - - CHAPTER XIII. - CAN THE SOUL BE KILLED? - -Matt. 10:28: “And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to -kill the soul; but rather fear him who is able to destroy both soul and -body in hell.” - - -Luke records the same sentiment in these words:-- - -“And I say unto you, my friends. Be not afraid of them that kill the -body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I forewarn you -whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which, after he hath killed, hath power to -cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.” Luke 12:4, 5. - -The estimate which immaterialists put upon these texts is thus expressed -by Mr. Landis, p. 181: “This text [Matt, 10:28] therefore must continue -to stand as the testimony of the Son of God in favor of the soul’s -immortality, and his solemn condemnation of the soul-ruining errors of -the annihilation and Sadducean doctrine.” - -We reply: Mr. L. evidently applies the argument to a wrong issue; for -whatever it may teach concerning the intermediate state, it is most -positively against the doctrine of eternal misery, and the consequent -immortality of the soul. It teaches that God can destroy the soul in -hell; and there is no force in our Lord’s warning unless we understand -it to affirm that he will thus destroy the souls of the wicked. We never -could with any propriety be warned to fear a person because he could do -that which he never designed to do, and never would do. We are to fear -the civil magistrate to such a degree, at least, as not to offend -against the laws, because he has power to put those laws into execution, -and visit upon us merited punishment; but our fear is to rest not simply -upon the fact that he has power to do this, but upon the certainty that -he will do it if we are guilty of crime. Otherwise there could be no -cause of fear, and no ground for any exhortation to fear. - -Now we are to fear God, that is, fear to disobey him, because he is able -to destroy body and soul in hell; and what is necessarily implied in -this? It is implied that he certainly _will_ do this in the cases of all -those who do not fear him enough to comply with his requirements. So the -text is a direct affirmation that the wicked will be destroyed, both -soul and body in hell. - -The next inquiry is, What is the meaning of the word, destroy? We answer -that, take the word, soul, to mean what we will, the word, destroy, here -has the same meaning and the same force as applied to the soul, that the -word kill has as applied to the body in the sentence before. Whatever -killing does to the body, destroying does to the soul. Don’t fear men -because they cannot kill the soul as they kill the body; but fear God -because he can and will kill the soul (if wicked) just as men kill the -body. This is the only consistent interpretation of the language. But -all well understand what it does to the body to kill it. It deprives it -of all its functions and powers of life and activity. It does the same -to the soul to destroy it, supposing the soul to be what is popularly -supposed. The word here rendered destroy is ἀπολλύω (_appolluo_), and is -defined by Greenfield, “to destroy, to kill, to put to death,” &c. - -Having seen that the text affirms in the most positive manner the -destruction of soul and body, or the complete cessation of existence, -for all the wicked, in hell, we now inquire whether it teaches a -conscious existence for the soul in the intermediate state? This must -be, it is claimed, because man cannot kill it. But the killing which God -inflicts, according to the popular view, is torment in the flames of -hell, and that commences immediately upon the death of the body. Let us -then see what the Scriptures testify concerning the receptacle of the -dead and the place of punishment. - -The word, hell, in our English version is from three different Greek -words. These words are ἅδης (_hades_), γεέννα (_ge-enna_), and ταρταρόω -(_tartaro-o_, a verb signifying to thrust down to tartarus). These all -designate different places; and the following full list of the instances -of their occurrence in the New Testament, will show their use. - -_Hades_ occurs in the following passages:-- - - Matt. 11:23. Shalt be brought down to _hell_. - - 16:18. The gates of _hell_ shall not prevail. - - Luke 10:15. Shalt be thrust down to _hell_. - - 16:23. In _hell_ he lifted up his eyes. - - Acts 2:27. Wilt not leave my soul in _hell_. - - 2:31. His soul was not left in _hell_. - - 1 Cor. 15:55. O _Grave_, where is thy victory? - - Rev. 1:18. Have the keys of _hell_ and death. - - 6:8. Was death, and _hell_ followed. - - Rev. 20:13. Death and _hell_ delivered up the dead which were - in them. - - 20:14. Death and _hell_ were cast into the lake of fire. - -_Ge-enna_ signifies Gehenna, the valley of Hinnom, near Jerusalem, in -which fires were kept constantly burning to consume the bodies of -malefactors and the rubbish which was brought from the city and cast -therein. It is found in the following places:-- - - Matt. 5:22. Shall be in danger of _hell_ fire. - 5:29. Whole body should be cast into _hell_. - 5:30. Whole body should be cast into _hell_. - 10:28. Destroy both soul and body in _hell_. - 18:9. Having two eyes to be cast into _hell_ fire. - 23:15. More the child of _hell_ than yourselves. - 23:33. How can ye escape the damnation of _hell_? - Mark 9:43. Having two hands to go into _hell_. - 9:45. Having two feet to be cast into _hell_. - 9:47. Having two eyes to be cast into _hell_. - Luke 12:5. Hath power to cast into _hell_. - James 3:6. It is set on fire of _hell_. - -_Tartaro-o_ is used only in the following text: - -“God spared not the angels that sinned, but _cast them down to hell_.” 2 -Pet. 2:4. - -From these references it will be seen that _hades_ is the place of the -dead whether righteous or wicked, from which they are brought only by a -resurrection. Rev. 20:13. On the contrary, Gehenna is the place into -which the wicked are to be cast alive with all their members, to be -destroyed soul and body. These places, therefore, are not to be -confounded together. - -Now the punishment against which the text warns us, is not a punishment -in _hades_, the state or place of the dead, but in _Gehenna_, which is -not inflicted till after the resurrection. Therefore we affirm that the -text contains no evidence whatever of the condition of man in death, but -passes over the entire period from the death of the body to the -resurrection. And this is further evident from the record in Luke: “Be -not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that, have no more that -they can do. But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which -after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell.” - -Luke does not use the term, soul, at all; yet he expresses the same -sentiment as Matthew. Man can kill the body or destroy this present -life; but he can accomplish no destruction beyond that. But God can not -only kill the body, or destroy the present life, but he can cast into -Gehenna, or destroy the life that we have beyond the resurrection. These -two things alone the text has in view. And now when we remember that -_psuche_, the word here rendered, soul, often means life, either the -present or future, and is forty times in the New Testament so rendered, -the text is freed from all difficulty. The word, kill, to be sure is not -such as would naturally be used in connection with life; but the word, -destroy, which is among the definitions of the original word, -_apokteino_, can be appropriately used with life. Thus, fear not them -which kill the body, but are not able to destroy the future life; but -rather fear him who is able to destroy the body and put an end to all -future life in hell. And it is worthy of notice that the destruction in -hell here threatened is not inflicted upon a person without his body. -Nothing is said about God’s destroying the soul alone; but it is at some -point beyond this life, when the person again has a body: which is not -till after the resurrection. - -Another declaration from the lips of our Lord, found in Matt. 16:25, 26, -will throw some light on our present subject: “For whosoever will save -his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake -shall find it. For what is a man profited if he shall gain the whole -world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for -his soul?” The word soul should here be rendered life. Dr. Clarke, on -verse 26, says: “On what authority many here translate the word _psuche_ -in the 25th verse, _life_, and in this verse, _soul_, I know not, but am -certain it means life in both places.” - -But let us take the expressions, “soul” and “to lose the soul,” in the -popular sense, and what should we have? Whosoever will save his soul (to -save the soul meaning to save it from hell) shall lose it (that is shall -go into hell torments): but whosoever will lose his soul (suffer eternal -misery) for my sake, shall find it (shall be saved in Heaven). This -makes utter nonsense of the passage, and so is a sufficient condemnation -of the view which makes such an interpretation necessary. - -The passage simply refers to the present and future life. Thus, -whosoever will save his life, that is, will deny Christ and his gospel -for the sake of avoiding persecution, or of preserving his present life, -he shall lose it in the world to come, when God shall destroy both soul -and body in Gehenna; but he who shall lose his present life if need be, -for the sake of Christ and his cause, shall find it in the world to -come, when eternal life is given to all the overcomers. - -Here the life is spoken of as something which can be lost and found -again. Between the losing and finding no one can claim that it maintains -a conscious existence. And what is meant by finding it? Simply that God -will bestow it upon us in the future beyond the resurrection. So what is -meant by the expression that man cannot kill it? Simply the same thing, -that God will, in the resurrection, endow us with life again, a life -which is beyond the power of man. - -The life of all men is in the hands of God. The body was formed of the -dust, but the life was imparted by God. Man, by sin, has made this -present life a temporary one. But through the plan of salvation, by -which the human race was placed upon a second probation, after Adam’s -fall, with the privilege of still gaining eternal life, a future life is -decreed for all; for there shall be a resurrection of the just and -unjust. With the righteous, this life will be eternal; for they have -secured the forgiveness of all their sins through Jesus Christ; but with -the wicked, it will soon end in the second death; for they have thrown -away their golden privilege, and clung to their sins, the wages of which -is death. Man may hasten the close of this present temporary life, may -cut it short by killing the body, for some years before it would close -in the natural course of events; but that future life, which in the -purpose of God is as sure as his own throne, they cannot touch. - -The exhortation is to those who are striving to serve God, and who -thereby are liable to lose their present lives at the hands of wicked -men for the truth’s sake. Fear them not, though with the bloody arm of -persecution they may deprive you of the present life; for the life which -is to come they cannot reach. - -And the warning is to the wicked that unless they fear God more than -men, and are governed by his glory more than by worldly considerations, -he will bring their existence to an utter end in the fire Gehenna. - -The text, therefore, so far from proving the existence in man of an -independent, death-surviving, conscious entity called the immortal soul, -speaks only of the present and future life, and, passing over the entire -period between death and the resurrection, then promises the righteous a -life which man cannot destroy, and affirms that the wicked shall utterly -cease to be in the second death. - - - - - CHAPTER XIV. - THE SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR. - - -In Rev. 6:9-11, is another instance where the word, soul, is used in a -manner which many take to be proof that there is in man a separate -entity, conscious in death, and capable in a disembodied state of -performing all the acts, and exercising all the emotions, which pertain -to this life. The verses referred to read:-- - -“And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls -of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which -they held. And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, -holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that -dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; -and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little -season, until their fellow-servants also and their brethren, that should -be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.” - -On the hypothesis of the popular view, what conclusions must we draw -from this testimony? - -1. It is assumed that these souls were in Heaven; then the altar under -which John saw them must have been the altar of incense, as that is the -only altar brought to view in Heaven. Rev. 8:3. But the altar spoken of -in the text is evidently the altar of sacrifice upon which they were -slain. Therefore to represent them as under the altar of incense, which -was never used for sacrifice, is both incongruous and unscriptural. - -2. We must conclude that they were in a state of confinement, shut up -under the altar--not a condition we would naturally associate with the -perfection of heavenly bliss. - -3. Solomon says of the dead, that their love, their hatred, and their -envy, is now perished. Eccl. 9:6. But that makes no difference; for here -are the souls of the holy martyrs still smarting with resentment against -their persecutors, and calling for vengeance upon their devoted heads. -Is this altogether consistent? Would not the superlative bliss of Heaven -swallow up all resentment against those who had done them this good -though they meant them harm, and lead them to bless rather than curse -the hand that had hastened them thither? - -But further, the same view which puts these souls into Heaven, puts the -souls of the wicked, at the termination of this mortal life, into the -lake of fire, where they are racked with unutterable and unceasing -anguish, in full view of all the heavenly host. In proof of this, the -parable of the rich man and Lazarus is strenuously urged. But is it so? -If it is not, then the popular exposition of that parable must be -abandoned. But that supposed stronghold will not readily be surrendered, -so it is proper to look at the bearing it has upon the case before us. - -According, then, to the orthodox view, the persecutors of these souls -were even then, or certainly soon would be, enveloped in the flames of -hell, right before their eyes, every fiber of their being quivering with -a keenness of torture which no language can express, and of which no -mind can adequately conceive. - -Here they were, their agony full in view of these souls of the martyrs, -and their piercing shrieks of infinite and hopeless woe ringing in their -ears; for the rich man and Abraham, you know, could converse together -across the gulf. And was not the sight of all this woe enough to glut -the most insatiate vengeance? Is there a fiend in hell who could -manifest the malevolence of planning and praying for greater vengeance -than this? Yet these souls are represented, even under these -circumstances, as calling upon God to avenge their blood on their -persecutors, and saying “How long?” as if chiding the tardy movements of -Providence, in commencing, or intensifying, their torments. Such is the -character which the common view attributes to these holy martyrs, and -such the spirit with which it clothes a system of religion the chief -injunction of which is to forgive, and the chief law of which is mercy. -Does it find indorsement in any breast in which there remains a drop of -even the milk of human kindness? - -4. These souls pray that their _blood_ may be avenged--an article which -the uncompounded, invisible, and immaterial soul, as generally -understood, is not supposed to possess. - -These are some of the difficulties we meet, some of the camels we have -to swallow, in taking down the popular view. - -But it is urged that these souls must be conscious; for they cry to God. -How easily our expositors forget that language has any literal use, when -they wish it to be figurative, or that it is ever used as a figure, when -they wish it to be literal. There is supposed to be such a figure of -speech as personification, in which, under certain conditions, life, -action, and intelligence, are attributed to inanimate objects. Thus the -blood of Abel is said to have cried to God from the ground. Gen. 4:9, -10. The stone cried out of the wall, and the beam out of the timber -answered it. Hab. 2:11. The hire of the laborers, kept back by fraud, -cried; and the cry entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. James -5:4. So these souls could cry, in the same sense, and yet be no more -conscious than Abel’s blood, the stone, the beam, or the laborer’s hire. - -So incongruous is the popular view that Albert Barnes makes haste to set -himself right on the record as follows:-- - -“We are not to suppose that this _literally_ occurred, and that John -actually saw the souls of the martyrs beneath the altar--for the whole -representation is symbolical; nor are we to suppose that the injured and -the wronged in Heaven actually pray for vengeance on those who wronged -them, or that the redeemed in Heaven will continue to pray with -reference to things on the earth; but it may be fairly inferred from -this that there will be _as real_ a remembrance of the wrongs of the -persecuted, the injured, and the oppressed, _as if_ such a prayer was -offered there; and that the oppressor has as much to dread from the -divine vengeance, _as if_ those whom he has injured should cry in Heaven -to the God who hears prayer, and who takes vengeance.”--_Notes on Rev. -6._ - -But it is said that white robes were given them; hence it is further -urged that they must be conscious. But this no more follows than it does -from the fact that they cried. How was it? They had gone down to the -grave in the most ignominious manner. Their lives had been -misrepresented, their reputations tarnished, their names defamed, their -motives maligned, and their graves covered with shame and reproach, as -containing the dishonored dust of the most vile and despicable -characters. Thus the church of Rome, which then molded the sentiments of -the principal nations of the earth, spared no pains to make her victims -an abhorring unto all flesh. - -But the Reformation commences its work. It soon begins to be seen that -the Romish church is the corrupt and disreputable party, and those -against whom it vents its rage are the good, the pure, and the true. The -work goes on among the most enlightened nations, the reputation of the -church going down, and that of the martyrs coming up, until the -corruptions of the papal abomination are fully exposed, and that huge -system of iniquity stands before the world in all its naked deformity, -while the martyrs are vindicated from all the aspersions under which -that Antichristian church had sought to bury them. Then it was seen that -they had suffered, not for being vile and criminal, but “for the word of -God and for the testimony which they held.” Then their praises were -sung, their virtues admired, their fortitude applauded, their names -honored, and their memory cherished. And thus it is even to this day. -White robes have thus been given unto every one of them. - -The whole trouble on such passages as this we conceive to arise from the -theological definition of the word soul: From that definition, one is -led to suppose that this text speaks of an immaterial, invisible, -immortal essence in man, which soars into its coveted freedom on the -death of its hindrance and clog, the mortal body. No instance of the -occurrence of the word in the original Hebrew or Greek will sustain such -a definition. It oftenest means life; and is not unfrequently rendered, -person. It applies to the dead as well as to the living, as may be seen -by reference to Gen. 2:7, where the word, “living,” need not have been -expressed were life an inseparable attribute of the soul; and to Num. -19:13, where the Hebrew Concordance reads, “dead soul.” - -The reader is also referred to the previous chapter on Soul and Spirit. -From the definitions there given, it is evident that the word soul may -mean, and the context requires that it here should mean, simply the -martyrs, those who had been slain; the expression, “the souls of them,” -being used to designate the whole person. They were represented to John -as having been slain upon the altar of papal sacrifice on this earth, -and lying dead beneath it. So Dr. Clarke, on this passage, says, “The -altar is upon earth, not in Heaven.” They certainly were not alive when -John saw them under the fifth seal; for he again brings to view the same -company in almost the same language, and assures us that the first time -they live after their martyrdom is at the resurrection of the just. Rev. -20:4-6. Lying there, victims of papal blood-thirstiness and oppression, -the great wrong, of which their sacrifice was the evidence, called upon -God for vengeance. They cried, or their blood cried, even as Abel’s -blood cried to God from the ground. - -Thus another stronghold of the immortality of the soul must be -surrendered to a harmonious interpretation, and the plain teaching, of -the word of God. - - - - - CHAPTER XV. - GATHERED TO HIS PEOPLE. - - -The pleasing doctrine that man can never die, though unfortunate in its -parentage, is very tenacious of its life. In treating this subject in -previous chapters, we have found that the record of man’s creation -brings to view no immortal element as entering into his being; that the -Bible, in its use of the terms immortal and immortality, never employs -them to express an attribute inherent in man’s nature; that no -description of soul and spirit, and no signification of the original -words, will sustain the present popular definition of these terms; that -the soul and spirit, though spoken of in the Bible, in the aggregate, -seventeen hundred times, are never once said to be immortal or -never-dying; and that no text in which these words are supposed to be -employed in such a manner as to show that they signify an -ever-conscious, immortal principle, can possibly be interpreted to -sustain such a doctrine. - -Yet the dogma of natural immortality, very reluctantly yields the -ground. To a twentieth proof text it will cling even the more -tenaciously, if the preceding nineteen are all swept away. Besides the -texts already noticed, there are a few other passages behind which it -seeks refuge; and with alacrity we follow it into all its hiding-places, -confident that in no passage in all the Bible can it find a shelter, but -that into every one which it claims as its own, it has entered, not by -right of possession, but as an intruder and a usurper. - -Behind the obituaries of the patriarchs it seeks to shield itself. It is -claimed, for instance, that the death of Abraham is recorded in such a -manner as to show that his conscious existence did not cease with his -earthly life. We might justly insist on their going farther back and -taking the recorded close of the lives of the antediluvian patriarchs as -the basis of their argument. One of these, Enoch, was translated to -Heaven without seeing death; and all the others, according to popular -belief, went to Heaven just as effectually, through death. But how -different is their record. Of Enoch it is said that he “was not; for God -took him;” while of the others it is said, And they “died.” Surely these -two records do not mean the same thing, and Enoch, whom God took, and -who is consequently alive in Heaven, must be, judging from the record, -in a different condition from those who died. - -But to return to the case of Abraham. The record of his death reads: -“Then Abraham gave up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old man -and full of years, and was gathered to his people.” On this verse, -Landis, p. 130, thus remarks:-- - -“What then is this _gathering_to the body or the soul? It cannot refer -to the body, for while his body was buried in the cave of Macpelah, in -Canaan, his fathers were buried afar off; Terah, in Haran, in -Mesopotamia, and the rest of his ancestors far off in Chaldea. Of -course, then, this gathering relates not to the body, but to the soul; -he was gathered to the assembly of the blessed, and thus entered his -habitation.” - -To show how gratuitous, not to say preposterous, is this conclusion, we -raise a query on two points: 1. Does the expression, “gathered to his -people,” denote that he went to dwell in conscious intercourse with -them? 2. Were his ancestors such righteous persons that they went to -Heaven when they died? In answering these queries, the last shall be the -first. It is a significant fact that Abraham had to be _separated_ from -his kindred and his _father’s house_, in order that God might make him a -special subject of his providence. And in Josh. 24:2, we are plainly -told that his ancestors were idolaters; for they served other gods. Such -being their character, death would send them, according to the popular -view, to the regions of the damned. At the time, then, of Abraham’s -death, they were writhing amid the lurid waves of the lake of fire. And -when Abraham was gathered to them, if it was in the sense which the -theology of our day teaches, he, too, was consigned to the flames of -hell! Oh! to what absurdities will men suffer themselves to be led -blindfold by a petted theory. God had said to Abram, Gen. 15:15: “And -thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be buried in a good -old age.” Was this the consoling promise that he should go to hell in -peace in a good old age? And is the record of his death an assertion -that he has his place among the damned!? Yes! if the immaterialist -theory be correct. Children of Abraham, arise! and with one mouth -vindicate your “righteous father” from the foul aspersion. Renounce a -theory as far from Heaven-born which compels you thus to look upon the -“father of the faithful.” - -Does, then, the expression, “gathered to his people,” mean his personal, -conscious intercourse with them? If man has an immortal soul which lives -in death, it does; and if it does, Abraham is in hell. There is no way -of avoiding this conclusion, except by repudiating the idea that man has -such a soul, and denying his conscious happiness or misery while in a -state of death. - -But how, then, could he be gathered to his people? Answer: He could go -into the grave into which they had gone, into the state of death, in -which they were held. Jacob said, when mourning for Joseph whom he -supposed dead: “I will go down into the grave unto my son mourning.” Not -that he expected to go into the same locality, or the same grave; for he -did not suppose that his son, being, as he then thought, devoured by -wild beasts, was in the grave literally at all; but by the grave he -evidently meant a state of death; and as his son had been violently -deprived of life, he too would go down mourning into the state of death; -and this he calls going unto his son. In Acts 13:36, Paul, speaking of -David, says that he “was _laid unto his fathers_.” This all must -acknowledge to be the exact equivalent of being “gathered to his -people;” then the apostle goes on and adds, “_and saw corruption_.” That -which was laid unto his fathers, or was gathered to his people, saw -corruption. Men may labor, if they choose, to refer it to the immortal -soul; but in that way they do it a very doubtful favor; for the success -of their argument is the destruction of their theory; and the soul is -shown to be something which is perishable and corruptible in its nature. - -The peaceful death of our father Abraham furnishes no proof of an -immortal soul in man, and from his hallowed resting-place no arguments -for such a dogma can be drawn. - -Another text may properly be considered in this connection:-- - -Ps. 90:10: “The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if -by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength -labor and sorrow; for it is soon cut off and we fly away.” - -On the authority of this text it is claimed that something flies away -when our strength is cut off in death; that that something is the -immortal soul, and that if it flies away, it is therefore conscious; and -if it thus survives the stroke of death, it is therefore immortal: -rather a numerous array of conclusions, and rather weighty ones, to be -drawn from the three words, “we fly away.” Let us look at David’s -argument. The reason given why our strength is labor and sorrow, is -because it is soon cut off and we fly away. If, now, our flying away -means the going away of a conscious soul, into Heaven, for instance, if -we are righteous, his argument stands thus: “Yet is their strength labor -and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and _we go to Heaven_.” Singular -reasoning, this! But his argument is all consistent if by flying away he -means that we go into the grave, where Solomon assures us that there is -no work, wisdom, knowledge, nor device. Let us not abuse the psalmist’s -reasoning. - -The text plainly tells us what flies away; namely, _we_ fly away. We is -a personal pronoun and includes the whole person. According to Buck’s -assertion that man is composed of two _essential_ elements, soul and -body, the man is not complete without them both; and the pronoun, we, -could not be used to express either of them separately. The text does -not intimate any separation; it does not say that the soul flies away, -or the spirit flies away; but _we_, in our undivided personality, fly -away. To what place does the body, an essential part of the we, fly? To -the grave, and there only. - -This is confirmed by Eccl. 9:3: “The heart of the sons of men is full of -evil; and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that -they go to the dead.” Had this text read, “And after that they go away,” -it would have been exactly parallel to Ps. 90:10; for no essential -difference can be claimed between going and flying. But here it is -expressly told where we go: we go to the _grave_. What is omitted in Ps. -90:10, is here supplied. - -We may also add that the Hebrew word _gooph_, rendered “fly away,” -signifies, according to Gesenius, “First, to cover, spec. with wings, -feathers, as birds cover their young. Second, to fly, properly of birds. -Third, to cover over, wrap in darkness. Fourth, to overcome with -darkness, to faint, to faint away.” - -The idea is plainly this: Though our days be fourscore years, yet is -their strength labor and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we sink -away, go to the grave, and are wrapped in the darkness of death. Viewed -thus, David’s language is consistent, and his reasoning harmonious; but -his language we pervert and his logic we destroy, the moment we try to -make his words prove the separation from the body, of a conscious soul -at death. - - - - - CHAPTER XVI. - SAMUEL AND THE WOMAN OF ENDOR. - - -In all arguments for the continued life and consciousness of the dead, 1 -Sam. 28:3-20, usually holds a conspicuous place. In examining this -scripture, we will look at (1) the narrative, (2) the claim that is -based upon it, (3) the character of the actors in the incident, (4) the -facts to be considered, and (5) the conclusions to be drawn. - -1. _The narrative._ Samuel was a prophet of God in Israel from 1112 to -1058 before Christ. Saul was king of Israel from 1096 to 1056 before -Christ. Samuel anointed Saul to his office as king, and from time to -time communicated instruction to him from the Lord as his counselor and -adviser. At the time when the incident recorded in 1 Sam. 28:3-20, -occurred, Samuel was dead. There was war between the Israelites and the -Philistines. The Philistines pressed hard upon Israel. They gathered -their forces together in Shunem, and Saul, assembling all Israel to -oppose them, pitched in Gilboa. Dismayed at the mighty array of the -Philistine host, Saul’s heart sunk within him, and he was sore afraid. -In anxiety and trembling, he cast about him for help. He sought the -Lord, but the Lord answered him not. No dream was given, no token by -Urim appeared, no prophet had a word from the mouth of the Lord to meet -the circumstances of his deep distress. He thought of his old-time -friend, the prophet Samuel, to whom he had so often gone, and who had so -often directed his steps in times of doubt and danger. But Samuel was -dead, and how could he consult him? - -There was in the land a class of people who claimed to have power to -communicate with the dead. This work, called necromancy (a “_pretended_ -communication with the dead”--_Webster_), had been strictly forbidden by -the Lord, Lev. 19:31; 20:27; Deut. 18:9-12, &c. And Saul in obedience to -the command of the Lord, Ex. 22:18, had cut off, so far as they could be -found, all persons of that class out of the land. Yet a few, controlled -wholly by the devil, still practiced, with caution and secrecy, their -hellish orgies. - -Whether Saul had ever believed in the reality of this work, or not, we -are not informed. But it is certain that in his present extremity, his -belief gave way to the pretensions of these necromancers, and the evil -thought took possession of him that he could consult in this way with -the prophet Samuel. So he inquired for a woman that had a familiar -spirit, and was told of one at Endor. - -Disguising himself, in order that the woman, knowing Saul’s decree -against witchcraft, might not fear to communicate for him, and going -secretly by night, he sought the woman. The woman being assured that no -evil was intended and no punishment should happen to her, asked whom she -should bring up. Saul answered, Bring me up Samuel. And when she saw the -object which her conjuration had evoked, she cried out with fear, and -said to her royal guest, Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul. -He told her to fear not, but tell what she saw. She answered, An old -man, covered with a mantle. “And Saul perceived,” says the narrative, -“that it was Samuel.” - -Samuel asked Saul why he had disquieted him to bring him up; and Saul -answered, that he might make known what he should do; for the -Philistines made war upon him, and God was departed from him, and he was -sore distressed. Samuel then asked him why he came to him since God had -departed from him, and had become his enemy. Then he proceeded to tell -him that the kingdom was rent out of his hand because he had failed to -obey the Lord; that the Philistines should triumph in the battle, and -that on the morrow he and his sons should die. This was the finishing -stroke to the already breaking heart of Saul, and, utterly overwhelmed -with his calamities, he fell senseless to the earth. - -Such are the essential facts brought to view in the narrative. Let us -now look at what is claimed from them. - -2. _The claim._ This can be expressed in few words. It is claimed that -Samuel actually appeared on this occasion, and that therefore the dead -are conscious, or that there is a spirit in man that lives on in -consciousness when the body dies; and, therefore again, the soul is -immortal. - -The validity of this claim rests very much on the question whether the -transaction here recorded was wrought by the power of God or by the -devil. If by God, then the representation was a true one; if by the -devil, we may look for deception; for he commenced his work by becoming -the father of all the lies in the world, and continues it by assiduously -circulating them. We will therefore consider, - -3. _The character of the actors._ These actors were, first, the woman -that had a familiar spirit; and familiar spirits are spirits of devils. -Compare together Num. 25:1-3; Ps. 106:28; and 1 Cor. 10:20. This work of -dealing with familiar spirits, God had declared to be an abomination to -him, he had expressly forbidden it, and sentenced to death all who -practiced it. - -The other chief actor in this scene was Saul. And what was his condition -at this time? He had so long lived in violation of divine instruction -that God had departed from him, and answered him no more by dreams, nor -by Urim, nor by prophets, which were the ways he had himself appointed -to communicate with his people. Query: Would the Lord refuse to -communicate with him in ways of his own appointing, and then come to him -by means the use of which he had expressly forbidden? We see then that -neither of the actors in this scene were persons through whom, or for -whom, we should expect the Lord to work. We will therefore notice -further, - -4. _The facts to be considered._ - -_a._ The wonders wrought on this occasion were all accomplished by the -familiar spirit with whom this woman consorted. There were two things -for this spirit to do: (1) Either to bring up in reality the dead person -that was called for, or (2) to counterfeit the dead man so perfectly -that those who were conversing with the familiar spirit would believe -that they were conversing with their dead friend. - -_b._ That it was not Samuel, but the familiar spirit personating Samuel, -that appeared, is evident from the fact that this supposed Samuel, -before holding any communication with Saul, put the woman on her guard, -telling her that her guest was none other than Saul himself. This is -shown by the fact that the woman, as soon as she saw him, cried out with -fear, not because Samuel really appeared contrary to her expectations, -as some have supposed; for she did not cry out, “Samuel has come, -indeed!” but because of what the appearance told her, for she -immediately turned to Saul and said, “Why hast thou deceived me? for -thou art Saul.” This would not be the work of the real Samuel, to put -the woman on her guard, to aid her in her unholy work of incantation. - -_c._ According to the claim based on this transaction, it was Samuel’s -immortal soul that appeared on this occasion, but its appearance was, -according to the description of the woman, an old man covered with a -mantle. Do immortal souls go about in this way, in the form of old men -covered with mantles? This renders it still more evident that it was the -familiar spirit, imitating Samuel as he appeared while here upon earth. - -_d._ Saul did not see Samuel at all. But does it not read that “Saul -perceived that it was Samuel”? Yes; but perceived how? Not by the sight -of his eyes, but from the woman’s description. The words “saw,” as -applied to the woman, verse 12, and “perceive,” as applied to Saul, -verse 14, are in the Septuagint different words. The woman actually saw -the appearance before her; and here the word (_eido_) εἴδω is used, -which signifies, according to Liddell and Scott, “to see, behold, look -at;” but when it is said that Saul perceived, the word is (_gignosco_) -γιγνώσκω, which signifies, according to the same authority, “to know, -perceive, gain knowledge of, observe, mark, be aware of, see into, -understand,” by an operation of the mind. In harmony with this view, is -Saul’s language to the woman, “What sawest _thou_?” and “What form is he -of?” If any should say that Saul might have seen all that the woman saw -if he had not been prostrate upon the ground, it is sufficient to reply -that it was not till after he asked these questions that he “stooped -with his face to the ground, and bowed himself.” Verse 14. If Samuel had -actually been present, Saul could have seen him as well as the woman. - -_e._ The appearance which the woman saw came up out of the earth. Was -that Samuel’s immortal soul? Are these souls in the earth? We supposed -they were in the heavenly glories of the world above. - -_f._ Is it said that, as the form came up out of the earth, Samuel had a -resurrection. Then the conscious-soul theory is abandoned. But if this -was a resurrection of Samuel, how could he come up out of the ground -here at Endor, near the sea of Galilee, when he was buried in distant -Ramah, verse 3, near Jerusalem? And if the old man was raised from the -dead, what became of him? Did he go through the pains of a second -dissolution, and enter the grave again? If so, well might he complain to -Saul for disquieting him to bring him up. - -_g._ This pretended Samuel told Saul that he and his sons would be with -him the following day. Verse 19. If he was an immortal spirit in glory, -how could Saul, whom God had rejected for his sins, go to be with him -there? - -_h._ Another sacred writer mentions this event in Saul’s life, and -assigns it as one of the two reasons why he was given up by the Lord to -die. 1 Chron. 10:13. - -5. _Conclusions._ What conclusions are inevitable from the foregoing -facts? It is first of all evident that Samuel was not present on that -occasion either as an immortal spirit from the third Heaven, or as one -resurrected from the dead. For - -_a._ It is not consistent to suppose that God, having refused to answer -Saul’s petitions in any legitimate way, would have respect to them when -presented through this forbidden channel. - -_b._ It is inconsistent to suppose that an immortal soul from glory -would come up out of the earth, as did the form which the woman evoked -with her hellish incantations. - -_c._ It is inconsistent to suppose that Samuel was resurrected bodily -here in Endor, when he was buried in Ramah. - -_d._ If he was raised, it must have been by God or the devil. But the -devil cannot raise the dead, and it is evident that God would not, at -least in answer to these agencies, the use of which he had forbidden -under pain of death. God would not thus raise up his servant to talk -with Saul on the devil’s own ground. - -_e._ It is incredible that such a man as Samuel, who held witchcraft as -such a heinous sin, 1 Sam. 15:23, should first hold friendly converse -with this abandoned woman in the midst of her incantations, and put her -on her guard, before delivering his message to Saul. - -_f._ It is the boldest assumption to suppose that any one, through this -agency of the devil, would have power to summon at will any immortal -soul from glory, or to raise any one from the dead, or that this woman, -through her hellish incantations, would have power to behold the holy -Samuel, while Saul could see nothing. - -But is it not said that the woman saw Samuel? Yes; and here is the only -seeming difficulty in all the narrative. We find these four expressions: -“The woman saw Samuel;” verse 12; “And Samuel said to Saul;” verse 15; -“Then said Samuel;” verse 16; and, “because of the words of Samuel.” -Verse 20. And how could it be so written, it is asked, if Samuel was not -there, and the woman did not see him, and he did not say the things here -recorded? - -Answer. This is easily explained by a very common law of language. -Consider the circumstances. The woman stood ready to bring up any one -that might be called for. She believed, of course, that they actually -came, just as mediums now-a-days believe the forms they see are those of -their departed friends. Samuel was called for, and this mantled old man -appeared. She supposed it was Samuel; and Saul supposed it was Samuel; -and then, according to the general law of the _language of appearance_, -the narrative proceeds _according to their supposition_. When it says -Samuel, it only means that form that appeared, which they _supposed_ to -be Samuel. - -Secondly, the conclusion is apparent that this was only a manifestation -of ancient necromancy, sorcery, witchcraft, or spiritualism; a wholesale -deception palmed off upon his dupes by the devil in disguise. Between -the ancient and modern there is this difference: Then he had to pretend -to bring up the dead from the ground; for the people then believed that -the dead were in the lower regions of the earth: now he brings them down -from the upper spheres; for the prevailing belief now is that those -regions are populous with the conscious spirits of the departed. - -Let no one then appeal to the workings of the witch of Endor to prove -the immortality of the soul, unless he is prepared to claim openly that -the Bible is a fiction, that ancient necromancy was a divine practice, -and that modern spiritualism with all its godless blasphemies and its -reeking corruptions is the only reliable oracle of truth and purity. - - - - - CHAPTER XVII. - THE TRANSFIGURATION. MATT. 17:1-9. - - -When our Lord was transfigured, on a high mountain of Galilee, before -Peter and James and John, there appeared with him two other glorified -personages, talking with him. These, the inspired narrator says, were -Moses and Elias, as the disciples understood them to be. Luke 9:30-33. - -With what pleasure does the immaterialist meet with an account of any -manifestation or action on the part of those who have long been dead; it -has so specious an appearance of sustaining his views, or at least of -furnishing him ground for an argument; for, says he, the person was -dead, and this manifestation was by his conscious spirit or immortal -soul. - -So far as the case of Elias is concerned, as he appeared at the -transfiguration, it affords that theory no benefit; for he, being -translated, never saw death, and so could appear in the body with which -he ascended. This is conceded by all; and for this reason his case is -never put in as a witness on this question, except by those who are so -unfamiliar with the record as to suppose that he, too, once died, and -here appeared as a disembodied spirit. - -But with Moses the case is different; for we have in the Bible a plain -account of his death and burial; yet here he appeared on the mount, -alive, active, and conscious; for he talked with Christ. And so with an -air of triumph, perhaps sincere, Landis asks (p. 181), “What then have -our opponents to say to this argument? for they must meet it or renounce -their theory.” - -Were we Sadducees, denying the resurrection, and any future life beyond -the grave, this case would lie as an insuperable barrier across our -pathway; but so long as the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is -taught in the Bible, the incident is not necessarily against those who -deny the existence of any such thing as a conscious, disembodied human -spirit, since the presence of Moses on the mount can be accounted for -otherwise than through such a medium. - -This scene was either a representation, made to pass before the minds of -the disciples, or it was a reality as it appeared. The view that it was -merely a representation receives some countenance from the fact that it -is called a vision. “Tell the vision to no man,” said Christ; and, while -the word, vision, is sometimes applied to real appearances, as in Luke -24:43, it also is taken to represent things that do not yet exist, as in -John’s vision of the new heavens and new earth. Again, Luke says that -they (Moses and Elias) “appeared in glory.” Our Lord himself has not yet -attained unto the full measure of glory that is to result to him from -his work of redemption, 1 Pet. 1:11; Isa. 53:11; and it may well be -doubted likewise if any of his followers have reached their full state -of glory. If, then, the expression quoted from Luke refers to the future -perfected glory of the redeemed, we have another evidence that this was -only a representation, like John’s visions of future scenes of bliss, -and not then a reality. But, if this was only a vision, no argument can -be drawn from it for the intermediate existence of the soul; for, in -that case, Moses and Elias need not have been even immaterially present. - -But let us consider it a reality. Then the presence of Moses can be -accounted for by supposing his resurrection from the dead. Against this -hypothesis our opponents have nothing to offer but their own assertions; -and they seem determined to make up in the amount of this commodity what -it lacks in conclusiveness. Thus Landis says, “Moses had died and was -buried, and as his body had never been raised from the dead, he of -course appeared as a disembodied spirit.” And Luther Lee says, “So far -as Moses is concerned, the argument is conclusive.” But against these -authorities, we bring forth another on the other side, as weighty, at -least, as both of them together. Dr. Adam Clarke says, on the same -passage, “The body of Moses was probably raised again, as a pledge of -the resurrection.” - -Before presenting an argument to show that Moses was raised, let us look -at one consideration which proves beyond a peradventure that what -appeared on the mount was not Moses’ disembodied spirit. It will be -admitted by all that the transfiguration was for the purpose of -presenting in miniature the future kingdom of God, the kingdom of glory. -Andrews (Life of our Lord, p. 321) says: “The Lord was pleased to show -certain of the apostles, by a momentary transfiguration of his person, -the supernatural character of his kingdom, and into what new and higher -conditions of being both he and they must be brought ere it could -come.... They saw in the ineffable glory of his person, and the -brightness around them, a foreshadowing of the kingdom of God as it -should come with power; and were for a moment ’eye-witnesses of his -majesty.’ 2 Pet. 1:16.” - -Who are to be the subjects in this heavenly kingdom? Ans. Those who are -translated at Christ’s coming, and the righteous dead who are raised -from their graves at that time. Will there be any disembodied spirits -there? None; for the theory is that at the resurrection, which precedes -the setting up of this kingdom, the disembodied spirits again take -possession of their reanimated bodies. Of this kingdom, the -transfiguration was a representation. There was Christ, the glorified -king; there was Elias, the representative of those who are to be -translated; and there was Moses; but, if it was simply his disembodied -soul, then there was a representation of something that will not exist -in the kingdom of God at all; and the representation was an imperfect -one, and so an utter failure. But if Moses was there in a body raised -from the dead, then the scene was harmonious and consistent, he -representing, as Dr. Clarke supposes, the righteous dead who are to be -raised, and Elias, the living who are to be translated. - -The question now turns upon the resurrection of Moses from the dead; and -if scriptural evidence can be shown that Moses was thus raised, this -passage immediately changes sides in this controversy. That Moses was -raised, we think is to be necessarily inferred from Jude 9: “Yet Michael -the archangel, when contending with the devil, he disputed about the -body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but -said, The Lord rebuke thee.” It will be noticed that this dispute was -about the _body_ of Moses. Michael (Christ, John 5:27-29; 1 Thess. 4:16) -and the devil, each claimed, it appears, the right to do something with -his body. - -Some have endeavored to reconcile Jude’s testimony with the -non-resurrection of Moses, by claiming that the devil wished to make -known to the children of Israel the place of Moses’ burial, in order to -lead them into idolatry; and that the contention between him and Michael -had reference to this. But such a conjecture cannot be entertained, as -in this case the contention would have been about the _grave_ of Moses, -rather than about his _body_. - -But this dispute did have reference solely to the body of Moses. Then we -inquire further what the devil has to do with the bodies of men. He is -said to have the power of death; hence the grave is his dominion, and -whoever enters there he claims as his lawful prey. On the other hand, -Christ is the Life-giver, whose prerogative it is to bring men out from -under the power of death. The most natural conclusion, therefore, is, -that the dispute took place on this very point; that it had reference to -the bringing back to life of that dead body, which the devil would -naturally wish to keep, and claim the right to keep, in his own power. -But Christ rebuked the adversary, and rescued his victim from his grasp. -This is the _necessary_ inference from this passage, and, as such, is -entitled to weight in this argument. - -The chief objection to this view, is this: If Moses was raised so many -years before the resurrection of Christ, how can Christ be called the -first-fruits of them that slept, as in 1 Cor. 15:20, 23? how can he be -said to be the first that should rise from the dead, as in Acts 26:23? -or be called the first-begotten, and first-begotten of the dead, as in -Heb. 1:6, and Rev. 1:5? or the first-born among many brethren, the -first-born of every creature, and the first-born from the dead, as in -Rom. 8:29, and Col. 1:15, 18? - -In answering these queries, we first call attention to an important -fact: Several individuals, of whom we have explicit account, were raised -to life before the resurrection of Christ. The following cases may be -cited: (1) The widow’s son, 1 Kings 17, (2) the son of the Shunammite, 2 -Kings 4, (3) the son of the widow of Nain, Luke 7:14, (4) the ruler’s -daughter, Luke 8:40, 55, and (5) the resurrection of Lazarus. - -These instances cannot be disposed of by making a distinction between a -resurrection to mortality and one to immortality; for where does the -Bible make any such distinction? or where does it give even an -intimation of anything of the kind? Christ, in sending word to John of -the results of his work, told the disciples to tell him, among other -things, that _the dead_ were _raised up_. And when the wicked are -restored to life, it is called a _resurrection_, no less so than the -restoration of the righteous. See John 5:29; Acts 24:15; Rev. 20:5. But -the wicked are not raised to immortality; therefore in the matter of -being raised from the dead, the Bible recognizes no distinction on -account of the different conditions to which the different classes are -raised. Hence the cases referred to above were resurrections from the -dead just as really as though they had been raised to immortality; and -the distinction which some attempt to make is thus shown to be wholly -gratuitous, and is excluded from the controversy. - -The objection now lies just as much against the cases of those of whose -resurrection we have the most explicit account, as against that of -Moses; and the question next to be met is, Can those passages which -declare that a number of the dead were raised before the resurrection of -Christ, and those which speak of Christ as the first to be raised, be -shown to be free from contradiction? - -It will be noticed that the objection, so far as the words, -first-fruits, first-begotten, and first-born, are concerned, rests -wholly upon the supposition that these words denote exclusively priority -in time. It instantly vanishes before the fact that these words are not -confined to this meaning. - -Christ is called the first-fruits in 1 Cor. 15, solely in reference to -his being the antitype of the wave-sheaf, and in contrast with the great -harvest that will take place at his second coming. This word is used in -different senses, as we learn from Jas. 1:18, and Rev. 14:4, where it -cannot have reference to antecedence in time. This is all that need be -said on this word. - -The word rendered first-begotten and first-born is πρωτοτοκος -(_prototokos_). This word is defined by Robinson thus: “Properly the -first-born of father or mother;” and, as the first-born was entitled to -certain prerogatives and privileges over the rest of the family, the -word takes another meaning, namely, “first-born, the same as _the -first_, _the chief_, one highly distinguished and pre-eminent. So of -Christ, the beloved Son of God. Col. 1:15.” Greenfield’s definition is -similar. This word is used in the same sense in the Septuagint. In Ex. -4:22, Israel is called the first-born; and in Jer. 31:9, Ephraim is -called the first-born; but, in point of time, Esau was before Israel, -and Manasseh before Ephraim. Their being called the first-born must -therefore be owing to the rank, dignity, and station, to which they had -attained. - -And hence the conclusion is not without foundation that these words, -when applied to Christ, denote the pre-eminent rank and station which he -holds in the great work, rather than the order of time in which his -resurrection occurred, a point to which no importance whatever can be -attached. All hinges upon Christ, and all is accomplished by his power, -and by virtue of his resurrection. He stands out foremost and -pre-eminent in all these displays, whether they take place before or -after his advent to this world. - -The expression in Acts 27:23, presents apparently the greatest -difficulty of any. The verse reads: “That Christ should suffer, and that -he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should show -light unto the people and to the Gentiles.” As it stands in our common -version it is difficult to reconcile this statement with the fact that a -number were raised from the dead previous to the resurrection of Christ -as already noticed, and we are led to wonder why Paul, knowing of all -these cases, should make such a statement. But, if we mistake not, the -original presents a different idea. In Greenfield’s Testament, the text -stands thus:-- - - Εἰ παθητὸς ὁ Χριστὸς, εἰ πρῶτος ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν φῶς μέλλει -καταγγέλλειν τω λαῷ καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσι. - -We call the attention of those familiar with the Greek to this passage, -and submit that it can be properly rendered as follows: “That Christ was -to suffer, [and] that first from the resurrection of the dead he was to -show light to the people and to the Gentiles.” - -Bloomfield, in his note on this verse, says that the words “may be -rendered, either ‘after the resurrection from the dead,’ or ‘by the -resurrection;’ but the latter is preferable.” And Wakefield translates -it thus: “That the Christ would suffer death, and would be the first to -proclaim salvation to this people and to the Gentiles by a resurrection -from the dead.” - -This is in accordance with what the same apostle declared to Timothy (1 -Tim. 1:10), that Christ brought life and immortality to light through -the gospel. And viewed in this light, the text is freed from all -difficulty. It simply teaches that Christ would be the first to -demonstrate before the people, by a resurrection from the dead, future -life and immortality for the redeemed. - -The resurrection of Lazarus, and other similar cases, though they might -show that the power of death could be so far broken as to give us a new -lease of mortal life, shed no light on our existence beyond this mortal -state. And the resurrection of Moses, supposing him to have been raised, -was not a public demonstration designed to show the people the path to a -future life. So far as we have any account, no one knew that he had been -raised till he appeared upon the mount of transfiguration. Christ was -the first one to show to the world, by his rising from the dead, the -great light of life and immortality beyond the grave. - -Thus the last seeming objection against the idea that Moses had a -resurrection is taken away; while in its favor we have his appearance on -the mount, and the language of Jude, which can be explained on no other -ground. - -Let us then take that view which a consistent regard for scriptural -harmony demands, though another supposed strong column on which rests -the dogma of the immortality of the soul, goes down before it with a -crash to the very dust. - - - - - CHAPTER XVIII. - DID CHRIST TEACH THAT THE DEAD ARE ALIVE? - - -Yes, says the immaterialist, for he taught that God, who declares -himself to be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is not the God of -the dead, but of the living; therefore, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are -living; but they are living as immaterial, disembodied immortal spirits; -for their bodies are in the grave. - -The occasion on which these words were spoken is described in Matt. -22:23-32. To understand the words of Christ, we must understand fully -the point at issue, and what his words were designed to prove; and to do -this, we must look carefully at the narrative:-- - -“The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no -resurrection, and asked him, saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, -having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed -unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren; and the first, -when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his -wife unto his brother: likewise the second also, and the third, unto the -seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the -resurrection, whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had -her. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the -Scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither -marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in -Heaven. But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read -that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, -and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the -dead, but of the living.” - -What, then, was the point at issue between Christ and the Sadducees? See -verse 23: “The same day, came to him the Sadducees, which _say there is -no resurrection_, and asked him,” &c. The Sadducees professed to believe -the writings of Moses, but denied the resurrection. Christ also believed -the writings of Moses, but _taught_ the resurrection. Here, then, was a -fair issue between them. They hear him teaching the resurrection; and to -object their faith to his, they refer to the law of Moses concerning -marriage, and then state a familiar fact; viz., that seven brothers, one -after another, all had one woman, and all died. Now arises a problem -very difficult to their minds, no doubt. How will this matter be -arranged in the resurrection which you teach? Whose wife shall she be in -the resurrection? Let it be noticed that the controversy between Christ -and the Sadducees had no respect whatever to an intermediate state, nor -does their query or Christ’s answer have any reference to such a state. -They do not inquire whose wife she is now, or which of the men’s -immortal souls claims her immortal soul in the spirit world; but, Whose -wife _shall she be_ in the resurrection (a future event)? Christ tells -them that they err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. -And then, to defend himself and condemn them out of their own mouth, he -proceeds to prove--what? a conscious intermediate state? No; but _the -resurrection_, from the writings of Moses. “But as touching the -resurrection from the dead,” says he [as touching the dead that they -rise, says Mark; and that the dead are raised, says Luke], “have ye not -read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of -Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God -of the dead, but of the living.” - -Let us now show that this quotation did prove the resurrection, and our -argument on this passage is closed. That, Moses by this language, did -teach the resurrection of the dead, we think is easily evident. Thus, -Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were dead; but God is not the God of the dead -(or those who are irrecoverably and eternally dead, as the Sadducees -believed them to be), but he _is_ the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. -What, therefore, shall we logically and scripturally conclude from this -fact? Why, simply that they shall live again, or have a resurrection -from the dead. In this view of the subject, Christ reasoned well, proved -the point he aimed to prove, confounded the Sadducees, and gained the -applause of the Pharisees, who believed in the resurrection. - -But grant for a moment that the language means what is popularly claimed -for it, and what becomes of Christ’s reputation as a reasoner, and a -teacher of wisdom sent from God? He set out to prove the resurrection; -but when he closes his argument, lo, wonderful to tell! he has proved -that all men are alive, and, therefore, there is no _need_ of a -resurrection! He neither meets the query of the Sadducees, nor defends -himself, but quite the reverse. Believe that our Lord would reason thus, -ye who can! - -If any should admit that a resurrection is proved by the language, but -claim from it that such resurrection takes place at death, a theory not -uncommon at the present time, we reply that they thereby abandon the -conscious-state theory, and affirm the existence of those who have died, -on another ground, viz., a resurrection. But, further, this is equally -foreign from what Christ set out to prove; for he had reference to an -event which was then future to the seven brethren and the woman that -died. They asked him, saying, “In the resurrection, therefore, when they -_shall rise_, whose wife _shall she be_ of them,” &c. And Jesus answered -and said, “When they _shall rise_ from the dead, they neither marry nor -are given in marriage, but are as the angels in Heaven.” Mark 12:23-25. -Again, in Luke’s account, Jesus says, “But they which _shall be_ -accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the -dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.” Luke 20:35. Thus we see -that a future event is everywhere referred to, and if he in reality -proved that an event had already taken place, which he designed to show -would take place in the future, it speaks no better for his reasoning or -his wisdom than the former supposition. - -Why God calls himself the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, though they -are yet dead, we learn from Heb. 11:16. It is not because they are now -alive, but because in God’s purpose who speaks of things that are not, -as though they were, they are to live, and “he _hath prepared_ for them -a city.” “Wherefore, God is not ashamed to be called their God; for he -hath prepared for them a city,” into possession of which they will of -course come in the future. - -In view of these facts, our friends should be careful lest they expose -themselves to the rebuke Christ gave to the Sadducees: “Ye do err, not -knowing the Scriptures;” for this instance, like all others, when -properly understood, so far from sustaining their position, becomes an -irrefragable evidence of the resurrection of the dead, and a future -life, but affirms nothing whatever for consciousness in death. - - - - - CHAPTER XIX. - MOSES AND THE PROPHETS ON THE PLACE AND CONDITION OF THE DEAD. - - -The hoary fable that every man has in his own nature an immaterial, -ever-conscious, never-dying principle, vaulting from the gloomy regions -of heathen mythology over into the precincts of Christianity, and -claiming the positive authority of Christ and his apostles, instead of -the uncertain speculations of Socrates and Plato, conceives that it -finds a secure intrenchment in Luke 16:19-31, or the record concerning -the rich man and Lazarus. - -Into this record, as into the strongest of strongholds, it enters with -every demonstration of confidence; and from its supposed impregnable -walls, it hurls mockery and defiance against all opposing views, as the -infatuated subjects of Belshazzar defied the soldiers of Cyrus from the -walls of Babylon. - -We venture to approach, at least to reconnoiter. We venture further, -from the record itself, even to lay siege to it, and dig a trench about -it, which, if we mistake not, will soon effectually reduce it, and all -the arguments for immortality it is supposed to contain. - -The first fact to which we call the attention of the reader is that -Christ, as the result of this narrative or parable, or whatever it may -be, refers us to Moses and the prophets for light and information -respecting the place and condition of the dead. In the record, the rich -man is represented as requesting that Lazarus might be sent to his -brethren on earth, lest they should come into the same place of torment. -How would he prevent them? By carrying back to them information -respecting the state that follows this life; by telling how it fared -with the covetous rich man who had enjoyed his good things in this life, -and inducing them to live such a life here as to avoid the condition -into which he had fallen. - -And what was Abraham’s answer? “They have Moses and the prophets.... If -they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded -though one rose from the dead.” That is to say, Moses and the prophets -had given them just as positive information respecting the condition -into which man passes from this life, as could be given them by one who -should repass the portals of the grave and rise from the dead. - -The significance of this declaration should not be overlooked. It throws -us right back upon the records of Moses and the prophets for information -upon that subject respecting which the incident here related is claimed -to be full and sufficient testimony. - -We therefore inquire what Moses and the prophets have taught us -respecting the place where the scene here depicted is represented to -have taken place. What place was this? Answer, _Hades_; for this is the -word from which hell is translated in verse 23. In hell, _hades_, the -rich man lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham and Lazarus afar off, -though still within sight and speaking distance. The New Testament was -written in Greek, while Moses and the prophets wrote in Hebrew. What is -the Hebrew word answering to the Greek _hades_? Answer, _Sheol_. These -are the equivalent terms in the two languages. All that a Hebrew writer -meant by _sheol_, a Greek writer meant by _hades_, and _vice versa_. The -question, then, is simply this: What have Moses and the prophets taught -us respecting _sheol_, and the condition of those who enter therein? - -_Meaning of hades and sheol._ These words denote the common receptacle -of the dead, both righteous and wicked. The righteous dead are there; -for at the resurrection they raise the victorious shout, “O Death, where -is thy sting? O Grave [Gr. _hades_], where is thy victory?” 1 Cor. -15:55. And the wicked dead are there; for at the resurrection to -damnation it is said that death and hell [Gr. _hades_] deliver them up. -Rev. 20:13. That the _hades_ of the New Testament is the _sheol_ of the -Old, Ps. 16, and Acts 2:27, bear testimony. Thus Ps. 16:10, says, “Thou -wilt not leave my soul in hell [Heb. _sheol_];” and the New Testament, -as above, makes a direct quotation of this passage by saying, “Thou wilt -not leave my soul in _hades_.” - -_Use of the word sheol._ This word occurs in the Old Testament -sixty-five times. It is rendered hell and grave each thirty-one times, -and pit three times. With our Lord’s special indorsement of what is -there written concerning it, we may look with interest at the facts -brought out by the testimony of Moses and the prophets. - -_All alike go there._ Thus Jacob says, “I will go down into _sheol_ [to -use the original word in place of the English rendering], unto my son -mourning.” Gen. 37:35. Korah and his company went down into _sheol_. -Num. 16:30, 33. All mankind go there. Ps. 89:48. - -_What goes into sheol._ _Sheol_ receives the whole man bodily at death. -Jacob expected to go down with his gray hairs to _sheol_. Korah, Dathan, -and Abiram, went into _sheol_ bodily. The soul of the Saviour left -_sheol_ at his resurrection. Ps. 16:10; Acts 2:27, 31. David, when -restored from dangerous sickness, testified that his soul was saved from -going into _sheol_. Ps. 30:2, 3. - -_The duration of its dominion._ Those who go down into _sheol_ must -remain there till their resurrection. At the second coming of Christ, -all the righteous are delivered from _sheol_. All the living wicked are -then turned into _sheol_, and for one thousand years it holds them in -its dread embrace. Then it gives them up, and judgment is executed upon -them. Rev. 20:11-15. - -_Location of sheol._ It is in the earth beneath. It embraces the -interior of the earth as the region of the dead, and the place of every -grave. Eze. 32:18-32. It is always spoken of as beneath, in the interior -of the earth, or in the nether parts of the earth. See Num. 16:30, 33; -Isa. 5:14; 14:9-20; Eze. 31:15-18; 32:18-32. Referring to the fires now -preying upon the interior parts of the earth, and which shall at last -cause the earth to melt with fervent heat, the Lord, through Moses, -says: “For a fire is kindled in mine anger, and shall burn unto the -lowest _sheol_, and shall consume the earth with her increase, and set -on fire the foundation of the mountains.” Deut. 32:22. Jonah went down -into _sheol_ when he descended into the depths of the waters, where none -but dead men had ever been. Jonah 1:2. - -_Condition of the righteous in sheol._ They do not praise the Lord -there. David so testifies: “In death there is no remembrance of thee; in -_sheol_ who shall give thee thanks?” Ps. 6:5. Hezekiah uttered the same -great truth, when he was delivered from death in answer to prayer: “I -said in the cutting off of my days, I shall go to the gates of _sheol_; -I am deprived of the residue of my years.... Behold, for peace I had -great bitterness; but thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the -_pit of corruption_; for thou hast cast all my sins behind my back. For -_sheol cannot praise_ thee, death cannot celebrate thee: they that go -down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth. The living, the living, he -shall praise thee, as I do this day: the father to the children shall -make known thy truth.” Isa. 38:10-19; Ps. 115:17; 146:1-4. - -_Condition of the wicked in sheol._ They are still and silent there. -David, in a prayer indited by the Spirit of God, says: “Let the wicked -be ashamed, and let them be silent in _sheol_.” Ps. 31:17. In 1 Sam. -2:9, we read that the wicked shall be silent in darkness. - -_General character of sheol._ It is a place of silence, secresy, sleep, -rest, darkness, corruption, and worms. Job says: “So man lieth down, and -riseth not: till the heavens be no more they shall not awake nor be -raised out of their sleep. Oh! that thou wouldst hide me in _sheol_, -that thou wouldst keep me secret till thy wrath be past, that thou -wouldst appoint me a set time and remember me. If a man die, shall he -live again? All the days of my appointed time will I wait till my change -come. Thou shalt call, and I will answer thee; thou wilt have a desire -to the work of thine hands.” Job 14:12-15. Again he says: “If I wait, -_sheol_ is mine house: I have made my bed in the darkness. I have said -to corruption, Thou art my father: to the worm, Thou art my mother and -my sister. And where is now my hope? As for my hope, who shall see it? -They shall go down to the bars of _sheol_, when our rest together is in -the dust.” Job. 17:13-16; 4:11-19; Ps. 88:10-12. - -_There is no knowledge in sheol._ This fact is plainly stated by Solomon -through the Spirit of inspiration: “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, -do it with thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, -nor wisdom in _sheol_ whither thou goest.” Eccl. 9:4-6, 10. When man -goes in there his very thoughts perish. Ps. 146:4. - -Such are the great facts concerning _sheol_, or hades, revealed to us in -the books of “Moses and the prophets.” Their statements are literal, -plain, explicit, and unequivocal. In opposition to all these, can it be -maintained that in _sheol_ and _hades_ there _is_ consciousness, wisdom, -device, knowledge, happiness, and misery, as is popularly claimed on the -authority of this record about the rich man and Lazarus? If not, and if -_sheol_ is such a place of silence, darkness, inactivity, and -unconsciousness, as they declare, can the use of such language as is -employed respecting the rich man and Lazarus in this very place be -accounted for? - - - - - CHAPTER XX. - THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS. - - -The previous chapter left us with the problem on our hands whether it -were better to try to overthrow all that Moses and the prophets have -written respecting _sheol_ and the condition of those who enter therein, -for the purpose of sustaining the common view of the rich man and -Lazarus, or to try to account for the use of the language used in that -narrative, in harmony with what Moses and the prophets have said -respecting that place. - -In the first place, we cannot set aside what Moses and the prophets have -written; for Christ, in the very case under consideration, indorses them -and refers us to them for instruction. How, then, can we account for the -fact that the rich man is represented as conscious, intelligent, and -active, in _hades_, when Moses and the prophets have taught us that -_hades_ is a place of darkness and silence, without knowledge, wisdom, -or device? If the record of the rich man and Lazarus is a parable, the -use of such language is at once accounted for; for if it is a parable, -the language is allegorical; and in allegory, life and action are often -attributed to inanimate objects, for the sake of enforcing or -illustrating some particular truth. - -Some notable instances of this style of writing are furnished us in the -Old Testament. In Judges 9:7-15, the trees are represented as going -forth to anoint a king over them; and they appealed to the olive tree -and the fig tree and the vine, and received answers from them in which -they declined to leave their stations of usefulness to be promoted over -them. Finally, they appealed to the bramble; and the bramble accepted -the trust. Now this representation was not designed to teach that trees -ordain civil government, walk about, and converse together; but it was -to illustrate the folly of the men of Shechem in electing Abimelech -king. Again, in 2 Kings 14:9, we read that the king of Israel sent to -the king of Judah, saying, “The thistle in Lebanon sent to the cedar -that was in Lebanon, saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife.” This -is not to teach that thistles and cedars have sons and daughters who -unite in marriage, but to illustrate the contempt which the king of -Israel felt for the proposition which the king of Judah made to him. - -Landis, p. 188, claims that it makes no difference whether the case of -the rich man and Lazarus is a parable or not, since a parable should not -be so worded as to convey a wrong impression to the mind, which this -would do, if the soul is not conscious in death. We reply, It makes all -the difference in the world; for if it is a parable, the life and action -attributed to the inanimate inhabitants of hades, is not to teach -anything respecting their real condition, any more than the life and -action attributed to the trees and brambles in the cases referred to, is -designed to teach what their condition is; but this intelligence and -action are attributed to these inanimate objects, to illustrate some -great truth which the speaker wished to enforce. - -In the case of the rich man and Lazarus, what was the object in view? -Answer: To rebuke the Pharisees for their covetousness (“And the -Pharisees also, who were _covetous_, heard all these things; and they -derided him.” Verse 14); to show to them, since they thought that riches -in this life was a mark of the divine favor and would secure God’s -blessing in the next, that if they gave themselves up to the sensual -enjoyment of their riches, neglecting and oppressing the poor, they -would, in the future, meet God’s wrath instead of his favor; and that -the poor, whom they despised and oppressed, might attain to that very -state of felicity, set forth under the figure of Abraham’s bosom, of -which they thought themselves so sure. - -That this is a parable seems abundantly evident: 1. It stands in -connection with a long list of parables. The preceding chapter, Luke 15, -contains three. This chapter opens with the parable of the unjust -steward; and there is no intimation of a change from parable to literal -narration in this case. 2. It is said that this cannot be a parable, -because it is introduced by a direct assertion. “There was a certain -rich man,” &c. But others which are parables are introduced in exactly -the same manner. Thus verse 1, “There _was_ a certain rich man which had -a steward,” &c. And chapter 15:11: “A certain man _had_ two sons,” &c. -3. The prophets, to whom we are referred, speak of the dead in _sheol_, -in the nether parts of the earth, as conversing together, taunting each -other, weeping bitterly, refusing to be comforted, &c., representations -exactly similar to those made in the case of the rich man and Lazarus, -and full as striking, but which no one can regard as setting forth the -actual condition of the dead. - -Thus in Isa. 14:9-20, it is represented that when the king of Babylon is -overthrown, he goes down into _sheol_, and the DEAD (for there are no -others in its dark domain) are stirred up to meet him. The kings that -had been destroyed by the king of Babylon, are represented as having -thrones in _sheol_ beneath, and when the king of Babylon joins them in -their dark abode, they rise up from their thrones, and mock him with -feigned obeisance, as in life they had rendered him real homage. And -they say, “Art thou become weak as we? Art thou become like unto us? Is -this the man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms?” -No one can suppose that they literally act or speak thus. But all this -is a striking figure to represent that death would reduce the king of -Babylon to the same level with his subjects and prisoners. - -Again in Eze. 31:15-18, and 32:17-32, Pharaoh and his host, slain in -battle with the king of Babylon, are set forth in the same manner. The -strong among the mighty are represented as speaking to him out of the -midst of _sheol_, as he enters therein. And this _sheol_, in “the nether -parts of the earth,” full of graves and of the dead, is contrasted with -the land of the living. These victims of slaughter went down to _sheol_ -with their weapons of war; and their swords they “laid under their -heads;” and when Pharaoh, lying among them, saw the multitude of his -enemies that were slain also, he was comforted at the sight. - -Another case, perhaps still more remarkable, is that of Rachel. Jer. -31:15-17; Matt. 2:17, 18; Gen. 25:17-20. Long ages after Rachel had -died, and entered into _sheol_, a dreadful slaughter took place among -her posterity. Thereupon she is represented as breaking forth into -lamentation and bitter weeping, and refusing to be comforted because her -children were not. And the Lord says to her, “Refrain thy voice from -weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, -saith the Lord.” - -No one can suppose that Rachel literally wept at the murder of her -children nearly 2000 years after her death, nor that the slaughtered -Egyptians put their swords under their heads as they were lying in -_sheol_, and conversed together in the nether parts of the earth, some -being comforted, and others ashamed; nor that the kings overthrown by -the king of Babylon rose up from their sepulchral thrones in mock -solemnity, and taunted him with becoming weak as they. - -But these were all figures to set forth great and salutary truths. May -not our Lord then, for once, be permitted for a like purpose to use a -like figure, so largely employed by the prophets, and so well known to -his hearers, by personifying persons in _hades_ to perform actions which -were not there literally to occur? We have certainly as good reason to -suppose that Rachel, the Egyptians, and the king of Babylon, were real -personages, and their descent into _sheol_ and the accompanying -circumstance as related by the prophets, veritable history, as to -suppose that Dives was a real character, and his torment in _hades_, and -his conversation with Abraham, a real transaction. - -Those who held in their hands the Old-Testament scriptures were -perfectly familiar with such figures. There the “trees of the field” -converse and “clap their hands,” the “floods” lift up their “voice,” the -hills and mountains “sing,” stones from the wall “cry out,” and beams -“answer,” the blood of Abel finds a “voice,” and “cries out from the -ground,” and dead men rejoice over the fall of their rivals, slain by -the sword. In a volume abounding with such figures, cannot for once a -rich man, representing a class of living persons, be endowed in _hades_ -with life and speech? must this one figure of personification be singled -out from all others, as a rigidly literal narrative, and be made to -sustain the weight of the most terrific doctrine of which the mind of -man can conceive? - -Sufficient evidence has been produced to show that this is a parable. -And now we invite the attention of the reader to the testimony of two -eminent authors respecting the use which should be made of parables. - -Dr. Clarke (note on Matt. 5:26) says:-- - -“Let it be remembered that by the consent of all (except the basely -interested), no _metaphor_ is ever to be produced in _proof_ of a -doctrine. In the things that concern our eternal salvation, we need the -most pointed and _express evidence_ on which to establish the faith of -our souls.” - -And Trench, in his work on parables, lays down this very important -rule:-- - -“The parables may not be made first sources of doctrine. Doctrines -otherwise and already grounded, may be illustrated, or indeed further -confirmed by them, but it is not allowable to constitute doctrine first -by their aid. They may be the outer ornamental fringe, but not the main -texture of the proof. For from the literal to the figurative, from the -clearer to the more obscure, has ever been recognized as the law of -Scripture interpretation. This rule, however, has been _often -forgotten_, and controversialists, looking round for arguments with -which to sustain some _weak position_, one for which they can find no -other support in Scripture, often invent for themselves supports in -these.” - -But some persist that this is not a parable, but a literal narrative; -and not to seem captious, we will consider it in this light. If this is -veritable history, all the particulars must be taken literally. Then the -wicked, tormented in the flames of hell, are within sight and speaking -distance of the saved in Heaven. In other words, Heaven is but the shore -of hell, and on that shore the redeemed can sit and watch the damned in -their fearful contortions of agony for which there is no name, and -listen to their entreaties for relief and their shrieks of fathomless -despair, to an extent, it would seem, sufficient to satisfy the fiercest -vengeance and the most implacable revenge. If this be so, our friends -must certainly abandon the argument they build on Rev. 6:9, 10, where -they have it that the souls of the martyrs, disembodied and conscious, -cry to God to visit vengeance upon their persecutors. If they were where -they could look over into the fiery gulf, and behold their persecutors -vainly battling with its flaming billows, or if not already there, -destined in a few short years to be plunged therein, let no one say of -the holy martyrs that they would, under such circumstances, cry -impatiently to God to hasten or intensify his vengeance. The arguments -based on the narrative of the rich man and Lazarus, and Rev. 6:9, 10, -must, one or the other of them, be given up; for they devour each other. -Let the advocates of the popular theory look to this. - -The beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom. The -rich man also died, and was buried. Let it be noted that the persons -themselves, as a whole, are spoken of, not any of their essential -elements, or immaterial appendages. Nothing is said of the soul of -either the rich man or Lazarus. As we are now considering this as a -literal transaction, a question vital to the argument is, _When_ do the -angels bear those who have died, as persons (for there is nothing -anywhere said about the angels’ carrying their souls), into Abraham’s -bosom, or the state of the blessed? Such scriptures as Matt. 24:30, 31; -1 Thess. 4:16, 17, answer this question very explicitly: “And he shall -send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather -together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the -other.” When? At the second advent of the Son of man in majesty and -glory; for then it is that the voice of the archangel, ringing through -the long galleries of _hades_, shall wake the righteous dead from their -silent slumbers, and angels bear them upward on wings of light, to be -forever with the Lord. - -The rich man dies, and is buried; and his next experience is the -suffering of torment in consuming flame. How long after his burial he -finds himself in this torment, we are not directly informed. But he has -bodily organs; for he has eyes to see, and a tongue to be cooled; but -these the dead are not usually considered to possess till the -resurrection. This drives Landis, p. 191, to the unusual admission that -the soul retains the human form, with its corresponding organs, hands, -feet, eyes, tongue, &c. Again, the rich man sees Lazarus in Abraham’s -bosom; but, as we have already seen, Lazarus is not literally borne -there by the angels till the resurrection. - -As a literal transaction, the scene is inevitably located, by the -concurrent testimony of all Scripture, beyond the resurrection. How, -then, it can be said to transpire in _hades_, we leave those to decide -who believe that it is a literal transaction. Certain it is that no such -scenes can really occur in _hades_, if the representations of that place -given us by Moses and the prophets are correct; while analogous scenes -will really take place beyond the resurrection: there the righteous are -rewarded, and the wicked punished in devouring fire; there the Lord told -the impenitent Jews that they should see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in -the kingdom of God, and they themselves thrust out, and that then there -would be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Luke 13:28. - -One view, only, maintains harmony between this and other portions of the -sacred writings; and that is the one which is here, imperfectly it may -be, but yet sincerely, advocated: that Christ, following the example of -the prophets, uses the figure of personification, and anticipates, as -transpiring in the grave, scenes which substantially occur beyond the -resurrection; and that the object of the parable was to rebuke the -Pharisees for their covetousness by indicating the fate that awaited a -life of avarice and oppression here, however sumptuous that life might -be. - -That it does not teach the existence of conscious souls between death -and the resurrection, is forever settled by the fact that Lazarus could -return only by a resurrection from the dead. When the rich man requested -that Lazarus might be sent to warn his brethren, Abraham replied that -they had Moses and the prophets, and if they would not hear them, they -would not “be persuaded _though one rose from the dead_.” The -conversation did not therefore relate to the coming back of the immortal -soul of Lazarus; and indeed no mention is made of any such thing in the -whole transaction. - -Therefore, interpret it as we may, it cannot be reasonably or -scripturally used to prove the entrance of man’s naked, unclothed spirit -into bliss or woe at the hour of death. - - - - - CHAPTER XXI. - WITH ME IN PARADISE. - - -According to Luke’s account of the crucifixion of our Saviour, Luke -23:27-46, one of the two malefactors who were crucified with him, said -to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And -Jesus said unto him, Verily, I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with -me in Paradise.” Verses 42, 43. This, says the immaterialist, “must ever -stand as a clear announcement of the uninterrupted immortality of the -soul.” (_Landis_, p. 211.) The “clear announcement” is made out in this -manner: Christ and the thief, it is claimed, both died that day; they -both went to paradise that day; and their condition while there was, of -course, one of consciousness and intelligence. - -There is one fact which stands somewhat in the way of this clear -announcement; and that is, that _Christ did not go to paradise that -day_. In answer to the popular view, we first set forth this unqualified -proposition, and undertake its proof; and if this shall prove to be well -grounded, the doctrine of annihilation will be found in a degree true; -for the claims usually built on the scripture above quoted are utterly -and forever annihilated by this fact. - -In entering upon the argument to show that Christ did not go to paradise -that day, we first inquire what paradise is and where it is. The word -occurs but three times in the English version of the Scriptures, all in -the New Testament; two besides the verse under consideration; but these -are amply sufficient to define and locate it. - -First, Paul in 2 Cor. 12:2, says: “I knew a man in Christ above fourteen -years ago (whether in the body I cannot tell; or whether out of the -body, I cannot tell; God knoweth), such an one caught up to the third -Heaven.” In verse 4, he affirms that the place to which this man was -caught up was paradise. This establishes the fact that paradise is in -the third Heaven. - -Again, in Rev. 2:7, we read the promise which the Saviour gives to the -overcomers; and he says: “To him that overcometh will I give to eat of -the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.” This -establishes another equally important fact, that paradise is where the -tree of life now is. Now, if the Scriptures anywhere give us any further -information respecting the place where the tree of life is to be found, -we have still further testimony respecting paradise. - -In Rev. 21 and 22, we have a description of the New Jerusalem, the holy -city which is above. In chap. 22:1, 2, we read: “And he showed me a pure -river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne -of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it [the city], and -on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare -twelve manner of fruit, and yielded her fruit every month.” By this -testimony, we learn that the tree of life, which grows in the midst of -the paradise of God, is in the holy city, fast by the river of life, -which proceeds from the throne of God. Nothing could be more explicit -than this. We have now found the paradise of the New Testament. It is in -the third Heaven, where the tree of life is, and where God maintains his -residence and his throne. Whoever, therefore, goes into paradise, goes -into the presence of God. If the Saviour went there on the day of his -crucifixion, with the impenitent thief, he went into the presence of his -Father. - -Now let us reverently listen to the words of the Lord and believe what -he says, while he himself testifies whether he went to paradise on the -day of his crucifixion, or not. On the morning of his resurrection, the -_third day_ after his crucifixion, he said to Mary, who was about to -embrace his feet, in accordance with the ancient custom of deference or -worship, “Touch me not; FOR I AM NOT YET ASCENDED TO MY FATHER.” The -third day, remember, from the crucifixion, and not ascended into -paradise yet! - -Struck into a state of bewilderment by this stunning fact, Landis, pp. -209, 211, clutches wildly for some supports by which to rear again his -prostrate structure. He feigns to find evidence in John 16:16, that -Jesus told his disciples that at death he would go to his Father: a -scripture which very evidently has reference, not to his death, but to -his bodily ascension, forty days after his resurrection. Then, referring -to the fact that the word “ascend” is from _anabaino_, he says: “Now -every tyro knows that in composition _ana_ has very frequently [?] the -force of _again_. _Baino_ alone means simply _to ascend_; _ana_ adds a -shade of meaning.” - -It is frequently the case that writers try to drive others into an -admission of their statements by representing that they will appear very -ignorant and stupid to deny them. But Mr. L., not being a tyro, -doubtless understands that nearly every statement in this criticism is -false in itself considered, and every one of them wholly so, as applied -to the case in hand. _Ana_, in composition with _baino_, does not have -the force of again. In neither Liddell and Scott, Robinson, Greenfield, -nor Parkhurst, is there any such definition as “ascended again” given to -_anabaino_. _Baino_ alone does not mean “to ascend.” No such definition -is given to it in the standard authorities here named. It means simply -to go, without any reference to the direction; other words, either in -composition with it, or in the context, signifying whether this motion -is up or down, forward or backward, over or under, &c. In no one of the -eighty-one instances of the use of the word in the New Testament, is it -translated “ascend again.” And finally, those texts which Mr. L. quotes -as containing the word again, as Matt. 3:16, which he quotes, “Christ -_went up again_, or returned,” and Matt. 5:1, which he quotes, “He went -up _again_ into a mountain,” the word, again, is not expressed in the -English nor implied in the Greek. In only one instance is the word again -used with _anabaino_; that is Gal. 2:1, where Paul says, “I went up -_again_ to Jerusalem;” but here the word again is from another word -(_palin_), and _anabaino_ is translated simply “went up.” - -Rarely do we meet with an instance of more reckless desperation in the -line of criticism. And what is the object of it? It is to have us -understand that when Christ says, “I am not yet ascended to my Father,” -he means to say, I am not yet ascended _again_ to my Father. And from -this he would have us further draw the lucid inference that Christ had -ascended once, that is, in his disembodied spirit, between his death and -resurrection, and now tells Mary not to touch him because he has not -ascended again! It would be difficult to conceive of a more unnecessary -and far-fetched inference. And that men will seriously contend for such -a view, shows the orbless obstinacy with which they will cling to -preconceived notions, though they have only the most groundless trifles -to sustain them, rather than surrender them for more consistent views. -Nothing can be more evident than that Christ, when he said, “I am not -yet ascended to my Father,” affirmed in the most direct manner that -since his advent into this world, he had not, up to that time, ascended -to his Father. - -Rather than thus summarily lose the argument that the thief was still -conscious in death, and that the soul is therefore (?) immortal, another -attempt is made to adjust the matter thus: Although Christ did not go to -his Father, he nevertheless went to paradise, which is not where the -Father dwells, but the intermediate resting place of departed souls. Do -we then understand them? We found them, a little while ago, arguing from -Eccl. 12:7, that the disembodied spirit _did_ return to God; which they -claimed to be proof positive that the soul is immortal; and thought it -would puzzle the annihilationists not a little. Do they now give this -up, and admit that the soul or spirit does not go to God, but only into -some intermediate place, called paradise? It matters not to us which -position they take, only we wish to know which one it is. We cannot hold -our peace and allow them to take one position on one text and another on -another, to avoid the embarrassments into which their theory plunges at -every turn. - -That paradise is no intermediate state, a halfway house between the -grave and the resurrection, we have fully shown; for we have the -positive statements of the Scriptures to show that paradise is in the -third Heaven, where God sits upon his throne; and Christ told Mary, the -third day after his crucifixion, in so many words, that he had not yet -ascended there. - -The popular interpretation of Christ’s language to the thief thus -utterly failing, we are thrown back upon the text for some other -explanation of the phraseology there used: “Verily I say unto thee, -To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” - -There are but two probable ways in which this language can be -interpreted: One is, to let the phrase, “to-day,” refer to the time to -which the thief had reference in his request. He said, “Lord, remember -me when thou comest into thy kingdom.” He looked forward to the day when -Christ should come into his kingdom. And if the “to-day” in Christ’s -answer refers to this time, then the sense would be, “Verily I say unto -thee, To-day, or this day, the day to which you refer, when I come into -my kingdom, thou shalt be with me in paradise.” The word, to-day, is -from the Greek, σήμερον (_semeron_); and all the definitions we find of -it would seem to confine it to present time, excluding an application of -it to the future. This interpretation, therefore, we think cannot be -urged. - -The other, and only remaining method of interpreting the passage, is to -place the comma after “to-day,” making to-day an adverb qualifying say. -The sense would then be, Verily I say unto thee to-day, thou shalt be -with me in paradise, at that period in the future when I shall come in -my kingdom. - -This method of punctuation, if it is allowable, clears the subject of -all difficulty. Let us then candidly consider what objections can be -urged against it. - -As to the punctuation itself, we all know that that is not the work of -inspiration, and withal that it is of recent origin, the comma in its -present form not having been invented till the year A. D. 1790. It is -therefore allowable to change this in any manner that the sense of the -passage, the context, or even other portions of the Scriptures may -demand. And in support of this punctuation, we have the example of some -Greek manuscripts, which, according to Griesbach, place the comma after -“to-day” in this declaration. - -But the objector accuses us of making sad nonsense of the text by this -change; and he asks, in bitter irony, “Didn’t the thief know it was that -day, without Christ’s telling him?” Very true, as a matter of fact; but -let the objector beware lest his sarcasm fall upon the Scriptures -themselves; for such very expressions do occur therein. See Zech. 9:12: -“Turn you to the stronghold, ye prisoners of hope: even _to-day_ do I -declare that I will render double unto thee.” Transposing this sentence, -without altering the sense, we have phraseology similar to that of Luke -23:43; namely, “I declare unto you even to-day, I will render double -unto thee.” The events threatened here were to take place in the future, -when the Lord should bend Judah, &c. See context. So the phrase, -“to-day,” could not qualify the “rendering double,” &c., but only the -declaration. - -Here, then, is an expression exactly parallel with that in Luke, and the -same irony is applicable; thus, “Did not the prisoners of hope know it -was that day when the declaration was made to them?” But let our -opponents now discard their unworthy weapon; for here it is leveled -against the words of Inspiration itself. - -But when we take into consideration the circumstances of the case, we -see a force and propriety in the Saviour’s making his declaration -emphatically upon that day. He had been preaching the advent of the -kingdom of Heaven to listening multitudes. A kingdom, he had promised to -his followers. But the powers of death and darkness had apparently -triumphed, and were crushing into the very grave both his prospects and -his promises. He who was expected to be the king of the coming kingdom, -stretched upon the shameful cross, was expiring in ignominy and -reproach; his disciples were scattered; and where now was the prospect -of that kingdom which had been preached and promised? But amid the -supernatural influences at work upon that memorable day, a ray of divine -illumination may have flashed in upon the soul of the poor thief, -traveling the same road of death beside his Lord. A conviction of the -truthfulness of his claims as the Messiah, the Son of God, may have -entered into his mind, and a desire have sprung up in his heart to trust -his lot in his hands, leading him to put up a humble and sincere -petition, Lord, in mercy remember me when the days of thy triumph and -glory shall come. Yes, says the suffering Saviour, in the hearing of the -mocking multitude, I say unto thee, _to-day_--to-day, in this hour of my -darkness and agony--to-day, when the fatal cross is apparently giving -the lie to all my pretensions--to-day, a day of forlorn prospects and -withered hopes, so far as human eyes can see--verily, _to-day_, I say -unto thee, thou shalt be with me in paradise, when my kingdom shall be -established in triumph and glory. - -Thus, there is a divine force and beauty in these words of our Lord, as -uttered on that occasion. How like a sun at midnight would they have -broken in upon the gloom that enshrouded the sorrowing hearts of the -disciples, had they fathomed their import. For who had occasion to sink -in despair, if not He upon whom all depended, and that, too, when -expiring under the agonies of the cross. But lo! no cloud of gloom is -sufficient to fix its shadows upon his serene brow. His divine -foresight, riding calmly over the events of the present, fixes itself -upon that coming period of glory, when he shall see of the travail of -his soul and be satisfied. There, in the hour of his deepest humility, -he points them to the joys of paradise. - -Thus, by a simple removal of the comma one word forward, the stone of -stumbling is taken out of this text, by making it harmonize with other -Scriptures; and thus, the promise, by having reference to something in -the future, and not to anything to be performed on that day, contains no -affirmation of consciousness in death. - - - - - CHAPTER XXII. - ABSENT FROM THE BODY. - - -Another passage, supposed to teach the separate conscious existence of -the soul, is found in 2 Cor. 5:8: “We are confident, I say, and willing -rather, to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.” On -the acknowledged principle that it is illogical to endeavor to build any -great doctrine upon an isolated passage, without taking into -consideration the general tenor of the context, if not also other -writings from the same author, let us look at some of the statements -which Paul has made in this connection. - -In verse 1 of this chapter, Paul introduces an earthly house and a -heavenly house, and says, “For we know that if our earthly house of this -tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made -with hands, eternal in the heavens.” He states our condition while in -the earthly house. Verse 2: “In this we groan,” verse 4, “being -burdened.” He tells what we desire in this state. Verse 2. “Earnestly -desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from Heaven [verse -3]: if so be that being clothed, we shall not be found naked.” In verse -4, Paul repeats all these facts in order to state the result of the work -which he desired: “For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being -burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon.” Now he -states the result of being clothed upon with the house from Heaven which -he so earnestly desired: “But clothed upon, that mortality might be -swallowed up of life.” Then he states that the condition he had in view -is that for which God in the beginning designed the human race: “Now he -that has wrought us for the self-same thing is God.” That is, God -designed that we should ultimately reach that condition which he here -designates as being clothed upon with our house from Heaven. Then he -states what assurance we have in this life that we shall eventually -attain to this condition: “who also hath given unto us the earnest -[assurance, pledge, token] of the Spirit.” That is, the Spirit dwelling -in our hearts, is the assurance or pledge we have that we shall finally -receive the desire of our hearts, and be clothed upon with our house -from Heaven. In verse 6, he states this to be the ground of his -confidence, although while “we are at home in the body, we are absent -from the Lord.” And then after incidentally stating the secret of the -Christian’s course in this life, “we walk by faith, not by sight,” he -penned the text quoted at the commencement of this chapter, stating that -he was willing rather to be absent from the body and to be present with -the Lord. - -We now have before us quite fully, the subject upon which Paul is here -treating. A thought now as to the meaning of the terms he employs. What -does he mean by the earthly house and the heavenly house? by being -clothed and unclothed? by mortality being swallowed up of life? and by -being absent from the body and present with the Lord? - -What he calls in verse 1, “our earthly house,” he designates in verse 6, -as being “at home in the body.” The chief characteristic of this house -is that it may be dissolved, or is mortal. This earthly house is -therefore our mortal body, or what is essentially the same thing, this -present mortal condition. The house from Heaven is eternal or immortal. -This, therefore, by parity of reasoning, is the immortal body or the -state of immortality which awaits the redeemed beyond the resurrection. - -Paul, in Rom. 8:22, 23, speaks very plainly of these two conditions: -“For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain -together until now. And not only they, but ourselves also, which have -the first-fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within -ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our -body.” None can fail to see the parallel between this passage in Romans, -and that portion of 2 Cor. 5, now under consideration. To the -Corinthians, Paul says, that in our earthly house we groan, being -burdened; to the Romans, that we groan within ourselves, or in this -mortal body; to the Corinthians, that while in this state we have the -earnest of the Spirit; to the Romans, that we have the first-fruits of -the Spirit, which is the same thing, the pledge, assurance, or earnest; -to the Corinthians, that we desire to be clothed upon with our house -from Heaven; to the Romans, that we wait for the adoption, to wit, the -redemption of our body. The ultimate object in view in both cases, as a -matter of hope and desire, is the redeemed or eternal state; but in the -one case it is being “clothed upon with our house from Heaven,” and in -the other, it is “the redemption of our body.” These two expressions, -therefore, denote one and the same thing. - -Returning to a consideration of the meaning of the terms which Paul -uses, we inquire what is meant by being unclothed. And the evident -answer is, The dissolution of our earthly house, or the falling of our -mortal body in death. The state of death, then, is that condition in -which we are unclothed. And the being clothed upon, is being released -from this state, when mortality is swallowed up of life, and we are -taken into the presence of the Lord. Then Paul states a conclusion very -apparent from his premises, that while we are at home in the body we are -absent from the Lord, and adds that he is willing rather to be absent -from the body and present with the Lord. - -The only verse in which consciousness in death can even be supposed to -be intimated, is the 8th verse, which speaks of our being absent from -the body and present with the Lord. But even here it will be seen that -the whole question turns on the time when we enter the presence of the -Lord. Is it immediately on the dissolution of our earthly house? This -the text does not inform us; but on this the preceding verses are very -explicit, as we shall presently see. - -Let us now look at a few considerations which show that it is impossible -to harmonize the popular view of consciousness in death, with the -statements which the apostle here makes. It is claimed that the house -which we have eternal in the Heavens is the immortal soul with which we -immediately enter into Heaven when the earthly house is dissolved. -Granting that this is so, let us go forward a little and mark the -difficulty in which this view is involved. The time comes when the -mortal body is raised from the dead and made immortal. In these redeemed -bodies we are to live in the kingdom of God to all eternity. This is -finally our eternal house. But when we take possession of this, what -becomes of our house that we occupied between death and the -resurrection? If we pass from our mortal bodies at death immediately -into a spiritual body prepared for us, which is the house we have in -Heaven, and in which we live till the resurrection, when our natural -bodies are redeemed, and we take possession of them, it necessarily -follows that we vacate that second house which we had occupied in -Heaven. Then what becomes of that house? Moreover this view introduces -something before us of which Paul has made no mention; for here we have -three houses, but Paul’s language allows of only two; and one of these -three houses, on the view before us, has to be abandoned, to go to ruin, -when we take possession of our redeemed bodies. All this is unscriptural -and absurd. Such a view is an impossibility. - -Again, Paul affirms in verse 5 that God hath wrought us for this -self-same thing, that is, created man for such a state of being as we -shall enjoy, when clothed upon with our house from Heaven. Is this -condition the separate existence of an immortal soul? No; for if man had -never sinned, he would have reached that state without seeing death, and -the idea of an immortal soul would never have had an existence. The -whole doctrine is the offspring of sin, for it is the result of the -fall. It is the second falsehood which the devil found necessary to -sustain his first one, “Ye shall not surely die.” For when all that is -outward, tangible, and visible of man does fall in death, his untruth -would be very apparent unless he could make them believe that there is -an invisible medium through which they still continue to live. Paul, -therefore, in the scripture under notice, does not have any reference to -an intermediate state. - -He further says that we have through the Spirit an earnest, or pledge, -that this condition, which is set forth as the chief object of desire, -will finally be reached, and we shall be clothed with our house from -Heaven. But what is the Holy Spirit in our hearts an earnest or pledge -of? What does it signify that we have a measure of the Holy Spirit here? -Is it a proof or assurance that we have immortal souls that will live -when the body is dead? No, but that we shall be redeemed and made -immortal. See Eph. 1:13, 14: “In whom also, after that ye believed, ye -were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of -our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto -the praise of his glory.” And in Rom. 8:11, Paul again says: “But if the -Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that -raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by -his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” - -These are the glorious promises of which the Holy Spirit in our hearts -is a pledge and assurance: that these mortal bodies shall be quickened -from the dead, even as Christ was raised up, and that we shall share in -the inheritance, when the purchased possession shall be redeemed. It -looks not to any intermediate state, but to the ultimate reward. - -And finally, Paul forever bars his teaching against the entrance of the -conscious state dogma, by saying that when we are clothed upon with our -house from Heaven, mortality is swallowed up of life. How can mortality -be swallowed up of life? It can be only by having a principle of life -come upon it which shall overpower and absorb it. Mortality can be -swallowed up only by immortality or eternal life. Is this the passing of -the soul from the mortal body at the hour of death? Let us look at it. -What is there about man, according to the common view, which is mortal? -The body. And what is immortal? The soul. At death, the body, that part -which is mortal, does not become immortal, but loses all its life, and -goes into the grave to crumble back to dust. And the soul, which was -immortal before, is no more than immortal afterward. Is there any -swallowing up of mortality by life here? Just the reverse. Mortality, or -the mortal part, is swallowed up by death. There is not so much life -afterward as before; for after death, the soul only lives, while the -body, which was alive before, is now dead. - -But Paul, before penning this language in 2 Cor. 5, had already told the -Corinthians when mortality would be swallowed up of life, and how it -would be accomplished; so he knew when he penned this portion of his -second epistle that they would understand it perfectly. See the 15th -chapter of his first epistle, verses 51-55: “Behold I show you a -mystery: we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a -moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the trumpet -shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be -changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal -must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on -incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall -be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in -victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” - -In verse 50, he says: “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood -cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither doth corruption inherit -incorruption.” Corruption does not inherit, or possess, incorruption. -Mortality does not possess immortality. The mortal body does not inclose -an immortal principle, which it has power to hold within its grasp, till -that grasp is rendered nerveless by the stroke of death, and the soul -flies away in glad release. But this mortal, all that there is about man -that is mortal, must put on, must be itself invested with, immortality, -and this corruptible, all about us that is perishable, must itself -become incorruptible; then it will not be this corruptible flesh and -blood, and then it can inherit the kingdom of God, and start off bold -and vigorous on its race of endless life; and outside of this change, -and independent of this grand investiture of our mortal nature with -immortality, there is no eternal life for any of the race. And when this -is accomplished, then death is swallowed up in victory; then we are -clothed upon with our house from Heaven; then mortality is swallowed up -of life. But this is not at death, but at the last trump, when the Lord -appears in glory, and the dead are raised, and the righteous living are -changed in the twinkling of an eye. How can the religious world stumble -in a path so plain! - -But if the heavenly house is our future immortal body, it may be asked -how Paul can say, as he does in 2 Cor. 5:1, “We have [present tense] a -building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” -We have this in the same sense that we have, at the present time, -eternal life. And John tells us how this is: It is by faith, or by -promise, not by actual possession. 1 John 5:11: “And this is the record, -that God hath given to us eternal life.” God hath given it to us; and on -the strength of this promise we have it. But where is it now? “And this -life is”--in us? No, but--“in his Son.” And when he, the Son, who is our -life, shall appear, we shall be clothed upon with our heavenly house, -and appear with him in glory. Col. 3:4. - -Again, it may be asked how Paul can speak of two houses, as though we -moved from one into the other, if it is only a change of condition from -mortal to immortality. He illustrates this in the figure he takes to -represent conversion. Eph. 4:22-24: “That ye put off concerning the -former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the -deceitful lusts; and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye -put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true -holiness.” Here the simple change of heart, the change of the -disposition, from sin to holiness, is spoken of as putting off one man -and putting on another. With even greater propriety, may the change from -mortal to immortality be spoken of as removing from an earthly, -perishable house, to an immortal, heavenly one. - -The terms Paul uses to describe the two states, are clearly defined. On -the one side it is an earthly house, groaning with burdens, mortality, -absent from the Lord. On the other, it is clothed upon with our house -from Heaven, mortality swallowed up of life, present with the Lord. He -did not desire to be unclothed, which, as already noticed, signifies the -condition of death; but he did desire to be present with the Lord; -therefore in death he would have us understand that the Christian is not -present with the Lord. - -From all this, we can only conclude that when he says he is willing to -be absent from the body and present with the Lord, he means to be -understood that he is willing that this burdened, groaning, mortal state -should end, and the promised glorious and eternal day begin. And being -confident, through the presence of the Spirit of God in his heart, that -when this change should be wrought, he would have a glorious part -therein, he was more than willing it should come. It was but the -breathing again of that prayer which has arisen like a continual sigh -from the heart of the church through all her weary pilgrimage, “Thy -kingdom come; yea, come, Lord Jesus, come quickly;” not, “Let our -immortal souls,” which they did not suppose they possessed, “enter a -conscious state in death” in which they did not believe. - - - - - CHAPTER XXIII. - IN THE BODY AND OUT. - - -It is confidently asserted that Paul believed a man could exist -independently of the body from certain expressions which he uses in 2 -Cor. 12: 2-4:-- - -“I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, -I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) -such an one caught up to the third Heaven. And I knew such a man, -whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) -how that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, -which it is not lawful for a man to utter.” - -By the man whom he knew, it is generally supposed that the apostle means -himself, and the language he uses is a record of his own experience. -Paul was taken to the third Heaven, to paradise, and heard words which -it is not possible for a man to utter; but whether it was in his body, -or out, he did not know. - -This instance, then, furnishes no example of a spirit actually existing -in a conscious condition outside of the body, even if this is what is -meant by the expression, “out of the body;” for Paul assures us that he -did not know that he was in that condition. Yet it is claimed that it -has all the force of an actual example; for such a condition is -recognized as possible. It is very readily admitted that such a -condition is recognized, as is expressed by the terms, “out of the -body;” but that this means an immaterial spirit, an immortal soul, the -real, intelligent man, speeding away through the universe even to the -third Heaven, there to hear unspeakable words, and gather up heavenly -information, and return at will to resume its abode in the, for a time, -deserted body, should not be too hastily inferred from this passage. - -Of what is the apostle speaking? He says, in verse 1: “It is not -expedient for me, doubtless, to glory. I will come to visions and -revelations of the Lord. I knew a man in Christ, above fourteen years -ago,” &c., as previously quoted. His subject, then, is the visions and -revelations he had received from the Lord; and the language from verse 2 -to verse 4 is the record of one such remarkable revelation, perhaps the -most remarkable one he had ever experienced. He was given a view of -paradise, and heard unspeakable words. And so real and clear and vivid -was the view, that he did not know but that he was transported bodily -into that place. If not in this manner, the view was given in the -ordinary course of vision, that is, by having the scene presented before -the mind by the power of the Holy Ghost. - -All must concede that only these two conditions are brought to view, -either his transportation bodily to paradise, or the ordinary condition -of being in vision. If he went bodily to paradise, the instance has no -bearing of course on the question of consciousness in death. And if it -was an ordinary vision, how does this prove consciousness in death? The -question is reduced to this one point; and the answer turns on the -definition given to the expression, “out of the body.” Did Paul mean by -it, what modern expositors wish us to understand by it? Paul meant by -it, simply being in vision; the expositors aforesaid mean by it, the -going out of the immortal spirit from the body, and its existence for a -time in a separate conscious intelligent condition independent of the -body. But let us look a little further, and see what this condition is. -According to the common view, the separation of the soul from the body -is death. This is what death is defined to mean. There can be no such -thing as the separation of soul and body, and death not result. And the -return of the soul to again inhabit the body, is a resurrection from the -dead. This is what is claimed in the case of Rachel, whose soul -departed, and she died, Gen. 35:18, and the widow’s son whom Elijah -raised, whose soul came into him again, and he revived. 1 Kings 17:22. - -But does any one suppose that Paul meant to say that he did not know but -that he died and had a resurrection? That is what he did say, if the -words, “out of the body,” mean what some would have us understand by -them. His soul went off to paradise, and his body lay here, we know not -how long, a corpse upon the earth! And when his soul returned, he had a -resurrection from the dead! A necessary conclusion so preposterous, must -be sufficient to convince any one that Paul, by the expression, “out of -the body,” does not mean a state of death. He simply means that he was -in vision, a state in which the mind, controlled for the time by the -Holy Ghost, is made to take cognizance of distant or future scenes, and -the person seems to himself to be really and bodily present, viewing the -scenes, and listening to the words that are spoken, before him. Dreams, -which all have experienced, are doubtless good illustrations of how this -can be, and the case of John, in the Revelation, furnishes a notable -example; for he was carried forward far into the future, and seemed to -be present and taking part in scenes that did not then exist, and at -which he could not really have been present, even in his supposed -immaterial immortal soul. - -Paul, then, had no reference whatever to a state of death in 2 Cor. -12:2-4. To suppose him to refer to that, according to the immaterialist -view, runs us into the greatest absurdity. Hence his language affords no -proof that there is a soul in man which can live on in a conscious -intelligent state, while the mortal body crumbles back to dust. - - - - - CHAPTER XXIV. - DEPARTING AND BEING WITH CHRIST. - - -When will all men come to agree respecting the state of the dead? When -will the question whether the dead are alive, conscious, active, and -intelligent, or whether they rest in the grave in unconsciousness and -inactivity, cease to be a vexed question? When shall it be decided -whether the shout of triumph which the ransomed are to raise, “O death, -where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?” is the celebration -of a real victory, or only an unnecessary and useless transaction, as it -must be if the grave holds not the real man, but only the shell, the -mortal body, which is generally considered an incumbrance and a clog? -Never will this question be decided till men shall be willing to follow -the Scriptures, instead of trying to compel the Scriptures to follow -them; never, while they put the figurative for the literal, and the -literal for the figurative, mistake sound for sense, and rest on the -possible construction of an isolated text, instead of, and in opposition -to, the general tenor of the teaching of the inspired writers. - -Paul has told us often enough, and it would seem explicitly enough, when -the Christian goes to be with his Lord. It is at the redemption of the -body. Rom. 8:23. It is in the day of the Lord Jesus. 1 Cor. 5:5. It is -at the last trump. 1 Cor. 15:51-55. It is when we are clothed upon with -our house from Heaven. 2 Cor. 5:4. It is when Christ our life shall -appear. Col. 3:4. It is when the Lord descends from Heaven with a shout, -and the dead are raised. 1 Thess. 4:16, 17. It is at the coming of the -Lord. 2 Thess. 2:1. It is to be at “that day,” an expression by which -Paul frequently designates the day of Christ’s appearing. 2 Tim. 4:7, 8. - -Yet Paul, in one instance, without stopping to explain, uses the -expression, “to depart and to be with Christ;” whereupon his words are -seized by religious teachers as unanswerable evidence that at death the -spirit enters at once into the presence of its Redeemer. The passage is -found in Phil. 1:21-24, and reads as follows:-- - -“For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I live in the -flesh, this is the fruit of my labor: yet what I shall choose I wot not. -For I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart and to be -with Christ; which is far better. Nevertheless, to abide in the flesh is -more needful for you.” - -Willing to go with our friends as far as we can in their interpretation -of any passage, we raise no issue here on the word depart. Paul probably -means by it the same as in 2 Tim. 4:6, where he says, “The time of my -departure is at hand,” referring to his approaching death. Then Paul, -immediately on dying, was to be with Christ. Not so fast. The very point -intended to be proved has, in such a conclusion, to be assumed. Paul had -in view two conditions: this present state, and the future state. -Between these two he was in a strait. The cause of God on earth, the -interests of the church, stirring to its very depths his large and -sympathetic heart, drew him here; his own desires drew him to the future -state of victory and rest. And so evenly balanced were the influences -drawing him in either direction, that he hardly knew upon which course -he would decide, were it left to him as a matter of choice. -Nevertheless, he said that it was more needful for the church that he -remain here, to give them still the benefit of his counsel and his -labors. - -The state or condition to which he looked forward was one which he -greatly desired. About four years before he wrote these words to the -Philippians, he had written to the Corinthians, telling them what he did -desire, and what he did not desire, in reference to the future. Said he, -“Not that we would be unclothed.” 2 Cor. 5:4. By being unclothed, he -meant the state of death, from the cessation of mortal life to the -resurrection. This he did not desire; but he immediately adds what he -did desire, namely, to be “clothed upon, that mortality might be -swallowed up of life;” and when this is done, all that is mortal of us -is made immortal, the dead are raised, and the body is redeemed. Rom. -8:23; 1 Cor. 15:52, 53. - -In writing to the Corinthians, he thus stated that the object of his -desire was to be clothed upon, and have mortality swallowed up of life; -to the Philippians he stated that the object of his desire was to be -with Christ. These expressions, then, mean the same thing. Therefore, in -Phil. 1:23, Paul passes over the state of death, the unclothed state, -just as he had done to the Corinthians; for he would not tell the -Corinthians that he did not desire a certain state, and four years after -write to the Philippians that he did desire it. Paul did not thus -contradict himself. - -But this intermediate state is the disputed territory in this -controversy; the condition of the dead therein is the very point in -question: and on this the text before us is entirely silent. - -This is the vulnerable point in the popular argument on this text. It is -assumed that the being with Christ takes place immediately on the -departure. But, while the text asserts nothing of this kind, multitudes -of other texts affirm that the point when we gain immortality and the -presence of Christ, is a point in the future beyond the resurrection. -And, unless some necessary connection can be shown between the departing -and the being with Christ, and the hosts of texts which make our -entrance into Christ’s presence a future event can be harmonized -therewith, any attempt to prove consciousness in death from this text is -an utter failure. - -Landis seems to feel the weakness of his side in this respect, and -spends the strength of his argument, pp. 224-229, in trying to make the -inference appear necessary that the being with Christ must be immediate -on the departure. He would have us think it utterly absurd and -nonsensical to suppose a moment to elapse between the two events. - -Let us then see if there is anything in Paul’s language which -contradicts the idea that a period of utter unconsciousness, of greater -or less length, intervenes between death and our entrance into the -future life. In the first place, if the unconsciousness is absolute, as -we suppose, the space passed over in the individual’s experience is an -utter blank. There is not the least perception, with such person, of the -lapse of a moment of time. When consciousness returns, the line of -thought is taken up at the very point where it ceased, without the -consciousness of a moment’s interruption. This fact is often proved by -actual experience. Persons have been known to become utterly unconscious -by a fracture of the skull, and a portion of it being depressed upon the -brain, suspending its action. Perhaps when the accident happened they -were in the act of issuing an order, or giving directions to those about -them. They have lain unconscious for months, and then been relieved by a -surgical operation; and when the brain began again to act, and -consciousness returned, they have immediately spoken and completed the -sentence they were in the act of uttering when they were struck down, -months before. This shows that to these persons there was no -consciousness of any time intervening, more than what passes between the -words of a sentence which we are speaking. It was all the same to them -as if they had at once completed the sentence they commenced to utter, -instead of having weeks and months of unconsciousness thrown in between -the words of which that sentence was composed. - -So with the dead. They are not aware of the lapse of a moment of time -between their death and the resurrection. A wink of the eye shuts out -for an instant the sight of all objects, but it is so instantaneous that -we do not perceive any interruption of the rays of vision. Six thousand -years in the grave to a dead man is no more than a wink of the eye to -the living. To them, consciousness, our only means of measuring time, is -gone; and it will seem to them when they awake that absolutely none has -elapsed. When Abel awakes from the dead, it will seem to him, until his -attention is attracted by the new scenes of immortality to which he will -be raised, that he is rising up from the murderous blows of Cain, under -which he had seemingly just fallen. And to Stephen, who died beholding -the exaltation of Christ in Heaven, it will be the same as if he had, -without a moment’s interruption, entered into his glorious presence. And -when Paul himself shall be raised, it will seem to him that the stroke -of the executioner was his translation to glory. - -Such being the indisputable evidence of facts upon this point, we ask -how a person, understanding this matter, would speak of the future life, -if he expected to obtain it in the kingdom of God? Would he speak of -passing long ages in the grave before he reached it? He might, if he -designed to state, for any one’s instruction, the actual facts in the -case; but if he was speaking simply of his own experience, it would not -be proper for him to mention the intervening time, because he would not -be conscious of any such time, and it would not seem to him on awaking -to life again that any such period had elapsed. - -Accordingly, Bishop Law lays down this general principle on this -question:-- - -“The Scriptures, in speaking of the connection between our present and -future being, do not take into the account our _intermediate state in -death_; no more than we, in describing the course of any man’s actions, -take into account the time _he sleeps_. Therefore, the Scriptures (to be -consistent with themselves) _must affirm_ an immediate connection -between death and the Judgment. Heb. 9:27; 2 Cor. 5:6, 8.” - -John Crellius says:-- - -“Because the time between death and the resurrection is not to be -reckoned, therefore the apostle might speak thus, though the soul has no -sense of anything after death.” - -Dr. Priestly says:-- - -“The apostle, considering his own situation, would naturally connect the -end of this life with the commencement of another and a better, as he -would have no perception of any interval between them. That the apostle -had no view short of the coming of Christ to Judgment, is evident from -the phrase he makes use of, namely, _being with Christ_, which can only -take place at his second coming. For Christ himself has said that he -would come again, and that he would take his disciples to himself, which -clearly implies that they were not to be with him before that time.” - -So in harmony with this reference to our Lord’s teaching is the language -used by Paul in 1 Thess. 4:16, 17, that we here refer to it again: “For -the Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a shout, with the voice -of the archangel, and with the trump of God; and the dead in Christ -shall rise first. Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up -together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so -shall we ever be with the Lord.” - -As Christ taught that the time when his people were to be with him again -was at his second coming, so Paul here teaches. We call attention to the -word _so_, in the last sentence of the quotation. So means in this way, -in this manner, by this means. “_So_,” in this manner, by this means, -“shall we ever be with the Lord.” When Paul, as he does here, describes -without any limitations, the way and means by which we go to be with the -Lord, he precludes every other means. He the same as says there is no -other means by which we can be with the Lord, and if there is any other -means of gaining this end, this language is not true. If we go to be -with the Lord, by means of our immortal spirit, when we die, we do not -go to be with him by means of the visible coming of Christ, the -resurrection of the dead, and the change of the living, and Paul’s -language is a stupendous falsehood. There is no possible way of avoiding -this conclusion, except by claiming that the descent of the Lord from -Heaven, the mighty shout, the voice of the archangel, the sounding of -the great trump of God, the resurrection of the dead, and the change of -the living, all take place when a person dies--a position too absurd to -be seriously refuted, and almost too ridiculous to be even stated. - -Shall we then take the position that Paul taught the Philippians that a -person went by his immortal spirit immediately at death to be with the -Lord, when he had plainly told the Thessalonians that this was to be -brought about in altogether a different manner, and by altogether -different means? No one who would have venerated that holy apostle when -alive, or who has any decent regard for his memory now that he is dead, -will accuse him of so teaching. - -Why, then, does he say that he has a desire to depart, that is, to die? -Because he well understood that his life of suffering, of toil, and -trial here was to terminate by death; and if the church could spare him, -he would gladly have it come, not only to release him from his almost -unbearable burdens, but because he knew further that all the intervening -space between his death and the return of his Lord would seem to him to -be instantly annihilated, and the glories of the eternal world, through -his resurrection from the dead, would instantly open upon his view. - -It is objected again that Paul was very foolish to express such a desire -if he was not to be with his Lord till the resurrection; for, in that -case, he would be with him no sooner if he died than he would if he did -not die. Those who make this objection, either cannot have fully -considered this subject, or they utterly fail to comprehend it. They -have no difficulty in seeing how Paul would be with Christ sooner by -dying, provided his spirit, when he died, immediately entered into his -presence; but they cannot see how it would be so when the time between -his death and the coming of Christ is to him an utter blank, and then -without the consciousness on his part, that a single instant has -elapsed, he is ushered into the presence of his Redeemer. Remember that -Paul’s consciousness was his only means of measuring time; and if he had -died just as he wrote these words to the Philippians, it would have been -_to him_ an entrance into Christ’s presence just as much sooner as what -time elapsed between the penning of that sentence and the day of his -death. None can fail to see this point, if they will consider it in the -light of the fact we have here tried so fully to set forth, that the -dead have no perceptions of passing time. - -In the light of the foregoing reasoning, let us read and paraphrase this -famous passage to the Philippians:-- - -“For to me to live is for the furtherance of the cause of Christ, and -for me to die is still gain to that cause (because ‘Christ shall be -magnified in my body, whether it be by life or death,’ verse 20). But if -I live in the flesh, this, the furtherance of Christ’s cause, is the -fruit of my labor; but what course I should take were it left for me to -decide, I know not; for I am in a straight betwixt two: I know that the -church still needs my labors, but I have a desire to end my mortal -pilgrimage, and be the next instant, so far as my experience goes (for -the dead perceive no passing of time), in the presence of my Lord. -Consulting my own feelings, this I should esteem far better; but I know -that it is more needful for you that I abide still in a condition to -labor on for your good in this mortal state.” - -Who can say, bearing in mind the language Paul frequently uses in his -other epistles, that this is not a just paraphrase of his language here. -The only objection against it is, that, so rendered, it does not support -the conscious-state dogma. But it makes a harmony in all that Paul has -taught on the subject; and is it not far more desirable to maintain the -harmony of the sacred writings, than to try to make them defend a dogma -which involves them in a fatal contradiction? - -REMAINING TEXTS CONSIDERED. - -We have now examined all the principal texts of the Scriptures which are -supposed to have a bearing on the question of the intermediate state. A -few others of minor importance are occasionally urged in favor of the -popular view, and as such are entitled to a passing notice. We give them -in consecutive order as follows:-- - -Rom. 8:38, 39. “For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, ... -shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ -Jesus our Lord.” - -It is claimed that death cannot separate us from the love of God; but, -as God cannot exercise his love toward any but a rational and conscious -creature, therefore the soul must be alive after death. (_Immortality of -the Soul, by Luther Lee_, p. 111.) To what far-fetched and abortive -reasoning will wrong theories lead intelligent men. We owe the reader an -apology for noticing this passage at all. We should not here introduce -it, were it not used as an objection to the view we advocate; and we -should not believe it could ever be urged as an objection, had we not -actually seen it. The reasoning of the apostle has to be completely -inverted before any argument (may we be pardoned the misnomer) can be -manufactured out of it for the conscious-state theory. For it is of our -love to God, through Christ, and not of his to us, that the apostle -speaks. It has reference, also, wholly to this life. Thus he says, verse -35, “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, -or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or -sword?” That is, shall these things which we have to endure in this life -on account of our profession of the gospel and our love for Christ, -quench that love in any wise? Shall we compromise the gospel, and -alienate ourselves from the love of Christ, who has done so much for us, -and through whom we hope for so much (see the whole chapter), to avoid a -little persecution, peril, and distress? The separation from the love of -Christ by death, of which he speaks, is the same as the separation by -persecution, &c.; but tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, -nakedness, peril, and sword, do not necessarily kill us; they have -respect to this life; the separation, therefore, is something which -takes place here--simply an alienation of our hearts from him. And shall -all these things, he asks--nay, more, shall even the prospect of death -on account of our profession of Christ, prevent our loving and following -him? No! is the implied and emphatic answer. - -Such we believe to be the view which any one must take of this passage, -who does not find himself under the unfortunate necessity of making out -a case. - -But looking at this scripture from the objector’s stand-point, the -singular inquiry at once forces itself upon us, Can the immortal soul in -its disembodied state suffer tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, -nakedness, peril, and sword!? - -2 Cor. 4:16. “For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man -perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.” - -Is this inward man the immortal soul? We answer, No; but the new man -which we put on, Christ formed within _the hope_ of glory. See Col. 3:9, -10; Eph. 4:22, 24; 3:16, 17; Col. 1:27. - -1 Thess. 4:14. “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even -so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.” - -Yes, says the objector, bring them from Heaven; so they must now be with -him there in a conscious state. Not quite so fast. The text speaks of -those who sleep in Jesus. Do you believe those who have gone to Heaven -are asleep? We always supposed that Heaven was a place of unceasing -activity, and of uninterrupted joy. And, again, are all these persons -going to be brought from Heaven asleep! What a theological incongruity! -But, from what place are they brought, if not from Heaven? The same -place, we answer, from which God brought our Lord Jesus Christ. And what -place was that? See Heb. 13:20: “Now the God of peace, that brought -again _from the dead_ our Lord Jesus,” &c. We may then read the text in -Thessalonians, as follows: “For if we believe that Jesus died and God -brought him from the dead, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will -God bring with him from the dead.” Simply this the text affirms, and -nothing more. It is a glorious pledge of the resurrection, and so far -diametrically opposed to the conscious-state theory. - -2 Tim. 4:6. “For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my -departure is at hand.” - -It is claimed that the departure here referred to is death, with which -we agree. We take no exceptions to the remark so often made, “Departed -this life,” &c. But as Paul does not here intimate that his departure -was to be to Heaven, or even to any conscious intermediate state, we -have no right to infer this. - -2 Pet. 1:14. “Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, -even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath showed me.” - -It is here claimed that the “I” that speaks, and the “my” that is in -possession of a tabernacle, is Peter’s soul, the man proper, and the -tabernacle, is the body which he was going to lay off. That Peter here -has reference to death, we doubt not; but it was to be as the Lord Jesus -Christ had showed him. How had he shown him it would be? See John 21:18, -19: “But when _thou_ shalt be old, _thou_ shalt stretch forth thy hands, -and another shall gird _thee_, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. -This spake he, signifying by what death _he_ should glorify God.” Here -we are shown that the “thou” and the “he,” claimed on 1 Pet. 1:14, to be -Peter’s soul, the man proper, was going to die, and by death, glorify -God. And Peter himself says in the next verse, “Moreover, I will -endeavor that ye may be able after _my_ decease to have these things -always in remembrance.” Here, then, the same “my,” Peter’s soul, the man -proper, recollect, which in the verse before is in the possessive case, -and governed by tabernacle, is again in the possessive case, and -governed by decease, or _death_! Yes, Peter _himself_ was going to die. -We find no proof of a double entity here. - -This phraseology is well illustrated by Job 7:21, which shows that the -man proper, the “I,” sleeps in the dust: “And why dost Thou not pardon -my transgression, and take away mine iniquity? for now shall I sleep in -the dust; and thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall not be.” - -2 Pet 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.” - -This testimony shows that the unjust do not enter into a place of -punishment at death, but are _reserved_ to the day of Judgment. Where -are they reserved? Answer. In the general receptacle of the dead, the -grave. See Job 21:30. - -Rev. 20:5. “But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand -years were finished. This is the first resurrection.” - -By this first resurrection a portion of the dead are restored to life, -consciousness, and activity, while it is said of those whose condition -is not affected by this resurrection, that they _lived not_ for a -thousand years. This proves that up to the time of this resurrection, -_all_ the dead were in a condition just the opposite of life--a -condition in which it might be said of them that they “lived not.” And -this, mark, is spoken of the whole conscious being, not of the body -merely. No language could more positively show that in death the whole -person is in a state just the opposite of life. - -Rev. 22:8, 9. “And I John ... fell down to worship before the feet of -the angel which showed me these things. Then saith he unto me, See thou -do it not; for I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the -prophets.” - -This text is supposed to prove that one of the old prophets came to John -as an angel, showing that the dead exist in a conscious state. But it -does not so teach. The angel simply stated that he was John’s -fellow-servant, and the fellow-servant of John’s brethren, the prophets, -and the fellow-servant of them which keep the sayings of this book. The -being of whom they were all worshipers together was the great God. -Therefore, says the angel, do not worship me, since I am only a -worshiper with you at the throne of God; but worship God. This angel had -doubtless been sent to the ancient prophets to reveal things to them, as -he had now come to John. Such we believe to be the legitimate teaching -of this scripture, the last that is found in the book of God supposed to -teach a conscious state. - - - - - CHAPTER XXV. - THE DEATH OF ADAM. - - -The inquirer into the nature of man, and his condition in death, must -ever turn with the deepest interest to the record left us concerning the -father of our race. In Adam we have an account of the origin of the -human family, at once so simple and consistent that the jeers of -skepticism fall harmless at its feet, and science, in comparison, only -makes itself ridiculous, in trying to account for it in any other -manner. And in the sentence pronounced upon him when he fell under the -fearful guilt of transgression, we are shown to what condition death was -designed to reduce the human family. In the creation and death of Adam, -we have the account of the building up and the unbuilding of a human -being; and this case, being the first and most illustrious, must furnish -the precedent and establish the rule for the whole race. - -Of the creation of Adam and the elements of which he was composed, we -have already spoken. The record brings to view a formation made wholly -of the dust of the ground. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of -the ground.” This body was endowed with a high and perfect organization, -and was quickened into life by the breath which the Lord breathed into -its nostrils. The body, before it was made alive, had no power to act; -the breath which was breathed into it could not of itself act; but the -body being quickened, the machinery set in motion by this vital -principle, all the phenomena of physical life and mental action at once -resulted. - -The Author of this noblest of creative works, who must of necessity, as -the ruler over all, require the creatures of his hand to obey him, and -toward whom an exercise of love, and a voluntary and willing submission, -can alone constitute obedience, placed the man whom he had formed, as -was meet, upon a state of probation, to test his loyalty to his Maker. -The scene of his trial was the beautiful garden in which was everything -that was pleasant to the sight and good for food; and over all that -adorned or enriched his Eden home, with one exception, he had unlimited -control. The condition upon which he was to be tested is thus definitely -expressed:-- - -“And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden -thou mayest freely eat. 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.” - -Adam and Eve could not mistake the requirement of this law, nor fail to -understand the intent of the penalty. And before Satan could cause his -temptation to make any impression on the mind of Eve, he had to -contradict this threatening, assuring her that they should not surely -die. A question of veracity was thus raised between God and Satan; and -strange to say, the theological world, in interpreting the penalty, have -virtually, with the exception of a small minority, sided with Satan. -This is seen in the interpretation which is commonly put on this -penalty, making it consist of three divisions: 1. Alienation of the soul -from God, the love of sin, and the hatred of holiness, called spiritual -death. 2. The separation of soul and body, called temporal death. 3. -Immediately after temporal death, the conscious torment of the soul in -hell, which is to have no end, and is called eternal death. The Baptist -Confession of Faith, Art. 5, says:-- - -“We believe that God made man upright; but he, sinning, involved himself -and posterity in death spiritual, temporal, and eternal; from all which -there is no deliverance but by Christ.” - -Let us look at the different installments of this penalty, and see if -they will harmonize with the language in which the original threatening -is expressed: “Thou shalt surely die.” Adam incurred the penalty by -sinning. After he had sinned, he was a sinner. But a state of sin is -that state of alienation from God which the orthodox school make to be a -part of the penalty of his transgression. In this they take as the -_punishment_ of sin that which was simply its _result_; and they make -the sentence read, virtually, in this profoundly sensible manner: “In -the day that thou sinnest, thou shalt surely be a sinner!” - -Because he wickedly became a sinner, and brought himself into a state of -alienation from God, the doom was pronounced upon him, “Thou shalt -surely die.” Could this mean eternal death? If so, Adam never could have -been released therefrom. But he is to be released from it; for “in -Christ shall all be made alive.” - -These two installments, then, spiritual and eternal death, utterly fail -us, when brought to the test of the language in which the sentence is -expressed: one is nonsense, and the other an impossibility. - -Temporal death alone remains to be considered; but the interpretation -which is given to this, completely nullifies the penalty, and makes -Satan to have been correct when he said, “Thou shalt not surely die.” -Temporal death is interpreted to mean the separation of the soul from -the body, the body alone to die, but the soul, which is called the real, -responsible man, to enter upon an enlarged and higher life. In this -case, there is no death; and the sentence should have read, In the day -thou eatest thereof, thou shalt be freed from the clog of this mortal -body, and enter upon a new and eternal life. So said Satan, “Ye shall be -as gods;” and true to this assertion from the father of lies, the -heathen have all along deified their dead men, and worshiped their -departed heroes; and modern poets have sung, “There is no death; what -seems so is transition.” If ever the skill of a deceiver and the -gullibility of a victim were manifested in an unaccountable degree, it -is in this fact, that right in the face and eyes of the pale throng that -daily passes down through the gate of death, the devil can make men -believe that after all his first lie was true, and there is no such -thing as death. - -From these considerations, it is evident that nothing will meet the -demands of the sentence but the cessation of the life of the whole man. -But that, says one, cannot be, for he was to die in the very day he ate -of the forbidden fruit; but he did not literally die for nine hundred -and thirty years. If this is an objection against the view we advocate, -it is equally such against every other. Take the threefold penalty above -noticed. If death spiritual, death temporal, and death eternal, was the -penalty, how much was fulfilled on the day he sinned? Not death eternal, -surely, and not death temporal, which did not take place for nine -hundred and thirty years, but only death spiritual. But this was only -the first installment of the penalty, and far less important than the -other two. The most that the friends of this interpretation can say, -therefore, is that the penalty begun on that very day to be fulfilled. -But we can say as much with our view. “Dying, thou shalt die,” reads the -margin; which some understand to mean, thou shalt inherit a mortal -nature, and the process of decay shall commence. As soon as he sinned, -he came under the sentence of death, and the work commenced. He bore up -against the encroachments of dissolution for nine hundred and thirty -years, and then the work was fully accomplished. - -When God proceeded to pronounce sentence upon Adam, he gave us an -authoritative interpretation of the penalty from which there is no -appeal. Gen. 3:19: “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till -thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: _for dust -thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return_.” - -The return to dust is here made a subsequent event, to be preceded by a -period of wearing toil. And being finally overcome by the labors and -ills of life, the person addressed was to return again to the dust from -which he was taken. With Adam, this process commenced on the very day he -transgressed, and the penalty threatened, which covered all this work -from beginning to end, was executed in full when this process was fully -completed in Adam’s death, nine hundred and thirty years thereafter. - -Two things are connected together in the penalty affixed to Adam’s -disobedience. These are the words, day and die: In the _day_ thou -eatest, thou shalt _die_. The dying, whatever view we take of it, must -include temporal or literal death. But this was not accomplished on that -very day. Therefore, to find a death which was inflicted on that literal -day, a figurative sense is given to the word die, and it is claimed that -a spiritual death was that day wrought upon Adam. But we inquire, If -either of these terms, day or die, are to be taken figuratively, why not -let the dying be literal, and the day be figurative, especially since -the sentence which God pronounced upon Adam, when he came up for trial, -shows that literal death, and that only, was intended in the penalty? - -The use of the word day in such a sense, meaning an indefinite period of -time, is of frequent occurrence in the Scriptures. An instance in point -occurs in 1 Kings 2:36-46. King Solomon bound Shimei by an oath to -remain in Jerusalem, under the sentence that on the day he went out in -any direction, he should be slain. After three years, two of his -servants ran away to Gath, and he went after them. It was then told -Solomon that Shimei had been to Gath and returned. Solomon sent for him, -reminded him of the conditions on which his life was suspended, and the -oath he had broken, and then commanded the executioner to put him to -death. - -Gath was some twenty-five miles from Jerusalem. That Shimei could go -there and get his servants, return, be sent for by Solomon, and be tried -and executed, all on the same day, is a supposition by no means -probable, even if it is possible. Yet in his death the sentence was -fulfilled, that on the day he went out he should be slain. Because on -the very day he passed out of the city, the only condition that held -back the execution of the sentence was removed, and he was virtually a -dead man. - -So with Adam. He was immediately cut off from the tree of life, his -source of physical vitality. So much was executed on that very day. -Death was then his inevitable portion, to be accomplished within the -limits of that period covered by the word, day. - -We are very well aware of the method adopted to evade the conclusion -which naturally follows from the language of the sentence in Gen. 3:19. -This, it is claimed, was spoken only of the body, not of the soul. The -poetry of Longfellow, - - “Dust thou art, to dust returnest, - Was not spoken of the soul,” - -takes much better with most people than the plain language of -inspiration itself. - -To whom, then, or to what, was this sentence addressed, “Dust thou art, -and unto dust shalt thou return”? Admitting that there is such a -creature of the imagination as the popular, independent, immortal soul, -was the language addressed to that or to the body? If there is such a -soul as this, what does it constitute, on the authority of the friends -of that theory, themselves? It is the real, responsible, intelligent -man. Watson says, “It is the soul _only_ which perceives pain or -pleasure, which suffers or enjoys;” and D. D. Whedon says, “It is the -soul that hears, feels, tastes, and smells, through its sensorial -organs.” The sentence, then, would be addressed to that which could -hear; the penalty would be pronounced upon that which could feel. The -body, in the common view, is only an irresponsible instrument, the means -by which the soul acts. It can, of itself, neither see, hear, feel, -will, or act. Who then will have the hardihood to assert that God -addressed his sentence to the irresponsible instrument, the body merely? -This would be the same as for the judge in a criminal court to proceed -deliberately to address the knife with which the murderer had taken the -life of his victim, and pronounce sentence upon that, instead of the -murderer himself. Away with a view which offers to the Majesty of Heaven -the insult of representing that he acts in this way! - -In the sentence, the personal pronoun, _thy_, is once, and the personal -pronoun, _thou_, is five times, applied to the Adam whom God addressed. -“In the sweat of _thy_ face, shalt _thou_ eat bread, till _thou_ return -unto the ground; for out of it wast _thou_ taken: for dust _thou_ art, -and unto dust shalt _thou_ return.” When we address our fellowmen by the -different personal pronouns of our language, what do we address? The -conscious, intelligent, responsible man, that which sees, feels, hears, -thinks, acts, and is morally accountable. But this, in popular parlance, -is the soul; these pronouns must every time stand for the soul. The -pronouns thy and thou, in Gen. 3:19, must then mean Adam’s soul. If they -do not mean it here, how does the same pronoun, thou, in Luke 23:43, -mean the thief’s soul, when Christ said to him, “This day shalt _thou_ -be with me in paradise”? or the _I_ and _my_ in 2 Pet. 1:14, refer to -Peter’s soul, as we are told they do, when he says, “Knowing that -shortly I must put off this my tabernacle.” Our friends must be -consistent and uniform in their interpretations. If in these instances -the pronouns do not refer to the soul, then these strong proof-texts, to -which the immaterialist always appeals, are abandoned: if they do here -refer to the soul, they must likewise in Gen. 3:19, refer to the soul. -In that language, then, God addresses Adam’s soul; and we have the -authority of Jehovah himself, the Creator of man, against whose -sentence, and the sunlight of whose word, it does not become puny -mortals to oppose their shallow dictums, and the rushlight of human -reason, that man’s soul is wholly mortal, and that in the dissolution of -death it goes back to dust again! There is no avoiding this conclusion; -and it forever settles the question of man’s condition in death. It -shows that the intermediate state must be one in which the conscious man -has lost his consciousness, the intelligent man his intelligence, the -responsible man his responsibility, and in which all the powers of his -being, mental, emotional, and physical, have ceased to act. - -No further argument need be introduced to show that the Adamic penalty -was literal death, and that it reduced the whole man to a condition of -unconsciousness and decay. But a few additional considerations will show -that the popular view is cumbered with absurdities on every hand so -plain that they should have proved their own antidote, and saved the -doctors of theology from the preposterous definitions they have attached -to death. - -We have the authority of Paul for stating that through Christ we are -released from all the penalty which the race has incurred through Adam’s -transgression. “As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made -alive.” If the death in which we are involved through Adam is death -spiritual, temporal, and eternal, then all the race is redeemed from -these through Christ, and Universalism is the result. - -Again, Christ tasted death for every man. He hath redeemed us from the -curse of the law, being made a curse for us. That is, Christ died the -same death for us which was introduced into the world by Adam’s sin. Was -this death eternal? If so, the Saviour is gone, and the plan of -salvation can never be carried into effect. - -In Rom. 5:12-14, occurs this remarkable passage:-- - -“Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and _death_ by sin; -and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until -the law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no -law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that -had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the -figure of Him that was to come.)” - -In the first part of the verse Paul speaks of the death that came in by -Adam’s sin, and then says that it reigned from Adam to Moses over them -that had not sinned. From this language, accepting the popular -interpretation of the Adamic penalty, we must come to the intolerable -conclusion that personally sinless beings from Adam to Moses were -consigned to eternal misery! From such a sentiment, every fiber of our -humanity recoils with horror. We cannot stifle the feeling that it is an -outrage upon the character of God, and therefore cannot be true. The -death threatened Adam was literal death, not eternal life in misery. - -To the view that the Adamic penalty was simply literal death, many -eminent men have given their unqualified adhesion. - -John Locke (_Reasonableness of Christianity_, s. 1,) says:-- - -“By reason of Adam’s transgression all men are mortal and come to -die.... It seems a strange way of understanding a law which requires the -plainest and directest words, that by death should be meant eternal life -in misery.... I confess that by death, here, I can understand nothing -but a ceasing to be, the losing of all actions of life and sense. Such a -death came upon Adam and all his posterity, by his first disobedience in -paradise, under which death they should have lain forever had it not -been for the redemption by Jesus Christ.” - -Isaac Watts (_Ruin and Recovery of Mankind_, s. 3), though he was a -believer in the immortality of the soul, has the candor to say:-- - -“There is not one place of Scripture that occurs to me, where the word -death as it was threatened in the law of innocency, necessarily -signifies a certain miserable immortality of the soul, either to Adam, -the actual sinner, or to his posterity.” - -Dr. Taylor says:-- - -“Death was to be the consequence of his [Adam’s] disobedience, and the -death here threatened can be opposed only to that life God gave Adam -when he created him.” - -With two more considerations we close this chapter:-- - -1. Adam was on probation. Life and death were set before him. “In the -day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die,” said God. The only -promise of life he had in case of disobedience came from one whom it is -not very flattering to the advocates of a natural immortality to call -the first propounder and natural ally of their system. But had Adam been -endowed with a natural immortality, it could not have been suspended on -his obedience. But it was so suspended, as we learn from the first pages -of revelation. It was, therefore, not absolute, but contingent. Immortal -he might become by obedience to God; disobeying, he was to die. He did -disobey, and was driven from the garden. “And now,” said God, “lest he -put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and -_live forever_;”--therefore, the cherubim and flaming sword were placed -to exclude forever his approach to the life-giving tree. Quite the -reverse of an uncontingent immortality is certainly brought to view -here. Adam could bequeath to his posterity no higher nature than he -himself possessed. The stream, that commencing just outside the garden -of Eden, has flowed down through the lapse of six thousand years, has -certainly never risen higher than the fountain head; and we may be sure -we possess no superior endowments in this respect to those of Adam. - -2. The second consideration under this head is, the exhortations we have -in the word of God to _seek_ for immortality, if we would obtain it. -“Seek the Lord, and ye shall live,” is his declaration to the house of -Israel. Amos 5:4, 6. “The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is -eternal life, through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Rom. 6:23. Gift to whom? -To every man, irrespective of character? By no means; but gift _through_ -Christ, to them only who are his. Again, “To them who by patient -continuance in well-doing _seek_ for glory, honor, and immortality [God -will render], eternal life.” Rom. 2:7. Varying the language of the -apostle a little, we may here inquire, What a man _hath_, why doth he -yet seek for? The propriety of seeking for that which we already have, -is something in regard to which it yet remains that we be enlightened by -the advocates of the dominant theology. - - - - - CHAPTER XXVI. - THE RESURRECTION. - - -As clearly as the human race have been taught by the experience of six -thousand years that death is their common lot, so clearly are we taught -by the word of God, and by some notable exhibitions of divine power, -that all who have gone into their graves shall come forth again to life. - -The words in the New Testament which express this fact are _anastasis_, -_egersis_, and _exanastasis_. The two latter occur but once each, the -first in reference to the resurrection of Christ, in Matt. 27:53, the -last in Phil. 3:11, where Paul expresses a desire to attain to a -resurrection out from among the dead. _Anastasis_ occurs forty-two -times, being the word which is invariably used in the New Testament, -with the exceptions just named, to express the resurrection. This word -is defined by Robinson to mean, literally, _a rising up_, as of walls, -of a suppliant, or from a seat. Specially in the New Testament, the -resurrection of the body from death, the return of the dead body to -life, as, first of individuals who have returned to life on earth, Heb. -11:35; secondly, of the future and general resurrection at the end of -all things, John 11:24. It is often joined to the word, dead; as in the -expression, the resurrection of the dead. - -From these well-established meanings of the word it is evident that that -which goes down will rise again. That which goes into the grave will -come up again out of the grave. The rising again of the body is -certainly assured by this word, and the manner in which it is used. This -resurrection is a future event: “The hour is coming, in the which all -that are in the graves shall hear His voice, and shall come forth.” John -5:28, 29. Paul said, when disputing with Tertullus before the governor, -I “have hope toward God, which they themselves also allow, that there -shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust.” -Acts 24:15. And he tells us in chapter 26:7, that unto that promise the -twelve tribes hope to come. - -If, then, this is a firmly-established fact, that God is to make such a -mighty manifestation of his power as to re-animate the scattered dust of -those whom the grave has consumed from time’s earliest morn, there must -be some cause for such an action. This great event has a tremendous -bearing on the question of the intermediate state, and all views of that -state must be adjusted to harmonize therewith. If any view is -entertained which virtually renders such an event unnecessary, it must -be shown that the resurrection as here defined is not taught in the word -of God, or it must be admitted that the doctrine which nullifies it, is -unscriptural. - -The important inquiry now arises respecting the popular view, If the -real being, the intelligent, responsible entity, ceases not its life and -consciousness at death, but continues on in a more enlarged and perfect -sphere of existence and activity, what need is there of the resurrection -of the body? If the body is but a trammel, a clog to the operations of -the soul, what need that it should come back and gather up its scattered -particles from the silent tomb, and re-fetter itself with this material -robe? - -Wm. Tyndale, defending the doctrine of Martin Luther, that the dead -sleep, addressed to his opponent the same pungent inquiry. He said:-- - -“And ye, in putting them [departed souls] in Heaven, hell, and -purgatory, destroy the argument wherewith Christ and Paul prove the -resurrection.... If the souls be in Heaven, tell me why they be not in -as good case as the angels be? and then what cause is there of the -resurrection?” - -Andrew Carmichael (_Theology of Scripture_, vol. ii., p. 315) says:-- - -“It cannot be too often repeated: _If there be an immortal soul there is -no resurrection; and if there be any resurrection there is no immortal -soul_.” - -Dr. Muller (_Ch. Doc. of Sin_, p. 318) says:-- - -“The Christian faith in immortality is indissolubly connected with a -promise of a future resurrection of the dead.” - -We now propose to show that the resurrection is a prominent doctrine of -the Bible; and if this can be established, it follows, upon the judgment -of these eminent men, that the immortality of the soul cannot be true. -We need not stop to notice that impalpable and groundless theory which -makes the resurrection take place immediately at death, by supposing it -to be the rising of the soul from the earthly house of this tabernacle, -and its entering at once into its spiritual house, this to be inhabited, -and the former, abandoned, forever. For in this case there is no -resurrection; since the soul lives right on, and does not die at all. -The resurrection which the Bible brings to view is a resurrection of -_the dead_. It cannot be applied to anything that continuously lives, -however many changes it may pass through. A person must go down into a -state of death before he can be raised from the dead. Hence this theory -is no resurrection at all, and so is at war with all the Bible says -about the resurrection of the dead. Moreover, it is utterly impossible -to harmonize this with the many references to the general resurrection -at the end of the world. - -We return to the Bible doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, the -literal resurrection and resuscitation of our natural bodies, and affirm -that the Bible makes this resurrection necessary, by representing the -dead to be in such a condition that without this event they can have no -future existence. - -1. Death is compared to sleep. There must, then, be some analogy between -a state of sleep and a state of death, and this analogy must pertain to -that which renders sleep a peculiar condition. Our condition in sleep -differs from our condition when awake, simply in this, that when we are -soundly asleep we are entirely _unconscious_. In this respect, then, -death is like sleep; that is, the dead are unconscious. This figure is -frequently used to represent the condition of the dead. Dan. 12:2: “Many -of them that _sleep_ in the dust of the earth shall awake.” Matt. 27:52: -“Many bodies of the saints which _slept_ arose.” Acts 7:60: After -Stephen had beheld the vision of Christ and was stoned to death, the -record says, he “fell _asleep_.” In 1 Cor. 15:20, Christ is called the -first-fruits of them that _slept_; and in verse 57, Paul says, “We shall -not all _sleep_.” Again Paul writes to the Thessalonians, 1 Thess. 4:13, -14, that he would not have them ignorant concerning them which are -_asleep_. In verse 14, he speaks of them as _asleep_ in Jesus, and -explains what he means, in verse 16, by calling them “dead in Christ.” -And the advocates of the conscious state cannot dispose of these -expressions by saying that they apply to the body merely; for they do -not hold that the consciousness which we have in life (which is what we -lose in death) pertains to the body merely. Job plainly declares that -they will not awake till the resurrection, at the last day. “Man dieth -and wasteth away; yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? As the -waters fail from the sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up, so man -lieth down and riseth not: till the heavens be no more, they shall not -awake, nor be raised out of their sleep.” If, therefore, there is no -resurrection, these dead are destined to sleep in unconsciousness -forever. - -2. The dead are in a condition as though they had not been. So Job -testifies; for he affirms that if he could have died in earliest -infancy, like a hidden, untimely birth, he would not have been; and in -this respect he declared he would have been like kings, counsellors, and -princes of the earth who built costly tombs in which to enshrine their -bodies when dead. To that condition he applies the expression which has -since been so often quoted, “There the wicked cease from troubling, and -there the weary be at rest.” Job 3:11-18. If, then, a person when dead -is as though he had not been, without a resurrection to release him from -this state, he will never be, or exist, again. - -3. The dead have no knowledge. Speaking of the dead man, Job says -(14:21), “His sons come to honor, and he knoweth it not; and they are -brought low, and he perceiveth it not of them.” Ps. 146:4. “His breath -goeth forth, he returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts -perish.” Solomon was inspired to speak to the same effect as his father -David: Eccl. 9:5, 6: “For the living know that they shall die, but the -dead know not anything.... Also their love, and their hatred, and their -envy, is now perished; neither have they any more a portion forever in -anything that is done under the sun.” Verse 10: “There is no work, nor -device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave whither thou goest.” -Evidence like this can neither be mistaken nor evaded. It is vain for -the immaterialist to claim that it applies to the body in distinction -from an immortal soul; for they do not hold that the thoughts -(διαλογισμός, _thought, reasoning_,) which David says perish in death, -belong to the body, but to the soul. And according to Solomon, that -which knows when the man is living, does not know when he is dead. -Without a resurrection, therefore, the dead will forever remain without -knowledge. - -4. The dead are not in Heaven nor in hell, but in the dust of the earth. -Job 17:13-16: “If I wait, the grave is mine house.” In chap. 14:14, he -said, “All the days of my appointed time will I wait, till my change -come.” The change referred to, must therefore be the resurrection, and -he describes his condition till that time, in the following language: “I -have made my bed in the darkness. I have said to corruption, Thou art my -father; to the worm, Thou art my mother and my sister, ... when _our -rest together is in the dust_.” Isa. 26:19: “Thy dead men shall live; -together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that -dwell in dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs; and the earth shall -cast out the dead.” Is it possible that the phraseology of this text can -be misunderstood? It speaks of the living again of dead men, of the -arising of dead bodies, and of the earth’s casting out the dead. And the -command is addressed to them thus: “Awake and sing.” Who? Ye who are -still conscious, basking in the bliss of Heaven and chanting the high -praises of God? No; but, “Ye who dwell _in dust_;” ye who are in your -graves. If the dead are conscious, Isaiah talked nonsense. If we believe -his testimony we must look into the graves for the dead; and if there is -no resurrection, there they will forever lie mingled with the clods of -the valley. - -5. The dead, even the most holy and righteous, have no remembrance of -God, and cannot, while in that condition, render him any praise and -thanksgiving. Ps. 6:5: “For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in -the grave who shall give thee thanks?” Ps. 115:17: “The dead praise not -the Lord, neither any that go down into silence.” Good King Hezekiah, -when praising the Lord for adding to his days fifteen years, gives this -as the reason why he thus rejoiced: Isa. 38:18, 19: “For the grave -cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee; they that go down into -the pit cannot hope for thy truth. The _living_, the _living_, he shall -praise thee, as I do this day; the father to the children shall make -known thy truth.” Modern doctors of divinity have Hezekiah in Heaven -praising God. He declared that when he was dead he could not do this. -Whose testimony is the more worthy of credit, that of the inspired king -of Israel, or that of the theologians of subsequent ages of error and -confusion? If we can believe Hezekiah, unless there is to be a -resurrection, the righteous dead are never more to praise their Maker. - -6. The dead, even the righteous, are not ascended to the Heavens. So -Peter testifies respecting the patriarch David: Acts 2:29, 34, 35: “Men -and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that -he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day. -For David is not ascended into the Heavens: but he saith himself, The -Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes -thy footstool.” We call the especial attention of the reader to the -whole argument presented by Peter, beginning with verse 24. Peter -undertakes to prove from a prophecy recorded in the Psalms, the -resurrection of Christ. He says, verse 31, “He, seeing this before, -spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell -[_hades_, the grave], neither did his flesh see corruption.” And how -does he prove that David speaks of Christ, and not of himself? He proves -it from the fact that David’s soul _was_ left in _hades_ and his flesh -did see corruption; and his sepulcher was with them to that day. For -David, he says, has not ascended into the Heavens. Now if David’s soul -did live right on in consciousness; if it was not left in _hades_, no -man can show that David, in that psalm, did not speak of himself instead -of Christ; and then Peter’s argument for the resurrection of Christ -would be entirely destroyed. But Peter, especially when speaking as he -was on this occasion under the influence of the Holy Ghost, knew how to -reason; and his argument entirely destroys the dogma of the immortality -of the soul. But if David has not yet ascended into the Heavens, how is -he ever to get there? There is no other way but by a resurrection of the -dead. So he himself says, Ps. 17:15: “I shall be satisfied when I awake -[from the sleep of death], with Thy likeness.” - -7. And finally, Paul, in his masterly argument in 1 Cor. 15, states -explicitly the conclusion which is necessary from every one of the texts -which we have quoted, that if there is no resurrection, then all the -dead, even those who have fallen asleep in Christ, are perished. Verses -16-18. “For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised. And if -Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. _Then -they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are_ PERISHED.” - -As we read this testimony, we pause in utter amazement that any who -profess to believe the Bible should cling with tenacity to the doctrine -of the immortality of the soul which so directly contradicts it. If the -souls of the dead live right on, are they perished? What! perished? and -yet living in a larger sphere? Perished? and yet enjoying the attendant -blessings of everlasting life in Heaven? Perished? and yet at God’s -right hand where there is fullness of joy, and pleasures forevermore? -Perish, amid the ruins of the heathen mythology from which it springs, -that theory which thus lifts its dead men on high, contrary to the -teachings of the word of God! - -Paul speaks of the whole being. As in Adam we die, so in Christ shall we -be made alive. Is it conceivable that Paul drops out of sight the real -man, the soul which soars away to realms of light, and frames all this -argument, and talks thus seriously about the cast-off shell, the body, -merely? The idea is preposterous to the last degree. - -After stating that if there is no resurrection we perish, he assures us -that Christ is risen and that there is a resurrection for all; then he -takes up the resurrection of those who sleep in Christ, and tells us -when that resurrection shall be. It is to take place, not by the rising -from this mortal coil of an ethereal, immaterial essence when we die, -but it is to be at the great day when the last trump shall shatter this -decrepid earth from center to circumference. - -The testimony on this point is well summed up by Bishop Law, who speaks -as follows:-- - -“I proceed to consider what account the Scriptures give of that state to -which death reduces us. And this we find represented by _sleep_; by a -negation of all _life_, _thought_, or _action_; by _rest_, -_resting-place_, or _home_, _silence_, _oblivion_, _darkness_, -_destruction_, or _corruption_.” - -This representation is abundantly sustained by the Scriptures referred -to; and by all these the great fact is inscribed in indelible characters -over the portals of the dark valley, that our existence is not -perpetuated by means of an immortal soul, but that without a -resurrection from the dead, there is no future life. - -But it is objected that, from our standpoint of the unconsciousness of -the dead, a resurrection is impossible; for if a person ever ceases to -exist as a conscious being, the re-organization of the matter of which -he was composed would be a new creation, but not a resurrection. It is -sufficient to say in reply that continued consciousness is not necessary -to preserve identity of being. This is proved by nearly every member of -the human family every day. Did the reader ever enjoy a period of sound, -unconscious sleep? If so, when he awoke, how did he know that he was the -same individual he was before? How does any one know, after a good -night’s sleep, that he is the same person that retired to rest the night -before? Simply because his organization is the same on awaking that it -was when he became unconscious in sleep. Now suppose that during this -period of unconsciousness, while the soul itself, if there is in man -such a distinct entity as is claimed, is also unconscious, the body of a -person could be cut up into innumerable fragments, the bones ground to -powder, the flesh dissolved in acids, and the entire being, soul and -all, destroyed. After remaining in this condition a little time, suppose -all those particles could be put back again substantially as they were -before, the general arrangement of the matter, especially of the brain, -the organ of the mind being identically what it was; and then suppose -that life could be imparted to it again, and the person be allowed to -sleep on till morning; when he woke, would he be conscious of any break -in the line of his existence? Any one must see that he would not. Being -organized just as before, his mind would resume its consciousness just -as if nothing had happened. - -So with the dissolution of death. After its period of unconsciousness is -passed over, in the resurrection the particles of the body are reunited, -re-organized, and re-arranged, essentially as they were at the moment of -death, and reanimated; then the line of life is taken up, and the -current of thought resumed just where it was laid down in death, it -matters not how many thousands of years before. This, the power of God -can do; and to deny this is to “err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the -power of God.” In this way, we can have a true and proper resurrection, -a living again of the whole person, as the Bible affirms. On the -supposition of continued consciousness, this is impossible; for in this -case the real man lives right on, the body, which the Bible makes of so -much importance, being only the garment with which it was temporarily -clothed; and in this case the resuscitation of the body would not and -could not be the resurrection of the man. The popular view makes the -Bible as inconsistent on the subject of man, as it would be for a -historian to give the history of some celebrated man’s coat, and call it -the history of the man himself. - -Then it is further objected that if persons come up in the resurrection -as they went down in death, we should have a motley group, bloated with -dropsy, emaciated with consumption, scabbed, scarred, ulcered, maimed -and deformed; which would be both unreasonable and disgusting. And this, -it is claimed, is a necessary consequence from the view that the same -matter is raised that went into the grave, and so far re-organized -according to its previous arrangement as to constitute identity of -being. But when we speak of the re-arrangement of the particles of the -body, is it not evident to all that there are fortuitous and abnormal -conditions which are not to be taken at all into the account? and that -the essential and elemental parts are only to be understood? Who would -imagine that the body might not differ in the resurrection from what it -was before, as much at least as it differs at one period in its earthly -history from its condition at another, and yet its identity be -preserved? But we are sometimes in health, sometimes in sickness, -sometimes in flesh, and sometimes wasted away, sometimes with diseased -members, and sometimes entirely free from disease; and in all these -changes we are conscious that we have the same body. Why? Because its -essential elements remain, and its organization is continued. Whatever -change can take place in our bodies during our earth life, and our -identity be continued, changed to the same degree may be the body when -raised from the dead, and yet it be the same body. But a missing member -might be instantly replaced, a diseased limb healed, the consumptive -restored to the bloom of health, or the body, swollen with dropsy, -reduced to its natural size, and the individual still be conscious that -he was the same person. - -It is said still further by way of objection, that the matter of one -body, after being decomposed by death, is absorbed and taken into other -bodies, and becomes constituent parts of them; so that at the -resurrection the same matter may have belonged to several different -bodies, and cannot be restored to them all; therefore the doctrine of -the resurrection of the body is unphilosophical. - -If the reader will take the trouble to submit this objection to a little -intelligent scrutiny, he will find it to grow rapidly and beautifully -less, until finally it vanishes entirely away. Let us take the extremest -case supposable: that of the cannibal who might possibly (though this -would not naturally be the case), make an entire meal of human flesh. We -cannot admit the statement of a certain minister who, in his zeal to -make this objection appear very strong, claimed that a cannibal might -have the whole body of his victim within his own at the same time. For -this supposes that he would eat a whole man at one meal, and, further, -that he would consume the viscera, skull, bones, brains, and all. But it -is hardly supposable that, cannibals though they are, they have such an -enormous capacity, or are such unpardonable eaters. - -Nevertheless, let us suppose that a cannibal would, in process of time, -consume an entire victim; what proportion could he use in this way? Not -one-half, by weight. And what proportion of this would be taken up by -the body and become incorporated with it? But a small fraction. And to -what parts would this naturally go? To those grosser and unessential -parts which most rapidly change, and demand the most constant supply. -But while a few pounds of matter are supplied to the body, if that body -maintains a uniform condition, an equal amount of matter has been thrown -off. Thus it will be seen that at no one time is it possible for any -material amount of one body to be a part of another. But if there was -danger, in these rare cases, that an essential element of one body would -become a constituent part of another, and so remain, could not the -providence of God easily interpose to prevent this, by giving these -particles another direction? Most assuredly it could. And this is not -beneath His care who numbers all the hairs of our heads, and without -whose notice not a sparrow falls to the ground. This objection not only -betrays an utter lack of faith in God’s power and care in such matters, -but philosophically considered, it amounts simply to a cavil. - -It is the resurrection of the body of which the Bible treats. It knows -no other. In 1 Cor. 15:35, 36, Paul asserts an obvious fact, that -nothing can be quickened (revived or resuscitated, as from death, or an -inanimate state--_Webster_,) except it first die. To talk of a -quickening or making alive of that which does not die, or of a -resurrection from the dead of that which does not go down into death, is -richly deserving of the epithet which Paul there applies to it. - -And what is it that shall be quickened in the resurrection? The holy and -infallible word of God replies, _This mortal body_. Rom. 8:11: “But if -the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus Christ from the dead dwell in -you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also _quicken your -mortal bodies_ by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” Again, in verse 23, -Paul says: “Even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the -adoption, to wit, the _redemption of our body_.” And in 1 Cor. 15, Paul -is as explicit as he well can be on this subject. Verse 44: “It is sown -a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.” What does he mean by the -natural body, and by its being sown? He means the burial of our present -bodies in the grave. So he says in verses 42, 43: “So also is the -resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in -incorruption: it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: it is sown -in weakness; it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body; it is -raised a spiritual body.” What is sown? The natural body. Then what is -raised? The very same thing. IT is sown; IT is raised; raised in -incorruption, in glory, in power, a spiritual body. Raised in this -manner, the natural body becomes a spiritual body. Why? Because the -Spirit of Him that raised up Christ quickens, resuscitates, or makes it -alive again, as Paul wrote to the Romans. Should it be said that there -is a natural body and a spiritual body in existence at the same time, we -answer that according to Paul, that is not so. He says, verse 46: -“Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is -natural; and _afterward_ that which is spiritual.” In verse 49, he says -we have borne the image of the earthly, and we shall bear, future, the -image of the heavenly; and this will be when this mortal and -corruptible, which is this mortal body, puts on incorruption, verses 52, -53, or is clothed upon with the house from Heaven. 2 Cor. 5. - -To the Philippians, Paul testifies again on this point: “For our -conversation is in Heaven, from whence also we look for the Saviour, the -Lord Jesus Christ, who shall _change our vile body_, that it may be -fashioned like unto his glorious body.” This language is explicit. A -change is to be wrought in the vile, mortal or corruptible body of this -present state, not a spiritual body released from it, which never sees -death and needs no change; and the change that is promised is, that this -body taken as it now is, is to be fashioned, changed over, into the -likeness of Christ’s glorious, immortal body. - -Having thus shown that a future resurrection is an event of the most -absolute necessity, inasmuch as without it there is no future existence -for the human race (a fact which entirely destroys at one blow the -doctrine of the immortality of the soul), we now propose to notice the -prominence given to this event in the sacred writings, and some of the -plain declarations that it will surely take place. - -1. The resurrection is the great event to which the sacred writers -looked forward as the object of their hope. In the far distant ages a -day rose to their view in which the dead came forth from their graves, -and stood before God; and before the coming of that day, they did not -expect eternal life. - -So Job testifies: “I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he will -stand at the latter day upon the earth. And though after my skin worms -destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God.” Job 19:25, 26. - -David entertained the same satisfactory hope. “As for me,” he says, “I -shall be satisfied when I awake with Thy likeness.” Ps. 17:15. - -Isaiah struck some thrilling notes on the same theme: “Thy dead men -shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, -ye that dwell in dust; for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth -shall cast out the dead.” Isa. 26:19. - -It was the hope of Paul, that eminent apostle, through all his -sufferings and toils. For this he could sacrifice any temporal good, and -take up any cross. He assures us that he considered his afflictions, his -troubles on every side, his perplexities, persecutions, stripes, -imprisonments, and perils, but light afflictions; yea, he could utterly -lose sight of them; and then he tells us why he could do it: it was in -view of “the glory which shall be revealed in us,” “knowing,” says he, -“that He which raised up the Lord Jesus, _shall raise us up also by -Jesus_, and shall present us with you.” 2 Cor. 4:14. The assurance that -he should be raised up at the last day, and be presented with the rest -of the saints, when the Lord shall present to his Father a church -without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, Eph. 5:27, sustained him -under all his burdens. The resurrection was the staff of his hope. Again -he says that he could count all things loss, if by any means he might -attain to a resurrection (_exanastasis_) out from among the dead. Phil. -3:8-11. - -We refer to one more passage which expresses as clearly as language can -do it, the apostle’s hope. 2 Cor. 1:8, 9: “For we would not, brethren, -have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we were -pressed out of measure, above strength, insomuch that we despaired even -of life. But we had the sentence of death in ourselves, that we should -not trust in ourselves, but in God _which raiseth the dead_.” Paul here -gives us to understand that he could not trust in himself because he was -mortal. He must therefore put his trust in God; and he tells us why he -does this: not because God had promised him any happiness as a -disembodied soul; but because he was able and willing _to raise him from -the dead_. Paul “kept back nothing that was profitable,” and did not -shun “to declare all the counsel of God,” yet he never once endeavored -to console himself or his brethren by any allusion to a disembodied -state of existence, but passed over this as if it were not at all to be -taken into the account, and fixed all his hope on the resurrection. Why -this, if going to Heaven or hell at death, be a gospel doctrine? - -2. The resurrection is the time to which prophets and apostles looked -forward as the day of their reward. Should any one carefully search the -Bible to ascertain the time which it designates as the time of reward to -the righteous, and punishment to the wicked, he would find it to be not -at death, but at the resurrection. Our Saviour clearly sets forth this -fact in Luke 14:13, 14: “But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, -the maimed, the lame, the blind; and thou shalt be blessed; for they -cannot recompense thee; for thou shalt be recompensed,” not at death, -but, “_at the resurrection of the just_.” - -Mark also the language by which the Lord would restrain that voice of -weeping which was heard in Ramah. When Herod sent forth and slew all the -children in Bethlehem from two years old and under, in hopes thereby to -put to death the infant Saviour, then was fulfilled, says Matthew, what -was spoken by the prophet, “In Ramah was there a voice heard, -lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her -children, and would not be comforted, because they were not.” But what -said the Lord to Rachel? See the original prophecy, Jer. 31:15-17: “Thus -saith the Lord, Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from -tears; for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they shall -come again from the land of the enemy. And there is hope in thine end, -saith the Lord, that thy children shall come again to their own border.” -Not thus would the mourning Rachels of the 19th century be comforted by -the professed shepherds of the flock of Christ. They would tell them, -Refrain thy voice from weeping; for thy sons are now angel cherubs -chanting their joyful anthems in their Heavenly Father’s home. But the -Lord points the mourners in Ramah forward to the resurrection for their -hope; and though till that time their children “were not,” or were out -of existence, in the land of death, the great enemy of our race, yet, -says the Lord, they shall come again from the land of the enemy, they -shall return again to their own border, and thy work shall be rewarded; -and he bids them refrain their voices from weeping, their eyes from -tears, and their hearts from sorrow, in view of that glorious event. - -The apostles represent the day of Christ’s coming and the resurrection -as the time when the saints will receive their crowns of glory. Says -Peter, “And when the Chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a -crown of glory that fadeth not away.” 1 Pet. 5:4. And Paul says that -there is laid up for him a crown of righteousness, and not for him only, -but for all those also that love his appearing, and which shall be given -him in that day (the day of Christ’s appearing). These holy apostles -were not expecting their crowns of reward sooner than this. - -All this is utterly inconsistent with the idea of a conscious -intermediate state, and rewards or punishments at death. But the word of -God must stand, and the theories of men must bow to its authority. - -In 1 Cor. 15:32, Paul further tells us when he expected to reap -advantage or reward for all the dangers he incurred here in behalf of -the truth: “If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at -Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and -drink; for to-morrow we die.” If without a resurrection he would receive -no reward, it is evident that he expected his reward at that time, but -not before. His language here is moreover a re-iteration of verse 18, -that if there is no resurrection, they which are fallen asleep in Christ -are perished. - -Our Lord testified that of all which the Father had given him he should -lose nothing, but would raise it up at the last day. This language is -also at once a positive declaration that the resurrection shall take -place, and that without this event, all is lost. To the same effect is 1 -Cor. 15:52, 53, “The trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised -incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible _must_ put -on incorruption, and this mortal _must_ put on immortality.” Here is a -plain announcement that the resurrection will take place; that the -change mentioned will be wrought at that time; and that this change must -take place or we cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Verse 50. Therefore, -without a resurrection, none who have fallen in death will ever behold -the kingdom of God. - -3. The resurrection is made the basis of many of the comforting promises -of Scripture. 1 Thess. 4:16, 17: “For the Lord himself shall descend -from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the -trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we which are -alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to -meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” We -have already referred to this passage in this chapter on the -Resurrection. We quote it again to show that God designed that from -these promises we should comfort ourselves and one another in that -keenest of all our afflictions, and the darkest of all our hours, the -hour of bereavement. For the apostle immediately adds, “Wherefore -comfort one another with these words.” Is it to such facts as these, the -second coming of Christ, and the resurrection of the dead, that the -theology of our day appeals to alleviate the sorrow which the human -heart will feel for the loss of departed loved ones? Here, if anywhere, -and on this subject, if on any that the apostle has anywhere taken up, -should come in the modern doctrine of uninterrupted consciousness in the -intermediate state. But Paul was evidently against any such doctrine, -and so denies it a place on the page of truth, but passes right over to -the resurrection as the place where comfort is to be found for the -mourners. - -As the resurrection is inseparably connected with the second coming of -Christ, the words of Christ in John 14:1-3, are equally in point on this -question. When he was about to leave his sorrowing disciples, he told -them that he was going to prepare a place for them; he informed them -moreover of his design that they should ultimately be with himself. But -how was this to be accomplished? Was it through death, by which a -deathless spirit would be released to soar away to meet its Saviour? No; -but, says he, I will _come again_ and receive you to myself, that where -I am, there ye may be also. Should any say that this coming of the -Saviour is at death, we reply that the disciples of our Lord did not so -understand it. See John 21:22, 23. Jesus incidentally remarked -concerning one of his followers, “If I will that he tarry _till I come_, -what is that to thee? follow thou me;” and the saying went immediately -abroad among the disciples, on the strength of these words, that that -disciple should _not die_. - -The eminent and pious Joseph Alleine also testifies:-- - -“But we shall lift up our heads because the day of our redemption -draweth nigh. This is the day I look for, and wait for, and have laid up -all my hopes in. If the Lord return not, I profess myself undone; my -preaching is vain, and my suffering is vain. The thing, you see, is -established, and every circumstance is determined. How sweet are the -words that dropped from the precious lips of our departing Lord! What -generous cordials hath he left us in his parting sermon and his last -prayer! And yet of all the rest these are the sweetest: ‘I will come -again and receive you unto myself, that where I am there ye may be -also.’ What need you any further witness?” - -Dr. Clarke, in his general remarks on 1 Cor. 15, says:-- - -“The doctrine of the resurrection appears to have been thought of much -more consequence among the primitive Christians than it is _now_. How is -this? The apostles were continually insisting on it, and exciting the -followers of God to diligence, obedience, and cheerfulness through it. -And their successors in the present day seldom mention it.... There is -not a doctrine in the gospel on which more stress is laid; and there is -not a doctrine in the present system of preaching, which is treated with -more neglect.” - - - - - CHAPTER XXVII. - THE JUDGMENT. - - -We have seen how the grand doctrine of the future resurrection of the -dead, demolishes with its ponderous weight the gossamer fabric of the -immortality of the soul. There is another doctrine as scriptural and as -prominent as the resurrection which opposes its impregnable battlements -to the same anti-scriptural fable--a fable, weak, though encased in the -coat of mail with which heathendom furnishes it, and not very imposing -in appearance, though adorned with the gorgeous trappings of the mother -of harlots. We refer to the doctrine of the future general Judgment. - -This doctrine, and the theory of the conscious state of the dead, cannot -exist together. There is an antagonism between them, irreconcilable, and -irrepressible. If every man is judged at death, as he indeed must be, if -an immortal soul survives the dissolution of the body, and enters at -once into the happiness or misery of the eternal state, accordingly as -its character has been good or bad, there is no occasion and no room for -a general Judgment in the future; and if, on the other hand, there is to -be such a future Judgment, it is proof positive that the other doctrine -is not true. - -We affirm, then, that the Scriptures clearly teach that there is to be a -general Judgment in the future, at which time such awards shall be -rendered to every one as shall accord with the record of his deeds. A -passage in Hebrews may seem to some minds to afford proof that the -Judgment follows immediately after death, and which may, consequently, -demand a brief notice at this point. Heb. 9:27: “And as it is appointed -unto men once to die, but after this the Judgment.” The sentence does -not end here, but is continued into the next verse: “_So_ Christ was -once offered to bear the sins of many.” From this it is evident that the -death to which Paul refers is some death which illustrates the death of -Christ as an offering for sin: As men die, and after this the Judgment, -_so_ (in like manner) Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many. -It is not then the common death of human beings to which the apostle -refers; for there is nothing in this death to show how Christ died as an -offering for sin. - -This language occurs at the conclusion of an argument on the priesthood -of Christ, as illustrated by the priesthood connected with the Jewish -service. Under that dispensation there was a yearly round of service -connected with the worldly sanctuary. On the day of atonement, when the -sanctuary was to be cleansed, a goat was slain for all the people. Their -life was imputed to it, and in it they in figure died. The blood of this -goat, representing the forfeited lives of the people, was then -ministered in the most holy place, which was a work of determination and -decision in their cases, which the word here rendered judgment -signifies. So Christ, the antitype, was once offered, and, if we avail -ourselves of his intercession, his blood is accepted instead of our -forfeited lives, and we shall stand acquitted in the real Judgment work -in the sanctuary above, as Israel were acquitted when the same work was -performed in figure in the worldly sanctuary of the former dispensation. -This text, therefore, not referring to the end of individual mortal -life, and its relation to future retribution, has no relevancy to the -question under discussion. - -We return to the proposition that a future general Judgment is -appointed. Paul reasoned before Felix of a Judgment to come. Acts 24:25. -But as it may be said that this was to be experienced when Felix died, -we will introduce another text which not only speaks of this Judgment as -future, but shows that it will pass simultaneously on the human race: -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.” Here it is announced in plain terms that the Judgment of this -world is future, that it is to take place at the time appointed, and -that a day, or period, is set apart for this purpose. - -Peter refers to the same day and says that the angels that sinned, and -the unjust of our own race, are reserved unto it. 2 Pet. 2:4, 9. Again -he says that this present earth is reserved unto fire, with which it -shall be destroyed in that day. 2 Pet. 3:7-12. Jude says that the angels -that kept not their first estate are reserved in everlasting chains -under darkness unto the Judgment of the great day. Jude 6. This is the -day when Christ is represented as separating the good from the bad, as a -shepherd divideth the sheep from the goats, Matt. 25:31-34, and the time -to which John looked forward when he said that he saw the dead, small -and great, stand before God, and the books were opened, and they were -judged out of those things written in the books. - -The Judgment also stands in many lines of prophecy, not as something -which has been going forward from the beginning, not as taking place as -each member of the human family passes from the stage of mortal -existence, but as the great event with which the probation of the human -race is to end. Testimony on this point need not be multiplied. It -cannot be denied that a day is coming in which sentence will be rendered -at once upon all who have lived a life of probation in this world, a -sentence which shall decide their condition for the eternity that lies -beyond. - -This fact being established, its bearing upon the question of -consciousness in death, cannot be overlooked. For, if every human being -at death passes at once into a state of reward or punishment, what -occasion is there for a future general Judgment that a second decision -may be rendered in their cases? Is it possible that a mistake was made -in the former decision? possible that some are now writhing in the -flames of hell, who should be basking in the bliss of Heaven? possible -that some are taking their fill of happiness in the bowers of paradise, -whose corrupt hearts and criminal life demand that they should have -their place with fiends in the lowest hell? And if mistakes have once -been made in the sentence rendered, may they not be made again? What -assurance can we have that, though we may be entitled by thorough -repentance to the happiness of Heaven, we may not be sentenced for all -eternity to the damnation of hell? Is it possible that such foul blots -of injustice stand upon the record of the government of Heaven? Yes, if -the conscious-state theory be true! We arraign that theory face to face -with this stupendous fact, and bid it behold its work. It destroys God’s -omniscience! It charges him with imperfection! It accuses his government -of mistakes which are worse than crimes! Is any theory, which is subject -to such overwhelming imputations, worthy of a moment’s credence? - -To avoid the foregoing fatal conclusions, is it said that sentence is -not passed at death, but that the dead are held somewhere in a state of -suspense, without being either rewarded or punished till the Judgment? -Then we inquire how this can be harmonized with the invariable arguments -which immaterialists use on this question? For is it not claimed that -the spirit goes immediately to God to receive sentence from the hand of -its Creator? Is it not claimed that the rich man was immediately after -death in hell, in torment? Is it not claimed that the repentant thief -was that very day with Christ in the joys of paradise? If these -instances and arguments are abandoned, let it be so understood. If not, -then no such after thought can be resorted to, to shield the -conscious-state dogma from the charges above mentioned. - -We close this argument with a paragraph from the candid pen of H. H. -Dobney, Baptist minister of England. In Future Punishment, pp. 139, 140, -he says:-- - -“There is something of awkwardness, which the Scriptures seem to avoid, -in making beings who have already entered, and many ages since, on a -state of happiness or misery, come from those abodes to be judged, and -to receive a formal award to the very condition which has long been -familiar to them. To have been in Heaven with Christ for glorious ages, -and then to stand at his bar for Judgment, and be invited to enter -Heaven as their eternal home, as though they had not been there already, -scarcely seems to look exactly like the Scripture account, while it -would almost appear to be wanting in congruity. Nor is this all. There -is another difficulty, namely: That the idea of a saint already ‘with -Christ,’ ‘present with the Lord’ (who is in Heaven, be it remembered, in -his resurrection and glorified body, wherewith he ascended from the brow -of Olivet), coming from Heaven to earth to glide into a body raised -simultaneously from the ground, he being in reality already possessed of -a spiritual body, would seem _an invention which has not one syllable in -Scripture to give it countenance_.” - - - - - CHAPTER XXVIII. - THE WAGES OF SIN. - - “One question more than others all, - From thoughtful minds implores reply; - It is as breathed from star and pall, - What fate awaits us when we die?”--_Alger._ - - -We have now examined the teaching of the Bible relative to man, in his -creation, in his life, in his death, and in the intermediate state to -his resurrection; and we have found its uniform and explicit testimony -to be that he has no inherent, inalienable principle in his nature which -is exempt from death; but that the only avenue to life beyond the grave -is through the resurrection. We have found also that such a resurrection -to a second life is decreed for all the race; and now the more momentous -question, what the issue of that existence is to be, presents itself for -solution. - -Natural, or temporal, death, we die in Adam. This death visits all alike -irrespective of character. The sincerest saint falls under its power, as -inevitably as the most reckless sinner. This cannot be our final end; -for it would not be in accordance with justice that our ultimate fate -should hinge on a transaction, like the sin of Adam, for which we are -not responsible. Every person must be the arbiter of his own destiny. To -secure this, the redemption which intervenes through Christ, provides -for all a release from the death entailed upon us by the Adamic -transgression, in order that every person’s individual acts may -constitute the record which shall determine his destiny beyond the -grave. What is that destiny to be? - -Our inquiry respects, not the future of the righteous, concerning which -there is no material controversy, but that of the sinner. Is his fate an -eternity of life in a devouring fire which is forever unable to devour -him? an eternal approach of death which never really arrives? - -Blinded by the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, two opposite -conclusions are reached by those who connect this doctrine with two -different classes of Scripture declarations. For one class, reading that -the punishment of the sinner is to be eternal, and holding that man has -an inherent immortality which can never be alienated, at once come to -the terrible conclusion of an eternity of conscious suffering, an -eternal hell as taught by Augustine. Another, connecting it with the -declarations that God’s anger shall not always burn against the wicked, -but that a time comes when every intelligence in the universe, in the -plenitude of joy, is heard ascribing honor, and blessing, and praise to -God, speedily reaches the conclusion of universal restoration as taught -by Origen. And if the doctrine of the immortality of the soul be a -scriptural doctrine, then the Scriptures are found supporting these two -diametrically opposite conclusions. - -We have seen that the Scriptures do not teach any such inherent -immortality as is claimed for man; this, therefore, cannot fetter us in -our investigation of this question. God can continue the existence of -the wicked to all eternity after the resurrection, if he so chooses; but -if so, the doctrine must rest on explicit statements of the Scriptures -to that effect. Paul says plainly that the wages of sin is death; Rom. -6:23; and as we do not receive wages for the work of another, this must -be a declaration of what will result to every individual for a course of -sin; and before this can be made to mean eternal life in misery, the -present constitution of language must be destroyed, and new definitions -be given to established terms. We hold this declaration of Paul’s, on -which we take our stand, to be the true ground between the errors above -mentioned, and one which not only harmonizes all the Bible on this -question, but which has abundance of positive testimony in its favor. - -1. The future punishment, threatened to the wicked, is to be eternal in -its duration. The establishment of this proposition, of course -overthrows the universal restoration of Origen; and the nature of this -punishment, involving a state of death, overthrows alike the restoration -view of Origen, and the eternal hell of Augustine. - -One “Thus saith the Lord,” is sufficient for the establishment of any -doctrine. One such we offer in support of the proposition now before us. -Speaking of the reprobate, Christ says, “And these shall go away into -everlasting punishment,” and immediately adds concerning the righteous, -“but the righteous, into life eternal.” Here the same Greek word, -_aionios_, is used to express the duration of these opposite states. If, -as must be admitted, the word expresses unending duration in the case of -the righteous, it must mean the same in that of the wicked. - -To the same end we might refer to the words of Christ on two other -occasions: John 3:36; Matt. 26:24. In the first of these passages he -says: “He that believeth not the Son shall not see life;” that is, -eternal life. But if, after a certain period of suffering, such persons -are released from that state by a restoration to God’s favor, this -declaration could not be true. In the second, he speaks of some of whom -he says that it would be good for them if they had not been born. And -this utterly precludes the idea that they should ever be released to -enter the bliss of Heaven; for the first moment of such release would -make amends for all past suffering; and throughout eternity they would -praise God that they had been born. - -The punishment of the wicked, alike with the reward of the righteous, is -therefore to be eternal. Two unending conditions are held out to men, -and between the two, they have the privilege in this life of choosing. - -2. In what will the eternal state of the wicked consist? Before -presenting an argument to show that it is death in the literal sense, it -may be necessary to notice the few passages of Scripture which are put -forth as evidence that it is eternal misery. - -1. Daniel 12:2: “And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth -shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting -contempt.” The shame spoken of in this text is coupled by the objector -with the contempt, and claimed to be like that, everlasting; and if the -shame, which is an emotion to be exercised by the individuals -themselves, is to be eternal, they must be awakened to everlasting life -and consciousness. - -The fact that they are raised to shame proves indeed that they have a -veritable resurrection to life and consciousness, and that this is no -figure of speech which is applied to them. But the reader will notice -that the shame is not said, like the contempt, to be everlasting. -Contempt is not an emotion which they feel; they are not raised to the -contempt of themselves; but it is an emotion felt by others toward them; -and this does not imply the consciousness of those against whom it is -directed; inasmuch as contempt may be felt for them as well after they -have passed from the stage of consciousness as before. The Syriac -sustains this idea. It reads, “Some to shame and the eternal contempt of -their companions.” And thus it will be. Shame for their wickedness and -corruption will burn into their very souls, so long as they have -conscious being. And when they pass away, consumed for their iniquities, -their loathsome characters and their guilty deeds, excite only contempt -on the part of the righteous, unmodified and unabated, so long as they -hold them in remembrance at all. The text, therefore, furnishes no proof -of the eternal suffering of the wicked. - -2. Matt. 25:41: “Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, -prepared for the devil and his angels.” What is here said to be -everlasting? Wicked men? No. The devil? No. His angels? No. But only the -fire. And how can the application of this term to the fire prove the -indestructibility and eternal life of those who are cast therein? It may -be answered, What propriety could there be in keeping up the fire -everlastingly, if its victims were not to be eternally the objects of -its power? And we reply, This word is sometimes used to denote the -results and not the continuance of the process. Everlasting fire may not -be fire which is everlastingly burning, but fire which produces results -which are everlasting in their nature. The victims cast therein will be -consumed, and if from that destruction they are never to be released, if -that fiery work is never to be undone, it is to them an everlasting -fire. This will appear more fully when we come to speak of the “eternal -fire” through which God’s vengeance was visited on the wicked cities of -Sodom and Gomorrah. - -There are several passages of scripture in which the same word, -_aionios_, is unquestionably used in this sense. In Heb. 5:9, we read of -“eternal salvation;” that is, a salvation which is eternal or -everlasting in its results, not one which is forever going on, but never -accomplished. In Heb. 6:2, Paul speaks of “eternal judgment;” not -judgment which is eternally going forward, but one which, having once -passed upon all men, Acts 17:31, is irreversible in its decisions, and -eternal in its effects. In Heb. 9:12, he speaks in the same way of -“eternal redemption,” not a redemption through which we are eternally -approaching a redeemed state which we never reach, but a redemption -which releases us for all eternity from the power of sin and death. It -would be just as proper to speak of the saints as always redeeming, but -never redeemed, as to to speak of the sinner as always consuming but -never consumed, or always dying but never dead. This fire is prepared -for the devil and his angels, and will be shared by all of the human -race who choose to follow the devil in his accursed rebellion against -the government of Heaven. It will be to them an everlasting fire; for -once having plunged into its fiery vortex, there is no life, beyond. -Other texts noticed in succeeding chapters. - - - - - CHAPTER XXIX. - EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT. - -Matt. 25:46: “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but -the righteous into life eternal.” - - -This text is very commonly urged as an objection against the view that -the destiny of the reprobate is an utter and eternal extinction of -being; and it is one which has great apparent force. But the secret of -this apparent strength lies in the fact that the term punishment is -almost invariably supposed to be confined to conscious suffering, and -that when any affliction is no longer taken cognizance of by the senses, -it ceases to be a punishment at all. But if it can be shown from sound -reason, and from the analogy of human penalties, that punishment is -estimated by the loss involved, and not merely by the amount of pain -inflicted, the objection vanishes at once, and will cease to hold back -many devout and holy minds from adopting the view we here advocate. - -On the duration of the punishment brought to view in the text, we take -no issue. It is to be eternal; but what is to be its nature? The text -says, Everlasting punishment; popular orthodoxy says, Unending misery; -the Bible, we believe, says, Eternal death. - -Is death punishment? If so, when a death is inflicted from which there -is to be no release, that punishment is eternal or everlasting. Then the -application of this scripture to the view we hold is very apparent. The -heathen, to reconcile themselves to what they supposed to be their -inevitable fate, used to argue that death was no evil. But when they -looked forward into the endless future of which that death deprived -them, they were obliged to reverse their former decision and acknowledge -that death was an _endless injury_.--_Cicero, Tusc. Disp._ i., 47. - -Why is the sentence of death in our courts of justice reckoned as the -most severe and greatest punishment? It is not because the pain involved -is greater; for the scourge, the rack, the pillory, and many kinds of -minor punishment, inflict more pain upon the petty offender than -decapitation or hanging inflicts upon the murderer. But it is reckoned -the greatest because it is the most lasting; and its length is estimated -by the life the person would have enjoyed, if it had not been inflicted. -It has deprived him of every hour of that life he would have had but for -this punishment; and hence the punishment is considered as co-existent -with the period of his natural life. - -Augustine says:-- - -“The laws do not estimate the punishment of a criminal by the brief -period during which he is being put to death, but by their removing him -forever from the company of living men.”--_De. civ. Dei, xxi._, 11. - -The same reasoning applies to the future life as readily as to the -present. By the terrible infliction of the second death, the sinner is -deprived of all the bright and ceaseless years of everlasting life. The -loss of every moment, hour, and year, of this life, is a punishment; -and, as the life is eternal, the loss, or the punishment, is eternal -also. “There is here no straining of argument to make out a case. The -argument is one which man’s judgment has in every age approved as just.” - -The original sustains the same idea. The word for punishment is -_kolasis_; and this is defined, “a curtailing, a pruning.” The idea of -cutting off is here prominent. The righteous go into everlasting life, -but the wicked, into an everlasting state in which they are curtailed or -cut off. Cut off from what? Not from happiness; for that is not the -subject of discourse; but from life, as expressly stated in reference to -the righteous. “The wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is -eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” And since the life given to -man through Christ, is eternal life, it follows that the loss of it -inflicted as a punishment, is eternal punishment. - -The same objection is again stated in a little different form. As in the -ages before our existence we suffered no punishment, so, it is claimed -it will be no punishment to be reduced to that state again. To this, we -reply, that those who never had an existence cannot, of course, be -conceived of in relation to rewards and punishments at all. But when a -person has once seen the light of life, when he has lived long enough to -taste its sweets and appreciate its blessings, is it then no punishment -to be deprived of it? Says Luther Lee (Immortality of the Soul, p. 128), -“We maintain that the simple loss of existence cannot be a penalty or -punishment in the circumstances of the sinner after the general -resurrection.” And what are these circumstances? He comes up to the -beloved city, and sees the people of God in the everlasting kingdom. He -sees before them an eternity, not of life only, but of bliss and glory -indescribable, while before himself is only the blackness of darkness -forever. Then, says the Saviour, addressing a class of sinners, there -shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, -Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of God. What is the cause of this -wailing? It is not that they have to choose between annihilation or -eternal torture. Had they this privilege, some might perhaps choose the -former; others would not. But the cause of their woe is not that they -are to receive a certain kind of punishment when they would prefer -another, but because they have lost the life and blessedness which they -now behold in possession of the righteous. The only conditions between -which they can draw their cheerless comparisons are, the blessed and -happy state of the righteous within the city of God, and their own -hapless lot outside of its walls. And we may well infer from the nature -of the case, as well as the Saviour’s language, that it is _because_ -they find themselves thus thrust out, that they lift up their voices in -lamentation and woe. “There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when -ye shall see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of God, _and ye -yourselves thrust out_!” - -The sinner then begins to see what he has lost; the sense of it, like a -barbed arrow, pierces his soul; and the thought that the glorious -inheritance before him might have been his but for his own self-willed -and perverse career, sets the keenest edge upon every pang of remorse. -And as he looks far away into eternity, to the utmost limit which the -mind’s eye can reach, and gets a glimpse of the inconceivable -blessedness and glory which he might have enjoyed but for his idol sin, -the hopeless thought that all is lost will be sufficient to rend the -hardest and most obdurate heart with unutterable agony. Say not then -that loss of existence under such circumstances is no penalty or -punishment. - -But again: The Bible plainly teaches degrees of punishment; and how is -this compatible, it is asked, with the idea of a mere state of death to -which all alike will be reduced? Let us ask believers in eternal misery -how they will maintain degrees in _their_ system? They tell us the -intensity of the pain endured will be in each case proportioned to the -guilt of the sufferer. But how can this be? Are not the flames of hell -equally severe in all parts? and will they not equally affect _all_ the -immaterial souls cast therein? But God can interpose, it is answered, to -produce the effect desired. Very well, then, we reply, cannot he also -interpose, if necessary, according to our view, and graduate the pain -attendant upon the sinner’s being reduced to a state of death as the -climax of his penalty? So, then, our view is equal with the common one -in this respect, while it possesses a great advantage over it in -another; for, while that has to find its degrees of punishment in -intensity of pain alone, the duration in all cases being equal, ours may -have not only degrees in pain, but in duration also; for, while some may -perish in a short space of time, the weary sufferings of others may be -long drawn out. But yet we apprehend that the bodily suffering will be -but an unnoticed trifle compared with the mental agony, that keen -anguish which will rack their souls as they get a view of their -incomparable loss, each according to his capacity of appreciation. The -youth who had but little more than reached the years of accountability -and died, perhaps with just enough guilt upon him to debar him from -Heaven, being less able to comprehend his situation and his loss, will -of course feel it less. To him of older years, more capacity, and -consequently a deeper experience in sin, the burden of his fate will be -proportionately greater. While the man of giant intellect, and almost -boundless comprehension, who thereby possessed greater influence for -evil, and hence was the more guilty for devoting those powers to that -evil, being able to understand his situation fully, comprehend his fate -and realize his loss, will feel it most keenly of all. Into _his_ soul -indeed the iron will enter most intolerably deep. And thus, by an -established law of mind, the sufferings of each may be most accurately -adjusted to the magnitude of his guilt. - -Then, says one, the sinner will long for death as a release from his -evils, and experience a sense of relief when all is over. No, friend, -not even this pitiful semblance of consolation is granted; for no such -sense of relief will ever come. The words of another will best -illustrate this point:-- - -“‘But the sense of relief when death comes at last.’ We hardly need to -reply: There can be no sense of relief. The light of life gone out, the -expired soul can never know that it has escaped from pain. The bold -transgressor may fix his thoughts upon it now, heedless of all that -intervenes; but he will forget to think of it then. To waken from a -troubled dream, and to know that it was only a dream, is an exceeding -joy; and with transport do the friends of one dying in delirium, note a -gleam of returning reason, ere he breathes his last. But the soul’s -death knows no waking; its maddening fever ends in no sweet moment of -rest. It can never feel that its woe is ended. The agony ends, not in a -happy consciousness that all is past, but in eternal night--in the -blackness of darkness forever!”--_Debt and Grace_, p. 424. - - - - - CHAPTER XXX. - THE UNDYING WORM AND QUENCHLESS FIRE. - -Mark 9:43, 44: “And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better -for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into -hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dieth -not, and the fire is not quenched.” - - -Twice our Lord repeats this solemn sentence against the wicked, “Where -their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” Verses 46, 48. -These passages are relied on with as much assurance, perhaps, as any, to -prove the eternal misery of the reprobate. If this language had never -been used by any of the inspired writers of the Scriptures, till it was -thus used in the New Testament, it might be urged with some degree of -plausibility, as an expressive imagery of eternal torment. But, even in -this case, it might be replied that fire, so far as we have any -experience with it, or knowledge of its nature, invariably consumes that -upon which it preys, and hence must be a symbol of complete destruction; -and that the expression, as it occurs in Mark 9:44, can denote nothing -less than the utter consumption of those who are cast into that fire. - -But this expression was one which was well known and understood by those -whom Christ was addressing. Isaiah and Jeremiah frequently use the -figure of the undying worm and quenchless fire. In their familiar -scriptures the people daily read these expressions. Let us see what idea -they would derive from them. We turn to Jeremiah 17:27, and read:-- - -“But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the Sabbath day, and not -bear a burden, even entering in at the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath -day; then will I kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour -the palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched.” - -From this text we certainly can learn the meaning that was attached to -the expression, “unquenchable fire,” by the Hebrew people. This fire was -not to be quenched, therefore it was unquenchable. But it was to be -kindled in the gates of Jerusalem, and devour the palaces thereof. It -was therefore literal, natural, fire. But how could a fire of this kind, -thus kindled, be supposed to be a fire that would burn eternally? They -certainly would not so understand it. No more should we. Moreover, this -threatening of the Lord by Jeremiah was fulfilled. 2 Chron. 36:19: “And -they burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and -burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all the goodly -vessels thereof.” Verse 21. “To fulfill the word of the Lord by -Jeremiah.” Thus Jerusalem was burned according to Jeremiah’s prediction -that it should be consumed in unquenchable fire. But how long did that -fire burn? Only till it had reduced to ashes the gates and palaces on -which it preyed. Unquenchable fire is therefore simply a fire that is -not quenched, or does not cease, till it has entirely consumed that -which causes or supports it. Then it dies out of itself, because there -is nothing more to burn. The expression does not mean a fire that must -absolutely eternally burn, and that consequently all that is cast -therein to feed the flame must forever be preserved by having the -portion consumed immediately renewed. - -To the wicked the threatened fire is unquenchable because it will not be -quenched, or caused to cease, till it has entirely devoured them. - -Ps. 37: 20: “But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the Lord -shall be as the fat of lambs; they shall consume; into smoke shall they -consume away.” Mal. 4: 3: “And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they -shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do -this saith the Lord of hosts.” - -Ezekiel speaks of unquenchable fire in a similar manner. - -Eze. 20: 47, 48: “Thus saith the Lord God: Behold I will kindle a fire -in thee, and it shall devour every green tree in thee, and every dry -tree; the flaming flame shall not be quenched, and all faces from the -south to the north shall be burned therein. And all flesh shall see that -I the Lord have kindled it: it shall not be quenched.” - -Though this is doubtless figurative language, denoting sore calamities -upon a certain land called the forest of the south field, it -nevertheless furnishes an instance of how the expression, unquenchable -fire, was then used and understood; for that generation many ages ago -perished, and those judgments long since ceased to exist. - -Isaiah not only speaks of the unquenchable fire, but he couples with it -the undying worm, the same as the language in Mark: - -Isa. 66: 24: “And they shall go forth and look upon the carcasses of the -men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, -neither shall their fire be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring -unto all flesh.” - -This is undoubtedly the language from which the expression in Mark is -borrowed; but a moment’s examination of it will show that the worm is -not the remorse of a guilty conscience, but that, like the fire, it is -something external to, and distinct from, the objects upon which it -preys; and moreover that those upon whom it feeds are not the living, -but the dead: it is the “carcasses” of the men that have transgressed -against the Lord. In Isa. 14: 11, and 51: 8, the prophet again speaks of -the worm as an agent of destruction, but it is always in connection with -death. It is thus evident that the terms employed by our Lord in -describing the doom of the wicked would convey to the minds of his -hearers the very opposite of the idea of eternal life in misery. - -There is other evidence, though no other is necessary, to show that the -idea which would be conveyed, and which the language was designed to -convey, to their minds, was that of complete extinction of being, an -utter consumption by external elements of destruction. The word -translated hell in the passage under consideration is _ge-enna_. It is -better to enter into life maimed, than to go in full possession of all -our members and faculties into _ge-enna_. Did those to whom Christ spoke -know anything about this place, and what kind of a fate awaited those -who were cast therein? A vivid picture of the place of torment to which -our Lord refers was in constant operation before their eyes, near by -Jerusalem. - -Greenfield defines the word thus:-- - -“Gehenna, the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, once celebrated for -the horrid worship of Moloch and afterward polluted with every species -of filth, as well as the carcasses of animals and dead bodies of -malefactors; to _consume which_, in order to avert the pestilence which -such a mass of corruption would occasion, constant fires were kept -burning.” - -Such was the fire of Gehenna; not a fire into which people were cast to -be kept alive and tortured, but one into which they were cast to be -consumed; not one which was designed to prey upon living beings, but -upon the carcasses of animals and the dead bodies of malefactors. Hence -we can see the consistency of associating the fire and the worm -together. Whatever portion of the dead body the fire failed to consume, -the worm would soon seize upon and devour. If a person had been -condemned to be cast alive into this place, as the wicked will be cast -into their Gehenna, what would have been his hope of escape? If the fire -could have been speedily quenched before it had taken his life, and the -worms which consumed what the fire left, could have been destroyed, he -might have had some hope of coming out alive; but if this could not be -done, he would know of a surety that his life would soon become extinct, -and then even his lifeless remains would be utterly consumed by these -agents of destruction. - -This was the scene to which Christ pointed his hearers to represent the -doom that awaits the wicked; that, as they gazed upon the work of -complete destruction going on in the valley of Hinnom, the worms -devouring what the flames spared, they might learn that in the future -Gehenna which awaited them, no part of their being would be exempt from -utter and complete destruction, one agent of death completing what -another failed to accomplish. - -As the definition of the word _ge-enna_ throws great light on the -meaning of this text, so the definition of another term used is equally -to the point. The words for unquenchable fire are _pur_ (long u) -_asbeston_, and this word _asbeston_, primarily means simply unquenched, -that is, not caused to cease by any external means: the idea of eternal -is a theological definition which has been attached to it. Ancient -writers used it in this sense. Homer, in the Illiad, xvi., 123, 294, -speaks of the Trojans’ hurling “unquenchable fire” upon the Grecian -ships, though but one of them was burnt by it. And Eusebius, who was a -learned Greek, employs the same expression in two instances in -recounting the martyrdom of Christians. Cronion and Julian, after being -tortured in various ways, were consumed in an “unquenchable fire,” _puri -asbesto_. The same is also said of Epimachus and Alexander. “The _pur -asbeston_,” says Wetstein, “denotes such a fire as cannot be -extinguished before it has consumed and destroyed all.” - -Such is the evident meaning of this passage, and the sense in which it -must have been understood at that time. Yet commentators, eighteen -hundred years this side of that time, presume to turn this whole -representation upside down, and give to the terms a meaning exactly -opposite from that which they were intended to convey. That sense alone -can be the correct one in which they were first spoken; and concerning -that there can be no question. - -There is another text often urged to prove the eternal conscious misery -of the wicked. It is one in which fire is mentioned as the instrument -used for the punishment of the wicked; and this fire being called -eternal, is understood in the same sense as the unquenchable fire of -Mark 9:43. It may therefore properly be examined in this connection. - -Jude 7: “Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like -manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange -flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal -fire.” - -This text, when rightly understood, will, we think, like that in Mark 9, -be found to convey just the opposite meaning from that popularly given -to it. The first great error in the interpretation of this text, lies, -as we view it, in a wrong application of the tense employed. It is -claimed that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, having been -destroyed, were committed to the flames of hell, where they are now -(present tense) suffering the vengeance of that eternal fire. But a -moment’s glance at the text will show that it is the example set forth, -and not the suffering, that is in the present tense. There are other -facts mentioned in the same tense with the suffering; thus, “giving -themselves over to fornication,” “going after strange flesh,” “suffering -the vengeance of eternal fire.” If one of these expressions denotes -something that is now going on, the others also denote the same. If they -are now suffering the fire, they are now giving themselves over to -fornication, and going after strange flesh; for all these declarations -are in the same construction. But no one will claim that the Sodomites -are now taking the course here described; neither, then, can it be -claimed that they are now suffering the pain of fire. - -The sense of the passage appears to be very evidently this: That the -Sodomites, giving themselves up to their wicked practices, and, as a -consequence, suffering an eternal overthrow by fire rained down upon -them from heaven, are thus set forth as an example to the ungodly of all -coming ages, of the overthrow they will also experience if they follow -the same course. - -Peter speaks of the same event, as an example to the wicked, and tells -what effect that fire had upon the cities of the plain. It did not -preserve them in the midst of the fire in unceasing torture, but turned -them into ashes. He says, 2 Pet. 2:6: “And turning the cities of Sodom -and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them with an overthrow, making them -an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly.” This language is -too plain to need comment. How are the Sodomites made an example? By -being overthrown and turned into ashes for their open and presumptuous -sins. It is God saying to the wicked of all coming time, Behold, how -your sins shall be visited unless you repent. - -But those fires are not now burning. Seek out the site of those ancient -and abandoned cities, and the brackish waters of the Dead Sea will be -found rolling their sluggish waves over the spot where once they stood. -Those fires are therefore called eternal, because their effects are -eternal, or age-lasting. They never have recovered, nor will they ever -recover while the world stands, from that terrible overthrow. - -And thus this text is very much to the purpose on the question before -us; for it declares that the punishment of Sodom is an exact pattern of -the future punishment of the wicked; hence that punishment will not be -eternal life in the fiery flame, but an utter consumption, even as Sodom -was consumed, by its resistless vengeance. - - - - - CHAPTER XXXI. - TORMENTED FOREVER AND EVER. - - -The only remaining texts to be urged in favor of the eternal torment of -the wicked, are two passages which are found in the book of Revelation. -The first is Rev. 14:11: “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.” - -It is proper first to inquire of whom this is spoken. The question -before us relates to the destiny of all the wicked. No text is therefore -conclusive on this question, which speaks of only a certain class, or a -limited number, of the wicked; for a particular class might for good -reasons be set apart to a certain punishment, and that punishment be -exceptional in their cases, and not such as awaits the whole race of the -guilty. The passage just quoted speaks not of all the wicked, but only -of a limited class--the worshipers of the beast and his image. The -beast, according to evidence which no Protestant will be disposed to -question, means the papal power; Rev. 13:1-10; and the image is to be -formed, near the close of the career of that power. Rev. 13:14-18; -14:1-5. The text, therefore, embraces only comparatively a small portion -of the wicked of the human race. The ancient world, with its teeming -millions, and the present heathen world, knowing nothing of this power, -are alike exempted from the punishment here brought to view. This text -might therefore be set aside as inconclusive, since, even if it should -be admitted to prove eternal torture for some, it does not for all. - -But we claim that no text affirms eternal torment for a single conscious -intelligence in all the universe, and hence undertake to show that this -passage does not prove it in reference to even the limited class brought -to view. The expression, “The smoke of their torment ascendeth up -forever and ever,” is the one upon which the doctrine of eternity of -suffering is in this case suspended. But the same may be said of this -expression that was said in last chapter in reference to the undying -worm and the quenchless fire. It was not new in John’s day, but was -borrowed from the Old Testament, and was one which was well understood -at that time. - -In Isa. 34:9, 10, the prophet, speaking of the land of Idumea, says: -“And the streams thereof shall be turned into pitch, and the dust -thereof into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become burning pitch. -It shall not be quenched night nor day: the smoke thereof shall go up -forever: from generation to generation it shall lie waste; none shall -pass through it forever and ever.” But two applications can be made of -this language. Either it refers to the literal land of Edom east and -south of Judea, or it is a figure to represent the whole world in the -day of final conflagration. In either case it is equally to the point. -If the literal land of Idumea is meant, and the language has reference -to the desolations which have fallen upon it, then certainly no eternity -of duration is implied in the declaration that the smoke thereof shall -go up forever. For all the predictions against the land of Idumea have -long since been fulfilled, and the judgments have ceased. If it refers -to the fires of the last day, when the elements melt with fervent heat, -no eternity of duration is even then implied in the expression; for the -earth is not to be forever destroyed by the purifying fires of the last -day. It is to rise from its ashes, and a new earth come forth purified -from all the stains of sin, and free from all the deformity of the -curse, to be the everlasting abode of the righteous. - -Here is an instance in which the word, forever, apply it in either of -the only two ways possible, must denote a limited period. And here the -Septuagint uses αἰων (_aion_) the same as is used in Rev. 14:11; and -from this passage in Isaiah, the language in Revelation was probably -borrowed. That the words αἰων and αἰωνιος sometimes denote a limited -period, and not invariably one of eternal duration, will appear in the -examination of the only remaining text that calls for consideration, -namely, Rev. 20:10: “And the devil that deceived them was cast into the -lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, -and shall be tormented day and night forever and ever.” - -The same limitation is apparent in this text that was observed in the -preceding. It does not refer to all the wicked, but speaks only of the -devil, the beast, and the false prophet. The lake of fire, the place and -means of their torment, is again mentioned in verse 14; but there it is -the symbol of complete and utter destruction. Death and Hades, it says, -were cast into the lake of fire, and after this it is said, “There shall -be no more death.” Rev. 21:4. Whatever, then, is cast into the lake of -fire, after it has wrought its work of destruction upon them, no longer -exists. This is the plain inference from what is here asserted -respecting death. Then follows the testimony of verse 15, that -“whosoever was not found written in the book of life, was cast into the -lake of fire.” And this makes a final disposition of all who are not -saved in the kingdom of Heaven. - -There is nothing in the way of this application, unless the words -“forever and ever” denote absolutely an eternity of duration. These -words are translated in the New Testament from _aion_, and _aionios_, -respecting which the following facts may be stated. - -_Aion_ is defined by different lexicographers as follows:-- - -Greenfield: “Duration, finite or infinite, unlimited duration, eternity; -a period of duration past or future, time, age, lifetime; the world, -universe.” - -Schrevelius: “An age, a long period of time; indefinite duration; time, -whether longer or shorter.” - -Liddell and Scott: “A space or period of time, especially a lifetime, -life, _ævum_; an age, a generation; long space of time, eternity; in -plural, _eis tous aionas ton aionon_, unto ages of ages, forever and -ever, N. T., Gal. 1:5.-3. later, a space of time clearly defined and -marked out, an era, age, period of a dispensation: _ho aion houtos_, -this present life, this world.” - -Parkhurst: “Always being. It denotes duration or continuance of time, -but with great variety. I. Both in the singular and the plural it -signifies eternity, whether past or to come. II. The duration of this -world. III. The ages of the world. IV. This present life. V. The world -to come. VI. An age, period, or periodical dispensation of divine -providence. VII. _Aiones_ seems, in Heb. 11:3, to denote the various -revolutions and grand occurrences which have happened in this created -system, including also the world itself. Comp. Heb. 1:2, and Macknight -on both texts. _Aion_, in the LXX. generally answers to the Hebrew -_holam_, which denotes _time hidden_ from man, whether indefinite or -definite, whether past or future.” - -Robinson: “Duration, the course or flow of time in various relations as -determined by the context, viz: (A) For human life, existence. (B) For -time indefinite, a period of the world, the world, in Gr. writers, and -also in Sept. and N. Testament. (C) For endless duration, perpetuity, -eternity.... Sept. mostly for Heb. _holam_, ‘hidden time,’ duration, -eternity.--Hence, in N. T. of long-continued time, indefinite duration, -in accordance with Greek usage, but modified as to construction and -extent by the example of the LXX., and the Rabbinic views.” - -Schleusner gives as the first meaning of _aion_, “a definite and -long-continued time,” _i. e._, a long-continued but still a definite -period of time. - -Wahl has arranged the definitions of _aion_ thus: “(1) Time, unlimited -duration, _ævum_. (2) The universe, _mundus_. (3) An age, period of the -world,” as the Jewish age, Christian age, &c. This reference to -Schleusner and Wahl we find in Stuart on Future Punishment, pp. 91, 93. - -_Holam_, the Hebrew word which corresponds to the Greek _aion_, is -applied according to Gesenius to things which endure for a long time, -for an indefinite period. It is applied to the Jewish priesthood, to the -Mosaic ordinances, to the possession of the land of Canaan, to the hills -and mountains, to the earth, to the time of service to be rendered by a -slave, and to some other things of a like nature. Stuart, p. 72. - -Cruden, in his Unabridged Concordance, under the word eternal, says:-- - -“The words, eternal, everlasting, and forever, are sometimes taken for a -long time, and are not always to be understood strictly. Thus, ‘Thou -shalt be our guide from this time forth even forever,’ that is, during -our whole life. And in many other places of Scripture, and in particular -when the word forever is applied to the Jewish rites and privileges, it -commonly signifies no more than during the standing of that -commonwealth, until the coming of the Messiah.” - -Dr. Clarke places in our hands a key to the interpretation of the words, -“forever” and “forever and ever,” which is adapted to every instance of -their use. According to his rule they are to be taken to mean as long as -a thing, considering the surrounding circumstances, can exist. And he -illustrates this in his closing remarks on 2 Kings 5, where, speaking of -the curse of the leprosy pronounced upon Gehazi forever, he says:-- - -“Some have thought, because of the prophet’s curse, ‘The leprosy of -Naaman shall cleave unto thee and to thy seed forever,’ that there are -persons still alive who are this man’s descendants, and afflicted with -this horrible disease. Mr. Maundrell, when he was in Judea, made -diligent inquiry concerning this, but could not ascertain the truth of -the supposition. To me it appears absurd; the denunciation took place in -the posterity of Gehazi till it should become extinct; and under the -influence of this disorder, this must _soon_ have taken place. The -_forever_ implies as long as any of his posterity should remain. This is -the import of the word, _leolam_. _It takes in the whole extent or -duration of the thing to which it is applied._ The _forever_ of Gehazi -was till his posterity became extinct.” - -The word _aionios_ is derived from _aion_, and its general meaning may -be determined from the definitions given above to the latter word. - -That these words are frequently applied to the existence of divine -beings, and the future happiness of the saints, is true; and that in -these cases they denote eternal duration is equally evident; yet, -according to the definition of the words and the rule laid down by Dr. -Clarke, that eternal duration could not be made out by the use of these -words alone. They denote duration or continuance of time, the length of -that duration being determined by the nature of the objects to which -they are applied. When applied to things which we know from other -declarations of the Scriptures are to have no end, they signify an -eternity of being; but when applied to things which are to end, they are -correspondingly limited in their meaning. That the existence of God and -the future happiness of the righteous are to be absolutely eternal, we -are abundantly assured by scriptures which make no use of the words in -question. When applied to these they therefore signify a period of -duration which is never to end. Just as plainly are we assured that the -existence of the wicked is at last to cease in the second death; and -when applied to this, the words _aion_ and _aionios_ must be limited -accordingly in their signification. Overlooking this plain principle of -interpretation, Prof. Stuart, p. 89, comes to this erroneous conclusion -respecting these words, because they are applied alike to the sufferings -of the lost and the happiness of the saved, that “we must either admit -the endless misery of hell, or give up the endless happiness of Heaven.” -We are under no such necessity. The words, _aion_ and _aionios_, -according to Dr. Clarke, cover the whole of the existence of the two -classes in their respective spheres, and that only. The one is, after a -season of suffering and anguish, to come to an end; the other is to go -on in bliss to all eternity. - -So when it is said that the beast and the false prophet, and they who -worship the beast and his image, are to be tormented day and night -forever and ever, we must understand this expression to cover only the -duration of their future existence beyond the grave. If we are anywhere -given to understand by other scriptures and by other terms which are -more rigid in their meaning, that this is to be eternal, the terms must -here be so understood; if not, we have no warrant for so defining them -here. - -That the forever and ever, _eis tous aionas ton aionon_, of the -suffering of the wicked, denotes a period of long duration, there is no -question; and it may be much longer than any have been disposed to -conceive who deny its eternity; yet it is to come to an end, not by -their restoration to God’s favor, but by the extinction of that life -which has in it no immortality, and because they have refused to accept -of the life freely offered to them, which is to continue through ages -without end. - -We have now examined all the more prominent passages which are urged in -favor of the eternal suffering of the lost. Though others may by some be -brought forward to prove this doctrine, we may safely take the position -that if it is not proved by those we have examined, it cannot be proved -by any in all the Bible; for these use the strongest terms and are most -explicit in their nature. And of these how many are there? Five in all. -Those who have never before examined this subject, will perhaps be -surprised to learn how small is the number of such texts. And should -they take into the account every text which is thought to have even the -slightest semblance of proving the immortality of the lost, it would not -be calculated to abate that surprise to any great degree. - -It now remains that we examine those texts, more in number, and more -explicit in statement, which prove that the wicked shall be at last as -though they had not been. - - - - - CHAPTER XXXII. - THE END OF THEM THAT OBEY NOT THE GOSPEL. - -“What shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?” 1 Pet. -4:17. - - -By this direct interrogation inspiration calls us face to face to the -great question of the final destiny of the lost, not to leave us at last -in perplexity and doubt, but to give us full information in reference -thereto. - -By the foregoing examination of themes which have a bearing upon this -question, we have been brought to a place where the way is all clear to -listen unbiased to the direct testimony of the Bible on the point now -before us. No immortality is anywhere affirmed of the soul, no eternal -misery is anywhere threatened against the lost. What then is to be their -fate? It is abundantly affirmed that they shall die. - -The inquiry into the nature of the death threatened Adam, in chapter -xxv., brought very clearly to view the fact that the penalty pronounced -upon his sin reduced back to the dust the entire being, leaving no part -conscious and active in the intermediate state. And the same penalty -stands against sin now as at the beginning. For our personal sins, death -is now threatened against us, as it was against him. This is the second -death; and those who fall under this will be reduced to the same -condition as that into which Adam was brought by death, with no promise -nor possibility of ever being released therefrom. - -Eze. 18:26: “When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, -and committeth iniquity, and dieth _in_ them; _for_ his iniquity that he -hath done shall he die.” - -Two deaths are here brought to view: First, the death common to this -state of being, which all share alike, good and bad, which is called the -first, or temporal, death; secondly, if a person dies this death in a -state of sin, that is, with sins upon him of which he does not repent -before he dies, _for_ those sins that he has committed he shall die. -Another death awaits him. The first death was not for his personal -transgressions; for this is entailed upon all alike through Adam, both -good and bad. But every one is to die for his own sins unless he -repents. How is this to be brought about? He is to be raised from the -first death and judged; and, if sins are then found upon him, for those -sins he suffers the same penalty, death; and being thus reduced to death -again, he will forever remain dead; for from this death there is no -release nor redemption provided. This is the second death, and is the -everlasting punishment in store for all the workers of iniquity. - -Paul says, Rom. 6:23, “The wages of sin is death;” and James (1:15) -corroborates this testimony, by saying, “Sin, when it is finished, -bringeth forth death.” In Rom. 2, Paul tells us of certain characters -which are certainly deserving, if any can be, of eternal torture; but, -in passing sentence upon them, he does not draw out before us a picture -of unending conscious misery, a course for which he has the most -appropriate occasion, if it be true, but only tells us, in accordance -with reason as well as revelation, that they are worthy of _death_. But -death is a state which can be reached only on a complete extinction of -life. As long as there is any life about a man, he is not dead. “The -death that never dies,” is a contradiction of terms. Nor can a person -properly be said to be dying, unless he is tending to a state of death, -which he will by and by reach. And yet the popular view of this subject -is well expressed in the following language of Thomas Vincent:-- - -“The torments of hell will not be in one part only, but in every part, -not in a weaker degree, but in the greatest extremity; not for a day, or -a month, or a year, but forever: the wicked will be always dying, never -dead; the pangs of death will ever be upon them, and yet they shall -never give up the ghost; if they could die they would think themselves -happy; they will always be roaring, and never breathe out their last; -always sinking, and never come to the bottom; always burning in those -flames, and never consumed; the eternity of hell will be the hell of -hell.” - -Again, the Lord says, speaking of a certain class of his enemies, “For -yet a little while and the indignation shall cease, and mine anger in -their destruction.” Isa. 10:25. This is conclusive testimony that all -those with whom the Lord has occasion to be angry, as he is with all the -wicked, Ps. 7:11, will be finally destroyed, and in that destruction his -anger toward them will cease. Yet the majority of divines tell us that -God’s “fiery indignation and incensed fury” toward them will never -cease; that he will never literally destroy them, but will forever -torment them, and keep them alive expressly that he may torment them. -Says Benson:-- - -“He will exert _all_ his divine attributes to make them as wretched as -the capacity of their nature will admit.” And he continues, “They must -be perpetually swelling their enormous sums of guilt, and still running -deeper, immensely deeper, in debt to divine and infinite justice. Hence -after the longest imaginable period, they will be so far from having -discharged their debt that they will find more due than when they first -began to suffer.” - -Thus the sinner is represented as being able to distance in sin the -power of Omnipotence to punish. They go on accumulating loads of guilt -in their rebellion against the divine government, while God, exerting -_all_ his divine attributes, follows tardily after, in fruitless efforts -to make the terrors of his punishment adequate to the infinitude of -their guilt. Oh, horrid picture of perverted imagination! Did we not -believe its authors labored under the sincere conviction that they were -doing God service, and did we not know that many good and estimable -persons still defend the doctrine under an earnest, though mistaken, -zeal for God, it would deserve to be styled the most arrant blasphemy. - -This condition of the finally reprobate, so often and so distinctly -defined as a state of death, is also set forth by very many other -expressions, by every variety of phrase, in fact, which expresses, in -the most complete and absolute manner, an utter loss of existence. - -Henry Constable, A. M., in his work on “The Duration and Nature of -Future Punishment,” p. 12, says:-- - -“But it is not only by this phrase, ‘death,’ that the Old Testament -describes the punishment of the ungodly. By every expression in the -Hebrew language, significant of loss of life, loss of existence, the -resolution of organized substance into its original parts, its reduction -to that condition in which it is as though it had never been called into -being--by every such expression does the Old Testament describe the end -of the ungodly. ‘The destruction of the transgressors and the sinners -shall be together:’ ‘prepare them for the _day of slaughter_:’ ‘_the -slain_ of the Lord shall be many:’ ‘they shall go forth and look upon -_the carcasses_ of the men that have sinned:’ ‘God shall _destroy_ -them:’ ‘they shall be _consumed_:’ ‘they shall be _cut off_:’ ‘they -shall be rooted _out of the land of the living_:’ ‘_blotted out of the -book of life_:’‘_they are not_.’ The Hebrew scholar will see from the -above passages that there is no phrase of the Hebrew language -significant of all destruction short of that philosophical annihilation -of elements which we do not assert, which is not used to denote the end -of the ungodly.” - -_The wicked shall be destroyed._ “The Lord preserveth all them that love -him; but all the wicked will he destroy.” Ps. 145:20. Here preservation -is promised only to those who love God, and in opposition to this, -_destruction_ is threatened to the wicked. But human wisdom teaches us -that God will preserve the wicked in hell--preserve them for the mere -sake of torturing them. Mr. Benson again says:-- - -“God is therefore present in hell to see the punishment of these rebels. -His fiery indignation kindles, and his incensed fury feeds the flame of -their torment, while his powerful presence and operation _maintains -their being_, and renders their powers most acutely sensible, thus -setting the keenest edge upon their pain, and making it cut most -intolerably deep.” - -_The wicked shall perish._ “For God so loved the world, that he gave his -only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not _perish_, -but have everlasting life.” John 3:16. A double enunciation of the truth -is couched in this short text. It is that eternal life is to be obtained -only through Christ, and that all who do not thus obtain it will -eventually perish. John testifies further on the same point in his 1st -epistle, 5:11: “And this is the record: that God hath given to us -eternal life, and this life is in his Son.” From which it follows, as a -most natural consequence, that “he that hath not the Son of God _hath -not life_.” Verse 12. - -_The wicked shall go to perdition._ “We are not of them who draw back -unto perdition, but of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” -Heb. 10:39. We either gain the salvation of our souls by a perseverance -in faith, and obtain eternal life by a patient continuance in -well-doing, Rom. 2:7, or we sink back into perdition, which, is defined -to be utter ruin, or _destruction_. - -“_The wicked shall come to an end and be as though they had not been._” -“For yet a little while, and the wicked shall not be; yea, thou shalt -diligently consider his place, and _it_ shall not be.” Ps. 37:10. If -this testimony be true, there will be neither a sinner nor any _place_ -for a sinner, after God has executed upon them his just judgments. “They -shall be as though they had not been.” Obad. 16. - -The reader is requested to mark the significance of these texts. They -are not figures, but plain enunciations of truth, demanding to be -understood in the plainest and most literal manner. And though they are -so abundant, and can be so easily produced, they are not to be passed -over any more lightly on this account. - -_The wicked are compared to the most inflammable and perishable -substances._ Had the wicked been compared to the most durable substances -with which we are acquainted in nature; had they been likened to the -“everlasting hills,” the during rock, or the precious metals, gold and -gems, the most incorruptible of all substances; such comparisons would -not have been without their weight in giving us an idea of an eternity -of existence; nor can we think they would have been overlooked by the -other side. We therefore claim an equal significance on our side of the -question for the fact that they are everywhere compared to just the -opposite of the above-named substances--substances the most perishable -and corruptible of any that exist. For no idea can be drawn from such -comparisons at all compatible with the idea of eternal preservation in -the midst of glowing and devouring fire. - -Thus it is said of the wicked that they shall be dashed in pieces like a -potter’s vessel, Ps. 2:9, they shall be like the beasts that perish, Ps. -49:20, like the untimely fruit of a woman, Ps. 58:8, like a whirlwind -that passeth away, Ps. 68:2; Prov. 10:25, like a waterless garden -scorched by an eastern sun, Isa. 1:30, like garments consumed by the -moth, Isa. 51:8, like the thistle down scattered by the whirlwind, Isa. -17:13, margin. They shall consume like the fat of lambs in the fire, Ps. -37:20, consume into smoke (_ibid._), and ashes, Mal. 4:3, melt like wax, -Ps. 68:2, burn like tow, Isa. 1:31, consume like thorns, Isa. 34:12, -vanish away like exhausted waters, Ps. 58:7. - -The illustrations which the New Testament uses to represent the destiny -of the wicked are of exactly the same nature. They are likened to chaff, -which is to be burned entirely up, Matt. 3:12, tares to be consumed, -Matt. 13:40, withered branches to be burned, John 15:6, bad fish cast -away to corruption, Matt. 13:47, 48, a house thrown down to its -foundations, Luke 6:49, to the destruction of the old world by water, -Luke 17:27, to the destruction of the Sodomites by fire, verse 29, 2 -Pet. 2:5, 6, and to natural brute beasts, that perish in their own -corruption. Verse 12. - -Such are the illustrations of the Scriptures on this subject. If the -wicked are to be tormented forever, all these illustrations are not only -unnatural, but false; for in that case they are not like the perishing -beasts, the passing whirlwind, the moth-consumed garment, the burning -fat, the vanishing smoke, or the melting wax; nor like chaff, tares, and -withered branches, consumed and reduced to ashes. These all lose their -form and substance, and become as though they had not been; but this the -wicked never do, according to the popular view. There is an enormous -contradiction somewhere. Is it between the writers of the Bible? or -between uninspired men and the word of God? The trouble is not with the -Bible; all is harmony there. The discrepancy arises from the creeds and -theories of men. - -The language of Moses and of Paul shows that an eternal existence of -moral corruption and fiery torture is not the doom of the wicked. When -Moses besought the Lord to forgive the sin of Israel, he said, “Yet now, -if thou wilt forgive their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, out -of thy book which thou hast written.” Ex. 32:32. This book must be the -book of life, in which the names of the righteous are written. By being -blotted out of this book, Moses evidently meant being devoted to the -doom of sinners. If Israel could not be forgiven, he would himself -perish with that unfaithful people. But no one can for a moment suppose -that he wished throughout eternity for a life of sin, pain, and -blasphemy, in hell. He only wished for an utter cessation of that life -which, if his prayer could not be granted, would be an intolerable -burden. And if this is what he meant by being blotted out of God’s book, -it follows that this will be the doom of the ungodly; for the Lord -answered, “Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I blot out of my -book.” - -In a similar manner, Paul speaks concerning the same people: “For I -could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my -kinsmen according to the flesh.” Rom. 9:3. We cannot suppose that Paul -would desire a life of sin and moral corruption, such as that of the -sinner in hell is said to be, even for the sake of his people. But he -was willing to give up his life for them, and cease to exist, if thereby -they might be saved. - -To notice more particularly some of the scriptures in which a portion of -the foregoing figures are found, their testimony may be summed up in the -following final proposition:-- - -_The wicked shall be consumed and devoured by fire._ “Woe unto them that -call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light -for darkness,” &c. “Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the -flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and -their blossom shall go up as dust”! Isa. 5:20-24. Reader, have you ever -seen fire devour stubble, or flame consume chaff? Then you have seen a -figure of the destruction of the wicked. And let the advocate of eternal -misery tell us, if such language does not denote the utter consumption -of the wicked, what language would do it, if the doctrine were true. Let -us know what language Inspiration should have used, had it wished to -convey such an idea. Is it such as this? “But the wicked shall perish, -and the enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs; they shall -consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” Ps. 37:20. “And they went -up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints -about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, -and _devoured_ them.” The word here rendered devour, κατέφαγεν, says -Stuart, is “intensive, to _eat up, devour_, so that it denotes utter -excision.” In the light of this scripture, we can readily understand how -it is that the wicked are to be recompensed in the earth. Prov. 11:31. -Coming up in the second resurrection, at the end of the 1000 years of -Rev. 20:5, they come up around the New Jerusalem, the beloved city, the -abode of the saints, then descended from Heaven to earth, chap. 21:5, -and then their fearful retribution overtakes them. It is then that they -have their portion in those purifying fires that sweep over the earth, -in which, according to Peter’s testimony, the elements of this great -globe itself shall melt with fervent heat. 2 Pet. 3:10, 12. For it is at -the day of Judgment (by which of course we must understand the execution -of the Judgment) and perdition of ungodly men that this takes place. See -verse 7. So, too, the righteous, as they go forth upon the new earth, -verse 13, destined to be their eternal and glorious abode, will receive -their recompense in the earth. Then will be fulfilled the word of the -Lord by the prophet Malachi, which says, “For behold, the day cometh, -that shall burn as an oven: and all the proud, yea, and all that do -wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, -saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor -branch. But unto you that fear my name, shall the Sun of righteousness -arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as -calves of the stall. And ye shall tread down the wicked; for they shall -be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, -saith the Lord of hosts.” Mark the distinctness of this language. It -does not say that the wicked shall be _as_ ashes, nor does it introduce -any comparison here whatever, but plainly states a plain fact, that they -_shall be ashes_, under the soles of the saints’ feet. Not that the -saints will literally walk on ashes, but the wicked, having been reduced -to ashes, like all other sin-and-curse-polluted things, are incorporated -into the substance of the new earth, which the saints are evermore to -inhabit, as it emerges from the renovating fires of the last day. - -Then will the universe be clean and pure. Then the stain of sin will all -be wiped away forever; sinners, and the great enemy that deceived them -(for he, too, shall be destroyed, Heb. 2:14), being rooted out of the -land of the living. Its every scar now impressed upon the handiwork of -God shall be effaced; and this unfortunate earth shall be re-adorned, as -only God, omnipotent in power and omniscient in wisdom, is able to adorn -it. And then will arise that glad anthem of universal Jubilee, in which -shall join _every creature_ which is in Heaven, and on the earth, and -under the earth, and such as are in the sea, ascribing blessing, and -honor, and glory, and power, unto him that sitteth on the throne, and -unto the Lamb forever and ever. Rev. 5:13. There is no room here for a -great receptacle of fiery torment, where an innumerable company of human -beings shall burn and blaspheme and sin and suffer forever and ever. -There is no room in this great song of joy for the discordant and -hopeless wailing of the damned. There is no provision made for an -eternal rebellion against the government of God, and eternal blasphemy -against his holy name! No! only the loyal subjects of the great Captain -of our salvation, only such as love immortal life, and seek for it, and -prepare themselves for its inestimable blessings, shall ever enjoy the -glorious boon; while those who put from themselves the word of God, and -“judge themselves unworthy of everlasting life,” Acts 13:46, will be -remanded back to the original elements from which they sprung; and -strict Justice will write upon their unhonored and unlamented graves -that they themselves were the arbiters of their own fate. - - - - - CHAPTER XXXIII. - GOD’S DEALINGS WITH HIS CREATURES. - - -“Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” asked an eminent -servant of God in the opening pages of revelation, Gen. 18:25; and when -all is finished, the redeemed, looking over all God’s dealings with man, -exclaim with fervent lips, “Just and true are thy ways, thou King of -saints.” Rev. 15:3. It is objected that we should raise no question -regarding the justness of the doom to which God may devote any portion -of our race; because we are not able to judge of his ways. Of things -with which we are imperfectly acquainted, or which are above our -comprehension, this is undoubtedly true; but respecting our relation to -God, the light in which he looks upon sin, and the disposition he will -finally make of it, he says to us, “Come, let us reason.” We are never -called upon to form an opinion or a decision in regard to things -respecting which we are incapable of judging; but we are called upon to -reverence God, as a God of love, wisdom, justice, and mercy. We must, -therefore, be capable of judging of his character, his mercy, his love, -his wisdom, and his justice. Are these characteristics displayed in his -future dealings with the wicked, according to the view generally -promulgated by the churches of the present day? The question to be -decided is this: Is an eternity of torture so intense that the severest -pain a person can suffer on earth is but a faint shadow of it, any _just -punishment_ for any conceivable amount of sin committed by the worst of -men, during the brief period of our mortal life? What is our present -life? Something for which we did not ask; something given us without our -knowledge or consent; and, in the forcible language of another, “Can any -abuse of this unasked-for gift justify the recompense of an existence -spent in unending agony?” - -Between the sins committed in this finite life, and the fiery torment of -hell continued through numberless millions of ages, and then no nearer -its end than when the first groan was uttered, there is a disproportion -so infinite, that few attempt to rest that eternal misery on merely the -sins of the present life; and they endeavor to vindicate God’s justice -in the matter, or at least to apologize for his course, by saying that -the sinner continues to sin, and that is the reason why he continues to -suffer. The guilt of all the sins done in the body is soon expiated in -the fiery flame; but then they must suffer for the sins committed after -they left this mortal state, and commenced their life of agony in hell. -And here they are represented as sinning faster than the inconceivable -woe of hell can punish. It is affirmed of them, as quoted from Benson in -the previous chapter, that “they must be perpetually swelling their -enormous sums of guilt, and still running deeper, immensely deeper, in -debt to divine and infinite justice. Hence, after the longest imaginable -period, they will be so far from having discharged their debt that they -will find more due than when they first began to suffer.” - -In like manner Wm. Archer Butler, in his sermon on Future Punishment, -says:-- - -“The punishments of hell are but the perpetual vengeance that -accompanies the sins of hell. An eternity of wickedness brings with it -an eternity of woe. The sinner is to suffer for everlasting, but it is -because the sin itself is as everlasting as the suffering.” - -Do the Scriptures anywhere thus speak? Do they not affirm, not once or -twice, but over and over again, that the punishment of the future is for -the sins of the present time? It is for the sins in which the sinner -dies, not for what he commits after death, that he is to suffer future -retribution. Eze. 18:26. The works for which we are to be brought into -judgment (and for no others can we be punished) are the works of this -present life. Eccl. 12:14. And Paul testifies, “For we must all appear -before the judgment seat of Christ, that every one may receive the -things _done in his body_, according to that he hath done, whether it be -good or bad.” 2 Cor. 5:10. It is for the sins done by human beings in -the body, in this present life, not for what they will commit as lost -spirits in hell, that they are to answer at the judgment seat of Christ, -and for which they are to receive a just retribution. And if everlasting -misery is thought to be too much for this, we are not at liberty to -throw in _post-mortem_ sins to balance the excessive punishment. If -eternal torment cannot be defended as a just punishment for the sins of -this present life, it cannot be defended at all. - -To illustrate: Suppose in an earthly tribunal the judge should sentence -a criminal to a punishment altogether too severe for the crime of which -he had been guilty, and then should endeavor to justify his course by -saying that he gave the sentence because he knew that the criminal would -deserve it by the sins he would commit after he went to jail! How long -would such a judge be tolerated? Yet this is the very course attributed -by learned doctors of divinity, to the Judge of all the earth, who has -declared that he will do right. - -On the supposition that eternal torture is to be inflicted as the -penalty for a life of sin in this world, were man asked if God’s conduct -in this respect was just, his own innate sense of justice, not yet -wholly obliterated by the fall, would prompt him to a universal and -determined, No! The framers of different religious systems have felt -this, and seem to have searched sharply for some avenue of escape from -the fearful wrong of this horrid theory. So Plato had his Acherusian -lake from which at least some of the wretched sufferers in Tartarus, -after a purgative process might issue forth again to the upper air. -Augustine following Plato in his notion of an abode of unending pain for -some, had also his purgatory from whence others might find a road to -Heaven. Rome has only a purgatory, the fires of a finite period, for the -millions within her communion. Origen conceived of a purgatory wider -than Plato’s, Augustine’s, or Rome’s, from which all should at length be -restored to the favor of God. - -The churches of the Reformation have generally accepted of Augustine’s -hell, but denied his purgatory. In the Protestant denominations, -therefore, we have this doctrine in its most horrid aspects. And it is -no marvel that many who have felt compelled by their creed to accept it, -have shrunk from its advocacy, and have tacitly, if not openly, -confessed that they could heartily wish it were a lie. - -Saurin at the close of one of his sermons thus speaks:-- - -“I sink, I sink, under the awful weight of my subject; and I declare, -when I see my friends, my relations, the people of my charge,--this -whole congregation, when I think that I, that you, that we are all -exposed to these torments; when I see in the lukewarmness of my -devosions, in the langour of my love, in the levity of my resolutions -and designs, the least evidence, though it be only possible or -presumptive, of my future misery, I find in the thought a mortal poison, -that diffuseth itself through every period of my existence, rendering -society tiresome, nourishment insipid, pleasure disgustful, _and life -itself a cruel bitter_. I cease to wonder that the fear of hell hath -made some _melancholy_, others _mad_; that it hath disposed some to -expose themselves to a living martyrdom, by fleeing from all commerce -with the rest of mankind, and others, to suffer the most terrible, -violent torments.” - -Albert Barnes, the well-known preacher and commentator, speaks on the -same point as follows:-- - -“I confess when I look upon a world of sinners and of sufferers; upon -death-beds and grave-yards, upon the world of woe filled with hosts to -suffer forever; when I see my friends, my parents, my family, my people, -my fellow-citizens; when I look upon a whole race all involved in this -sin and danger, and when I see the great mass of them wholly -unconcerned, and when I feel that God only can save them, and yet he -does not do it--I am struck dumb. It is all dark, dark, dark to my soul, -and I cannot disguise it.”--_Sermons_, pp. 124, 125. - -Such is the effect of the doctrine of eternal misery with some, -according to the confession of its own advocates. No one can say that -such effects are either good or desirable. And why does it not have this -effect upon more? We answer, it is because the lips only mechanically -assent to what the heart and reason either will not try to realize, or -else do not seriously believe. Says Bishop Newton:-- - -“Imagine a creature, nay, imagine numberless creatures produced out of -nothing ... delivered over to torments of endless ages, without the -least hope or possibility of relaxation or redemption. Imagine it you -may, but you can never seriously believe it, nor reconcile it to God and -goodness.”--_Dissertation_, No. 60. - -But the majority are affected by it far differently. Every better -emotion of their nature revolts at the idea, and they will not accept -it. They cannot believe that God is thus cruel, tyrannical, revengeful, -implacable; the personification, in short, of every trait of character -which, when seen in men here, we consider unmistakable marks of -debasement and degradation; and believing the Bible and Christianity to -be identified with such teaching as this, with equal promptness they too -are rejected and cast away. But here we need not enlarge. Probably no -one will read these lines under whose observation some case has not come -of persons driven into skepticism, yes, driven and held there, by the -popular doctrine of eternal misery--a doctrine which has been well -described by a Christian writer, as “a theology that is confused, -entangled, imperfect, and gloomy; a theology which, while it abundantly -breeds infidelity among the educated classes, fails to spread through -the body of the population, and but dimly, or only as a flickering -candle enlightens the world.”--_I. Taylor._ - -But how is it with the view we have tried to present? Quite the reverse, -as our own observation proves. Instances have come under our immediate -knowledge of persons who, when they saw the divine harmony of God’s -system of government, as brought to view in his word, when they saw the -just and reasonable disposition which the Bible declares that he will -make of all those who will persist in rebellion against him,--a -disposition in which justice and mercy so beautifully blend, have been -able to take that Bible and say for the first time in their life they -could believe it to be the book of God. And believing this, they have -been led to turn their feet into its testimonies, and strive by -obedience to its plain requirements to escape a doom which they could -see to be just, and therefore knew to be certain. This has been the -experience of many. Let, then, the impression no longer exist, and the -assertion no more be made, that these views tend to irreligion and -infidelity. Their fruits everywhere show just the reverse. - -Can it then be wondered at that we should be solicitous to disabuse the -minds of the people in this respect? Shall we not have a zeal for the -Lord, and be untiring in our efforts to wipe off from the book and -character of God the aspersions which are by this doctrine cast upon -them? God represents himself to his creatures by the endearing name of -Love; he declares that he is very pitiful and of tender mercy, -long-suffering and slow to anger, not hasty to execute sentence against -an evil work, not gratified in any manner by the death of the wicked, -and not willing that any should perish; he declares that he delighteth -in mercy, that he will not contend forever, neither be always wroth. And -can it be that while thus representing himself to the inhabitants of -earth, he was kindling fiery torture on multitudes of wretched beings in -the dreary regions of hell, feeding their flame with his incensed fury, -preserving and tormenting them in infinite indignation, exerting all his -divine attributes to make them as wretched as the capacity of their -nature would admit, and maintaining a fixed purpose to do this through -the endless ages of eternity! If not, “what a portentous error must it -be!” How fearfully is his character misrepresented! What a bold and -audacious libel is uttered against his holy name! - -The root and trunk of all this, is the “taken-for-granted” position that -the soul is immortal. But search through your Bible and see if you find -it so. See if you will not rather be prepared to exclaim with the -eminent commentator, Olshausen, that “the doctrine of the ‘immortality -of the soul,’ and the name, are _alike unknown to the entire Bible_.” -(Comment on 1 Cor. 15:19, 20.) See if you can find the death that never -dies, and never-dying soul. If not, we ask you to reject the idea at -once as a most dangerous and destructive error. Men are thus rejecting -it. The leaven is working in the public mind. Men are growing suspicious -of the truth of a declaration, first uttered by a not over-truthful -character in Eden, perpetuated thence through heathenism, and at last -through the medium of the mother of harlots, disseminated through all -the veins and channels of Orthodoxy. But truth will work its way up, -however deeply the rubbish may have been heaped upon it; and before the -bright rising of its light, all antiquated superstitions and -traditionary dogmas, will lie exposed in their native deformity. - - - - - CHAPTER XXXIV. - THE CLAIMS OF PHILOSOPHY. - - -After the Bible, what? When once the word of God pronounces upon a -question, what further evidence is needed to sustain the position, or -what evidence is strong enough to break its decision? What can human -reason, science, and philosophy, do for a theory upon which the -Scriptures have written “Ichabod”? - -We have, in previous chapters, examined the teaching of the Bible on the -whole subject of man’s creation, nature, death, intermediate state, and -final doom. We have found that man was not created absolutely mortal or -immortal, but relatively both: immortality was within his reach, and -mortality lay as a danger in his path. He sinned and became absolutely -mortal. Then death becomes an unconscious sleep in the grave, and his -destiny beyond the tomb, if he does not secure through Christ, eternal -life, is an utter loss of existence. But there are some who think that -reason, science, and philosophy, are sufficient to disprove these -conclusions; or, at least, that they are so strong that the Bible record -must be made to harmonize with the claims drawn from these sources. But -they forget that much that we call reason is in the sight of God -“foolishness,” that there is a philosophy which the Bible pronounces -“vain,” and some kinds of science which it says are “falsely so called.” - -We are willing to grant philosophy the privilege of trying to -substantiate its claims. It may boast like Goliah, but it will be found -weaker than Belshazzar before the handwriting on the wall. - -_The soul immortal._ It is claimed that the soul is immaterial, and -cannot therefore be destroyed, and hence must be immortal. Luther Lee -says:-- - -“If God himself has made the soul immaterial, he cannot destroy it by -bringing material agents to act upon it.” - -This claim is good if whatever is indestructible is immortal. But this -is a manifest error. The elements of the human body are indestructible, -but the body is not therefore immortal. It is subject to change, death, -and decay. But if it is claimed that the soul, being immaterial, is -without elements, then perhaps it might follow that it is -indestructible; for that which is nothing can never be made less than -nothing. - -But if the soul of man, being immaterial, is thus proved to be immortal, -what shall we say of the souls of the lower orders of animals? for they -manifest the phenomena of mind as well as men. They remember, fear, -imagine, compare, manifest gratitude, anger, sorrow, desire, &c. Bishop -Warburton says:-- - -“I think it may be strictly demonstrated that man has an immaterial -soul; _but then_, the same arguments which prove _that_, prove, -likewise, that the souls of all living animals are immaterial.” - -Whoever, therefore, affirms the immortality of man from the -immateriality of his soul, is bound to affirm the same, not only of the -nobler animals, but also of all the lower orders of the brute creation. -Here, believers in natural immortality are crushed beneath the weight of -their own arguments. If it be said that God can, if he choose, blot from -existence the immaterial soul of the beetle and the titmouse, we reply, -so can he that of man; and then its immortality is at an end, and the -whole argument is abandoned. - -“_Matter cannot think._” This is the fundamental proposition on which -the airy phantom of the immortality of the soul relies for its support. -Since man does think, and matter cannot think, the mind or soul must be -immaterial and immortal. It is one thing to make such an assertion; it -is quite another thing to prove it; and the proof lies not within the -power of man. That mind, like electricity, may be a property of matter, -or result from material causes, Sidney Smith, in his Principles of -Phrenology, 1838, very clearly states as follows:-- - -“The existence of matter must be conceded, in an argument which has for -its object the proof that _there is something besides_; and when that is -admitted, the proof rests with the skeptic, who conceives that the -intervention of some other principle is necessary to account for the -phenomena presented to our experience. The hidden qualities of this -substance must be detected, and its whole attributes known, before we -can be warranted in _assuming the existence of something else_ as -necessary to the production of what is presented to our consciousness. -And when such a principle as that of galvanism or electricity, -confessedly a property of matter, can be present in or absent from a -body, attract, repel, and move, without adding to or subtracting from -the weight, heat, size, color, or any other quality of a corpuscle, it -will require some better species of logic than any hitherto presented to -establish the impossibility of mind being a certain form, quality, or -accessory of matter, inherent in and never separated from it. We do not -argue thus because we are confident that there exists nothing but -matter; for, in truth our feeling is that the question is involved in -too much mystery to entitle us to speak with the boldness of settled -conviction on either side. But we assume this position, because we think -the burden of proof falls on the spiritualists, and that they have not -established the necessity of inferring the existence of another entity -besides matter to account for all the phenomena of mind, by having -failed to exhaust all the possible qualities or probable capacities of -that substance which they labor so assiduously to degrade and despise. - -“But while they have altogether failed to establish this necessity, -whereon depends their entire proposition, they have recourse to the -usual expedients of unsuccessful logicians, by exciting the ignorant -prejudices of bigotry and intolerance, against all that is dignified -with the name of dispassionate philosophy. - -“The truth is, it is time that all this fudge and cant about the -doctrine of materialism, which affects the theory of immortality in no -shape whatever--as the God who appointed the end could as easily ordain -that the means might be either through the medium of matter or -spirit--should be fairly put down by men of common sense and -metaphysical discrimination.” - -On the same point, Mr. W. G. Moncrieff says:-- - -“Often do we hear the words, ‘Matter cannot think,’ and the trumpet of -orthodoxy summons us to attend. - -“In our simplicity we have been led to reason thus: Matter cannot -think--God made man of the dust of the ground--then of course man cannot -think! He may grow like a palm tree, but can reason no more than it. Now -this argumentation seems really valid, and yet every human being in his -senses laughs it to scorn. _I do think_, is the protest of each child of -humanity. Then if you do, we respond, in your case, matter must perform -the function of reflection and kindred operations. More than living -organization you are not, and if you declare living, organized matter -incapable of thought, we are bound to infer that you have no thought at -all. Accepting your premises, we must hand you the conclusion. The logic -is good, but we are generous enough to allow that we cannot subscribe to -it. It has often occurred to us as a fair procedure, just for the sake -of bringing orthodoxy to a stand, to assert that spirit cannot think; of -course, we are only referring to created beings, on this occasion. We -have often tried to understand the popular idea of a spirit; and we must -confess that it defies our apprehension. It is something, nothing; a -substance, an essence; everything by turns, and nothing long. To believe -that such a production could evolve thought, is an inordinate demand on -human credulity. How the expedient was resorted to we cannot tell: was -it because thought is invisible, that this invisible parent was sought -for it? Then why not trace heat beyond the fire, perfume beyond the -rose, attraction beyond the sun, and vitality beyond the branchy oak? Of -all insane fancies, this popular idea of the human spirit is the most -complete; we have no wish to give offense, but the truth must be -spoken.” - -We arraign this theory also before the majesty of the brute creation. -What about the immaterial minds of the lower animals? Does matter think -in their cases? or have they also immortal souls? Dogs, horses, monkeys, -elephants, &c., have been taught to perform different acts, imitate -various movements, and even to dance the same tune over and over again, -to accompanying strains of music: acts which involve the exercise of -memory, will, reason, and judgment. - -The exercise of high mental powers is shown in the intelligence and -sagacity of the horse and elephant, in the manifold cunning of the fox, -in the beaver and bee, which construct their houses with such mechanical -ingenuity, in the mules of the Andes, which thread with so sure a foot -the gloomy gorges and craggy heights of the mountains, and in the dogs -of St. Bernard, as they rescue benighted and half-frozen travelers in -the passes of the Alps. Hogg, the Ettrick Shepherd, speaking of the -sagacity of one of his dogs, says:-- - -“He had never turned sheep in his life; but as soon as he discovered -that it was his duty to do so, and that it obliged me, I can never -forget with what anxiety and eagerness he _learned_ his different -evolutions; he would try every way, deliberately, till he found out what -I wanted him to do; and when once I made him _understand_ a direction, -he never mistook or forgot it. Well as I knew him, he often astonished -me, for when hard pressed, in accomplishing the task which was set him, -he had expedients of the moment that bespoke _a great share of the -reasoning faculty_.” - -John Locke, the distinguished writer on metaphysical questions, says:-- - -“Birds’ learning of tunes, and the endeavors one may observe in them to -hit the notes right, put it past doubt with me that they have -perception, and retain ideas in their _memories_, and use them for -patterns.... It seems as evident to me that they [brutes] _do reason as -that they have sense_.” - -Pritchard, On the Vital Principle, says:-- - -“Sensation is an attribute of the mind, and the possession of mind -certainly extends as far as its phenomena. Whatever beings have -conscious feeling, have, unless the preceding arguments amount to -nothing, souls, or immaterial minds, distinct from the substance of -which they appear to us to be composed. _If all animals feel, all -animals have souls._” - -H. H. Dobney, Future Punishment, p. 101, says:-- - -“While consciousness, reason, and the sense of right and wrong, are -among the highest attributes of man, these in a degree are allowed to be -possessed by some at least of the brute creation. Dr. Brown, according -to his biographer, Dr. Welsh, ‘believed that many of the lower animals -have the sense of right and wrong; and that the metaphysical argument -which proves the immortality of man, extends with equal force to the -other orders of earthly existence.’” - -Similar views are attributed to Coleridge and Cudworth. - -Dalton, in his treatise on Human Physiology, p. 428, says:-- - -“The possession of this kind of intelligence and reasoning power, is not -confined to the human species. We have already seen that there are many -instinctive actions in man as well as in animals. It is no less true -that, in the higher animals, there is often _the same exercise of -reasoning power as in man_. The degree of this power is much less in -them than in him, _but its nature is the same_. Whenever, in an animal, -we see any action performed, with the evident intention of accomplishing -a particular object, such an act is plainly the result of reasoning -power, not essentially different from our own. - -“The establishment of sentinels by gregarious animals to warn the herd -of the approach of danger; the recollection of punishment inflicted, for -a particular action, and the subsequent avoidance or concealment of that -action; the teachability of many animals, and their capacity of forming -new habits, or improving the old ones, are instances of the same kind of -intellectual power, and _are quite different from instinct_, strictly -speaking. It is this faculty which especially predominates over the -other in the higher classes of animals, and which finally attains its -maximum of development in the human species.” - -With these testimonies from such eminent witnesses, we leave the friends -of the rational argument inextricably mixed up with the brute creation. -The legitimate result of their theory is to confer immortality upon all -orders of animated existence. We are sometimes accused of degrading man -to the level of the brute. But if our friends of the other side elevate -all brutes up to the level of man, how does that practically differ from -what they accuse us of doing? The result is the same. If all come at -last upon the same level, it matters not whether brutes come up or man -goes down. - -But our view is not open to this objection. While we deny that -immortality is proved for either man or beast by any vital or mental -powers which they may exhibit, our theory finds a superior position for -man in his more refined mental and physical organization, whereby he -becomes possessed of a higher mental and moral nature, and is the proper -recipient of the hope of immortality. - -Another fact on which it is supposed that an argument for immortality -can be founded is, - -_The capacities of the soul._ The mind of man, it is argued, by its -wonderful achievements, and its lofty aspirations, shows itself capable -of some higher and better state of being than we at present enjoy. And -from this the conclusion is easy (if people will not stop to scan very -critically the connection) that such a state of being inevitably awaits -mankind, in which they are destined to live forever. - -But this argument, which, stripped of its disguise, is simply an -egotistical assertion, I am fit to be a god, and therefore I am a god, -will be found to collapse under very slight pressure. Mr. J. Panton Ham -describes it in fitting terms, when he speaks of it as follows:-- - -“Because a man has skill and ability, is he therefore immortal? We, in -our ignorance and imperfection, would exalt the intellectual above the -moral. The former has greater attractions for imperfect man than the -latter. Had we the peopling of paradise, we should fill it with the -world’s heroes in literature, science, and the arts. The skillful are -the world’s saints, and the proper candidates for Heaven’s ‘many -mansions.’ This argument, dispassionately considered apart from the -imposing parade of human achievements, is just this: Man is _clever_, -therefore he is _immortal_. Here is neither logic nor religion. The -cleverness of man is surely no title to immortality, much less is it the -proof of its possession. It is a silly logic which asserts human -immortality from such strange premises as balloons and pyramids, -electro-telegraphs and railways.” - -But all men cannot engineer the construction of a pyramid, nor construct -a balloon, nor build an engine, much less accomplish the greater feat -involved in their first invention. All men are not learned and skillful, -and of such eminent capabilities. Is it not, in fact, almost an -infinitely small proportion of the human race that has manifested those -great powers on which this argument is based! And can the capacities of -a few leading minds determine the destiny of the great mass of men who -possess no such powers? - -And if an argument may be based on the capacities of some, may not an -equal and opposite argument be based on the incapacity of others? and in -this case on which side would the weight of evidence lie? And as there -is almost every conceivable gradation of intelligence, who will tell us -whereabouts in this scale the infinite endowment of immortality is first -perceptible? Looking at the human race, and the races immediately below, -we behold a point where they seem to blend indistinguishably into each -other. Will an utter lack of capacity be affirmed of the higher orders -of the brute creation? And descending in the scale, where shall we stop? -Where is the transition from immortality to mortality? - -We have given, in the preceding portion of this chapter, extracts from -eminent authors showing that brutes reason, that they exercise, to a -degree, all the powers of the human mind, that they have a sense, to -some extent, of right and wrong, and give evidence, of the same nature -as man is able to give in reference to himself, that they possess just -as immaterial a soul as he. And have we not all seen horses and dogs -that gave evidence of possessing more good sense than some men? And in -this graduated scale of animated existence, where is the dividing line -between the mortal and the immortal? Will some one locate it? What -degree of mental capacity is necessary to constitute an evidence of -immortality? And here we leave this argument. It demands no further -notice till its friends who base immortality on mental capacity will -determine which class of their less fortunate brothers is so low as to -be beyond its reach. - -_Universal belief and inborn desire._ Men have universally believed in -the immortality of the soul, it is claimed, and all men desire it; -therefore, all men have it. Strange conclusion from strange premises. As -to the first part of this argument, the universal belief, that appears -not to be true, in fact. On this, a glance at a quotation or two must -suffice. Whately (Essay 1 on a Future State) says:-- - -“We find Socrates and his disciples, represented by Plato, as fully -admitting in their discussions of the subject, that ‘men in general were -highly incredulous as to the soul’s future existence.’ The Epicurean -school openly contended against it. Aristotle passes it by as not worth -considering, and takes for granted the contrary supposition, as not -needing proof.” - -Leland, on the Advantages of Revelation, says:-- - -When Cicero “sets himself to prove the immortality of the soul, he -represents the contrary as the prevailing opinion,” there being “crowds -of opponents, not the Epicureans only; but, which he could not account -for, those that were the most learned persons, had that doctrine in -contempt.” - -Touching the other portion of the argument, the universal and inborn -desire, those who make use of it, to make it of any avail, are bound to -supply and prove the suppressed premise, which is that all men have what -they desire. The syllogism would then stand thus: 1. All men have what -they desire. 2. All men desire immortality. Conclusion. Therefore, all -men are immortal. This is a fair statement of the question; but are any -presumptuous enough to take the ground that all men have what they -desire? Is it true, in fact? Do not our every-day’s observations give it -the unqualified lie? Men desire riches, but do all possess them? they -desire health, but do all have it? they desire happiness here, but what -an infinitely small portion of the race are really happy. To try to get -over the matter by saying that these desires that men have _may_ be -gratified by their taking a right course, is an abandonment of the whole -argument; for thus much we readily grant concerning immortality: all men -may gratify their desires here by taking a right course; immortality -also is suspended upon conditions, and those only will have it in whom -those conditions are found to be scrupulously complied with. - -But there is another fatal flaw in this argument in another respect; for -it is not immortality in the abstract that is the object of this great -desire among men, but _happiness_. And the very persons who contend for -immortality because men desire it, hold that a great portion of the race -will be forever miserable. But this is not what men desire; and not -being what they desire, it follows that all will not obtain what they -desire, and hence the argument built on desire is good for nothing on -their own showing. It simply proves universal salvation, or that men -will be forever happy because all men desire it, or it proves nothing. - -_The analogies of nature._ The day shuts down in darkness, but is not -forever lost; the morn returns again, and the bright sun comes forth -rejoicing as a strong man to run a race. Nature is bound, cold and -lifeless, in the icy chains of winter; but it is not lost in absolute -death. Anon the spring approaches, and at its animating voice and warm -breath, the pulse of life beats again through all her works; her cold -cheek kindles with the glow of fresh vitality; and she comes forth -adorned with new beauty, waking new songs of praise in every grove. The -chrysalis, too, that lay apparently a dead worm, motionless and dry, -soon wakes up to a higher life, and comes forth gloriously arrayed, like -a “living blossom of the air,” sipping nectar from the choicest sweets -of earth, and nestling in the bosom of its fairest flowers. And so, too, -it is claimed of man, “that when the body shall drop as a withered -calyx, the soul shall go forth like a winged seed.”--_Horticultural -Address, by E. H. Chapin._ - -Let us take care that here our judgments are not led captive by the -fascinations of poetry, or the rhetorical beauties of which this -argument is so eminently susceptible. Among the many instances of -nature, we find only a few that furnish the analogies here presented. -The chrysalis, so often referred to, after it has spent its brief day as -a living butterfly, perishes and is heard of no more forever. So with -all the higher order of brutes: they fall in death and make no more -their appearance upon our path. The most, then, that can be drawn from -this argument, is a faint foreshadowing, perhaps, of a future life. But -here, let it be understood, there is no issue. We all agree that the -race shall be called again to life. “As in Adam all die, so in Christ -shall all be made alive.” 1 Cor. 15:22. But the point at issue is, Are -our souls immortal, and must this life be, to all our race, necessarily -eternal? To prove that man will live again is one thing; to prove that -that life will be eternal, is quite another. - -_The anomalies of the present state._ How often do we here see the -wicked spreading himself like a green bay tree, having more than heart -could wish, while the righteous grope their way along, in trouble and -want. The wicked are exalted, and the good are oppressed. This does not -look like the arrangement of a God who is the patron of virtue and the -enemy of vice. It is therefore argued that there will be another state -in which all these wrongs shall be righted, virtue rewarded, and -wickedness punished. Yes, we reply, there will. But, certainly, a space -of time infinitely short of eternity would suffice to correct all the -anomalies of this brief life, which so puzzle men here. This argument, -like the former, may be a fair inference for a future state; it may -portend to the ungodly a scene of retribution, but can prove nothing as -to its duration. - -_Immortality assumed._ We are told that the Bible assumes the -immortality of the soul as a truth so evident that it is not necessary -to expressly affirm it. This is why the doctrine has come to be so -generally received against so explicit evidence against it. _It has been -taken for granted!_ Says Bishop Tillotson:-- - -“The immortality of the soul is rather supposed, or taken for granted, -than expressly revealed in the Bible.” - -“It is taken for granted” that immortality is an essential attribute of -the soul, and that therefore for the Bible to affirm it would be mere -tautology. But we reply, Is not immortality an essential attribute also -of Jehovah? Yet the Bible has been tautological enough to plainly state -this fact. And it would seem that it might have carried its “tautology” -a little further, and told us as much, at least _once_, about the soul, -if that too is immortal; for surely its immortality cannot be _more_ -essential than that of Jehovah. - -_Annihilation impossible._ Nature everywhere revolts, we are told, -against our doctrine of annihilation, and everywhere proves it false; -for nothing ever has been, nor ever can be, annihilated. To which we -reply, Very true; and here we would correct the impression which some -seem to entertain, that we believe in any such annihilation of the -wicked; or the annihilation of anything as matter. In reference to the -wicked, we simply affirm that they will be annihilated as living beings, -the matter of which they are composed passing into other forms. The -second definition of annihilate, according to Webster, is, “To destroy -the form or the peculiar distinctive properties, so that the specific -thing no longer exists; as, to _annihilate_ a forest by cutting and -carrying away the trees, though the timber may still exist; to -_annihilate_ a house by demolishing the structure.” Just so of the -wicked: as conscious intelligent beings they are annihilated, being -resolved into their original elements. - -_Evil tendency._ Why promulgate the doctrine of the destruction of the -wicked, it is asked, even if it be true? Will not evil rather than good -result from it? Some, honestly no doubt, deprecate any agitation of this -question; and we have even heard some, impelled either by their fears or -their prejudices, go so far as to declare that “it will make more -infidels than Tom Paine’s Age of Reason,” and that “no conversions to -God will ever follow in the track of its blighting and soul-destroying -influence.” - -It might be necessary first to inquire what idea these persons have of -infidelity. Perhaps they apply that term to everything that is not in -agreement with their own views. And if this is the standard by which -they judge of this matter, their assertion may possibly be in part -correct; for converts to this doctrine are multiplying at a rapid rate. -But giving to infidelity its legitimate definition, we call upon all -those who claim that this doctrine makes infidels, to give some proof of -their assertion before they again repeat it. This matter can be easily -tested. The friends and advocates of this doctrine are neither few nor -obscure. Men from all the walks of life, public and private, are daily -swelling the ranks; and if this doctrine makes infidels, the infidels of -our day should be found among those who receive it. But do we find them -there? If one solitary individual can be found who repudiates the -Scriptures as the revealed will of God, because he has been made to -believe that they do not teach eternal misery for the lost, we would be -glad to see him, or even to learn of him. This is not what causes -infidelity, it is what cures it. What do we find in the ranks of the -friends of this doctrine? Not the criminal and vicious classes, not -those who have thrown off all restraint, not rejecters of divine -revelation; but we find those who were formerly skeptics rescued from -their skepticism, and infidels recovered from their infidelity. We find -multitudes who can now rest down with sweet assurance on the word of -God, the perplexities with which they had been troubled respecting God’s -dealings with his creatures all cleared from the mind, and whose -feelings may be well expressed in the following language from Henry -Constable, A. M.:-- - -“For myself, I cannot express my sense of the value I place on the view -I now seek to impress on others. It has for me thrown a light on God’s -character, and God’s word, and the future of his world, which I once -thought I should never have seen on this side of the grave. It has not -removed the wholesome and necessary terrors of the Lord from the mind, -but it has clothed God with a loveliness which makes him, and the -eternal Son who represents him to man, incalculably more attractive. I -am no longer looking for shifts to excuse his conduct in my own eyes and -those of others, and forced to feel that here at least I could never -find one to answer my object. I can look at all he has done, and all he -tells me he will hereafter do, and, scanning it closely, and examining -it even where it has most of awe and severity, exclaim with all my heart -and with all my understanding--‘Just and true are thy ways, thou King of -saints.’” - -These are among its general good effects. But there exists a special -reason at the present time why men should be made acquainted with the -true teachings of the Bible on this question. It is the only antidote -against modern spiritualism, that master-piece of Satanic cunning and -deception, and the climax of his corrupting work in the earth. In what -horrid blasphemies has this delusion arrayed itself! To what corruption -does it lead its votaries! How utterly it debauches the moral natures of -all those who suffer themselves to receive its polluting touch! And -notwithstanding it carries in its train all these terrible evils, how -rapidly is it spreading through the land, and at what a fearful rate is -it swelling the catalogue of its victims! - -Why is this? It is because the way has long and thoroughly been prepared -for it in the doctrine of the conscious state of the dead, and the -immortality of the soul. This is its foundation, its life and spirit. -Take away this, and it is robbed of its vitality. For if it be true, as -the Bible declares, that when a man goes into the grave, his thoughts -perish, his love and hatred and envy are no longer exercised, and he -knows not anything, then whatever spirit comes to us from the unseen -world, professing to be the spirit of a dead man, it comes with a lie in -its mouth, and thus shows itself to be of the synagogue of Satan. This -is the Ithuriel spear that transforms this lying system, which at its -best showing is as low and ugly as the blotchiest toad that ever lived, -into the real devil that it is. Then let this truth be spread abroad on -all the wings of the wind, that in the hands of the people may be placed -some safeguard against this ghastly embodiment of falsehood, pollution, -and death. - -With the truth clearly stated as to how God will deal with the sinner -and finally dispose of sin, we can appeal with confidence to the calm -reason and the better nature of every child of Adam. We can second the -tender entreaty which God extends to every wayward soul, “Turn ye, turn -ye, for why will ye die?” “As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no -pleasure in the death of the wicked, but that he turn from his way and -live.” Life and death are set before you. The Saviour bids you look unto -him and live. Mercy entreats you to destroy not yourself. The spirit and -the bride bid you come and partake of the water of life freely. - -You can no longer take refuge from an awakened conscience under the idea -that the threatenings of the Lord are not understood, and may not -therefore be so terrific as supposed. The sinner’s doom is unmistakably -declared; and in the justness of that sentence, however slightly you may -now realize the heinousness and just desert of sin, your own reason can -but heartily concur. Will you then plunge headlong to ruin? or will you -turn and accept the immense gratuity of eternal life? Of course you do -not _mean_ to perish. We accuse you not of this. The shining form of -Hope is dancing on before you in the path of life--hope that ere it is -too late, ere the silver cord be loosed or ever the golden bowl be -broken, you will make sure a treasure and inheritance in Heaven. - -We would impress upon your mind that this hope _may_ deceive you. Ere -you reach the delusive phantom, the earth may suddenly open beneath your -feet, and Hades receive you to its fixed embrace. Ere you overtake the -beckoning form, ere the good intention be carried out, ere you grasp the -prize now held only by the uncertain tenure of good resolve, the glory -of the coming Judge, descending through the parting and dissolving -heavens, may suddenly burst upon your unprepared soul. Yes! the great -voice from the temple of Heaven, crying, “It is finished!” may suddenly -arrest you in the midst of your delaying and dallying career! The -heavenly court of mercy may cease its sitting, ere you have made a -friend of the great Advocate who alone can plead your cause! - -“Procrastination is the thief of time.” It may be the thief of your -eternal bliss. Its every moment is high-handed and insane presumption. -Its path is a path of unseen and innumerable dangers. You have no lease -of your life. The present state is one of exposure and peril. The shafts -of death are flying thickly about you. Time is short and its sands are -swiftly falling. The bliss of Heaven, or the blackness of darkness -forever, will soon be yours. With the saved or lost you must soon take -your position. There is no intermediate ground. Choose, then, we beseech -you, the enduring portion. Choose for eternity, choose wisely, choose -_now_. And may it be ours to join the great song of salvation at last, -ascribing blessing, and honor, and glory, and power, unto Him who -sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb who poured out his soul an -offering for sin, that whosoever would believe on him might not perish -but have everlasting life. - - Worthy the Lamb once slain! So shall at last - All beings sing in Heaven and earth and sea, - The direful reign of sin forever past, - Before them, bliss whose end shall never be. - - Worthy the Lamb! his life has saved from death, - Through him alone the immortal boon is given, - So shall each bounding pulse, each joyful breath, - Ascribe to him the bliss and power of Heaven. - - Welcome, life-giving hour, expected long! - Dawn on these regions peopled with the dead. - Our hearts leap forward to begin the song - Of a glad universe whence sin has fled. - -[Illustration] - - - - - APPENDIX. - MORALITY OF THE DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE LIFE. - - -The following is from “The Doctrine of a Future Life,” by W. R. Alger. -He here discusses the “morality of the doctrine of a future life” on the -strong hypothesis that there is to be no existence hereafter, and -utterly disproves the conclusions which some would make the inevitable -consequence of such a doctrine. The same objections are urged against -the view we entertain that after the Judgment the sinner is to endure a -punishment which reaches its climax in the loss of existence. With a -hundred-fold more force the reasoning of Mr. Alger lies against these -objections when urged in opposition to our view. We have in this life -the great incentive to goodness and virtue, that is involved in the hope -of immortality, seconded by the wonderful intervention of Christ in our -behalf, which is calculated to arouse all the nobler sentiments of our -being. If this will not win men from sin to a holy life, they would not -be driven to it by threats of eternal torture. Mr. Alger says:-- - -“The morality of the doctrine of a future life having thus been defended -from the attacks of those who have sought to destroy it in the fancied -interests either of the enjoyments of the earth, or of the purity of -virtue and religion, it now remains to free it from the still more fatal -supports which false or superficial religionists have sought to give it -by wrenching out of it meanings it never held, by various perverse -abuses of it, by monstrous exaggerations of its moral importance to the -present. We have seen that the supposition of another life, correctly -interpreted, lays no new duty upon man, takes away from him no old duty -or privilege, but simply gives to the previously-existing facts of the -case the intensifying glory and strength of fresh light, motive, and -consolation. But many public teachers, not content to treat the subject -with this sobriety of reason, instead of presenting the careful -conclusions of a conscientious analysis, have sought to strengthen their -argument to the feelings by help of prodigious assumptions, assumptions -hastily adopted, highly colored, and authoritatively urged. Upon the -hypothesis that annihilation is the fate of man, they are not satisfied -merely to take away from the present all the additional light, -incentive, and comfort, imparted by the faith in a future existence, but -they arbitrarily remove all the alleviations and glories intrinsically -belonging to the scene, and paint it in the most horrible hues, and set -it in a frame of midnight. Thus, instead of calmly seeking to elicit and -recommend truth, they strive, by terrifying the fancy and shocking the -prejudices, to make people accept their dogma because frightened at the -seeming consequences of rejecting it. It is necessary to expose the -fearful fallacies which have been employed in this way, and which are -yet extensively used for the same purpose. - -“Even a Christian writer usually so judicious as Andrews Norton has -said: ‘Without the belief in personal immortality there can be no -religion; for what can any truths of religion concern the feelings and -the conduct of beings whose existence is limited to a few years in this -world?’ Such a statement from such a quarter is astonishing. Surely the -sentiments natural to a person or incumbent upon him do not depend on -the _duration_ of his being, but on the character, endowments, and -relations of his being. The hypothetical fact that man perishes with his -body does not destroy God, does not destroy man’s dependence on God for -all his privileges, does not annihilate the overwhelming magnificence of -the universe, does not alter the native sovereignty of holiness, does -not quench our living reason, imagination, or sensibility, while they -last. The soul’s gratitude, wonder, love, and worship, are just as right -and instinctive as before. If our experience on earth, before the -phenomena of the visible creation and in conscious communion with the -emblemed attributes of God, does not cause us to kneel in humility and -to adore in awe, then it may be doubted if Heaven or hell will ever -persuade us to any sincerity in such acts. The simple prolongation of -our being does not add to its qualitative contents, cannot increase the -kinds of our capacity or the number of our duties. Chalmers utters an -injurious error in saying as he does, ‘If there be no future life, the -moral constitution of man is stripped of its significancy, and the -Author of that constitution is stripped of his wisdom, and authority and -honor.’ The creative Sovereign of fifty million firmaments of worlds, -‘stripped of his wisdom and authority and honor,’ because a few insects -on a little speck are not eternal! Can egotistic folly any further go? -The affirmation or denial of immortality neither adds to nor diminishes -the numerical relations and ingredients of our nature and experience. If -religion is fitted for us on the former supposition, it is also on the -latter. To any dependent intelligence blessed with our human -susceptibilities, reverential love and submission are as obligatory, -natural and becoming on the brink of annihilation as on the verge of -immortality. Rebellious egotism makes all the difference. Truth is -truth, whatever it be. Religion is the meek submission of self-will to -God’s will. That is a duty not to be escaped, no matter what the future -reserves or excludes for us. - -“Another sophism almost universally accepted needs to be shown. Man, it -is said, has no interest in a future life if not conscious in it of the -past. If, on exchange of worlds, man loses his memory, he virtually -ceases to exist, and might just as well be annihilated. A future life -with perfect oblivion of the present is no life at all for us. Is not -this style of thought the most provincial egotism, the utter absence of -all generous thought and sympathy unselfishly grasping the absolute -boons of being? It is a shallow error, too, even on the grounds of -selfishness itself. In any point of view the difference is diametric and -immense between a happy being in an eternal present, unconscious of the -past, and no being at all. Suppose a man thirty years of age were -offered his choice to die this moment, or to live fifty years longer of -unalloyed success and happiness, only with a complete forgetfulness of -all that has happened up to this moment. He would not hesitate to grasp -the gift, however much he regretted the condition. - -“It has often been argued that with the denial of a retributive life -beyond the grave all restraints are taken off from the passions, free -course given to every impulse. Chateaubriand says bluntly, ‘There can be -no morality if there be no future state.’ With displeasing coarseness, -and with most reprehensible recklessness of reasoning, Luther says, in -contradiction to the essential nobleness of his loving, heroic nature, -‘If you believe in no future life, I would not give a mushroom for your -God. Do, then, as you like. For if no God, so no devil, no hell: as with -a fallen tree, all is over when you die. Then plunge into lechery, -rascality, robbery, and murder.’ What bible of Moloch had he been -studying to form, for the time, so horrid a theory of the happiest life, -and to put so degrading an estimate upon human nature? Is man’s will a -starved wolf, only held back by the triple chain of fear of death, -Satan, and hell, from tearing forth with ravenous bounds to flesh the -fangs of his desires in bleeding virtue and innocence? Does the greatest -satisfaction man is capable of here, the highest blessedness he can -attain to, consist in drunkenness, gluttony, dishonesty, violence, and -impiety? If he had the appetite of a tiger or a vulture,--then, thus to -wallow in the offal of vice, dive into the carrion of sensuality, -abandon himself to reveling in carnivorous crime, might be his instinct -and his happiness. But by virtue of his humanity man loves his fellows, -enjoys the scenery of nature, takes delight in thought and art, dilates -with grand presentiments of glory and eternity, mysteriously yearns -after the hidden God. To a reasonable man--and no other is to be -reasoned with on matters of truth and interest--the assumption of this -brief season as all, will be a double motive not to hasten and imbitter -its brevity by folly, excess, and sin. If you are to be dead to-morrow, -for that very reason, in God’s name, do not, by gormandizing and -guzzling, anticipate death to-day! The true restraint from wrong and -degradation is not a crouching conscience of superstition and -selfishness, fancying a chasm of fire, but a high-toned conscience of -reason and honor, perceiving that they _are_ wrong and degradation, and -spontaneously loathing them. - -“Still worse, many esteemed authors have not hesitated to assert that -unless there be a future life there is not only no check on passion -within, but no moral law without: every man is free to do what he -pleases, without blame or fault. Sir Kenelm Digby says, in his ‘Treatise -on Man’s Soule,’ that ‘to predicate mortality in the soule taketh away -all morality, and changeth men into beastes, by removing the ground of -all difference in those thinges which are to governe our actions.’ This -style of teaching is a very mischievous absurdity. Admit, for a moment, -that Jocko in the woods of Brazil, and Schiller in the brilliant circles -of Weimar, will at last meet the same fate in the dusty grasp of death; -yet, while they live, one is an ape, the other is a man. And the -differences of capacity and of duty are numberless and immense. The -statement is enough: argument would be ridiculous. The words of an -audacious French preacher are yet more shocking than those of the -English nobleman. It is hard to believe they could be uttered in good -faith. Says Massillon, in his famous declamation on immortality, ‘If we -wholly perish with the body, the maxims of charity, patience, justice, -honor, gratitude, and friendship, are but empty words. Our own passions -shall decide our duty. If retribution terminate with the grave, morality -is a mere chimera, a bugbear of human invention.’ What debauched -unbeliever ever inculcated a viler or a more fatal doctrine? Its utter -baselessness, as a single illustration may show, is obvious at a glance. -As the sciences of algebra and geometry, the relations of numbers and -bodies, are true for the material world although they may be lost sight -of when time and space are transcended in some higher state, so the -science of ethics, the relations of nobler and baser, of right and -wrong, the manifold grades and qualities of actions and motives, are -true for human nature and experience in this life even if men perish in -the grave. However soon certain facts are to end, while they endure they -are as they are. In a moment of carelessness, by some strange slip of -the mind,--showing, perhaps, how tenaciously rooted are the common -prejudice and falsehood on this subject,--even so bold and fresh a -thinker as Theodore Parker has contradicted his own philosophy by -declaring, ‘If to-morrow I perish utterly, then my fathers will be to me -only as the ground out of which my bread-corn is grown. I shall care -nothing for the generations of mankind. I shall know no higher law than -passion. Morality will vanish.’ Ah, man reveres his fathers, and loves -to act nobly, not because he is to live forever, but because he is a -man. And, though all the summer hopes of escaping the grave were taken -from human life, choicest and tenderest virtues might still flourish, as -it is said the German cross-bill pairs and broods in the dead of winter. -The martyr’s sacrifice and the voluptuary’s indulgence are very -different things to-day, if they do both cease to-morrow. No speed of -advancing destruction can equalize Agamemnon and Thersites, Mansfield -and Jeffries, or hustle together justice and fraud, cowardice and valor, -purity and corruption, so that they will interchange qualities. There is -an eternal and immutable morality, as whiteness is white, and blackness -is black, and triangularity is triangular. And no severance of temporal -ties or compression of spatial limits can ever cut the condign bonds of -duty and annihilate the essential distinctions of good and evil, -magnanimity and meanness, faithfulness and treachery. - -“Reducing our destiny from endless to definite cannot alter the inherent -rightfulness and superiority of the claims of virtue. The most it can do -is to lessen the strength of the motive, to give the great motor-nerve -of our moral life a perceptible stroke of palsy. In reference to the -question, Can ephemera have a moral law? Richter reasons as follows: -‘Suppose a statue besouled for two days. If on the first day you should -shatter it, and thus rob it of one day’s life, would you be guilty of -murder? One can injure only an immortal.’ The sophistry appears when we -rectify the conclusion thus: one can inflict an _immortal_ injury only -on an immortal being. In fact, it would appear to be a greater wrong and -injury, for the time, to destroy one day’s life of a man whose entire -existence was confined to two days, than it would be to take away the -same period from the bodily existence of one who immediately thereupon -passes into a more exalted and eternal life. To the sufferer, the former -would seem an immitigable calamity, the latter a benign furtherance; -while, in the agent, the overt act is the same. This general moral -problem has been more accurately answered by Isaac Taylor, whose lucid -statement is as follows: ‘The creatures of a summer’s day might be -imagined, when they stand upon the threshold of their term of existence, -to make inquiry concerning the attributes of the Creator and the rules -of his government; for these are to be the law of their season of life -and the measure of their enjoyments. The sons of immortality would put -the same questions with an intensity the greater from the greater -stake.’ - -“Practically, the acknowledged authority of the moral law in human -society cannot be destroyed. Its influence may be unlimitedly weakened, -its basis variously altered, but as a confessed sovereign principle it -cannot be expelled. The denial of the freedom of the will theoretically -explodes it; but social custom, law, and opinion will enforce it still. -Make man a mere dissoluble mixture of carbon and magnetism, yet so long -as he can distinguish right and wrong, good and evil, love and hate, -and, unsophisticated by dialectics, can follow either of opposite -courses of action, the moral law exists and exerts its sway. It has been -asked, ‘If the incendiary be, like the fire he kindles, a result of -material combinations, shall he not be treated in the same way?’ We -should reply thus: No matter what man springs from or consists of, if he -has moral ideas, performs moral actions, and is susceptible of moral -motives, then he is morally responsible; for all practical and -disciplinary purposes he is wholly removed from the categories of -physical science. - -“Another pernicious misrepresentation of the fair consequences of the -denial of a life hereafter is shown in the frequent declaration that -then there would be no motive to any thing good and great. The -incentives which animate men to strenuous services, perilous virtues, -disinterested enterprises, spiritual culture, would cease to operate. -The essential life of all moral motives would be killed. This view is to -be met by a broad and indignant denial based on an appeal to human -consciousness and to the reason of the thing. Every man knows by -experience that there are a multitude of powerful motives, entirely -disconnected with future reward or punishment, causing him to resist -evil and to do good even with self-sacrificing toil and danger. When the -fireman risks his life to save a child from the flames of a tumbling -house, is the hope of Heaven his motive? When the soldier spurns an -offered bribe and will not betray his comrades nor desert his post, is -the fear of hell all that animates him? A million such decisive -specifications might be made. The renowned sentence of Cicero, “_Nemo -unquam sine magna spe immortalitatis se pro patria offerret ad mortem_,” -is effective eloquence; but it is a baseless libel against humanity and -the truth. In every moment of supreme nobleness and sacrifice, -personality vanishes. Thousands of patriots, philosophers, saints, have -been glad to die for the freedom of native land, the cause of truth, the -welfare of fellow-men, without a taint of selfish reward touching their -wills. Are there not souls - - ‘To whom dishonor’s shadow is a substance - More terrible than death here and hereafter.’ - -He must be the basest of men who would decline to do any sublime act of -virtue because he did not expect to enjoy the consequences of it -eternally. Is there no motive for the preservation of health because it -cannot be an everlasting possession? Since we cannot eat sweet and -wholesome food forever, shall we therefore at once saturate our stomachs -with nauseating poisons? - -“If all experienced good and evil wholly terminate for us when we die, -still, every intrinsic reason which, on the supposition of immortality, -makes wisdom better than folly, industry better than sloth, -righteousness better than iniquity, benevolence and purity better than -hatred and corruption, also makes them equally preferable while they -last. Even if the philosopher and the idiot, the religious -philanthropist and the brutal pirate, did die alike, who would not -rather live like the sage and the saint than like the fool and the -felon? Shall Heaven be held before man simply as a piece of meat before -a hungry dog to make him jump well? It is a shocking perversion of the -grandest doctrine of faith. Let the theory of annihilation assume its -direst phase, still, our perception of principles, our consciousness of -sentiments, our sense of moral loyalty, are not dissolved, but will hold -us firmly to every noble duty until we ourselves flow into the -dissolving abyss. But some one may say, ‘If I have fought with beasts at -Ephesus, what advantageth it me if the dead rise not?’ It advantageth -you everything _until you are dead_, although there be nothing -afterwards. As long as you live is it not glory and reward enough _to -have conquered_ the beasts at Ephesus? This is sufficient reply to the -unbelieving flouters at the moral law. And, as an unanswerable -refutation of the feeble whine of sentimentality that without immortal -endurance nothing is worthy our affection, let great Shakespeare -advance, with his matchless depth of bold insight reversing the -conclusion, and pronouncing, in tones of cordial solidity,-- - - ‘This, thou perceivest, will make thy love more strong, - To love that well which thou must leave ere long.’ - -“What though Decay’s shapeless hand extinguish us? Its foreflung and -enervating shadow shall neither transform us into devils nor degrade us -into beasts. - -“The future life, outside of the realm of faith, to an earnest and -independent inquirer, and considered as a scientific question, lies in a -painted mist of uncertainty. There is room for hope, and there is room -for doubt. The wavering evidences in some moods preponderate on that -side, in other moods, on this side. Meanwhile it is clear that, while he -lives here, the best thing he can do is to cherish a devout spirit, -cultivate a noble character, lead a pure and useful life in the service -of wisdom, humanity, and God, and finally, when the appointed time -arrives, meet the issue with reverential and affectionate conformity, -without dictating terms. Let the vanishing man say, like Ruckert’s dying -flower, ‘Thanks to-day for all the favors I have received from sun and -stream and earth and sky,--for all the gifts from men and God which have -made my little life an ornament and a bliss. Heaven, stretch out thine -azure tent while my faded one is sinking here. Joyous spring-tide, roll -on through ages yet to come, in which fresh generations shall rise and -be glad. Farewell all! Content to have had my turn, I now fall asleep, -without a murmur or a sigh.’ Surely the mournful nobility of such a -strain of sentiment is preferable by much to the selfish terror of that -unquestioning belief which in the Middle Age depicted the chase of the -soul by Satan, on the columns and doors of the churches, under the -symbol of a deer pursued by a hunter and hounds; and which has in later -times produced in thousands the feeling thus terribly expressed by -Bunyan, ‘I blessed the condition of the dog and toad because they had no -soul to perish under the everlasting weight of hell!’ - -“Sight of truth, with devout and loving submission to it, is an -achievement whose nobleness outweighs its sorrow, even if the gazer -foresee his own destruction. - -“It is not our intention in these words to cast doubt on the immortality -of the soul, or to depreciate the value of a belief in it. We desire to -vindicate morality and religion from the unwitting attacks made on them -by many self-styled Christian writers in their exaggeration of the -practical importance of such a faith. The qualitative contents of human -nature have nothing to do with its quantitative contents: our duties -rest not on the length, but on the faculties and relations, of our -existence. Make the life of a dog endless, he has only the capacity of a -dog; make the life of a man finite, still, within its limits, he has the -psychological functions of humanity. Faith in immortality may enlarge -and intensify the motives to prudent and noble conduct; it does not -create new ones. The denial of immortality may pale and contract those -motives; it does not take them away. - -“Knowing the burden and sorrow of earth, brooding in dim solicitude over -the far times and men yet to be, we cannot recklessly utter a word -calculated to lessen the hopes of man, pathetic creature, who weeps into -the world and faints out of it. It is our faith--not knowledge--that the -spirit is without terminus or rest. The faithful truth-hunter, in dying, -finds not a covert, but a better trail. Yet the saintliness of the -intellect is to be purged from prejudice and self-will. With God we are -not to prescribe conditions. The thought that all high virtue and piety -must die with the abandonment of belief in immortality is as pernicious -and dangerous as it is shallow, vulgar, and unchristian. The view is -obviously gaining prevalence among scientific and philosophical -thinkers, that life is the specialization of the universal in the -individual, death the restoration of the individual to the whole. This -doubt as to a personal future life will unquestionably increase. Let -traditional teachers beware how they venture to shift the moral law from -its immutable basis in the will of God to a precarious poise on the -selfish hope and fear of man. The sole safety, the ultimate desideratum, -is perception of law with disinterested conformity.”--_Doctrine of a -Future Life_, pp. 652-661. - - - - - INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED. - - Alger, W. R., 264, 345 - Alleine, Jos., 257 - Andrews, S. J., 140 - Augustine, 273 - - Baptist Confession, 219 - Barnes, A., 117, 317 - Benson, 302, 303 - Bloomfield, 97, 147 - Buck, Chas., 47 - Bush, Geo., 43, 101 - Butler, Wm. A., 314 - - Carmichael, A., 233 - Chaldee Paraphrase, 76 - Chapin, E. H., 335 - Cicero, 9, 273 - Clarke, A., 32, 36, 43, 86, 90, 140, 167, 257, 295 - Conant, T. J., 32 - Constable, H., 303, 340 - Crellius, J., 206 - Cruden, 294 - - Dalton, 328 - Dobney, H. H., 8, 263, 328 - Douay Bible, 76 - - Eusebius, 285 - - Gesenius, 51 - Greenfield, 283, 292 - - Ham, J. P., 331 - Hobbs, 9 - Hogg, James, 327 - Homer, 285 - Hudson, C. F., 278 - - Kitto, 41 - - Landis, R. W., 45, 58, 59, 61, 64, 73, 77, 89, 94, 105, 122, 162, 170, - 172, 175, 203 - Law, Bishop, 205, 242 - Lee, Luther, 101, 140, 210, 274, 323 - Leeland, 333 - Liddell & Scott, 292 - Locke, John, 228, 328 - Longfellow, 224 - Luther, 76 - - Mattison, H., 36 - Moncrieff, W. G., 326 - Muller, Dr., 233 - - Newton, Bp., 318 - - Olshausen, 49, 321 - - Parkhurst, 51, 53, 102, 293 - Priestly, Dr., 206 - Pritchard, 328 - - Robinson, 53, 293 - - Saurin, 317 - Scott, Thos., 32 - Schrevelius, 292 - Schleusner, 293 - Seneca, 9 - Septuagint, 76 - Socrates, 9 - Smith, Sidney, 324 - Smith, Wm., 49 - Stuart, Moses, 8, 296 - Syriac Version, 76 - - Taylor, I., 319 - Taylor, Dr. J., 51, 229 - Tillotson, Bp., 337 - Trench, 167 - Tyndale, Wm., 233 - - Vincent, Thos., 301 - - Wahl, 294 - Wakefield, 147 - Warburton, Bp., 324 - Watson, 70 - Watts, Isaac, 228 - Wesley, 70 - Wetstein, 285 - Whately, R., 333 - Whedon, D. D., 224 - - - - - INDEX - --OF-- - THE PRINCIPAL TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE - ILLUSTRATED OR EXPLAINED. - - GENESIS. - PAGE. - 1: 20, 21, 24, 30, 43 - 1: 26, 27, 21 - 2: 2, 67 - 2: 7, 31, 36, 54 - 2: 16, 17, 218 - 3: 4, 14 - 3: 19, 221 - 4: 9, 10, 117 - 5: 3, 24, 70 - 7: 15, 21, 22, 33, 34 - 9: 6, 26 - 14: 21, 50 - 15: 15, 123 - 16: 22, 27 - 17: 14, 51 - 18: 1-8, 27 - 18: 25, 312 - 23: 8, 50 - 25: 8, 122 - 25: 17-20, 165 - 32: 24, 27 - 35: 18, 48, 54, 101 - 37: 35, 157 - - EXODUS. - 4: 32, 145 - 22: 18, 129 - 23: 9, 50 - 24: 9-11, 28 - 31: 14, 51 - 32: 32, 307 - 33: 20, 29 - 33: 21-23, 28 - - LEVITICUS. - 11: 10, 51 - 19: 31; 20: 27, 129 - - NUMBERS. - 6: 6, 41, 50 - 16: 22, 91 - 16: 30, 33, 157 - 19: 13, 119 - 22: 31, 27 - 25: 1-3, 131 - 27: 16, 91 - - DEUTERONOMY. - 18: 9-12, 129 - 32: 22, 158 - - JOSHUA. - 10: 30, 51 - 24: 2, 123 - - JUDGES. - 9: 7-15, 162 - 13: 6, 13, 27 - - 1 SAMUEL. - 2: 9, 159 - 15: 23, 135 - 26: 24, 77 - 28: 3-20, 127 - - 1 KINGS. - 2: 36-46, 223 - 17: 21, 48, 103 - 17: 22, 103, 143 - - 2 KINGS. - 4: 34, 143 - 14: 9, 162 - - 1 CHRONICLES. - 10: 13, 134 - - 2 CHRONICLES. - 36: 19: 21, 280 - - JOB. - 3: 11-18, 236 - 4: 11-19, 160 - 7: 21, 214 - 10: 8-11, 69 - 14: 12-15, 159, 237 - 14: 21, 236 - 17: 13-16, 160, 237 - 19: 25, 26, 250 - 26: 4, 52 - 30: 15, 50 - 32: 8, 66 - 33: 18, 20, 22, 51 - 34: 14, 15, 57 - - PSALMS. - 2: 9, 306 - 6: 5, 158, 238 - 7: 11, 301 - 16: 10, 156 - 17: 15, 240, 250 - 27: 12, 50 - 30: 2, 3, 157 - 31: 5, 77 - 31: 17, 159 - 37: 10, 305 - 37: 20, 281, 306, 309 - 49: 14, 15, 51 - 49: 20, 306 - 58: 7, 8, 306 - 64: 1, 78 - 68: 2, 306 - 78: 18, 51 - 88: 10-12, 160 - 89: 48, 157 - 89: 88, 51 - 90: 10, 125 - 106: 28, 131 - 115: 17, 159, 238 - 139: 7, 27 - 145: 20, 303 - 146: 3, 4, 33, 159, 236 - - PROVERBS. - 10: 25, 306 - 11: 31, 309 - 20: 7, 52 - 23: 2, 50 - - ECCLESIASTES. - 3: 19, 20, 35 - 3: 21, 72 - 9: 3, 126 - 9: 5, 6, 10, 84, 114, 237 - 12: 7, 48, 56 - 12: 14, 315 - - ISAIAH. - 1: 30, 31, 306 - 5: 14, 158 - 5: 20-24, 309 - 10: 25, 301 - 14: 9-20, 158, 164 - 14: 11, 282 - 17: 13, 306 - 26: 19, 238, 250 - 34: 9, 10, 290 - 34: 12, 306 - 38: 10-19, 159 - 38: 17, 51 - 38: 18, 19, 238 - 42: 7, 92 - 44: 2, 69 - 51: 8, 282, 306 - 53: 10-12, 93, 139 - 57: 16, 50, 69 - 61: 1, 92 - 66: 24, 282 - - JEREMIAH. - 1: 5, 69 - 17 27, 280 - 31: 9, 146 - 31: 15-17, 165, 253 - - EZEKIEL. - 18: 26, 299, 315 - 20: 47, 48, 281 - 31: 15-18, 158, 165 - 32: 18-32, 158 - - DANIEL. - 7: 10, 82 - 12: 2, 235, 268 - - HOSEA. - 12: 4, 27 - - AMOS. - 5: 4, 6, 230 - - OBADIAH. - 1: 16, 305 - - JONAH. - 1: 2, 158 - 4: 3, 78 - - HABAKKUK. - 1: 7, 98 - 2: 11, 117 - - ZECHARIAH. - 9: 12, 180 - 12: 1, 64, 66 - - MALACHI. - 4: 1-3, 306, 310 - - MATTHEW. - 2: 17, 18, 165 - 3: 12, 306 - 5: 22, 29, 30, 108 - 10: 28, 105, 108 - 11: 23, 108 - 13: 40, 47, 49, 306 - 16: 18, 108 - 16: 25, 26, 110 - 17: 1-9, 137 - 18: 9, 108 - 22: 23-32, 149 - 23: 15, 33, 108 - 24: 26, 96 - 24: 30, 31, 169 - 25: 31, 34, 261 - 25: 41, 46, 269, 271 - 26: 24, 267 - 26: 38, 93 - 27: 52, 53, 231, 285 - - MARK. - 6: 9, 96 - 9: 43, 45, 47, 108 - 9: 43, 44, 279 - 12: 23-25, 152 - - LUKE. - 1: 11, 13, 28, 29, 27 - 4: 18-21, 92 - 6: 49, 306 - 7: 14, 144 - 8: 40, 45, 144 - 10: 15, 108 - 12: 4, 5, 105, 108 - 13: 28, 171 - 14: 13, 14, 252 - 15: 11, 164 - 16: 19, 31, 108, 154, 161 - 17: 27, 29, 306 - 20: 35, 153 - 23: 39-43, 172 - 23: 46, 48, 77 - 24: 29, 29 - 24: 39, 95 - 24: 43, 139 - - JOHN. - 1: 18, 29 - 3: 6, 68 - 3: 16, 304 - 3: 36, 267 - 4: 24, 27, 98 - 5: 27, 29, 142, 144 - 5: 28, 29, 232 - 10: 15, 78 - 11: 24, 231 - 13: 38, 78 - 14: 1-3, 256 - 15: 6, 306 - 21: 18, 19, 214 - 21: 22, 23, 257 - - ACTS. - 1: 9-11, 29 - 2: 27, 31, 108, 156 - 2: 29, 34, 35, 239 - 7: 15, 77 - 7: 60, 235 - 12: 7-9, 27 - 13: 36, 124 - 13: 46, 312 - 17: 31, 63, 260, 271 - 23: 8, 97 - 21: 15, 144, 232 - 24: 25, 260 - 26: 7, 232 - 26: 23, 146 - - ROMANS. - 1: 4, 93 - 1: 23, 15, 20, 30 - 2: 7, 17, 230, 304 - 3: 20, 68 - 5: 12-14, 227 - 6: 12, 69 - 6: 23, 230, 300 - 8: 11, 69, 94, 248 - 8: 22, 23, 185, 200 - 8: 29, 143 - 8: 38, 39, 210 - 9: 3, 308 - - 1 CORINTHIANS. - 5: 5, 98, 200 - 9: 25, 15 - 10: 20, 131 - 11: 7, 26 - 15: 18, 240 - 15: 20, 23, 143, 235 - 15: 32, 254 - 15: 35, 36, 247 - 15: 42-44, 19, 42, 248 - 15: 46, 47, 49, 25, 42, 249 - 15: 50, 19 - 15: 51-55, 15, 17, 19, 108, 200 - - 2 CORINTHIANS. - 1: 8, 9, 251 - 4: 11, 69 - 4: 14, 251 - 4: 16, 212 - 5: 4, 69, 200 - 5: 8, 183 - 5: 10, 315 - 12: 2, 173 - 12: 2-4, 195 - - GALATIANS. - 1: 5, 291 - 5: 19, 21, 99 - - EPHESIANS. - 1: 20, 29 - 4: 22, 24, 25, 193 - 5: 27, 251 - 6: 24, 20 - - PHILIPPIANS. - 1: 21-24, 200 - 2: 5, 6, 29 - 3: 20, 100 - 3: 21, 42, 85, 249 - 3: 11, 231 - 3: 8-11, 251 - - COLOSSIANS. - 1: 15, 18, 29, 143 - 1: 27, 212 - 3: 3, 97 - 3: 4, 103, 200 - 3: 9, 10, 24, 212 - - 1 THESSALONIANS. - 4: 13, 14, 16, 17, 142, 169, 200, 212, - 235 - - 1 TIMOTHY. - 1: 10, 147 - 1: 17, 15, 30, 36 - 2: 1, 200 - 6: 16, 18, 56 - - 2 TIMOTHY. - 1: 10, 18 - 4: 6, 213 - 4: 7, 8, 200 - - TITUS. - 2: 7, 20 - - HEBREWS. - 1: 1-3, 30 - 1: 6, 143 - 1: 7, 14, 27 - 2: 14, 311 - 5: 9, 270 - 6: 2, 270 - 8: 1, 29 - 9: 12, 271 - 9: 27, 259 - 10: 39, 304 - 11: 3, 293 - 11: 16, 153 - 11: 35, 231 - 12: 9, 23, 91 - - JAMES. - 1: 15, 300 - 1: 18, 145 - 3: 6, 108 - - 1 PETER. - 1: 11, 139 - 1: 12, 91 - 1: 4, 23, 16 - 1: 23-25, 68 - 3: 4, 16 - 3: 18-20, 87 - 4: 17, 298 - 5: 4, 254 - - 2 PETER. - 1: 16, 141 - 2: 4, 9, 109, 215, 261 - 2: 6, 287 - 2: 5, 6, 12, 306 - 3: 7-12 261, 310 - - 1 JOHN. - 5: 11, 12, 192, 304 - - JUDE. - 1: 6, 261 - 1: 7, 286 - - REVELATION. - 1: 5, 143 - 1: 18, 93, 108 - 2: 7, 173 - 4: 5, 27 - 5: 6, 27 - 6: 8, 108 - 6: 9-11, 113, 169 - 13: 1-10, 289 - 13: 14-18, 289 - 14: 4, 145 - 14: 1-5, 289 - 14: 11, 288 - 15: 3, 312 - 16: 3, 44 - 20: 5, 144, 215 - 20: 10, 291 - 20: 11-15, 108, 109, 158 - 21: 4, 15, 291 - 21: 5, 309 - 22: 1, 2, 174 - 22: 8, 9, 215 - - - - - GENERAL INDEX. - - - Abraham’s ancestors idolaters, 123 - - Abel’s blood cried from the ground to God, 117 - - Absent from the body, meaning of, 183 - - Adam threatened with literal death, 228, - testimony of Locke, Watts, and Taylor, 228, - his condition in his creation, 229 - - A dishonorable perversion, 53, 54 - - _Aion_, meaning of, according to Greenfield, Schrevelius, Liddell and - Scott, Parkhurst, Robinson, Schleusner, and Wahl, 292, 293 - - _Aionios_, meaning of, 295 - - Analogies of nature, 335 - - Analogy between sleep and death, 235 - - Anecdote of the reasoning powers of brutes, 327 - - Annihilation impossible, 337 - - Angels not the ancient prophets, 215 - - An ancient case of modern spiritualism, 136 - - _Anastasis_, meaning of, 231 - - A clean universe at last, 311 - - An illustration on future punishment, 315 - - Anomalies of the present state, 336 - - A spirit, or spiritual being, what, 27 - - A spirit hath not flesh and bones, 95, - note by Bloomfield, 97 - - A threefold death disproved, 219 - - Attempt to understand the popular idea of a spirit, 326 - - _Athanasia_, _aphthartos_, and _aphtharsia_, use and meaning of, 15, 19 - - Bible views of future punishment produce the best effect, 319 - - Can the soul be killed? 105 - - Capacities of the soul, 330 - - Christ the express image of God, 29, 30 - - Christ, the first-fruits, first-begotten, and first-born, how, 143-145 - - Christ first raised from the dead, exposition of Acts 26:23, 146 - - Christ and the Sadducees 149 - - Clarke on Gen. 2:7, 32, - on Heb. 12:22, 86, - his key to the words forever and ever, 295 - - Comma, in its present form, when invented, 179 - - Conant on Gen. 2:7; Isa. 2:22, 32 - - Connection between our present and future being, testimony of Bishop - Law, 205, - Crellius and Priestly, 206 - - Criticism, a desperate case of, 176 - - Cruden on the words eternal, everlasting, and forever, 294 - - Day in Gen. 2:17, meaning of, 223 - - Date of Samuel’s ministry, 128 - - Date of Saul’s reign, 128 - - Death a punishment, 272, - Augustine’s testimony, 273, - no relief to the sinner, 278 - - Deeds done in the body only to be judged, 315 - - David not ascended to Heaven, 239 - - Departing and being with Christ, 199 - - Death of Adam, the same that is threatened against the sinner, 299 - - Departure and return of the soul, 100, - note by Luther Lee, 101, - by Prof. Bush, 101, - by Parkhurst, 102 - - Destiny of the wicked: they shall be destroyed, 303, - shall perish, go to perdition, and be as though they had not been, - 304, - their doom set forth in language that is not figurative, 305, - they are compared to the most inflammable substances, 305, - they shall be consumed and devoured by fire, 308 - - Earthly house, what, 185 - - Eternal torment threatened to no one, 289 - - Eternal suffering not proportioned to the sins of a finite life, 313 - - Eternal fire, Jude 7, - illustrated and explained, 286 - - Everlasting fire, 270 - - Everlasting punishment, 271 - - Evil tendency of the doctrine of the destruction of the wicked, 338 - - Expressions used to describe the final condition of the wicked, 303 - - Future punishment eternal, 267, - it consists in death, 299 - - Gathered to his people, meaning of, 120, - sees corruption, 124 - - _Ge-enna_, the hell of Mark 9:43, 44, - meaning of, 283 - - God not a God of the dead but of the living, meaning of, 153 - - God’s dealings with his creatures, 312 - - God a person, 28 - - _Hades_ and _sheol_, meaning of, 156, - use of the word _sheol_, 157, - who go there, and the duration of its dominion, 157, - its location, 158, - condition of the righteous there, 158, - general character of, 159, - no knowledge there, 160 - - Hell, words so translated, 107 - - Hinnom, valley of, a figure of the place of future punishment, 283 - - _Holam_, Hebrew, corresponding to aion, defined by Gesenius, 294 - - House from Heaven, what, 185 - - Idumea, threatenings against, 290, - the language illustrates Rev. 14:11, 290 - - Immortal and immortality, how often used in the Bible, 13-20 - - Immortality assumed, 337 - - Immaterial souls of brutes, 323, - the testimony of Bishop Warburton, 324 - - Instinct not the only reasoning power possessed by brutes, 329 - - In the body and out, 195 - - Is Abraham in hell? 123 - - Judgment, doctrine of, contradicted by the popular view, 63 - - _Katephagen_, Rev. 20:9, defined by Stuart, 309 - - _Kolasis_, Matt. 25:46, meaning of, 274 - - Language of appearance, 136 - - Lazarus carried to Abraham’s bosom, when? 169 - - Matter cannot think, 324, - the proof rests with the skeptic, Sidney Smith’s testimony, 325, - W. G. Moncrieff’s testimony, 326 - - Milton’s translation of Eccl. 3:21, 76 - - Mind determined by sensation to belong to the lower animals, 328 - - Moses and the prophets on the place and condition of the dead, 154 - - Moses was raised from the dead, 142 - - Nature sheds no light on the future state, 8 - - Necromancy defined by Webster, 128 - - _Nephesh_ defined by Parkhurst, Taylor, and Gesenius, 51 - - Origen’s restorationism, an enlarged purgatory, 316 - - Parable, case of the rich man and Lazarus, a, 163, - how to be used, testimony of Clarke and Trench, 167 - - Paradise, where situated, 173 - - Paraphrase of Phil. 1:21-24, 209 - - Paul’s departure, 213 - - Personification used in the Bible, 117, 162 - - Peter’s tabernacle, its putting off, 213 - - Pharisees confess spirit, 97 - - _Plasso_, definition of, 65 - - Punctuation of Luke 23:43, 179 - - Punishment for sins in hell not threatened, 314 - - Punishment, degrees of, 276 - - Purgatory, an invention to relieve the great wrong of conscious eternal - misery, 316, - borrowed from Plato by Augustine, adopted by Rome, 316 - - Reasons why the doctrine of future punishment should be agitated, 320 - - Reformers adopted Augustine’s hell without his purgatory, 316 - - Rebellion against God, not eternal, 311 - - Resurrection proved by Christ, 151, - from what words translated, 231, - a prominent doctrine of the Bible, 234, - Clarke’s testimony, 257, - not impossible, 262, - objections against answered, 244-247, - object of the Christian’s hope, 250, - time of reward to the righteous, 252, - comfort of mourners, _id._, - time when crowns of glory are to be given, 254, - basis of Scripture promises, 255, - inseparably connected with the coming of Christ, 256 - - Samuel and the woman of Endor, 127 - - Scott’s note on Gen. 2:7, 32 - - _Semeron_, meaning of, 179 - - Sense of right and wrong possessed to a degree by the lower animals, - 328 - - Separation from the love of God, 210 - - Shame and everlasting contempt, Dan. 12:2, 268 - - Sins in hell committed faster than God can punish, Benson, 302 - - Sodom and Gomorrah turned into ashes by eternal fire, 287 - - Soul and spirit, meaning of, 46, - times of their use in the Bible, 50-55 - - Souls under the altar, 113, - note by Barnes, 117 - - Spirit, how formed, 64, - returns to God, 56, - for what purpose? 62, - not conscious, 61, - committed to God, 77, - saved in the day of the Lord, 1 Cor. 5:5, 98 - - Spirits of just men made perfect, 80, - spirits in prison, 87, - note by Clarke, 91 - - State to which death reduces us, Law’s testimony, 242 - - Tendency of the doctrine of eternal misery, testimony of Saurin and A. - Barnes, 317, - it cannot be believed, testimony of Bp. Newton, 318 - - The image of God, 21 - - The breath of life, 31, - possessed by all animals, 33, 34 - - The living soul, 36, - dead soul, 41, - applied to all orders of animals, 43 - - The transfiguration, 137, - a miniature of the kingdom of God, 140, - no disembodied souls there, 141 - - The rich man and Lazarus, 161 - - The dead rise up to meet the king of Babylon and Pharaoh in _sheol_, - 164, 165 - - Thief on the cross, 172 - - The inward man, what? 212 - - The unjust reserved to Judgment, 215 - - The death of Adam, 216, - his sentence, 218 - - The dead as though they had not been, 236, - have no knowledge, _id._, - not in Heaven nor hell, 237, - without a resurrection are perished, 240 - - The Judgment a future event, 258, - objections answered, 259, - destroys the idea of the conscious-state theory, 262, - testimony of Dobney, 263 - - The doctrine of the immortality of the soul leads to erroneous - conclusions on future punishment, 266 - - The wages of sin, 264 - - The undying worm and quenchless fire, 279, - a figure borrowed from the Old Testament, 280, - testimony of Jeremiah, 280, - of David and Ezekiel, 281, - of Isaiah, 282 - - The two deaths mentioned in Eze. 18:26, 299 - - The wicked, how recompensed in the earth, 309 - - The claims of philosophy, 322 - - The soul immaterial, 323 - - Them that sleep in Jesus brought with him, 212 - - “Thou” and “thy,” meaning of in Gen. 3:19, 225 - - Tormented forever and ever, Rev. 14:11, 288, - of whom spoken, 289 - - Traduction _vs._ creationism, 69-71 - - Trees represented as appointing a king over themselves, 162 - - True spirit of inquiry, 11 - - Tunes learned by birds, 328 - - Tyndale’s pungent inquiry, 233 - - Universal belief and inborn desire, 333 - - Unquenchable fire, meaning of the word _asbestos_, 284 - - Vincent’s description of hell, 301 - - We fly away, Ps. 90:10, meaning of, 125-127 - - White robes of Rev. 6:11, meaning of, 119 - - Who knoweth? Eccl. 3:21, 72 - - Word translated perceive, in 1 Sam. 28:14, 133 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - CATALOGUE - - Of Books, Pamphlets, Tracts, &c., Issued by the Seventh-Day - Adventist Publishing Association, - Battle Creek, Mich. - - --------------------- - -HYMNS AND TUNES; 320 pages of hymns, 96 pages of music; in plain -morocco, $1.00. - -A COMPLETE HISTORY OF THE SABBATH AND FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK. By J. N. -Andrews, $1.00. - -THE SPIRIT OF PROPHECY, Vols. 1 & 2. By Ellen G. White. Each $1.00. - -THOUGHTS ON THE REVELATION, critical and practical. By U. Smith. 328 -pp., $1.00. - -THOUGHTS ON THE BOOK OF DANIEL critical and practical. By U. Smith. -Bound, $1.00; condensed edition, paper, 35 cts. - -THE NATURE AND DESTINY OF MAN. By U. Smith. 384 pp., bound, $1.00, -paper, 40 cts. - -LIFE INCIDENTS, in connection with the great Advent movement. By Eld. -James White. 373 pp., $1.00. - -AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF ELD. JOSEPH BATES, with portrait of the author. 318 -pp., $1.00, - -HOW TO LIVE; comprising a series of articles on Health, and how to -preserve it, with various recipes for cooking healthful food, &c. 400 -pp., $1.00. - -SABBATH READINGS; or Moral and Religious Reading for Youth and Children. -400 pp., 60 cts; in five pamphlets, 50 cts. - -APPEAL TO YOUTH; Address at the Funeral of Henry N. White; also a brief -narrative of his life, &c. 96 pp., muslin, 40 cts.; paper covers, 10 -cts. - -THE GAME OF LIFE, with notes. Three illustrations 5x6 inches each, -representing Satan playing with man for his soul. In board, 50 cts., in -paper, 30 cts. - -THE UNITED STATES IN PROPHECY. By U. Smith. Bound, 40 cts.; paper, 20 -cts. - -HYMNS AND SPIRITUAL SONGS for Camp-meetings and other Religious -Gatherings. Compiled by Eld. James White. 196 pp. Bound, 50 cts., paper, -25 cts. - -REFUTATION OF THE AGE TO COME.] By J. H. Waggoner. Price 20 cts. - -PROGRESSIVE BIBLE LESSONS FOR CHILDREN; for Sabbath Schools and -Families. G. H. Bell. Bound, 35 cts., paper, 25 cts. - -THE ADVENT KEEPSAKE; comprising a text of Scripture for each day of the -year, on the subjects of the Second Advent, the Resurrection, &c. Plain -muslin, 25 cts; gilt, 40 cts. - -A SOLEMN APPEAL relative to Solitary Vice, and the Abuses and Excesses -of the Marriage Relation. Edited by Eld. James White. Muslin, 50 cts.; -paper, 30 cts. - -AN APPEAL to the Working Men and Women, in the Ranks of Seventh-day -Adventists. By James White. 172 pp., bound, 40 cts; paper covers, 25 -cts. - -SERMONS ON THE SABBATH AND LAW; embracing an outline of the Biblical and -Secular History of the Sabbath for 6000 years. By J. N. Andrews. 25 cts. - -THE STATE OF THE DEAD. By U. Smith. 224 pp., 25 cts. - -HISTORY of the Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul. By D. M. -Canright. 25 cts. - -DISCUSSION ON THE SABBATH QUESTION, between Elds. Lane and Barnaby. 25 -cts. - -THE ATONEMENT; an Examination of a Remedial System in the light of -Nature and Revelation. By J. H. Waggoner. 20 cts. - -OUR FAITH AND HOPE, Nos. 1 & 2.--Sermons on the Advent, &c. By James -White, Each 20 cts. - -THE NATURE AND TENDENCY OF MODERN SPIRITUALISM. By J. H. Waggoner. 20 -cts. - -THE BIBLE FROM HEAVEN; or, a dissertation on the Evidences of -Christianity. 20 cts. - -DISCUSSION ON THE SABBATH QUESTION, between Elds. Grant and Cornell. 20 -cts. - -REVIEW OF OBJECTIONS TO THE VISIONS. U. Smith, 20 cts. - -COMPLETE TESTIMONY OF THE FATHERS, concerning the Sabbath and First Day -of the Week. By J. N. Andrews. 15 cts. - -THE DESTINY OF THE WICKED. By U. Smith. 15 cts. - -THE MINISTRATION OF ANGELS; and the Origin, History, and Destiny of -Satan. By D. M. Canright, 15 cts. - -THE MESSAGES OF REV. 14, particularly the Third Angel’s Message and -Two-Horned Beast. By J. N. Andrews. 15 cts. - -THE RESURRECTION OF THE UNJUST; a Vindication of the Doctrine. By J. H. -Waggoner. 15 cts. - -THE SANCTUARY AND TWENTY-THREE HUNDRED DAYS. By J. N. Andrews. 10 cts. - -THE SAINTS’ INHERITANCE, or, The Earth made New. By J. N. Loughborough. -10 cts. - -THE SEVENTH PART OF TIME; a sermon on the Sabbath Question. By W. H. -Littlejohn. 10 cts. - -REVIEW OF GILFILLAN, and other authors, on the Sabbath By T. B. Brown. -10 cts. - -THE SEVEN TRUMPETS; an Exposition of Rev. 8 and 9. 10 cts. - -THE DATE OF THE SEVENTY WEEKS OF DAN. 9 established. By J. N. Andrews. -10 cts. - -THE TRUTH FOUND; the Nature and Obligation of the Sabbath of the Fourth -Commandment. By J. H. Waggoner. 10 cts. - -VINDICATION OF THE TRUE SABBATH. By J. W. Morton. 10 cts. - -SUNDAY SEVENTH-DAY EXAMINED. A Refutation of the Teachings of Medem, -Jennings, Akers, and Fuller. By J. N. Andrews. 10 cts. - -MATTHEW TWENTY-FOUR; a full Exposition of the chapter. By James White. -10 cts. - -KEY TO PROPHETIC CHART; the symbols of Daniel and John explained, and -the prophetic periods determined. 10 cts. - -THE POSITION AND WORK OF THE TRUE PEOPLE OF GOD under the Third Angel’s -Message. By W. H. Littlejohn. 10 cts. - -AN APPEAL TO THE BAPTISTS, from the Seventh-day Baptists, for the -Restoration of the Bible Sabbath. 10 cts. - -MILTON ON THE STATE OF THE DEAD. 5 cts. - -FOUR-CENT TRACTS: The Two Covenants--The Law and the Gospel--The Seventh -Part of Time--Who Changed the Sabbath?--Celestial Railroad--Samuel and -the Witch of Endor--The Ten Commandments not Abolished--Address to the -Baptists. - -THREE-CENT TRACTS: The Kingdom--Scripture References--Much in -Little--The End of the Wicked--Infidel Cavils Considered--Spiritualism a -Satanic Delusion--The Lost Time Question. - -TWO-CENT TRACTS: The Sufferings of Christ--Seven Reasons for -Sunday-Keeping Examined--Sabbath by Elihu--The Rich Man and Lazarus--The -Second Advent--Definite Seventh Day--Argument on Sabbaton--Clerical -Slander--Departing and Being with Christ--Fundamental Principles of S. -D. Adventists--The Millennium. - -ONE-CENT TRACTS: Appeal on Immortality--Brief Thoughts on -Immortality--Thoughts for the Candid--Sign of the Doy of God--The Two -Laws--Geology and the Bible--The Perfection of the Ten Commandments--The -Coming of the Lord--Without Excuse. - -CHARTS: THE PROPHETIC, AND LAW OF GOD CHARTS, painted and mounted, such -as are used by our preachers, each $1.50. The two charts, on cloth, -unpainted, by mail, with key, without rollers. $2.50. - -THE WAY OF LIFE. This is an Allegorical Picture, showing the way of Life -and Salvation through Jesus Christ from Paradise Lost to Paradise -Restored. By Eld. M. G. Kellogg. The size of this instructive and -beautiful picture is 19x24 inches. Price, post-paid, $1.00. - - - =Works in Other Languages.= - -The Association also publishes the _Advent Tidende_, Danish, monthly, at -$1.00 per year, and works on some of the above-named subjects in the -German, French, Danish, and Holland languages. - -☛ Any of the foregoing works will be sent by mail to any part of the -United States, post-paid, on receipt of the prices above stated. - - ⁂ Address REVIEW & HERALD, - BATTLE CREEK, MICH. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - PERIODICALS. - - ---------- - -THE ADVENT REVIEW & HERALD OF THE SABBATH, weekly. This sheet is an -earnest exponent of the Prophecies, and treats largely upon the Signs of -the Times, Second Advent of Christ, Harmony of the Law and the Gospel, -the Sabbath of the Lord, and, What we Must do to be Saved. Terms, $2.00 -a year in advance. - -THE YOUTH’S INSTRUCTOR, monthly. This is a high-toned, practical sheet, -devoted to moral and religious instruction, adapted to the wants of -youth and children. It is the largest and the best youth’s paper -published in America. Terms, 50 cts. a year, in advance. - -THE HEALTH REFORMER. This is a live Journal, devoted to an Exposition of -the Laws of Human Life, and the application of those laws in the -Preservation of Health, and the Treatment of Disease. The REFORMER will -contain, each issue, thirty-two pages of reading matter, from able and -earnest pens, devoted to real, practical life, to physical, moral, and -mental improvement. Its publishers are determined that it shall be the -best Health Journal in the land. - -Terms, $1.00 a year, in advance. Address, HEALTH REFORMER, Battle Creek, -Mich. - - - =BOOKS FROM OTHER PUBLISHERS.= - -FUTURE PUNISHMENT, by H. H. Dobney, Baptist minister of England. The -Scriptural Doctrine of Future Punishment, with an Appendix, containing -the “State of the Dead,” by John Milton, author of “Paradise Lost,” -extracted from his “Treatise on Christian Doctrine.” - -This is a very able and critical work. It should be read by every one -who is interested in the immortality subject. It is also one of the best -works upon the subject to put into the hands of candid ministers, and -other persons of mind. - -Price, post-paid, $1.00. - -THE VOICE OF THE CHURCH, on the Coming and Kingdom of the Redeemer; or, -a History of the Doctrine of the Reign of Christ on Earth. By D. T. -Taylor. A very valuable work, highly endorsed on both sides of the -Atlantic. - -Price, post-paid, $1.00. - - The Great Reformation, by Martin, 5 Vols., $ 7.00 - D’Aubigne’s History of the Reformation, 5 Vols., 4.50 - Scripture Biography, 4.50 - Cruden’s Concordance, sheep, 2.00 - ” ” muslin, 1.50 - Bible Dictionary, sheep, 2.00 - ” ” muslin, 1.50 - Cole’s Concordance, 1.50 - Prince of the House of David, 2.00 - Pillar of Fire, 2.00 - Throne of David, 2.00 - The Court and Camp of David, 1.50 - The Old Red House, 1.50 - Higher Christian Life, 1.50 - Pilgrim’s Progress, large type, 1.25 - ” ” small ” .60 - Biography of George Whitefield, 1.25 - History of English Puritans, 1.25 - Story of a Pocket Bible, 1.25 - Captain Russell’s Watchword, 1.25 - The Upward Path, 1.25 - Ellen Dacre, 1.25 - The Brother’s Choice, 1.15 - Climbing the Mountain, 1.15 - The Two Books, 1.15 - Awakening of Italy, 1.00 - White Foreigners, 1.00 - Lady Huntington, 1.00 - Young Man’s Counselor, 1.00 - Young Lady’s Counselor, 1.00 - Paul Venner, 1.00 - Among the Alps, 1.00 - Poems of Home Life, .80 - Edith Somers, .80 - Nuts for Boys to Crack, .80 - Anecdotes for the Family, .75 - Pictorial Narratives, .60 - Bertie’s Birthday Present, .60 - Songs for Little Ones, .60 - Memoir of Dr. Payson, .60 - Mirage of Life, .60 - Huguenots of France, .50 - The Boy Patriot, .50 - Springtime of Life, .50 - May Coverly, .50 - Glen Cabin, .50 - The Old, Old Story, cloth, gilt, .50 - Poems by Rebekah Smith, .50 - Charlotte Elizabeth, .40 - Save the Erring, .40 - Blanche Gamond, .40 - My Brother Ben, .40 - Hannah’s Path, .35 - Star of Bethlehem, .30 - Father’s Letters to a Daughter, .30 - -☛ A more full Catalogue of books of this nature, for sale at this -Office, can be had on application. - - Address, REVIEW & HERALD, - BATTLE CREEK, MICH. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - =HEALTH REFORM PUBLICATIONS.= - - -------------- - -=The Hygienic System.= By R. T. Trall, M. D. Recently published at the -Office of the HEALTH REFORMER. It is just the work for the time, and -should be read by the million. Price, post-paid, 20 cents. - -=The Health and Diseases of Woman.= By R. T. Trall, M. D. A work of -great value. Price, post-paid, 20 cents. - -=Tobacco-Using.= A philosophical exposition of the Effects of Tobacco on -the Human System. By R. T. Trall, M. D. Price, post-paid, 20 cents. - -=Cook Book=, and Kitchen Guide: comprising recipes for the preparation -of hygienic food, directions for canning fruit, &c., together with -advice relative to change of diet. Price, post-paid, 20 cents. - -=Hydropathic Encyclopedia.= Trall. Price, post-paid, $4.50. - -=Water Cure for the Million.= Trall. Price, post-paid, 30 cents. - -=Uterine Diseases and Displacements.= Trall. Price, post-paid, $3.00. - -=Science of Human Life.= By Sylvester Graham, M. D. Price, post-paid, -$3.00. - -=Valuable Pamphlet.= Containing three of the most important of Graham’s -twenty-five Lectures on the Science of Human Life--eighth, the Organs -and their Uses; thirteenth, Man’s Physical Nature and the Structure of -His Teeth: fourteenth, the Dietetic Character of Man. Price, post-paid, -35 cts. - -=Hydropathic Family Physician.= By Joel Shew, M. D. Price, post-paid, -$3.50. - -=Domestic Practice.= Johnson. Price, post-paid, $1.75. - -=Hand Book of Health=--Physiology and Hygiene. Published by the Health -Reform Institute, Battle Creek, Mich. Price, post-paid, 75 cents; paper -cover, 40 cents. - -=Water Cure in Chronic Diseases.= By J. M. Gully, M. D. Price, -post-paid, $1.75. - -=Cure of Consumption.= Dr. Work. Price, post-paid, 80 cts. - -=Reform Tracts=, by mail, in packages of not less than 200 pages, -post-paid, at the rate of 800 pages for $1.00. - -Address, =Health Reformer=, _Battle Creek, Mich._ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - Transcriber’s Note - -The few words in Greek have been reproduced here as printed. Several -lack the necessary (and occasionally the correct) diacritical marks. - -There are also occasional lapses in the quotation of Biblical passages, -where opening or closing quotation marks are misplaced or missing. The -King James Version, which is used by the author, has been employed here -as well to more accurately punctuate them. - -The General Index, in the original text, used a tabular form. This has -been re-cast as an indented list. - -Errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, and -are noted here. The references are to the page and line in the original. - - 27.28 and which are [“]sent forth Added. - - 30.23 man in 'hi[sim /s im]age stamped him with Spaced - immortality, moved. - - 51.19 '1 Kings [17[, /:]21, 22; Replaced. - - 79.23 God.[”] Col. 3:3. [“]And when will the Added/Removed. - believer - - 79.24 [“]When> Christ who is our life Added. - - 131.4 the father of all the lies in the world[./,] Replaced. - - 131.5 by assiduously circulating them[,/.] Replaced. - - 153.14 [“]Wherefore, God is not ashamed Added. - - 160.7 together is in the dust.[”] Job. 17:13-16; Added. - 4:11-19; - - 160.14 whither thou goest.[”] Eccl. 9:4-6, 10. Added. - - 191.16 O grave, where is thy victory[./?] Replaced. - - 212.3 under the unfortu[n]ate necessity Added. - - 213.21 [P/B]ut as Paul does not here intimate Replaced. - - 264.20 What fate awaits us when we Added. - die?=[”]=--_Alger._ - - 285.2 Homer, in the [Illiad], _sic_--Iliad - - 285.13 fire as cannot be extingu=[i]=shed Added. - - 294.21 this time forth even forever, [”/’] that is, Replaced. - - 317.13 when I see in the lukewarmness of my _sic_--devotions - devosions, - - 320.24 exerting all his divine attri[tri]butes Removed. - - 327.22 gloomy gorges and craggy h[e]ights of the Added. - mountains, - - 338.9 we simply affirm that they will be Added. - anni[hi]lated - - 349.11 carniv[e/o]rous crime Replaced. - - 364.10 C[ir/ri]ticism , a desperate case of, 176 Transposed. - - 371.33 from the Seventh-day Bap[t]ists, Added. - - c7.11 Pictorial Nar[r]atives>, .60 Added. - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The state of the dead and the destiny -of the wicked, by Uriah Smith - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE STATE OF THE DEAD *** - -***** This file should be named 54373-0.txt or 54373-0.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/4/3/7/54373/ - -Produced by KD Weeks, MFR, Bryan Ness and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/old/54373-0.zip b/old/54373-0.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index cfc8cef..0000000 --- a/old/54373-0.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/54373-h.zip b/old/54373-h.zip Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 5b6a4a8..0000000 --- a/old/54373-h.zip +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/54373-h/54373-h.htm b/old/54373-h/54373-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 5e03e8f..0000000 --- a/old/54373-h/54373-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,15610 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" /> - <title>The State of the Dead and the Destiny of the Wicked, by Uriah Smith</title> - <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" /> - <style type="text/css"> - body { margin-left: 8%; margin-right: 10%; } - h1 { text-align: center; font-weight: normal; font-size: 1.4em; } - h2 { text-align: center; font-weight: normal; font-size: 1.2em; } - .pageno { right: 1%; font-size: x-small; background-color: inherit; color: silver; - text-indent: 0em; text-align: right; position: absolute; - border: thin solid silver; padding: .1em .2em; font-style: normal; - font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; } - p { text-indent: 0; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; text-align: justify; } - sup { vertical-align: top; font-size: 0.6em; } - .fss { font-size: 75%; } - .sc { font-variant: small-caps; } - .large { font-size: large; } - .xlarge { font-size: x-large; } - .small { font-size: small; } - .lg-container-b { text-align: center; } - @media handheld { .lg-container-b { clear: both; } } - .lg-container-r { text-align: right; } - @media handheld { .lg-container-r { clear: both; } } - .linegroup { display: inline-block; text-align: left; } - @media handheld { .linegroup { display: block; margin-left: 1.5em; } } - .linegroup .group { margin: 1em auto; } - .linegroup .line { text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em; } - div.linegroup > :first-child { margin-top: 0; } - .linegroup .in2 { padding-left: 4.0em; } - .linegroup .in31 { padding-left: 18.5em; } - .linegroup .in38 { padding-left: 22.0em; } - .index li {text-indent: -1em; padding-left: 1em; } - .index ul {list-style-type: none; padding-left: 0; } - ul.index {list-style-type: none; padding-left: 0; } - div.footnote > :first-child { margin-top: 1em; } - div.footnote p { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: 0.0em; margin-bottom: 0.0em; } - div.pbb { page-break-before: always; } - hr.pb { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-bottom: 1em; } - @media handheld { hr.pb { display: none; } } - .chapter { clear: both; page-break-before: always; } - .figcenter { clear: both; max-width: 100%; margin: 2em auto; text-align: center; } - .figcenter img { max-width: 100%; height: auto; } - .id001 { width:60%; } - .id002 { width:15%; } - @media handheld { .id001 { margin-left:20%; width:60%; } } - @media handheld { .id002 { margin-left:42%; width:15%; } } - .ig001 { width:100%; } - .table0 { margin: auto; margin-left: 0%; margin-right: 0%; width: 100%; } - .table1 { margin: auto; margin-top: 2em; width: 80%; } - .table2 { margin: auto; margin-top: 1em; margin-left: 2%; margin-right: 2%; - width: 96%; } - .table3 { margin: auto; width: 90%; } - .nf-center { text-align: center; } - .nf-center-c0 { text-align: left; margin: 0.5em 0; } - .nf-center-c1 { text-align: left; margin: 1em 0; } - .c000 { margin-top: 1em; } - .c001 { margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em; } - .c002 { page-break-before: always; margin-top: 1em; } - .c003 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em; - margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 42%; width: 15%; margin-right: 43%; - margin-top: 1em; } - .c004 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em; - margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 42%; width: 15%; margin-right: 43%; } - .c005 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em; - margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 42%; width: 15%; margin-right: 43%; - margin-top: 4em; } - .c006 { margin-top: 4em; } - .c007 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em; - margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 47%; width: 5%; margin-right: 48%; } - .c008 { page-break-before:auto; margin-top: 4em; } - .c009 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em; - margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 42%; width: 15%; margin-right: 43%; - margin-top: 2em; } - .c010 { margin-top: 2em; text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.0em; } - .c011 { text-indent: 1em; margin-top: 0.0em; margin-bottom: 0.0em; } - .c012 { margin-right: 2.78%; text-align: right; } - .c013 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em; - margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 40%; width: 20%; margin-right: 40%; } - .c014 { text-decoration: none; } - .c015 { vertical-align: top; text-align: left; padding-right: 1em; } - .c016 { vertical-align: top; text-align: right; padding-right: 1em; } - .c017 { vertical-align: top; text-align: left; } - .c018 { text-indent: 2.78%; margin-top: 0.0em; margin-bottom: 0.0em; } - .c019 { margin-top: 1em; font-size: 95%; } - .c020 { margin-top: 1em; text-indent: 1em; margin-bottom: 0.0em; } - .c021 { margin-top: 2em; font-size: 95%; } - .c022 { margin-top: 2em; } - .c023 { margin-top: .5em; } - .c024 { text-align: center; } - .c025 { vertical-align: top; text-align: right; } - .c026 { border: none; border-bottom: thin solid; margin-top: 1em; - margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 35%; width: 30%; margin-right: 35%; } - .c027 { vertical-align: top; text-align: left; padding-right: 1em; - text-indent: 2.1em; } - .c028 { vertical-align: top; text-align: left; padding-right: 1em; - text-indent: 1.4em; } - .c029 { margin-right: 2.78%; } - a:link { text-decoration: none; } - div.tnotes { padding-left:1em;padding-right:1em;background-color:#E3E4FA; - border:1px solid silver; margin:1em 5% 0 5%; text-align: justify; } - .epubonly {visibility: hidden; display: none; } - @media handheld { .epubonly { visibility: visible; display: inline; } } - .htmlonly {visibility: visible; display: inline; } - @media handheld { .htmlonly { visibility: hidden; display: none; } } - ins.correction { text-decoration:none; border-bottom: thin dotted gray; } - .quote { font-size: 95%; margin-top: 1.0em; margin-bottom: 1.0em; } - </style> - </head> - <body> - - -<pre> - -The Project Gutenberg EBook of The state of the dead and the destiny of -the wicked, by Uriah Smith - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: The state of the dead and the destiny of the wicked - -Author: Uriah Smith - -Release Date: March 22, 2017 [EBook #54373] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE STATE OF THE DEAD *** - - - - -Produced by KD Weeks, MFR, Bryan Ness and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - - -</pre> - - -<div class='pbb'> - <hr class='pb c000' /> -</div> -<div class='tnotes'> - -<div class='nf-center-c1'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div>Transcriber’s Note:</div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c001'>Footnotes have been collected at the end of each chapter, and are -linked for ease of reference.</p> - -<p class='c001'>Minor errors, attributable to the printer, have been corrected. Please -see the transcriber’s <a href='#endnote'>note</a> at the end of this text -for details regarding the handling of any textual issues encountered -during its preparation.</p> - -<p class='c001'>The cover image has been amended to add title page information, and, -as amended, is added to the public domain.</p> -<div class='htmlonly'> - -<div class='figcenter id001'> -<img src='images/cover.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' /> -</div> - -</div> - -</div> - -<div> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_I'>I</span> - <h1 class='c002'>THE <br /> <span class='xlarge'>STATE OF THE DEAD</span> <br /> AND THE <br /> <span class='xlarge'><span class='sc'>Destiny of the Wicked</span></span>.</h1> -</div> - -<hr class='c003' /> - -<div class='nf-center-c1'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div>BY URIAH SMITH.</div> - </div> -</div> - -<hr class='c004' /> - -<hr class='c005' /> - -<div class='nf-center-c1'> -<div class='nf-center c006'> - <div>STEAM PRESS</div> - <div>OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION,</div> - <div>BATTLE CREEK, MICH.:</div> - </div> -</div> - -<hr class='c007' /> - -<div class='nf-center-c1'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div>1873.</div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_iii'>iii</span> - <h2 class='c008'>PREFACE.</h2> -</div> -<hr class='c009' /> - -<p class='c010'>Questions of such absorbing interest to the human race -as “The State of the Dead,” and “The Destiny of the -Wicked,” should command the candid attention of all -serious and thoughtful men. The Bible alone can answer -the inquiries of the human mind on these important subjects; -and if the Bible is the full and complete revelation -which it claims to be, we must believe that it has answered -them. What that answer is, the following pages -undertake to show.</p> - -<p class='c011'>On the questions here discussed there is at the present -time a daily-increasing agitation in the theological world. -The frequency with which these topics come to the surface -in the religious papers of the land, is evidence of this. -Not only in this country, but in England and Germany, -the views of Bible students on these points are in a state -of transition. The doctrine that there is no eternal life -out of Christ, and that consequently the punishment of -the wicked is not to be eternal misery, is now able to present -an array of adherents so strong in numbers, so cultivated -in intellect, and so correct at heart, that many of -its opponents are changing their base of operations toward -it, and taking steps looking not only to a toleration of its -existence, but to a compromise with its claims.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In adding another book to the many which have been -written on this subject, the object has been to give in a -<span class='pageno' id='Page_iv'>iv</span>concise manner a more general view of the teaching of -the word of God, the ultimate source of authority, on this -question, than has heretofore been presented. A chapter -on the Claims of Philosophy is appended to the Biblical -argument, more to answer the queries of those who attach -importance to such considerations, than because they -are entitled to any real weight in the determination of -this controversy.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The interest that has of late years arisen on the subject -of the state of the dead, is timely. Spiritualism, with its -foul embrace and pestilential breath, is seeking to spread -its pollutions over all the land; and it appeals to the popular -views of the condition of man in death as a foundation -for its claims. The teaching of the Bible on this -point is the most effectual antidote to that unhallowed -delusion. Before the true light on the intermediate state, -and the destiny of the wicked, not only spiritualism with -its foul brood flees away, but purgatory, saint worship, -universalism, and a host of other errors all go down.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In this period of agitation and transition, let no man -blindly commit himself to predetermined views, but hold -himself ready to follow truth always and everywhere. -Let him hold his sympathies entirely at its disposal. This -is the course of safety; for truth has angels, Christ and -God upon its side; and though it had but one adherent -on the earth, it would triumph all the same. So while -truth can receive no detriment from the combined opposition -of all the world, its adherents, few in number though -they may be, will secure in the end an everlasting gain.</p> - -<div class='c012'>U. S.</div> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Battle Creek</span>, <em>May 2, 1873</em>.</p> -<div class='pbb'> - <hr class='pb c000' /> -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c006'> - <div><span class='pageno' id='Page_5'>5</span>MAN’S NATURE AND DESTINY.</div> - </div> -</div> - -<hr class='c013' /> - -<div> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER I. <br /> <span class='fss'>PRIMARY QUESTIONS.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Gradually the mind awakes to the mystery -of life. Excepting only the first pair, every adult -member of the human race has come up through -the helplessness of infancy and the limited acquirements -of childhood. All have reached -their full capacity to think and do, only by the -slow development of their mental and physical -powers. Without either counsel or co-operation -of our own, we find ourselves on the plane of -human existence, subject to all the conditions of -the race, and hastening forward to its destiny, -whatever it may be.</p> - -<p class='c011'>A retinue of mysterious inquiries throng our -steps. Whence came this order of things? Who -ordained this arrangement? For what purpose -are we here? What is our nature? What are -our obligations? And whither are we bound? -Life, what a mystery! Having commenced, will -it ever end? Once we did not exist; are we -destined to that condition again? Death we see -<span class='pageno' id='Page_6'>6</span>everywhere around us. Its victims are silent, -cold, and still. They give no outward evidence -of retaining any of those faculties, mental, emotional, -or physical, which distinguished them -when living. Is death the end of all these? -And is death the extinction of the race? These -are questions which have ever excited in the -human mind an intensity of thought, and a -strength of feeling, which no other subjects can -produce.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To these questions, so well-defined, so definite -in their demands, and of such all-absorbing interest, -where shall we look for an answer? Have -we any means within our reach by which to solve -these problems? We look abroad upon the earth -and admire its multiplied forms of life and beauty; -we mark the revolving seasons and the uniform -and beneficent operations of nature; we look to -the heavenly bodies and behold their glory, and -the regularity of their mighty motions--do these -answer our questions? They tell us something, -but not all. They tell us of the great Creator -and upholder of all things; for, as the apostle -says, “The invisible things of him from the creation -of the world are clearly seen, being understood -by the things that are made, even his eternal -power and Godhead.” They tell us upon -whom our existence depends and to whom we are -amenable.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But this only intensifies our anxiety a thousand -<span class='pageno' id='Page_7'>7</span>fold. For now we want to know upon -what conditions his favor is suspended. What -must we do to meet his requirements? How -may we secure his approbation? He surely is a -being who will reward virtue and punish sin. -Sometime our deeds must be compared with his -requirements, and sentence be rendered in accordance -therewith. How will this affect our future -existence? Deriving it from him, does he suspend -its continuance on our obedience? or has -he made us self-existent beings, so that we must -live forever, if not in his favor, then the conscious -recipients of his wrath?</p> - -<p class='c011'>With what intense anxiety the mind turns to -the future. What is to be the issue of this mysterious -problem of life? Who can tell? Nature -is silent. We appeal to those who are entering -the dark valley. But who can reveal the mysteries -of those hidden regions till he has explored -them? and the “curtain of the tent into which -they enter, never outward swings.” Sternly -the grave closes its heavy portals against every -attempt to catch a glimpse of the unknown -beyond. Science proves itself a fool on this -momentous question. The imagination breaks -down; and the human mind, unaided, sinks into -a melancholy, but well-grounded, despair.</p> - -<p class='c011'>God must tell us, or we can never know what -lies beyond this state of existence, till we experience -it for ourselves. He who has placed us -<span class='pageno' id='Page_8'>8</span>here, must himself make known to us his purposes -and his will, or we are forever in the dark. -Of this, all reverent and thoughtful minds are -well assured.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Professor Stuart, in his “Exegetical Essays -on Several Words Relating to Future Punishment,” -says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The light of nature can never scatter the darkness in -question. This light has never yet sufficed to make the -question clear to any portion of our benighted race, -whether the soul is immortal. Cicero, incomparably the -most able defender of the soul’s immortality of which the -heathen world can yet boast, very ingenuously confesses -that, after all the arguments which he had adduced in -order to confirm the doctrine in question, it so fell out -that his mind was satisfied of it only when directly employed -in contemplating the arguments adduced in its -favor. At all other times he fell unconsciously into a -state of doubt and darkness. It is notorious, also, that -Socrates, the next most able advocate, among the heathen, -of the same doctrine, has adduced arguments to -establish the never-ceasing existence of the soul which -will not bear the test of examination. If there be any -satisfactory light, then, on the momentous question of a -future state, it must be sought from the word of God.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>H. H. Dobney, Baptist minister, of England -(Future Punishment, p. 107), says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Reason cannot prove man to be immortal. We may -devoutly enter the temple of nature, we may reverently -tread her emerald floor, and gaze on her blue, ‘star-pictured -ceiling,’ but to our anxious inquiry, though -proposed with heart-breaking intensity, the oracle is -dumb, or like those of Delphi and Dodona, mutters only -<span class='pageno' id='Page_9'>9</span>an ambitious reply that leaves us in utter bewilderment.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>And what information have they been able to -give us, who have either been ignorant of divine -revelation, or, having the light, have turned their -backs upon it? Listen to a little of what they -have told us, which sufficiently indicates the -character of the knowledge they possessed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Socrates, when about to drink the fatal hemlock, -said:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“I am going out of the world, and you are to continue -in it; but which of us has the better part, is a secret to -every one but God.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Cicero, after recounting the various opinions of -philosophers on this subject, levels all their systems -to the ground by this ingenuous confession:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Which of these is true, God alone knows, and which -is the most probable, is a very great question.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Seneca, reviewing the arguments of the ancients -on this subject, said:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Immortality, however desirable, was rather promised -than proved by these great men.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>And the skeptic Hobbs, when death was forcing -him from this state of existence, could only -exclaim, with dread uncertainty, “I am taking a -leap in the dark!”--dying words not calculated -to inspire any great degree of comfort and assurance -in the hearts of those who are inclined to -follow in his steps.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_10'>10</span>With a full sense of our need, we turn, then, -to the revelation which God has given us in his -word. Will this answer our inquiries? It is not -a revelation if it does not; for this must be the -very object of a revelation. Logicians tell us -that there is “an antecedent probability in favor -of a divine revelation, arising from the nature of -the Deity and the moral condition of man.” On -the same ground, there must be an equal probability -that, if we are immortal, never-dying beings, -that revelation will plainly tell us so.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To the Bible alone, we look for correct views -on the important subjects of the character of -God, the nature of life and death, the resurrection, -Heaven, and hell. But our views upon all -these, must be, to a great extent, governed by -our views of the nature and destiny of man. On -this subject, therefore, the teachings of the Bible -must, of consistency, be sufficiently clear and full.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Prominent upon the pages of inspiration, we -see pointed out the great distinction which God -has put between right and wrong, the rewards -he has promised to virtue, and the punishment -he has threatened against sin; we find it revealed -that but few, comparatively, will be saved, while -the great majority of our race will be lost; and -as the means by which the perdition of ungodly -men is accomplished, we find described in fearfully -ominous terms, a lake of fire burning with -brimstone, intense and unquenchable.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_11'>11</span>How these facts intensify the importance of -the question, Are all men immortal? Are these -wicked immortal? Is their portion an eternity -of incomprehensible, conscious torture, and unutterable -woe? Have they in their nature a principle -so tenacious of life that the severest implements -of destruction with which the Almighty -can assail it, an eternity of his intensest devouring -fire can make no inroads upon its inviolate -vitality? Fearful questions!--questions in reference -to which it cannot be that the word of -God will leave us in darkness, or perplex us with -doubt, or deceive us with falsehood.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In commending the reader to the word of -God on this great theme, it is unnecessary to suggest -to any candid mind the spirit in which we -should present our inquiries. Prejudice or passion -should not come within the sacred precincts -of such an investigation. If God has plainly revealed -that all the finally impenitent of our race -are doomed to an eternity of conscious misery, -we must accept that fact, however hard it may -be to find any correspondence between the magnitude -of the guilt and the infinitude of the punishment, -and however hard it may be to reconcile -such treatment with the character of a God who -has declared himself to be “<span class='sc'>Love</span>.” If, on the -other hand, the record shows that God’s government -can be vindicated, sin meet its just deserts, -and at the same time such disposition be finally -<span class='pageno' id='Page_12'>12</span>made of the lost, as to relieve the universe from -the horrid spectacle of a hell forever burning, -filled with sensitive beings, frenzied with fire and -flame, and blaspheming in their ever-strengthening -agony--can any one be the less ready to -accept this fact, or hesitate, on this account, to -join in the ascription, “Great and marvelous are -thy works, Lord God Almighty; <em>just and true</em> -are thy ways, thou King of saints”?</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER II. <br /> <span class='fss'>IMMORTAL AND IMMORTALITY.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>In turning to the Bible, our only source of information -on this question, to learn whether or -not man is immortal, the first and most natural -step in the inquiry is to ascertain what use the -Bible makes of the terms “immortal” and “immortality.” -How frequently does it use them? -To whom does it apply them? Of whom does it -make immortality an attribute? Does it affirm -it of man or any part of him?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Should we, without opening the Bible, endeavor -to form an opinion of its teachings from -the current phraseology of modern theology, we -should conclude it to be full of declarations in -the most explicit terms that man is in possession -of an immortal soul and deathless spirit; for the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_13'>13</span>popular religious literature of to-day, which -claims to be a true reflection of the declarations -of God’s word, is full of these expressions. -Glibly they fall from the lips of the religious -teacher. Broadcast they go forth from the religious -press. Into orthodox sermons and prayers -they enter as essential elements. They are -appealed to as the all-prolific source of comfort -and consolation in case of those who mourn the -loss of friends by death. We are told that they -are not dead; for “there is no death; what seems -so is transition;” they have only changed to another -state of being, only gone before; for the soul -is immortal, the spirit never dying; and it cannot -for a moment cease its conscious existence.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This is all right provided the Bible warrants -such declarations. But it is far from safe to conclude -without examination that the Bible does -warrant them; for whoever has read church history -knows that it is little more than a record of -the unceasing attempts of the great enemy of all -truth to corrupt the practices of the professors of -Christianity, and to pervert and obscure the simple -teachings of God’s word with the absurdities -and mysticisms of heathen mythology. It has -been only by the utmost vigilance that any -Christian institution has been preserved, or any -Christian doctrine saved, free from some of the -corruptions of the great systems of false religion -which have always held by far the greater portion -<span class='pageno' id='Page_14'>14</span>of our race in their chains of darkness and -superstition. And if we arraign the creeds of -the six hundred Protestant sects, as containing -many unscriptural dogmas, it is only what every -one of them does, in reference to the other five -hundred and ninety-nine.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To the law, then, and to the testimony. What -say the Scriptures on the subject of immortality?</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Fact</span> 1. The terms “immortal” and “immortality” -are not found in the Old Testament, either -in our English version or in the original Hebrew. -There is, however, one expression, in Gen. 3:4, -which is, perhaps, equivalent in meaning, and -was spoken in reference to the human race; -namely, “Thou shalt not surely die.” But unfortunately -for believers in natural immortality, -this declaration came from one whom no person -would like to acknowledge as the author of his -creed. It is what the devil said to Eve, the terrible -deception by means of which he accomplished -her fall, and so “brought death into the -world and all our woe.” But does not the New -Testament supply this seemingly unpardonable -omission of the Old, by many times affirming -that all men have immortality?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Remembering the many times you have heard -and read from Biblical expositors that you were -in possession of an immortal soul, how many times -do you think that declaration is made in the New -Testament? One hundred times? Fifty? Thirty? -<span class='pageno' id='Page_15'>15</span>Twenty? Ten? No. Five? No. Twice? <em>No.</em> -<span class='sc'>Once?</span> NO! Does not the New Testament -then apply the term immortal to anything? Yes; -and this brings us to</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Fact</span> 2. The term immortal is used but once -in the New Testament, in the English version, -and is then applied to God. The following is the -passage: 1 Tim. 1:17: “Now unto the King -eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be -honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The original word, however, αφθαρτος (<em>aphthartos</em>) -from which immortal is here translated, occurs -in six other instances in the New Testament, -in every one of which it is rendered incorruptible. -The word is defined by Greenfield, “Incorruptible, -immortal, imperishable, undying, enduring.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is used, first, to describe God, in Rom. 1:23, -“And changed the glory of the <em>uncorruptible</em> -God into an image made like to corruptible man, -and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping -things.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is used in 1 Cor. 9:25, to describe the -heavenly crown of the overcomer: “And every -man that striveth for the mastery is temperate -in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible -crown, but we an <em>incorruptible</em>.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is used in 1 Cor. 15:52, to describe the immortal -bodies of the redeemed: “In a moment, -in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; -for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall -<span class='pageno' id='Page_16'>16</span>be raised <em>incorruptible</em>, and we shall be changed.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is used in 1 Tim. 1:17, to describe God as -already quoted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is used in 1 Pet. 1:4, to describe the inheritance -reserved in Heaven for the overcomer: -“To an inheritance <em>incorruptible</em> and undefiled, -that fadeth not away, reserved in Heaven for -you.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is used in 1 Pet. 1:23, to describe the principle -by which regeneration is wrought in us: -“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of -<em>incorruptible</em>, by the word of God, which liveth -and abideth forever.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is used in 1 Pet. 3:4, to describe the heavenly -adorning which we are to labor to secure: -“But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in -that which is <em>not corruptible</em>, even the ornament -of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight -of God of great price.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>And these are all the instances of its use. In -no one of them is it applied to man or any part -of him, as a natural possession. But does not -the last text affirm that man is in possession of a -deathless spirit? The words “incorruptible” and -“spirit” both occur, it is true, in the same verse; -but they do not stand together, another noun and -its adjectives coming in between them; they are -not in the same case, incorruptible being in the -dative, and spirit, in the genitive; they are not -of the same gender, incorruptible being masculine -<span class='pageno' id='Page_17'>17</span>or feminine, and spirit, neuter. What is it -which is in the sight of God of great price? The -ornament of a meek and quiet spirit. What is -the nature of this ornament? It is not destructible -like the laurel wreath, the rich apparel, the -gold and gems with which the unsanctified man -seeks to adorn himself; but it is incorruptible, a -disposition molded by the Spirit of God, some -of the fruit of that heavenly tree which God values. -Does man by nature possess this incorruptible -ornament, this meek and quiet spirit? No; for -we are exhorted to procure and adopt this instead -of the other. This, and this only, the text affirms. -To say that this text proves that man is in possession -of a deathless spirit, is no more consistent -nor logical than it would be to say that Paul declares -that man has an immortal soul, because in -his first epistle to Timothy (1:17), he uses the -word immortal, and in his first epistle to the -Thessalonians (5:23), he uses the word soul. The -argument would be the same in both cases.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Fact</span> 3. The word “immortality” occurs but -five times in the New Testament, in our English -version. The following are the instances:--</p> - -<p class='c011'>In Rom. 2:7, it is set forth as something for -which we are to seek by patient continuance in -well-doing: “To them who by patient continuance -in well-doing seek for glory and honor and -<em>immortality</em>, [God will render] eternal life.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>In 1 Cor. 15:53, 54, it is twice used to describe -<span class='pageno' id='Page_18'>18</span>what this mortal must put on before we can inherit -the kingdom of God: “For this corruptible -must put on incorruption, and this mortal must -put on <em>immortality</em>. So when this corruptible -shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal -shall have put on <em>immortality</em>, then shall be -brought to pass the saying that is written, Death -is swallowed up in victory.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>In 1 Tim. 6:16, it is applied to God, and the -sweeping declaration is made that he alone has -it: “Who only hath <em>immortality</em>, dwelling in -the light which no man can approach unto; -whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom -be honor and power everlasting. Amen.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>In 2 Tim. 1:10, we are told from what source -we receive the true light concerning it, which -forever cuts off the claim that reason or science -can demonstrate it, or that the oracles of heathenism -can make it known to us: “But now is -made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour -Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and -hath brought life and <em>immortality</em> to light -through the gospel.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>How has Christ brought life and immortality -to light? Answer: By abolishing death. There -could have been no life nor immortality without -this; for the race were hopelessly doomed to -death through sin. Then by what means and -for whom has he abolished death? Answer: -By dying for man and rising again, a victor over -<span class='pageno' id='Page_19'>19</span>death; and he has wrought this work only for -those who will accept of it through him; for all -who reject his proffered aid will meet at last the -same fate that would have been the lot of all, -had Christ never undertaken in our behalf. Thus -through the gospel, the good news of salvation -through him, he has brought to light the fact, -not that all men are by nature already in possession -of immortality, but that a way is opened -whereby we may at last gain possession of this -inestimable boon.</p> - -<p class='c011'>As with the word immortal, so with immortality: -the original from which it comes, occurs -a few more times than it is so translated in the -English version. There are two words translated -immortality. These are ἀθανασία (<em>athanasia</em>) -and ἀφθαρσία (<em>aphtharsia</em>). The former is -defined by Greenfield and Robinson simply “immortality,” -and is so translated in every instance. -It occurs three times, in 1 Cor. 15:53, -54; 1 Tim. 6:16, as noticed above. The latter -is defined, by the same authorities, “incorruptibility, -incorruptness; by implication, immortality.” -In addition to the instances above cited, -it occurs in the following passages; in all eight -times:--</p> - -<p class='c011'>1 Cor. 15:42: “So also is the resurrection of -the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised -in <em>incorruption</em>.” In verses 50, 53 and 54, of -the same chapter, it is that <em>incorruption</em> which -<span class='pageno' id='Page_20'>20</span>corruption [our present mortal condition] does -not inherit, and which this corruptible must put -on before we can enter into the kingdom of God. -In Eph. 6:24, it is used to describe the love we -should bear to Christ, and in Titus 2:7, the -quality of the doctrine we should hold, in both -which instances it is translated “sincerity.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>We now have before us all the testimony of -the Bible relative to immortality. So far from -being applied to man, the term is used as in -Rom. 1:23, to point out the contrast between -God and man. God is incorruptible or immortal. -Man is corruptible or mortal. But if the -real man, the essential being, consists of an undecaying -soul, a deathless spirit, he, too, is incorruptible, -and this contrast could not be drawn. -It is placed before us as an object of hope for -which we are to seek: declarations which would -be a fraud and deception if we already have it. -It is used to distinguish between heavenly and -eternal objects, and those that are earthly and -decaying. In view of these facts, no candid -mind can dissent from the following</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Conclusion</span>: So far as its use of the terms -“immortal” and “immortality” is concerned, -the Bible contains no proof that man is in possession -of an undying nature.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_21'>21</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER III. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE IMAGE OF GOD.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>If man is immortal, we should naturally suppose -that the Bible would make known so weighty -a truth in some of the instances where it has had -occasion to use the words immortal and immortality. -Where else could it more properly be -revealed? And the fact that its use of those -terms affords no proof that man is in possession -of this great attribute, but rather that it belongs -to God alone, should cause a person to receive -with great allowance the positive assertions of -popular theology on this question. Nevertheless -it is supposed that there are other sources from -which proof can be drawn that man has a hold -on life equal with that of Jehovah himself; so -that he will live as long as God exists.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The first of these is the opening testimony of -the Bible concerning man, which asserts that he -was to be made in the image of God. Gen. 1:26, -27: “And God said, Let us make man in our -image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion -over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl -of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the -earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth -upon the earth. So God created man in his -own image, in the image of God created he him; -male and female created he them.”</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_22'>22</span>The first impulse of a person unacquainted -with this controversy would be to ask in astonishment -what this has to do with the immortality -of man; nor would his astonishment be in any -wise diminished when he heard the reply that -as God is immortal, man, made in his image, -must be immortal also. Has God, then, no other -attribute but immortality, that we must confine -it to this? Is not God omnipotent? Yes. -Is man? No. Is not God omnipresent? Yes. -Is man? No. Is not God omniscient? Yes. -Is man? No. Is not God independent and self-existent? -Yes. Is man? No. Is not God infallible? -Yes. Is man? No. Then why single -out the one attribute of immortality, and -make the likeness of man to God consist wholly -in this? In the form of a syllogism the popular -argument stands thus:--</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Major Premise</em>: God is immortal. 1 Tim. -1:17.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Minor Premise</em>: Man is created in the image -of God. Gen. 1:27.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Conclusion</em>: Therefore man is immortal.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This is easily quashed by another equally good, -thus:--</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. God is omnipotent.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. Man is made in the image of God.</p> - -<p class='c011'>3. Therefore man is omnipotent.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This conclusion, by being brought within the -cognizance of our senses, becomes more obviously, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_23'>23</span>though it is not more essentially, absurd. It -shows either that the argument for immortality -drawn from the image of God, is unqualified assumption, -or that puny and finite man is clothed -with all the attributes of the deity.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In what respect, then, is man in the image of -his Maker? A universal rule of interpretation, -applying to Bible language as well as any other, -is to allow every word its most obvious and -literal import, unless some plain reason exists -for giving it a mystical or figurative meaning. -The plain and literal definition of image is, as -given by Webster, “An imitation, representation -or similitude of any person or thing, sculptured, -drawn, painted, or otherwise made <em>perceptible to -the sight</em>; a <em>visible</em> presentation; a copy; a likeness; -an effigy.” We have italicized a portion -of this definition as containing an essential idea. -An image must be something that is visible -to the eye. How can we conceive of an image -of anything that is not perceptible to the sight, -and which we cannot take cognizance of by any -of the senses? Even an image formed in the -mind must be conceived of as having some sort -of outward shape or form. In this sense, of having -outward form, the word is used in each of -the thirty-one times of its occurrence elsewhere -in the Old Testament.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The second time the word image is used, it is -used to show the relation existing between son -<span class='pageno' id='Page_24'>24</span>and father, and is a good comment on the relation -which Gen. 1:26, 27, asserts to exist between -man and God. Gen. 5:3: “And Adam -lived an hundred and thirty years and begat a -son in his own likeness, after his image.” No -one would think of referring this to anything -but physical resemblance. Now put the two -passages together. Moses first asserts that God -made man in his own image, after his likeness, -and a few chapters farther on asserts that this -same man begat a son in his own likeness, after -his image. And, while all must admit that this -latter refers to bodily form or physical shape, the -theological schools tell us that the former, from -the same writer, and with no intimation that it -is used in any other sense, must refer solely to -the attribute of immortality. Is not this taking -unwarrantable liberty with the inspired testimony? -There is no room for any other conclusion -than that just as a son is, in outward -appearance, the image of his father, so man possesses, -not the nature and attributes of God in -all their perfection, but a likeness or image of -him in his physical form.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It may be said that the word image is used in -a different sense in the New Testament, as, for -example, in Col. 3:9, 10: “Lie not one to another, -seeing that ye have put off the old man -with his deeds, and have put on the new man, -which is renewed in knowledge after the image -<span class='pageno' id='Page_25'>25</span>of him that created him.” Let it ever be borne -in mind that the point which popular theology -has to prove is that man is immortal because in -the image of God. This text is against that -view; for that which is here said to be in the -image of Him that created him, is not the natural -man himself, but the new man which is put -on, implying that the image had been destroyed, -and could be restored only in Christ. If, therefore, -it meant immortality as used by Moses, this -text would show that that immortality was not -absolute, but contingent, and, having been lost -by the race, can be regained only through Christ.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Eph. 4:24, shows how this new man is created: -“And that ye put on the new man, which -after God is created in righteousness and true -holiness.” Nothing is said about immortality -even in connection with the new man.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again: The word here translated image (ἐικων) -is defined by Greenfield, as meaning by metonymy, -“an exemplar, model, pattern, standard, -Col. 3:10.” No such definition as this is given -by Gesenius to the word in Genesis. So, though -this Greek word may here have this sense, it -affords no evidence that the Hebrew word in -Gen. 1:26, 27, can refer to anything else but the -outward form.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The same reasoning will apply to 1 Cor. 15:49, -where the “image of the heavenly,” which -is promised to the righteous, is something which -<span class='pageno' id='Page_26'>26</span>is not in possession of the natural man, but will -be attained through the resurrection: “we <em>shall</em> -bear the image of the heavenly.” It cannot -therefore refer to the image stamped upon man -at his creation, unless it be admitted that that -image, with all its included privileges, has been -lost by the human race--an admission fatal to -the hypothesis of the believers in the natural -immortality of man.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In 1 Cor. 11:7, we read that man, as contrasted -with the woman, is “the image and -glory of God.” To make the expression “image -of God” here mean immortality, is to confine it -to man, and rob the better part of the human -race of this high prerogative.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In Gen. 9:6, we read: “Whoso sheddeth -man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed; -for in the image of God made he man.” Substituting -what the image is here claimed to mean, -we should have this very singular reading: -“Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his -blood be shed; for he made him immortal, and -his life cannot be taken.” Evidently the reference -in all such passages is, not only to “the human -face divine,” but to the whole physical -frame, which, in comparison with all other forms -of animated existence, is upright and godlike.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But here the mystical interpretation of our -current theology has thrown up what is considered -an insuperable objection to this view; for -<span class='pageno' id='Page_27'>27</span>how can man be physically in the image of God, -when God is not a person, is without form, and -has neither body nor parts? In reply, we ask, -Where does the Bible say that God is a formless, -impersonal being, having neither body nor parts? -Does it not say that he is a spirit? John 4:24. -Yes; and we inquire again, Does it not say that -the angels are spirits? Heb. 1:7, 14. And are -not the angels, saying nothing of those instances -in which they have appeared to men in bodily -form, and always in human shape (Gen. 18:1-8, -16-22; 32:24; Hos. 12:4; Num. 22:31; Judges -13:6, 13; Luke 1:11, 13, 28, 29; Acts 12:7-9; -&c., &c.), always spoken of as beings having -bodily form? A spirit, or spiritual being, as -God is, in the highest sense, so far from not having -a bodily form, must possess it, as the instrumentality -for the manifestation of his powers. -1 Cor. 15:44.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again, it is urged that God is omnipresent; -and how can this be, if he is a person? Answer: -He has a representative, his Holy Spirit, by -which he is ever present and ever felt in all -his universe. “Whither shall I go,” asks David, -“from thy Spirit? or whither shall I flee -from thy presence?” Ps. 139:7. And John -saw standing before the throne of God seven -Spirits, which are declared to be “the seven -Spirits of God,” and which are <a id='corr27.28'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='sent'>“sent</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_27.28'><ins class='correction' title='sent'>“sent</ins></a></span> forth into all -the earth.” Rev. 4:5; 5:6.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_28'>28</span>We now invite the attention of the reader to a -little of the evidence that may be presented to -show that God is a person, and so that man, -though of course in an imperfect and finite degree, -may be an image, or likeness of him, as to -his bodily form.</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. God has made visible to mortal eyes parts -of his person. Moses saw the God of Israel. -Ex. 33:21-23. An immaterial being, if such a -thing can be conceived of, without body or parts, -cannot be seen with mortal eyes. To say that -God assumed a body and shape for this occasion, -places the common view in a worse light still; -for it is virtually charging upon God a double deception: -first, giving Moses to understand that -he was a being with body and parts, and, secondly, -under the promise of showing himself, -showing him something that was <em>not</em> himself. -And he told Moses that he would put his hand -over him as he passed by, and then take it away, -that he might see his back parts, but not his face. -Has he hands? has he back parts? has he a -face? If not, why try to convey ideas by means -of language?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again, Moses, Aaron, Nadab, Abihu, and seventy -of the elders, saw the God of Israel. Ex. 24:9-11. -“And there was under his feet as it were -a paved work of a sapphire stone.” Has he feet? -Or is the record that these persons saw them, a -fabrication? No man, to be sure, has seen his -<span class='pageno' id='Page_29'>29</span>face, nor could he do it and live, as God has declared. -Ex. 33:20; John 1:18.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. Christ, as manifested among men, is declared -to be the image of God, and in his form. Christ -showed, after his resurrection, that his immortal, -though not then glorified, body, had flesh and -bones. Luke 24:29. Bodily he ascended into -Heaven where none can presume to deny him a -local habitation. Acts 1:9-11; Eph. 1:20; -Heb. 8:1. But Paul, speaking of this same Jesus, -says, “Who is the image of the invisible God, -the firstborn of every creature.” Col. 1:15. -Here the antithesis expressed is between God -who is invisible, and his image in the person of -Christ which was visible. It follows, therefore, -that what of Christ the disciples could see, which -was his bodily form, was the image, to give them -an idea of God, whom they could not see.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again: “Let this mind be in you which was -also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of -God, thought it not robbery to be equal with -God.” Phil. 2:5, 6. It remains to be told how -Christ could be in the form of God, and yet God -have no form.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Once more: “God who at sundry times, and -in divers manners, spake in time past unto the -fathers by the prophets, hath in these last days -spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed -heir of all things, by whom also he made -the worlds; who being the brightness of his -<span class='pageno' id='Page_30'>30</span>glory, and the <em>express image of his person</em>,” &c. -Heb. 1:1-3. This testimony is conclusive. It -is an inspired declaration that God has a personal -form; and to give an idea of what that -form is, it declares that Christ, just as we conceive -of him as ascended up bodily on high, is -the express image thereof.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The evidence already presented shows that -there is no necessity for making the image of -God in which man was created to consist of anything -else but bodily form. But to whatever -else persons may be inclined to apply it, Paul in -his testimony to the Romans, forever destroys -the possibility of making it apply to immortality. -He says, Rom. 1:22, 23: “Professing themselves -to be wise, they became fools, and changed the -glory of the uncorruptible God into an image -made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and -fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.” The -word here rendered uncorruptible is the same -word that is translated immortal and applied to -God in 1 Tim. 1:17. Now if God by making -man in <a id='corr30.23'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='hisim age'>his image</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_30.23'><ins class='correction' title='hisim age'>his image</ins></a></span> stamped him with immortality, -man is just as incorruptible as God himself. -But Paul says that he is not so; that while God -is uncorruptible or immortal, man is corruptible -or mortal. The image of God does not therefore, -confer immortality.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_31'>31</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER IV. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE BREATH OF LIFE.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Gen. 1:27, states, in general terms, the form -in which man was created, as contrasted with -other orders of animal life. In Gen. 2:7, the -process is described by which this creation was -accomplished. Finding no proof in the former -passage that man was put in possession of immortality -(see preceding chapter) we turn to the -latter text to examine the claims based upon -that. The verse reads: “And the Lord God -formed man of the dust of the ground, and -breathed into his nostrils the breath of life: and -man became a living soul.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Here the advocates of man’s natural immortality -endeavor to make a strong stand, as it is very -proper they should do; for certainly if in that inspired -record which describes the building up of -man, the putting together of the different parts or -constituent elements of which he is composed, there -is no testimony that he was clothed with immortality, -and no hook furnished upon which an argument -for such an attribute can be hung, their -whole system is shaken to its very foundation.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The claim based upon this passage is that man -is composed of two parts: the body formed of the -dust of the ground, and an immortal soul placed -<span class='pageno' id='Page_32'>32</span>therein by God’s breathing into the nostrils of -that dust-formed body the breath of life. We -will let two representative men speak on this -point, and state the popular view. Thomas -Scott, D. D., on Gen. 2:7, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The Lord not only gave man life in common with the -other animals which had bodies formed of the same materials; -but immediately communicated from himself the -<em>rational soul</em>, here denoted by the <em>expression of breathing -into his nostrils the breath of life</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Adam Clarke, LL. D., on Gen. 2:7, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“In the most distinct manner God shows us that man -is a compound being, having a body and soul distinctly -and separately created, the body out of the dust of the -earth, <em>the soul immediately breathed from God himself</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Critics speak of this expression in a different -manner from theologians; for whereas the latter -make it confer immortality, and raise man in this -respect to the same plane with his Maker, the -former speak of it as suggestive of man’s frail -nature, and his precarious tenure of life itself. -Thus Dr. Conant says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“In whose nostrils is breath. Only breath, so frail a -principle of life, and so easily extinguished.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>And in a note on Isa. 2:22, where the prophet -says, “Cease ye from man whose breath is in his -nostrils; for wherein is he to be accounted of?” -he adds:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Not as in the common English version, ‘whose breath -is in his nostrils;’ for where else should it be? The objection -<span class='pageno' id='Page_33'>33</span>is not to its place in the body, which is the proper -one for it, but to its <em>frail and perishable nature</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>To the same intent the psalmist speaks, Ps. -146:3, 4: “Put not your trust in princes, nor in -the son of man, in whom there is no help. <em>His -breath goeth forth</em>, he returneth to his earth; in -that very day his thoughts perish.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>But let us examine the claim that the “breath -of life” which God breathed into man conferred -upon him the attribute of immortality. There -was nothing naturally immortal, certainly, in the -dust of which Adam was composed. Whatever -of immortality he had, therefore, after receiving -the breath of life, must have existed in that -breath in itself considered. Hence, it must follow -that the “breath of life” confers immortality -upon any creature to which it is given. Will -our friends accept this issue? If not, they abandon -the argument; for certainly it can confer no -more upon man than upon any other being. -And if they do accept it, we will introduce to -them a class of immortal associates not very flattering -to their vanity nor to their argument; for -Moses applies the very same expression to all the -lower orders of the animal creation.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In Gen. 7:15, we read: “And they went in -unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, -wherein is the breath of life.” It must be evident -to every one, at a glance, that the whole -animal creation, including man, is comprehended -<span class='pageno' id='Page_34'>34</span>in the phrase “all flesh.” But verses 21 and 22 -contain stronger expressions still: “And all flesh -died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, -and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping -thing that creepeth upon the face of the earth, -and every man. <em>All in whose nostrils was the -breath of life</em>, of all that was in the dry land, -died.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Here the different orders of animals are named, -and man is expressly mentioned with them; and -all alike are said to have had in their nostrils the -breath of life. It matters not that we are not -told in the case of the lower animals how this -breath was conferred, as in the case of man; for -the immortality, if there is any in this matter, -must reside, as we have seen, in the breath itself, -not in the manner of its bestowal; and here it is -affirmed that all creatures possess it; and of the -animals, it is declared, as well as of man, that it -resides in their nostrils.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is objected that in Gen. 2:7, the “breath of -life” as applied to man is plural, “breath of lives” -(see Clarke), meaning both animal life, and that -immortality which is the subject of our investigation. -But, we reply, it is the same form in Gen. -7:22, where it is applied to all animals; and if -the reader will look at the margin of this latter -text he will see that the expression is stronger -still, “the breath of the spirit of life” or of lives.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The language which Solomon uses respecting -<span class='pageno' id='Page_35'>35</span>both men and beasts strongly expresses their -common mortality: “For that which befalleth -the sons of men, befalleth beasts; even one thing -befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the -other; yea, <em>they have all one breath</em>; so that a -man [in this respect] hath no pre-eminence -above a beast; for all is vanity. All go unto -one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to -dust again.” Eccl. 3:19, 20.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus the advocates of natural immortality -by appealing to Moses’ record respecting the -breath of life, are crushed beneath the weight of -their own arguments; for if “the breath of life” -proves immortality for man, it must prove the -same for every creature to which it is given. -The Bible affirms that all orders of the animal -creation that live upon the land, possess it. -Hence our opponents are bound to concede the -immortality of birds, beasts, bugs, beetles, and -every creeping thing. We are sometimes accused -of bringing man down by our argument to -a level with the beast. What better is this argument -of our friends which brings beasts and -reptiles up to a level with man? We deny the -charge that we are doing the one, and shall be -pardoned for declining to do the other.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_36'>36</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER V. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE LIVING SOUL.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Finding no immortality for man in the breath -of life which God breathed into man’s nostrils at -the commencement of his mysterious existence, -it remains to inquire if it resides in the “living -soul,” which man, as the result of that action, -immediately became. “And the Lord God -formed man of the dust of the ground, and -breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and -man became a living soul.” Gen. 2:7.</p> - -<p class='c011'>On this point also it is proper to let the representatives -of the popular view define their position. -Prof. H. Mattison, on the verse just -quoted, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“That this act was the infusion of a spiritual nature -into the body of Adam, is evident from the following considerations: -The phrase, ‘breath of life,’ is rendered -breath of lives by all Hebrew scholars. Not only did animal -life then begin, but another and higher life which -constituted him not only a mere animal, but a ‘living -soul.’ He was a body before,--he is now more than a -body, a soul and body united. If he was a ‘soul’ before, -then how could he become such by the last act of -creation? And if he was not a soul before, but now became -one, then the soul must have been superadded to -his former material nature.”--<cite>Discussion with Storrs</cite>, p. -14.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Dr. Clarke, on Gen. 2:7, says:--</p> - -<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_37'>37</span></div> -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“In the most distinct manner God shows us that man -is a <em>compound</em> being, having a body and soul distinctly -and separately created; the body out of the dust of the -earth, the soul immediately breathed from God himself.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>To the same end see the reasonings of Landis, -Clark (D. W.), and others. Aware of the importance -to their system of maintaining this interpretation, -they very consistently rally to its -support the flower of their strength. It is the -redan of their works, and they cannot be blamed -for being unwilling to surrender it without a decisive -struggle. For if there is nothing in the -inspired record of the formation of man, that record -which undertakes to give us a correct view -of his nature, to show that he is endowed with -immortality, their system is not only shaken to -its foundation, but even the foundation itself is -swept entirely away.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The vital point, to which they bend all their -energies, is somehow to show that a distinct entity, -an intelligent part, an immortal soul, was -brought near to that body as it lay there perfect -in its organization, and thrust therein, which immediately -began through the eyes of that body -to see, through its ears to hear, through its lips -to speak, and through its nerves to feel. Query: -Was this soul capable of performing all these -functions before it entered the body? If it was, -why thrust it within this prison house? If it -was not, will it be capable of performing them -after it leaves the body?</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_38'>38</span>Heavy drafts are made on rhetoric in favor of -this superadded soul. Figures of beauty are -summoned to lend to the argument their aid. -An avalanche of flowers is thrown upon it, to -adorn its strength, or perchance to hide its weakness. -But when we search for the logic, we find -it a chain of sand. Right at the critical point, -the argument fails to connect; and so after all -their expenditure of effort, after all their lofty -flights, and sweating toil, their conclusion comes -out--blank assumption. Why? Because they -are endeavoring to reach a result which they -are dependent upon the text to establish, but -which the text directly contradicts. The record -does not say that God formed a body, and put -therein a superadded soul, to use that body as -an instrument; but he formed <em>man</em> of the dust. -That which was formed of the dust was the man -himself, not simply an instrument for the man to -use when he should be put therein. Adam was -just as essentially a man before the breath of life -was imparted, as after that event. This was the -difference: before, he was a dead man; afterward, -a living one. The organs were all there ready -for their proper action. It only needed the vitalizing -principle of the breath of life to set them -in motion. That came, and the lungs began to -expand, the heart to beat, the blood to flow, and -the limbs to move; then was exhibited all the -phenomena of physical action; then, too, the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_39'>39</span>brain began to act, and there was exhibited all -the phenomena of mental action, perception, -thought, memory, will, &c.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The engine is an engine before the motive -power is applied. The bolts, bars, pistons, -cranks, shafts, and wheels, are all there. The -parts designed to move are ready for action. But -all is silent and still. Apply the steam, and it -springs, as it were, into a thing of life, and gives -forth all its marvelous exhibitions of celerity and -power.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So with man. When the breath of life was -imparted, which, as we have seen was given in -common to all the animal creation, that simply -was applied which set the machine in motion. -No separate and independent organization was -added, but a change took place in the man himself. -The man <em>became</em> something, or reached a -condition which before he had not attained. The -verb “became” is defined by Webster, “to pass -from one state to another; to enter into some -state or condition, by a change from another state -or condition, or by assuming or receiving new -properties or qualities, additional matter or a new -character.” And Gen. 2:7, is then cited as an -illustration of this definition. But it will be -seen that none of these will fit the popular idea -of the superadded soul; for that is not held to -be simply a change in Adam’s condition, or a -new property or quality of his being, or an addition -<span class='pageno' id='Page_40'>40</span>of matter, or a new character; but a separate -and independent entity, capable, without the -body, of a higher existence than with it. The -boy becomes a man; the acorn, an oak; the egg, -an eagle; the chrysalis, a butterfly; but the capabilities -of the change all inhere in the object -which experiences it. A superadded, independent -soul could not have been put into man, and -be said to have <em>become</em> that soul. Yet it is said -of Adam, that he, on receiving the breath of life, -<em>became</em> a living soul. An engine is put into a -ship, and by its power propels it over the face of -the deep; but the ship, by receiving the engine, -does not become the engine, nor the engine the -ship. No sophistry, even from the darkest -depths of its alchemy, can bring up and attach to -the word “become” a definition which will make -it mean, as applied to any body, the addition of -a distinct and separate organization to that -body.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To the inquiry of Prof. Mattison, “If he was ‘a -soul’ before, then how could he become such by -the last act of creation,” it may be replied, The -antithesis is not based upon the word soul, but -upon the word living. This will become evident -by trying to read the passage without this word: -“And the Lord God breathed into his nostrils -the breath of life, and man became a soul.” That -is not it. He became a <em>living</em> soul. He was a -soul before, but not a living soul. To thus speak -<span class='pageno' id='Page_41'>41</span>of a dead soul, may provoke from some a sneer; -nevertheless, the Hebrews so used the terms. -See Num. 6:6: “He shall come at no dead body,” -on which Cruden says, “in Hebrew, dead soul.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Kitto, in his Relig. Encyclopedia, under the -term Adam, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“And Jehovah God formed the man (Heb., the Adam) -dust from the ground, and blew into his nostrils the -breath of life, and man became a <em>living animal</em>. Some of -our readers may be surprised at our having translated -<em>nephesh chaiyah</em> by living animal. There are good interpreters -and preachers who, confiding in the common -translation, living soul, have maintained that here is intimated -a distinctive pre-eminence above the inferior animals, -as possessed of an immaterial and immortal spirit. -But, however true that distinction is, and supported by -abundant argument from both philosophy and the Scriptures, -we should be acting unfaithfully if we were to assume -its being <em>contained</em> or <em>implied</em> in this passage.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The “abundant argument from both philosophy -and the Scriptures” for man’s immortal -spirit, may be more difficult to find than many -suppose. But this admission that nothing of the -kind is implied in this passage, is a gratifying -triumph of fair and candid criticism over what -has been almost universally believed and taught.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But we are not left to our own reasoning on -this point; for inspiration itself has given us a -comment upon the passage in question; and certainly -it is safe to let one inspired writer explain -the words of another.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_42'>42</span>Paul, in 1 Cor. 15:44, and onward, is contrasting -the first Adam with the second, and our present -state with the future. He says: “There is a -natural body and there is a spiritual body. And -so it is written, The first man Adam was made a -living soul, the last Adam was made a quickening -spirit.” Here Paul refers directly to the facts -recorded in Gen. 2:7. In verse 47, he tells us -the nature of this man that was made a living -soul: “The first man is of the earth, earthy; the -second man is the Lord from Heaven.” In verse -49, he says, “And as we have borne the image of -the earthy,” have been, like Adam, living souls, -“we shall also bear the image of the heavenly,” -when our bodies are fashioned like unto his glorious -body. Phil. 3:21. In verses 50 and 53, -he tells us why it is necessary that this should -be done, and how it will be accomplished: “Now -this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot -inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption -inherit incorruption. For this corruptible -must put on incorruption, and this mortal -must put on immortality.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Putting these declarations all together, what -do we have? We have a very explicit statement -that this first man, this living soul which Adam -was made, was of the earth, earthy, did not bear -the image of the heavenly in its freedom from a -decaying nature, did not possess that incorruption -without which we cannot inherit the kingdom of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_43'>43</span>God, but was wholly mortal and corruptible. -Would people allow these plain and weighty -words of the apostle their true meaning upon -this question, it would not only summarily arrest -all controversy over the particular text under -consideration, but leave small ground, at least -from the teachings of the Scriptures, to argue for -the natural immortality of man.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But the terms “living soul” like the breath of -life, are applied to all orders of the animate creation, -to beasts and reptiles, as well as to man. -The Hebrew words are <em>nephesh chaiyah</em>; and -these words are in the very first chapter of Genesis -four times applied to the lower orders of animals: -Gen. 1:20, 21, 24, 30. On Gen. 1:21, Dr. -A. Clarke offers this comment:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“<em>Nephesh chaiyah</em>; a general term to express all creatures -endued with animal life, in any of its infinitely varied -gradations, from the half-reasoning elephant down to -the stupid potto, or lower still, to the polype, which seems -equally to share the vegetable and animal life.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>This is a valuable comment on the meaning of -these words. He would have greatly enhanced -the utility of that information, if he had told us -that the same words are applied to man in Gen. -2:7.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Prof. Bush, in his notes on this latter text, -says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The phrase living soul is in the foregoing narrative -repeatedly applied to the inferior orders of animals which -<span class='pageno' id='Page_44'>44</span>are not considered to be possessed of a ‘soul’ in the sense -in which that term is applied to man. It would seem to -mean the same, therefore, when spoken of man, that it -does when spoken of beasts, viz.: an animated being, a -creature possessed of life and sensation, and capable of -performing all the physical functions by which animals are -distinguished, as eating, drinking, walking, &c.... -Indeed it may be remarked that the Scriptures generally -afford much less <em>explicit</em> evidence of the existence of a -sentient immaterial principle in man, capable of living -and acting separate from the body, than is usually supposed.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>And there is nothing in the term “living” to -imply that the life with which Adam was then -endowed would continue forever; for these living -souls are said to die. Rev. 16:3: “And every -living soul died in the sea.” Whether this means -men navigating its surface or the animals living -in its waters, it is equally to the point as showing -that that which is designated by the terms -“living soul,” whatever it is, is subject to death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Staggered by the fact (and unable to conceal -it) that the terms “living soul” are applied to -all animals, the advocates of man’s immortality -then undertake to make the word “became” the -pivot of their argument. Man “became” a living -soul, but it is not said of the beasts that they -became such; hence this must denote the addition -of something to man which the animals did -not receive. And in their anxiety to make this -appear, they surreptitiously insert the idea that -<span class='pageno' id='Page_45'>45</span>the animal life of man is derived from the dust -of the ground, and that something of a higher -nature was imparted to man by the breath of -life which was breathed into him, and the living -soul which he became. Thus Mr. Landis, in his -work, “The Immortality of the Soul,”<a id='rA' /><a href='#fA' class='c014'><sup>[A]</sup></a> p. 141, -says: “Hence something was to be added to the -mere animal life derived from the dust of the -ground.” Now Mr. L. ought to know, and knowing, -ought to have the candor to admit, that no -life at all is derived from the dust of the ground. -All the life that Adam had was imparted by the -breath of life which God breathed into his nostrils, -which breath all breathing animals, no matter -how they obtained it, possessed as well as he.</p> - -<div class='footnote' id='fA'> -<p class='c011'><a href='#rA'>A</a>. “The Immortality of the Soul and the Final Condition of the -Wicked Carefully Considered. By Robert W. Landis. New -York: Published by Carlton and Porter.” This is a work of -518 pages, and being issued under the patronage of the great -Methodist Book Concern, we take it to be a representative work, -and shall occasionally refer to its positions.</p> -</div> - -<p class='c011'>No emphasis can be attached to the word “became:” -for everything that is called a living soul -must by some process have become such. “Whatever -was or is first <em>became</em> what it was or is.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Take the case of Eve. She was formed of a -rib of Adam, made of pre-existent matter. It is -not said of her that God breathed into her nostrils -the breath of life, or that she became a living -soul; yet no one claims that her nature was -essentially different from that of Adam with -<span class='pageno' id='Page_46'>46</span>whom she was associated, as a fitting companion.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And it will be further seen that this word “became” -can have no value in the argument, unless -the absurd principle be first set up as truth, that -whatever becomes anything must forever remain -what it has become.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Defenders of the popular view, by such reasoning -reduce their argument to its last degree of attenuation; -but here its assumption becomes so -transparent that it has no longer power to mislead, -and needs no further reply.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER VI. <br /> <span class='fss'>WHAT IS SOUL? WHAT IS SPIRIT?</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The discussion of Gen. 2:7 (as in the preceding -chapter), brings directly before us for solution -the question, What is meant by the terms soul -and spirit, as applied to man? Some believers -in unconditional immortality point triumphantly -to the fact that the terms soul and spirit are -used in reference to the human race, as though -that settled the question, and placed an insuperable -embargo upon all further discussion. This -arises simply from their not looking into this -matter with sufficient thoroughness to see that -all we question in the case is the popular definition -that is given to these terms. We do not -<span class='pageno' id='Page_47'>47</span>deny that man has a soul and spirit; we only -say that if our friends will show that the Bible -anywhere attaches to them the meaning with -which modern theology has invested them, they -will supply what has thus far been a perpetual -lack, and forever settle this controversy.</p> - -<p class='c011'>What do theologians tell us these terms signify? -Buck, in his Theological Dictionary, says: -“Soul, that vital, immaterial, active substance or -principle in man whereby he perceives, remembers, -reasons, and wills.” On spirit, he says: -“An incorporeal being or intelligence; in which -sense God is said to be a spirit, as are the angels -and the human soul.” On man, he says: “The -constituent and essential parts of man created by -God are two: body and soul. The one was -made out of dust; the other was breathed into -him.” This soul, he further says, “is a spiritual -substance;” and then, apparently feeling not -exactly safe in calling that a <em>substance</em> which he -claims to be <em>immaterial</em>, he bewilders it by saying -“subsistence,” and then adds, “immaterial, -immortal.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>This position strikes us as considerably open -to criticism. On this definition of “soul,” how -can we deny it to the lower animals? for they -“perceive, remember, reason, and will.” And, if -spirit means the “human soul,” the question -arises, Has man two immortal elements in his -nature? for the Bible applies both terms to him -<span class='pageno' id='Page_48'>48</span>at the same time. Paul, to the Thessalonians, -says: “And I pray God your whole spirit and -soul and body be preserved blameless unto the -coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Does Paul -here use tautology, by applying to man two -terms meaning the same thing? That would be -a serious charge against his inspiration. Then -has man two immortal parts, soul and spirit -both? This would evidently be overdoing the -matter; for, where one is enough, two are a -burden. And further, on this hypothesis, would -these two immortal parts exist hereafter as two -independent and separate beings?</p> - -<p class='c011'>This idea being preposterous, one question -more remains: Which of these two is the immortal -part? Is it the soul or the spirit? It -cannot be both; and it matters not to us which -is the one chosen. But we want to know what -the decision is between the two. If they say -that what we call the soul is the immortal part, -then they give up such texts as Eccl. 12:7: -“The spirit shall return to God who gave it;” -and Luke 23:46, “Into thy hands I commend -my spirit,” &c. On the other hand, if they claim -that it is the spirit which is the immortal part, -then they give up such texts as Gen. 35:18: -“And it came to pass as her soul was in departing -(for she died);” and 1 Kings 17:21, “Let -this child’s soul come into him again.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>And, further, if the body and soul are both -<span class='pageno' id='Page_49'>49</span><em>essential</em> parts of man, as Mr. B. affirms, how -can either exist as a distinct, conscious, and perfect -being without the other?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Foreseeing these difficulties, Smith, in his Bible -Dictionary, distinguishes between soul and -spirit thus: “Soul (Heb. <em>nephesh</em>, Gr. ψυχὴ). -One of three parts of which man was anciently -believed to consist. The term ψυχὴ, is sometimes -used to denote the vital principle, sometimes the -sentient principle, or seat of the senses, desires, -affections, appetites, passions. In the latter -sense, it is distinguished from πνευμα [<em>pneuma</em>], -the higher rational nature. This distinction appears -in the Septuagint, and sometimes in the -New Testament. 1 Thess. 5:23.” Then he -quotes Olshausen on 1 Thess. 5:23, as saying: -“For whilst the ψυχὴ [soul] denotes the lower -region of the spiritual man,--comprises, therefore, -the powers to which analogous ones are -found in <em>animal</em> life also, as understanding, -appetitive faculty, memory, fancy,--the πνευμα -[<em>pneuma</em>] includes those capacities which constitute -the true human life.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>So it seems that, according to these expositors, -while the Hebrew <em>nephesh</em>, and Greek <em>psuche</em>, -usually translated soul, denote powers common -to all animal life, the Hebrew <em>ruach</em>, and the -corresponding Greek <em>pneuma</em>, signify the higher -powers, and consequently that part which is supposed -to be immortal.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_50'>50</span>Now let us inquire what meaning the sacred -writers attach to these terms. As already stated, -the original words from which soul and spirit are -translated, are, for soul, <em>nephesh</em> in the Hebrew, -and <em>psuche</em> in the Greek, and for spirit, <em>ruach</em> in -the Hebrew, and <em>pneuma</em> in the Greek. To -these no one is at liberty to attach any arbitrary -meaning. We must determine their signification -by the sense in which they are used in the sacred -record; and whoever goes beyond that, does violence -to the word of God.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The word <em>nephesh</em> occurs 745 times in the Old -Testament, and is translated by the term soul -about 473 times. In every instance in the Old -Testament where the word soul occurs, it is from -<em>nephesh</em>, with the exception of Job 30:15, where -it comes from <i>n’dee-vah</i>, and Isa. 57:16, where -it is from <i>n’shah-mah</i>. But the mere use of the -word soul determines nothing; for it cannot be -claimed to signify an immortal part, until we -somewhere find immortality affirmed of it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Besides the word soul, <em>nephesh</em>, is translated life -and lives, as in Gen. 1:20, 30, in all 118 times. It -is translated person, as in Gen. 14:21, in all 29 -times. It is translated mind, as in Gen. 23:8, in -all 15 times. It is translated heart, as in Ex. -23:9, in all 15 times. It is translated body, or -dead body, as in Num. 6:6, in all 11 times. It -is translated will, as in Ps. 27:12, in all 4 times. -It is translated appetite, as in Prov. 23:2, twice; -<span class='pageno' id='Page_51'>51</span>lust, as in Ps. 78:18, twice; thing, as in Lev. -11:10, twice.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Besides the foregoing, it is rendered by the -various pronouns, and by the words, breath, -beast, fish, creature, ghost, pleasure, desire, &c., -in all forty-three different ways. <em>Nephesh</em> is -never rendered spirit.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This soul (<em>nephesh</em>) is represented as in danger -of the grave, Ps. 49:14, 15; 89:88; Job 33:18, -20, 22; Isa. 38:17. It is also spoken of as liable -to be destroyed, killed, &c., Gen. 17:14; Ex. 31:14; -Josh. 10:30, 32, 35, 37, 39, &c.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Parkhurst, author of a Greek and a Hebrew -Lexicon, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“As a noun, <em>neh-phesh</em> hath been supposed to signify -the spiritual part of man, or what we commonly call his -soul. I must for myself confess that I can find no passage -where it hath undoubtedly this meaning. Gen. 35:18; -<a id='corr51.19'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='1 Kings 17, 21, 22'>1 Kings 17:21, 22</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_51.19'><ins class='correction' title='1 Kings 17, 21, 22'>1 Kings 17:21, 22</ins></a></span>; Ps. 16:10, seem fairest for this -signification. But may not <em>neh-phesh</em>, in the three former -passages, be most properly rendered <em>breath</em>, and in the -last, a breathing, or animal frame?”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Taylor, author of a Hebrew Concordance, says that -<em>neh-phesh</em> “signifies the animal life, or that principle by -which every animal, according to its kind, lives. Gen. -1:20, 24, 30; Lev. 11:40. Which animal life, so far as -we know anything of the manner of its existence, or so -far as the Scriptures lead our thoughts, consists in the -<em>breath</em>, Job. 41:21; 31:39, and in the <em>blood</em>. Lev. 17:11, -14.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Gesenius, the standard Hebrew lexicographer, -defines <em>nephesh</em> as follows:--</p> - -<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_52'>52</span></div> -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“1. Breath. 2. The vital spirit, as the Greek <em>psuche</em>, -and Latin <em>anima</em>, through which the body lives, <em>i. e.</em>, the -principle of life manifested in the breath.” To this he -also ascribes “whatever has respect to the sustenance of -life by food and drink, and the contrary.” “3. The -rational soul, mind, <em>animus</em>, as the seat of feelings, affections, -and emotions. 4. Concr. living thing, animal in -which is the <em>nephesh</em>, life.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The word soul in the New Testament comes -invariably from the Greek ψυχή (<em>psuche</em>); which -word occurs 105 times. It is translated soul 58 -times; life, 40 times; mind, 3 times; heart, -twice; us, once; and you, once.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Spirit in the Old Testament is from two Hebrew -words <i>n’shah-mah</i> and <em>ruach</em>.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The former occurs 24 times. It is 17 times -rendered breath, 3 times, blast, twice, spirit, once, -soul, and once, inspiration. It is defined by Gesenius, -“Breath, spirit, spoken of the breath of -God, <em>i. e.</em>, <em>a</em>) the wind, <em>b</em>) the breath, breathing of -his anger. 2. Breath, life of man and beasts. 3. -The mind, the intellect. 4. Concr. living thing, -animals.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The latter, <em>ruach</em>, occurs 442 times. Spirit in -every instance in the Old Testament is from this -word, except Job 26:4, and Prov. 20:27; where -it is from <i>n’shah-mah</i>. Besides spirit it is translated -wind 97 times, breath, 28 times, smell, 8 -times, mind, 6 times, blast, 4 times; also anger, -courage, smell, air, &c., in all sixteen different -ways.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_53'>53</span>Spirit in the New Testament is from the Greek, -πνεῦμα (<em>pneuma</em>) in every instance. The original -word occurs 385 times, and besides spirit is rendered -ghost 92 times, wind, once, and life, once. -Parkhurst in his Greek Lexicon, says: “It may -be worth remarking that the leading sense of the -old English word ghost is breath; ... that -ghost is evidently of the same root with <em>gust</em> of -wind; and that both these words are plain derivatives -from the Hebrew, to move with violence; -whence also <em>gush</em>, &c.”</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Pneuma</em> is defined by Robinson in his Greek -Lexicon of the New Testament, to mean, primarily, -“1. A breathing, breath, breath of air, air in -motion. 2. The spirit of man, <em>i. e.</em>, the vital -spirit, life, soul, the principle of life residing in -the breath breathed into men from God, and -again returning to God.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>We now have before us the use and definitions -of the words from which soul and spirit are translated. -From the facts presented we learn that a -large variety of meanings attaches to them; and -that we are at liberty wherever they occur to -give them that definition which the sense of the -context requires. But when a certain meaning -is attached to either of these words in one place, -it is not saying that it has the same meaning in -every other place.</p> - -<p class='c011'>By a dishonorable perversion on this point -some have tried to hold up to ridicule the advocates -<span class='pageno' id='Page_54'>54</span>of the view we here defend. Thus, when -we read in Gen. 2:7, that Adam became a living -soul, the sense demands, and the meaning of the -word soul will warrant, that we then apply it to -the whole person; Adam, as a complete being, -was a living soul. But when we read in Gen. -35:18, “And it came to pass, as her soul was in -departing, for she died,” we give the word, according -to another of its definitions, a more limited -signification, and apply it, with Parkhurst, -to the breath of life.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But some have met us here in this manner: -“Materialists tell us that soul means the whole -man, then let us see how it will read in Gen. 35:18; -‘And it came to pass as the whole man was -in departing; for she died.’” Or they will say, -“Materialists tell us that soul means the breath; -then let us try it in Gen. 2:7: ‘And Adam became -a living breath.’”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Such a course, while it is no credit to their -mental acumen, is utterly disastrous to all their -claims of candor and honesty in their treatment -of this important subject. While we are not at -liberty to go beyond the latitude of meaning -which is attached to the words soul and spirit, -we are at liberty to use whatever definition the -circumstances of the case require, varying of -course in different passages. But in the whole -list of definitions, and in the entire use of the -words, we find nothing answering to that immaterial, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_55'>55</span>independent, immortal part, capable of a -conscious, intelligent, active existence out of the -body as well as in, of which the popular religious -teachers of the day endeavor to make these words -the vehicle.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And now we would commend to the attention -of the reader another stupendous fact, the bearing -of which he cannot fail to appreciate. We -want to know if this soul, or spirit, is immortal. -The Hebrew and Greek words from which they -are translated, occur in the Bible, as we have -seen, <em>seventeen hundred times</em>. Surely, once at -least in that long list we shall be told that the -soul is immortal, if this is its high prerogative. -Seventeen hundred times we inquire if the soul -is once said to be immortal, or the spirit deathless. -And the invariable and overwhelming response -we meet is, <em>Not Once!</em> Nowhere, though -used so many hundred times, is the soul said to -be undying in its nature, or the spirit deathless. -Strange and unaccountable fact, if immortality -is an inseparable attribute of the soul and spirit!</p> - -<p class='c011'>An attempt is sometimes made to parry the -force of this fact by saying that the immortality -of the soul, like that of God, is taken for granted. -We reply, The immortality of God is not taken -for granted. Although this might be taken for -granted if anything could be so taken, yet it is -directly asserted that God is immortal. Let now -the advocates of the soul’s natural immortality -<span class='pageno' id='Page_56'>56</span>produce one text where it is said to have immortality, -as God is said to have it, 1 Tim. 6:16, or -where it is said to be immortal, as God is said to -be, 1 Tim. 1:17, and the question is settled. But -this cannot be done; and the ignoble shift of the -taken-for-granted argument falls dead to the -floor.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER VII. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE SPIRIT RETURNS TO GOD.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Ecclesiastes 12:7: “Then shall the dust return -to the earth as it was, and the spirit shall -return to God who gave it.” It is natural for -men to appeal first and most directly to those -sources from which they expect the most efficient -help. So the advocates of man’s natural immortality, -when put to the task of showing what -scriptures they regard as containing proof of -their position, almost invariably make their first -appeal to the text here quoted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In the examination of this text, and all others -of a like nature, let it ever be remembered that -the question at issue is, Has man in his nature -a constituent element, which is an independent -entity, and which, when the body dies, keeps -right on in uninterrupted consciousness, being -capable of exercising in a still higher degree out -<span class='pageno' id='Page_57'>57</span>of the body the functions of intelligence and -activity which it manifested through the body, -and destined, whether a subject of God’s favor, -or of his threatened and merited wrath, to live -so long as God himself exists.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Does this text assert anything of this kind? -Does it state that from which even such an inference -can be drawn? We invite the reader to -go with us, while we endeavor to consider carefully -what the text really teaches. Our opponents -appeal to it as direct testimony. Let us -see how far we can go with them.</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. Solomon, under a series of beautiful figures, -speaks in Eccl. 12:1-7, of the lying down of man -in death. Granted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. Dust, or the body, and spirit are spoken of -as two distinct things. Granted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>3. At death, the spirit leaves the body. Granted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>4. The spirit is disposed of in a different manner -from the body. Granted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>5. This spirit returns to God, and is therefore -conscious, after the dissolution of the body. Not -granted. Where is the proof of this? Here our -paths begin to diverge from each other. But -how could it return to God if it was not conscious? -Answer: In the manner Job describes. -“If he [God] set his heart upon man, if he gather -unto himself his spirit and his breath, all flesh -shall perish together, and man shall turn again to -dust.” Job 34:14, 15. This text speaks of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_58'>58</span>God’s gathering to himself the “breath” of man; -something which no one supposes to be capable -of a separate conscious existence. Over against -this proposition we are compelled to mark, Assumption.</p> - -<p class='c011'>6. This spirit is therefore to exist forever. -This conclusion also we fail to see, either expressed, -or even in the remotest manner, implied. -Thus the vital points in the evidence are wholly -assumed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But if the spirit here does not mean what it -is popularly supposed to mean, what is its signification? -What is it that returns to God? It -will be noticed that it is something which God -“gave” to man. And Solomon introduces it in -a familiar manner, as if alluding to something already -recorded and well understood. He makes -evident reference to the creation of man in the -beginning. His body was formed of the dust; -and in addition to this, what did God do for man -or give unto him? He breathed into his nostrils -the <em>breath of life</em>. This is the only spirit that is -distinctly spoken of as having been given by -God to man. No one claims that this, like the -body, was from the dust, or returns to dust; but -it does not therefore follow that it is conscious or -immortal.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Landis, p. 133, falls into this wrong method of -reasoning. He says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“If the soul were mortal, it too would be given up to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_59'>59</span>the dust, it would return also to the earth. But God affirms -that it does not return to the earth; and therefore -it is distinct from the mortal and perishable part of man.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The breath of life is distinct from the body, -and did not come from the dust of the ground; -but to say that it can exist in a conscious state -independent of the body, and that it must live -forever, is groundless assumption.</p> - -<p class='c011'>If spirit here means “the breath of life,” how, -or in what sense, does it return to God? Landis, -p. 150, thus falsely treats this point also: “How -can the air we breathe,” he asks, “return to God?” -Between the breath of life as imparted to man by -God, vitalizing the animal frame, and air considered -simply as an element, we apprehend there -is a broad distinction. Solomon is showing the -dissolution of man by tracing back the steps -taken in his formation. The breath of life was -breathed into Adam in the beginning; by which -he became a living soul. That is withdrawn -from man, and as a consequence he becomes inanimate. -Then the body, deprived of its vitalizing -principle, having been formed of the dust, -goes back to dust again.</p> - -<p class='c011'>That the breath of life came from God to man, -none will deny. Do they ask how it returns to -him? Tell us how it came from him, and we -will tell how it returns. In the same sense in -which God gave it to man, in that sense it returns -to him. That is all there is of it. The explanation -<span class='pageno' id='Page_60'>60</span>is perfectly simple, because one division -of the problem is comprehended just as easily as -the other. It is an easy thing to turn off with a -flippant sneer an explanation which if allowed to -stand, takes the very breath of life out of a cherished -theory.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But there is a grave objection lying against -the popular exposition of this text, which must -not pass unnoticed. It is involved in the question, -What was the state or condition of this -spirit before God gave it to man? Was it an independent, -conscious, and intelligent being, before -it was put into Adam, as it is claimed that -it was after Adam got through with it, and it returned -to God? Solomon evidently designs to -state respecting all the elements of which man is -composed, as is expressly stated of the body, that -they resume the original condition in which they -were, before they came together to form the component -parts of man. We know it is argued -that the expression respecting the body, that it -returns to the dust “as it was,” is good ground -for an inference that the spirit returns not as it -was. Every principle of logic requires the very -opposite conclusion. For, having set the mind -upon that idea of sameness of condition, and then -referring us to the source from whence the spirit -came, and stating that it goes back to that source, -the language is as good as an affirmation that it -goes back to its original condition also, and must -<span class='pageno' id='Page_61'>61</span>be so understood unless an express affirmation is -made to the contrary. The question is therefore -pertinent, Was this spirit before it came into -man, a conscious being, as it is claimed to be -after it leaves him? In other words, have we -all had a conscious pre-existence? Is the mystery -of our Lord’s incarnation repeated in every -member of the human race? Yes! if popular -theologians rightly explain this text. And the -more daring or reckless spirits among them, seeing -the logical sequence of their reasoning, boldly -avow this position.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Mr. Landis (to whom we make occasional reference -as an exponent of the popular theory) recoils -at the idea of pre-existence, and claims (p. -147) that the spirit does not return as it was, but -acquires “a moral character, and so is changed -from what it was when first created and given to -man”! Oh! then, when Adam’s body was formed -of the dust of the ground a spirit <em>was created</em> -(from what?) and put into it. Where did he -learn this? To what new revelation has he -had access to become acquainted with so remarkable -a fact? Or whence derives he his authority -to manufacture statements of this kind? -His soul swells with indignation over some whom -he styles materialists, and whom he accuses of -manufacturing scripture. Thou that sayest a -man should not, dost thou? Nothing is said of -the “creation of a spirit” in connection with the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_62'>62</span>formation of Adam’s body. The body having -been formed, God, by an agency, not created for -the purpose, but already existing with himself, -endowed it with life, and Adam became a living -soul.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Having thus artfully introduced the idea that -the spirit was created for the occasion, Mr. L. -takes up this reasoning which shows that if the -spirit is conscious after leaving the body, it must -have been before it entered it, and, applying to it -a term doubtless suggested by his own feelings -in view of the assumptions to which he was himself -obliged to resort, calls it silly. Nevertheless -here is the rock on which their exposition of this -text inevitably and hopelessly founders.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There is another consideration not without its -bearing on this question. The words, “And the -spirit shall return to God who gave it,” are -spoken promiscuously of all mankind. They -apply alike to the righteous and wicked. If the -spirit survives the death of the body, the spirits -of the righteous would, as a natural consequence, -ascend to God, in whose presence they are promised -fullness of joy. But do the spirits of the -wicked go to God also? For what purpose? -The immediate destination usually assigned to -them is the lake of fire. Is it said that they first -go to God to be judged? Then we ask, Where -does the Bible once affirm that a person is judged -when he dies? On the contrary, the Scriptures -<span class='pageno' id='Page_63'>63</span>invariably place the Judgment in the future, and -assert in the most explicit terms that God has -appointed a day for that purpose. Acts 17:31.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus the Bible doctrine of the Judgment is -directly contradicted by this view. According -to the Scriptures no man has yet received his final -judgment; yet, according to the view under -examination, the spirits of all who have ever -died, good and bad, righteous and wicked, have -gone to God. For what purpose have the spirits -of the wicked gone to him? Are they there -still? Does God so deal with rebels against his -government--give them Heaven from one to six -thousand years, more or less, and hell afterward? -Away with a view which introduces such inconsistencies -into God’s dealings with his creatures.</p> - -<p class='c011'>How infinitely preferable that view which -alone the record warrants; that is, that the -spirit that returns to God who gave it is the -breath of life, that agency by which God vivifies -and sustains these physical frames; since this, -so far as the record goes, is just what God did -give to man in the beginning, since the definition -of the term sustains such an application, since -this spirit, without doing violence to either -thought or language, can return to God in the -same sense in which it came from him, and, -above all, since this view harmonizes all the record, -and avoids those inconsistencies and contradictions -in which we find ourselves inevitably involved -<span class='pageno' id='Page_64'>64</span>the very moment we undertake to make -the spirit mean a separate entity, conscious in -death and immortal in its nature.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER VIII. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE FORMATION OF THE SPIRIT.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>In a search for testimony relative to the nature -of man, with the purpose of ascertaining -whether or not he is immortal, those texts first -demand attention which are claimed as proof -that he is above and beyond the power of death. -Zech. 12:1, is introduced as positive testimony on -this side of the question:</p> - -<p class='c011'>“The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, -saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the -heavens and layeth the foundations of the -earth, and formeth the spirit of man within -him.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>With an immense flourish this text is introduced -by Mr. Landis, p. 152; and with an air of -triumph he adds that materialists are in the -habit of passing it in silence. We think we can -answer for them that they have seen in it nothing -to answer, and hence have declined to spend -their time beating the air. As to the nature of -the spirit which God forms in man, its characteristics -and attributes, this text affirms nothing. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_65'>65</span>Above all, respecting the main inquiry, Is this -spirit immortal? the text is entirely silent. Why -then is it introduced? Because it contains the -word spirit. But, as has been shown (chapter vi), -nothing is proved by the mere use of the words -soul and spirit, till some affirmation can be found -in the Scriptures that these terms signify an independent -entity, which has the power of uninterrupted -consciousness, and the endowment of -immortality. For men to take these terms and -give them definitions and clothe them with attributes -which are the offspring of pagan philosophy, -or figments of their own imagination, and -then claim that because the Bible uses these -terms it sustains their views, is to us, at least, a -very unsatisfactory method of settling this question. -But, from the persistency with which it is -followed by those of the opposite view, one might -conclude that it is the only way they have of -sustaining their position.</p> - -<p class='c011'>God formeth the spirit of man within him. -So the text asserts. The word, form, is in the -Septuagint, <em>plasso</em>. The definition of this word, -as given by Liddell and Scott, is, “To form, -mould, shape, Lat. <em>fingere</em>, strictly used of the -artist who works in soft substances, such as -earth, clay, wax.” The word, then, signifies giving -shape and form to something already in existence; -for the artist does not create his clay, -wax, &c., but only changes its form. The second -<span class='pageno' id='Page_66'>66</span>definition seems, however, to be more applicable -to the case in hand. Thus, “II. generally, to -bring into shape or form, πλ. τὴν ψυχὴν τὸ σῶμα, to -mould and form the mind or body by care, diet, -and exercise.” Thus God makes man the crown -of creation by forming in him (through a superior -organization of the brain) an intellectual or mental -nature, and we can still further form or mold -it, by care and cultivation. There is nothing -here to favor the idea of the creation of a separate -immaterial and immortal entity, and its insertion -into the human frame.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This text is illustrated by Job 32:8: “But -there is a spirit in man; and the inspiration of -the Almighty giveth them understanding;” not -“giveth it [the spirit] understanding,” as we -heard an immaterialist in debate not long since -read it; but “giveth them [the men] understanding.” -That is, men are endowed with a superior -mental organization; and by means of that God -gives them understanding.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Since, however, Zech. 12:1, is used by immaterialists, -to prove that souls are specially created, -it raises the question, which may as well be -considered in this connection as any other, -whence the spirit, whatever it is, is derived. In -the text under consideration, the present tense is -evidently used for the past; and hence it might -be read, “The burden of the word of the Lord -... which stretched forth the heavens, and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_67'>67</span>laid the foundations of the earth, and <em>formed</em> the -spirit of man within him.” If now this means -the creation of an immortal entity to be added -to man, called his spirit, it applies only to the -first man, the man formed at the creation of the -world. The question then remains, How do all -succeeding members of the human race, how do -we, get an immortal spirit? Is it by a special -act of creation on the part of God, or is it by -generation from father to son? Has God, for every -member of the human race since Adam, by -special act created a soul or spirit? They who -say he has, contradict Gen. 2:2, which declares -that all God’s work of creation, so far as it pertains -to this world, was finished in the first week -of time. If this testimony is true, it is certain -that God has not been at work ever since creating -human souls as fast as bodies were brought -into existence to need them, the greater part of -the time thousands of them every day.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Has God thus made himself the servant of the -human race, to wait upon their will, caprice, and -passions? for how many of the inhabitants of -this earth are the offspring of the foulest iniquity -and the most unbridled lust! Does God hold -himself in readiness to create souls which must -come from his hand immaculate and pure, to be -thrust into such vile tenements, at the bidding of -godless lust? The reader will pardon the irreverence -of the question, for the sake of an exposure -<span class='pageno' id='Page_68'>68</span>of the absurdity of that theory which -prompts it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But if we say that the soul is transmitted with -the body, then what becomes of its incorruptibility -and immortality? for “that which is born of -the flesh is flesh.” John 3:6. And Peter says -(1 Pet. 1:23-25): “Being born again, not of -corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the -word of God which liveth and abideth forever. -For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man -as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and -the flower thereof falleth away; but the word of -the Lord endureth forever.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>There could hardly be a plainer testimony that -man as a whole is mortal and perishable. He is -born of corruptible seed. But more than this, it -is added, “All flesh is as grass.” Should it be -said that this means simply the body, we reply -that the term flesh is frequently used in the New -Testament to signify the whole man. Thus, -Rom. 3:20: “By the deeds of the law there -shall no flesh be justified.” Paul does not here -talk about the justification of bones, sinews, -nerves and muscles; he refers to the whole responsible -man. In the same sense the term is -used in many other passages. But Peter himself, -in the passage just quoted, cuts off its application -exclusively to the body; for after saying -that “all flesh is as grass,” he continues, “and all -the glory of man as the flower of grass.” The -<span class='pageno' id='Page_69'>69</span>glory of man must include all that there is noble -and exalted about his nature. If the soul is the -highest and most godlike part of man, it is included -in this glory; but lo! it is all like the -flower of the grass, transitory and perishable.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The word mortal, which means liable to death, -occurs five times in our English version, and in -every instance is used to describe the nature of -the real man. Rom. 6:12; 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:53, -54; 2 Cor. 4:11. It occurs in the original in -one other instance (2 Cor. 5:4) where it is rendered -“mortality.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The texts usually relied on to prove that souls -are immediately created are Eccl. 12:7; Isa. 57:16; -Zech. 12:1. The first of these was examined -in the last chapter. The word translated “form” -in the last of these passages, as shown in this present -chapter, is not a word that signifies to create, -but only to put into form, mold, and fashion. Isa. -57:16, speaks of the souls which God has made. -But there are numerous other texts, as Job 10:8-11; -Isa. 44:2; 64:8; Jer. 1:5, &c., which -speak in the same manner of the body. But if -such expressions can be used with respect to the -body, produced by the natural process of generation, -the same expression with reference to the -soul contains no proof that that is not also transmitted -with the body.</p> - -<p class='c011'>God said to our first parents, and the commission -was repeated to Noah after the flood, “Be -<span class='pageno' id='Page_70'>70</span>fruitful and multiply.” Multiply what? Themselves, -of course. Did that mean that they should -multiply bodies, and God would multiply souls to -fit them? Nothing of the kind; but they were -to multiply beings having all the characteristics, -endowments, and attributes of themselves. So -Adam, Gen. 5:3, “begat a son in his own likeness, -after his image, and called his name Seth.” -This son was like Adam in all respects, having -all the natures that Adam possessed; and -that which was begotten by Adam was called -Seth. But according to the doctrine of creationism, -Adam begat only a body, and God created a -soul, which is the real man, and called his name -Seth, and put it into that body. Neither this -text nor any other gives countenance to any -such absurdity.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Some prominent theologians, both ancient and -modern, have adopted the doctrine of traduction -as opposed to that of creationism, believing the -latter to be contrary to philosophy and revelation, -but the former to be in harmony with both. -In Wesley’s Journal, Vol. v., p. 10, is found the -following entry:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“I read and abridged an old work on the origin of -the soul. I never before saw anything on the subject so -satisfactory. I think the author proves to a demonstration -that God has enabled man, as all other creatures, to -propagate his whole specie, consisting of soul and body.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The testimony of Richard Watson (Institutes, -pp. 362, 3) is equally explicit. He says:--</p> - -<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_71'>71</span></div> -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“A question as to the transmission of this corruption -of nature from parents to children has been debated -among those who, nevertheless, admit the fact; some -contending that the soul is <span lang="la" xml:lang="la"><em>ex traduce</em></span>; others that it is by -immediate creation. It is certain that, as to the metaphysical -part of this question, we can come to no satisfactory -conclusion. The Scriptures, however, appear to -be more in favor of traduction. ‘Adam begat a son in his -own likeness.’ ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh,’ -which refers certainly to the soul as well as to the body.... -The tenet of the soul’s descent appears to have -most countenance from the language of Scripture, and it -is no small confirmation of it, that when God designed to -incarnate his own Son, he stepped out of the ordinary -course, and formed a sinless human nature immediately -by the power of the Holy Ghost.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The evidence is thus rendered conclusive from -both reason and Scripture, that the soul is transmitted -through the process of generation with -the body. What then, we ask again, becomes of -its immortality? For “that which is born of -the flesh is flesh,” and mortality cannot generate -itself to a higher plane and beget immortality. -This is not saying that mind is matter; for the -results of organization are not to be confounded -with the matter of which the organization is -composed.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_72'>72</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER IX. <br /> <span class='fss'>WHO KNOWETH?</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>With these words Solomon introduces, in Eccl. -3:21, a very important question respecting the -spirit of man. He says: “Who knoweth the -spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit -of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?” -Deeming this a good foundation, the advocates -of natural immortality proceed to build thereon. -They take it to be, first, a positive declaration -that the spirit of man does go up, and the spirit -of the beast downward to the earth. Then the -superstructure is easily erected: Thus, Solomon -must have believed that man had a spirit capable -of a separate and conscious existence in death; -and this spirit, in the hour of dissolution, ascends -up on high, and goes into the presence of God. -It therefore survives the stroke of death, and is -consequently immortal.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Here they rest their argument; but we would -like to have them proceed; for the text speaks -of the spirit of the beast, which must also be -disposed of. If the spirit of man, because it -separates from him and goes up, is conscious, is -not the spirit of the beast, because it separates -from it and goes down, conscious also? There is -nothing in the man’s spirit going up which can -<span class='pageno' id='Page_73'>73</span>by any means show it to be conscious, any more -than there is in the spirit of the beast going -down, to show it to be conscious. But, if the -spirit of the beast survives the stroke of death, -it has just as much immortality as that of man. -This line of argument, therefore, proves too much, -and must be abandoned.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But is not the word spirit as applied to the -beast a different word in the original from the -one translated spirit and applied to man? No; -they are both from the same original word; and -that word is <em>ruach</em>, the word from which spirit -is translated in the Old Testament in every instance -with two exceptions. The beast has the -same spirit that man has.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Landis (p. 146) feels the weight of the stunning -blow which this fact gives to the popular view, -and endeavors to parry its force by the following -desperate resort: He says that Solomon is here -describing the state of doubt and perplexity -through which he had formerly passed; and, to -use Mr. L.’s own words, “in this perplexity he -attributes to both man and beast a <em>ruach</em>.” But -he says that Solomon got over this state of doubt -and uncertainty, and “never again attributed a -<em>ruach</em> to beasts.” What we regard as the Bible -view of man’s nature is not unfrequently denominated -infidelity by the popular theologians of -the present day; but it strikes us as rather a -bold position to go back and accuse the sacred -<span class='pageno' id='Page_74'>74</span>writers of laboring under a spirit of infidelity -when they penned these sentiments.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But if we take Solomon’s words to be a declaration -that the spirit of man does go up, his -question, even then, would imply a strong affirmation -that we are ignorant of its essential qualities. -Who knoweth this spirit? Who can tell -its nature? Who can describe its inherent -characteristics? Who can tell how long it shall -continue to exist? On these vital points, the -text is entirely silent, granting all that is claimed -for it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But, further, if this text asserts that the spirit -of man goes up to God, it will be noticed that -it is spoken promiscuously of all mankind. -Then the same queries would arise respecting the -spirits of the wicked, for what purpose they go -to God, and the same objections would lie against -that view that were stated in the examination of -Eccl. 12:7, in chapter vii.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To arrive, however, at the correct meaning of -Eccl. 3:21, a brief examination of the context -is necessary. In verse 18, Solomon expresses a -desire that the sons of men may see that they -themselves are beasts. Not that he intended to -be understood that man is in no respect superior -to a beast; for no one, inspired or not, above the -level of an idiot, would make such an assertion, -in view of man’s more perfect organization, his -reasoning faculties, and, above all, his future -<span class='pageno' id='Page_75'>75</span>prospects, if righteous. He simply means, as -plainly expressed in the next verse, that in one -respect, namely, their dissolution in death, man -possesses no superiority over the other orders of -animated existence. “For,” he says, “that which -befalleth the sons of men, befalleth beasts; even -one thing befalleth them; as the one dieth [here -is the point of similarity], so dieth the other; -yea, they have all one breath [<em>ruach</em>, the same -word that is rendered spirit in verse 21]; so that -a man [in this respect] hath no pre-eminence -above a beast. All go unto one place [is that -place Heaven? and is this a declaration that all, -men and beasts alike, go there?] all are of the -dust, and all turn to dust again.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus definite and positive is the teaching of -Solomon that in respect to their life here upon -earth, and their condition in death, men and -beasts are exactly alike; and now can we suppose -that, after having thus clearly expressed his -views of this matter, he proceeds in the very -next sentence to contradict it all, and assert that -in death there is a difference between men and -beasts, that men do have a pre-eminence, that all -do <em>not</em> go to one place, that the spirit of man -goes up conscious to God, and the spirit of the -beast goes down to perish in the earth? This -would be to make the wisest man that ever -lived, the most stupid reasoner that ever put -pen to paper.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_76'>76</span>How, then, is his language in verse 21 to be -understood? Answer: Understand it as a question -whether the spirit of man goes up, and the -spirit of the beast down, as some asserted in opposition -to the views which he taught. John -Milton, author of Paradise Lost, so translates it: -“Who knoweth the spirit of man [<span lang="la" xml:lang="la"><em>an sursum ascendat</em></span>] -<em>whether</em> it goeth upward?” &c. The -Douay Bible renders the passage thus: “Who -knoweth <em>if</em> the spirit of the children of Adam -ascend upward, and <em>if</em> the spirit of the beasts -descend downward?” The Septuagint, the Vulgate, -the Chaldee Paraphrase, the Syriac, and -the German of Luther, give the same reading.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This puts the matter in quite a different light, -and saves Solomon from self-contradiction; but, -alas for the immaterialist! it completely overturns -the structure of immortality built thereon.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The notion prevailed in the heathen world that -man’s spirit ascended up to be with the gods, but -the spirit of the beast went down to the earth. -It was the old lesson taught by that unreliable -character. in Eden, “Ye shall not surely die,” -but “ye shall be as gods.” Solomon contradicts -this by stating the truth in the case, that death -reduces man and beast alike to one common condition. -Then he asks, Who knows that the opposite -heathen doctrine is true, that the spirit of -man goes up, and that of the beast down? He -had declared that they all went to one place, in -<span class='pageno' id='Page_77'>77</span>accordance with God’s original sentence, “Thou -shalt surely die;” now he calls for evidence, if -there be any, to show that the opposite doctrine -is true. Thus he smites to the ground this pagan -notion by putting it to the proof of its claims, -for which no proof exists.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There is another class of expressions respecting -the word spirit, which properly come under consideration -at this point. The first is Ps. 31:5, -where David says: “Into thine hand I commit -my spirit.” Our Lord used similar language, -perhaps borrowed from this expression of David, -when, expiring on the cross, he said, “Father, -into thy hands I commend my spirit.” Luke 23:46. -And Stephen, the martyr, in the same line -of thought, put up this expiring prayer: “Lord -Jesus, receive my spirit.” Acts 7:59. What -was it which David and our Lord wished to -commit into the hands of God, and Stephen, into -the hands of Christ? A conscious entity it is -claimed, the living and immortal part of man; -for nothing less could properly be committed to -God. Thus Mr. Landis (p. 131) asks: “What -was it then? The mere life which passed into -nonentity at death? And can any one suppose -they would have commended to God a nonentity? -This would be a shameless trifling with -sacred things.” But David, on one occasion (1 -Sam. 26:24), prayed that his life might be much -set by, or be precious, in the eyes of the Lord. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_78'>78</span>That which is precious in his sight, it seems -might very properly be commended to his keeping, -especially when passing, for his sake, out of -our immediate control. And in the very psalm -(31) in which he commits his spirit to God, he -does it in view of the fact that his enemies had -“devised to take away his <em>life</em>.” Verse 13.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is a fact that the same or similar acts are -spoken of frequently as done in reference to the -life that are said to be done in reference to the -spirit. Can a person commit his spirit to God? -So he can commit to him the preservation of his -life. Thus David says, Ps. 64:1: “Preserve my -life.” What! Mr. Landis would exclaim, preserve -a nonentity? Jonah prayed (4:3), “O -Lord, take, I beseech thee, my life from me.” -Christ says, John 10:15: “I lay down my life -for the sheep;” and in John 13:38, he asks Peter, -“Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake?”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus our life is something that we can commit -to another for safe keeping; it can be taken away -from us; we can give it up, or lay it down. Is -it, therefore, a distinct entity, conscious in death? -If it is not, then equivalent expressions applied -to the spirit do not prove that to be conscious in -death and immortal; for they prove the same in -the one case as in the other; and whatever they -fail to prove in the one case, they fail to prove -also in the other.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But if the spirit, as is claimed, lives right along -<span class='pageno' id='Page_79'>79</span>after death, just as conscious as before, and a -hundred-fold more active, capable, intelligent, -and free, where would be the propriety of committing -it to God in the hour of death, any more -than at any point during its earthly existence? -There would be none whatever. Entering upon -that permanent higher life, it would be much -more capable of caring for itself than in this -earthly condition. The expression bears upon -its very face evidence that those who used it desired -to commit something into the care of their -Maker which was about to pass out of their possession; -to commit something into his hands for -safe keeping until they should be brought back -from the state of unconsciousness and inactivity -into which they were then falling. And what -was that? It was what they were then losing, -namely, their life, their <em>pneuma</em>, which Robinson -defines as meaning, among other things, “The -principle of life residing in the breath, breathed -into man from God, and again returning to God.” -And when the life is thus given up to God by -his people, where is it? “Hid with Christ in -<a id='corr79.23'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='God. Col. 3:3. “And'>God.” Col. 3:3. And</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_79.23'><ins class='correction' title='God. Col. 3:3. “And'>God.” Col. 3:3. And</ins></a></span> when will the believer -receive it again? <a id='corr79.24'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='When'>“When</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_79.24'><ins class='correction' title='When'>“When</ins></a></span> Christ who is our life -shall appear.” Verse 4. Then Stephen will receive -from his Lord that which while dying he -besought him to receive. Then they who for -Christ’s sake have lost their life (not merely their -bodies while their life continued right on) will -have that life restored to them again.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_80'>80</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER X. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE SPIRITS OF JUST MEN MADE PERFECT.</span></h2> -</div> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c010'>“But ye are come,” says Paul, “unto Mount Zion, -and unto the city of the living God, the Heavenly Jerusalem, -and to an innumerable company of angels, to -the general assembly and church of the firstborn which -are written in Heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and -to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus the -mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of -sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of -Abel.” Heb. 12:22-24.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c010'>With a great show of confidence, either pretended -or real, the advocates of man’s immortality -bring forward this text in proof of their -position. That portion of the forgoing quotation -upon which they hang their theory is the expression, -“the spirits of just men made perfect,” -which they take to be both a declaration and -proof thereof, that the spirits of men are released -by death, and thereupon are made perfect or glorified -in the presence of God in Heaven. A little -further examination of the language will, we -think, show that such an assertion is not made -in the text and that even such an inference cannot -justly be drawn.</p> - -<p class='c011'>That Paul is here contrasting the blessings and -privileges enjoyed by believers under the gospel -dispensation with those possessed by the Jews -<span class='pageno' id='Page_81'>81</span>under the former dispensation, will probably not -be questioned on either side. Ye are not come -to the mount that might be touched [Mount -Sinai] and the sound of a trumpet, &c., that is, -to that system of types and ceremonies instituted -through Moses at Sinai, of which an outward -priesthood were the ministers, and Old Jerusalem -the representative city; but ye are come to -Mount Zion, to the New Jerusalem, to Jesus, and -to his better sacrifice. These things to which -we are come are the superior blessings of the gospel, -over what was enjoyed under the former dispensation. -But where or how does the fact come -in, as one of these blessings, that man has a -spirit which is conscious in death, and is made -perfect by the dissolution of the body? It will -be seen that if this be a fact, it is brought in, at -best, only incidentally. There is no proof of it in -the expression, “spirits of just men made perfect,” -in itself considered; for they could be made perfect -at some future time, without supposing them -conscious from death to the resurrection. The -only proof that can here be found, then, lies in -the fact that we are said to have <em>come</em> to these -spirits. This is supposed to prove that they -must be spirits out of the body, and that they -must also be conscious. Then we inquire, How -do we come to the spirits of just men made perfect, -and what is meant by the expression?</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is not difficult to determine how we come to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_82'>82</span>all the other objects mentioned by Paul in the -three verses quoted; but how we come to the -spirits of just men made perfect, according to -the popular view of that expression, is not so -clear. If we mistake not, the common view will -have to be modified, or the explanation remain -ungiven.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Let us see: “Ye are come [or, putting it in the -first person, since Paul brings these to view as -present blessings all through the gospel dispensation, -we are come] unto Mount Zion, and unto -the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem.” -That is, we in this dispensation no -longer look to Old Jerusalem as the center of our -worship, but we look above, to the New Jerusalem, -where the sanctuary and Priest of this dispensation -are. In this sense we are come to -them.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“And to an innumerable company of angels.” -Angels are the assistants of our Lord in his work, -who now mediates for his people individually. -Dan. 7:10. They are sent forth to minister to -those who shall be heirs of salvation. Heb. 1:14. -They are therefore more intimately concerned -in the believer’s welfare in this dispensation -than in the old. We have thus come to -their presence and ministration.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“To the general assembly and church of the -firstborn which are written in Heaven.” That -is, we have now come to the time when believers -<span class='pageno' id='Page_83'>83</span>of whatever nationality, whose names are recorded -in the Lamb’s book of life in Heaven, -constitute a general assembly, or compose one -church. We do not now look to Jewish genealogies -to find the people of God, but we look to -the record in Heaven. And God now takes his -people into covenant relation with himself as individuals, -and not as a nation. Thus we are -come in this dispensation to the general assembly, -the church of the firstborn.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“And to God the Judge of all.” Directly, -through the mediation of his Son, we draw near -to God. Passing over for a time the expression -under discussion, the spirits of just men made -perfect, we read on:--</p> - -<p class='c011'>“And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant.” -We now come to Jesus, the real mediator, -instead of to the typical priesthood of the former -dispensation.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“And to the blood of sprinkling that speaketh -better things than that of Abel.” That is, there -is now ministered for us the blood of Jesus, the -better sacrifice, which takes away from us sin in -fact, instead of the blood of beasts, which took it -away only in figure.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It can readily be seen how we come to all these -things under this dispensation; how these are all -privileges and blessings under the gospel, beyond -what was enjoyed in the former dispensation. -But now, if the spirits of just men made perfect -<span class='pageno' id='Page_84'>84</span>mean disembodied spirits in the popular sense, -how do we come to these as a gospel blessing? -This is what we would like to have our friends -tell us. In what respect is our relation to our -dead friends, the supposed spirits of the departed, -changed by the gospel? If there is any sense in -which we may be said to have come to these, we -would like to know it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But again, when do we come into closest contact -with a man’s spirit? Is it when that spirit -is disembodied, and has gone far away to dwell -in the presence of God, and is to have no more -to do forever with anything that is done under -the sun? Eccl. 9:6. Is it not rather when the -spirit of a man through the eyes of that man -looks upon us, through his mouth speaks to us, -and through his hands handles us? Outside the -hell-doomed hosts of spiritualists, will any one -say that we enjoy more intimate relations with a -spirit when it is out of the body than we do -while it is in the body? A consideration of this -point must convince any one that the idea of -<em>coming</em> to the spirits of just men made perfect -cannot possibly be applied to spirits out of the -body.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It will be noticed further that the text does -not speak of spirits made perfect, but of men -made perfect. The Greek (και πνεύμασι δικαίων τετελειωμένων) -shows that the participle, “made perfect,” -agrees with “the just,” or “just men,” and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_85'>85</span>not with “spirits.” When, then, we inquire, are -men made perfect? There is a certain sense in -which they are made perfect in this life through -the justification of the blood of Christ, and sanctification -of his Spirit; and they are made perfect -in an absolute sense, as in Heb. 11:40, when -they experience the final glorification, and their -vile bodies are made like unto Christ’s most glorious -body. Phil. 3:21.</p> - -<p class='c011'>If it is said that the text refers to this latter -perfection, then it is placed beyond the resurrection, -and affords no proof of a conscious disembodied -spirit. If it refers to the former, then it -applies to persons still in this state, and not in -death. To one or the other it must refer; and -apply it which way we may, it does not bring to -view a spirit conscious in death. Therefore it -fails entirely to prove the point in favor of which -our friends produce it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In harmony with the context, we apply it to -the present state, to men in this life, to a blessing -peculiar to the gospel, to the justification -and sanctification which the believer now enjoys -through Christ. And in this sense we see how -we come to it, as to all the other things mentioned -by Paul. We come to the enjoyment of -this blessing ourselves, and to communion and -fellowship with those who are also in possession -of it.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_86'>86</span>Finally, to show that this not a view devised -to meet any exigency of our position, we will -bring to its support a name which with all will -have great weight, and with many will be final -authority. Dr. Adam Clarke, on this passage, -says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“In several parts of this epistle [to the Hebrews], -τελειος, the just man, signifies one who has a full knowledge -of the Christian system, who is justified and saved -by Christ Jesus; and τετελειωμενοι are the <em>adult Christians</em>, -who are opposed to the νεπιοι or babes in knowledge and -grace. See chap. 5:12-14; 8:11; Gal. 4:1-3. <em>The -spirits of just men made perfect</em>, or the <em>righteous perfect</em>, -are the full-grown Christians; those who are justified by -the blood and sanctified by the Spirit of Christ. Being -<em>come</em> to such implies that spiritual union which the disciples -of Christ have with each other, and which they possess -how far soever separate; for they are all joined in -one Spirit, Eph. 2:18; they are in the unity of the -Spirit, Eph. 4:3, 4; and of one soul, Acts 4:32. This -is a unity which was never possessed even by the Jews -themselves, in their best state; it is peculiar to real -Christianity; as to <em>nominal</em> Christianity, wars and desolations -between man and his fellows are quite consistent -with <em>its</em> spirit.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The reader is also referred to Dr. C.’s note at -the end of Heb. 12.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_87'>87</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XI. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE SPIRITS IN PRISON.</span></h2> -</div> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c010'>“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just -for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put -to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit; by -which also he went and preached unto the spirits in -prison; which sometime were disobedient, when once the -longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while -the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, -were saved by water.” 1 Pet. 3:18-20.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The advocates of natural immortality are not -long in finding their way to this passage. Here, -it is claimed, are spirits brought to view, out of -the body; for they were the spirits of the antediluvians: -and they were conscious and intelligent; -for they could listen to the preaching of Christ, -who, by his conscious spirit, while his body lay -in the grave, went and preached to them.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Let us see just what conclusions the popular -interpretation of this passage involves, that we -may test their claims by the Scriptures. 1. The -spirits were the spirits of wicked men; for they -were disobedient in the days of Noah, and perished -in the flood. 2. They were consequently -in their place of punishment, the place to which -popular theology assigns all such spirits immediately -on their passing from this state of existence. -3. The spirit of Christ went into hell to preach -<span class='pageno' id='Page_88'>88</span>to them. These are the facts that are to be -cleared of improbabilities, and harmonized with -the Scriptures, before the passage can be made -available for the popular view.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But the bare suggestion of so singular a transaction -as Christ’s going to preach to these spirits, -immediately gives rise to the query for what -purpose Christ should take pains to go down -into hell, to preach to damned spirits there; and -what message he could possibly bear to them. -The day of their probation was past; they could -not be helped by any gospel message; then why -preach to them? Would Christ go to taunt -them by describing before them blessings which -they could never receive, or raising in their bosoms -hopes of a release from damnation, which -he never designed to grant?</p> - -<p class='c011'>These considerations fall like a mighty avalanche -across the way of the common interpretation. -The thought is felt to be almost an insuperable -objection, and many are the shifts devised -to get around it. One thinks that the word -preached does not necessarily mean to preach the -gospel, notwithstanding almost every instance of -the use of the word in the New Testament describes -the preaching of the gospel by Christ or -his apostles; but that Christ went there to announce -to them that his sufferings had been -accomplished, and the prophecies concerning -him fulfilled. But what object could there be -<span class='pageno' id='Page_89'>89</span>in that? How would that affect their condition? -Was it to add poignancy to their pain by rendering -their misery doubly sure? And were -there not devils enough in hell to perform that -work, without making it necessary that Christ -should perform such a ghostly task, and that, -too, right between those points of time when he -laid down his life for our sins and was raised -again for our justification?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Another thinks these were the spirits of such -as repented during the forty days’ rain of the -flood; that they were with the saved in Paradise, -a department of the under world where the -spirits of the good are kept (the elysium, in fact, -of ancient heathen mythology), but that they -“still felt uneasy on account of having perished -[that is, lost their bodies] under a divine judgment,” -and “were now assured by Jesus that -their repentance had been accepted.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Such resorts show the desperate extremities -to which the popular exposition of this passage -is driven.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Others frankly acknowledge that they cannot -tell what, nor for what purpose, Christ preached -to the lost in hell. So Landis, p. 236. But he -says it makes no difference if we cannot tell what -he preached nor why he preached, since we have -the assurance that he did go there and preach. -Profound conclusion! Would it not be better, -since we have the assurance that he preached, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_90'>90</span>to conclude that he preached at a time when -preaching could benefit them, rather than at a -time when we know that it could not profit -them, and there could be no occasion for it whatever?</p> - -<p class='c011'>The whole issue thus turns on the question, -When was this work of preaching performed? -Some will say, “While they were in prison, and -that means the state of death, and shows that -the dead are conscious and can be preached to.” -Then, we reply, the dead also can be benefited -by preaching, and led to repentance; and the -doctrine of purgatory springs in full blossom -into our creed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But does the text affirm that the preaching -was done to these spirits while they were in -prison? May it not be that the preaching was -done at some previous time to persons who were, -when Peter wrote, in prison, or, if you please, in -a state of death? So it would be true that the -spirits were in prison when Peter makes mention -of them, and yet the preaching might have been -done to them at a former period, while they were -still in the flesh and could be benefited by it. -This is the view taken of the passage by Dr. -Clarke. He says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“<em>He went and preached</em>] By the ministry of Noah one -hundred and twenty years.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Thus he places Christ’s going and preaching -by his Spirit in the days of Noah, and not during -the time his body lay in the grave.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_91'>91</span>Again, he says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The word πνευμασι, <em>spirits</em>, is supposed to render this -view of the subject improbable, because this must mean -<em>disembodied</em> spirits; but this certainly does not follow; -for the <em>spirits of just men made perfect</em>, Heb. 12:23, -certainly means righteous men, and men <em>still in the -church militant</em>; and the Father of <em>spirits</em>, Heb. 12:9, -means men <em>still in the body</em>; and the God of the <em>spirits</em> -of all flesh, Num. 16:22, and 27:16, means <em>men</em>, <em>not</em> in a -disembodied state.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The preaching was certainly to the antediluvians. -But why should Christ single out that -class to preach to, about twenty-four hundred -years afterward, in hell? The whole idea is -forced, unnatural, and absurd. The preaching -that was given to them was through Noah, who, -by the power of the Holy Ghost (1 Pet. 1:12), -delivered to them the message of warning. Let -this be the preaching referred to, and all is harmonious -and clear; and this interpretation the -construction of the original demands; for the -word rendered in our version, “were disobedient,” -is simply the aorist participle; and the -dependent sentence, “when once the long-suffering -of God waited in the days of Noah,” limits -the verb “preached” rather than the participle. -The whole passage might be translated thus: -“In which also, having gone to the spirits in -prison, he preached to the then disobedient ones, -when once [or at the time when] the long-suffering -of God waited in the days of Noah.”</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_92'>92</span>But how were they in prison? In the same -sense in which persons in error and darkness are -said to be in prison. Isa. 42:7: “To open the -blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the -prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the -prison house.” Also Isa. 61:1: “The Spirit of -the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord -hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto -the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the -broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, -and the opening of the prison to them -that are bound.” Christ himself declared, Luke -4:18-21, that this scripture was fulfilled in his -mission to those here on earth who sat in darkness -and error, and under the dominion of sin. -So the antediluvians were shut up under the -sentence of condemnation. Their days were -limited to a hundred and twenty years; and -their only way of escape from impending destruction -was through the preaching of Noah.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So much with reference to the spirits to whom -the preaching was given. Now we affirm further -that Christ’s spirit did not go anywhere to preach -to anybody, while he lay in the grave. If Christ’s -spirit, the real being, the divine part, did survive -the death of the cross, then</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. We have only a human offering for our -sacrifice; and the claim of the spiritualists is -true that the blood of Christ is no more than -that of any man.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_93'>93</span>2. Then Christ did not pour out his soul unto -death and make it an offering for sin, as the -prophet declared that he would, Isa. 53:10, 12; -and his soul was not sorrowful even unto death, -as he himself affirmed. Matt. 26:38.</p> - -<p class='c011'>3. The text says Christ was quickened by the -Spirit; and between his death and quickening -no action is affirmed of him; and hence any such -affirmation on the part of man is assumption. -There can be no doubt but the quickening here -brought to view was his resurrection. The -Greek word is a very strong one, ζωοποιέω, to impart -life, to make alive. He was put to death in -the flesh, but made alive by the Spirit. Landis, -p. 232, labors hard to turn this word from its -natural meaning and make it signify, not giving -life, but continuing alive. It is impossible to -regard this as anything less than unmitigated -sophistry. The verb is a regular active verb. -In the passive voice it expresses an action received. -Christ did not continue alive, but <em>was -made alive</em> by the Spirit. Then he was for a -time dead. How long? From the cross to the -resurrection. Rom. 1:4. So he says himself -in Rev. 1:18, I am he that liveth and was dead. -Yet men will stand up, and for the purpose of -sustaining a pet theory, rob the world’s Offering -of all its virtue, and nullify the whole plan of -salvation, by declaring that Christ never was -dead.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_94'>94</span>The word quicken is the same that is used in -Rom. 8:11: “But if the Spirit of Him that -raised up Jesus from the dead, dwell in you, He -that raised up Christ from the dead, shall also -quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that -dwelleth in you.” God brought again our Lord -from the dead by the Holy Spirit; and by the -same Spirit are his followers to be raised up at -the last day. But that Christ went anywhere -in spirit, or did any action between his death -and quickening, is what the Scriptures nowhere -affirm, and no man has a right to claim.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Mr. Landis, p. 235, argues that this preaching -could not have been in the days of Noah, because -the events narrated took place this side the death -of Christ. Why did he not say this side the resurrection -of Christ? Oh! that would spoil it all. -But the record shows upon its very face that if -it refers to a time subsequent to Christ’s death, -it was also subsequent to his resurrection; for if -events are here stated in chronological order, the -resurrection of Christ as well as his death comes -before his preaching. Thus, 1. He was put to -death in the flesh. 2. Was quickened by the -Spirit, which was his resurrection, as no man -with any show of reason can dispute; and 3. -Went and preached to the spirits in prison. So -the preaching does not come in, on this ground, -till after Christ was made alive from the dead.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Some people seem to treat the Scriptures as if -<span class='pageno' id='Page_95'>95</span>they were given to man that he might exercise -his inventive powers in trying to get around them. -But no inventive power that the human mind -has yet developed will enable a man, let him -plan, contrive, devise, and arrange, as he may, -to fix this preaching of Christ between his death -and resurrection. If he could fix it there, what -would it prove? The man of sin would rise up -and bless him from his papal throne, for proving -his darling purgatory. Such a position may do -for Mormons, Mohammedans, Pagans, and Papists; -but let no Protestant try to defend it, and not -hang his head for shame. Mr. Landis says that -“Mr. Dobney and the rest of the fraternity conveniently -forget that there is any such passage -[as 1 Pet. 3:19] in the word of God.” But we -cannot help thinking that it would have been -well for him, and saved a pitiful display of distorted -logic, if he had been prudent enough to -forget it too.</p> - -<p class='c011'>THE WORD SPIRIT IN OTHER TEXTS.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There are a few other texts which contain the -word spirit an explanation of which may be -properly introduced at this point:--</p> - -<p class='c011'>Luke 24:39: “Behold my hands and my feet, -that it is I myself: handle me and see; for a -spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me -have.” These are the words of Christ as on one -occasion he met with his disciples after his resurrection; -<span class='pageno' id='Page_96'>96</span>and as he then possessed a spiritual -body which is given by the resurrection, it is -claimed that his words prove the existence of -spirits utterly disembodied in the popular sense. -But we inquire, What did the disciples suppose -they saw? Verse 37 states: “They supposed -they had seen a spirit;” and on this verse -Greenfield puts in the margin the word <em>phantasma</em> -instead of <em>pneuma</em>, and marks it as a -reading adopted by Griesbach. They supposed -they had seen a phantom, apparition, specter. -This exactly corresponds with their action when -on another occasion Christ came to them walking -on the sea, Matt. 14:26; Mark 6:49, and they -were affrighted and cried out, supposing it was a -spirit, where the Greek uses phantom in both -instances. The Bible nowhere countenances the -idea that phantoms or specters have any real -existence; but the imagination and superstition -of the human mind have ever been prolific in such -conceptions. The disciples were of course familiar -with the popular notions on this question; -and when the Saviour suddenly appeared in -their midst, coming in without lifting the latch, -or making any visible opening, as spiritual bodies -are able to do, their first idea was the superstitious -one of an apparition or specter, and they -were affrighted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Now when Jesus, to allay their fears, told them -that a spirit had not flesh and bones as he had, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_97'>97</span>he evidently used the word spirit in the sense of -the idea which they then had in their minds, -namely, that of a phantom; and though the -word <em>pneuma</em> is used, which in its very great -variety of meanings may be employed, perhaps, to -express such a conception, we are not to understand -that the word cannot be used to describe -bodies like that which Christ then possessed. -He was not such a spirit as they supposed; for -a <em>pneuma</em>, such as they then conceived of, in the -sense of a phantom, had not flesh and bones as -he had. Bloomfield, on verse 37, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“It may be added that our Lord meant not to countenance -those notions, but to show his hearers that, according -to their <em>own</em> notions of spirits, he was not one.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Acts 23:8: “For the Sadducees say that there -is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit, but -the Pharisees confess both.” Paul declared himself -in verse 6 to be a Pharisee; and in telling -what they believed, in verse 8, it is claimed that -Paul plainly ranged himself on the side of those -who believe in the separate conscious existence -of the spirit of man. But does this text say that -the Pharisees believed any such thing? Three -terms are used in expressing what the Sadducees -did not believe, “resurrection, angel, and spirit.” -But when the faith of the Pharisees is stated, -these three are reduced to <em>two</em>: “The Pharisees -confess <em>both</em>.” Both means only two, not three. -Now what two of the three terms before employed -<span class='pageno' id='Page_98'>98</span>unite to express one branch of the faith of the -Pharisees? The word angel could not be one; -for angels are a distinct race of beings from the -human family. Then we have left, resurrection -and spirit. The Pharisees believed in angels and -in the resurrection of the human race. Then all -the spirit they believed in, as pertaining to man, -according to this testimony, is what is connected -with the resurrection; and that, of course, is the -spiritual body with which we are then endowed. -“It is sown,” says this same apostle, “a natural -body, it is raised a <em>spiritual</em> body.” 1 Cor. 15:44. -That the term spirit is applied to those beings -which possess a spiritual body is evident -from Heb. 1:7, which reads, “Who maketh his -angels spirits.” Angels are personal beings, but -their bodies are spiritual bodies, invisible, under -ordinary circumstances, to mortal eyes. Hence -they are called spirits. So of God, John 4:24: -“God is a Spirit;” that is, a spiritual being; not -an impersonal one, as much in one place as another.</p> - -<p class='c011'>1 Cor. 5:5: “To deliver such an one unto -Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the -spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord -Jesus.” Although this text is quoted to prove -the separate conscious existence of a part of man -between death and the resurrection, the reader -cannot fail to notice that the time when the -spirit is saved is in the day of the Lord Jesus, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_99'>99</span>when the resurrection takes place. This text -proves nothing, therefore, respecting the condition -of the spirit previous to that time; and, so -far as our present purpose is concerned, we might -dismiss it with this remark; but a word or two -more may serve to free the text still further from -difficulty. What is meant by delivering the person -to Satan? and what is the destruction of the -flesh? Satan is the God of this world; and if -any man is a friend of the world, he is on the -side of Satan and an enemy of God. The church -is the body of Christ, and belongs to him. A -person committing the deeds spoken of in this -chapter must be separated from that body, and -given back to the world. He is thus delivered -unto Satan. This is for the destruction of the -flesh. The flesh is often used to mean the carnal -mind. Gal. 5:19-21. The spiritually-minded -man has crucified, or destroyed, the flesh. Now, -a person who desires eternal life, when he finds -himself set aside from the church, and placed -back in the world, the kingdom of Satan, on account -of his having the carnal mind, understands -that to gain eternal life he must then put away -the carnal mind, or crucify and destroy the flesh. -If he does this, he becomes spiritually minded, -joined again to the body of Christ, and the old -man, the flesh, being destroyed, he, as a spiritually-minded -man, will be saved in the day -of the Lord Jesus. Spirit we understand to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_100'>100</span>be used in contrast with the flesh, the one denoting -a person in a carnal state, the other, in a -spiritual. To deal with a person as the apostle -here directs, set him aside from the church till he -sees, and repents of, his sins, is often the only -way to save him. In the day of the Lord Jesus, -a person is saved by having his body fashioned -like unto Christ’s glorious body, not destroyed. -Phil. 3:21. The destruction spoken of in the -text cannot therefore be the literal destruction of -the body in contrast with the disembodied spirit.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XII. <br /> <span class='fss'>DEPARTURE AND RETURN OF THE SOUL.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>We have now examined all those passages in -which the word spirit is used in such a manner -as to furnish what is claimed to be evidence of -its uninterrupted consciousness after the death of -the body. We have found them all easily explainable -in harmony with other positive and -literal declarations of the Scriptures that the -dead know not any thing, that when a man’s -breath goeth forth and he returneth to his earth, -his very thoughts perish, and that there is no -<span class='pageno' id='Page_101'>101</span>wisdom nor knowledge nor device in the grave -to which we go. And so far the unity of the -Bible system of truth on this point is unimpaired, -and the harmony of the testimony of the -Scriptures is maintained.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We will now examine those scriptures in which -the term soul is supposed to be used in a manner -to favor the popular view. The first of these is -Gen. 35:18: “And it came to pass as her soul -was in departing (for she died), that she called -his name Benoni.” This is adduced as evidence -that the soul departs when the body dies, and -lives on in an active, conscious condition.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Luther Lee remarks on this passage:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Her body did not depart. Her brains did not depart. -There was nothing which departed which could consistently -be called her soul, only on the supposition that -there is in man an immaterial spirit which leaves the body -at death.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>We may offset this assertion of Luther Lee’s -with the following criticism from Prof. Bush:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“<em>As her soul was in departing.</em> Heb. <em>betzeth naphshah, -in the going out of her soul</em>, or <em>life</em>. Gr., ἐν τω ἀφιεναι ἀυτην -την ψυχην, <em>in her sending out her life</em>. The language -legitimately implies no more than the departing or ceasing -of the vital principle, whatever that be. In like manner -when the prophet Elijah stretched himself upon the -dead child, 1 Kings 17:21, and cried three times, saying, -‘O Lord my God, let this child’s soul come into him again,’ -he merely prays for the return of his physical vitality.”--<cite>Note -on Gen. 35:18.</cite></p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_102'>102</span>The Hebrew word here translated soul is <em>nephesh</em>, -rendered in the Septuagint by <em>psuche</em>; -and it is unnecessary to remind those who have -read the chapter on Soul and Spirit that these -words mean something besides body and brains. -They often signify that which can be said to -leave the body, as we shall presently see, rendering -entirely uncalled for the supposition of an -immaterial spirit which Mr. Lee makes such -haste to adopt.</p> - -<p class='c011'>What then did depart, and what is the plain, -simple import of the declaration? We call the -reader’s attention again to the criticism of Parkhurst, -the lexicographer, on this passage:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“As a noun, <em>nephesh</em> hath been supposed to signify the -spiritual part of man, or what we commonly call his soul. -I must for myself confess that I can find no passage where -it hath undoubtedly this meaning. Gen. 35:18; 1 Kings -17:21, 22; Ps. 16:10, seem fairest for this signification. -But may not <em>nephesh</em>, in the three former passages, be -most properly rendered <em>breath</em>, and in the last, a breathing -or animal frame?”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Thus, while Mr. Parkhurst admits that Gen. -35:18, is the fairest instance that can be found -where <em>nephesh</em> could be supposed to mean the -spiritual part of man, yet he will not so far hazard -his reputation, as a scholar and critic as to -give it that meaning in this or any other instance, -declaring that here it may most properly be rendered -“breath.” And this is in harmony with the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_103'>103</span>account of man’s creation, where it is seen that -the imparting of the breath of life is what made -Adam a living soul; and the loss of that breath, -of course, reduces man again to a state of death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>1 Kings 17:21, 22: “And the Lord heard the -voice of Elijah, and the soul of the child came -into him again, and he revived.” In the light of -the foregoing criticism on Gen. 35:18, this text -scarcely needs a passing remark. The same principle -of interpretation applies to this as to the -former. But one can hardly read such passages -as this without noticing how at variance they -read with the popular view. The child, as a -whole, is the object with which the text deals. -The child was dead. Something called the soul, -which the child is spoken of as having in possession, -had gone from him, which caused his death. -This element, not the child itself, but what belonged -to the child, as a living being, came into -him again, and <em>the child</em> revived.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But according to the immaterialist view, this -passage should not so read at all. For that -makes the soul to be the child proper; and the -passage should read something like this: “And -the Lord heard the voice of Elijah, and the child -came and took possession of his body again, and -the body revived.” This is the popular view. -Mark the chasm between it and the Scripture -record.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_104'>104</span>Verse 17 tells what had left the child, and -what it was therefore necessary for the child to -recover before he could live again. “His sickness -was so sore,” says the record, “that there was -no <em>breath</em> left in him.” That was the trouble: -the breath of life was gone from the child. And -when Elijah comes to pray for his restoration, he -asks, in the most natural manner possible, that -the very thing that had left the child, and thereby -caused his death, might come into him again, -and cause him to live; and that was simply what -verse 17 states, the breath of life.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus in neither of these passages do we find -any evidence of the existence of an immaterial, -immortal soul, which so confidently claims the -throne of honor in the temple of modern orthodoxy.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_105'>105</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XIII. <br /> <span class='fss'>CAN THE SOUL BE KILLED?</span></h2> -</div> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c010'>Matt. 10:28: “And fear not them which kill the -body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear -him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Luke records the same sentiment in these -words:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“And I say unto you, my friends. Be not afraid of -them that kill the body, and after that have no more that -they can do. But I forewarn you whom ye shall fear: -Fear him, which, after he hath killed, hath power to cast -into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.” Luke 12:4, 5.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The estimate which immaterialists put upon -these texts is thus expressed by Mr. Landis, p. -181: “This text [Matt, 10:28] therefore must continue -to stand as the testimony of the Son of God -in favor of the soul’s immortality, and his solemn -condemnation of the soul-ruining errors of the -annihilation and Sadducean doctrine.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>We reply: Mr. L. evidently applies the argument -to a wrong issue; for whatever it may -teach concerning the intermediate state, it is most -positively against the doctrine of eternal misery, -and the consequent immortality of the soul. It -teaches that God can destroy the soul in hell; and -there is no force in our Lord’s warning unless we -understand it to affirm that he will thus destroy -the souls of the wicked. We never could with -any propriety be warned to fear a person because -<span class='pageno' id='Page_106'>106</span>he could do that which he never designed to do, -and never would do. We are to fear the civil -magistrate to such a degree, at least, as not to -offend against the laws, because he has power -to put those laws into execution, and visit upon -us merited punishment; but our fear is to rest -not simply upon the fact that he has power to do -this, but upon the certainty that he will do it if -we are guilty of crime. Otherwise there could -be no cause of fear, and no ground for any -exhortation to fear.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Now we are to fear God, that is, fear to disobey -him, because he is able to destroy body and -soul in hell; and what is necessarily implied in -this? It is implied that he certainly <em>will</em> do this -in the cases of all those who do not fear him -enough to comply with his requirements. So -the text is a direct affirmation that the wicked -will be destroyed, both soul and body in hell.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The next inquiry is, What is the meaning of -the word, destroy? We answer that, take the -word, soul, to mean what we will, the word, -destroy, here has the same meaning and the same -force as applied to the soul, that the word kill has -as applied to the body in the sentence before. -Whatever killing does to the body, destroying -does to the soul. Don’t fear men because -they cannot kill the soul as they kill the body; -but fear God because he can and will kill the -soul (if wicked) just as men kill the body. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_107'>107</span>This is the only consistent interpretation of the -language. But all well understand what it does -to the body to kill it. It deprives it of all its -functions and powers of life and activity. It does -the same to the soul to destroy it, supposing the -soul to be what is popularly supposed. The word -here rendered destroy is ἀπολλύω (<em>appolluo</em>), and -is defined by Greenfield, “to destroy, to kill, to -put to death,” &c.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Having seen that the text affirms in the most -positive manner the destruction of soul and body, -or the complete cessation of existence, for all -the wicked, in hell, we now inquire whether it -teaches a conscious existence for the soul in the -intermediate state? This must be, it is claimed, -because man cannot kill it. But the killing which -God inflicts, according to the popular view, is -torment in the flames of hell, and that commences -immediately upon the death of the body. Let us -then see what the Scriptures testify concerning -the receptacle of the dead and the place of punishment.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The word, hell, in our English version is from -three different Greek words. These words are -ἅδης (<em>hades</em>), γεέννα (<em>ge-enna</em>), and ταρταρόω (<em>tartaro-o</em>, -a verb signifying to thrust down to tartarus). -These all designate different places; and -the following full list of the instances of their -occurrence in the New Testament, will show -their use.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_108'>108</span><em>Hades</em> occurs in the following passages:--</p> - -<table class='table0' summary=''> -<colgroup> -<col width='10%' /> -<col width='12%' /> -<col width='76%' /> -</colgroup> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Matt.</td> - <td class='c016'>11:23.</td> - <td class='c017'>Shalt be brought down to <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>16:18.</td> - <td class='c017'>The gates of <em>hell</em> shall not prevail.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Luke</td> - <td class='c016'>10:15.</td> - <td class='c017'>Shalt be thrust down to <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>16:23.</td> - <td class='c017'>In <em>hell</em> he lifted up his eyes.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Acts</td> - <td class='c016'>2:27.</td> - <td class='c017'>Wilt not leave my soul in <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>2:31.</td> - <td class='c017'>His soul was not left in <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>1 Cor.</td> - <td class='c016'>15:55.</td> - <td class='c017'>O <em>Grave</em>, where is thy victory?</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Rev.</td> - <td class='c016'>1:18.</td> - <td class='c017'>Have the keys of <em>hell</em> and death.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>6:8.</td> - <td class='c017'>Was death, and <em>hell</em> followed.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Rev.</td> - <td class='c016'>20:13.</td> - <td class='c017'>Death and <em>hell</em> delivered up the dead which were in them.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>20:14.</td> - <td class='c017'>Death and <em>hell</em> were cast into the lake of fire.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class='c011'><em>Ge-enna</em> signifies Gehenna, the valley of Hinnom, -near Jerusalem, in which fires were kept -constantly burning to consume the bodies of -malefactors and the rubbish which was brought -from the city and cast therein. It is found in -the following places:--</p> - -<table class='table0' summary=''> -<colgroup> -<col width='10%' /> -<col width='12%' /> -<col width='76%' /> -</colgroup> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Matt.</td> - <td class='c016'>5:22.</td> - <td class='c017'>Shall be in danger of <em>hell</em> fire.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>5:29.</td> - <td class='c017'>Whole body should be cast into <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>5:30.</td> - <td class='c017'>Whole body should be cast into <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>10:28.</td> - <td class='c017'>Destroy both soul and body in <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>18:9.</td> - <td class='c017'>Having two eyes to be cast into <em>hell</em> fire.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>23:15.</td> - <td class='c017'>More the child of <em>hell</em> than yourselves.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>23:33.</td> - <td class='c017'>How can ye escape the damnation of <em>hell</em>?</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Mark</td> - <td class='c016'>9:43.</td> - <td class='c017'>Having two hands to go into <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>9:45.</td> - <td class='c017'>Having two feet to be cast into <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c016'>9:47.</td> - <td class='c017'>Having two eyes to be cast into <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Luke</td> - <td class='c016'>12:5.</td> - <td class='c017'>Hath power to cast into <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>James</td> - <td class='c016'>3:6.</td> - <td class='c017'>It is set on fire of <em>hell</em>.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class='c011'><em>Tartaro-o</em> is used only in the following text:</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_109'>109</span>“God spared not the angels that sinned, but <em>cast -them down to hell</em>.” 2 Pet. 2:4.</p> - -<p class='c011'>From these references it will be seen that <em>hades</em> -is the place of the dead whether righteous or -wicked, from which they are brought only by a -resurrection. Rev. 20:13. On the contrary, Gehenna -is the place into which the wicked are to -be cast alive with all their members, to be destroyed -soul and body. These places, therefore, -are not to be confounded together.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Now the punishment against which the text -warns us, is not a punishment in <em>hades</em>, the -state or place of the dead, but in <em>Gehenna</em>, which -is not inflicted till after the resurrection. Therefore -we affirm that the text contains no evidence -whatever of the condition of man in death, but -passes over the entire period from the death of -the body to the resurrection. And this is further -evident from the record in Luke: “Be not -afraid of them that kill the body, and after that, -have no more that they can do. But I will forewarn -you whom ye shall fear: Fear him, which -after he hath killed, hath power to cast into -hell.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Luke does not use the term, soul, at all; yet he -expresses the same sentiment as Matthew. Man -can kill the body or destroy this present life; -but he can accomplish no destruction beyond that. -But God can not only kill the body, or destroy -the present life, but he can cast into Gehenna, or -<span class='pageno' id='Page_110'>110</span>destroy the life that we have beyond the resurrection. -These two things alone the text has in -view. And now when we remember that <em>psuche</em>, -the word here rendered, soul, often means life, -either the present or future, and is forty times in -the New Testament so rendered, the text is freed -from all difficulty. The word, kill, to be sure is -not such as would naturally be used in connection -with life; but the word, destroy, which is among -the definitions of the original word, <em>apokteino</em>, can -be appropriately used with life. Thus, fear not -them which kill the body, but are not able to -destroy the future life; but rather fear him who -is able to destroy the body and put an end to all -future life in hell. And it is worthy of notice -that the destruction in hell here threatened is -not inflicted upon a person without his body. -Nothing is said about God’s destroying the soul -alone; but it is at some point beyond this life, -when the person again has a body: which is not -till after the resurrection.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Another declaration from the lips of our Lord, -found in Matt. 16:25, 26, will throw some light -on our present subject: “For whosoever will save -his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his -life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man -profited if he shall gain the whole world, and lose -his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange -for his soul?” The word soul should -here be rendered life. Dr. Clarke, on verse 26, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_111'>111</span>says: “On what authority many here translate -the word <em>psuche</em> in the 25th verse, <em>life</em>, and -in this verse, <em>soul</em>, I know not, but am certain it -means life in both places.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>But let us take the expressions, “soul” and -“to lose the soul,” in the popular sense, and what -should we have? Whosoever will save his -soul (to save the soul meaning to save it from -hell) shall lose it (that is shall go into hell torments): -but whosoever will lose his soul (suffer -eternal misery) for my sake, shall find it (shall be -saved in Heaven). This makes utter nonsense -of the passage, and so is a sufficient condemnation -of the view which makes such an interpretation -necessary.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The passage simply refers to the present and -future life. Thus, whosoever will save his life, -that is, will deny Christ and his gospel for the -sake of avoiding persecution, or of preserving his -present life, he shall lose it in the world to come, -when God shall destroy both soul and body in -Gehenna; but he who shall lose his present life -if need be, for the sake of Christ and his cause, -shall find it in the world to come, when eternal -life is given to all the overcomers.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Here the life is spoken of as something which -can be lost and found again. Between the losing -and finding no one can claim that it maintains -a conscious existence. And what is meant by finding -it? Simply that God will bestow it upon us -<span class='pageno' id='Page_112'>112</span>in the future beyond the resurrection. So what -is meant by the expression that man cannot kill -it? Simply the same thing, that God will, in the -resurrection, endow us with life again, a life -which is beyond the power of man.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The life of all men is in the hands of God. The -body was formed of the dust, but the life was imparted -by God. Man, by sin, has made this present -life a temporary one. But through the plan -of salvation, by which the human race was placed -upon a second probation, after Adam’s fall, with -the privilege of still gaining eternal life, a future -life is decreed for all; for there shall be a resurrection -of the just and unjust. With the righteous, -this life will be eternal; for they have secured the -forgiveness of all their sins through Jesus Christ; -but with the wicked, it will soon end in the -second death; for they have thrown away their -golden privilege, and clung to their sins, the -wages of which is death. Man may hasten the -close of this present temporary life, may cut it -short by killing the body, for some years before -it would close in the natural course of events; -but that future life, which in the purpose of God -is as sure as his own throne, they cannot touch.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The exhortation is to those who are striving to -serve God, and who thereby are liable to lose -their present lives at the hands of wicked men -for the truth’s sake. Fear them not, though with -the bloody arm of persecution they may deprive -<span class='pageno' id='Page_113'>113</span>you of the present life; for the life which is to -come they cannot reach.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And the warning is to the wicked that unless -they fear God more than men, and are governed -by his glory more than by worldly considerations, -he will bring their existence to an utter -end in the fire Gehenna.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The text, therefore, so far from proving the existence -in man of an independent, death-surviving, -conscious entity called the immortal soul, -speaks only of the present and future life, and, -passing over the entire period between death and -the resurrection, then promises the righteous a -life which man cannot destroy, and affirms that -the wicked shall utterly cease to be in the second -death.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XIV. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE SOULS UNDER THE ALTAR.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>In Rev. 6:9-11, is another instance where the -word, soul, is used in a manner which many take -to be proof that there is in man a separate entity, -conscious in death, and capable in a disembodied -state of performing all the acts, and exercising all -the emotions, which pertain to this life. The -verses referred to read:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under -the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_114'>114</span>God, and for the testimony which they held. And they -cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy -and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on -them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were -given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, -that they should rest yet for a little season, until their -fellow-servants also and their brethren, that should be -killed as they were, should be fulfilled.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>On the hypothesis of the popular view, what -conclusions must we draw from this testimony?</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. It is assumed that these souls were in -Heaven; then the altar under which John saw -them must have been the altar of incense, as -that is the only altar brought to view in Heaven. -Rev. 8:3. But the altar spoken of in the text -is evidently the altar of sacrifice upon which -they were slain. Therefore to represent them as -under the altar of incense, which was never used -for sacrifice, is both incongruous and unscriptural.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. We must conclude that they were in a state -of confinement, shut up under the altar--not a -condition we would naturally associate with the -perfection of heavenly bliss.</p> - -<p class='c011'>3. Solomon says of the dead, that their love, -their hatred, and their envy, is now perished. -Eccl. 9:6. But that makes no difference; for -here are the souls of the holy martyrs still smarting -with resentment against their persecutors, -and calling for vengeance upon their devoted -heads. Is this altogether consistent? Would -<span class='pageno' id='Page_115'>115</span>not the superlative bliss of Heaven swallow up -all resentment against those who had done them -this good though they meant them harm, and -lead them to bless rather than curse the hand -that had hastened them thither?</p> - -<p class='c011'>But further, the same view which puts these -souls into Heaven, puts the souls of the wicked, -at the termination of this mortal life, into the -lake of fire, where they are racked with unutterable -and unceasing anguish, in full view of all -the heavenly host. In proof of this, the parable -of the rich man and Lazarus is strenuously urged. -But is it so? If it is not, then the popular exposition -of that parable must be abandoned. But -that supposed stronghold will not readily be surrendered, -so it is proper to look at the bearing it -has upon the case before us.</p> - -<p class='c011'>According, then, to the orthodox view, the persecutors -of these souls were even then, or certainly -soon would be, enveloped in the flames of -hell, right before their eyes, every fiber of their -being quivering with a keenness of torture which -no language can express, and of which no mind -can adequately conceive.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Here they were, their agony full in view of -these souls of the martyrs, and their piercing -shrieks of infinite and hopeless woe ringing in -their ears; for the rich man and Abraham, you -know, could converse together across the gulf. -And was not the sight of all this woe enough to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_116'>116</span>glut the most insatiate vengeance? Is there a -fiend in hell who could manifest the malevolence -of planning and praying for greater vengeance -than this? Yet these souls are represented, even -under these circumstances, as calling upon God -to avenge their blood on their persecutors, and -saying “How long?” as if chiding the tardy -movements of Providence, in commencing, or intensifying, -their torments. Such is the character -which the common view attributes to these holy -martyrs, and such the spirit with which it clothes -a system of religion the chief injunction of which -is to forgive, and the chief law of which is mercy. -Does it find indorsement in any breast in which -there remains a drop of even the milk of human -kindness?</p> - -<p class='c011'>4. These souls pray that their <em>blood</em> may be -avenged--an article which the uncompounded, -invisible, and immaterial soul, as generally understood, -is not supposed to possess.</p> - -<p class='c011'>These are some of the difficulties we meet, -some of the camels we have to swallow, in taking -down the popular view.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But it is urged that these souls must be conscious; -for they cry to God. How easily our expositors -forget that language has any literal use, -when they wish it to be figurative, or that it is -ever used as a figure, when they wish it to be -literal. There is supposed to be such a figure of -speech as personification, in which, under certain -<span class='pageno' id='Page_117'>117</span>conditions, life, action, and intelligence, are attributed -to inanimate objects. Thus the blood -of Abel is said to have cried to God from the -ground. Gen. 4:9, 10. The stone cried out of -the wall, and the beam out of the timber -answered it. Hab. 2:11. The hire of the laborers, -kept back by fraud, cried; and the cry -entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. -James 5:4. So these souls could cry, in the -same sense, and yet be no more conscious than -Abel’s blood, the stone, the beam, or the laborer’s -hire.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So incongruous is the popular view that Albert -Barnes makes haste to set himself right on the -record as follows:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“We are not to suppose that this <em>literally</em> occurred, and -that John actually saw the souls of the martyrs beneath -the altar--for the whole representation is symbolical; nor -are we to suppose that the injured and the wronged in -Heaven actually pray for vengeance on those who wronged -them, or that the redeemed in Heaven will continue to -pray with reference to things on the earth; but it may -be fairly inferred from this that there will be <em>as real</em> -a remembrance of the wrongs of the persecuted, the injured, -and the oppressed, <em>as if</em> such a prayer was offered -there; and that the oppressor has as much to dread from -the divine vengeance, <em>as if</em> those whom he has injured -should cry in Heaven to the God who hears prayer, and -who takes vengeance.”--<cite>Notes on Rev. 6.</cite></p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>But it is said that white robes were given -them; hence it is further urged that they must -be conscious. But this no more follows than it -<span class='pageno' id='Page_118'>118</span>does from the fact that they cried. How was it? -They had gone down to the grave in the most -ignominious manner. Their lives had been misrepresented, -their reputations tarnished, their -names defamed, their motives maligned, and -their graves covered with shame and reproach, -as containing the dishonored dust of the most -vile and despicable characters. Thus the church -of Rome, which then molded the sentiments of -the principal nations of the earth, spared no -pains to make her victims an abhorring unto all -flesh.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But the Reformation commences its work. It -soon begins to be seen that the Romish church is -the corrupt and disreputable party, and those -against whom it vents its rage are the good, the -pure, and the true. The work goes on among -the most enlightened nations, the reputation of -the church going down, and that of the martyrs -coming up, until the corruptions of the papal -abomination are fully exposed, and that huge -system of iniquity stands before the world in all -its naked deformity, while the martyrs are vindicated -from all the aspersions under which that -Antichristian church had sought to bury them. -Then it was seen that they had suffered, not for -being vile and criminal, but “for the word of God -and for the testimony which they held.” Then -their praises were sung, their virtues admired, -their fortitude applauded, their names honored, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_119'>119</span>and their memory cherished. And thus it is even -to this day. White robes have thus been given -unto every one of them.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The whole trouble on such passages as this we -conceive to arise from the theological definition -of the word soul: From that definition, one is -led to suppose that this text speaks of an immaterial, -invisible, immortal essence in man, which -soars into its coveted freedom on the death of its -hindrance and clog, the mortal body. No instance -of the occurrence of the word in the original -Hebrew or Greek will sustain such a definition. -It oftenest means life; and is not unfrequently -rendered, person. It applies to the dead -as well as to the living, as may be seen by reference -to Gen. 2:7, where the word, “living,” need -not have been expressed were life an inseparable -attribute of the soul; and to Num. 19:13, where -the Hebrew Concordance reads, “dead soul.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The reader is also referred to the previous -chapter on Soul and Spirit. From the definitions -there given, it is evident that the word soul -may mean, and the context requires that it here -should mean, simply the martyrs, those who had -been slain; the expression, “the souls of them,” -being used to designate the whole person. They -were represented to John as having been slain -upon the altar of papal sacrifice on this earth, -and lying dead beneath it. So Dr. Clarke, on -this passage, says, “The altar is upon earth, not -<span class='pageno' id='Page_120'>120</span>in Heaven.” They certainly were not alive when -John saw them under the fifth seal; for he again -brings to view the same company in almost the -same language, and assures us that the first time -they live after their martyrdom is at the resurrection -of the just. Rev. 20:4-6. Lying there, -victims of papal blood-thirstiness and oppression, -the great wrong, of which their sacrifice was the -evidence, called upon God for vengeance. They -cried, or their blood cried, even as Abel’s blood -cried to God from the ground.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus another stronghold of the immortality -of the soul must be surrendered to a harmonious -interpretation, and the plain teaching, of the -word of God.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XV. <br /> <span class='fss'>GATHERED TO HIS PEOPLE.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The pleasing doctrine that man can never die, -though unfortunate in its parentage, is very tenacious -of its life. In treating this subject in -previous chapters, we have found that the record -of man’s creation brings to view no immortal -element as entering into his being; that the -Bible, in its use of the terms immortal and immortality, -never employs them to express an -attribute inherent in man’s nature; that no description -<span class='pageno' id='Page_121'>121</span>of soul and spirit, and no signification -of the original words, will sustain the present -popular definition of these terms; that the soul -and spirit, though spoken of in the Bible, in the -aggregate, seventeen hundred times, are never -once said to be immortal or never-dying; and -that no text in which these words are supposed -to be employed in such a manner as to show that -they signify an ever-conscious, immortal principle, -can possibly be interpreted to sustain such a -doctrine.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Yet the dogma of natural immortality, very -reluctantly yields the ground. To a twentieth -proof text it will cling even the more tenaciously, -if the preceding nineteen are all swept away. -Besides the texts already noticed, there are a -few other passages behind which it seeks refuge; -and with alacrity we follow it into all its hiding-places, -confident that in no passage in all the -Bible can it find a shelter, but that into every -one which it claims as its own, it has entered, -not by right of possession, but as an intruder and -a usurper.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Behind the obituaries of the patriarchs it -seeks to shield itself. It is claimed, for instance, -that the death of Abraham is recorded in such a -manner as to show that his conscious existence -did not cease with his earthly life. We might -justly insist on their going farther back and taking -the recorded close of the lives of the antediluvian -<span class='pageno' id='Page_122'>122</span>patriarchs as the basis of their argument. -One of these, Enoch, was translated to Heaven -without seeing death; and all the others, according -to popular belief, went to Heaven just as -effectually, through death. But how different is -their record. Of Enoch it is said that he “was -not; for God took him;” while of the others it -is said, And they “died.” Surely these two -records do not mean the same thing, and Enoch, -whom God took, and who is consequently alive -in Heaven, must be, judging from the record, in -a different condition from those who died.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But to return to the case of Abraham. The -record of his death reads: “Then Abraham gave -up the ghost, and died in a good old age, an old -man and full of years, and was gathered to his -people.” On this verse, Landis, p. 130, thus remarks:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“What then is this <em>gathering</em>to the -body or the soul? It cannot refer to the body, for while -his body was buried in the cave of Macpelah, in Canaan, -his fathers were buried afar off; Terah, in Haran, in -Mesopotamia, and the rest of his ancestors far off in -Chaldea. Of course, then, this gathering relates not to -the body, but to the soul; he was gathered to the assembly -of the blessed, and thus entered his habitation.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>To show how gratuitous, not to say preposterous, -is this conclusion, we raise a query on two -points: 1. Does the expression, “gathered to his -people,” denote that he went to dwell in conscious -intercourse with them? 2. Were his -<span class='pageno' id='Page_123'>123</span>ancestors such righteous persons that they went -to Heaven when they died? In answering -these queries, the last shall be the first. It is a -significant fact that Abraham had to be <em>separated</em> -from his kindred and his <i>father’s house</i>, in order -that God might make him a special subject of -his providence. And in Josh. 24:2, we are -plainly told that his ancestors were idolaters; -for they served other gods. Such being their -character, death would send them, according to -the popular view, to the regions of the damned. -At the time, then, of Abraham’s death, they -were writhing amid the lurid waves of the lake -of fire. And when Abraham was gathered to -them, if it was in the sense which the theology -of our day teaches, he, too, was consigned to the -flames of hell! Oh! to what absurdities will -men suffer themselves to be led blindfold by a -petted theory. God had said to Abram, Gen. -15:15: “And thou shalt go to thy fathers in -peace; thou shalt be buried in a good old age.” -Was this the consoling promise that he should -go to hell in peace in a good old age? And is -the record of his death an assertion that he has -his place among the damned!? Yes! if the immaterialist -theory be correct. Children of Abraham, -arise! and with one mouth vindicate your -“righteous father” from the foul aspersion. Renounce -a theory as far from Heaven-born which -compels you thus to look upon the “father of the -faithful.”</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_124'>124</span>Does, then, the expression, “gathered to his -people,” mean his personal, conscious intercourse -with them? If man has an immortal soul which -lives in death, it does; and if it does, Abraham -is in hell. There is no way of avoiding this -conclusion, except by repudiating the idea that -man has such a soul, and denying his conscious -happiness or misery while in a state of death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But how, then, could he be gathered to his -people? Answer: He could go into the grave -into which they had gone, into the state of -death, in which they were held. Jacob said, -when mourning for Joseph whom he supposed -dead: “I will go down into the grave unto my -son mourning.” Not that he expected to go into -the same locality, or the same grave; for he did -not suppose that his son, being, as he then -thought, devoured by wild beasts, was in the -grave literally at all; but by the grave he evidently -meant a state of death; and as his son -had been violently deprived of life, he too would -go down mourning into the state of death; and -this he calls going unto his son. In Acts 13:36, -Paul, speaking of David, says that he “was <em>laid -unto his fathers</em>.” This all must acknowledge -to be the exact equivalent of being “gathered to -his people;” then the apostle goes on and adds, -“<em>and saw corruption</em>.” That which was laid -unto his fathers, or was gathered to his people, -saw corruption. Men may labor, if they choose, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_125'>125</span>to refer it to the immortal soul; but in that way -they do it a very doubtful favor; for the success -of their argument is the destruction of their -theory; and the soul is shown to be something -which is perishable and corruptible in its nature.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The peaceful death of our father Abraham -furnishes no proof of an immortal soul in man, -and from his hallowed resting-place no arguments -for such a dogma can be drawn.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Another text may properly be considered in -this connection:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Ps. 90:10: “The days of our years are threescore -years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore -years, yet is their strength labor and sorrow; for it -is soon cut off and we fly away.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>On the authority of this text it is claimed that -something flies away when our strength is cut -off in death; that that something is the immortal -soul, and that if it flies away, it is therefore conscious; -and if it thus survives the stroke of -death, it is therefore immortal: rather a numerous -array of conclusions, and rather weighty -ones, to be drawn from the three words, “we fly -away.” Let us look at David’s argument. The -reason given why our strength is labor and sorrow, -is because it is soon cut off and we fly away. -If, now, our flying away means the going away -of a conscious soul, into Heaven, for instance, if -we are righteous, his argument stands thus: -“Yet is their strength labor and sorrow; for it -<span class='pageno' id='Page_126'>126</span>is soon cut off, and <em>we go to Heaven</em>.” Singular -reasoning, this! But his argument is all consistent -if by flying away he means that we go into -the grave, where Solomon assures us that there -is no work, wisdom, knowledge, nor device. Let -us not abuse the psalmist’s reasoning.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The text plainly tells us what flies away; -namely, <em>we</em> fly away. We is a personal pronoun -and includes the whole person. According to -Buck’s assertion that man is composed of two -<em>essential</em> elements, soul and body, the man is not -complete without them both; and the pronoun, -we, could not be used to express either of them -separately. The text does not intimate any -separation; it does not say that the soul flies -away, or the spirit flies away; but <em>we</em>, in our -undivided personality, fly away. To what place -does the body, an essential part of the we, fly? -To the grave, and there only.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This is confirmed by Eccl. 9:3: “The heart -of the sons of men is full of evil; and madness is -in their hearts while they live, and after that -they go to the dead.” Had this text read, “And -after that they go away,” it would have been -exactly parallel to Ps. 90:10; for no essential -difference can be claimed between going and -flying. But here it is expressly told where we -go: we go to the <em>grave</em>. What is omitted in Ps. -90:10, is here supplied.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We may also add that the Hebrew word <em>gooph</em>, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_127'>127</span>rendered “fly away,” signifies, according to Gesenius, -“First, to cover, spec. with wings, feathers, -as birds cover their young. Second, to fly, properly -of birds. Third, to cover over, wrap in -darkness. Fourth, to overcome with darkness, -to faint, to faint away.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The idea is plainly this: Though our days be -fourscore years, yet is their strength labor and -sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we sink away, -go to the grave, and are wrapped in the darkness -of death. Viewed thus, David’s language is consistent, -and his reasoning harmonious; but his -language we pervert and his logic we destroy, -the moment we try to make his words prove the -separation from the body, of a conscious soul at -death.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XVI. <br /> <span class='fss'>SAMUEL AND THE WOMAN OF ENDOR.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>In all arguments for the continued life and -consciousness of the dead, 1 Sam. 28:3-20, usually -holds a conspicuous place. In examining -this scripture, we will look at (1) the narrative, -(2) the claim that is based upon it, (3) the character -of the actors in the incident, (4) the facts -to be considered, and (5) the conclusions to be -drawn.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_128'>128</span>1. <em>The narrative.</em> Samuel was a prophet of -God in Israel from 1112 to 1058 before Christ. -Saul was king of Israel from 1096 to 1056 before -Christ. Samuel anointed Saul to his office as -king, and from time to time communicated instruction -to him from the Lord as his counselor -and adviser. At the time when the incident recorded -in 1 Sam. 28:3-20, occurred, Samuel was -dead. There was war between the Israelites and -the Philistines. The Philistines pressed hard -upon Israel. They gathered their forces together -in Shunem, and Saul, assembling all Israel to oppose -them, pitched in Gilboa. Dismayed at the -mighty array of the Philistine host, Saul’s heart -sunk within him, and he was sore afraid. In -anxiety and trembling, he cast about him for -help. He sought the Lord, but the Lord answered -him not. No dream was given, no token -by Urim appeared, no prophet had a word from -the mouth of the Lord to meet the circumstances -of his deep distress. He thought of his old-time -friend, the prophet Samuel, to whom he had so -often gone, and who had so often directed his -steps in times of doubt and danger. But Samuel -was dead, and how could he consult him?</p> - -<p class='c011'>There was in the land a class of people who -claimed to have power to communicate with the -dead. This work, called necromancy (a “<em>pretended</em> -communication with the dead”--<cite>Webster</cite>), -had been strictly forbidden by the Lord, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_129'>129</span>Lev. 19:31; 20:27; Deut. 18:9-12, &c. And -Saul in obedience to the command of the Lord, -Ex. 22:18, had cut off, so far as they could be -found, all persons of that class out of the land. -Yet a few, controlled wholly by the devil, still -practiced, with caution and secrecy, their hellish -orgies.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Whether Saul had ever believed in the reality -of this work, or not, we are not informed. But -it is certain that in his present extremity, his -belief gave way to the pretensions of these necromancers, -and the evil thought took possession -of him that he could consult in this way with -the prophet Samuel. So he inquired for a woman -that had a familiar spirit, and was told of one at -Endor.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Disguising himself, in order that the woman, -knowing Saul’s decree against witchcraft, might -not fear to communicate for him, and going secretly -by night, he sought the woman. The -woman being assured that no evil was intended -and no punishment should happen to her, asked -whom she should bring up. Saul answered, -Bring me up Samuel. And when she saw the -object which her conjuration had evoked, she -cried out with fear, and said to her royal guest, -Why hast thou deceived me? for thou art Saul. -He told her to fear not, but tell what she saw. -She answered, An old man, covered with a mantle. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_130'>130</span>“And Saul perceived,” says the narrative, -“that it was Samuel.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Samuel asked Saul why he had disquieted him -to bring him up; and Saul answered, that he -might make known what he should do; for the -Philistines made war upon him, and God was departed -from him, and he was sore distressed. -Samuel then asked him why he came to him -since God had departed from him, and had become -his enemy. Then he proceeded to tell him -that the kingdom was rent out of his hand because -he had failed to obey the Lord; that the -Philistines should triumph in the battle, and -that on the morrow he and his sons should die. -This was the finishing stroke to the already -breaking heart of Saul, and, utterly overwhelmed -with his calamities, he fell senseless to the earth.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Such are the essential facts brought to view -in the narrative. Let us now look at what is -claimed from them.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. <em>The claim.</em> This can be expressed in few -words. It is claimed that Samuel actually appeared -on this occasion, and that therefore the -dead are conscious, or that there is a spirit in -man that lives on in consciousness when the -body dies; and, therefore again, the soul is -immortal.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The validity of this claim rests very much on -the question whether the transaction here recorded -was wrought by the power of God or by -<span class='pageno' id='Page_131'>131</span>the devil. If by God, then the representation -was a true one; if by the devil, we may look for -deception; for he commenced his work by becoming -the father of all the lies in the <a id='corr131.4'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='world.'>world,</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_131.4'><ins class='correction' title='world.'>world,</ins></a></span> -and continues it by assiduously circulating <a id='corr131.5'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='them,'>them.</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_131.5'><ins class='correction' title='them,'>them.</ins></a></span> -We will therefore consider,</p> - -<p class='c011'>3. <em>The character of the actors.</em> These actors -were, first, the woman that had a familiar spirit; -and familiar spirits are spirits of devils. Compare -together Num. 25:1-3; Ps. 106:28; and -1 Cor. 10:20. This work of dealing with familiar -spirits, God had declared to be an abomination -to him, he had expressly forbidden it, and -sentenced to death all who practiced it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The other chief actor in this scene was Saul. -And what was his condition at this time? He -had so long lived in violation of divine instruction -that God had departed from him, and answered -him no more by dreams, nor by Urim, -nor by prophets, which were the ways he had -himself appointed to communicate with his people. -Query: Would the Lord refuse to communicate -with him in ways of his own appointing, -and then come to him by means the use of -which he had expressly forbidden? We see -then that neither of the actors in this scene -were persons through whom, or for whom, we -should expect the Lord to work. We will therefore -notice further,</p> - -<p class='c011'>4. <em>The facts to be considered.</em></p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_132'>132</span><em>a.</em> The wonders wrought on this occasion were -all accomplished by the familiar spirit with whom -this woman consorted. There were two things -for this spirit to do: (1) Either to bring up in -reality the dead person that was called for, or -(2) to counterfeit the dead man so perfectly that -those who were conversing with the familiar -spirit would believe that they were conversing -with their dead friend.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>b.</em> That it was not Samuel, but the familiar -spirit personating Samuel, that appeared, is evident -from the fact that this supposed Samuel, -before holding any communication with Saul, put -the woman on her guard, telling her that her -guest was none other than Saul himself. This is -shown by the fact that the woman, as soon as she -saw him, cried out with fear, not because Samuel -really appeared contrary to her expectations, as -some have supposed; for she did not cry out, -“Samuel has come, indeed!” but because of what -the appearance told her, for she immediately -turned to Saul and said, “Why hast thou deceived -me? for thou art Saul.” This would not -be the work of the real Samuel, to put the woman -on her guard, to aid her in her unholy work of -incantation.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>c.</em> According to the claim based on this transaction, -it was Samuel’s immortal soul that appeared -on this occasion, but its appearance was, -according to the description of the woman, an old -<span class='pageno' id='Page_133'>133</span>man covered with a mantle. Do immortal souls -go about in this way, in the form of old men covered -with mantles? This renders it still more -evident that it was the familiar spirit, imitating -Samuel as he appeared while here upon earth.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>d.</em> Saul did not see Samuel at all. But does -it not read that “Saul perceived that it was Samuel”? -Yes; but perceived how? Not by the -sight of his eyes, but from the woman’s description. -The words “saw,” as applied to the woman, -verse 12, and “perceive,” as applied to Saul, verse -14, are in the Septuagint different words. The -woman actually saw the appearance before her; -and here the word (<em>eido</em>) εἴδω is used, which -signifies, according to Liddell and Scott, “to see, -behold, look at;” but when it is said that Saul -perceived, the word is (<em>gignosco</em>) γιγνώσκω, which -signifies, according to the same authority, “to -know, perceive, gain knowledge of, observe, mark, -be aware of, see into, understand,” by an operation -of the mind. In harmony with this view, -is Saul’s language to the woman, “What sawest -<em>thou</em>?” and “What form is he of?” If any should -say that Saul might have seen all that the woman -saw if he had not been prostrate upon the ground, -it is sufficient to reply that it was not till after -he asked these questions that he “stooped with -his face to the ground, and bowed himself.” -Verse 14. If Samuel had actually been present, -Saul could have seen him as well as the woman.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_134'>134</span><em>e.</em> The appearance which the woman saw came -up out of the earth. Was that Samuel’s immortal -soul? Are these souls in the earth? We -supposed they were in the heavenly glories of -the world above.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>f.</em> Is it said that, as the form came up out of -the earth, Samuel had a resurrection. Then the -conscious-soul theory is abandoned. But if this -was a resurrection of Samuel, how could he come -up out of the ground here at Endor, near the sea -of Galilee, when he was buried in distant Ramah, -verse 3, near Jerusalem? And if the old man -was raised from the dead, what became of him? -Did he go through the pains of a second dissolution, -and enter the grave again? If so, well -might he complain to Saul for disquieting him -to bring him up.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>g.</em> This pretended Samuel told Saul that he -and his sons would be with him the following -day. Verse 19. If he was an immortal spirit in -glory, how could Saul, whom God had rejected -for his sins, go to be with him there?</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>h.</em> Another sacred writer mentions this event -in Saul’s life, and assigns it as one of the two -reasons why he was given up by the Lord to die. -1 Chron. 10:13.</p> - -<p class='c011'>5. <em>Conclusions.</em> What conclusions are inevitable -from the foregoing facts? It is first of all -evident that Samuel was not present on that occasion -either as an immortal spirit from the third -<span class='pageno' id='Page_135'>135</span>Heaven, or as one resurrected from the dead. For</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>a.</em> It is not consistent to suppose that God, -having refused to answer Saul’s petitions in any -legitimate way, would have respect to them when -presented through this forbidden channel.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>b.</em> It is inconsistent to suppose that an immortal -soul from glory would come up out of the -earth, as did the form which the woman evoked -with her hellish incantations.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>c.</em> It is inconsistent to suppose that Samuel -was resurrected bodily here in Endor, when he -was buried in Ramah.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>d.</em> If he was raised, it must have been by God -or the devil. But the devil cannot raise the dead, -and it is evident that God would not, at least in -answer to these agencies, the use of which he had -forbidden under pain of death. God would not -thus raise up his servant to talk with Saul on -the devil’s own ground.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>e.</em> It is incredible that such a man as Samuel, -who held witchcraft as such a heinous sin, 1 Sam. -15:23, should first hold friendly converse with -this abandoned woman in the midst of her incantations, -and put her on her guard, before delivering -his message to Saul.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>f.</em> It is the boldest assumption to suppose that -any one, through this agency of the devil, would -have power to summon at will any immortal soul -from glory, or to raise any one from the dead, or -that this woman, through her hellish incantations, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_136'>136</span>would have power to behold the holy Samuel, -while Saul could see nothing.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But is it not said that the woman saw Samuel? -Yes; and here is the only seeming difficulty -in all the narrative. We find these four -expressions: “The woman saw Samuel;” verse -12; “And Samuel said to Saul;” verse 15; “Then -said Samuel;” verse 16; and, “because of the -words of Samuel.” Verse 20. And how could -it be so written, it is asked, if Samuel was not -there, and the woman did not see him, and he -did not say the things here recorded?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Answer. This is easily explained by a very -common law of language. Consider the circumstances. -The woman stood ready to bring up -any one that might be called for. She believed, -of course, that they actually came, just as mediums -now-a-days believe the forms they see are -those of their departed friends. Samuel was -called for, and this mantled old man appeared. -She supposed it was Samuel; and Saul supposed -it was Samuel; and then, according to the general -law of the <em>language of appearance</em>, the narrative -proceeds <em>according to their supposition</em>. -When it says Samuel, it only means that form -that appeared, which they <em>supposed</em> to be Samuel.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Secondly, the conclusion is apparent that this -was only a manifestation of ancient necromancy, -sorcery, witchcraft, or spiritualism; a wholesale -deception palmed off upon his dupes by the devil -<span class='pageno' id='Page_137'>137</span>in disguise. Between the ancient and modern -there is this difference: Then he had to pretend -to bring up the dead from the ground; for the -people then believed that the dead were in the -lower regions of the earth: now he brings them -down from the upper spheres; for the prevailing -belief now is that those regions are populous -with the conscious spirits of the departed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Let no one then appeal to the workings of the -witch of Endor to prove the immortality of the -soul, unless he is prepared to claim openly that -the Bible is a fiction, that ancient necromancy -was a divine practice, and that modern spiritualism -with all its godless blasphemies and its reeking -corruptions is the only reliable oracle of truth -and purity.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XVII. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE TRANSFIGURATION. MATT. 17:1-9.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>When our Lord was transfigured, on a high -mountain of Galilee, before Peter and James and -John, there appeared with him two other glorified -personages, talking with him. These, the -inspired narrator says, were Moses and Elias, as -the disciples understood them to be. Luke 9:30-33.</p> - -<p class='c011'>With what pleasure does the immaterialist -<span class='pageno' id='Page_138'>138</span>meet with an account of any manifestation or -action on the part of those who have long been -dead; it has so specious an appearance of sustaining -his views, or at least of furnishing him -ground for an argument; for, says he, the person -was dead, and this manifestation was by his -conscious spirit or immortal soul.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So far as the case of Elias is concerned, as he -appeared at the transfiguration, it affords that -theory no benefit; for he, being translated, never -saw death, and so could appear in the body with -which he ascended. This is conceded by all; -and for this reason his case is never put in as a -witness on this question, except by those who -are so unfamiliar with the record as to suppose -that he, too, once died, and here appeared as a -disembodied spirit.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But with Moses the case is different; for we -have in the Bible a plain account of his death -and burial; yet here he appeared on the mount, -alive, active, and conscious; for he talked with -Christ. And so with an air of triumph, perhaps -sincere, Landis asks (p. 181), “What then have -our opponents to say to this argument? for they -must meet it or renounce their theory.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Were we Sadducees, denying the resurrection, -and any future life beyond the grave, this case -would lie as an insuperable barrier across our -pathway; but so long as the doctrine of the resurrection -of the dead is taught in the Bible, the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_139'>139</span>incident is not necessarily against those who -deny the existence of any such thing as a conscious, -disembodied human spirit, since the presence -of Moses on the mount can be accounted -for otherwise than through such a medium.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This scene was either a representation, made -to pass before the minds of the disciples, or it -was a reality as it appeared. The view that it -was merely a representation receives some countenance -from the fact that it is called a vision. -“Tell the vision to no man,” said Christ; and, -while the word, vision, is sometimes applied to -real appearances, as in Luke 24:43, it also is -taken to represent things that do not yet exist, -as in John’s vision of the new heavens and new -earth. Again, Luke says that they (Moses and -Elias) “appeared in glory.” Our Lord himself -has not yet attained unto the full measure of -glory that is to result to him from his work of -redemption, 1 Pet. 1:11; Isa. 53:11; and it -may well be doubted likewise if any of his followers -have reached their full state of glory. If, -then, the expression quoted from Luke refers to -the future perfected glory of the redeemed, we -have another evidence that this was only a representation, -like John’s visions of future scenes -of bliss, and not then a reality. But, if this was -only a vision, no argument can be drawn from it -for the intermediate existence of the soul; for, in -<span class='pageno' id='Page_140'>140</span>that case, Moses and Elias need not have been -even immaterially present.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But let us consider it a reality. Then the -presence of Moses can be accounted for by supposing -his resurrection from the dead. Against -this hypothesis our opponents have nothing to -offer but their own assertions; and they seem -determined to make up in the amount of this -commodity what it lacks in conclusiveness. -Thus Landis says, “Moses had died and was -buried, and as his body had never been raised -from the dead, he of course appeared as a disembodied -spirit.” And Luther Lee says, “So -far as Moses is concerned, the argument is conclusive.” -But against these authorities, we bring -forth another on the other side, as weighty, at -least, as both of them together. Dr. Adam -Clarke says, on the same passage, “The body of -Moses was probably raised again, as a pledge of -the resurrection.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Before presenting an argument to show that -Moses was raised, let us look at one consideration -which proves beyond a peradventure that what -appeared on the mount was not Moses’ disembodied -spirit. It will be admitted by all that -the transfiguration was for the purpose of presenting -in miniature the future kingdom of God, -the kingdom of glory. Andrews (Life of our -Lord, p. 321) says: “The Lord was pleased to -show certain of the apostles, by a momentary -<span class='pageno' id='Page_141'>141</span>transfiguration of his person, the supernatural -character of his kingdom, and into what new -and higher conditions of being both he and they -must be brought ere it could come.... -They saw in the ineffable glory of his person, -and the brightness around them, a foreshadowing -of the kingdom of God as it should come with -power; and were for a moment ’eye-witnesses of -his majesty.’ 2 Pet. 1:16.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Who are to be the subjects in this heavenly -kingdom? Ans. Those who are translated at -Christ’s coming, and the righteous dead who are -raised from their graves at that time. Will there -be any disembodied spirits there? None; for -the theory is that at the resurrection, which -precedes the setting up of this kingdom, the -disembodied spirits again take possession of their -reanimated bodies. Of this kingdom, the transfiguration -was a representation. There was -Christ, the glorified king; there was Elias, the -representative of those who are to be translated; -and there was Moses; but, if it was simply his -disembodied soul, then there was a representation -of something that will not exist in the kingdom -of God at all; and the representation was an -imperfect one, and so an utter failure. But if -Moses was there in a body raised from the dead, -then the scene was harmonious and consistent, -he representing, as Dr. Clarke supposes, the -righteous dead who are to be raised, and Elias, -the living who are to be translated.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_142'>142</span>The question now turns upon the resurrection -of Moses from the dead; and if scriptural evidence -can be shown that Moses was thus raised, -this passage immediately changes sides in this -controversy. That Moses was raised, we think -is to be necessarily inferred from Jude 9: “Yet -Michael the archangel, when contending with the -devil, he disputed about the body of Moses, durst -not bring against him a railing accusation, but -said, The Lord rebuke thee.” It will be noticed -that this dispute was about the <em>body</em> of Moses. -Michael (Christ, John 5:27-29; 1 Thess. 4:16) -and the devil, each claimed, it appears, the right -to do something with his body.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Some have endeavored to reconcile Jude’s -testimony with the non-resurrection of Moses, by -claiming that the devil wished to make known -to the children of Israel the place of Moses’ -burial, in order to lead them into idolatry; and -that the contention between him and Michael -had reference to this. But such a conjecture -cannot be entertained, as in this case the contention -would have been about the <em>grave</em> of Moses, -rather than about his <em>body</em>.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But this dispute did have reference solely to -the body of Moses. Then we inquire further -what the devil has to do with the bodies of men. -He is said to have the power of death; hence -the grave is his dominion, and whoever enters -there he claims as his lawful prey. On the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_143'>143</span>other hand, Christ is the Life-giver, whose prerogative -it is to bring men out from under the -power of death. The most natural conclusion, -therefore, is, that the dispute took place on this -very point; that it had reference to the bringing -back to life of that dead body, which the devil -would naturally wish to keep, and claim the -right to keep, in his own power. But Christ -rebuked the adversary, and rescued his victim -from his grasp. This is the <em>necessary</em> inference -from this passage, and, as such, is entitled to -weight in this argument.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The chief objection to this view, is this: If -Moses was raised so many years before the resurrection -of Christ, how can Christ be called the -first-fruits of them that slept, as in 1 Cor. 15:20, -23? how can he be said to be the first that -should rise from the dead, as in Acts 26:23? -or be called the first-begotten, and first-begotten -of the dead, as in Heb. 1:6, and Rev. 1:5? or -the first-born among many brethren, the first-born -of every creature, and the first-born from -the dead, as in Rom. 8:29, and Col. 1:15, 18?</p> - -<p class='c011'>In answering these queries, we first call attention -to an important fact: Several individuals, -of whom we have explicit account, were raised -to life before the resurrection of Christ. The -following cases may be cited: (1) The widow’s -son, 1 Kings 17, (2) the son of the Shunammite, -2 Kings 4, (3) the son of the widow of Nain, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_144'>144</span>Luke 7:14, (4) the ruler’s daughter, Luke 8:40, -55, and (5) the resurrection of Lazarus.</p> - -<p class='c011'>These instances cannot be disposed of by making -a distinction between a resurrection to mortality -and one to immortality; for where does the -Bible make any such distinction? or where does -it give even an intimation of anything of the -kind? Christ, in sending word to John of the -results of his work, told the disciples to tell him, -among other things, that <em>the dead</em> were <em>raised -up</em>. And when the wicked are restored to life, -it is called a <em>resurrection</em>, no less so than the -restoration of the righteous. See John 5:29; -Acts 24:15; Rev. 20:5. But the wicked are -not raised to immortality; therefore in the matter -of being raised from the dead, the Bible recognizes -no distinction on account of the different -conditions to which the different classes are -raised. Hence the cases referred to above were -resurrections from the dead just as really as -though they had been raised to immortality; -and the distinction which some attempt to make -is thus shown to be wholly gratuitous, and is -excluded from the controversy.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The objection now lies just as much against -the cases of those of whose resurrection we have -the most explicit account, as against that of -Moses; and the question next to be met is, Can -those passages which declare that a number of -the dead were raised before the resurrection of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_145'>145</span>Christ, and those which speak of Christ as the -first to be raised, be shown to be free from contradiction?</p> - -<p class='c011'>It will be noticed that the objection, so far as -the words, first-fruits, first-begotten, and first-born, -are concerned, rests wholly upon the supposition -that these words denote exclusively -priority in time. It instantly vanishes before -the fact that these words are not confined to this -meaning.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Christ is called the first-fruits in 1 Cor. 15, -solely in reference to his being the antitype of -the wave-sheaf, and in contrast with the great -harvest that will take place at his second coming. -This word is used in different senses, as we learn -from Jas. 1:18, and Rev. 14:4, where it cannot -have reference to antecedence in time. This is -all that need be said on this word.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The word rendered first-begotten and first-born -is πρωτοτοκος (<em>prototokos</em>). This word is -defined by Robinson thus: “Properly the first-born -of father or mother;” and, as the first-born -was entitled to certain prerogatives and privileges -over the rest of the family, the word takes another -meaning, namely, “first-born, the same as -<em>the first</em>, <em>the chief</em>, one highly distinguished and -pre-eminent. So of Christ, the beloved Son of -God. Col. 1:15.” Greenfield’s definition is -similar. This word is used in the same sense in -the Septuagint. In Ex. 4:22, Israel is called -<span class='pageno' id='Page_146'>146</span>the first-born; and in Jer. 31:9, Ephraim is -called the first-born; but, in point of time, Esau -was before Israel, and Manasseh before Ephraim. -Their being called the first-born must therefore -be owing to the rank, dignity, and station, to -which they had attained.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And hence the conclusion is not without -foundation that these words, when applied to -Christ, denote the pre-eminent rank and station -which he holds in the great work, rather than -the order of time in which his resurrection occurred, -a point to which no importance whatever -can be attached. All hinges upon Christ, and -all is accomplished by his power, and by virtue -of his resurrection. He stands out foremost and -pre-eminent in all these displays, whether they -take place before or after his advent to this -world.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The expression in Acts 27:23, presents apparently -the greatest difficulty of any. The verse -reads: “That Christ should suffer, and that he -should be the first that should rise from the -dead, and should show light unto the people and -to the Gentiles.” As it stands in our common -version it is difficult to reconcile this statement -with the fact that a number were raised from -the dead previous to the resurrection of Christ -as already noticed, and we are led to wonder -why Paul, knowing of all these cases, should -make such a statement. But, if we mistake not, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_147'>147</span>the original presents a different idea. In Greenfield’s -Testament, the text stands thus:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c018'>Εἰ παθητὸς ὁ Χριστὸς, εἰ πρῶτος ἐξ ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν φῶς -μέλλει καταγγέλλειν τω λαῷ καὶ τοῖς ἔθνεσι.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>We call the attention of those familiar with -the Greek to this passage, and submit that it can -be properly rendered as follows: “That Christ -was to suffer, [and] that first from the resurrection -of the dead he was to show light to the -people and to the Gentiles.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Bloomfield, in his note on this verse, says that -the words “may be rendered, either ‘after the -resurrection from the dead,’ or ‘by the resurrection;’ -but the latter is preferable.” And Wakefield -translates it thus: “That the Christ would -suffer death, and would be the first to proclaim -salvation to this people and to the Gentiles by a -resurrection from the dead.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>This is in accordance with what the same -apostle declared to Timothy (1 Tim. 1:10), that -Christ brought life and immortality to light -through the gospel. And viewed in this light, -the text is freed from all difficulty. It simply -teaches that Christ would be the first to demonstrate -before the people, by a resurrection from -the dead, future life and immortality for the -redeemed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The resurrection of Lazarus, and other similar -cases, though they might show that the power of -death could be so far broken as to give us a new -<span class='pageno' id='Page_148'>148</span>lease of mortal life, shed no light on our existence -beyond this mortal state. And the resurrection -of Moses, supposing him to have been raised, -was not a public demonstration designed to show -the people the path to a future life. So far as -we have any account, no one knew that he had -been raised till he appeared upon the mount of -transfiguration. Christ was the first one to show -to the world, by his rising from the dead, the -great light of life and immortality beyond the -grave.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus the last seeming objection against the -idea that Moses had a resurrection is taken away; -while in its favor we have his appearance on the -mount, and the language of Jude, which can be -explained on no other ground.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Let us then take that view which a consistent -regard for scriptural harmony demands, though -another supposed strong column on which rests -the dogma of the immortality of the soul, goes -down before it with a crash to the very dust.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_149'>149</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XVIII. <br /> <span class='fss'>DID CHRIST TEACH THAT THE DEAD ARE ALIVE?</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Yes, says the immaterialist, for he taught that -God, who declares himself to be the God of Abraham, -Isaac, and Jacob, is not the God of the dead, -but of the living; therefore, Abraham, Isaac, and -Jacob, are living; but they are living as immaterial, -disembodied immortal spirits; for their bodies -are in the grave.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The occasion on which these words were spoken -is described in Matt. 22:23-32. To understand -the words of Christ, we must understand fully -the point at issue, and what his words were designed -to prove; and to do this, we must look -carefully at the narrative:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say -that there is no resurrection, and asked him, saying, Master, -Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his -brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his -brother. Now there were with us seven brethren; and -the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having -no issue, left his wife unto his brother: likewise the -second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last -of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection, -whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. -Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing -the Scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the -resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, -but are as the angels of God in Heaven. But as -<span class='pageno' id='Page_150'>150</span>touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read -that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am -the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God -of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the -living.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>What, then, was the point at issue between -Christ and the Sadducees? See verse 23: “The -same day, came to him the Sadducees, which <em>say -there is no resurrection</em>, and asked him,” &c. -The Sadducees professed to believe the writings -of Moses, but denied the resurrection. Christ -also believed the writings of Moses, but <em>taught</em> -the resurrection. Here, then, was a fair issue -between them. They hear him teaching the resurrection; -and to object their faith to his, they -refer to the law of Moses concerning marriage, -and then state a familiar fact; viz., that seven -brothers, one after another, all had one woman, -and all died. Now arises a problem very difficult -to their minds, no doubt. How will this -matter be arranged in the resurrection which you -teach? Whose wife shall she be in the resurrection? -Let it be noticed that the controversy -between Christ and the Sadducees had no respect -whatever to an intermediate state, nor does their -query or Christ’s answer have any reference to -such a state. They do not inquire whose wife -she is now, or which of the men’s immortal souls -claims her immortal soul in the spirit world; but, -Whose wife <em>shall she be</em> in the resurrection (a -future event)? Christ tells them that they err, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_151'>151</span>not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of -God. And then, to defend himself and condemn -them out of their own mouth, he proceeds to -prove--what? a conscious intermediate state? -No; but <em>the resurrection</em>, from the writings of -Moses. “But as touching the resurrection from -the dead,” says he [as touching the dead that -they rise, says Mark; and that the dead are -raised, says Luke], “have ye not read that which -was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the -God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the -God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, -but of the living.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Let us now show that this quotation did prove -the resurrection, and our argument on this passage -is closed. That, Moses by this language, did -teach the resurrection of the dead, we think is -easily evident. Thus, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, -were dead; but God is not the God of the dead -(or those who are irrecoverably and eternally dead, -as the Sadducees believed them to be), but he <em>is</em> -the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. What, -therefore, shall we logically and scripturally conclude -from this fact? Why, simply that they -shall live again, or have a resurrection from the -dead. In this view of the subject, Christ reasoned -well, proved the point he aimed to prove, -confounded the Sadducees, and gained the applause -of the Pharisees, who believed in the resurrection.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_152'>152</span>But grant for a moment that the language -means what is popularly claimed for it, and what -becomes of Christ’s reputation as a reasoner, and -a teacher of wisdom sent from God? He set out -to prove the resurrection; but when he closes -his argument, lo, wonderful to tell! he has proved -that all men are alive, and, therefore, there is no -<em>need</em> of a resurrection! He neither meets the -query of the Sadducees, nor defends himself, but -quite the reverse. Believe that our Lord would -reason thus, ye who can!</p> - -<p class='c011'>If any should admit that a resurrection is -proved by the language, but claim from it that -such resurrection takes place at death, a theory -not uncommon at the present time, we reply that -they thereby abandon the conscious-state theory, -and affirm the existence of those who have died, -on another ground, viz., a resurrection. But, -further, this is equally foreign from what Christ -set out to prove; for he had reference to an event -which was then future to the seven brethren and -the woman that died. They asked him, saying, -“In the resurrection, therefore, when they <em>shall -rise</em>, whose wife <em>shall she be</em> of them,” &c. And -Jesus answered and said, “When they <em>shall rise</em> -from the dead, they neither marry nor are given -in marriage, but are as the angels in Heaven.” -Mark 12:23-25. Again, in Luke’s account, Jesus -says, “But they which <em>shall be</em> accounted -worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection -<span class='pageno' id='Page_153'>153</span>from the dead, neither marry nor are given in -marriage.” Luke 20:35. Thus we see that a -future event is everywhere referred to, and if he -in reality proved that an event had already -taken place, which he designed to show would -take place in the future, it speaks no better for -his reasoning or his wisdom than the former supposition.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Why God calls himself the God of Abraham, -Isaac, and Jacob, though they are yet dead, we -learn from Heb. 11:16. It is not because they -are now alive, but because in God’s purpose who -speaks of things that are not, as though they were, -they are to live, and “he <em>hath prepared</em> for them -a city.” <a id='corr153.14'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='Wherefore'>“Wherefore</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_153.14'><ins class='correction' title='Wherefore'>“Wherefore</ins></a></span>, God is not ashamed to be -called their God; for he hath prepared for them -a city,” into possession of which they will of course -come in the future.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In view of these facts, our friends should be -careful lest they expose themselves to the rebuke -Christ gave to the Sadducees: “Ye do err, not -knowing the Scriptures;” for this instance, like -all others, when properly understood, so far from -sustaining their position, becomes an irrefragable -evidence of the resurrection of the dead, and a -future life, but affirms nothing whatever for consciousness -in death.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_154'>154</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XIX. <br /> <span class='fss'>MOSES AND THE PROPHETS ON THE PLACE AND CONDITION OF THE DEAD.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The hoary fable that every man has in his -own nature an immaterial, ever-conscious, never-dying -principle, vaulting from the gloomy regions -of heathen mythology over into the precincts -of Christianity, and claiming the positive -authority of Christ and his apostles, instead of -the uncertain speculations of Socrates and Plato, -conceives that it finds a secure intrenchment in -Luke 16:19-31, or the record concerning the rich -man and Lazarus.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Into this record, as into the strongest of strongholds, -it enters with every demonstration of confidence; -and from its supposed impregnable walls, -it hurls mockery and defiance against all opposing -views, as the infatuated subjects of Belshazzar -defied the soldiers of Cyrus from the walls of -Babylon.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We venture to approach, at least to reconnoiter. -We venture further, from the record itself, even -to lay siege to it, and dig a trench about it, which, -if we mistake not, will soon effectually reduce it, -and all the arguments for immortality it is supposed -to contain.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The first fact to which we call the attention of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_155'>155</span>the reader is that Christ, as the result of this -narrative or parable, or whatever it may be, refers -us to Moses and the prophets for light and -information respecting the place and condition of -the dead. In the record, the rich man is represented -as requesting that Lazarus might be sent -to his brethren on earth, lest they should come -into the same place of torment. How would he -prevent them? By carrying back to them information -respecting the state that follows this -life; by telling how it fared with the covetous -rich man who had enjoyed his good things in -this life, and inducing them to live such a life here -as to avoid the condition into which he had fallen.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And what was Abraham’s answer? “They -have Moses and the prophets.... If they -hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will -they be persuaded though one rose from the -dead.” That is to say, Moses and the prophets -had given them just as positive information respecting -the condition into which man passes -from this life, as could be given them by one who -should repass the portals of the grave and rise -from the dead.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The significance of this declaration should not -be overlooked. It throws us right back upon the -records of Moses and the prophets for information -upon that subject respecting which the incident -here related is claimed to be full and sufficient -testimony.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_156'>156</span>We therefore inquire what Moses and the -prophets have taught us respecting the place -where the scene here depicted is represented to -have taken place. What place was this? Answer, -<em>Hades</em>; for this is the word from which hell is -translated in verse 23. In hell, <em>hades</em>, the rich man -lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham and Lazarus -afar off, though still within sight and speaking -distance. The New Testament was written in -Greek, while Moses and the prophets wrote in -Hebrew. What is the Hebrew word answering -to the Greek <em>hades</em>? Answer, <em>Sheol</em>. These are -the equivalent terms in the two languages. All -that a Hebrew writer meant by <em>sheol</em>, a Greek -writer meant by <em>hades</em>, and <em>vice versa</em>. The -question, then, is simply this: What have Moses -and the prophets taught us respecting <em>sheol</em>, and -the condition of those who enter therein?</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Meaning of hades and sheol.</em> These words -denote the common receptacle of the dead, both -righteous and wicked. The righteous dead are -there; for at the resurrection they raise the victorious -shout, “O Death, where is thy sting? O -Grave [Gr. <em>hades</em>], where is thy victory?” 1 Cor. -15:55. And the wicked dead are there; for at -the resurrection to damnation it is said that -death and hell [Gr. <em>hades</em>] deliver them up. -Rev. 20:13. That the <em>hades</em> of the New Testament -is the <em>sheol</em> of the Old, Ps. 16, and Acts 2:27, -bear testimony. Thus Ps. 16:10, says, “Thou -<span class='pageno' id='Page_157'>157</span>wilt not leave my soul in hell [Heb. <em>sheol</em>];” and -the New Testament, as above, makes a direct -quotation of this passage by saying, “Thou wilt -not leave my soul in <em>hades</em>.”</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Use of the word sheol.</em> This word occurs in -the Old Testament sixty-five times. It is rendered -hell and grave each thirty-one times, and -pit three times. With our Lord’s special indorsement -of what is there written concerning -it, we may look with interest at the facts -brought out by the testimony of Moses and the -prophets.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>All alike go there.</em> Thus Jacob says, “I will -go down into <em>sheol</em> [to use the original word in -place of the English rendering], unto my son -mourning.” Gen. 37:35. Korah and his company -went down into <em>sheol</em>. Num. 16:30, 33. -All mankind go there. Ps. 89:48.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>What goes into sheol.</em> <em>Sheol</em> receives the -whole man bodily at death. Jacob expected to -go down with his gray hairs to <em>sheol</em>. Korah, -Dathan, and Abiram, went into <em>sheol</em> bodily. -The soul of the Saviour left <em>sheol</em> at his resurrection. -Ps. 16:10; Acts 2:27, 31. David, -when restored from dangerous sickness, testified -that his soul was saved from going into <em>sheol</em>. -Ps. 30:2, 3.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The duration of its dominion.</em> Those who -go down into <em>sheol</em> must remain there till their -resurrection. At the second coming of Christ, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_158'>158</span>all the righteous are delivered from <em>sheol</em>. All -the living wicked are then turned into <em>sheol</em>, and -for one thousand years it holds them in its dread -embrace. Then it gives them up, and judgment -is executed upon them. Rev. 20:11-15.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Location of sheol.</em> It is in the earth beneath. -It embraces the interior of the earth as the region -of the dead, and the place of every grave. -Eze. 32:18-32. It is always spoken of as beneath, -in the interior of the earth, or in the nether -parts of the earth. See Num. 16:30, 33; -Isa. 5:14; 14:9-20; Eze. 31:15-18; 32:18-32. -Referring to the fires now preying upon the interior -parts of the earth, and which shall at last -cause the earth to melt with fervent heat, the -Lord, through Moses, says: “For a fire is kindled -in mine anger, and shall burn unto the lowest -<em>sheol</em>, and shall consume the earth with her increase, -and set on fire the foundation of the -mountains.” Deut. 32:22. Jonah went down -into <em>sheol</em> when he descended into the depths of -the waters, where none but dead men had ever -been. Jonah 1:2.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Condition of the righteous in sheol.</em> They do -not praise the Lord there. David so testifies: -“In death there is no remembrance of thee; in -<em>sheol</em> who shall give thee thanks?” Ps. 6:5. -Hezekiah uttered the same great truth, when he -was delivered from death in answer to prayer: -“I said in the cutting off of my days, I shall go -<span class='pageno' id='Page_159'>159</span>to the gates of <em>sheol</em>; I am deprived of the residue -of my years.... Behold, for peace I had -great bitterness; but thou hast in love to my -soul delivered it from the <em>pit of corruption</em>; for -thou hast cast all my sins behind my back. For -<em>sheol cannot praise</em> thee, death cannot celebrate -thee: they that go down into the pit cannot hope -for thy truth. The living, the living, he shall -praise thee, as I do this day: the father to the -children shall make known thy truth.” Isa. 38:10-19; -Ps. 115:17; 146:1-4.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Condition of the wicked in sheol.</em> They are -still and silent there. David, in a prayer indited -by the Spirit of God, says: “Let the wicked be -ashamed, and let them be silent in <em>sheol</em>.” Ps. -31:17. In 1 Sam. 2:9, we read that the wicked -shall be silent in darkness.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>General character of sheol.</em> It is a place of -silence, secresy, sleep, rest, darkness, corruption, -and worms. Job says: “So man lieth down, and -riseth not: till the heavens be no more they shall -not awake nor be raised out of their sleep. Oh! -that thou wouldst hide me in <em>sheol</em>, that thou -wouldst keep me secret till thy wrath be past, -that thou wouldst appoint me a set time and remember -me. If a man die, shall he live again? -All the days of my appointed time will I wait -till my change come. Thou shalt call, and I will -answer thee; thou wilt have a desire to the work -of thine hands.” Job 14:12-15. Again he says: -<span class='pageno' id='Page_160'>160</span>“If I wait, <em>sheol</em> is mine house: I have made my -bed in the darkness. I have said to corruption, -Thou art my father: to the worm, Thou art my -mother and my sister. And where is now my -hope? As for my hope, who shall see it? They -shall go down to the bars of <em>sheol</em>, when our rest -together is in the <a id='corr160.7'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='dust.'>dust.”</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_160.7'><ins class='correction' title='dust.'>dust.”</ins></a></span> Job. 17:13-16; 4:11-19; -Ps. 88:10-12.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>There is no knowledge in sheol.</em> This fact is -plainly stated by Solomon through the Spirit of -inspiration: “Whatsoever thy hand findeth to -do, do it with thy might; for there is no work, -nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom in <em>sheol</em> -whither thou <a id='corr160.14'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='goest.'>goest.”</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_160.14'><ins class='correction' title='goest.'>goest.”</ins></a></span> Eccl. 9:4-6, 10. When -man goes in there his very thoughts perish. Ps. -146:4.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Such are the great facts concerning <em>sheol</em>, or -hades, revealed to us in the books of “Moses and -the prophets.” Their statements are literal, -plain, explicit, and unequivocal. In opposition -to all these, can it be maintained that in <em>sheol</em> -and <em>hades</em> there <em>is</em> consciousness, wisdom, device, -knowledge, happiness, and misery, as is popularly -claimed on the authority of this record -about the rich man and Lazarus? If not, and if -<em>sheol</em> is such a place of silence, darkness, inactivity, -and unconsciousness, as they declare, can the -use of such language as is employed respecting -the rich man and Lazarus in this very place be -accounted for?</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_161'>161</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XX. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The previous chapter left us with the problem -on our hands whether it were better to try to -overthrow all that Moses and the prophets have -written respecting <em>sheol</em> and the condition of -those who enter therein, for the purpose of sustaining -the common view of the rich man and -Lazarus, or to try to account for the use of the -language used in that narrative, in harmony with -what Moses and the prophets have said respecting -that place.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In the first place, we cannot set aside what -Moses and the prophets have written; for Christ, -in the very case under consideration, indorses -them and refers us to them for instruction. -How, then, can we account for the fact that the -rich man is represented as conscious, intelligent, -and active, in <em>hades</em>, when Moses and the prophets -have taught us that <em>hades</em> is a place of darkness -and silence, without knowledge, wisdom, or -device? If the record of the rich man and -Lazarus is a parable, the use of such language -is at once accounted for; for if it is a parable, -the language is allegorical; and in allegory, life -and action are often attributed to inanimate objects, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_162'>162</span>for the sake of enforcing or illustrating -some particular truth.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Some notable instances of this style of writing -are furnished us in the Old Testament. In -Judges 9:7-15, the trees are represented as going -forth to anoint a king over them; and they -appealed to the olive tree and the fig tree and -the vine, and received answers from them in -which they declined to leave their stations of usefulness -to be promoted over them. Finally, they -appealed to the bramble; and the bramble accepted -the trust. Now this representation was -not designed to teach that trees ordain civil government, -walk about, and converse together; but -it was to illustrate the folly of the men of Shechem -in electing Abimelech king. Again, in 2 -Kings 14:9, we read that the king of Israel sent -to the king of Judah, saying, “The thistle in -Lebanon sent to the cedar that was in Lebanon, -saying, Give thy daughter to my son to wife.” -This is not to teach that thistles and cedars have -sons and daughters who unite in marriage, but to -illustrate the contempt which the king of Israel -felt for the proposition which the king of Judah -made to him.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Landis, p. 188, claims that it makes no difference -whether the case of the rich man and Lazarus -is a parable or not, since a parable should -not be so worded as to convey a wrong impression -to the mind, which this would do, if the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_163'>163</span>soul is not conscious in death. We reply, It -makes all the difference in the world; for if it is -a parable, the life and action attributed to the -inanimate inhabitants of hades, is not to teach -anything respecting their real condition, any -more than the life and action attributed to the -trees and brambles in the cases referred to, is designed -to teach what their condition is; but this -intelligence and action are attributed to these inanimate -objects, to illustrate some great truth -which the speaker wished to enforce.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In the case of the rich man and Lazarus, what -was the object in view? Answer: To rebuke -the Pharisees for their covetousness (“And the -Pharisees also, who were <em>covetous</em>, heard all these -things; and they derided him.” Verse 14); to -show to them, since they thought that riches in -this life was a mark of the divine favor and -would secure God’s blessing in the next, that if -they gave themselves up to the sensual enjoyment -of their riches, neglecting and oppressing -the poor, they would, in the future, meet God’s -wrath instead of his favor; and that the poor, -whom they despised and oppressed, might attain -to that very state of felicity, set forth under the -figure of Abraham’s bosom, of which they thought -themselves so sure.</p> - -<p class='c011'>That this is a parable seems abundantly evident: -1. It stands in connection with a long -list of parables. The preceding chapter, Luke -<span class='pageno' id='Page_164'>164</span>15, contains three. This chapter opens with the -parable of the unjust steward; and there is no -intimation of a change from parable to literal -narration in this case. 2. It is said that this cannot -be a parable, because it is introduced by a -direct assertion. “There was a certain rich -man,” &c. But others which are parables are -introduced in exactly the same manner. Thus -verse 1, “There <em>was</em> a certain rich man which -had a steward,” &c. And chapter 15:11: “A -certain man <em>had</em> two sons,” &c. 3. The prophets, -to whom we are referred, speak of the dead -in <em>sheol</em>, in the nether parts of the earth, as conversing -together, taunting each other, weeping -bitterly, refusing to be comforted, &c., representations -exactly similar to those made in the case -of the rich man and Lazarus, and full as striking, -but which no one can regard as setting forth the -actual condition of the dead.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus in Isa. 14:9-20, it is represented that -when the king of Babylon is overthrown, he goes -down into <em>sheol</em>, and the <span class='fss'>DEAD</span> (for there are no -others in its dark domain) are stirred up to meet -him. The kings that had been destroyed by the -king of Babylon, are represented as having -thrones in <em>sheol</em> beneath, and when the king of -Babylon joins them in their dark abode, they -rise up from their thrones, and mock him with -feigned obeisance, as in life they had rendered him -real homage. And they say, “Art thou become -<span class='pageno' id='Page_165'>165</span>weak as we? Art thou become like unto us? -Is this the man that made the earth to tremble, -that did shake kingdoms?” No one can suppose -that they literally act or speak thus. But all this -is a striking figure to represent that death would -reduce the king of Babylon to the same level -with his subjects and prisoners.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again in Eze. 31:15-18, and 32:17-32, Pharaoh -and his host, slain in battle with the king -of Babylon, are set forth in the same manner. The -strong among the mighty are represented as -speaking to him out of the midst of <em>sheol</em>, as he -enters therein. And this <em>sheol</em>, in “the nether -parts of the earth,” full of graves and of the dead, -is contrasted with the land of the living. These -victims of slaughter went down to <em>sheol</em> with -their weapons of war; and their swords they -“laid under their heads;” and when Pharaoh, -lying among them, saw the multitude of his enemies -that were slain also, he was comforted at -the sight.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Another case, perhaps still more remarkable, -is that of Rachel. Jer. 31:15-17; Matt. 2:17, -18; Gen. 25:17-20. Long ages after Rachel had -died, and entered into <em>sheol</em>, a dreadful slaughter -took place among her posterity. Thereupon she -is represented as breaking forth into lamentation -and bitter weeping, and refusing to be comforted -because her children were not. And the Lord -says to her, “Refrain thy voice from weeping, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_166'>166</span>and thine eyes from tears; for thy work shall be -rewarded, saith the Lord.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>No one can suppose that Rachel literally wept -at the murder of her children nearly 2000 years -after her death, nor that the slaughtered Egyptians -put their swords under their heads as they -were lying in <em>sheol</em>, and conversed together in -the nether parts of the earth, some being comforted, -and others ashamed; nor that the kings -overthrown by the king of Babylon rose up from -their sepulchral thrones in mock solemnity, and -taunted him with becoming weak as they.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But these were all figures to set forth great -and salutary truths. May not our Lord then, for -once, be permitted for a like purpose to use a -like figure, so largely employed by the prophets, -and so well known to his hearers, by personifying -persons in <em>hades</em> to perform actions which -were not there literally to occur? We have certainly -as good reason to suppose that Rachel, the -Egyptians, and the king of Babylon, were real -personages, and their descent into <em>sheol</em> and the -accompanying circumstance as related by the -prophets, veritable history, as to suppose that -Dives was a real character, and his torment in -<em>hades</em>, and his conversation with Abraham, a real -transaction.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Those who held in their hands the Old-Testament -scriptures were perfectly familiar with such -figures. There the “trees of the field” converse -<span class='pageno' id='Page_167'>167</span>and “clap their hands,” the “floods” lift up their -“voice,” the hills and mountains “sing,” stones -from the wall “cry out,” and beams “answer,” -the blood of Abel finds a “voice,” and “cries out -from the ground,” and dead men rejoice over the -fall of their rivals, slain by the sword. In a volume -abounding with such figures, cannot for -once a rich man, representing a class of living -persons, be endowed in <em>hades</em> with life and -speech? must this one figure of personification -be singled out from all others, as a rigidly literal -narrative, and be made to sustain the weight of -the most terrific doctrine of which the mind of -man can conceive?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Sufficient evidence has been produced to show -that this is a parable. And now we invite the -attention of the reader to the testimony of two -eminent authors respecting the use which should -be made of parables.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Dr. Clarke (note on Matt. 5:26) says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Let it be remembered that by the consent of all (except -the basely interested), no <em>metaphor</em> is ever to be produced -in <em>proof</em> of a doctrine. In the things that concern -our eternal salvation, we need the most pointed and <em>express -evidence</em> on which to establish the faith of our souls.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>And Trench, in his work on parables, lays -down this very important rule:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The parables may not be made first sources of doctrine. -Doctrines otherwise and already grounded, may be illustrated, -or indeed further confirmed by them, but it is not -<span class='pageno' id='Page_168'>168</span>allowable to constitute doctrine first by their aid. They -may be the outer ornamental fringe, but not the main -texture of the proof. For from the literal to the figurative, -from the clearer to the more obscure, has ever been -recognized as the law of Scripture interpretation. This -rule, however, has been <em>often forgotten</em>, and controversialists, -looking round for arguments with which to sustain -some <em>weak position</em>, one for which they can find no other -support in Scripture, often invent for themselves supports -in these.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>But some persist that this is not a parable, but -a literal narrative; and not to seem captious, we -will consider it in this light. If this is veritable -history, all the particulars must be taken literally. -Then the wicked, tormented in the flames -of hell, are within sight and speaking distance of -the saved in Heaven. In other words, Heaven -is but the shore of hell, and on that shore the redeemed -can sit and watch the damned in their -fearful contortions of agony for which there is -no name, and listen to their entreaties for relief -and their shrieks of fathomless despair, to an -extent, it would seem, sufficient to satisfy the -fiercest vengeance and the most implacable revenge. -If this be so, our friends must certainly -abandon the argument they build on Rev. 6:9, -10, where they have it that the souls of the martyrs, -disembodied and conscious, cry to God to -visit vengeance upon their persecutors. If they -were where they could look over into the fiery -gulf, and behold their persecutors vainly battling -<span class='pageno' id='Page_169'>169</span>with its flaming billows, or if not already -there, destined in a few short years to be plunged -therein, let no one say of the holy martyrs that -they would, under such circumstances, cry impatiently -to God to hasten or intensify his vengeance. -The arguments based on the narrative -of the rich man and Lazarus, and Rev. 6:9, 10, -must, one or the other of them, be given up; for -they devour each other. Let the advocates of -the popular theory look to this.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The beggar died, and was carried by the angels -into Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died, -and was buried. Let it be noted that the persons -themselves, as a whole, are spoken of, not -any of their essential elements, or immaterial -appendages. Nothing is said of the soul of either -the rich man or Lazarus. As we are now considering -this as a literal transaction, a question -vital to the argument is, <em>When</em> do the angels -bear those who have died, as persons (for there is -nothing anywhere said about the angels’ carrying -their souls), into Abraham’s bosom, or the state -of the blessed? Such scriptures as Matt. 24:30, -31; 1 Thess. 4:16, 17, answer this question very -explicitly: “And he shall send his angels with a -great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together -his elect from the four winds, from one end -of heaven to the other.” When? At the second -advent of the Son of man in majesty and glory; -for then it is that the voice of the archangel, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_170'>170</span>ringing through the long galleries of <em>hades</em>, shall -wake the righteous dead from their silent slumbers, -and angels bear them upward on wings of -light, to be forever with the Lord.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The rich man dies, and is buried; and his next -experience is the suffering of torment in consuming -flame. How long after his burial he finds -himself in this torment, we are not directly informed. -But he has bodily organs; for he has -eyes to see, and a tongue to be cooled; but these -the dead are not usually considered to possess -till the resurrection. This drives Landis, p. 191, -to the unusual admission that the soul retains -the human form, with its corresponding organs, -hands, feet, eyes, tongue, &c. Again, the rich -man sees Lazarus in Abraham’s bosom; but, as -we have already seen, Lazarus is not literally -borne there by the angels till the resurrection.</p> - -<p class='c011'>As a literal transaction, the scene is inevitably -located, by the concurrent testimony of all -Scripture, beyond the resurrection. How, then, -it can be said to transpire in <em>hades</em>, we leave -those to decide who believe that it is a literal -transaction. Certain it is that no such scenes -can really occur in <em>hades</em>, if the representations of -that place given us by Moses and the prophets -are correct; while analogous scenes will really -take place beyond the resurrection: there the -righteous are rewarded, and the wicked punished -in devouring fire; there the Lord told the impenitent -<span class='pageno' id='Page_171'>171</span>Jews that they should see Abraham, -Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of God, and -they themselves thrust out, and that then there -would be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Luke -13:28.</p> - -<p class='c011'>One view, only, maintains harmony between -this and other portions of the sacred writings; -and that is the one which is here, imperfectly it -may be, but yet sincerely, advocated: that Christ, -following the example of the prophets, uses the -figure of personification, and anticipates, as transpiring -in the grave, scenes which substantially -occur beyond the resurrection; and that the object -of the parable was to rebuke the Pharisees -for their covetousness by indicating the fate that -awaited a life of avarice and oppression here, -however sumptuous that life might be.</p> - -<p class='c011'>That it does not teach the existence of conscious -souls between death and the resurrection, -is forever settled by the fact that Lazarus could -return only by a resurrection from the dead. -When the rich man requested that Lazarus -might be sent to warn his brethren, Abraham -replied that they had Moses and the prophets, -and if they would not hear them, they would not -“be persuaded <em>though one rose from the dead</em>.” -The conversation did not therefore relate to the -coming back of the immortal soul of Lazarus; -and indeed no mention is made of any such thing -in the whole transaction.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_172'>172</span>Therefore, interpret it as we may, it cannot -be reasonably or scripturally used to prove the -entrance of man’s naked, unclothed spirit into -bliss or woe at the hour of death.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXI. <br /> <span class='fss'>WITH ME IN PARADISE.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>According to Luke’s account of the crucifixion -of our Saviour, Luke 23:27-46, one of the -two malefactors who were crucified with him, -said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when thou -comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto -him, Verily, I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou -be with me in Paradise.” Verses 42, 43. This, -says the immaterialist, “must ever stand as a -clear announcement of the uninterrupted immortality -of the soul.” (<cite>Landis</cite>, p. 211.) The “clear -announcement” is made out in this manner: -Christ and the thief, it is claimed, both died -that day; they both went to paradise that day; -and their condition while there was, of course, -one of consciousness and intelligence.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There is one fact which stands somewhat in -the way of this clear announcement; and that -is, that <em>Christ did not go to paradise that day</em>. -In answer to the popular view, we first set forth -<span class='pageno' id='Page_173'>173</span>this unqualified proposition, and undertake its -proof; and if this shall prove to be well grounded, -the doctrine of annihilation will be found in -a degree true; for the claims usually built on -the scripture above quoted are utterly and forever -annihilated by this fact.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In entering upon the argument to show that -Christ did not go to paradise that day, we first -inquire what paradise is and where it is. The -word occurs but three times in the English version -of the Scriptures, all in the New Testament; -two besides the verse under consideration; but -these are amply sufficient to define and locate it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>First, Paul in 2 Cor. 12:2, says: “I knew a -man in Christ above fourteen years ago (whether -in the body I cannot tell; or whether out of the -body, I cannot tell; God knoweth), such an one -caught up to the third Heaven.” In verse 4, he -affirms that the place to which this man was -caught up was paradise. This establishes the -fact that paradise is in the third Heaven.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again, in Rev. 2:7, we read the promise -which the Saviour gives to the overcomers; and -he says: “To him that overcometh will I give -to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst -of the paradise of God.” This establishes another -equally important fact, that paradise is -where the tree of life now is. Now, if the -Scriptures anywhere give us any further information -respecting the place where the tree of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_174'>174</span>life is to be found, we have still further testimony -respecting paradise.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In Rev. 21 and 22, we have a description of -the New Jerusalem, the holy city which is above. -In chap. 22:1, 2, we read: “And he showed -me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, -proceeding out of the throne of God and of the -Lamb. In the midst of the street of it [the city], -and on either side of the river, was there the -tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruit, -and yielded her fruit every month.” By this -testimony, we learn that the tree of life, which -grows in the midst of the paradise of God, is in -the holy city, fast by the river of life, which -proceeds from the throne of God. Nothing -could be more explicit than this. We have now -found the paradise of the New Testament. It is -in the third Heaven, where the tree of life is, -and where God maintains his residence and his -throne. Whoever, therefore, goes into paradise, -goes into the presence of God. If the Saviour -went there on the day of his crucifixion, with -the impenitent thief, he went into the presence -of his Father.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Now let us reverently listen to the words of -the Lord and believe what he says, while he -himself testifies whether he went to paradise on -the day of his crucifixion, or not. On the morning -of his resurrection, the <em>third day</em> after his crucifixion, -he said to Mary, who was about to embrace -<span class='pageno' id='Page_175'>175</span>his feet, in accordance with the ancient -custom of deference or worship, “Touch me not; -FOR I AM NOT YET ASCENDED TO MY -FATHER.” The third day, remember, from the -crucifixion, and not ascended into paradise yet!</p> - -<p class='c011'>Struck into a state of bewilderment by this -stunning fact, Landis, pp. 209, 211, clutches -wildly for some supports by which to rear again -his prostrate structure. He feigns to find evidence -in John 16:16, that Jesus told his disciples -that at death he would go to his Father: a -scripture which very evidently has reference, not -to his death, but to his bodily ascension, forty -days after his resurrection. Then, referring to -the fact that the word “ascend” is from <em>anabaino</em>, -he says: “Now every tyro knows that in -composition <em>ana</em> has very frequently [?] the -force of <em>again</em>. <em>Baino</em> alone means simply <em>to -ascend</em>; <em>ana</em> adds a shade of meaning.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is frequently the case that writers try to -drive others into an admission of their statements -by representing that they will appear very ignorant -and stupid to deny them. But Mr. L., not -being a tyro, doubtless understands that nearly -every statement in this criticism is false in itself -considered, and every one of them wholly so, as -applied to the case in hand. <em>Ana</em>, in composition -with <em>baino</em>, does not have the force of again. -In neither Liddell and Scott, Robinson, Greenfield, -nor Parkhurst, is there any such definition -<span class='pageno' id='Page_176'>176</span>as “ascended again” given to <em>anabaino</em>. <em>Baino</em> -alone does not mean “to ascend.” No such definition -is given to it in the standard authorities -here named. It means simply to go, without -any reference to the direction; other words, -either in composition with it, or in the context, -signifying whether this motion is up or down, -forward or backward, over or under, &c. In no -one of the eighty-one instances of the use of the -word in the New Testament, is it translated -“ascend again.” And finally, those texts which -Mr. L. quotes as containing the word again, as -Matt. 3:16, which he quotes, “Christ <em>went up -again</em>, or returned,” and Matt. 5:1, which he -quotes, “He went up <em>again</em> into a mountain,” -the word, again, is not expressed in the English -nor implied in the Greek. In only one instance -is the word again used with <em>anabaino</em>; that is -Gal. 2:1, where Paul says, “I went up <em>again</em> -to Jerusalem;” but here the word again is from -another word (<em>palin</em>), and <em>anabaino</em> is translated -simply “went up.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Rarely do we meet with an instance of more -reckless desperation in the line of criticism. And -what is the object of it? It is to have us understand -that when Christ says, “I am not yet -ascended to my Father,” he means to say, I am -not yet ascended <em>again</em> to my Father. And from -this he would have us further draw the lucid inference -that Christ had ascended once, that is, in -<span class='pageno' id='Page_177'>177</span>his disembodied spirit, between his death and -resurrection, and now tells Mary not to touch him -because he has not ascended again! It would be -difficult to conceive of a more unnecessary and -far-fetched inference. And that men will seriously -contend for such a view, shows the orbless -obstinacy with which they will cling to preconceived -notions, though they have only the most -groundless trifles to sustain them, rather than -surrender them for more consistent views. Nothing -can be more evident than that Christ, when -he said, “I am not yet ascended to my Father,” -affirmed in the most direct manner that since his -advent into this world, he had not, up to that -time, ascended to his Father.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Rather than thus summarily lose the argument -that the thief was still conscious in death, and -that the soul is therefore (?) immortal, another -attempt is made to adjust the matter thus: Although -Christ did not go to his Father, he nevertheless -went to paradise, which is not where the -Father dwells, but the intermediate resting place -of departed souls. Do we then understand them? -We found them, a little while ago, arguing from -Eccl. 12:7, that the disembodied spirit <em>did</em> return -to God; which they claimed to be proof positive -that the soul is immortal; and thought it would -puzzle the annihilationists not a little. Do they -now give this up, and admit that the soul or spirit -does not go to God, but only into some intermediate -<span class='pageno' id='Page_178'>178</span>place, called paradise? It matters not to -us which position they take, only we wish to -know which one it is. We cannot hold our peace -and allow them to take one position on one text -and another on another, to avoid the embarrassments -into which their theory plunges at every -turn.</p> - -<p class='c011'>That paradise is no intermediate state, a halfway -house between the grave and the resurrection, -we have fully shown; for we have the positive -statements of the Scriptures to show that -paradise is in the third Heaven, where God sits -upon his throne; and Christ told Mary, the third -day after his crucifixion, in so many words, that -he had not yet ascended there.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The popular interpretation of Christ’s language -to the thief thus utterly failing, we are thrown -back upon the text for some other explanation -of the phraseology there used: “Verily I say -unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>There are but two probable ways in which this -language can be interpreted: One is, to let the -phrase, “to-day,” refer to the time to which the -thief had reference in his request. He said, “Lord, -remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.” -He looked forward to the day when Christ -should come into his kingdom. And if the “to-day” -in Christ’s answer refers to this time, then -the sense would be, “Verily I say unto thee, To-day, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_179'>179</span>or this day, the day to which you refer, when -I come into my kingdom, thou shalt be with me -in paradise.” The word, to-day, is from the -Greek, σήμερον (<em>semeron</em>); and all the definitions -we find of it would seem to confine it to present -time, excluding an application of it to the future. -This interpretation, therefore, we think cannot -be urged.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The other, and only remaining method of interpreting -the passage, is to place the comma after -“to-day,” making to-day an adverb qualifying -say. The sense would then be, Verily I say unto -thee to-day, thou shalt be with me in paradise, -at that period in the future when I shall come in -my kingdom.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This method of punctuation, if it is allowable, -clears the subject of all difficulty. Let us then -candidly consider what objections can be urged -against it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>As to the punctuation itself, we all know that -that is not the work of inspiration, and withal -that it is of recent origin, the comma in its present -form not having been invented till the year -<span class='fss'>A. D.</span> 1790. It is therefore allowable to change -this in any manner that the sense of the passage, -the context, or even other portions of the Scriptures -may demand. And in support of this -punctuation, we have the example of some Greek -manuscripts, which, according to Griesbach, place -the comma after “to-day” in this declaration.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_180'>180</span>But the objector accuses us of making sad -nonsense of the text by this change; and he -asks, in bitter irony, “Didn’t the thief know it -was that day, without Christ’s telling him?” -Very true, as a matter of fact; but let the objector -beware lest his sarcasm fall upon the -Scriptures themselves; for such very expressions -do occur therein. See Zech. 9:12: “Turn you -to the stronghold, ye prisoners of hope: even -<em>to-day</em> do I declare that I will render double -unto thee.” Transposing this sentence, without -altering the sense, we have phraseology similar -to that of Luke 23:43; namely, “I declare -unto you even to-day, I will render double unto -thee.” The events threatened here were to take -place in the future, when the Lord should bend -Judah, &c. See context. So the phrase, “to-day,” -could not qualify the “rendering double,” -&c., but only the declaration.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Here, then, is an expression exactly parallel -with that in Luke, and the same irony is applicable; -thus, “Did not the prisoners of hope know -it was that day when the declaration was made -to them?” But let our opponents now discard -their unworthy weapon; for here it is leveled -against the words of Inspiration itself.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But when we take into consideration the circumstances -of the case, we see a force and propriety -in the Saviour’s making his declaration -emphatically upon that day. He had been -<span class='pageno' id='Page_181'>181</span>preaching the advent of the kingdom of Heaven -to listening multitudes. A kingdom, he had -promised to his followers. But the powers of -death and darkness had apparently triumphed, -and were crushing into the very grave both his -prospects and his promises. He who was expected -to be the king of the coming kingdom, -stretched upon the shameful cross, was expiring -in ignominy and reproach; his disciples were -scattered; and where now was the prospect of -that kingdom which had been preached and -promised? But amid the supernatural influences -at work upon that memorable day, a ray -of divine illumination may have flashed in upon -the soul of the poor thief, traveling the same -road of death beside his Lord. A conviction of -the truthfulness of his claims as the Messiah, the -Son of God, may have entered into his mind, -and a desire have sprung up in his heart to trust -his lot in his hands, leading him to put up a -humble and sincere petition, Lord, in mercy remember -me when the days of thy triumph and -glory shall come. Yes, says the suffering Saviour, -in the hearing of the mocking multitude, -I say unto thee, <em>to-day</em>--to-day, in this hour of -my darkness and agony--to-day, when the fatal -cross is apparently giving the lie to all my pretensions--to-day, -a day of forlorn prospects and -withered hopes, so far as human eyes can see--verily, -<em>to-day</em>, I say unto thee, thou shalt be with -<span class='pageno' id='Page_182'>182</span>me in paradise, when my kingdom shall be established -in triumph and glory.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus, there is a divine force and beauty in -these words of our Lord, as uttered on that occasion. -How like a sun at midnight would they -have broken in upon the gloom that enshrouded -the sorrowing hearts of the disciples, had they -fathomed their import. For who had occasion -to sink in despair, if not He upon whom all depended, -and that, too, when expiring under the -agonies of the cross. But lo! no cloud of gloom -is sufficient to fix its shadows upon his serene -brow. His divine foresight, riding calmly over -the events of the present, fixes itself upon that -coming period of glory, when he shall see of the -travail of his soul and be satisfied. There, in -the hour of his deepest humility, he points them -to the joys of paradise.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus, by a simple removal of the comma one -word forward, the stone of stumbling is taken -out of this text, by making it harmonize with -other Scriptures; and thus, the promise, by having -reference to something in the future, and not -to anything to be performed on that day, contains -no affirmation of consciousness in death.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_183'>183</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXII. <br /> <span class='fss'>ABSENT FROM THE BODY.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Another passage, supposed to teach the separate -conscious existence of the soul, is found in 2 -Cor. 5:8: “We are confident, I say, and willing -rather, to be absent from the body, and to be -present with the Lord.” On the acknowledged -principle that it is illogical to endeavor to build -any great doctrine upon an isolated passage, -without taking into consideration the general -tenor of the context, if not also other writings -from the same author, let us look at some of the -statements which Paul has made in this connection.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In verse 1 of this chapter, Paul introduces an -earthly house and a heavenly house, and says, -“For we know that if our earthly house of this -tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of -God, an house not made with hands, eternal in -the heavens.” He states our condition while in -the earthly house. Verse 2: “In this we groan,” -verse 4, “being burdened.” He tells what we -desire in this state. Verse 2. “Earnestly desiring -to be clothed upon with our house which is -from Heaven [verse 3]: if so be that being -clothed, we shall not be found naked.” In verse -4, Paul repeats all these facts in order to state -<span class='pageno' id='Page_184'>184</span>the result of the work which he desired: “For -we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being -burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, -but clothed upon.” Now he states the result of -being clothed upon with the house from Heaven -which he so earnestly desired: “But clothed -upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of -life.” Then he states that the condition he had -in view is that for which God in the beginning -designed the human race: “Now he that has -wrought us for the self-same thing is God.” -That is, God designed that we should ultimately -reach that condition which he here designates as -being clothed upon with our house from Heaven. -Then he states what assurance we have in this -life that we shall eventually attain to this condition: -“who also hath given unto us the earnest -[assurance, pledge, token] of the Spirit.” That -is, the Spirit dwelling in our hearts, is the assurance -or pledge we have that we shall finally receive -the desire of our hearts, and be clothed -upon with our house from Heaven. In verse 6, -he states this to be the ground of his confidence, -although while “we are at home in the body, we -are absent from the Lord.” And then after incidentally -stating the secret of the Christian’s -course in this life, “we walk by faith, not by -sight,” he penned the text quoted at the commencement -of this chapter, stating that he was -willing rather to be absent from the body and to -be present with the Lord.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_185'>185</span>We now have before us quite fully, the subject -upon which Paul is here treating. A thought -now as to the meaning of the terms he employs. -What does he mean by the earthly house and -the heavenly house? by being clothed and unclothed? -by mortality being swallowed up of -life? and by being absent from the body and -present with the Lord?</p> - -<p class='c011'>What he calls in verse 1, “our earthly house,” -he designates in verse 6, as being “at home in -the body.” The chief characteristic of this house -is that it may be dissolved, or is mortal. This -earthly house is therefore our mortal body, or -what is essentially the same thing, this present -mortal condition. The house from Heaven is -eternal or immortal. This, therefore, by parity -of reasoning, is the immortal body or the state -of immortality which awaits the redeemed beyond -the resurrection.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Paul, in Rom. 8:22, 23, speaks very plainly -of these two conditions: “For we know that -the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in -pain together until now. And not only they, -but ourselves also, which have the first-fruits of -the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, -waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption -of our body.” None can fail to see the -parallel between this passage in Romans, and -that portion of 2 Cor. 5, now under consideration. -To the Corinthians, Paul says, that in -<span class='pageno' id='Page_186'>186</span>our earthly house we groan, being burdened; to -the Romans, that we groan within ourselves, or -in this mortal body; to the Corinthians, that -while in this state we have the earnest of the -Spirit; to the Romans, that we have the first-fruits -of the Spirit, which is the same thing, the -pledge, assurance, or earnest; to the Corinthians, -that we desire to be clothed upon with our house -from Heaven; to the Romans, that we wait for -the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. -The ultimate object in view in both cases, as a -matter of hope and desire, is the redeemed or -eternal state; but in the one case it is being -“clothed upon with our house from Heaven,” -and in the other, it is “the redemption of our -body.” These two expressions, therefore, denote -one and the same thing.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Returning to a consideration of the meaning -of the terms which Paul uses, we inquire what -is meant by being unclothed. And the evident -answer is, The dissolution of our earthly house, -or the falling of our mortal body in death. The -state of death, then, is that condition in which -we are unclothed. And the being clothed upon, -is being released from this state, when mortality -is swallowed up of life, and we are taken into -the presence of the Lord. Then Paul states a -conclusion very apparent from his premises, that -while we are at home in the body we are absent -from the Lord, and adds that he is willing rather -<span class='pageno' id='Page_187'>187</span>to be absent from the body and present with the -Lord.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The only verse in which consciousness in death -can even be supposed to be intimated, is the 8th -verse, which speaks of our being absent from the -body and present with the Lord. But even here -it will be seen that the whole question turns on -the time when we enter the presence of the -Lord. Is it immediately on the dissolution of -our earthly house? This the text does not inform -us; but on this the preceding verses are -very explicit, as we shall presently see.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Let us now look at a few considerations which -show that it is impossible to harmonize the popular -view of consciousness in death, with the -statements which the apostle here makes. It is -claimed that the house which we have eternal in -the Heavens is the immortal soul with which we -immediately enter into Heaven when the earthly -house is dissolved. Granting that this is so, let -us go forward a little and mark the difficulty in -which this view is involved. The time comes -when the mortal body is raised from the dead -and made immortal. In these redeemed bodies -we are to live in the kingdom of God to all eternity. -This is finally our eternal house. But -when we take possession of this, what becomes -of our house that we occupied between death -and the resurrection? If we pass from our mortal -bodies at death immediately into a spiritual -<span class='pageno' id='Page_188'>188</span>body prepared for us, which is the house we -have in Heaven, and in which we live till the -resurrection, when our natural bodies are redeemed, -and we take possession of them, it necessarily -follows that we vacate that second house -which we had occupied in Heaven. Then what -becomes of that house? Moreover this view introduces -something before us of which Paul has -made no mention; for here we have three houses, -but Paul’s language allows of only two; and one -of these three houses, on the view before us, has -to be abandoned, to go to ruin, when we take possession -of our redeemed bodies. All this is unscriptural -and absurd. Such a view is an impossibility.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again, Paul affirms in verse 5 that God hath -wrought us for this self-same thing, that is, created -man for such a state of being as we shall -enjoy, when clothed upon with our house from -Heaven. Is this condition the separate existence -of an immortal soul? No; for if man had never -sinned, he would have reached that state without -seeing death, and the idea of an immortal -soul would never have had an existence. The -whole doctrine is the offspring of sin, for it is the -result of the fall. It is the second falsehood -which the devil found necessary to sustain his -first one, “Ye shall not surely die.” For when -all that is outward, tangible, and visible of man -does fall in death, his untruth would be very apparent -<span class='pageno' id='Page_189'>189</span>unless he could make them believe that -there is an invisible medium through which -they still continue to live. Paul, therefore, in -the scripture under notice, does not have any reference -to an intermediate state.</p> - -<p class='c011'>He further says that we have through the -Spirit an earnest, or pledge, that this condition, -which is set forth as the chief object of desire, -will finally be reached, and we shall be clothed -with our house from Heaven. But what is the -Holy Spirit in our hearts an earnest or pledge -of? What does it signify that we have a measure -of the Holy Spirit here? Is it a proof or assurance -that we have immortal souls that will -live when the body is dead? No, but that we -shall be redeemed and made immortal. See Eph. -1:13, 14: “In whom also, after that ye believed, -ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, -which is the earnest of our inheritance until the -redemption of the purchased possession, unto the -praise of his glory.” And in Rom. 8:11, Paul -again says: “But if the Spirit of Him that -raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he -that raised up Christ from the dead shall also -quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that -dwelleth in you.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>These are the glorious promises of which the -Holy Spirit in our hearts is a pledge and assurance: -that these mortal bodies shall be quickened -from the dead, even as Christ was raised -<span class='pageno' id='Page_190'>190</span>up, and that we shall share in the inheritance, -when the purchased possession shall be redeemed. -It looks not to any intermediate state, but to the -ultimate reward.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And finally, Paul forever bars his teaching -against the entrance of the conscious state dogma, -by saying that when we are clothed upon with -our house from Heaven, mortality is swallowed -up of life. How can mortality be swallowed up -of life? It can be only by having a principle of -life come upon it which shall overpower and absorb -it. Mortality can be swallowed up only by -immortality or eternal life. Is this the passing -of the soul from the mortal body at the hour of -death? Let us look at it. What is there about -man, according to the common view, which is -mortal? The body. And what is immortal? -The soul. At death, the body, that part which -is mortal, does not become immortal, but loses all -its life, and goes into the grave to crumble back -to dust. And the soul, which was immortal before, -is no more than immortal afterward. Is -there any swallowing up of mortality by life -here? Just the reverse. Mortality, or the mortal -part, is swallowed up by death. There is not -so much life afterward as before; for after death, -the soul only lives, while the body, which was -alive before, is now dead.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But Paul, before penning this language in -2 Cor. 5, had already told the Corinthians when -<span class='pageno' id='Page_191'>191</span>mortality would be swallowed up of life, and how -it would be accomplished; so he knew when he -penned this portion of his second epistle that they -would understand it perfectly. See the 15th -chapter of his first epistle, verses 51-55: “Behold -I show you a mystery: we shall not all sleep, -but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the -twinkling of an eye, at the last trump; for the -trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised -incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this -corruptible must put on incorruption, and this -mortal must put on immortality. So when this -corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and -this mortal shall have put on immortality, then -shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, -Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, -where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy <a id='corr191.16'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='victory.'>victory?</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_191.16'><ins class='correction' title='victory.'>victory?</ins></a></span>”</p> - -<p class='c011'>In verse 50, he says: “Now this I say, brethren, -that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom -of God, neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” -Corruption does not inherit, or -possess, incorruption. Mortality does not possess -immortality. The mortal body does not inclose -an immortal principle, which it has power to -hold within its grasp, till that grasp is rendered -nerveless by the stroke of death, and the soul -flies away in glad release. But this mortal, all -that there is about man that is mortal, must put -on, must be itself invested with, immortality, and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_192'>192</span>this corruptible, all about us that is perishable, -must itself become incorruptible; then it will -not be this corruptible flesh and blood, and then -it can inherit the kingdom of God, and start off -bold and vigorous on its race of endless life; and -outside of this change, and independent of this -grand investiture of our mortal nature with immortality, -there is no eternal life for any of the -race. And when this is accomplished, then death -is swallowed up in victory; then we are clothed -upon with our house from Heaven; then mortality -is swallowed up of life. But this is not at -death, but at the last trump, when the Lord appears -in glory, and the dead are raised, and the -righteous living are changed in the twinkling of -an eye. How can the religious world stumble -in a path so plain!</p> - -<p class='c011'>But if the heavenly house is our future immortal -body, it may be asked how Paul can say, -as he does in 2 Cor. 5:1, “We have [present -tense] a building of God, an house not made with -hands, eternal in the heavens.” We have this in -the same sense that we have, at the present time, -eternal life. And John tells us how this is: It -is by faith, or by promise, not by actual possession. -1 John 5:11: “And this is the record, -that God hath given to us eternal life.” God -hath given it to us; and on the strength of this -promise we have it. But where is it now? -“And this life is”--in us? No, but--“in his -<span class='pageno' id='Page_193'>193</span>Son.” And when he, the Son, who is our life, -shall appear, we shall be clothed upon with our -heavenly house, and appear with him in glory. -Col. 3:4.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again, it may be asked how Paul can speak of -two houses, as though we moved from one into -the other, if it is only a change of condition from -mortal to immortality. He illustrates this in the -figure he takes to represent conversion. Eph. -4:22-24: “That ye put off concerning the former -conversation the old man, which is corrupt according -to the deceitful lusts; and be renewed in the -spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new -man, which after God is created in righteousness -and true holiness.” Here the simple change of -heart, the change of the disposition, from sin to -holiness, is spoken of as putting off one man and -putting on another. With even greater propriety, -may the change from mortal to immortality -be spoken of as removing from an earthly, perishable -house, to an immortal, heavenly one.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The terms Paul uses to describe the two states, -are clearly defined. On the one side it is an -earthly house, groaning with burdens, mortality, -absent from the Lord. On the other, it is clothed -upon with our house from Heaven, mortality -swallowed up of life, present with the Lord. He -did not desire to be unclothed, which, as already -noticed, signifies the condition of death; but he -did desire to be present with the Lord; therefore -<span class='pageno' id='Page_194'>194</span>in death he would have us understand that -the Christian is not present with the Lord.</p> - -<p class='c011'>From all this, we can only conclude that -when he says he is willing to be absent from the -body and present with the Lord, he means to be -understood that he is willing that this burdened, -groaning, mortal state should end, and the promised -glorious and eternal day begin. And being -confident, through the presence of the Spirit of -God in his heart, that when this change should -be wrought, he would have a glorious part therein, -he was more than willing it should come. It -was but the breathing again of that prayer which -has arisen like a continual sigh from the heart of -the church through all her weary pilgrimage, -“Thy kingdom come; yea, come, Lord Jesus, -come quickly;” not, “Let our immortal souls,” -which they did not suppose they possessed, -“enter a conscious state in death” in which they -did not believe.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_195'>195</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXIII. <br /> <span class='fss'>IN THE BODY AND OUT.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>It is confidently asserted that Paul believed a -man could exist independently of the body from -certain expressions which he uses in 2 Cor. 12: -2-4:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, -(whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of -the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one -caught up to the third Heaven. And I knew such a man, -whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: -God knoweth;) how that he was caught up into paradise, -and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful -for a man to utter.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>By the man whom he knew, it is generally -supposed that the apostle means himself, and the -language he uses is a record of his own experience. -Paul was taken to the third Heaven, to -paradise, and heard words which it is not possible -for a man to utter; but whether it was in -his body, or out, he did not know.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This instance, then, furnishes no example of a -spirit actually existing in a conscious condition -outside of the body, even if this is what is meant -by the expression, “out of the body;” for Paul -assures us that he did not know that he was in -that condition. Yet it is claimed that it has all -the force of an actual example; for such a condition -<span class='pageno' id='Page_196'>196</span>is recognized as possible. It is very readily -admitted that such a condition is recognized, as -is expressed by the terms, “out of the body;” but -that this means an immaterial spirit, an immortal -soul, the real, intelligent man, speeding away -through the universe even to the third Heaven, -there to hear unspeakable words, and gather up -heavenly information, and return at will to resume -its abode in the, for a time, deserted body, -should not be too hastily inferred from this passage.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Of what is the apostle speaking? He says, in -verse 1: “It is not expedient for me, doubtless, -to glory. I will come to visions and revelations -of the Lord. I knew a man in Christ, above -fourteen years ago,” &c., as previously quoted. -His subject, then, is the visions and revelations -he had received from the Lord; and the language -from verse 2 to verse 4 is the record of -one such remarkable revelation, perhaps the most -remarkable one he had ever experienced. He -was given a view of paradise, and heard unspeakable -words. And so real and clear and vivid was -the view, that he did not know but that he was -transported bodily into that place. If not in -this manner, the view was given in the ordinary -course of vision, that is, by having the scene presented -before the mind by the power of the Holy -Ghost.</p> - -<p class='c011'>All must concede that only these two conditions -<span class='pageno' id='Page_197'>197</span>are brought to view, either his transportation -bodily to paradise, or the ordinary condition -of being in vision. If he went bodily to paradise, -the instance has no bearing of course on the -question of consciousness in death. And if it -was an ordinary vision, how does this prove consciousness -in death? The question is reduced to -this one point; and the answer turns on the definition -given to the expression, “out of the body.” -Did Paul mean by it, what modern expositors -wish us to understand by it? Paul meant by it, -simply being in vision; the expositors aforesaid -mean by it, the going out of the immortal spirit -from the body, and its existence for a time in a -separate conscious intelligent condition independent -of the body. But let us look a little further, -and see what this condition is. According to the -common view, the separation of the soul from -the body is death. This is what death is defined -to mean. There can be no such thing as the -separation of soul and body, and death not result. -And the return of the soul to again inhabit the -body, is a resurrection from the dead. This is -what is claimed in the case of Rachel, whose soul -departed, and she died, Gen. 35:18, and the widow’s -son whom Elijah raised, whose soul came -into him again, and he revived. 1 Kings 17:22.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But does any one suppose that Paul meant to -say that he did not know but that he died and -had a resurrection? That is what he did say, if -the words, “out of the body,” mean what some -<span class='pageno' id='Page_198'>198</span>would have us understand by them. His soul -went off to paradise, and his body lay here, we -know not how long, a corpse upon the earth! -And when his soul returned, he had a resurrection -from the dead! A necessary conclusion so -preposterous, must be sufficient to convince any -one that Paul, by the expression, “out of the -body,” does not mean a state of death. He simply -means that he was in vision, a state in which -the mind, controlled for the time by the Holy -Ghost, is made to take cognizance of distant or -future scenes, and the person seems to himself to -be really and bodily present, viewing the scenes, -and listening to the words that are spoken, before -him. Dreams, which all have experienced, -are doubtless good illustrations of how this can -be, and the case of John, in the Revelation, furnishes -a notable example; for he was carried forward -far into the future, and seemed to be present -and taking part in scenes that did not then -exist, and at which he could not really have been -present, even in his supposed immaterial immortal -soul.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Paul, then, had no reference whatever to a -state of death in 2 Cor. 12:2-4. To suppose -him to refer to that, according to the immaterialist -view, runs us into the greatest absurdity. -Hence his language affords no proof that there is -a soul in man which can live on in a conscious -intelligent state, while the mortal body crumbles -back to dust.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_199'>199</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXIV. <br /> <span class='fss'>DEPARTING AND BEING WITH CHRIST.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>When will all men come to agree respecting -the state of the dead? When will the question -whether the dead are alive, conscious, active, and -intelligent, or whether they rest in the grave in -unconsciousness and inactivity, cease to be a -vexed question? When shall it be decided -whether the shout of triumph which the ransomed -are to raise, “O death, where is thy sting? -O grave, where is thy victory?” is the celebration -of a real victory, or only an unnecessary and -useless transaction, as it must be if the grave -holds not the real man, but only the shell, the -mortal body, which is generally considered an -incumbrance and a clog? Never will this question -be decided till men shall be willing to follow -the Scriptures, instead of trying to compel the -Scriptures to follow them; never, while they -put the figurative for the literal, and the literal -for the figurative, mistake sound for sense, and -rest on the possible construction of an isolated -text, instead of, and in opposition to, the general -tenor of the teaching of the inspired writers.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Paul has told us often enough, and it would -seem explicitly enough, when the Christian goes -to be with his Lord. It is at the redemption of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_200'>200</span>the body. Rom. 8:23. It is in the day of the -Lord Jesus. 1 Cor. 5:5. It is at the last trump. -1 Cor. 15:51-55. It is when we are clothed -upon with our house from Heaven. 2 Cor. 5:4. -It is when Christ our life shall appear. Col. 3:4. -It is when the Lord descends from Heaven with -a shout, and the dead are raised. 1 Thess. 4:16, -17. It is at the coming of the Lord. 2 Thess. -2:1. It is to be at “that day,” an expression by -which Paul frequently designates the day of -Christ’s appearing. 2 Tim. 4:7, 8.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Yet Paul, in one instance, without stopping to -explain, uses the expression, “to depart and to -be with Christ;” whereupon his words are seized -by religious teachers as unanswerable evidence -that at death the spirit enters at once into the -presence of its Redeemer. The passage is found -in Phil. 1:21-24, and reads as follows:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain. But if I -live in the flesh, this is the fruit of my labor: yet what I -shall choose I wot not. For I am in a strait betwixt two, -having a desire to depart and to be with Christ; which is -far better. Nevertheless, to abide in the flesh is more -needful for you.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Willing to go with our friends as far as we can -in their interpretation of any passage, we raise -no issue here on the word depart. Paul probably -means by it the same as in 2 Tim. 4:6, -where he says, “The time of my departure is at -hand,” referring to his approaching death. Then -<span class='pageno' id='Page_201'>201</span>Paul, immediately on dying, was to be with -Christ. Not so fast. The very point intended -to be proved has, in such a conclusion, to be assumed. -Paul had in view two conditions: this -present state, and the future state. Between -these two he was in a strait. The cause of God -on earth, the interests of the church, stirring to -its very depths his large and sympathetic heart, -drew him here; his own desires drew him to the -future state of victory and rest. And so evenly -balanced were the influences drawing him in -either direction, that he hardly knew upon -which course he would decide, were it left to -him as a matter of choice. Nevertheless, he said -that it was more needful for the church that he -remain here, to give them still the benefit of his -counsel and his labors.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The state or condition to which he looked forward -was one which he greatly desired. About -four years before he wrote these words to the -Philippians, he had written to the Corinthians, -telling them what he did desire, and what he did -not desire, in reference to the future. Said he, -“Not that we would be unclothed.” 2 Cor. 5:4. -By being unclothed, he meant the state of death, -from the cessation of mortal life to the resurrection. -This he did not desire; but he immediately -adds what he did desire, namely, to be -“clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed -up of life;” and when this is done, all that -<span class='pageno' id='Page_202'>202</span>is mortal of us is made immortal, the dead are -raised, and the body is redeemed. Rom. 8:23; -1 Cor. 15:52, 53.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In writing to the Corinthians, he thus stated -that the object of his desire was to be clothed -upon, and have mortality swallowed up of life; -to the Philippians he stated that the object of -his desire was to be with Christ. These expressions, -then, mean the same thing. Therefore, in -Phil. 1:23, Paul passes over the state of death, -the unclothed state, just as he had done to the -Corinthians; for he would not tell the Corinthians -that he did not desire a certain state, and -four years after write to the Philippians that he -did desire it. Paul did not thus contradict himself.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But this intermediate state is the disputed territory -in this controversy; the condition of the -dead therein is the very point in question: and -on this the text before us is entirely silent.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This is the vulnerable point in the popular argument -on this text. It is assumed that the being -with Christ takes place immediately on the -departure. But, while the text asserts nothing -of this kind, multitudes of other texts affirm that -the point when we gain immortality and the -presence of Christ, is a point in the future beyond -the resurrection. And, unless some necessary -connection can be shown between the departing -and the being with Christ, and the hosts -<span class='pageno' id='Page_203'>203</span>of texts which make our entrance into Christ’s -presence a future event can be harmonized therewith, -any attempt to prove consciousness in -death from this text is an utter failure.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Landis seems to feel the weakness of his side -in this respect, and spends the strength of his argument, -pp. 224-229, in trying to make the inference -appear necessary that the being with -Christ must be immediate on the departure. He -would have us think it utterly absurd and nonsensical -to suppose a moment to elapse between -the two events.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Let us then see if there is anything in Paul’s -language which contradicts the idea that a period -of utter unconsciousness, of greater or less length, -intervenes between death and our entrance into -the future life. In the first place, if the unconsciousness -is absolute, as we suppose, the space -passed over in the individual’s experience is an -utter blank. There is not the least perception, -with such person, of the lapse of a moment of -time. When consciousness returns, the line of -thought is taken up at the very point where it -ceased, without the consciousness of a moment’s -interruption. This fact is often proved by actual -experience. Persons have been known to become -utterly unconscious by a fracture of the skull, -and a portion of it being depressed upon the -brain, suspending its action. Perhaps when the -accident happened they were in the act of issuing -<span class='pageno' id='Page_204'>204</span>an order, or giving directions to those about -them. They have lain unconscious for months, -and then been relieved by a surgical operation; -and when the brain began again to act, and -consciousness returned, they have immediately -spoken and completed the sentence they were in -the act of uttering when they were struck down, -months before. This shows that to these persons -there was no consciousness of any time intervening, -more than what passes between the words -of a sentence which we are speaking. It was all -the same to them as if they had at once completed -the sentence they commenced to utter, instead -of having weeks and months of unconsciousness -thrown in between the words of which that -sentence was composed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So with the dead. They are not aware of the -lapse of a moment of time between their death -and the resurrection. A wink of the eye shuts -out for an instant the sight of all objects, but it -is so instantaneous that we do not perceive any -interruption of the rays of vision. Six thousand -years in the grave to a dead man is no more than -a wink of the eye to the living. To them, consciousness, -our only means of measuring time, is -gone; and it will seem to them when they awake -that absolutely none has elapsed. When Abel -awakes from the dead, it will seem to him, until -his attention is attracted by the new scenes of -immortality to which he will be raised, that he -<span class='pageno' id='Page_205'>205</span>is rising up from the murderous blows of Cain, -under which he had seemingly just fallen. And -to Stephen, who died beholding the exaltation of -Christ in Heaven, it will be the same as if he -had, without a moment’s interruption, entered -into his glorious presence. And when Paul himself -shall be raised, it will seem to him that the -stroke of the executioner was his translation to -glory.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Such being the indisputable evidence of facts -upon this point, we ask how a person, understanding -this matter, would speak of the future -life, if he expected to obtain it in the kingdom of -God? Would he speak of passing long ages in -the grave before he reached it? He might, if he -designed to state, for any one’s instruction, the -actual facts in the case; but if he was speaking -simply of his own experience, it would not be -proper for him to mention the intervening time, -because he would not be conscious of any such -time, and it would not seem to him on awaking -to life again that any such period had elapsed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Accordingly, Bishop Law lays down this general -principle on this question:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The Scriptures, in speaking of the connection between -our present and future being, do not take into the account -our <em>intermediate state in death</em>; no more than we, in describing -the course of any man’s actions, take into account -the time <em>he sleeps</em>. Therefore, the Scriptures (to be consistent -with themselves) <em>must affirm</em> an immediate connection -between death and the Judgment. Heb. 9:27; 2 -Cor. 5:6, 8.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_206'>206</span>John Crellius says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Because the time between death and the resurrection -is not to be reckoned, therefore the apostle might speak -thus, though the soul has no sense of anything after -death.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Dr. Priestly says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The apostle, considering his own situation, would -naturally connect the end of this life with the commencement -of another and a better, as he would have no perception -of any interval between them. That the apostle had -no view short of the coming of Christ to Judgment, is evident -from the phrase he makes use of, namely, <em>being with -Christ</em>, which can only take place at his second coming. -For Christ himself has said that he would come again, -and that he would take his disciples to himself, which -clearly implies that they were not to be with him before -that time.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>So in harmony with this reference to our Lord’s -teaching is the language used by Paul in 1 Thess. -4:16, 17, that we here refer to it again: “For the -Lord himself shall descend from Heaven with a -shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with -the trump of God; and the dead in Christ shall -rise first. Then we which are alive and remain -shall be caught up together with them in the -clouds, to meet the Lord in the air; and so shall -we ever be with the Lord.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>As Christ taught that the time when his people -were to be with him again was at his second -coming, so Paul here teaches. We call attention -to the word <em>so</em>, in the last sentence of the quotation. -So means in this way, in this manner, by -<span class='pageno' id='Page_207'>207</span>this means. “<em>So</em>,” in this manner, by this means, -“shall we ever be with the Lord.” When Paul, -as he does here, describes without any limitations, -the way and means by which we go to be with -the Lord, he precludes every other means. He -the same as says there is no other means by -which we can be with the Lord, and if there is -any other means of gaining this end, this language -is not true. If we go to be with the Lord, -by means of our immortal spirit, when we die, -we do not go to be with him by means of the -visible coming of Christ, the resurrection of the -dead, and the change of the living, and Paul’s -language is a stupendous falsehood. There is no -possible way of avoiding this conclusion, except -by claiming that the descent of the Lord from -Heaven, the mighty shout, the voice of the archangel, -the sounding of the great trump of God, -the resurrection of the dead, and the change of -the living, all take place when a person dies--a -position too absurd to be seriously refuted, and -almost too ridiculous to be even stated.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Shall we then take the position that Paul -taught the Philippians that a person went by his -immortal spirit immediately at death to be with -the Lord, when he had plainly told the Thessalonians -that this was to be brought about in altogether -a different manner, and by altogether different -means? No one who would have venerated -that holy apostle when alive, or who has -<span class='pageno' id='Page_208'>208</span>any decent regard for his memory now that he -is dead, will accuse him of so teaching.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Why, then, does he say that he has a desire to -depart, that is, to die? Because he well understood -that his life of suffering, of toil, and trial -here was to terminate by death; and if the church -could spare him, he would gladly have it come, -not only to release him from his almost unbearable -burdens, but because he knew further that all -the intervening space between his death and the -return of his Lord would seem to him to be instantly -annihilated, and the glories of the eternal -world, through his resurrection from the dead, -would instantly open upon his view.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is objected again that Paul was very foolish -to express such a desire if he was not to be with -his Lord till the resurrection; for, in that case, -he would be with him no sooner if he died than -he would if he did not die. Those who make -this objection, either cannot have fully considered -this subject, or they utterly fail to comprehend it. -They have no difficulty in seeing how Paul would -be with Christ sooner by dying, provided his -spirit, when he died, immediately entered into -his presence; but they cannot see how it would -be so when the time between his death and the -coming of Christ is to him an utter blank, and -then without the consciousness on his part, that -a single instant has elapsed, he is ushered into -the presence of his Redeemer. Remember that -<span class='pageno' id='Page_209'>209</span>Paul’s consciousness was his only means of measuring -time; and if he had died just as he wrote -these words to the Philippians, it would have -been <em>to him</em> an entrance into Christ’s presence -just as much sooner as what time elapsed between -the penning of that sentence and the day of his -death. None can fail to see this point, if they -will consider it in the light of the fact we have -here tried so fully to set forth, that the dead have -no perceptions of passing time.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In the light of the foregoing reasoning, let us -read and paraphrase this famous passage to the -Philippians:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“For to me to live is for the furtherance of the cause of -Christ, and for me to die is still gain to that cause (because -‘Christ shall be magnified in my body, whether it -be by life or death,’ verse 20). But if I live in the flesh, -this, the furtherance of Christ’s cause, is the fruit of my -labor; but what course I should take were it left for me -to decide, I know not; for I am in a straight betwixt two: -I know that the church still needs my labors, but I have -a desire to end my mortal pilgrimage, and be the next instant, -so far as my experience goes (for the dead perceive -no passing of time), in the presence of my Lord. Consulting -my own feelings, this I should esteem far better; but -I know that it is more needful for you that I abide still -in a condition to labor on for your good in this mortal -state.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Who can say, bearing in mind the language -Paul frequently uses in his other epistles, that -this is not a just paraphrase of his language here. -The only objection against it is, that, so rendered, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_210'>210</span>it does not support the conscious-state dogma. -But it makes a harmony in all that Paul has -taught on the subject; and is it not far more desirable -to maintain the harmony of the sacred -writings, than to try to make them defend a -dogma which involves them in a fatal contradiction?</p> - -<p class='c011'>REMAINING TEXTS CONSIDERED.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We have now examined all the principal texts -of the Scriptures which are supposed to have a -bearing on the question of the intermediate state. -A few others of minor importance are occasionally -urged in favor of the popular view, and as -such are entitled to a passing notice. We give -them in consecutive order as follows:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Rom. 8:38, 39. “For I am persuaded that neither -death, nor life, ... shall be able to separate us from -the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>It is claimed that death cannot separate us -from the love of God; but, as God cannot exercise -his love toward any but a rational and conscious -creature, therefore the soul must be -alive after death. (<cite>Immortality of the Soul, -by Luther Lee</cite>, p. 111.) To what far-fetched and -abortive reasoning will wrong theories lead intelligent -men. We owe the reader an apology for -noticing this passage at all. We should not here -introduce it, were it not used as an objection to -the view we advocate; and we should not believe -<span class='pageno' id='Page_211'>211</span>it could ever be urged as an objection, had -we not actually seen it. The reasoning of the -apostle has to be completely inverted before any -argument (may we be pardoned the misnomer) -can be manufactured out of it for the conscious-state -theory. For it is of our love to God, through -Christ, and not of his to us, that the apostle -speaks. It has reference, also, wholly to this life. -Thus he says, verse 35, “Who shall separate us -from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or -distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, -or peril, or sword?” That is, shall these things -which we have to endure in this life on account -of our profession of the gospel and our love for -Christ, quench that love in any wise? Shall we -compromise the gospel, and alienate ourselves -from the love of Christ, who has done so much -for us, and through whom we hope for so much -(see the whole chapter), to avoid a little persecution, -peril, and distress? The separation from -the love of Christ by death, of which he speaks, -is the same as the separation by persecution, &c.; -but tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, nakedness, -peril, and sword, do not necessarily kill -us; they have respect to this life; the separation, -therefore, is something which takes place here--simply -an alienation of our hearts from him. -And shall all these things, he asks--nay, more, -shall even the prospect of death on account of -our profession of Christ, prevent our loving and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_212'>212</span>following him? No! is the implied and emphatic -answer.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Such we believe to be the view which any one -must take of this passage, who does not find himself -under the <a id='corr212.3'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='unfortuate'>unfortunate</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_212.3'><ins class='correction' title='unfortuate'>unfortunate</ins></a></span> necessity of making out -a case.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But looking at this scripture from the objector’s -stand-point, the singular inquiry at once -forces itself upon us, Can the immortal soul in -its disembodied state suffer tribulation, distress, -persecution, famine, nakedness, peril, and sword!?</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>2 Cor. 4:16. “For which cause we faint not; but -though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is -renewed day by day.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Is this inward man the immortal soul? We -answer, No; but the new man which we put on, -Christ formed within <em>the hope</em> of glory. See -Col. 3:9, 10; Eph. 4:22, 24; 3:16, 17; Col. -1:27.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>1 Thess. 4:14. “For if we believe that Jesus died -and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus -will God bring with him.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Yes, says the objector, bring them from Heaven; -so they must now be with him there in a conscious -state. Not quite so fast. The text speaks -of those who sleep in Jesus. Do you believe those -who have gone to Heaven are asleep? We always -supposed that Heaven was a place of unceasing -activity, and of uninterrupted joy. And, -again, are all these persons going to be brought -<span class='pageno' id='Page_213'>213</span>from Heaven asleep! What a theological incongruity! -But, from what place are they brought, -if not from Heaven? The same place, we answer, -from which God brought our Lord Jesus -Christ. And what place was that? See Heb. -13:20: “Now the God of peace, that brought -again <em>from the dead</em> our Lord Jesus,” &c. -We may then read the text in Thessalonians, as -follows: “For if we believe that Jesus died and -God brought him from the dead, even so them -also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with -him from the dead.” Simply this the text affirms, -and nothing more. It is a glorious pledge of the -resurrection, and so far diametrically opposed to -the conscious-state theory.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>2 Tim. 4:6. “For I am now ready to be offered, and -the time of my departure is at hand.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>It is claimed that the departure here referred to -is death, with which we agree. We take no exceptions -to the remark so often made, “Departed -this life,” &c. <a id='corr213.21'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='Put'>But</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_213.21'><ins class='correction' title='Put'>But</ins></a></span> as Paul does not here intimate -that his departure was to be to Heaven, or -even to any conscious intermediate state, we -have no right to infer this.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>2 Pet. 1:14. “Knowing that shortly I must put off -this my tabernacle, even as our Lord Jesus Christ hath -showed me.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>It is here claimed that the “I” that speaks, -and the “my” that is in possession of a tabernacle, -is Peter’s soul, the man proper, and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_214'>214</span>the tabernacle, is the body which he was going -to lay off. That Peter here has reference -to death, we doubt not; but it was to be -as the Lord Jesus Christ had showed him. -How had he shown him it would be? See -John 21:18, 19: “But when <em>thou</em> shalt be old, -<em>thou</em> shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another -shall gird <em>thee</em>, and carry thee whither thou -wouldest not. This spake he, signifying by -what death <em>he</em> should glorify God.” Here we -are shown that the “thou” and the “he,” -claimed on 1 Pet. 1:14, to be Peter’s soul, the -man proper, was going to die, and by death, glorify -God. And Peter himself says in the next -verse, “Moreover, I will endeavor that ye may -be able after <em>my</em> decease to have these things always -in remembrance.” Here, then, the same -“my,” Peter’s soul, the man proper, recollect, -which in the verse before is in the possessive -case, and governed by tabernacle, is again in -the possessive case, and governed by decease, or -<em>death</em>! Yes, Peter <em>himself</em> was going to die. -We find no proof of a double entity here.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This phraseology is well illustrated by Job 7:21, -which shows that the man proper, the “I,” -sleeps in the dust: “And why dost Thou not -pardon my transgression, and take away mine -iniquity? for now shall I sleep in the dust; and -thou shalt seek me in the morning, but I shall -not be.”</p> - -<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_215'>215</span></div> -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>2 Pet 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.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>This testimony shows that the unjust do not -enter into a place of punishment at death, but -are <em>reserved</em> to the day of Judgment. Where -are they reserved? Answer. In the general -receptacle of the dead, the grave. See Job -21:30.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Rev. 20:5. “But the rest of the dead lived not -again until the thousand years were finished. This is -the first resurrection.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>By this first resurrection a portion of the -dead are restored to life, consciousness, and -activity, while it is said of those whose condition -is not affected by this resurrection, that -they <em>lived not</em> for a thousand years. This -proves that up to the time of this resurrection, -<em>all</em> the dead were in a condition just the opposite -of life--a condition in which it might -be said of them that they “lived not.” And -this, mark, is spoken of the whole conscious -being, not of the body merely. No language -could more positively show that in death the -whole person is in a state just the opposite of life.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Rev. 22:8, 9. “And I John ... fell down to worship -before the feet of the angel which showed me these -things. Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not; -for I am thy fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the -prophets.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_216'>216</span>This text is supposed to prove that one of the -old prophets came to John as an angel, showing -that the dead exist in a conscious state. But it -does not so teach. The angel simply stated that he -was John’s fellow-servant, and the fellow-servant -of John’s brethren, the prophets, and the fellow-servant -of them which keep the sayings of this -book. The being of whom they were all worshipers -together was the great God. Therefore, -says the angel, do not worship me, since I am -only a worshiper with you at the throne of God; -but worship God. This angel had doubtless been -sent to the ancient prophets to reveal things to -them, as he had now come to John. Such we -believe to be the legitimate teaching of this -scripture, the last that is found in the book of -God supposed to teach a conscious state.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXV. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE DEATH OF ADAM.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The inquirer into the nature of man, and his -condition in death, must ever turn with the -deepest interest to the record left us concerning -the father of our race. In Adam we have an -account of the origin of the human family, at -once so simple and consistent that the jeers of -skepticism fall harmless at its feet, and science, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_217'>217</span>in comparison, only makes itself ridiculous, in -trying to account for it in any other manner. -And in the sentence pronounced upon him when -he fell under the fearful guilt of transgression, we -are shown to what condition death was designed -to reduce the human family. In the creation and -death of Adam, we have the account of the building -up and the unbuilding of a human being; -and this case, being the first and most illustrious, -must furnish the precedent and establish the rule -for the whole race.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Of the creation of Adam and the elements of -which he was composed, we have already spoken. -The record brings to view a formation made -wholly of the dust of the ground. “And the -Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground.” -This body was endowed with a high and perfect -organization, and was quickened into life by the -breath which the Lord breathed into its nostrils. -The body, before it was made alive, had no power -to act; the breath which was breathed into it -could not of itself act; but the body being quickened, -the machinery set in motion by this vital -principle, all the phenomena of physical life and -mental action at once resulted.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The Author of this noblest of creative works, -who must of necessity, as the ruler over all, require -the creatures of his hand to obey him, and -toward whom an exercise of love, and a voluntary -and willing submission, can alone constitute -<span class='pageno' id='Page_218'>218</span>obedience, placed the man whom he had formed, -as was meet, upon a state of probation, to test -his loyalty to his Maker. The scene of his trial -was the beautiful garden in which was everything -that was pleasant to the sight and good for food; -and over all that adorned or enriched his Eden -home, with one exception, he had unlimited control. -The condition upon which he was to be -tested is thus definitely expressed:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of -every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat. 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.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Adam and Eve could not mistake the requirement -of this law, nor fail to understand the intent -of the penalty. And before Satan could -cause his temptation to make any impression on -the mind of Eve, he had to contradict this threatening, -assuring her that they should not surely -die. A question of veracity was thus raised between -God and Satan; and strange to say, the -theological world, in interpreting the penalty, -have virtually, with the exception of a small minority, -sided with Satan. This is seen in the interpretation -which is commonly put on this penalty, -making it consist of three divisions: 1. -Alienation of the soul from God, the love of sin, -and the hatred of holiness, called spiritual death. -2. The separation of soul and body, called temporal -<span class='pageno' id='Page_219'>219</span>death. 3. Immediately after temporal death, -the conscious torment of the soul in hell, which -is to have no end, and is called eternal death. -The Baptist Confession of Faith, Art. 5, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“We believe that God made man upright; but he, sinning, -involved himself and posterity in death spiritual, -temporal, and eternal; from all which there is no deliverance -but by Christ.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Let us look at the different installments of this -penalty, and see if they will harmonize with the -language in which the original threatening is expressed: -“Thou shalt surely die.” Adam incurred -the penalty by sinning. After he had sinned, -he was a sinner. But a state of sin is that state -of alienation from God which the orthodox school -make to be a part of the penalty of his transgression. -In this they take as the <em>punishment</em> -of sin that which was simply its <em>result</em>; and -they make the sentence read, virtually, in this -profoundly sensible manner: “In the day that -thou sinnest, thou shalt surely be a sinner!”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Because he wickedly became a sinner, and -brought himself into a state of alienation from -God, the doom was pronounced upon him, “Thou -shalt surely die.” Could this mean eternal death? -If so, Adam never could have been released therefrom. -But he is to be released from it; for “in -Christ shall all be made alive.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>These two installments, then, spiritual and -eternal death, utterly fail us, when brought to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_220'>220</span>the test of the language in which the sentence is -expressed: one is nonsense, and the other an impossibility.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Temporal death alone remains to be considered; -but the interpretation which is given to this, completely -nullifies the penalty, and makes Satan to -have been correct when he said, “Thou shalt not -surely die.” Temporal death is interpreted to -mean the separation of the soul from the body, -the body alone to die, but the soul, which is called -the real, responsible man, to enter upon an enlarged -and higher life. In this case, there is no -death; and the sentence should have read, In the -day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt be freed from -the clog of this mortal body, and enter upon a -new and eternal life. So said Satan, “Ye shall -be as gods;” and true to this assertion from the -father of lies, the heathen have all along deified -their dead men, and worshiped their departed -heroes; and modern poets have sung, “There is -no death; what seems so is transition.” If ever -the skill of a deceiver and the gullibility of a -victim were manifested in an unaccountable degree, -it is in this fact, that right in the face and -eyes of the pale throng that daily passes down -through the gate of death, the devil can make -men believe that after all his first lie was true, -and there is no such thing as death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>From these considerations, it is evident that -nothing will meet the demands of the sentence -<span class='pageno' id='Page_221'>221</span>but the cessation of the life of the whole man. -But that, says one, cannot be, for he was to die -in the very day he ate of the forbidden fruit; -but he did not literally die for nine hundred and -thirty years. If this is an objection against the -view we advocate, it is equally such against every -other. Take the threefold penalty above noticed. -If death spiritual, death temporal, and death -eternal, was the penalty, how much was fulfilled -on the day he sinned? Not death eternal, surely, -and not death temporal, which did not take place -for nine hundred and thirty years, but only death -spiritual. But this was only the first installment -of the penalty, and far less important than the -other two. The most that the friends of this interpretation -can say, therefore, is that the penalty -begun on that very day to be fulfilled. But -we can say as much with our view. “Dying, -thou shalt die,” reads the margin; which some -understand to mean, thou shalt inherit a mortal -nature, and the process of decay shall commence. -As soon as he sinned, he came under -the sentence of death, and the work commenced. -He bore up against the encroachments -of dissolution for nine hundred and thirty -years, and then the work was fully accomplished.</p> - -<p class='c011'>When God proceeded to pronounce sentence -upon Adam, he gave us an authoritative interpretation -of the penalty from which there is no -appeal. Gen. 3:19: “In the sweat of thy face -<span class='pageno' id='Page_222'>222</span>shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the -ground; for out of it wast thou taken: <em>for dust -thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return</em>.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The return to dust is here made a subsequent -event, to be preceded by a period of wearing -toil. And being finally overcome by the labors -and ills of life, the person addressed was to return -again to the dust from which he was taken. -With Adam, this process commenced on the -very day he transgressed, and the penalty -threatened, which covered all this work from -beginning to end, was executed in full when this -process was fully completed in Adam’s death, -nine hundred and thirty years thereafter.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Two things are connected together in the penalty -affixed to Adam’s disobedience. These are -the words, day and die: In the <em>day</em> thou eatest, -thou shalt <em>die</em>. The dying, whatever view we -take of it, must include temporal or literal death. -But this was not accomplished on that very day. -Therefore, to find a death which was inflicted on -that literal day, a figurative sense is given to the -word die, and it is claimed that a spiritual death -was that day wrought upon Adam. But we inquire, -If either of these terms, day or die, are to -be taken figuratively, why not let the dying be -literal, and the day be figurative, especially since -the sentence which God pronounced upon Adam, -when he came up for trial, shows that literal -death, and that only, was intended in the penalty?</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_223'>223</span>The use of the word day in such a sense, -meaning an indefinite period of time, is of frequent -occurrence in the Scriptures. An instance -in point occurs in 1 Kings 2:36-46. King Solomon -bound Shimei by an oath to remain in Jerusalem, -under the sentence that on the day he -went out in any direction, he should be slain. -After three years, two of his servants ran away -to Gath, and he went after them. It was then -told Solomon that Shimei had been to Gath and -returned. Solomon sent for him, reminded him -of the conditions on which his life was suspended, -and the oath he had broken, and then commanded -the executioner to put him to death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Gath was some twenty-five miles from Jerusalem. -That Shimei could go there and get his -servants, return, be sent for by Solomon, and be -tried and executed, all on the same day, is a supposition -by no means probable, even if it is possible. -Yet in his death the sentence was fulfilled, -that on the day he went out he should be slain. -Because on the very day he passed out of the -city, the only condition that held back the execution -of the sentence was removed, and he was -virtually a dead man.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So with Adam. He was immediately cut off -from the tree of life, his source of physical vitality. -So much was executed on that very day. -Death was then his inevitable portion, to be -accomplished within the limits of that period -covered by the word, day.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_224'>224</span>We are very well aware of the method adopted -to evade the conclusion which naturally follows -from the language of the sentence in Gen. 3:19. -This, it is claimed, was spoken only of the body, -not of the soul. The poetry of Longfellow,</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c019'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“Dust thou art, to dust returnest,</div> - <div class='line in2'>Was not spoken of the soul,”</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c020'>takes much better with most people than the -plain language of inspiration itself.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To whom, then, or to what, was this sentence -addressed, “Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt -thou return”? Admitting that there is such a -creature of the imagination as the popular, independent, -immortal soul, was the language addressed -to that or to the body? If there is such -a soul as this, what does it constitute, on the -authority of the friends of that theory, themselves? -It is the real, responsible, intelligent -man. Watson says, “It is the soul <em>only</em> which -perceives pain or pleasure, which suffers or enjoys;” -and D. D. Whedon says, “It is the soul -that hears, feels, tastes, and smells, through its -sensorial organs.” The sentence, then, would be -addressed to that which could hear; the penalty -would be pronounced upon that which could feel. -The body, in the common view, is only an irresponsible -instrument, the means by which the -soul acts. It can, of itself, neither see, hear, feel, -will, or act. Who then will have the hardihood -to assert that God addressed his sentence to the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_225'>225</span>irresponsible instrument, the body merely? This -would be the same as for the judge in a criminal -court to proceed deliberately to address the -knife with which the murderer had taken the -life of his victim, and pronounce sentence upon -that, instead of the murderer himself. Away -with a view which offers to the Majesty of -Heaven the insult of representing that he acts in -this way!</p> - -<p class='c011'>In the sentence, the personal pronoun, <em>thy</em>, is -once, and the personal pronoun, <em>thou</em>, is five -times, applied to the Adam whom God addressed. -“In the sweat of <em>thy</em> face, shalt <em>thou</em> eat bread, -till <em>thou</em> return unto the ground; for out of it -wast <em>thou</em> taken: for dust <em>thou</em> art, and unto -dust shalt <em>thou</em> return.” When we address our -fellowmen by the different personal pronouns of -our language, what do we address? The conscious, -intelligent, responsible man, that which -sees, feels, hears, thinks, acts, and is morally accountable. -But this, in popular parlance, is the -soul; these pronouns must every time stand for -the soul. The pronouns thy and thou, in Gen. -3:19, must then mean Adam’s soul. If they do -not mean it here, how does the same pronoun, -thou, in Luke 23:43, mean the thief’s soul, -when Christ said to him, “This day shalt <em>thou</em> -be with me in paradise”? or the <em>I</em> and <em>my</em> in 2 -Pet. 1:14, refer to Peter’s soul, as we are told -they do, when he says, “Knowing that shortly I -<span class='pageno' id='Page_226'>226</span>must put off this my tabernacle.” Our friends -must be consistent and uniform in their interpretations. -If in these instances the pronouns -do not refer to the soul, then these strong proof-texts, -to which the immaterialist always appeals, -are abandoned: if they do here refer to the soul, -they must likewise in Gen. 3:19, refer to the -soul. In that language, then, God addresses -Adam’s soul; and we have the authority of -Jehovah himself, the Creator of man, against -whose sentence, and the sunlight of whose word, -it does not become puny mortals to oppose their -shallow dictums, and the rushlight of human -reason, that man’s soul is wholly mortal, and that -in the dissolution of death it goes back to dust -again! There is no avoiding this conclusion; -and it forever settles the question of man’s condition -in death. It shows that the intermediate -state must be one in which the conscious man -has lost his consciousness, the intelligent man -his intelligence, the responsible man his responsibility, -and in which all the powers of his being, -mental, emotional, and physical, have ceased to act.</p> - -<p class='c011'>No further argument need be introduced to -show that the Adamic penalty was literal death, -and that it reduced the whole man to a condition -of unconsciousness and decay. But a few -additional considerations will show that the popular -view is cumbered with absurdities on every -hand so plain that they should have proved their -<span class='pageno' id='Page_227'>227</span>own antidote, and saved the doctors of theology -from the preposterous definitions they have attached -to death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We have the authority of Paul for stating that -through Christ we are released from all the penalty -which the race has incurred through Adam’s -transgression. “As in Adam all die, so in Christ -shall all be made alive.” If the death in which -we are involved through Adam is death spiritual, -temporal, and eternal, then all the race is redeemed -from these through Christ, and Universalism -is the result.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Again, Christ tasted death for every man. He -hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being -made a curse for us. That is, Christ died -the same death for us which was introduced into -the world by Adam’s sin. Was this death eternal? -If so, the Saviour is gone, and the plan of -salvation can never be carried into effect.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In Rom. 5:12-14, occurs this remarkable passage:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, -and <em>death</em> by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for -that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the -world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. -Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even -over them that had not sinned after the similitude of -Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of Him that was -to come.)”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>In the first part of the verse Paul speaks of -the death that came in by Adam’s sin, and then -<span class='pageno' id='Page_228'>228</span>says that it reigned from Adam to Moses over -them that had not sinned. From this language, -accepting the popular interpretation of the Adamic -penalty, we must come to the intolerable -conclusion that personally sinless beings from -Adam to Moses were consigned to eternal misery! -From such a sentiment, every fiber of our -humanity recoils with horror. We cannot stifle -the feeling that it is an outrage upon the character -of God, and therefore cannot be true. The -death threatened Adam was literal death, not -eternal life in misery.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To the view that the Adamic penalty was simply -literal death, many eminent men have given -their unqualified adhesion.</p> - -<p class='c011'>John Locke (<cite>Reasonableness of Christianity</cite>, -s. 1,) says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“By reason of Adam’s transgression all men are mortal -and come to die.... It seems a strange way of -understanding a law which requires the plainest and -directest words, that by death should be meant eternal -life in misery.... I confess that by death, here, I can -understand nothing but a ceasing to be, the losing of all -actions of life and sense. Such a death came upon Adam -and all his posterity, by his first disobedience in paradise, -under which death they should have lain forever had it -not been for the redemption by Jesus Christ.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Isaac Watts (<cite>Ruin and Recovery of Mankind</cite>, -s. 3), though he was a believer in the immortality -of the soul, has the candor to say:--</p> - -<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_229'>229</span></div> -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“There is not one place of Scripture that occurs to -me, where the word death as it was threatened in the -law of innocency, necessarily signifies a certain miserable -immortality of the soul, either to Adam, the actual sinner, -or to his posterity.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Dr. Taylor says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Death was to be the consequence of his [Adam’s] disobedience, -and the death here threatened can be opposed -only to that life God gave Adam when he created him.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>With two more considerations we close this -chapter:--</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. Adam was on probation. Life and death -were set before him. “In the day that thou -eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die,” said God. -The only promise of life he had in case of disobedience -came from one whom it is not very flattering -to the advocates of a natural immortality -to call the first propounder and natural ally of -their system. But had Adam been endowed with -a natural immortality, it could not have been -suspended on his obedience. But it was so suspended, -as we learn from the first pages of revelation. -It was, therefore, not absolute, but contingent. -Immortal he might become by obedience -to God; disobeying, he was to die. He did -disobey, and was driven from the garden. “And -now,” said God, “lest he put forth his hand, and -take also of the tree of life, and eat, and <em>live forever</em>;”--therefore, -the cherubim and flaming sword -were placed to exclude forever his approach to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_230'>230</span>the life-giving tree. Quite the reverse of an uncontingent -immortality is certainly brought to -view here. Adam could bequeath to his posterity -no higher nature than he himself possessed. -The stream, that commencing just outside the garden -of Eden, has flowed down through the lapse -of six thousand years, has certainly never risen -higher than the fountain head; and we may be -sure we possess no superior endowments in this -respect to those of Adam.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. The second consideration under this head is, -the exhortations we have in the word of God to -<em>seek</em> for immortality, if we would obtain it. “Seek -the Lord, and ye shall live,” is his declaration to -the house of Israel. Amos 5:4, 6. “The wages -of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life, -through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Rom. 6:23. -Gift to whom? To every man, irrespective of -character? By no means; but gift <em>through</em> -Christ, to them only who are his. Again, “To -them who by patient continuance in well-doing -<em>seek</em> for glory, honor, and immortality [God will -render], eternal life.” Rom. 2:7. Varying the -language of the apostle a little, we may here inquire, -What a man <em>hath</em>, why doth he yet seek -for? The propriety of seeking for that which -we already have, is something in regard to which -it yet remains that we be enlightened by the advocates -of the dominant theology.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_231'>231</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXVI. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE RESURRECTION.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>As clearly as the human race have been taught -by the experience of six thousand years that -death is their common lot, so clearly are we -taught by the word of God, and by some notable -exhibitions of divine power, that all who -have gone into their graves shall come forth -again to life.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The words in the New Testament which express -this fact are <em>anastasis</em>, <em>egersis</em>, and <em>exanastasis</em>. -The two latter occur but once each, the -first in reference to the resurrection of Christ, in -Matt. 27:53, the last in Phil. 3:11, where Paul -expresses a desire to attain to a resurrection out -from among the dead. <em>Anastasis</em> occurs forty-two -times, being the word which is invariably -used in the New Testament, with the exceptions -just named, to express the resurrection. This -word is defined by Robinson to mean, literally, <em>a -rising up</em>, as of walls, of a suppliant, or from a -seat. Specially in the New Testament, the resurrection -of the body from death, the return of -the dead body to life, as, first of individuals who -have returned to life on earth, Heb. 11:35; secondly, -of the future and general resurrection at -the end of all things, John 11:24. It is often -<span class='pageno' id='Page_232'>232</span>joined to the word, dead; as in the expression, -the resurrection of the dead.</p> - -<p class='c011'>From these well-established meanings of the -word it is evident that that which goes down -will rise again. That which goes into the grave -will come up again out of the grave. The rising -again of the body is certainly assured by this -word, and the manner in which it is used. This -resurrection is a future event: “The hour is coming, -in the which all that are in the graves shall -hear His voice, and shall come forth.” John 5:28, -29. Paul said, when disputing with Tertullus -before the governor, I “have hope toward -God, which they themselves also allow, that there -shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the -just and the unjust.” Acts 24:15. And he tells -us in chapter 26:7, that unto that promise the -twelve tribes hope to come.</p> - -<p class='c011'>If, then, this is a firmly-established fact, that -God is to make such a mighty manifestation of -his power as to re-animate the scattered dust of -those whom the grave has consumed from time’s -earliest morn, there must be some cause for such -an action. This great event has a tremendous -bearing on the question of the intermediate -state, and all views of that state must be adjusted -to harmonize therewith. If any view is -entertained which virtually renders such an event -unnecessary, it must be shown that the resurrection -as here defined is not taught in the word of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_233'>233</span>God, or it must be admitted that the doctrine -which nullifies it, is unscriptural.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The important inquiry now arises respecting -the popular view, If the real being, the intelligent, -responsible entity, ceases not its life and -consciousness at death, but continues on in a -more enlarged and perfect sphere of existence and -activity, what need is there of the resurrection of -the body? If the body is but a trammel, a clog -to the operations of the soul, what need that it -should come back and gather up its scattered -particles from the silent tomb, and re-fetter itself -with this material robe?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Wm. Tyndale, defending the doctrine of Martin -Luther, that the dead sleep, addressed to his -opponent the same pungent inquiry. He said:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“And ye, in putting them [departed souls] in Heaven, -hell, and purgatory, destroy the argument wherewith -Christ and Paul prove the resurrection.... If the -souls be in Heaven, tell me why they be not in as good -case as the angels be? and then what cause is there of -the resurrection?”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Andrew Carmichael (<cite>Theology of Scripture</cite>, -vol. ii., p. 315) says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“It cannot be too often repeated: <em>If there be an immortal -soul there is no resurrection; and if there be any resurrection -there is no immortal soul</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Dr. Muller (<cite>Ch. Doc. of Sin</cite>, p. 318) says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The Christian faith in immortality is indissolubly connected -with a promise of a future resurrection of the -dead.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_234'>234</span>We now propose to show that the resurrection -is a prominent doctrine of the Bible; and if this -can be established, it follows, upon the judgment -of these eminent men, that the immortality of -the soul cannot be true. We need not stop to -notice that impalpable and groundless theory -which makes the resurrection take place immediately -at death, by supposing it to be the rising -of the soul from the earthly house of this tabernacle, -and its entering at once into its spiritual -house, this to be inhabited, and the former, abandoned, -forever. For in this case there is no resurrection; -since the soul lives right on, and does -not die at all. The resurrection which the Bible -brings to view is a resurrection of <em>the dead</em>. It -cannot be applied to anything that continuously -lives, however many changes it may pass through. -A person must go down into a state of death before -he can be raised from the dead. Hence this -theory is no resurrection at all, and so is at war -with all the Bible says about the resurrection of -the dead. Moreover, it is utterly impossible to -harmonize this with the many references to the -general resurrection at the end of the world.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We return to the Bible doctrine of the resurrection -of the dead, the literal resurrection and -resuscitation of our natural bodies, and affirm that -the Bible makes this resurrection necessary, by -representing the dead to be in such a condition -that without this event they can have no future -existence.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_235'>235</span>1. Death is compared to sleep. There must, -then, be some analogy between a state of sleep -and a state of death, and this analogy must pertain -to that which renders sleep a peculiar condition. -Our condition in sleep differs from our -condition when awake, simply in this, that when -we are soundly asleep we are entirely <em>unconscious</em>. -In this respect, then, death is like sleep; -that is, the dead are unconscious. This figure is -frequently used to represent the condition of the -dead. Dan. 12:2: “Many of them that <em>sleep</em> in -the dust of the earth shall awake.” Matt. 27:52: -“Many bodies of the saints which <em>slept</em> -arose.” Acts 7:60: After Stephen had beheld -the vision of Christ and was stoned to death, the -record says, he “fell <em>asleep</em>.” In 1 Cor. 15:20, -Christ is called the first-fruits of them that <em>slept</em>; -and in verse 57, Paul says, “We shall not all -<em>sleep</em>.” Again Paul writes to the Thessalonians, -1 Thess. 4:13, 14, that he would not have them -ignorant concerning them which are <em>asleep</em>. In -verse 14, he speaks of them as <em>asleep</em> in Jesus, -and explains what he means, in verse 16, by calling -them “dead in Christ.” And the advocates -of the conscious state cannot dispose of these expressions -by saying that they apply to the body -merely; for they do not hold that the consciousness -which we have in life (which is what we -lose in death) pertains to the body merely. Job -plainly declares that they will not awake till the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_236'>236</span>resurrection, at the last day. “Man dieth and -wasteth away; yea, man giveth up the ghost, -and where is he? As the waters fail from the -sea, and the flood decayeth and drieth up, so man -lieth down and riseth not: till the heavens be no -more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of -their sleep.” If, therefore, there is no resurrection, -these dead are destined to sleep in unconsciousness -forever.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. The dead are in a condition as though they -had not been. So Job testifies; for he affirms -that if he could have died in earliest infancy, like -a hidden, untimely birth, he would not have been; -and in this respect he declared he would have -been like kings, counsellors, and princes of the -earth who built costly tombs in which to enshrine -their bodies when dead. To that condition he -applies the expression which has since been so -often quoted, “There the wicked cease from -troubling, and there the weary be at rest.” Job -3:11-18. If, then, a person when dead is as -though he had not been, without a resurrection to -release him from this state, he will never be, or -exist, again.</p> - -<p class='c011'>3. The dead have no knowledge. Speaking of -the dead man, Job says (14:21), “His sons come -to honor, and he knoweth it not; and they are -brought low, and he perceiveth it not of them.” -Ps. 146:4. “His breath goeth forth, he returneth -to his earth; in that very day his thoughts -<span class='pageno' id='Page_237'>237</span>perish.” Solomon was inspired to speak to the -same effect as his father David: Eccl. 9:5, 6: -“For the living know that they shall die, but the -dead know not anything.... Also their love, -and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished; -neither have they any more a portion forever in -anything that is done under the sun.” Verse 10: -“There is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, -nor wisdom, in the grave whither thou goest.” -Evidence like this can neither be mistaken nor -evaded. It is vain for the immaterialist to claim -that it applies to the body in distinction from an -immortal soul; for they do not hold that the -thoughts (διαλογισμός, <em>thought, reasoning</em>,) which -David says perish in death, belong to the body, -but to the soul. And according to Solomon, that -which knows when the man is living, does not -know when he is dead. Without a resurrection, -therefore, the dead will forever remain without -knowledge.</p> - -<p class='c011'>4. The dead are not in Heaven nor in hell, but -in the dust of the earth. Job 17:13-16: “If I -wait, the grave is mine house.” In chap. 14:14, -he said, “All the days of my appointed time will -I wait, till my change come.” The change referred -to, must therefore be the resurrection, and -he describes his condition till that time, in the -following language: “I have made my bed in -the darkness. I have said to corruption, Thou -art my father; to the worm, Thou art my mother -<span class='pageno' id='Page_238'>238</span>and my sister, ... when <em>our rest together is in -the dust</em>.” Isa. 26:19: “Thy dead men shall -live; together with my dead body shall they arise. -Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust; for thy -dew is as the dew of herbs; and the earth shall -cast out the dead.” Is it possible that the phraseology -of this text can be misunderstood? It -speaks of the living again of dead men, of the -arising of dead bodies, and of the earth’s casting -out the dead. And the command is addressed to -them thus: “Awake and sing.” Who? Ye who -are still conscious, basking in the bliss of Heaven -and chanting the high praises of God? No; but, -“Ye who dwell <em>in dust</em>;” ye who are in your -graves. If the dead are conscious, Isaiah talked -nonsense. If we believe his testimony we must -look into the graves for the dead; and if there is -no resurrection, there they will forever lie mingled -with the clods of the valley.</p> - -<p class='c011'>5. The dead, even the most holy and righteous, -have no remembrance of God, and cannot, while -in that condition, render him any praise and -thanksgiving. Ps. 6:5: “For in death there is -no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall -give thee thanks?” Ps. 115:17: “The dead -praise not the Lord, neither any that go down -into silence.” Good King Hezekiah, when praising -the Lord for adding to his days fifteen years, -gives this as the reason why he thus rejoiced: -Isa. 38:18, 19: “For the grave cannot praise -<span class='pageno' id='Page_239'>239</span>thee, death cannot celebrate thee; they that go -down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth. -The <em>living</em>, the <em>living</em>, he shall praise thee, as I -do this day; the father to the children shall -make known thy truth.” Modern doctors of divinity -have Hezekiah in Heaven praising God. -He declared that when he was dead he could not -do this. Whose testimony is the more worthy -of credit, that of the inspired king of Israel, or -that of the theologians of subsequent ages of error -and confusion? If we can believe Hezekiah, -unless there is to be a resurrection, the righteous -dead are never more to praise their Maker.</p> - -<p class='c011'>6. The dead, even the righteous, are not ascended -to the Heavens. So Peter testifies respecting -the patriarch David: Acts 2:29, 34, 35: “Men and -brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch -David, that he is both dead and buried, and -his sepulcher is with us unto this day. For David -is not ascended into the Heavens: but he saith -himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on -my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool.” -We call the especial attention of the -reader to the whole argument presented by Peter, -beginning with verse 24. Peter undertakes -to prove from a prophecy recorded in the Psalms, -the resurrection of Christ. He says, verse 31, -“He, seeing this before, spake of the resurrection -of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell -[<em>hades</em>, the grave], neither did his flesh see corruption.” -<span class='pageno' id='Page_240'>240</span>And how does he prove that David -speaks of Christ, and not of himself? He proves -it from the fact that David’s soul <em>was</em> left in -<em>hades</em> and his flesh did see corruption; and his -sepulcher was with them to that day. For David, -he says, has not ascended into the Heavens. -Now if David’s soul did live right on in consciousness; -if it was not left in <em>hades</em>, no man can -show that David, in that psalm, did not speak of -himself instead of Christ; and then Peter’s argument -for the resurrection of Christ would be entirely -destroyed. But Peter, especially when -speaking as he was on this occasion under the -influence of the Holy Ghost, knew how to reason; -and his argument entirely destroys the -dogma of the immortality of the soul. But if -David has not yet ascended into the Heavens, -how is he ever to get there? There is no other -way but by a resurrection of the dead. So he -himself says, Ps. 17:15: “I shall be satisfied -when I awake [from the sleep of death], with -Thy likeness.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>7. And finally, Paul, in his masterly argument -in 1 Cor. 15, states explicitly the conclusion -which is necessary from every one of the texts -which we have quoted, that if there is no resurrection, -then all the dead, even those who have -fallen asleep in Christ, are perished. Verses 16-18. -“For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ -raised. And if Christ be not raised, your faith -<span class='pageno' id='Page_241'>241</span>is vain; ye are yet in your sins. <em>Then they also -which are fallen asleep in Christ are</em> <span class='fss'>PERISHED</span>.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>As we read this testimony, we pause in utter -amazement that any who profess to believe the -Bible should cling with tenacity to the doctrine -of the immortality of the soul which so directly -contradicts it. If the souls of the dead live right -on, are they perished? What! perished? and -yet living in a larger sphere? Perished? and -yet enjoying the attendant blessings of everlasting -life in Heaven? Perished? and yet at God’s -right hand where there is fullness of joy, and -pleasures forevermore? Perish, amid the ruins -of the heathen mythology from which it springs, -that theory which thus lifts its dead men on -high, contrary to the teachings of the word of -God!</p> - -<p class='c011'>Paul speaks of the whole being. As in Adam -we die, so in Christ shall we be made alive. Is -it conceivable that Paul drops out of sight the -real man, the soul which soars away to realms -of light, and frames all this argument, and talks -thus seriously about the cast-off shell, the body, -merely? The idea is preposterous to the last -degree.</p> - -<p class='c011'>After stating that if there is no resurrection we -perish, he assures us that Christ is risen and that -there is a resurrection for all; then he takes up -the resurrection of those who sleep in Christ, and -tells us when that resurrection shall be. It is to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_242'>242</span>take place, not by the rising from this mortal -coil of an ethereal, immaterial essence when we -die, but it is to be at the great day when the last -trump shall shatter this decrepid earth from center -to circumference.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The testimony on this point is well summed -up by Bishop Law, who speaks as follows:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“I proceed to consider what account the Scriptures -give of that state to which death reduces us. And this -we find represented by <em>sleep</em>; by a negation of all <em>life</em>, -<em>thought</em>, or <em>action</em>; by <em>rest</em>, <em>resting-place</em>, or <em>home</em>, <em>silence</em>, -<em>oblivion</em>, <em>darkness</em>, <em>destruction</em>, or <em>corruption</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>This representation is abundantly sustained -by the Scriptures referred to; and by all these -the great fact is inscribed in indelible characters -over the portals of the dark valley, that our existence -is not perpetuated by means of an immortal -soul, but that without a resurrection from the -dead, there is no future life.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But it is objected that, from our standpoint of -the unconsciousness of the dead, a resurrection is -impossible; for if a person ever ceases to exist as -a conscious being, the re-organization of the matter -of which he was composed would be a new -creation, but not a resurrection. It is sufficient -to say in reply that continued consciousness is -not necessary to preserve identity of being. This -is proved by nearly every member of the human -family every day. Did the reader ever enjoy a -period of sound, unconscious sleep? If so, when -<span class='pageno' id='Page_243'>243</span>he awoke, how did he know that he was the -same individual he was before? How does any -one know, after a good night’s sleep, that he is -the same person that retired to rest the night before? -Simply because his organization is the -same on awaking that it was when he became -unconscious in sleep. Now suppose that during -this period of unconsciousness, while the soul itself, -if there is in man such a distinct entity as is -claimed, is also unconscious, the body of a person -could be cut up into innumerable fragments, the -bones ground to powder, the flesh dissolved in -acids, and the entire being, soul and all, destroyed. -After remaining in this condition a little -time, suppose all those particles could be put -back again substantially as they were before, the -general arrangement of the matter, especially of -the brain, the organ of the mind being identically -what it was; and then suppose that life -could be imparted to it again, and the person be -allowed to sleep on till morning; when he woke, -would he be conscious of any break in the line of -his existence? Any one must see that he would -not. Being organized just as before, his mind -would resume its consciousness just as if nothing -had happened.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So with the dissolution of death. After its -period of unconsciousness is passed over, in the -resurrection the particles of the body are reunited, -re-organized, and re-arranged, essentially -<span class='pageno' id='Page_244'>244</span>as they were at the moment of death, and reanimated; -then the line of life is taken up, and -the current of thought resumed just where it was -laid down in death, it matters not how many -thousands of years before. This, the power of -God can do; and to deny this is to “err, not -knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.” -In this way, we can have a true and proper resurrection, -a living again of the whole person, as -the Bible affirms. On the supposition of continued -consciousness, this is impossible; for in -this case the real man lives right on, the body, -which the Bible makes of so much importance, -being only the garment with which it was temporarily -clothed; and in this case the resuscitation -of the body would not and could not be the -resurrection of the man. The popular view -makes the Bible as inconsistent on the subject of -man, as it would be for a historian to give the -history of some celebrated man’s coat, and call it -the history of the man himself.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Then it is further objected that if persons come -up in the resurrection as they went down in death, -we should have a motley group, bloated with -dropsy, emaciated with consumption, scabbed, -scarred, ulcered, maimed and deformed; which -would be both unreasonable and disgusting. And -this, it is claimed, is a necessary consequence from -the view that the same matter is raised that went -into the grave, and so far re-organized according -<span class='pageno' id='Page_245'>245</span>to its previous arrangement as to constitute identity -of being. But when we speak of the re-arrangement -of the particles of the body, is it not -evident to all that there are fortuitous and abnormal -conditions which are not to be taken at -all into the account? and that the essential and -elemental parts are only to be understood? Who -would imagine that the body might not differ in -the resurrection from what it was before, as much -at least as it differs at one period in its earthly -history from its condition at another, and yet its -identity be preserved? But we are sometimes -in health, sometimes in sickness, sometimes in -flesh, and sometimes wasted away, sometimes -with diseased members, and sometimes entirely -free from disease; and in all these changes we -are conscious that we have the same body. -Why? Because its essential elements remain, -and its organization is continued. Whatever -change can take place in our bodies during our -earth life, and our identity be continued, changed -to the same degree may be the body when raised -from the dead, and yet it be the same body. But -a missing member might be instantly replaced, a -diseased limb healed, the consumptive restored to -the bloom of health, or the body, swollen with -dropsy, reduced to its natural size, and the individual -still be conscious that he was the same -person.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is said still further by way of objection, that -<span class='pageno' id='Page_246'>246</span>the matter of one body, after being decomposed -by death, is absorbed and taken into other bodies, -and becomes constituent parts of them; so that -at the resurrection the same matter may have belonged -to several different bodies, and cannot be -restored to them all; therefore the doctrine of -the resurrection of the body is unphilosophical.</p> - -<p class='c011'>If the reader will take the trouble to submit -this objection to a little intelligent scrutiny, he -will find it to grow rapidly and beautifully less, -until finally it vanishes entirely away. Let us -take the extremest case supposable: that of the -cannibal who might possibly (though this would -not naturally be the case), make an entire meal -of human flesh. We cannot admit the statement -of a certain minister who, in his zeal to make this -objection appear very strong, claimed that a cannibal -might have the whole body of his victim -within his own at the same time. For this supposes -that he would eat a whole man at one -meal, and, further, that he would consume the -viscera, skull, bones, brains, and all. But it is -hardly supposable that, cannibals though they -are, they have such an enormous capacity, or are -such unpardonable eaters.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Nevertheless, let us suppose that a cannibal -would, in process of time, consume an entire victim; -what proportion could he use in this way? -Not one-half, by weight. And what proportion -of this would be taken up by the body and become -<span class='pageno' id='Page_247'>247</span>incorporated with it? But a small fraction. -And to what parts would this naturally go? -To those grosser and unessential parts which -most rapidly change, and demand the most constant -supply. But while a few pounds of matter -are supplied to the body, if that body maintains -a uniform condition, an equal amount of matter -has been thrown off. Thus it will be seen that at -no one time is it possible for any material amount -of one body to be a part of another. But if -there was danger, in these rare cases, that an essential -element of one body would become a constituent -part of another, and so remain, could not -the providence of God easily interpose to prevent -this, by giving these particles another direction? -Most assuredly it could. And this is not beneath -His care who numbers all the hairs of our heads, -and without whose notice not a sparrow falls to -the ground. This objection not only betrays an -utter lack of faith in God’s power and care in -such matters, but philosophically considered, it -amounts simply to a cavil.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is the resurrection of the body of which the -Bible treats. It knows no other. In 1 Cor. 15:35, -36, Paul asserts an obvious fact, that nothing -can be quickened (revived or resuscitated, as -from death, or an inanimate state--<cite>Webster</cite>,) except -it first die. To talk of a quickening or making -alive of that which does not die, or of a resurrection -from the dead of that which does not -<span class='pageno' id='Page_248'>248</span>go down into death, is richly deserving of the epithet -which Paul there applies to it.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And what is it that shall be quickened in the -resurrection? The holy and infallible word of -God replies, <em>This mortal body</em>. Rom. 8:11: -“But if the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus -Christ from the dead dwell in you, he that raised -up Christ from the dead shall also <em>quicken your -mortal bodies</em> by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.” -Again, in verse 23, Paul says: “Even we ourselves -groan within ourselves, waiting for the -adoption, to wit, the <em>redemption of our body</em>.” -And in 1 Cor. 15, Paul is as explicit as he well -can be on this subject. Verse 44: “It is sown a -natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.” What -does he mean by the natural body, and by its -being sown? He means the burial of our present -bodies in the grave. So he says in verses 42, -43: “So also is the resurrection of the dead. It -is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: -it is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory: -it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: it -is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual -body.” What is sown? The natural body. Then -what is raised? The very same thing. IT is -sown; IT is raised; raised in incorruption, in -glory, in power, a spiritual body. Raised in this -manner, the natural body becomes a spiritual -body. Why? Because the Spirit of Him that -raised up Christ quickens, resuscitates, or makes -<span class='pageno' id='Page_249'>249</span>it alive again, as Paul wrote to the Romans. -Should it be said that there is a natural body -and a spiritual body in existence at the same -time, we answer that according to Paul, that is -not so. He says, verse 46: “Howbeit that was -not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; -and <em>afterward</em> that which is spiritual.” In -verse 49, he says we have borne the image of the -earthly, and we shall bear, future, the image of -the heavenly; and this will be when this mortal -and corruptible, which is this mortal body, puts -on incorruption, verses 52, 53, or is clothed upon -with the house from Heaven. 2 Cor. 5.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To the Philippians, Paul testifies again on this -point: “For our conversation is in Heaven, from -whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord -Jesus Christ, who shall <em>change our vile body</em>, that -it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body.” -This language is explicit. A change is to be -wrought in the vile, mortal or corruptible body -of this present state, not a spiritual body released -from it, which never sees death and needs -no change; and the change that is promised is, -that this body taken as it now is, is to be fashioned, -changed over, into the likeness of Christ’s -glorious, immortal body.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Having thus shown that a future resurrection -is an event of the most absolute necessity, inasmuch -as without it there is no future existence -for the human race (a fact which entirely destroys -<span class='pageno' id='Page_250'>250</span>at one blow the doctrine of the immortality of -the soul), we now propose to notice the prominence -given to this event in the sacred writings, -and some of the plain declarations that it will -surely take place.</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. The resurrection is the great event to which -the sacred writers looked forward as the object of -their hope. In the far distant ages a day rose to -their view in which the dead came forth from -their graves, and stood before God; and before -the coming of that day, they did not expect eternal -life.</p> - -<p class='c011'>So Job testifies: “I know that my Redeemer -liveth, and that he will stand at the latter day -upon the earth. And though after my skin -worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I -see God.” Job 19:25, 26.</p> - -<p class='c011'>David entertained the same satisfactory hope. -“As for me,” he says, “I shall be satisfied when -I awake with Thy likeness.” Ps. 17:15.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Isaiah struck some thrilling notes on the same -theme: “Thy dead men shall live, together with -my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, -ye that dwell in dust; for thy dew is as the dew -of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.” -Isa. 26:19.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It was the hope of Paul, that eminent apostle, -through all his sufferings and toils. For this he -could sacrifice any temporal good, and take up -any cross. He assures us that he considered his -<span class='pageno' id='Page_251'>251</span>afflictions, his troubles on every side, his perplexities, -persecutions, stripes, imprisonments, and -perils, but light afflictions; yea, he could utterly -lose sight of them; and then he tells us why he -could do it: it was in view of “the glory which -shall be revealed in us,” “knowing,” says he, -“that He which raised up the Lord Jesus, <em>shall -raise us up also by Jesus</em>, and shall present us -with you.” 2 Cor. 4:14. The assurance that he -should be raised up at the last day, and be presented -with the rest of the saints, when the Lord -shall present to his Father a church without spot -or wrinkle or any such thing, Eph. 5:27, sustained -him under all his burdens. The resurrection -was the staff of his hope. Again he says -that he could count all things loss, if by any -means he might attain to a resurrection (<em>exanastasis</em>) -out from among the dead. Phil. 3:8-11.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We refer to one more passage which expresses -as clearly as language can do it, the apostle’s -hope. 2 Cor. 1:8, 9: “For we would not, brethren, -have you ignorant of our trouble which -came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of -measure, above strength, insomuch that we despaired -even of life. But we had the sentence of -death in ourselves, that we should not trust in -ourselves, but in God <em>which raiseth the dead</em>.” -Paul here gives us to understand that he could -not trust in himself because he was mortal. He -must therefore put his trust in God; and he tells -<span class='pageno' id='Page_252'>252</span>us why he does this: not because God had -promised him any happiness as a disembodied -soul; but because he was able and willing <em>to raise -him from the dead</em>. Paul “kept back nothing -that was profitable,” and did not shun “to declare -all the counsel of God,” yet he never once -endeavored to console himself or his brethren by -any allusion to a disembodied state of existence, -but passed over this as if it were not at all to be -taken into the account, and fixed all his hope on -the resurrection. Why this, if going to Heaven -or hell at death, be a gospel doctrine?</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. The resurrection is the time to which prophets -and apostles looked forward as the day of -their reward. Should any one carefully search -the Bible to ascertain the time which it designates -as the time of reward to the righteous, and -punishment to the wicked, he would find it to -be not at death, but at the resurrection. Our -Saviour clearly sets forth this fact in Luke 14:13, -14: “But when thou makest a feast, call the -poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind; and thou -shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense -thee; for thou shalt be recompensed,” not at -death, but, “<em>at the resurrection of the just</em>.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Mark also the language by which the Lord -would restrain that voice of weeping which was -heard in Ramah. When Herod sent forth and -slew all the children in Bethlehem from two -years old and under, in hopes thereby to put to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_253'>253</span>death the infant Saviour, then was fulfilled, says -Matthew, what was spoken by the prophet, “In -Ramah was there a voice heard, lamentation, and -weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for -her children, and would not be comforted, because -they were not.” But what said the Lord -to Rachel? See the original prophecy, Jer. 31:15-17: -“Thus saith the Lord, Refrain thy voice -from weeping, and thine eyes from tears; for thy -work shall be rewarded, saith the Lord; and they -shall come again from the land of the enemy. -And there is hope in thine end, saith the Lord, -that thy children shall come again to their own -border.” Not thus would the mourning Rachels -of the 19th century be comforted by the professed -shepherds of the flock of Christ. They -would tell them, Refrain thy voice from weeping; -for thy sons are now angel cherubs chanting their -joyful anthems in their Heavenly Father’s home. -But the Lord points the mourners in Ramah -forward to the resurrection for their hope; and -though till that time their children “were not,” -or were out of existence, in the land of death, the -great enemy of our race, yet, says the Lord, they -shall come again from the land of the enemy, -they shall return again to their own border, and -thy work shall be rewarded; and he bids them -refrain their voices from weeping, their eyes from -tears, and their hearts from sorrow, in view of -that glorious event.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_254'>254</span>The apostles represent the day of Christ’s coming -and the resurrection as the time when the -saints will receive their crowns of glory. Says -Peter, “And when the Chief Shepherd shall appear, -ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth -not away.” 1 Pet. 5:4. And Paul says that -there is laid up for him a crown of righteousness, -and not for him only, but for all those also that -love his appearing, and which shall be given him -in that day (the day of Christ’s appearing). -These holy apostles were not expecting their -crowns of reward sooner than this.</p> - -<p class='c011'>All this is utterly inconsistent with the idea -of a conscious intermediate state, and rewards or -punishments at death. But the word of God -must stand, and the theories of men must bow to -its authority.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In 1 Cor. 15:32, Paul further tells us when he -expected to reap advantage or reward for all the -dangers he incurred here in behalf of the truth: -“If after the manner of men I have fought with -beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the -dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to-morrow -we die.” If without a resurrection he would -receive no reward, it is evident that he expected -his reward at that time, but not before. His -language here is moreover a re-iteration of verse -18, that if there is no resurrection, they which -are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Our Lord testified that of all which the Father -<span class='pageno' id='Page_255'>255</span>had given him he should lose nothing, but would -raise it up at the last day. This language is also -at once a positive declaration that the resurrection -shall take place, and that without this event, -all is lost. To the same effect is 1 Cor. 15:52, -53, “The trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall -be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. -For this corruptible <em>must</em> put on incorruption, -and this mortal <em>must</em> put on immortality.” Here -is a plain announcement that the resurrection -will take place; that the change mentioned will -be wrought at that time; and that this change -must take place or we cannot inherit the kingdom -of God. Verse 50. Therefore, without a -resurrection, none who have fallen in death will -ever behold the kingdom of God.</p> - -<p class='c011'>3. The resurrection is made the basis of many -of the comforting promises of Scripture. 1 Thess. -4:16, 17: “For the Lord himself shall descend -from Heaven with a shout, with the voice of the -archangel, and with the trump of God; and the -dead in Christ shall rise first. Then we which -are alive and remain shall be caught up together -with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the -air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.” -We have already referred to this passage in this -chapter on the Resurrection. We quote it again -to show that God designed that from these promises -we should comfort ourselves and one another -in that keenest of all our afflictions, and the darkest -<span class='pageno' id='Page_256'>256</span>of all our hours, the hour of bereavement. -For the apostle immediately adds, “Wherefore -comfort one another with these words.” Is it to -such facts as these, the second coming of Christ, -and the resurrection of the dead, that the theology -of our day appeals to alleviate the sorrow -which the human heart will feel for the loss of -departed loved ones? Here, if anywhere, and -on this subject, if on any that the apostle has -anywhere taken up, should come in the modern -doctrine of uninterrupted consciousness in the -intermediate state. But Paul was evidently -against any such doctrine, and so denies it a -place on the page of truth, but passes right over -to the resurrection as the place where comfort is -to be found for the mourners.</p> - -<p class='c011'>As the resurrection is inseparably connected -with the second coming of Christ, the words of -Christ in John 14:1-3, are equally in point on -this question. When he was about to leave his -sorrowing disciples, he told them that he was -going to prepare a place for them; he informed -them moreover of his design that they should -ultimately be with himself. But how was this -to be accomplished? Was it through death, by -which a deathless spirit would be released to -soar away to meet its Saviour? No; but, says -he, I will <em>come again</em> and receive you to myself, -that where I am, there ye may be also. Should -any say that this coming of the Saviour is at -<span class='pageno' id='Page_257'>257</span>death, we reply that the disciples of our Lord -did not so understand it. See John 21:22, 23. -Jesus incidentally remarked concerning one of -his followers, “If I will that he tarry <em>till I come</em>, -what is that to thee? follow thou me;” and the -saying went immediately abroad among the disciples, -on the strength of these words, that that -disciple should <em>not die</em>.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The eminent and pious Joseph Alleine also -testifies:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“But we shall lift up our heads because the day of our -redemption draweth nigh. This is the day I look for, -and wait for, and have laid up all my hopes in. If the -Lord return not, I profess myself undone; my preaching -is vain, and my suffering is vain. The thing, you see, is -established, and every circumstance is determined. How -sweet are the words that dropped from the precious lips -of our departing Lord! What generous cordials hath he -left us in his parting sermon and his last prayer! And -yet of all the rest these are the sweetest: ‘I will come -again and receive you unto myself, that where I am -there ye may be also.’ What need you any further witness?”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Dr. Clarke, in his general remarks on 1 Cor. -15, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The doctrine of the resurrection appears to have -been thought of much more consequence among the -primitive Christians than it is <em>now</em>. How is this? The -apostles were continually insisting on it, and exciting the -followers of God to diligence, obedience, and cheerfulness -through it. And their successors in the present day seldom -mention it.... There is not a doctrine in the -gospel on which more stress is laid; and there is not a -<span class='pageno' id='Page_258'>258</span>doctrine in the present system of preaching, which is -treated with more neglect.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXVII. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE JUDGMENT.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>We have seen how the grand doctrine of the -future resurrection of the dead, demolishes with -its ponderous weight the gossamer fabric of the -immortality of the soul. There is another doctrine -as scriptural and as prominent as the resurrection -which opposes its impregnable battlements -to the same anti-scriptural fable--a fable, weak, -though encased in the coat of mail with which -heathendom furnishes it, and not very imposing -in appearance, though adorned with the gorgeous -trappings of the mother of harlots. We refer to -the doctrine of the future general Judgment.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This doctrine, and the theory of the conscious -state of the dead, cannot exist together. There -is an antagonism between them, irreconcilable, -and irrepressible. If every man is judged at -death, as he indeed must be, if an immortal soul -survives the dissolution of the body, and enters -at once into the happiness or misery of the eternal -state, accordingly as its character has been -good or bad, there is no occasion and no room for -a general Judgment in the future; and if, on the -other hand, there is to be such a future Judgment, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_259'>259</span>it is proof positive that the other doctrine is not -true.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We affirm, then, that the Scriptures clearly -teach that there is to be a general Judgment in -the future, at which time such awards shall be -rendered to every one as shall accord with the -record of his deeds. A passage in Hebrews may -seem to some minds to afford proof that the -Judgment follows immediately after death, and -which may, consequently, demand a brief notice -at this point. Heb. 9:27: “And as it is appointed -unto men once to die, but after this the -Judgment.” The sentence does not end here, -but is continued into the next verse: “<em>So</em> Christ -was once offered to bear the sins of many.” -From this it is evident that the death to which -Paul refers is some death which illustrates the -death of Christ as an offering for sin: As men -die, and after this the Judgment, <em>so</em> (in like manner) -Christ was once offered to bear the sins of -many. It is not then the common death of human -beings to which the apostle refers; for there -is nothing in this death to show how Christ died -as an offering for sin.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This language occurs at the conclusion of an -argument on the priesthood of Christ, as illustrated -by the priesthood connected with the -Jewish service. Under that dispensation there -was a yearly round of service connected with the -worldly sanctuary. On the day of atonement, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_260'>260</span>when the sanctuary was to be cleansed, a goat -was slain for all the people. Their life was imputed -to it, and in it they in figure died. The -blood of this goat, representing the forfeited lives -of the people, was then ministered in the most -holy place, which was a work of determination -and decision in their cases, which the word here -rendered judgment signifies. So Christ, the antitype, -was once offered, and, if we avail ourselves -of his intercession, his blood is accepted instead -of our forfeited lives, and we shall stand acquitted -in the real Judgment work in the sanctuary -above, as Israel were acquitted when the same -work was performed in figure in the worldly -sanctuary of the former dispensation. This text, -therefore, not referring to the end of individual -mortal life, and its relation to future retribution, -has no relevancy to the question under discussion.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We return to the proposition that a future -general Judgment is appointed. Paul reasoned -before Felix of a Judgment to come. Acts 24:25. -But as it may be said that this was to be -experienced when Felix died, we will introduce -another text which not only speaks of this Judgment -as future, but shows that it will pass simultaneously -on the human race: 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 -<span class='pageno' id='Page_261'>261</span>given assurance unto all men in that he hath -raised him from the dead.” Here it is announced -in plain terms that the Judgment of this world -is future, that it is to take place at the time appointed, -and that a day, or period, is set apart for -this purpose.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Peter refers to the same day and says that the -angels that sinned, and the unjust of our own -race, are reserved unto it. 2 Pet. 2:4, 9. Again -he says that this present earth is reserved unto -fire, with which it shall be destroyed in that day. -2 Pet. 3:7-12. Jude says that the angels that -kept not their first estate are reserved in everlasting -chains under darkness unto the Judgment -of the great day. Jude 6. This is the day when -Christ is represented as separating the good from -the bad, as a shepherd divideth the sheep from -the goats, Matt. 25:31-34, and the time to which -John looked forward when he said that he saw -the dead, small and great, stand before God, and -the books were opened, and they were judged -out of those things written in the books.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The Judgment also stands in many lines of -prophecy, not as something which has been going -forward from the beginning, not as taking place -as each member of the human family passes from -the stage of mortal existence, but as the great -event with which the probation of the human -race is to end. Testimony on this point need not -be multiplied. It cannot be denied that a day is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_262'>262</span>coming in which sentence will be rendered at -once upon all who have lived a life of probation -in this world, a sentence which shall decide their -condition for the eternity that lies beyond.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This fact being established, its bearing upon -the question of consciousness in death, cannot be -overlooked. For, if every human being at death -passes at once into a state of reward or punishment, -what occasion is there for a future general -Judgment that a second decision may be rendered -in their cases? Is it possible that a mistake -was made in the former decision? possible that -some are now writhing in the flames of hell, who -should be basking in the bliss of Heaven? possible -that some are taking their fill of happiness -in the bowers of paradise, whose corrupt hearts -and criminal life demand that they should have -their place with fiends in the lowest hell? And -if mistakes have once been made in the sentence -rendered, may they not be made again? What -assurance can we have that, though we may be -entitled by thorough repentance to the happiness -of Heaven, we may not be sentenced for all eternity -to the damnation of hell? Is it possible -that such foul blots of injustice stand upon the -record of the government of Heaven? Yes, if -the conscious-state theory be true! We arraign -that theory face to face with this stupendous -fact, and bid it behold its work. It destroys -God’s omniscience! It charges him with imperfection! -<span class='pageno' id='Page_263'>263</span>It accuses his government of mistakes -which are worse than crimes! Is any theory, -which is subject to such overwhelming imputations, -worthy of a moment’s credence?</p> - -<p class='c011'>To avoid the foregoing fatal conclusions, is it -said that sentence is not passed at death, but -that the dead are held somewhere in a state of -suspense, without being either rewarded or punished -till the Judgment? Then we inquire how -this can be harmonized with the invariable arguments -which immaterialists use on this question? -For is it not claimed that the spirit goes immediately -to God to receive sentence from the hand -of its Creator? Is it not claimed that the rich -man was immediately after death in hell, in -torment? Is it not claimed that the repentant -thief was that very day with Christ in the joys -of paradise? If these instances and arguments -are abandoned, let it be so understood. If not, -then no such after thought can be resorted to, to -shield the conscious-state dogma from the charges -above mentioned.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We close this argument with a paragraph from -the candid pen of H. H. Dobney, Baptist minister -of England. In Future Punishment, pp. 139, -140, he says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“There is something of awkwardness, which the -Scriptures seem to avoid, in making beings who have -already entered, and many ages since, on a state of happiness -or misery, come from those abodes to be judged, -and to receive a formal award to the very condition which -<span class='pageno' id='Page_264'>264</span>has long been familiar to them. To have been in Heaven -with Christ for glorious ages, and then to stand at his bar -for Judgment, and be invited to enter Heaven as their -eternal home, as though they had not been there already, -scarcely seems to look exactly like the Scripture account, -while it would almost appear to be wanting in congruity. -Nor is this all. There is another difficulty, namely: -That the idea of a saint already ‘with Christ,’ ‘present -with the Lord’ (who is in Heaven, be it remembered, in -his resurrection and glorified body, wherewith he ascended -from the brow of Olivet), coming from Heaven to -earth to glide into a body raised simultaneously from the -ground, he being in reality already possessed of a spiritual -body, would seem <em>an invention which has not one syllable -in Scripture to give it countenance</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXVIII. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE WAGES OF SIN.</span></h2> -</div> - -<div class='lg-container-b c021'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>“One question more than others all,</div> - <div class='line in2'>From thoughtful minds implores reply;</div> - <div class='line'>It is as breathed from star and pall,</div> - <div class='line in2'>What fate awaits us when we <a id='corr264.20'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='die?'>die?”</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_264.20'><ins class='correction' title='die?'>die?”</ins></a></span>--<cite>Alger.</cite></div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>We have now examined the teaching of the -Bible relative to man, in his creation, in his life, -in his death, and in the intermediate state to his -resurrection; and we have found its uniform and -explicit testimony to be that he has no inherent, -inalienable principle in his nature which is exempt -from death; but that the only avenue to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_265'>265</span>life beyond the grave is through the resurrection. -We have found also that such a resurrection to a -second life is decreed for all the race; and now -the more momentous question, what the issue of -that existence is to be, presents itself for solution.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Natural, or temporal, death, we die in Adam. -This death visits all alike irrespective of character. -The sincerest saint falls under its power, as -inevitably as the most reckless sinner. This cannot -be our final end; for it would not be in accordance -with justice that our ultimate fate should -hinge on a transaction, like the sin of Adam, for -which we are not responsible. Every person -must be the arbiter of his own destiny. To secure -this, the redemption which intervenes -through Christ, provides for all a release from -the death entailed upon us by the Adamic transgression, -in order that every person’s individual -acts may constitute the record which shall determine -his destiny beyond the grave. What is -that destiny to be?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Our inquiry respects, not the future of the -righteous, concerning which there is no material -controversy, but that of the sinner. Is his fate -an eternity of life in a devouring fire which is -forever unable to devour him? an eternal approach -of death which never really arrives?</p> - -<p class='c011'>Blinded by the doctrine of the immortality of -the soul, two opposite conclusions are reached by -those who connect this doctrine with two different -<span class='pageno' id='Page_266'>266</span>classes of Scripture declarations. For one -class, reading that the punishment of the sinner -is to be eternal, and holding that man has an inherent -immortality which can never be alienated, -at once come to the terrible conclusion of an eternity -of conscious suffering, an eternal hell as -taught by Augustine. Another, connecting it -with the declarations that God’s anger shall not -always burn against the wicked, but that a time -comes when every intelligence in the universe, -in the plenitude of joy, is heard ascribing honor, -and blessing, and praise to God, speedily reaches -the conclusion of universal restoration as taught -by Origen. And if the doctrine of the immortality -of the soul be a scriptural doctrine, then the -Scriptures are found supporting these two diametrically -opposite conclusions.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We have seen that the Scriptures do not teach -any such inherent immortality as is claimed for -man; this, therefore, cannot fetter us in our investigation -of this question. God can continue -the existence of the wicked to all eternity after -the resurrection, if he so chooses; but if so, the -doctrine must rest on explicit statements of the -Scriptures to that effect. Paul says plainly that -the wages of sin is death; Rom. 6:23; and as -we do not receive wages for the work of another, -this must be a declaration of what will result to -every individual for a course of sin; and before -this can be made to mean eternal life in misery, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_267'>267</span>the present constitution of language must be destroyed, -and new definitions be given to established -terms. We hold this declaration of Paul’s, -on which we take our stand, to be the true -ground between the errors above mentioned, and -one which not only harmonizes all the Bible on -this question, but which has abundance of positive -testimony in its favor.</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. The future punishment, threatened to the -wicked, is to be eternal in its duration. The establishment -of this proposition, of course overthrows -the universal restoration of Origen; and -the nature of this punishment, involving a state -of death, overthrows alike the restoration view -of Origen, and the eternal hell of Augustine.</p> - -<p class='c011'>One “Thus saith the Lord,” is sufficient for -the establishment of any doctrine. One such we -offer in support of the proposition now before us. -Speaking of the reprobate, Christ says, “And -these shall go away into everlasting punishment,” -and immediately adds concerning the righteous, -“but the righteous, into life eternal.” Here the -same Greek word, <em>aionios</em>, is used to express the -duration of these opposite states. If, as must be -admitted, the word expresses unending duration -in the case of the righteous, it must mean the -same in that of the wicked.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To the same end we might refer to the words -of Christ on two other occasions: John 3:36; -Matt. 26:24. In the first of these passages he -<span class='pageno' id='Page_268'>268</span>says: “He that believeth not the Son shall not -see life;” that is, eternal life. But if, after a certain -period of suffering, such persons are released -from that state by a restoration to God’s favor, -this declaration could not be true. In the second, -he speaks of some of whom he says that it -would be good for them if they had not been -born. And this utterly precludes the idea that -they should ever be released to enter the bliss of -Heaven; for the first moment of such release -would make amends for all past suffering; and -throughout eternity they would praise God that -they had been born.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The punishment of the wicked, alike with the -reward of the righteous, is therefore to be eternal. -Two unending conditions are held out to -men, and between the two, they have the privilege -in this life of choosing.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. In what will the eternal state of the wicked -consist? Before presenting an argument to show -that it is death in the literal sense, it may be -necessary to notice the few passages of Scripture -which are put forth as evidence that it is eternal -misery.</p> - -<p class='c011'>1. Daniel 12:2: “And many of them that -sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some -to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting -contempt.” The shame spoken of in this -text is coupled by the objector with the contempt, -and claimed to be like that, everlasting; -<span class='pageno' id='Page_269'>269</span>and if the shame, which is an emotion to be exercised -by the individuals themselves, is to be -eternal, they must be awakened to everlasting -life and consciousness.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The fact that they are raised to shame proves -indeed that they have a veritable resurrection to -life and consciousness, and that this is no figure -of speech which is applied to them. But the -reader will notice that the shame is not said, like -the contempt, to be everlasting. Contempt is -not an emotion which they feel; they are not -raised to the contempt of themselves; but it is -an emotion felt by others toward them; and this -does not imply the consciousness of those against -whom it is directed; inasmuch as contempt may -be felt for them as well after they have passed -from the stage of consciousness as before. The -Syriac sustains this idea. It reads, “Some to -shame and the eternal contempt of their companions.” -And thus it will be. Shame for their -wickedness and corruption will burn into their -very souls, so long as they have conscious being. -And when they pass away, consumed for their -iniquities, their loathsome characters and their -guilty deeds, excite only contempt on the part of -the righteous, unmodified and unabated, so long -as they hold them in remembrance at all. The -text, therefore, furnishes no proof of the eternal -suffering of the wicked.</p> - -<p class='c011'>2. Matt. 25:41: “Depart from me, ye cursed, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_270'>270</span>into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and -his angels.” What is here said to be everlasting? -Wicked men? No. The devil? No. His angels? -No. But only the fire. And how can -the application of this term to the fire prove the -indestructibility and eternal life of those who are -cast therein? It may be answered, What propriety -could there be in keeping up the fire everlastingly, -if its victims were not to be eternally -the objects of its power? And we reply, This -word is sometimes used to denote the results and -not the continuance of the process. Everlasting -fire may not be fire which is everlastingly burning, -but fire which produces results which are everlasting -in their nature. The victims cast therein -will be consumed, and if from that destruction -they are never to be released, if that fiery work -is never to be undone, it is to them an everlasting -fire. This will appear more fully when we -come to speak of the “eternal fire” through -which God’s vengeance was visited on the wicked -cities of Sodom and Gomorrah.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There are several passages of scripture in which -the same word, <em>aionios</em>, is unquestionably used -in this sense. In Heb. 5:9, we read of “eternal -salvation;” that is, a salvation which is eternal -or everlasting in its results, not one which is forever -going on, but never accomplished. In Heb. -6:2, Paul speaks of “eternal judgment;” not -judgment which is eternally going forward, but -<span class='pageno' id='Page_271'>271</span>one which, having once passed upon all men, -Acts 17:31, is irreversible in its decisions, and -eternal in its effects. In Heb. 9:12, he speaks -in the same way of “eternal redemption,” not a -redemption through which we are eternally approaching -a redeemed state which we never -reach, but a redemption which releases us for all -eternity from the power of sin and death. It -would be just as proper to speak of the saints as -always redeeming, but never redeemed, as to -to speak of the sinner as always consuming but -never consumed, or always dying but never dead. -This fire is prepared for the devil and his angels, -and will be shared by all of the human race who -choose to follow the devil in his accursed rebellion -against the government of Heaven. It will -be to them an everlasting fire; for once having -plunged into its fiery vortex, there is no life, beyond. -Other texts noticed in succeeding chapters.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXIX. <br /> <span class='fss'>EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT.</span></h2> -</div> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c010'>Matt. 25:46: “And these shall go away into everlasting -punishment, but the righteous into life eternal.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c010'>This text is very commonly urged as an objection -against the view that the destiny of the -reprobate is an utter and eternal extinction of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_272'>272</span>being; and it is one which has great apparent -force. But the secret of this apparent strength -lies in the fact that the term punishment is almost -invariably supposed to be confined to conscious -suffering, and that when any affliction is -no longer taken cognizance of by the senses, it -ceases to be a punishment at all. But if it can -be shown from sound reason, and from the analogy -of human penalties, that punishment is estimated -by the loss involved, and not merely by -the amount of pain inflicted, the objection vanishes -at once, and will cease to hold back many -devout and holy minds from adopting the view -we here advocate.</p> - -<p class='c011'>On the duration of the punishment brought to -view in the text, we take no issue. It is to be -eternal; but what is to be its nature? The text -says, Everlasting punishment; popular orthodoxy -says, Unending misery; the Bible, we -believe, says, Eternal death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Is death punishment? If so, when a death is -inflicted from which there is to be no release, that -punishment is eternal or everlasting. Then the -application of this scripture to the view we hold -is very apparent. The heathen, to reconcile -themselves to what they supposed to be their -inevitable fate, used to argue that death was no -evil. But when they looked forward into the -endless future of which that death deprived them, -they were obliged to reverse their former decision -<span class='pageno' id='Page_273'>273</span>and acknowledge that death was an <em>endless injury</em>.--<cite>Cicero, -Tusc. Disp.</cite> i., 47.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Why is the sentence of death in our courts of -justice reckoned as the most severe and greatest -punishment? It is not because the pain involved -is greater; for the scourge, the rack, the pillory, -and many kinds of minor punishment, inflict -more pain upon the petty offender than decapitation -or hanging inflicts upon the murderer. -But it is reckoned the greatest because it is the -most lasting; and its length is estimated by the -life the person would have enjoyed, if it had not -been inflicted. It has deprived him of every -hour of that life he would have had but for this -punishment; and hence the punishment is considered -as co-existent with the period of his natural -life.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Augustine says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The laws do not estimate the punishment of a criminal -by the brief period during which he is being put to -death, but by their removing him forever from the company -of living men.”--<cite>De. civ. Dei, xxi.</cite>, 11.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The same reasoning applies to the future life -as readily as to the present. By the terrible -infliction of the second death, the sinner is deprived -of all the bright and ceaseless years of -everlasting life. The loss of every moment, hour, -and year, of this life, is a punishment; and, as -the life is eternal, the loss, or the punishment, is -eternal also. “There is here no straining of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_274'>274</span>argument to make out a case. The argument is -one which man’s judgment has in every age approved -as just.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The original sustains the same idea. The -word for punishment is <em>kolasis</em>; and this is defined, -“a curtailing, a pruning.” The idea of -cutting off is here prominent. The righteous go -into everlasting life, but the wicked, into an everlasting -state in which they are curtailed or cut -off. Cut off from what? Not from happiness; -for that is not the subject of discourse; but from -life, as expressly stated in reference to the righteous. -“The wages of sin is death; but the gift -of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our -Lord.” And since the life given to man through -Christ, is eternal life, it follows that the loss of it -inflicted as a punishment, is eternal punishment.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The same objection is again stated in a little -different form. As in the ages before our existence -we suffered no punishment, so, it is claimed -it will be no punishment to be reduced to that -state again. To this, we reply, that those who -never had an existence cannot, of course, be conceived -of in relation to rewards and punishments -at all. But when a person has once seen the -light of life, when he has lived long enough to -taste its sweets and appreciate its blessings, is it -then no punishment to be deprived of it? Says -Luther Lee (Immortality of the Soul, p. 128), -“We maintain that the simple loss of existence -<span class='pageno' id='Page_275'>275</span>cannot be a penalty or punishment in the circumstances -of the sinner after the general resurrection.” -And what are these circumstances? -He comes up to the beloved city, and sees the -people of God in the everlasting kingdom. He -sees before them an eternity, not of life only, but -of bliss and glory indescribable, while before -himself is only the blackness of darkness forever. -Then, says the Saviour, addressing a class of -sinners, there shall be wailing and gnashing of -teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, Isaac, and -Jacob, in the kingdom of God. What is the -cause of this wailing? It is not that they have -to choose between annihilation or eternal torture. -Had they this privilege, some might perhaps -choose the former; others would not. But the -cause of their woe is not that they are to receive -a certain kind of punishment when they would -prefer another, but because they have lost the life -and blessedness which they now behold in possession -of the righteous. The only conditions -between which they can draw their cheerless -comparisons are, the blessed and happy state of -the righteous within the city of God, and their -own hapless lot outside of its walls. And we -may well infer from the nature of the case, as -well as the Saviour’s language, that it is <em>because</em> -they find themselves thus thrust out, that they -lift up their voices in lamentation and woe. -“There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_276'>276</span>when ye shall see Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, -in the kingdom of God, <em>and ye yourselves thrust -out</em>!”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The sinner then begins to see what he has lost; -the sense of it, like a barbed arrow, pierces his -soul; and the thought that the glorious inheritance -before him might have been his but for his -own self-willed and perverse career, sets the -keenest edge upon every pang of remorse. And -as he looks far away into eternity, to the utmost -limit which the mind’s eye can reach, and gets a -glimpse of the inconceivable blessedness and -glory which he might have enjoyed but for his -idol sin, the hopeless thought that all is lost will -be sufficient to rend the hardest and most obdurate -heart with unutterable agony. Say not then -that loss of existence under such circumstances is -no penalty or punishment.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But again: The Bible plainly teaches degrees -of punishment; and how is this compatible, it is -asked, with the idea of a mere state of death to -which all alike will be reduced? Let us ask -believers in eternal misery how they will maintain -degrees in <em>their</em> system? They tell us the -intensity of the pain endured will be in each -case proportioned to the guilt of the sufferer. -But how can this be? Are not the flames of hell -equally severe in all parts? and will they not -equally affect <em>all</em> the immaterial souls cast therein? -But God can interpose, it is answered, to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_277'>277</span>produce the effect desired. Very well, then, we -reply, cannot he also interpose, if necessary, -according to our view, and graduate the pain -attendant upon the sinner’s being reduced to a -state of death as the climax of his penalty? So, -then, our view is equal with the common one in -this respect, while it possesses a great advantage -over it in another; for, while that has to find its -degrees of punishment in intensity of pain alone, -the duration in all cases being equal, ours may -have not only degrees in pain, but in duration -also; for, while some may perish in a short space -of time, the weary sufferings of others may be -long drawn out. But yet we apprehend that the -bodily suffering will be but an unnoticed trifle -compared with the mental agony, that keen -anguish which will rack their souls as they get -a view of their incomparable loss, each according -to his capacity of appreciation. The youth who -had but little more than reached the years of accountability -and died, perhaps with just enough -guilt upon him to debar him from Heaven, being -less able to comprehend his situation and his loss, -will of course feel it less. To him of older years, -more capacity, and consequently a deeper experience -in sin, the burden of his fate will be proportionately -greater. While the man of giant -intellect, and almost boundless comprehension, -who thereby possessed greater influence for evil, -and hence was the more guilty for devoting those -<span class='pageno' id='Page_278'>278</span>powers to that evil, being able to understand his -situation fully, comprehend his fate and realize -his loss, will feel it most keenly of all. Into <em>his</em> -soul indeed the iron will enter most intolerably -deep. And thus, by an established law of mind, -the sufferings of each may be most accurately -adjusted to the magnitude of his guilt.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Then, says one, the sinner will long for death -as a release from his evils, and experience a sense -of relief when all is over. No, friend, not even -this pitiful semblance of consolation is granted; -for no such sense of relief will ever come. The -words of another will best illustrate this point:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“‘But the sense of relief when death comes at last.’ -We hardly need to reply: There can be no sense of relief. -The light of life gone out, the expired soul can never -know that it has escaped from pain. The bold transgressor -may fix his thoughts upon it now, heedless of all -that intervenes; but he will forget to think of it then. -To waken from a troubled dream, and to know that it was -only a dream, is an exceeding joy; and with transport do -the friends of one dying in delirium, note a gleam of returning -reason, ere he breathes his last. But the soul’s -death knows no waking; its maddening fever ends in no -sweet moment of rest. It can never feel that its woe is -ended. The agony ends, not in a happy consciousness -that all is past, but in eternal night--in the blackness of -darkness forever!”--<cite>Debt and Grace</cite>, p. 424.</p> - -</div> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_279'>279</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXX. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE UNDYING WORM AND QUENCHLESS FIRE.</span></h2> -</div> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c010'>Mark 9:43, 44: “And if thy hand offend thee, cut it -off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than -having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never -shall be quenched: where their worm dieth not, and the -fire is not quenched.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c010'>Twice our Lord repeats this solemn sentence -against the wicked, “Where their worm dieth -not, and the fire is not quenched.” Verses 46, 48. -These passages are relied on with as much assurance, -perhaps, as any, to prove the eternal misery -of the reprobate. If this language had -never been used by any of the inspired writers -of the Scriptures, till it was thus used in the -New Testament, it might be urged with some degree -of plausibility, as an expressive imagery of -eternal torment. But, even in this case, it might -be replied that fire, so far as we have any experience -with it, or knowledge of its nature, invariably -consumes that upon which it preys, and -hence must be a symbol of complete destruction; -and that the expression, as it occurs in Mark 9:44, -can denote nothing less than the utter consumption -of those who are cast into that fire.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But this expression was one which was well -known and understood by those whom Christ -was addressing. Isaiah and Jeremiah frequently -<span class='pageno' id='Page_280'>280</span>use the figure of the undying worm and quenchless -fire. In their familiar scriptures the people -daily read these expressions. Let us see what -idea they would derive from them. We turn to -Jeremiah 17:27, and read:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“But if ye will not hearken unto me to hallow the -Sabbath day, and not bear a burden, even entering in at -the gates of Jerusalem on the Sabbath day; then will I -kindle a fire in the gates thereof, and it shall devour the -palaces of Jerusalem, and it shall not be quenched.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>From this text we certainly can learn the -meaning that was attached to the expression, -“unquenchable fire,” by the Hebrew people. -This fire was not to be quenched, therefore it -was unquenchable. But it was to be kindled in -the gates of Jerusalem, and devour the palaces -thereof. It was therefore literal, natural, fire. -But how could a fire of this kind, thus kindled, -be supposed to be a fire that would burn eternally? -They certainly would not so understand it. No -more should we. Moreover, this threatening of -the Lord by Jeremiah was fulfilled. 2 Chron. -36:19: “And they burnt the house of God, and -brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt all -the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all -the goodly vessels thereof.” Verse 21. “To fulfill -the word of the Lord by Jeremiah.” Thus -Jerusalem was burned according to Jeremiah’s -prediction that it should be consumed in unquenchable -fire. But how long did that fire -<span class='pageno' id='Page_281'>281</span>burn? Only till it had reduced to ashes the -gates and palaces on which it preyed. Unquenchable -fire is therefore simply a fire that is -not quenched, or does not cease, till it has entirely -consumed that which causes or supports it. Then -it dies out of itself, because there is nothing more -to burn. The expression does not mean a fire -that must absolutely eternally burn, and that -consequently all that is cast therein to feed the -flame must forever be preserved by having the -portion consumed immediately renewed.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To the wicked the threatened fire is unquenchable -because it will not be quenched, or caused to -cease, till it has entirely devoured them.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Ps. 37: 20: “But the wicked shall perish, and the enemies -of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs; they -shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away.” -Mal. 4: 3: “And ye shall tread down the wicked; for -they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day -that I shall do this saith the Lord of hosts.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Ezekiel speaks of unquenchable fire in a similar -manner.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Eze. 20: 47, 48: “Thus saith the Lord God: Behold -I will kindle a fire in thee, and it shall devour every green -tree in thee, and every dry tree; the flaming flame shall -not be quenched, and all faces from the south to the north -shall be burned therein. And all flesh shall see that I the -Lord have kindled it: it shall not be quenched.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Though this is doubtless figurative language, -denoting sore calamities upon a certain land -called the forest of the south field, it nevertheless -<span class='pageno' id='Page_282'>282</span>furnishes an instance of how the expression, -unquenchable fire, was then used and understood; -for that generation many ages ago perished, and -those judgments long since ceased to exist.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Isaiah not only speaks of the unquenchable -fire, but he couples with it the undying worm, -the same as the language in Mark:</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Isa. 66: 24: “And they shall go forth and look upon -the carcasses of the men that have transgressed against -me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire -be quenched, and they shall be an abhorring unto all -flesh.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>This is undoubtedly the language from which -the expression in Mark is borrowed; but a moment’s -examination of it will show that the worm -is not the remorse of a guilty conscience, but -that, like the fire, it is something external to, and -distinct from, the objects upon which it preys; -and moreover that those upon whom it feeds are -not the living, but the dead: it is the “carcasses” -of the men that have transgressed against the -Lord. In Isa. 14: 11, and 51: 8, the prophet -again speaks of the worm as an agent of destruction, -but it is always in connection with death. -It is thus evident that the terms employed by -our Lord in describing the doom of the wicked -would convey to the minds of his hearers the -very opposite of the idea of eternal life in misery.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There is other evidence, though no other is -necessary, to show that the idea which would be -<span class='pageno' id='Page_283'>283</span>conveyed, and which the language was designed -to convey, to their minds, was that of complete -extinction of being, an utter consumption by external -elements of destruction. The word translated -hell in the passage under consideration is -<em>ge-enna</em>. It is better to enter into life maimed, -than to go in full possession of all our members -and faculties into <em>ge-enna</em>. Did those to whom -Christ spoke know anything about this place, -and what kind of a fate awaited those who were -cast therein? A vivid picture of the place of -torment to which our Lord refers was in constant -operation before their eyes, near by Jerusalem.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Greenfield defines the word thus:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Gehenna, the valley of Hinnom, south of Jerusalem, -once celebrated for the horrid worship of Moloch and -afterward polluted with every species of filth, as well as -the carcasses of animals and dead bodies of malefactors; -to <em>consume which</em>, in order to avert the pestilence which -such a mass of corruption would occasion, constant fires -were kept burning.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Such was the fire of Gehenna; not a fire into -which people were cast to be kept alive and -tortured, but one into which they were cast to be -consumed; not one which was designed to prey -upon living beings, but upon the carcasses of -animals and the dead bodies of malefactors. -Hence we can see the consistency of associating -the fire and the worm together. Whatever portion -of the dead body the fire failed to consume, -the worm would soon seize upon and devour. If -<span class='pageno' id='Page_284'>284</span>a person had been condemned to be cast alive -into this place, as the wicked will be cast into -their Gehenna, what would have been his hope -of escape? If the fire could have been speedily -quenched before it had taken his life, and the -worms which consumed what the fire left, could -have been destroyed, he might have had some -hope of coming out alive; but if this could not -be done, he would know of a surety that his life -would soon become extinct, and then even his -lifeless remains would be utterly consumed by -these agents of destruction.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This was the scene to which Christ pointed his -hearers to represent the doom that awaits the -wicked; that, as they gazed upon the work of -complete destruction going on in the valley of -Hinnom, the worms devouring what the flames -spared, they might learn that in the future Gehenna -which awaited them, no part of their being -would be exempt from utter and complete destruction, -one agent of death completing what -another failed to accomplish.</p> - -<p class='c011'>As the definition of the word <em>ge-enna</em> throws -great light on the meaning of this text, so -the definition of another term used is equally to -the point. The words for unquenchable fire are -<em>pur</em> (long u) <em>asbeston</em>, and this word <em>asbeston</em>, -primarily means simply unquenched, that is, not -caused to cease by any external means: the idea -of eternal is a theological definition which has -<span class='pageno' id='Page_285'>285</span>been attached to it. Ancient writers used it in -this sense. Homer, in the <a id='corr285.2'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='sic: Iliad'>Illiad</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_285.2'><ins class='correction' title='sic: Iliad'>Illiad</ins></a></span>, xvi., 123, 294, -speaks of the Trojans’ hurling “unquenchable -fire” upon the Grecian ships, though but one of -them was burnt by it. And Eusebius, who was -a learned Greek, employs the same expression in -two instances in recounting the martyrdom of -Christians. Cronion and Julian, after being tortured -in various ways, were consumed in an -“unquenchable fire,” <em>puri asbesto</em>. The same is -also said of Epimachus and Alexander. “The -<em>pur asbeston</em>,” says Wetstein, “denotes such a -fire as cannot be <a id='corr285.13'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='extingushed'>extinguished</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_285.13'><ins class='correction' title='extingushed'>extinguished</ins></a></span> before it has consumed -and destroyed all.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Such is the evident meaning of this passage, -and the sense in which it must have been understood -at that time. Yet commentators, eighteen -hundred years this side of that time, presume to -turn this whole representation upside down, and -give to the terms a meaning exactly opposite -from that which they were intended to convey. -That sense alone can be the correct one in which -they were first spoken; and concerning that -there can be no question.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There is another text often urged to prove the -eternal conscious misery of the wicked. It is -one in which fire is mentioned as the instrument -used for the punishment of the wicked; and this -fire being called eternal, is understood in the -same sense as the unquenchable fire of Mark 9:43. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_286'>286</span>It may therefore properly be examined in -this connection.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Jude 7: “Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the -cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over -to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth -for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>This text, when rightly understood, will, we -think, like that in Mark 9, be found to convey -just the opposite meaning from that popularly -given to it. The first great error in the interpretation -of this text, lies, as we view it, in a -wrong application of the tense employed. It is -claimed that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, -having been destroyed, were committed -to the flames of hell, where they are now (present -tense) suffering the vengeance of that eternal -fire. But a moment’s glance at the text will -show that it is the example set forth, and not the -suffering, that is in the present tense. There are -other facts mentioned in the same tense with the -suffering; thus, “giving themselves over to fornication,” -“going after strange flesh,” “suffering -the vengeance of eternal fire.” If one of these -expressions denotes something that is now going -on, the others also denote the same. If they are -now suffering the fire, they are now giving themselves -over to fornication, and going after strange -flesh; for all these declarations are in the same -construction. But no one will claim that the -Sodomites are now taking the course here described; -<span class='pageno' id='Page_287'>287</span>neither, then, can it be claimed that -they are now suffering the pain of fire.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The sense of the passage appears to be very -evidently this: That the Sodomites, giving themselves -up to their wicked practices, and, as a consequence, -suffering an eternal overthrow by fire -rained down upon them from heaven, are thus -set forth as an example to the ungodly of all -coming ages, of the overthrow they will also experience -if they follow the same course.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Peter speaks of the same event, as an example -to the wicked, and tells what effect that fire had -upon the cities of the plain. It did not preserve -them in the midst of the fire in unceasing torture, -but turned them into ashes. He says, 2 Pet. 2:6: -“And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah -into ashes, condemned them with an -overthrow, making them an ensample unto those -that after should live ungodly.” This language -is too plain to need comment. How are the -Sodomites made an example? By being overthrown -and turned into ashes for their open and -presumptuous sins. It is God saying to the -wicked of all coming time, Behold, how your -sins shall be visited unless you repent.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But those fires are not now burning. Seek -out the site of those ancient and abandoned cities, -and the brackish waters of the Dead Sea will -be found rolling their sluggish waves over the -spot where once they stood. Those fires are -<span class='pageno' id='Page_288'>288</span>therefore called eternal, because their effects are -eternal, or age-lasting. They never have recovered, -nor will they ever recover while the world -stands, from that terrible overthrow.</p> - -<p class='c011'>And thus this text is very much to the purpose -on the question before us; for it declares -that the punishment of Sodom is an exact pattern -of the future punishment of the wicked; -hence that punishment will not be eternal life in -the fiery flame, but an utter consumption, even -as Sodom was consumed, by its resistless vengeance.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXXI. <br /> <span class='fss'>TORMENTED FOREVER AND EVER.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The only remaining texts to be urged in favor -of the eternal torment of the wicked, are two passages -which are found in the book of Revelation. -The first is Rev. 14:11: “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.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>It is proper first to inquire of whom this is -spoken. The question before us relates to the -destiny of all the wicked. No text is therefore -conclusive on this question, which speaks of only -<span class='pageno' id='Page_289'>289</span>a certain class, or a limited number, of the wicked; -for a particular class might for good reasons -be set apart to a certain punishment, and that -punishment be exceptional in their cases, and -not such as awaits the whole race of the guilty. -The passage just quoted speaks not of all the -wicked, but only of a limited class--the worshipers -of the beast and his image. The beast, according -to evidence which no Protestant will -be disposed to question, means the papal power; -Rev. 13:1-10; and the image is to be formed, -near the close of the career of that power. Rev. -13:14-18; 14:1-5. The text, therefore, embraces -only comparatively a small portion of the -wicked of the human race. The ancient world, -with its teeming millions, and the present heathen -world, knowing nothing of this power, are alike -exempted from the punishment here brought to -view. This text might therefore be set aside as -inconclusive, since, even if it should be admitted -to prove eternal torture for some, it does not -for all.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But we claim that no text affirms eternal torment -for a single conscious intelligence in all the -universe, and hence undertake to show that this -passage does not prove it in reference to even -the limited class brought to view. The expression, -“The smoke of their torment ascendeth up -forever and ever,” is the one upon which the doctrine -of eternity of suffering is in this case suspended. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_290'>290</span>But the same may be said of this expression -that was said in last chapter in reference -to the undying worm and the quenchless fire. It -was not new in John’s day, but was borrowed -from the Old Testament, and was one which was -well understood at that time.</p> - -<p class='c011'>In Isa. 34:9, 10, the prophet, speaking of the -land of Idumea, says: “And the streams thereof -shall be turned into pitch, and the dust thereof -into brimstone, and the land thereof shall become -burning pitch. It shall not be quenched night -nor day: the smoke thereof shall go up forever: -from generation to generation it shall lie waste; -none shall pass through it forever and ever.” -But two applications can be made of this language. -Either it refers to the literal land of -Edom east and south of Judea, or it is a figure to -represent the whole world in the day of final -conflagration. In either case it is equally to the -point. If the literal land of Idumea is meant, -and the language has reference to the desolations -which have fallen upon it, then certainly no eternity -of duration is implied in the declaration -that the smoke thereof shall go up forever. For -all the predictions against the land of Idumea -have long since been fulfilled, and the judgments -have ceased. If it refers to the fires of the last -day, when the elements melt with fervent heat, -no eternity of duration is even then implied in -the expression; for the earth is not to be forever -<span class='pageno' id='Page_291'>291</span>destroyed by the purifying fires of the last day. -It is to rise from its ashes, and a new earth come -forth purified from all the stains of sin, and free -from all the deformity of the curse, to be the everlasting -abode of the righteous.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Here is an instance in which the word, forever, -apply it in either of the only two ways possible, -must denote a limited period. And here -the Septuagint uses αἰων (<em>aion</em>) the same as is -used in Rev. 14:11; and from this passage in -Isaiah, the language in Revelation was probably -borrowed. That the words αἰων and αἰωνιος sometimes -denote a limited period, and not invariably -one of eternal duration, will appear in the examination -of the only remaining text that calls for -consideration, namely, Rev. 20:10: “And the -devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of -fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false -prophet are, and shall be tormented day and -night forever and ever.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>The same limitation is apparent in this text -that was observed in the preceding. It does not -refer to all the wicked, but speaks only of the -devil, the beast, and the false prophet. The lake -of fire, the place and means of their torment, is -again mentioned in verse 14; but there it is the -symbol of complete and utter destruction. Death -and Hades, it says, were cast into the lake of -fire, and after this it is said, “There shall be no -more death.” Rev. 21:4. Whatever, then, is -<span class='pageno' id='Page_292'>292</span>cast into the lake of fire, after it has wrought its -work of destruction upon them, no longer exists. -This is the plain inference from what is here asserted -respecting death. Then follows the testimony -of verse 15, that “whosoever was not found -written in the book of life, was cast into the lake -of fire.” And this makes a final disposition of -all who are not saved in the kingdom of Heaven.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There is nothing in the way of this application, -unless the words “forever and ever” denote absolutely -an eternity of duration. These words -are translated in the New Testament from <em>aion</em>, -and <em>aionios</em>, respecting which the following facts -may be stated.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Aion</em> is defined by different lexicographers as -follows:--</p> - -<p class='c011'>Greenfield: “Duration, finite or infinite, unlimited -duration, eternity; a period of duration -past or future, time, age, lifetime; the world, universe.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Schrevelius: “An age, a long period of time; -indefinite duration; time, whether longer or -shorter.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Liddell and Scott: “A space or period of -time, especially a lifetime, life, <span lang="la" xml:lang="la"><em>ævum</em></span>; an age, -a generation; long space of time, eternity; in -plural, <em>eis tous aionas ton aionon</em>, unto ages of -ages, forever and ever, N. T., Gal. 1:5.-3. later, -a space of time clearly defined and marked out, -an era, age, period of a dispensation: <em>ho aion -houtos</em>, this present life, this world.”</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_293'>293</span>Parkhurst: “Always being. It denotes duration -or continuance of time, but with great variety. -I. Both in the singular and the plural it -signifies eternity, whether past or to come. II. -The duration of this world. III. The ages of -the world. IV. This present life. V. The world -to come. VI. An age, period, or periodical dispensation -of divine providence. VII. <em>Aiones</em> -seems, in Heb. 11:3, to denote the various revolutions -and grand occurrences which have happened -in this created system, including also the -world itself. Comp. Heb. 1:2, and Macknight -on both texts. <em>Aion</em>, in the LXX. generally answers -to the Hebrew <em>holam</em>, which denotes <em>time -hidden</em> from man, whether indefinite or definite, -whether past or future.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Robinson: “Duration, the course or flow of -time in various relations as determined by the -context, viz: (A) For human life, existence. (B) -For time indefinite, a period of the world, the -world, in Gr. writers, and also in Sept. and N. -Testament. (C) For endless duration, perpetuity, -eternity.... Sept. mostly for Heb. <em>holam</em>, -‘hidden time,’ duration, eternity.--Hence, in N. -T. of long-continued time, indefinite duration, in -accordance with Greek usage, but modified as to -construction and extent by the example of the -LXX., and the Rabbinic views.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Schleusner gives as the first meaning of <em>aion</em>, -“a definite and long-continued time,” <em>i. e.</em>, a long-continued -but still a definite period of time.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_294'>294</span>Wahl has arranged the definitions of <em>aion</em> -thus: “(1) Time, unlimited duration, <span lang="la" xml:lang="la"><em>ævum</em></span>. (2) -The universe, <span lang="la" xml:lang="la"><em>mundus</em></span>. (3) An age, period of -the world,” as the Jewish age, Christian age, &c. -This reference to Schleusner and Wahl we find in -Stuart on Future Punishment, pp. 91, 93.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Holam</em>, the Hebrew word which corresponds -to the Greek <em>aion</em>, is applied according to Gesenius -to things which endure for a long time, for -an indefinite period. It is applied to the Jewish -priesthood, to the Mosaic ordinances, to the possession -of the land of Canaan, to the hills and -mountains, to the earth, to the time of service to -be rendered by a slave, and to some other things -of a like nature. Stuart, p. 72.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Cruden, in his Unabridged Concordance, under -the word eternal, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The words, eternal, everlasting, and forever, are -sometimes taken for a long time, and are not always to be -understood strictly. Thus, ‘Thou shalt be our guide from -this time forth even <a id='corr294.21'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='forever,”'>forever,’</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_294.21'><ins class='correction' title='forever,”'>forever,’</ins></a></span> that is, during our whole -life. And in many other places of Scripture, and in particular -when the word forever is applied to the Jewish -rites and privileges, it commonly signifies no more than -during the standing of that commonwealth, until the -coming of the Messiah.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Dr. Clarke places in our hands a key to the interpretation -of the words, “forever” and “forever -and ever,” which is adapted to every instance of -their use. According to his rule they are to be -taken to mean as long as a thing, considering the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_295'>295</span>surrounding circumstances, can exist. And he -illustrates this in his closing remarks on 2 Kings -5, where, speaking of the curse of the leprosy -pronounced upon Gehazi forever, he says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Some have thought, because of the prophet’s curse, -‘The leprosy of Naaman shall cleave unto thee and to thy -seed forever,’ that there are persons still alive who are -this man’s descendants, and afflicted with this horrible -disease. Mr. Maundrell, when he was in Judea, made -diligent inquiry concerning this, but could not ascertain -the truth of the supposition. To me it appears absurd; -the denunciation took place in the posterity of Gehazi -till it should become extinct; and under the influence of -this disorder, this must <em>soon</em> have taken place. The <em>forever</em> -implies as long as any of his posterity should remain. -This is the import of the word, <em>leolam</em>. <em>It takes in the -whole extent or duration of the thing to which it is applied.</em> -The <em>forever</em> of Gehazi was till his posterity became extinct.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The word <em>aionios</em> is derived from <em>aion</em>, and -its general meaning may be determined from the -definitions given above to the latter word.</p> - -<p class='c011'>That these words are frequently applied to -the existence of divine beings, and the future -happiness of the saints, is true; and that in these -cases they denote eternal duration is equally evident; -yet, according to the definition of the -words and the rule laid down by Dr. Clarke, that -eternal duration could not be made out by the -use of these words alone. They denote duration -or continuance of time, the length of that duration -<span class='pageno' id='Page_296'>296</span>being determined by the nature of the objects -to which they are applied. When applied -to things which we know from other declarations -of the Scriptures are to have no end, they signify -an eternity of being; but when applied to things -which are to end, they are correspondingly limited -in their meaning. That the existence of -God and the future happiness of the righteous -are to be absolutely eternal, we are abundantly -assured by scriptures which make no use of the -words in question. When applied to these they -therefore signify a period of duration which is -never to end. Just as plainly are we assured -that the existence of the wicked is at last to -cease in the second death; and when applied to -this, the words <em>aion</em> and <em>aionios</em> must be limited -accordingly in their signification. Overlooking -this plain principle of interpretation, Prof. Stuart, -p. 89, comes to this erroneous conclusion respecting -these words, because they are applied -alike to the sufferings of the lost and the happiness -of the saved, that “we must either admit -the endless misery of hell, or give up the endless -happiness of Heaven.” We are under no such -necessity. The words, <em>aion</em> and <em>aionios</em>, according -to Dr. Clarke, cover the whole of the existence -of the two classes in their respective -spheres, and that only. The one is, after a season -of suffering and anguish, to come to an end; -the other is to go on in bliss to all eternity.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_297'>297</span>So when it is said that the beast and the false -prophet, and they who worship the beast and his -image, are to be tormented day and night forever -and ever, we must understand this expression to -cover only the duration of their future existence -beyond the grave. If we are anywhere given -to understand by other scriptures and by other -terms which are more rigid in their meaning, -that this is to be eternal, the terms must here -be so understood; if not, we have no warrant for -so defining them here.</p> - -<p class='c011'>That the forever and ever, <em>eis tous aionas ton -aionon</em>, of the suffering of the wicked, denotes -a period of long duration, there is no question; -and it may be much longer than any have been -disposed to conceive who deny its eternity; yet -it is to come to an end, not by their restoration -to God’s favor, but by the extinction of that life -which has in it no immortality, and because they -have refused to accept of the life freely offered -to them, which is to continue through ages without -end.</p> - -<p class='c011'>We have now examined all the more prominent -passages which are urged in favor of the eternal -suffering of the lost. Though others may by -some be brought forward to prove this doctrine, -we may safely take the position that if it is not -proved by those we have examined, it cannot be -proved by any in all the Bible; for these use the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_298'>298</span>strongest terms and are most explicit in their -nature. And of these how many are there? Five -in all. Those who have never before examined -this subject, will perhaps be surprised to learn -how small is the number of such texts. And -should they take into the account every text -which is thought to have even the slightest semblance -of proving the immortality of the lost, it -would not be calculated to abate that surprise -to any great degree.</p> - -<p class='c011'>It now remains that we examine those texts, -more in number, and more explicit in statement, -which prove that the wicked shall be at last as -though they had not been.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXXII. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE END OF THEM THAT OBEY NOT THE GOSPEL.</span></h2> -</div> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c010'>“What shall the end be of them that obey not the -gospel of God?” 1 Pet. 4:17.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c010'>By this direct interrogation inspiration calls us -face to face to the great question of the final -destiny of the lost, not to leave us at last in perplexity -and doubt, but to give us full information -in reference thereto.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_299'>299</span>By the foregoing examination of themes which -have a bearing upon this question, we have been -brought to a place where the way is all clear to -listen unbiased to the direct testimony of the -Bible on the point now before us. No immortality -is anywhere affirmed of the soul, no eternal -misery is anywhere threatened against the lost. -What then is to be their fate? It is abundantly -affirmed that they shall die.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The inquiry into the nature of the death -threatened Adam, in chapter xxv., brought very -clearly to view the fact that the penalty pronounced -upon his sin reduced back to the dust -the entire being, leaving no part conscious and -active in the intermediate state. And the same -penalty stands against sin now as at the beginning. -For our personal sins, death is now threatened -against us, as it was against him. This is -the second death; and those who fall under this -will be reduced to the same condition as that -into which Adam was brought by death, with no -promise nor possibility of ever being released -therefrom.</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>Eze. 18:26: “When a righteous man turneth away -from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and -dieth <em>in</em> them; <em>for</em> his iniquity that he hath done shall he -die.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Two deaths are here brought to view: First, -the death common to this state of being, which -all share alike, good and bad, which is called the -first, or temporal, death; secondly, if a person -<span class='pageno' id='Page_300'>300</span>dies this death in a state of sin, that is, with sins -upon him of which he does not repent before he -dies, <em>for</em> those sins that he has committed he -shall die. Another death awaits him. The first -death was not for his personal transgressions; -for this is entailed upon all alike through Adam, -both good and bad. But every one is to die for -his own sins unless he repents. How is this to -be brought about? He is to be raised from the -first death and judged; and, if sins are then -found upon him, for those sins he suffers the -same penalty, death; and being thus reduced to -death again, he will forever remain dead; for -from this death there is no release nor redemption -provided. This is the second death, and is -the everlasting punishment in store for all the -workers of iniquity.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Paul says, Rom. 6:23, “The wages of sin is -death;” and James (1:15) corroborates this -testimony, by saying, “Sin, when it is finished, -bringeth forth death.” In Rom. 2, Paul tells us -of certain characters which are certainly deserving, -if any can be, of eternal torture; but, in -passing sentence upon them, he does not draw -out before us a picture of unending conscious -misery, a course for which he has the most appropriate -occasion, if it be true, but only tells us, -in accordance with reason as well as revelation, -that they are worthy of <em>death</em>. But death is a -state which can be reached only on a complete -<span class='pageno' id='Page_301'>301</span>extinction of life. As long as there is any life -about a man, he is not dead. “The death that -never dies,” is a contradiction of terms. Nor can -a person properly be said to be dying, unless he -is tending to a state of death, which he will by -and by reach. And yet the popular view of this -subject is well expressed in the following language -of Thomas Vincent:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The torments of hell will not be in one part only, but -in every part, not in a weaker degree, but in the greatest -extremity; not for a day, or a month, or a year, but forever: -the wicked will be always dying, never dead; the -pangs of death will ever be upon them, and yet they -shall never give up the ghost; if they could die they -would think themselves happy; they will always be roaring, -and never breathe out their last; always sinking, and -never come to the bottom; always burning in those -flames, and never consumed; the eternity of hell will be -the hell of hell.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Again, the Lord says, speaking of a certain -class of his enemies, “For yet a little while and -the indignation shall cease, and mine anger in -their destruction.” Isa. 10:25. This is conclusive -testimony that all those with whom the -Lord has occasion to be angry, as he is with all -the wicked, Ps. 7:11, will be finally destroyed, -and in that destruction his anger toward them -will cease. Yet the majority of divines tell us -that God’s “fiery indignation and incensed fury” -toward them will never cease; that he will never -literally destroy them, but will forever torment -<span class='pageno' id='Page_302'>302</span>them, and keep them alive expressly that he may -torment them. Says Benson:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“He will exert <em>all</em> his divine attributes to make them -as wretched as the capacity of their nature will admit.” -And he continues, “They must be perpetually swelling -their enormous sums of guilt, and still running deeper, -immensely deeper, in debt to divine and infinite justice. -Hence after the longest imaginable period, they will be so -far from having discharged their debt that they will find -more due than when they first began to suffer.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Thus the sinner is represented as being able -to distance in sin the power of Omnipotence to -punish. They go on accumulating loads of guilt -in their rebellion against the divine government, -while God, exerting <em>all</em> his divine attributes, follows -tardily after, in fruitless efforts to make the -terrors of his punishment adequate to the infinitude -of their guilt. Oh, horrid picture of perverted -imagination! Did we not believe its -authors labored under the sincere conviction that -they were doing God service, and did we not -know that many good and estimable persons still -defend the doctrine under an earnest, though -mistaken, zeal for God, it would deserve to be -styled the most arrant blasphemy.</p> - -<p class='c011'>This condition of the finally reprobate, so often -and so distinctly defined as a state of death, is -also set forth by very many other expressions, by -every variety of phrase, in fact, which expresses, -in the most complete and absolute manner, an -utter loss of existence.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_303'>303</span>Henry Constable, A. M., in his work on “The -Duration and Nature of Future Punishment,” p. -12, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“But it is not only by this phrase, ‘death,’ that the -Old Testament describes the punishment of the ungodly. -By every expression in the Hebrew language, significant -of loss of life, loss of existence, the resolution of organized -substance into its original parts, its reduction to that -condition in which it is as though it had never been -called into being--by every such expression does the Old -Testament describe the end of the ungodly. ‘The destruction -of the transgressors and the sinners shall be -together:’ ‘prepare them for the <em>day of slaughter</em>:’ ‘<em>the -slain</em> of the Lord shall be many:’ ‘they shall go forth and -look upon <em>the carcasses</em> of the men that have sinned:’ ‘God -shall <em>destroy</em> them:’ ‘they shall be <em>consumed</em>:’ ‘they shall -be <em>cut off</em>:’ ‘they shall be rooted <em>out of the land of the -living</em>:’ ‘<em>blotted out of the book of life</em>:’‘<em>they are not</em>.’ -The Hebrew scholar will see from the above passages that -there is no phrase of the Hebrew language significant of -all destruction short of that philosophical annihilation of -elements which we do not assert, which is not used to -denote the end of the ungodly.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'><em>The wicked shall be destroyed.</em> “The Lord -preserveth all them that love him; but all the -wicked will he destroy.” Ps. 145:20. Here -preservation is promised only to those who love -God, and in opposition to this, <em>destruction</em> is -threatened to the wicked. But human wisdom -teaches us that God will preserve the wicked in -hell--preserve them for the mere sake of torturing -them. Mr. Benson again says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“God is therefore present in hell to see the punishment -<span class='pageno' id='Page_304'>304</span>of these rebels. His fiery indignation kindles, and -his incensed fury feeds the flame of their torment, while -his powerful presence and operation <em>maintains their being</em>, -and renders their powers most acutely sensible, thus setting -the keenest edge upon their pain, and making it cut -most intolerably deep.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'><em>The wicked shall perish.</em> “For God so loved -the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, -that whosoever believeth in him should not <em>perish</em>, -but have everlasting life.” John 3:16. A -double enunciation of the truth is couched in this -short text. It is that eternal life is to be obtained -only through Christ, and that all who do -not thus obtain it will eventually perish. John -testifies further on the same point in his 1st -epistle, 5:11: “And this is the record: that God -hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his -Son.” From which it follows, as a most natural -consequence, that “he that hath not the Son of -God <em>hath not life</em>.” Verse 12.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The wicked shall go to perdition.</em> “We are -not of them who draw back unto perdition, but -of them that believe to the saving of the soul.” -Heb. 10:39. We either gain the salvation of -our souls by a perseverance in faith, and obtain -eternal life by a patient continuance in well-doing, -Rom. 2:7, or we sink back into perdition, -which, is defined to be utter ruin, or <em>destruction</em>.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“<em>The wicked shall come to an end and be as -though they had not been.</em>” “For yet a little -while, and the wicked shall not be; yea, thou -<span class='pageno' id='Page_305'>305</span>shalt diligently consider his place, and <em>it</em> shall not -be.” Ps. 37:10. If this testimony be true, there -will be neither a sinner nor any <em>place</em> for a sinner, -after God has executed upon them his just -judgments. “They shall be as though they had -not been.” Obad. 16.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The reader is requested to mark the significance -of these texts. They are not figures, but -plain enunciations of truth, demanding to be understood -in the plainest and most literal manner. -And though they are so abundant, and can be so -easily produced, they are not to be passed over -any more lightly on this account.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The wicked are compared to the most inflammable -and perishable substances.</em> Had the -wicked been compared to the most durable -substances with which we are acquainted in -nature; had they been likened to the “everlasting -hills,” the during rock, or the precious metals, -gold and gems, the most incorruptible of all substances; -such comparisons would not have been -without their weight in giving us an idea of an -eternity of existence; nor can we think they -would have been overlooked by the other side. -We therefore claim an equal significance on our -side of the question for the fact that they are -everywhere compared to just the opposite of the -above-named substances--substances the most -perishable and corruptible of any that exist. -For no idea can be drawn from such comparisons -<span class='pageno' id='Page_306'>306</span>at all compatible with the idea of eternal preservation -in the midst of glowing and devouring -fire.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Thus it is said of the wicked that they shall -be dashed in pieces like a potter’s vessel, Ps. 2:9, -they shall be like the beasts that perish, Ps. -49:20, like the untimely fruit of a woman, Ps. -58:8, like a whirlwind that passeth away, Ps. -68:2; Prov. 10:25, like a waterless garden -scorched by an eastern sun, Isa. 1:30, like garments -consumed by the moth, Isa. 51:8, like the -thistle down scattered by the whirlwind, Isa. 17:13, -margin. They shall consume like the fat of -lambs in the fire, Ps. 37:20, consume into smoke -(<em>ibid.</em>), and ashes, Mal. 4:3, melt like wax, Ps. -68:2, burn like tow, Isa. 1:31, consume like -thorns, Isa. 34:12, vanish away like exhausted -waters, Ps. 58:7.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The illustrations which the New Testament -uses to represent the destiny of the wicked are -of exactly the same nature. They are likened to -chaff, which is to be burned entirely up, Matt. 3:12, -tares to be consumed, Matt. 13:40, withered -branches to be burned, John 15:6, bad fish cast -away to corruption, Matt. 13:47, 48, a house -thrown down to its foundations, Luke 6:49, to -the destruction of the old world by water, Luke -17:27, to the destruction of the Sodomites by fire, -verse 29, 2 Pet. 2:5, 6, and to natural brute beasts, -that perish in their own corruption. Verse 12.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_307'>307</span>Such are the illustrations of the Scriptures on -this subject. If the wicked are to be tormented -forever, all these illustrations are not only unnatural, -but false; for in that case they are not -like the perishing beasts, the passing whirlwind, -the moth-consumed garment, the burning fat, -the vanishing smoke, or the melting wax; nor -like chaff, tares, and withered branches, consumed -and reduced to ashes. These all lose their form -and substance, and become as though they had -not been; but this the wicked never do, according -to the popular view. There is an enormous -contradiction somewhere. Is it between the -writers of the Bible? or between uninspired -men and the word of God? The trouble is not -with the Bible; all is harmony there. The discrepancy -arises from the creeds and theories of -men.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The language of Moses and of Paul shows that -an eternal existence of moral corruption and -fiery torture is not the doom of the wicked. -When Moses besought the Lord to forgive the -sin of Israel, he said, “Yet now, if thou wilt forgive -their sin--; and if not, blot me, I pray thee, -out of thy book which thou hast written.” Ex. -32:32. This book must be the book of life, in -which the names of the righteous are written. -By being blotted out of this book, Moses evidently -meant being devoted to the doom of sinners. -If Israel could not be forgiven, he would -<span class='pageno' id='Page_308'>308</span>himself perish with that unfaithful people. But -no one can for a moment suppose that he wished -throughout eternity for a life of sin, pain, and -blasphemy, in hell. He only wished for an utter -cessation of that life which, if his prayer could -not be granted, would be an intolerable burden. -And if this is what he meant by being blotted -out of God’s book, it follows that this will be the -doom of the ungodly; for the Lord answered, -“Whosoever hath sinned against me, him will I -blot out of my book.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>In a similar manner, Paul speaks concerning -the same people: “For I could wish that myself -were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my -kinsmen according to the flesh.” Rom. 9:3. We -cannot suppose that Paul would desire a life of -sin and moral corruption, such as that of the sinner -in hell is said to be, even for the sake of his -people. But he was willing to give up his life -for them, and cease to exist, if thereby they -might be saved.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To notice more particularly some of the scriptures -in which a portion of the foregoing figures -are found, their testimony may be summed up in -the following final proposition:--</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The wicked shall be consumed and devoured -by fire.</em> “Woe unto them that call evil good, and -good evil; that put darkness for light, and light -for darkness,” &c. “Therefore as the fire devoureth -the stubble, and the flame consumeth the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_309'>309</span>chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and -their blossom shall go up as dust”! Isa. 5:20-24. -Reader, have you ever seen fire devour -stubble, or flame consume chaff? Then you -have seen a figure of the destruction of the -wicked. And let the advocate of eternal misery -tell us, if such language does not denote the utter -consumption of the wicked, what language would -do it, if the doctrine were true. Let us know -what language Inspiration should have used, had -it wished to convey such an idea. Is it such as -this? “But the wicked shall perish, and the -enemies of the Lord shall be as the fat of lambs; -they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume -away.” Ps. 37:20. “And they went up -on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the -camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: -and fire came down from God out of heaven, and -<em>devoured</em> them.” The word here rendered devour, -κατέφαγεν, says Stuart, is “intensive, to <em>eat -up, devour</em>, so that it denotes utter excision.” -In the light of this scripture, we can readily -understand how it is that the wicked are to be -recompensed in the earth. Prov. 11:31. Coming -up in the second resurrection, at the end of -the 1000 years of Rev. 20:5, they come up -around the New Jerusalem, the beloved city, the -abode of the saints, then descended from Heaven -to earth, chap. 21:5, and then their fearful retribution -overtakes them. It is then that they -<span class='pageno' id='Page_310'>310</span>have their portion in those purifying fires that -sweep over the earth, in which, according to -Peter’s testimony, the elements of this great -globe itself shall melt with fervent heat. 2 Pet. -3:10, 12. For it is at the day of Judgment (by -which of course we must understand the execution -of the Judgment) and perdition of ungodly -men that this takes place. See verse 7. So, -too, the righteous, as they go forth upon the -new earth, verse 13, destined to be their eternal -and glorious abode, will receive their recompense -in the earth. Then will be fulfilled the word of -the Lord by the prophet Malachi, which says, -“For behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as -an oven: and all the proud, yea, and all that do -wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that -cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of -hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor -branch. But unto you that fear my name, -shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing -in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and -grow up as calves of the stall. And ye shall -tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes -under the soles of your feet in the day that I -shall do this, saith the Lord of hosts.” Mark the -distinctness of this language. It does not say -that the wicked shall be <em>as</em> ashes, nor does it introduce -any comparison here whatever, but plainly -states a plain fact, that they <em>shall be ashes</em>, under -the soles of the saints’ feet. Not that the saints -<span class='pageno' id='Page_311'>311</span>will literally walk on ashes, but the wicked, having -been reduced to ashes, like all other sin-and-curse-polluted -things, are incorporated into the -substance of the new earth, which the saints are -evermore to inhabit, as it emerges from the renovating -fires of the last day.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Then will the universe be clean and pure. -Then the stain of sin will all be wiped away -forever; sinners, and the great enemy that deceived -them (for he, too, shall be destroyed, Heb. -2:14), being rooted out of the land of the -living. Its every scar now impressed upon the -handiwork of God shall be effaced; and this unfortunate -earth shall be re-adorned, as only God, -omnipotent in power and omniscient in wisdom, -is able to adorn it. And then will arise that -glad anthem of universal Jubilee, in which shall -join <em>every creature</em> which is in Heaven, and on -the earth, and under the earth, and such as are -in the sea, ascribing blessing, and honor, and -glory, and power, unto him that sitteth on the -throne, and unto the Lamb forever and ever. -Rev. 5:13. There is no room here for a great -receptacle of fiery torment, where an innumerable -company of human beings shall burn and -blaspheme and sin and suffer forever and ever. -There is no room in this great song of joy for the -discordant and hopeless wailing of the damned. -There is no provision made for an eternal rebellion -against the government of God, and eternal -<span class='pageno' id='Page_312'>312</span>blasphemy against his holy name! No! only -the loyal subjects of the great Captain of our -salvation, only such as love immortal life, and -seek for it, and prepare themselves for its inestimable -blessings, shall ever enjoy the glorious -boon; while those who put from themselves the -word of God, and “judge themselves unworthy of -everlasting life,” Acts 13:46, will be remanded -back to the original elements from which they -sprung; and strict Justice will write upon their -unhonored and unlamented graves that they -themselves were the arbiters of their own fate.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXXIII. <br /> <span class='fss'>GOD’S DEALINGS WITH HIS CREATURES.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>“Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” -asked an eminent servant of God in the opening -pages of revelation, Gen. 18:25; and when all is -finished, the redeemed, looking over all God’s -dealings with man, exclaim with fervent lips, -“Just and true are thy ways, thou King of -saints.” Rev. 15:3. It is objected that we -should raise no question regarding the justness -of the doom to which God may devote any portion -of our race; because we are not able to judge -of his ways. Of things with which we are imperfectly -acquainted, or which are above our comprehension, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_313'>313</span>this is undoubtedly true; but respecting -our relation to God, the light in which he -looks upon sin, and the disposition he will finally -make of it, he says to us, “Come, let us reason.” -We are never called upon to form an opinion or -a decision in regard to things respecting which -we are incapable of judging; but we are called -upon to reverence God, as a God of love, wisdom, -justice, and mercy. We must, therefore, be capable -of judging of his character, his mercy, his -love, his wisdom, and his justice. Are these -characteristics displayed in his future dealings -with the wicked, according to the view generally -promulgated by the churches of the present day? -The question to be decided is this: Is an eternity -of torture so intense that the severest pain -a person can suffer on earth is but a faint shadow -of it, any <em>just punishment</em> for any conceivable -amount of sin committed by the worst of men, -during the brief period of our mortal life? What -is our present life? Something for which we did -not ask; something given us without our knowledge -or consent; and, in the forcible language of -another, “Can any abuse of this unasked-for gift -justify the recompense of an existence spent in -unending agony?”</p> - -<p class='c011'>Between the sins committed in this finite life, -and the fiery torment of hell continued through -numberless millions of ages, and then no nearer -its end than when the first groan was uttered, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_314'>314</span>there is a disproportion so infinite, that few attempt -to rest that eternal misery on merely the -sins of the present life; and they endeavor to -vindicate God’s justice in the matter, or at least -to apologize for his course, by saying that the -sinner continues to sin, and that is the reason -why he continues to suffer. The guilt of all the -sins done in the body is soon expiated in the -fiery flame; but then they must suffer for the -sins committed after they left this mortal state, -and commenced their life of agony in hell. And -here they are represented as sinning faster than -the inconceivable woe of hell can punish. It is -affirmed of them, as quoted from Benson in the -previous chapter, that “they must be perpetually -swelling their enormous sums of guilt, and still -running deeper, immensely deeper, in debt to divine -and infinite justice. Hence, after the longest -imaginable period, they will be so far from -having discharged their debt that they will find -more due than when they first began to suffer.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>In like manner Wm. Archer Butler, in his -sermon on Future Punishment, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The punishments of hell are but the perpetual vengeance -that accompanies the sins of hell. An eternity of -wickedness brings with it an eternity of woe. The sinner -is to suffer for everlasting, but it is because the sin itself -is as everlasting as the suffering.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Do the Scriptures anywhere thus speak? Do -they not affirm, not once or twice, but over and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_315'>315</span>over again, that the punishment of the future -is for the sins of the present time? It is for -the sins in which the sinner dies, not for what -he commits after death, that he is to suffer future -retribution. Eze. 18:26. The works for which -we are to be brought into judgment (and for no -others can we be punished) are the works of this -present life. Eccl. 12:14. And Paul testifies, -“For we must all appear before the judgment -seat of Christ, that every one may receive the -things <em>done in his body</em>, according to that he -hath done, whether it be good or bad.” 2 Cor. -5:10. It is for the sins done by human beings -in the body, in this present life, not for what -they will commit as lost spirits in hell, that they -are to answer at the judgment seat of Christ, and -for which they are to receive a just retribution. -And if everlasting misery is thought to be too -much for this, we are not at liberty to throw in -<em>post-mortem</em> sins to balance the excessive punishment. -If eternal torment cannot be defended -as a just punishment for the sins of this present -life, it cannot be defended at all.</p> - -<p class='c011'>To illustrate: Suppose in an earthly tribunal -the judge should sentence a criminal to a punishment -altogether too severe for the crime of -which he had been guilty, and then should endeavor -to justify his course by saying that he -gave the sentence because he knew that the -criminal would deserve it by the sins he would -<span class='pageno' id='Page_316'>316</span>commit after he went to jail! How long would -such a judge be tolerated? Yet this is the very -course attributed by learned doctors of divinity, -to the Judge of all the earth, who has declared -that he will do right.</p> - -<p class='c011'>On the supposition that eternal torture is to -be inflicted as the penalty for a life of sin in this -world, were man asked if God’s conduct in this -respect was just, his own innate sense of justice, -not yet wholly obliterated by the fall, would -prompt him to a universal and determined, No! -The framers of different religious systems have -felt this, and seem to have searched sharply for -some avenue of escape from the fearful wrong -of this horrid theory. So Plato had his Acherusian -lake from which at least some of the wretched -sufferers in Tartarus, after a purgative process -might issue forth again to the upper air. Augustine -following Plato in his notion of an abode -of unending pain for some, had also his purgatory -from whence others might find a road to -Heaven. Rome has only a purgatory, the fires -of a finite period, for the millions within her -communion. Origen conceived of a purgatory -wider than Plato’s, Augustine’s, or Rome’s, from -which all should at length be restored to the favor -of God.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The churches of the Reformation have generally -accepted of Augustine’s hell, but denied his -purgatory. In the Protestant denominations, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_317'>317</span>therefore, we have this doctrine in its most horrid -aspects. And it is no marvel that many who -have felt compelled by their creed to accept it, -have shrunk from its advocacy, and have tacitly, -if not openly, confessed that they could heartily -wish it were a lie.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Saurin at the close of one of his sermons thus -speaks:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“I sink, I sink, under the awful weight of my subject; -and I declare, when I see my friends, my relations, the -people of my charge,--this whole congregation, when I -think that I, that you, that we are all exposed to these -torments; when I see in the lukewarmness of my <a id='corr317.13'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='sic: devotions'>devosions</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_317.13'><ins class='correction' title='sic: devotions'>devosions</ins></a></span>, -in the langour of my love, in the levity of my resolutions -and designs, the least evidence, though it be only -possible or presumptive, of my future misery, I find in -the thought a mortal poison, that diffuseth itself through -every period of my existence, rendering society tiresome, -nourishment insipid, pleasure disgustful, <em>and life itself a -cruel bitter</em>. I cease to wonder that the fear of hell hath -made some <em>melancholy</em>, others <em>mad</em>; that it hath disposed -some to expose themselves to a living martyrdom, by -fleeing from all commerce with the rest of mankind, and -others, to suffer the most terrible, violent torments.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Albert Barnes, the well-known preacher and -commentator, speaks on the same point as follows:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“I confess when I look upon a world of sinners and of -sufferers; upon death-beds and grave-yards, upon the -world of woe filled with hosts to suffer forever; when I -see my friends, my parents, my family, my people, my -fellow-citizens; when I look upon a whole race all involved -in this sin and danger, and when I see the great -<span class='pageno' id='Page_318'>318</span>mass of them wholly unconcerned, and when I feel that -God only can save them, and yet he does not do it--I am -struck dumb. It is all dark, dark, dark to my soul, and -I cannot disguise it.”--<cite>Sermons</cite>, pp. 124, 125.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Such is the effect of the doctrine of eternal -misery with some, according to the confession of -its own advocates. No one can say that such -effects are either good or desirable. And why -does it not have this effect upon more? We answer, -it is because the lips only mechanically assent -to what the heart and reason either will not -try to realize, or else do not seriously believe. -Says Bishop Newton:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Imagine a creature, nay, imagine numberless creatures -produced out of nothing ... delivered over to torments -of endless ages, without the least hope or possibility -of relaxation or redemption. Imagine it you may, -but you can never seriously believe it, nor reconcile it to -God and goodness.”--<cite>Dissertation</cite>, No. 60.</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>But the majority are affected by it far differently. -Every better emotion of their nature revolts -at the idea, and they will not accept it. -They cannot believe that God is thus cruel, tyrannical, -revengeful, implacable; the personification, -in short, of every trait of character which, -when seen in men here, we consider unmistakable -marks of debasement and degradation; and believing -the Bible and Christianity to be identified -with such teaching as this, with equal promptness -they too are rejected and cast away. But here -we need not enlarge. Probably no one will read -<span class='pageno' id='Page_319'>319</span>these lines under whose observation some case -has not come of persons driven into skepticism, -yes, driven and held there, by the popular doctrine -of eternal misery--a doctrine which has -been well described by a Christian writer, as “a -theology that is confused, entangled, imperfect, -and gloomy; a theology which, while it abundantly -breeds infidelity among the educated classes, -fails to spread through the body of the population, -and but dimly, or only as a flickering candle -enlightens the world.”--<cite>I. Taylor.</cite></p> - -<p class='c011'>But how is it with the view we have tried to -present? Quite the reverse, as our own observation -proves. Instances have come under our immediate -knowledge of persons who, when they -saw the divine harmony of God’s system of government, -as brought to view in his word, when -they saw the just and reasonable disposition -which the Bible declares that he will make of all -those who will persist in rebellion against him,--a -disposition in which justice and mercy so beautifully -blend, have been able to take that Bible -and say for the first time in their life they could -believe it to be the book of God. And believing -this, they have been led to turn their feet into its -testimonies, and strive by obedience to its plain -requirements to escape a doom which they could -see to be just, and therefore knew to be certain. -This has been the experience of many. Let, then, -the impression no longer exist, and the assertion -<span class='pageno' id='Page_320'>320</span>no more be made, that these views tend to irreligion -and infidelity. Their fruits everywhere -show just the reverse.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Can it then be wondered at that we should be -solicitous to disabuse the minds of the people in -this respect? Shall we not have a zeal for the -Lord, and be untiring in our efforts to wipe off -from the book and character of God the aspersions -which are by this doctrine cast upon them? -God represents himself to his creatures by the -endearing name of Love; he declares that he is -very pitiful and of tender mercy, long-suffering -and slow to anger, not hasty to execute sentence -against an evil work, not gratified in any manner -by the death of the wicked, and not willing that -any should perish; he declares that he delighteth -in mercy, that he will not contend forever, -neither be always wroth. And can it be that -while thus representing himself to the inhabitants -of earth, he was kindling fiery torture on -multitudes of wretched beings in the dreary regions -of hell, feeding their flame with his incensed -fury, preserving and tormenting them in -infinite indignation, exerting all his divine <a id='corr320.24'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='attritributes'>attributes</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_320.24'><ins class='correction' title='attritributes'>attributes</ins></a></span> -to make them as wretched as the capacity -of their nature would admit, and maintaining -a fixed purpose to do this through the endless -ages of eternity! If not, “what a portentous error -must it be!” How fearfully is his character -<span class='pageno' id='Page_321'>321</span>misrepresented! What a bold and audacious libel -is uttered against his holy name!</p> - -<p class='c011'>The root and trunk of all this, is the “taken-for-granted” -position that the soul is immortal. -But search through your Bible and see if you find -it so. See if you will not rather be prepared to -exclaim with the eminent commentator, Olshausen, -that “the doctrine of the ‘immortality of the -soul,’ and the name, are <em>alike unknown to the entire -Bible</em>.” (Comment on 1 Cor. 15:19, 20.) See -if you can find the death that never dies, and -never-dying soul. If not, we ask you to reject -the idea at once as a most dangerous and destructive -error. Men are thus rejecting it. The -leaven is working in the public mind. Men are -growing suspicious of the truth of a declaration, -first uttered by a not over-truthful character in -Eden, perpetuated thence through heathenism, -and at last through the medium of the mother of -harlots, disseminated through all the veins and -channels of Orthodoxy. But truth will work its -way up, however deeply the rubbish may have -been heaped upon it; and before the bright rising -of its light, all antiquated superstitions and -traditionary dogmas, will lie exposed in their native -deformity.</p> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_322'>322</span> - <h2 class='c008'>CHAPTER XXXIV. <br /> <span class='fss'>THE CLAIMS OF PHILOSOPHY.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>After the Bible, what? When once the word -of God pronounces upon a question, what further -evidence is needed to sustain the position, or -what evidence is strong enough to break its decision? -What can human reason, science, and -philosophy, do for a theory upon which the -Scriptures have written “Ichabod”?</p> - -<p class='c011'>We have, in previous chapters, examined the -teaching of the Bible on the whole subject of -man’s creation, nature, death, intermediate state, -and final doom. We have found that man was -not created absolutely mortal or immortal, but -relatively both: immortality was within his -reach, and mortality lay as a danger in his path. -He sinned and became absolutely mortal. Then -death becomes an unconscious sleep in the grave, -and his destiny beyond the tomb, if he does not -secure through Christ, eternal life, is an utter loss -of existence. But there are some who think that -reason, science, and philosophy, are sufficient to -disprove these conclusions; or, at least, that they -are so strong that the Bible record must be made -to harmonize with the claims drawn from these -sources. But they forget that much that we call -reason is in the sight of God “foolishness,” that -<span class='pageno' id='Page_323'>323</span>there is a philosophy which the Bible pronounces -“vain,” and some kinds of science which it -says are “falsely so called.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>We are willing to grant philosophy the privilege -of trying to substantiate its claims. It may -boast like Goliah, but it will be found weaker -than Belshazzar before the handwriting on the -wall.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The soul immortal.</em> It is claimed that the soul -is immaterial, and cannot therefore be destroyed, -and hence must be immortal. Luther Lee says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“If God himself has made the soul immaterial, he cannot -destroy it by bringing material agents to act upon it.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>This claim is good if whatever is indestructible -is immortal. But this is a manifest error. -The elements of the human body are indestructible, -but the body is not therefore immortal. It -is subject to change, death, and decay. But if it -is claimed that the soul, being immaterial, is -without elements, then perhaps it might follow -that it is indestructible; for that which is nothing -can never be made less than nothing.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But if the soul of man, being immaterial, is -thus proved to be immortal, what shall we say -of the souls of the lower orders of animals? for -they manifest the phenomena of mind as well as -men. They remember, fear, imagine, compare, -manifest gratitude, anger, sorrow, desire, &c. -Bishop Warburton says:--</p> - -<div><span class='pageno' id='Page_324'>324</span></div> -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“I think it may be strictly demonstrated that man has -an immaterial soul; <em>but then</em>, the same arguments which -prove <em>that</em>, prove, likewise, that the souls of all living animals -are immaterial.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Whoever, therefore, affirms the immortality of -man from the immateriality of his soul, is bound -to affirm the same, not only of the nobler animals, -but also of all the lower orders of the brute -creation. Here, believers in natural immortality -are crushed beneath the weight of their own arguments. -If it be said that God can, if he choose, -blot from existence the immaterial soul of the -beetle and the titmouse, we reply, so can he that -of man; and then its immortality is at an end, -and the whole argument is abandoned.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“<em>Matter cannot think.</em>” This is the fundamental -proposition on which the airy phantom -of the immortality of the soul relies for its support. -Since man does think, and matter cannot -think, the mind or soul must be immaterial -and immortal. It is one thing to make such -an assertion; it is quite another thing to prove -it; and the proof lies not within the power -of man. That mind, like electricity, may be a -property of matter, or result from material causes, -Sidney Smith, in his Principles of Phrenology, -1838, very clearly states as follows:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The existence of matter must be conceded, in an argument -which has for its object the proof that <em>there is -something besides</em>; and when that is admitted, the proof -<span class='pageno' id='Page_325'>325</span>rests with the skeptic, who conceives that the intervention -of some other principle is necessary to account for the -phenomena presented to our experience. The hidden -qualities of this substance must be detected, and its whole -attributes known, before we can be warranted in <em>assuming -the existence of something else</em> as necessary to the production -of what is presented to our consciousness. And -when such a principle as that of galvanism or electricity, -confessedly a property of matter, can be present in or absent -from a body, attract, repel, and move, without adding -to or subtracting from the weight, heat, size, color, -or any other quality of a corpuscle, it will require some -better species of logic than any hitherto presented to establish -the impossibility of mind being a certain form, -quality, or accessory of matter, inherent in and never separated -from it. We do not argue thus because we are -confident that there exists nothing but matter; for, in -truth our feeling is that the question is involved in too -much mystery to entitle us to speak with the boldness of -settled conviction on either side. But we assume this position, -because we think the burden of proof falls on the -spiritualists, and that they have not established the necessity -of inferring the existence of another entity besides -matter to account for all the phenomena of mind, -by having failed to exhaust all the possible qualities or -probable capacities of that substance which they labor so -assiduously to degrade and despise.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“But while they have altogether failed to establish -this necessity, whereon depends their entire proposition, -they have recourse to the usual expedients of unsuccessful -logicians, by exciting the ignorant prejudices of bigotry -and intolerance, against all that is dignified with the -name of dispassionate philosophy.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“The truth is, it is time that all this fudge and cant -about the doctrine of materialism, which affects the theory -of immortality in no shape whatever--as the God who -<span class='pageno' id='Page_326'>326</span>appointed the end could as easily ordain that the means -might be either through the medium of matter or spirit--should -be fairly put down by men of common sense and -metaphysical discrimination.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>On the same point, Mr. W. G. Moncrieff -says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Often do we hear the words, ‘Matter cannot think,’ -and the trumpet of orthodoxy summons us to attend.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“In our simplicity we have been led to reason thus: -Matter cannot think--God made man of the dust of the -ground--then of course man cannot think! He may -grow like a palm tree, but can reason no more than it. -Now this argumentation seems really valid, and yet every -human being in his senses laughs it to scorn. <em>I do -think</em>, is the protest of each child of humanity. Then if -you do, we respond, in your case, matter must perform -the function of reflection and kindred operations. More -than living organization you are not, and if you declare -living, organized matter incapable of thought, we are -bound to infer that you have no thought at all. Accepting -your premises, we must hand you the conclusion. The -logic is good, but we are generous enough to allow that -we cannot subscribe to it. It has often occurred to us as -a fair procedure, just for the sake of bringing orthodoxy -to a stand, to assert that spirit cannot think; of course, -we are only referring to created beings, on this occasion. -We have often tried to understand the popular idea of a -spirit; and we must confess that it defies our apprehension. -It is something, nothing; a substance, an essence; -everything by turns, and nothing long. To believe that -such a production could evolve thought, is an inordinate -demand on human credulity. How the expedient was resorted -to we cannot tell: was it because thought is invisible, -that this invisible parent was sought for it? Then -why not trace heat beyond the fire, perfume beyond the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_327'>327</span>rose, attraction beyond the sun, and vitality beyond the -branchy oak? Of all insane fancies, this popular idea of -the human spirit is the most complete; we have no wish -to give offense, but the truth must be spoken.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>We arraign this theory also before the majesty -of the brute creation. What about the immaterial -minds of the lower animals? Does matter -think in their cases? or have they also immortal -souls? Dogs, horses, monkeys, elephants, &c., -have been taught to perform different acts, imitate -various movements, and even to dance the -same tune over and over again, to accompanying -strains of music: acts which involve the exercise -of memory, will, reason, and judgment.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The exercise of high mental powers is shown -in the intelligence and sagacity of the horse and -elephant, in the manifold cunning of the fox, in -the beaver and bee, which construct their houses -with such mechanical ingenuity, in the mules of -the Andes, which thread with so sure a foot the -gloomy gorges and craggy <a id='corr327.22'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='hights'>heights</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_327.22'><ins class='correction' title='hights'>heights</ins></a></span> of the mountains, -and in the dogs of St. Bernard, as they -rescue benighted and half-frozen travelers in the -passes of the Alps. Hogg, the Ettrick Shepherd, -speaking of the sagacity of one of his dogs, -says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“He had never turned sheep in his life; but as soon -as he discovered that it was his duty to do so, and that it -obliged me, I can never forget with what anxiety and -eagerness he <em>learned</em> his different evolutions; he would -try every way, deliberately, till he found out what I -<span class='pageno' id='Page_328'>328</span>wanted him to do; and when once I made him <em>understand</em> -a direction, he never mistook or forgot it. Well as I -knew him, he often astonished me, for when hard pressed, -in accomplishing the task which was set him, he had expedients -of the moment that bespoke <em>a great share of the -reasoning faculty</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>John Locke, the distinguished writer on metaphysical -questions, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Birds’ learning of tunes, and the endeavors one may -observe in them to hit the notes right, put it past doubt -with me that they have perception, and retain ideas in -their <em>memories</em>, and use them for patterns.... It -seems as evident to me that they [brutes] <em>do reason as that -they have sense</em>.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Pritchard, On the Vital Principle, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Sensation is an attribute of the mind, and the possession -of mind certainly extends as far as its phenomena. -Whatever beings have conscious feeling, have, unless the -preceding arguments amount to nothing, souls, or immaterial -minds, distinct from the substance of which they -appear to us to be composed. <em>If all animals feel, all animals -have souls.</em>”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>H. H. Dobney, Future Punishment, p. 101, -says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“While consciousness, reason, and the sense of right -and wrong, are among the highest attributes of man, -these in a degree are allowed to be possessed by some at -least of the brute creation. Dr. Brown, according to his -biographer, Dr. Welsh, ‘believed that many of the lower -animals have the sense of right and wrong; and that the -metaphysical argument which proves the immortality of -man, extends with equal force to the other orders of -earthly existence.’”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_329'>329</span>Similar views are attributed to Coleridge and -Cudworth.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Dalton, in his treatise on Human Physiology, -p. 428, says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The possession of this kind of intelligence and reasoning -power, is not confined to the human species. We -have already seen that there are many instinctive actions -in man as well as in animals. It is no less true that, in -the higher animals, there is often <em>the same exercise of reasoning -power as in man</em>. The degree of this power is -much less in them than in him, <em>but its nature is the same</em>. -Whenever, in an animal, we see any action performed, -with the evident intention of accomplishing a particular -object, such an act is plainly the result of reasoning -power, not essentially different from our own.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“The establishment of sentinels by gregarious animals -to warn the herd of the approach of danger; the recollection -of punishment inflicted, for a particular action, -and the subsequent avoidance or concealment of that action; -the teachability of many animals, and their capacity -of forming new habits, or improving the old ones, are -instances of the same kind of intellectual power, and <em>are -quite different from instinct</em>, strictly speaking. It is this -faculty which especially predominates over the other in -the higher classes of animals, and which finally attains its -maximum of development in the human species.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>With these testimonies from such eminent -witnesses, we leave the friends of the rational -argument inextricably mixed up with the brute -creation. The legitimate result of their theory -is to confer immortality upon all orders of animated -existence. We are sometimes accused of -degrading man to the level of the brute. But if -<span class='pageno' id='Page_330'>330</span>our friends of the other side elevate all brutes up -to the level of man, how does that practically -differ from what they accuse us of doing? The -result is the same. If all come at last upon the -same level, it matters not whether brutes come -up or man goes down.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But our view is not open to this objection. -While we deny that immortality is proved for -either man or beast by any vital or mental powers -which they may exhibit, our theory finds a -superior position for man in his more refined -mental and physical organization, whereby he -becomes possessed of a higher mental and moral -nature, and is the proper recipient of the hope of -immortality.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Another fact on which it is supposed that an -argument for immortality can be founded is,</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The capacities of the soul.</em> The mind of man, -it is argued, by its wonderful achievements, and -its lofty aspirations, shows itself capable of some -higher and better state of being than we at present -enjoy. And from this the conclusion is easy -(if people will not stop to scan very critically -the connection) that such a state of being inevitably -awaits mankind, in which they are destined -to live forever.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But this argument, which, stripped of its disguise, -is simply an egotistical assertion, I am fit -to be a god, and therefore I am a god, will be -found to collapse under very slight pressure. Mr. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_331'>331</span>J. Panton Ham describes it in fitting terms, when -he speaks of it as follows:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“Because a man has skill and ability, is he therefore -immortal? We, in our ignorance and imperfection, would -exalt the intellectual above the moral. The former has -greater attractions for imperfect man than the latter. -Had we the peopling of paradise, we should fill it with the -world’s heroes in literature, science, and the arts. The -skillful are the world’s saints, and the proper candidates -for Heaven’s ‘many mansions.’ This argument, dispassionately -considered apart from the imposing parade of -human achievements, is just this: Man is <em>clever</em>, therefore -he is <em>immortal</em>. Here is neither logic nor religion. -The cleverness of man is surely no title to immortality, -much less is it the proof of its possession. It is a silly -logic which asserts human immortality from such strange -premises as balloons and pyramids, electro-telegraphs and -railways.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>But all men cannot engineer the construction -of a pyramid, nor construct a balloon, nor build -an engine, much less accomplish the greater feat -involved in their first invention. All men are -not learned and skillful, and of such eminent capabilities. -Is it not, in fact, almost an infinitely -small proportion of the human race that has -manifested those great powers on which this argument -is based! And can the capacities of a -few leading minds determine the destiny of the -great mass of men who possess no such powers?</p> - -<p class='c011'>And if an argument may be based on the capacities -of some, may not an equal and opposite -argument be based on the incapacity of others? -<span class='pageno' id='Page_332'>332</span>and in this case on which side would the weight -of evidence lie? And as there is almost every -conceivable gradation of intelligence, who will -tell us whereabouts in this scale the infinite endowment -of immortality is first perceptible? -Looking at the human race, and the races immediately -below, we behold a point where they -seem to blend indistinguishably into each other. -Will an utter lack of capacity be affirmed of the -higher orders of the brute creation? And descending -in the scale, where shall we stop? -Where is the transition from immortality to mortality?</p> - -<p class='c011'>We have given, in the preceding portion of this -chapter, extracts from eminent authors showing -that brutes reason, that they exercise, to a degree, -all the powers of the human mind, that they -have a sense, to some extent, of right and wrong, -and give evidence, of the same nature as man is -able to give in reference to himself, that they -possess just as immaterial a soul as he. And -have we not all seen horses and dogs that gave -evidence of possessing more good sense than -some men? And in this graduated scale of animated -existence, where is the dividing line between -the mortal and the immortal? Will some -one locate it? What degree of mental capacity -is necessary to constitute an evidence of immortality? -And here we leave this argument. It -demands no further notice till its friends who -<span class='pageno' id='Page_333'>333</span>base immortality on mental capacity will determine -which class of their less fortunate brothers -is so low as to be beyond its reach.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Universal belief and inborn desire.</em> Men -have universally believed in the immortality of -the soul, it is claimed, and all men desire it; -therefore, all men have it. Strange conclusion -from strange premises. As to the first part of -this argument, the universal belief, that appears -not to be true, in fact. On this, a glance at a -quotation or two must suffice. Whately (Essay -1 on a Future State) says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“We find Socrates and his disciples, represented by -Plato, as fully admitting in their discussions of the subject, -that ‘men in general were highly incredulous as to -the soul’s future existence.’ The Epicurean school openly -contended against it. Aristotle passes it by as not worth -considering, and takes for granted the contrary supposition, -as not needing proof.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Leland, on the Advantages of Revelation, -says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>When Cicero “sets himself to prove the immortality of -the soul, he represents the contrary as the prevailing opinion,” -there being “crowds of opponents, not the Epicureans -only; but, which he could not account for, those -that were the most learned persons, had that doctrine in -contempt.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>Touching the other portion of the argument, -the universal and inborn desire, those who make -use of it, to make it of any avail, are bound to -supply and prove the suppressed premise, which -<span class='pageno' id='Page_334'>334</span>is that all men have what they desire. The syllogism -would then stand thus: 1. All men have -what they desire. 2. All men desire immortality. -Conclusion. Therefore, all men are immortal. -This is a fair statement of the question; but are -any presumptuous enough to take the ground -that all men have what they desire? Is it true, -in fact? Do not our every-day’s observations -give it the unqualified lie? Men desire riches, -but do all possess them? they desire health, but -do all have it? they desire happiness here, but -what an infinitely small portion of the race are -really happy. To try to get over the matter by -saying that these desires that men have <em>may</em> be -gratified by their taking a right course, is an -abandonment of the whole argument; for thus -much we readily grant concerning immortality: -all men may gratify their desires here by taking -a right course; immortality also is suspended -upon conditions, and those only will have it in -whom those conditions are found to be scrupulously -complied with.</p> - -<p class='c011'>But there is another fatal flaw in this argument -in another respect; for it is not immortality -in the abstract that is the object of this great -desire among men, but <em>happiness</em>. And the very -persons who contend for immortality because -men desire it, hold that a great portion of the -race will be forever miserable. But this is not -what men desire; and not being what they desire, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_335'>335</span>it follows that all will not obtain what they -desire, and hence the argument built on desire is -good for nothing on their own showing. It simply -proves universal salvation, or that men will -be forever happy because all men desire it, or it -proves nothing.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The analogies of nature.</em> The day shuts down -in darkness, but is not forever lost; the morn returns -again, and the bright sun comes forth rejoicing -as a strong man to run a race. Nature is -bound, cold and lifeless, in the icy chains of winter; -but it is not lost in absolute death. Anon -the spring approaches, and at its animating voice -and warm breath, the pulse of life beats again -through all her works; her cold cheek kindles -with the glow of fresh vitality; and she comes -forth adorned with new beauty, waking new -songs of praise in every grove. The chrysalis, -too, that lay apparently a dead worm, motionless -and dry, soon wakes up to a higher life, and -comes forth gloriously arrayed, like a “living -blossom of the air,” sipping nectar from the -choicest sweets of earth, and nestling in the bosom -of its fairest flowers. And so, too, it is -claimed of man, “that when the body shall drop -as a withered calyx, the soul shall go forth like -a winged seed.”--<cite>Horticultural Address, by E. -H. Chapin.</cite></p> - -<p class='c011'>Let us take care that here our judgments are -not led captive by the fascinations of poetry, or -<span class='pageno' id='Page_336'>336</span>the rhetorical beauties of which this argument is -so eminently susceptible. Among the many instances -of nature, we find only a few that furnish -the analogies here presented. The chrysalis, -so often referred to, after it has spent its brief -day as a living butterfly, perishes and is heard -of no more forever. So with all the higher order -of brutes: they fall in death and make no more -their appearance upon our path. The most, -then, that can be drawn from this argument, is -a faint foreshadowing, perhaps, of a future life. -But here, let it be understood, there is no issue. -We all agree that the race shall be called again -to life. “As in Adam all die, so in Christ shall -all be made alive.” 1 Cor. 15:22. But the -point at issue is, Are our souls immortal, and -must this life be, to all our race, necessarily eternal? -To prove that man will live again is one -thing; to prove that that life will be eternal, is -quite another.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>The anomalies of the present state.</em> How often -do we here see the wicked spreading himself like -a green bay tree, having more than heart could -wish, while the righteous grope their way along, -in trouble and want. The wicked are exalted, -and the good are oppressed. This does not look -like the arrangement of a God who is the patron -of virtue and the enemy of vice. It is therefore -argued that there will be another state in which -all these wrongs shall be righted, virtue rewarded, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_337'>337</span>and wickedness punished. Yes, we reply, there -will. But, certainly, a space of time infinitely -short of eternity would suffice to correct all the -anomalies of this brief life, which so puzzle men -here. This argument, like the former, may be a -fair inference for a future state; it may portend -to the ungodly a scene of retribution, but can -prove nothing as to its duration.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Immortality assumed.</em> We are told that the -Bible assumes the immortality of the soul as a -truth so evident that it is not necessary to expressly -affirm it. This is why the doctrine has -come to be so generally received against so explicit -evidence against it. <em>It has been taken for -granted!</em> Says Bishop Tillotson:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The immortality of the soul is rather supposed, or -taken for granted, than expressly revealed in the Bible.”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>“It is taken for granted” that immortality is -an essential attribute of the soul, and that therefore -for the Bible to affirm it would be mere tautology. -But we reply, Is not immortality an essential -attribute also of Jehovah? Yet the Bible -has been tautological enough to plainly state this -fact. And it would seem that it might have carried -its “tautology” a little further, and told us -as much, at least <em>once</em>, about the soul, if that too -is immortal; for surely its immortality cannot be -<em>more</em> essential than that of Jehovah.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Annihilation impossible.</em> Nature everywhere -revolts, we are told, against our doctrine of annihilation, -<span class='pageno' id='Page_338'>338</span>and everywhere proves it false; for -nothing ever has been, nor ever can be, annihilated. -To which we reply, Very true; and here -we would correct the impression which some -seem to entertain, that we believe in any such -annihilation of the wicked; or the annihilation -of anything as matter. In reference to the -wicked, we simply affirm that they will be <a id='corr338.9'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='annilated'>annihilated</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_338.9'><ins class='correction' title='annilated'>annihilated</ins></a></span> -as living beings, the matter of which they -are composed passing into other forms. The second -definition of annihilate, according to Webster, -is, “To destroy the form or the peculiar distinctive -properties, so that the specific thing no longer -exists; as, to <em>annihilate</em> a forest by cutting and -carrying away the trees, though the timber may -still exist; to <em>annihilate</em> a house by demolishing -the structure.” Just so of the wicked: as conscious -intelligent beings they are annihilated, being -resolved into their original elements.</p> - -<p class='c011'><em>Evil tendency.</em> Why promulgate the doctrine -of the destruction of the wicked, it is asked, even -if it be true? Will not evil rather than good result -from it? Some, honestly no doubt, deprecate -any agitation of this question; and we have -even heard some, impelled either by their fears or -their prejudices, go so far as to declare that “it -will make more infidels than Tom Paine’s Age of -Reason,” and that “no conversions to God will -ever follow in the track of its blighting and soul-destroying -influence.”</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_339'>339</span>It might be necessary first to inquire what idea -these persons have of infidelity. Perhaps they -apply that term to everything that is not in -agreement with their own views. And if this is -the standard by which they judge of this matter, -their assertion may possibly be in part correct; -for converts to this doctrine are multiplying at a -rapid rate. But giving to infidelity its legitimate -definition, we call upon all those who claim that -this doctrine makes infidels, to give some proof -of their assertion before they again repeat it. -This matter can be easily tested. The friends -and advocates of this doctrine are neither few -nor obscure. Men from all the walks of life, public -and private, are daily swelling the ranks; and -if this doctrine makes infidels, the infidels of our -day should be found among those who receive it. -But do we find them there? If one solitary individual -can be found who repudiates the Scriptures -as the revealed will of God, because he has -been made to believe that they do not teach -eternal misery for the lost, we would be glad to -see him, or even to learn of him. This is not -what causes infidelity, it is what cures it. What -do we find in the ranks of the friends of this doctrine? -Not the criminal and vicious classes, not -those who have thrown off all restraint, not rejecters -of divine revelation; but we find those -who were formerly skeptics rescued from their -skepticism, and infidels recovered from their infidelity. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_340'>340</span>We find multitudes who can now rest -down with sweet assurance on the word of God, -the perplexities with which they had been troubled -respecting God’s dealings with his creatures -all cleared from the mind, and whose feelings -may be well expressed in the following language -from Henry Constable, A. M.:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“For myself, I cannot express my sense of the value I -place on the view I now seek to impress on others. It -has for me thrown a light on God’s character, and God’s -word, and the future of his world, which I once thought -I should never have seen on this side of the grave. It -has not removed the wholesome and necessary terrors of -the Lord from the mind, but it has clothed God with a -loveliness which makes him, and the eternal Son who represents -him to man, incalculably more attractive. I am -no longer looking for shifts to excuse his conduct in my -own eyes and those of others, and forced to feel that here -at least I could never find one to answer my object. I -can look at all he has done, and all he tells me he will -hereafter do, and, scanning it closely, and examining it -even where it has most of awe and severity, exclaim with -all my heart and with all my understanding--‘Just and -true are thy ways, thou King of saints.’”</p> - -</div> - -<p class='c011'>These are among its general good effects. But -there exists a special reason at the present time -why men should be made acquainted with the -true teachings of the Bible on this question. It -is the only antidote against modern spiritualism, -that master-piece of Satanic cunning and deception, -and the climax of his corrupting work in -the earth. In what horrid blasphemies has this -<span class='pageno' id='Page_341'>341</span>delusion arrayed itself! To what corruption -does it lead its votaries! How utterly it debauches -the moral natures of all those who suffer -themselves to receive its polluting touch! And -notwithstanding it carries in its train all these -terrible evils, how rapidly is it spreading through -the land, and at what a fearful rate is it swelling -the catalogue of its victims!</p> - -<p class='c011'>Why is this? It is because the way has long -and thoroughly been prepared for it in the doctrine -of the conscious state of the dead, and the -immortality of the soul. This is its foundation, -its life and spirit. Take away this, and it is robbed -of its vitality. For if it be true, as the Bible -declares, that when a man goes into the grave, -his thoughts perish, his love and hatred and envy -are no longer exercised, and he knows not anything, -then whatever spirit comes to us from the -unseen world, professing to be the spirit of a dead -man, it comes with a lie in its mouth, and thus -shows itself to be of the synagogue of Satan. This -is the Ithuriel spear that transforms this lying -system, which at its best showing is as low and -ugly as the blotchiest toad that ever lived, into -the real devil that it is. Then let this truth be -spread abroad on all the wings of the wind, that -in the hands of the people may be placed some -safeguard against this ghastly embodiment of -falsehood, pollution, and death.</p> - -<p class='c011'>With the truth clearly stated as to how God -<span class='pageno' id='Page_342'>342</span>will deal with the sinner and finally dispose of -sin, we can appeal with confidence to the calm -reason and the better nature of every child of -Adam. We can second the tender entreaty which -God extends to every wayward soul, “Turn ye, -turn ye, for why will ye die?” “As I live, saith -the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of -the wicked, but that he turn from his way and -live.” Life and death are set before you. The -Saviour bids you look unto him and live. Mercy -entreats you to destroy not yourself. The spirit -and the bride bid you come and partake of the -water of life freely.</p> - -<p class='c011'>You can no longer take refuge from an awakened -conscience under the idea that the threatenings -of the Lord are not understood, and may not -therefore be so terrific as supposed. The sinner’s -doom is unmistakably declared; and in the justness -of that sentence, however slightly you may -now realize the heinousness and just desert of -sin, your own reason can but heartily concur. -Will you then plunge headlong to ruin? or will -you turn and accept the immense gratuity of -eternal life? Of course you do not <em>mean</em> to perish. -We accuse you not of this. The shining -form of Hope is dancing on before you in the path -of life--hope that ere it is too late, ere the silver -cord be loosed or ever the golden bowl be broken, -you will make sure a treasure and inheritance in -Heaven.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_343'>343</span>We would impress upon your mind that this -hope <em>may</em> deceive you. Ere you reach the delusive -phantom, the earth may suddenly open beneath -your feet, and Hades receive you to its -fixed embrace. Ere you overtake the beckoning -form, ere the good intention be carried out, ere -you grasp the prize now held only by the uncertain -tenure of good resolve, the glory of the coming -Judge, descending through the parting and -dissolving heavens, may suddenly burst upon -your unprepared soul. Yes! the great voice -from the temple of Heaven, crying, “It is finished!” -may suddenly arrest you in the midst of -your delaying and dallying career! The heavenly -court of mercy may cease its sitting, ere you -have made a friend of the great Advocate who -alone can plead your cause!</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Procrastination is the thief of time.” It may -be the thief of your eternal bliss. Its every moment -is high-handed and insane presumption. Its -path is a path of unseen and innumerable dangers. -You have no lease of your life. The present state -is one of exposure and peril. The shafts of death -are flying thickly about you. Time is short and -its sands are swiftly falling. The bliss of Heaven, -or the blackness of darkness forever, will soon be -yours. With the saved or lost you must soon -take your position. There is no intermediate -ground. Choose, then, we beseech you, the enduring -portion. Choose for eternity, choose -<span class='pageno' id='Page_344'>344</span>wisely, choose <em>now</em>. And may it be ours to join -the great song of salvation at last, ascribing blessing, -and honor, and glory, and power, unto Him -who sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb -who poured out his soul an offering for sin, that -whosoever would believe on him might not perish -but have everlasting life.</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c019'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>Worthy the Lamb once slain! So shall at last</div> - <div class='line in2'>All beings sing in Heaven and earth and sea,</div> - <div class='line'>The direful reign of sin forever past,</div> - <div class='line in2'>Before them, bliss whose end shall never be.</div> - </div> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>Worthy the Lamb! his life has saved from death,</div> - <div class='line in2'>Through him alone the immortal boon is given,</div> - <div class='line'>So shall each bounding pulse, each joyful breath,</div> - <div class='line in2'>Ascribe to him the bliss and power of Heaven.</div> - </div> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>Welcome, life-giving hour, expected long!</div> - <div class='line in2'>Dawn on these regions peopled with the dead.</div> - <div class='line'>Our hearts leap forward to begin the song</div> - <div class='line in2'>Of a glad universe whence sin has fled.</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='figcenter id002'> -<img src='images/i_0344.jpg' alt='' class='ig001' /> -</div> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_345'>345</span> - <h2 class='c008'>APPENDIX. <br /> <span class='fss'>MORALITY OF THE DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE LIFE.</span></h2> -</div> - -<p class='c010'>The following is from “The Doctrine of a Future -Life,” by W. R. Alger. He here discusses -the “morality of the doctrine of a future life” on -the strong hypothesis that there is to be no existence -hereafter, and utterly disproves the conclusions -which some would make the inevitable consequence -of such a doctrine. The same objections -are urged against the view we entertain that -after the Judgment the sinner is to endure a punishment -which reaches its climax in the loss of -existence. With a hundred-fold more force the -reasoning of Mr. Alger lies against these objections -when urged in opposition to our view. We -have in this life the great incentive to goodness -and virtue, that is involved in the hope of immortality, -seconded by the wonderful intervention -of Christ in our behalf, which is calculated -to arouse all the nobler sentiments of our being. -If this will not win men from sin to a holy life, -they would not be driven to it by threats of eternal -torture. Mr. Alger says:--</p> - -<div class='quote'> - -<p class='c011'>“The morality of the doctrine of a future life having -thus been defended from the attacks of those who have -sought to destroy it in the fancied interests either of the -enjoyments of the earth, or of the purity of virtue and -<span class='pageno' id='Page_346'>346</span>religion, it now remains to free it from the still more fatal -supports which false or superficial religionists have -sought to give it by wrenching out of it meanings it never -held, by various perverse abuses of it, by monstrous exaggerations -of its moral importance to the present. We -have seen that the supposition of another life, correctly -interpreted, lays no new duty upon man, takes away from -him no old duty or privilege, but simply gives to the previously-existing -facts of the case the intensifying glory -and strength of fresh light, motive, and consolation. But -many public teachers, not content to treat the subject -with this sobriety of reason, instead of presenting the -careful conclusions of a conscientious analysis, have sought -to strengthen their argument to the feelings by help of -prodigious assumptions, assumptions hastily adopted, -highly colored, and authoritatively urged. Upon the hypothesis -that annihilation is the fate of man, they are not -satisfied merely to take away from the present all the additional -light, incentive, and comfort, imparted by the -faith in a future existence, but they arbitrarily remove -all the alleviations and glories intrinsically belonging to -the scene, and paint it in the most horrible hues, and set -it in a frame of midnight. Thus, instead of calmly seeking -to elicit and recommend truth, they strive, by terrifying -the fancy and shocking the prejudices, to make people -accept their dogma because frightened at the seeming -consequences of rejecting it. It is necessary to expose -the fearful fallacies which have been employed in this -way, and which are yet extensively used for the same -purpose.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Even a Christian writer usually so judicious as Andrews -Norton has said: ‘Without the belief in personal -immortality there can be no religion; for what can any -truths of religion concern the feelings and the conduct of -beings whose existence is limited to a few years in this -world?’ Such a statement from such a quarter is astonishing. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_347'>347</span>Surely the sentiments natural to a person or incumbent -upon him do not depend on the <em>duration</em> of his -being, but on the character, endowments, and relations -of his being. The hypothetical fact that man perishes -with his body does not destroy God, does not destroy -man’s dependence on God for all his privileges, does not -annihilate the overwhelming magnificence of the universe, -does not alter the native sovereignty of holiness, -does not quench our living reason, imagination, or sensibility, -while they last. The soul’s gratitude, wonder, -love, and worship, are just as right and instinctive as before. -If our experience on earth, before the phenomena -of the visible creation and in conscious communion with -the emblemed attributes of God, does not cause us to -kneel in humility and to adore in awe, then it may be -doubted if Heaven or hell will ever persuade us to any -sincerity in such acts. The simple prolongation of our -being does not add to its qualitative contents, cannot increase -the kinds of our capacity or the number of our duties. -Chalmers utters an injurious error in saying as he -does, ‘If there be no future life, the moral constitution -of man is stripped of its significancy, and the Author of -that constitution is stripped of his wisdom, and authority -and honor.’ The creative Sovereign of fifty million -firmaments of worlds, ‘stripped of his wisdom and authority -and honor,’ because a few insects on a little speck -are not eternal! Can egotistic folly any further go? -The affirmation or denial of immortality neither adds to -nor diminishes the numerical relations and ingredients of -our nature and experience. If religion is fitted for us on -the former supposition, it is also on the latter. To any -dependent intelligence blessed with our human susceptibilities, -reverential love and submission are as obligatory, -natural and becoming on the brink of annihilation as on -the verge of immortality. Rebellious egotism makes all -the difference. Truth is truth, whatever it be. Religion -<span class='pageno' id='Page_348'>348</span>is the meek submission of self-will to God’s will. That -is a duty not to be escaped, no matter what the future reserves -or excludes for us.</p> - -<p class='c020'>“Another sophism almost universally accepted needs to -be shown. Man, it is said, has no interest in a future -life if not conscious in it of the past. If, on exchange of -worlds, man loses his memory, he virtually ceases to exist, -and might just as well be annihilated. A future life -with perfect oblivion of the present is no life at all for us. -Is not this style of thought the most provincial egotism, -the utter absence of all generous thought and sympathy unselfishly -grasping the absolute boons of being? It is a shallow -error, too, even on the grounds of selfishness itself. In -any point of view the difference is diametric and immense -between a happy being in an eternal present, unconscious -of the past, and no being at all. Suppose a man thirty -years of age were offered his choice to die this moment, -or to live fifty years longer of unalloyed success and happiness, -only with a complete forgetfulness of all that has -happened up to this moment. He would not hesitate to -grasp the gift, however much he regretted the condition.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“It has often been argued that with the denial of a retributive -life beyond the grave all restraints are taken off -from the passions, free course given to every impulse. -Chateaubriand says bluntly, ‘There can be no morality if -there be no future state.’ With displeasing coarseness, -and with most reprehensible recklessness of reasoning, -Luther says, in contradiction to the essential nobleness -of his loving, heroic nature, ‘If you believe in no future -life, I would not give a mushroom for your God. Do, -then, as you like. For if no God, so no devil, no hell: -as with a fallen tree, all is over when you die. Then -plunge into lechery, rascality, robbery, and murder.’ -What bible of Moloch had he been studying to form, for -the time, so horrid a theory of the happiest life, and to -<span class='pageno' id='Page_349'>349</span>put so degrading an estimate upon human nature? Is -man’s will a starved wolf, only held back by the triple -chain of fear of death, Satan, and hell, from tearing -forth with ravenous bounds to flesh the fangs of his desires -in bleeding virtue and innocence? Does the greatest -satisfaction man is capable of here, the highest blessedness -he can attain to, consist in drunkenness, gluttony, -dishonesty, violence, and impiety? If he had the -appetite of a tiger or a vulture,--then, thus to wallow in -the offal of vice, dive into the carrion of sensuality, abandon -himself to reveling in <a id='corr349.11'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='carniverous'>carnivorous</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_349.11'><ins class='correction' title='carniverous'>carnivorous</ins></a></span> crime, might be -his instinct and his happiness. But by virtue of his humanity -man loves his fellows, enjoys the scenery of nature, -takes delight in thought and art, dilates with grand -presentiments of glory and eternity, mysteriously yearns -after the hidden God. To a reasonable man--and no -other is to be reasoned with on matters of truth and interest--the -assumption of this brief season as all, will be -a double motive not to hasten and imbitter its brevity by -folly, excess, and sin. If you are to be dead to-morrow, -for that very reason, in God’s name, do not, by gormandizing -and guzzling, anticipate death to-day! The true -restraint from wrong and degradation is not a crouching -conscience of superstition and selfishness, fancying a -chasm of fire, but a high-toned conscience of reason and -honor, perceiving that they <em>are</em> wrong and degradation, -and spontaneously loathing them.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Still worse, many esteemed authors have not hesitated -to assert that unless there be a future life there is not -only no check on passion within, but no moral law without: -every man is free to do what he pleases, without -blame or fault. Sir Kenelm Digby says, in his ‘Treatise -on Man’s Soule,’ that ‘to predicate mortality in the -soule taketh away all morality, and changeth men into -beastes, by removing the ground of all difference in those -thinges which are to governe our actions.’ This style of -<span class='pageno' id='Page_350'>350</span>teaching is a very mischievous absurdity. Admit, for a -moment, that Jocko in the woods of Brazil, and Schiller -in the brilliant circles of Weimar, will at last meet the -same fate in the dusty grasp of death; yet, while they -live, one is an ape, the other is a man. And the differences -of capacity and of duty are numberless and immense. -The statement is enough: argument would be -ridiculous. The words of an audacious French preacher -are yet more shocking than those of the English nobleman. -It is hard to believe they could be uttered in good -faith. Says Massillon, in his famous declamation on immortality, -‘If we wholly perish with the body, the maxims -of charity, patience, justice, honor, gratitude, and -friendship, are but empty words. Our own passions -shall decide our duty. If retribution terminate with the -grave, morality is a mere chimera, a bugbear of human -invention.’ What debauched unbeliever ever inculcated -a viler or a more fatal doctrine? Its utter baselessness, -as a single illustration may show, is obvious at a glance. -As the sciences of algebra and geometry, the relations of -numbers and bodies, are true for the material world although -they may be lost sight of when time and space are -transcended in some higher state, so the science of ethics, -the relations of nobler and baser, of right and wrong, the -manifold grades and qualities of actions and motives, are -true for human nature and experience in this life even if -men perish in the grave. However soon certain facts are -to end, while they endure they are as they are. In a -moment of carelessness, by some strange slip of the -mind,--showing, perhaps, how tenaciously rooted are the -common prejudice and falsehood on this subject,--even -so bold and fresh a thinker as Theodore Parker has contradicted -his own philosophy by declaring, ‘If to-morrow -I perish utterly, then my fathers will be to me only as the -ground out of which my bread-corn is grown. I shall -care nothing for the generations of mankind. I shall -<span class='pageno' id='Page_351'>351</span>know no higher law than passion. Morality will vanish.’ -Ah, man reveres his fathers, and loves to act nobly, not -because he is to live forever, but because he is a man. -And, though all the summer hopes of escaping the grave -were taken from human life, choicest and tenderest virtues -might still flourish, as it is said the German cross-bill -pairs and broods in the dead of winter. The martyr’s -sacrifice and the voluptuary’s indulgence are very different -things to-day, if they do both cease to-morrow. No -speed of advancing destruction can equalize Agamemnon -and Thersites, Mansfield and Jeffries, or hustle together -justice and fraud, cowardice and valor, purity and corruption, -so that they will interchange qualities. There -is an eternal and immutable morality, as whiteness is -white, and blackness is black, and triangularity is triangular. -And no severance of temporal ties or compression -of spatial limits can ever cut the condign bonds of duty -and annihilate the essential distinctions of good and evil, -magnanimity and meanness, faithfulness and treachery.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Reducing our destiny from endless to definite cannot -alter the inherent rightfulness and superiority of the -claims of virtue. The most it can do is to lessen the -strength of the motive, to give the great motor-nerve of -our moral life a perceptible stroke of palsy. In reference -to the question, Can ephemera have a moral law? Richter -reasons as follows: ‘Suppose a statue besouled for -two days. If on the first day you should shatter it, and -thus rob it of one day’s life, would you be guilty of murder? -One can injure only an immortal.’ The sophistry -appears when we rectify the conclusion thus: one can inflict -an <em>immortal</em> injury only on an immortal being. In -fact, it would appear to be a greater wrong and injury, -for the time, to destroy one day’s life of a man whose entire -existence was confined to two days, than it would be -to take away the same period from the bodily existence -of one who immediately thereupon passes into a more exalted -<span class='pageno' id='Page_352'>352</span>and eternal life. To the sufferer, the former would -seem an immitigable calamity, the latter a benign furtherance; -while, in the agent, the overt act is the same. -This general moral problem has been more accurately answered -by Isaac Taylor, whose lucid statement is as follows: -‘The creatures of a summer’s day might be imagined, -when they stand upon the threshold of their term -of existence, to make inquiry concerning the attributes of -the Creator and the rules of his government; for these -are to be the law of their season of life and the measure -of their enjoyments. The sons of immortality would put -the same questions with an intensity the greater from the -greater stake.’</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Practically, the acknowledged authority of the moral -law in human society cannot be destroyed. Its influence -may be unlimitedly weakened, its basis variously altered, -but as a confessed sovereign principle it cannot be -expelled. The denial of the freedom of the will theoretically -explodes it; but social custom, law, and opinion -will enforce it still. Make man a mere dissoluble mixture -of carbon and magnetism, yet so long as he can distinguish -right and wrong, good and evil, love and hate, and, -unsophisticated by dialectics, can follow either of opposite -courses of action, the moral law exists and exerts its -sway. It has been asked, ‘If the incendiary be, like the -fire he kindles, a result of material combinations, shall he -not be treated in the same way?’ We should reply thus: -No matter what man springs from or consists of, if he -has moral ideas, performs moral actions, and is susceptible -of moral motives, then he is morally responsible; for -all practical and disciplinary purposes he is wholly removed -from the categories of physical science.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Another pernicious misrepresentation of the fair consequences -of the denial of a life hereafter is shown in the -frequent declaration that then there would be no motive -to any thing good and great. The incentives which animate -<span class='pageno' id='Page_353'>353</span>men to strenuous services, perilous virtues, disinterested -enterprises, spiritual culture, would cease to operate. -The essential life of all moral motives would be -killed. This view is to be met by a broad and indignant -denial based on an appeal to human consciousness and to -the reason of the thing. Every man knows by experience -that there are a multitude of powerful motives, entirely -disconnected with future reward or punishment, -causing him to resist evil and to do good even with self-sacrificing -toil and danger. When the fireman risks his -life to save a child from the flames of a tumbling house, -is the hope of Heaven his motive? When the soldier -spurns an offered bribe and will not betray his comrades -nor desert his post, is the fear of hell all that animates -him? A million such decisive specifications might be -made. The renowned sentence of Cicero, “<span lang="la" xml:lang="la"><em>Nemo unquam -sine magna spe immortalitatis se pro patria offerret -ad mortem</em></span>,” is effective eloquence; but it is a baseless libel -against humanity and the truth. In every moment -of supreme nobleness and sacrifice, personality vanishes. -Thousands of patriots, philosophers, saints, have been -glad to die for the freedom of native land, the cause of -truth, the welfare of fellow-men, without a taint of selfish -reward touching their wills. Are there not souls</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c019'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>‘To whom dishonor’s shadow is a substance</div> - <div class='line'>More terrible than death here and hereafter.’</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c020'>He must be the basest of men who would decline to do -any sublime act of virtue because he did not expect to -enjoy the consequences of it eternally. Is there no motive -for the preservation of health because it cannot be -an everlasting possession? Since we cannot eat sweet -and wholesome food forever, shall we therefore at once -saturate our stomachs with nauseating poisons?</p> - -<p class='c011'>“If all experienced good and evil wholly terminate for -us when we die, still, every intrinsic reason which, on the -<span class='pageno' id='Page_354'>354</span>supposition of immortality, makes wisdom better than -folly, industry better than sloth, righteousness better -than iniquity, benevolence and purity better than hatred -and corruption, also makes them equally preferable while -they last. Even if the philosopher and the idiot, the religious -philanthropist and the brutal pirate, did die alike, -who would not rather live like the sage and the saint than -like the fool and the felon? Shall Heaven be held before -man simply as a piece of meat before a hungry dog -to make him jump well? It is a shocking perversion of -the grandest doctrine of faith. Let the theory of annihilation -assume its direst phase, still, our perception of -principles, our consciousness of sentiments, our sense of -moral loyalty, are not dissolved, but will hold us firmly -to every noble duty until we ourselves flow into the dissolving -abyss. But some one may say, ‘If I have fought -with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me if the -dead rise not?’ It advantageth you everything <em>until you -are dead</em>, although there be nothing afterwards. As long -as you live is it not glory and reward enough <em>to have conquered</em> -the beasts at Ephesus? This is sufficient reply to -the unbelieving flouters at the moral law. And, as an unanswerable -refutation of the feeble whine of sentimentality -that without immortal endurance nothing is worthy -our affection, let great Shakespeare advance, with his -matchless depth of bold insight reversing the conclusion, -and pronouncing, in tones of cordial solidity,--</p> - -<div class='lg-container-b c019'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>‘This, thou perceivest, will make thy love more strong,</div> - <div class='line'>To love that well which thou must leave ere long.’</div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c020'>“What though Decay’s shapeless hand extinguish us? -Its foreflung and enervating shadow shall neither transform -us into devils nor degrade us into beasts.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“The future life, outside of the realm of faith, to an -earnest and independent inquirer, and considered as a -scientific question, lies in a painted mist of uncertainty. -<span class='pageno' id='Page_355'>355</span>There is room for hope, and there is room for doubt. -The wavering evidences in some moods preponderate on -that side, in other moods, on this side. Meanwhile it is -clear that, while he lives here, the best thing he can do is -to cherish a devout spirit, cultivate a noble character, -lead a pure and useful life in the service of wisdom, humanity, -and God, and finally, when the appointed time -arrives, meet the issue with reverential and affectionate -conformity, without dictating terms. Let the vanishing -man say, like Ruckert’s dying flower, ‘Thanks to-day for -all the favors I have received from sun and stream and -earth and sky,--for all the gifts from men and God which -have made my little life an ornament and a bliss. Heaven, -stretch out thine azure tent while my faded one is sinking -here. Joyous spring-tide, roll on through ages yet -to come, in which fresh generations shall rise and be glad. -Farewell all! Content to have had my turn, I now fall -asleep, without a murmur or a sigh.’ Surely the mournful -nobility of such a strain of sentiment is preferable by -much to the selfish terror of that unquestioning belief -which in the Middle Age depicted the chase of the soul -by Satan, on the columns and doors of the churches, under -the symbol of a deer pursued by a hunter and hounds; -and which has in later times produced in thousands the -feeling thus terribly expressed by Bunyan, ‘I blessed the -condition of the dog and toad because they had no soul -to perish under the everlasting weight of hell!’</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Sight of truth, with devout and loving submission to -it, is an achievement whose nobleness outweighs its sorrow, -even if the gazer foresee his own destruction.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“It is not our intention in these words to cast doubt -on the immortality of the soul, or to depreciate the value -of a belief in it. We desire to vindicate morality and religion -from the unwitting attacks made on them by many -self-styled Christian writers in their exaggeration of the -practical importance of such a faith. The qualitative -<span class='pageno' id='Page_356'>356</span>contents of human nature have nothing to do with its -quantitative contents: our duties rest not on the length, -but on the faculties and relations, of our existence. Make -the life of a dog endless, he has only the capacity of a -dog; make the life of a man finite, still, within its limits, -he has the psychological functions of humanity. Faith in -immortality may enlarge and intensify the motives to prudent -and noble conduct; it does not create new ones. -The denial of immortality may pale and contract those -motives; it does not take them away.</p> - -<p class='c011'>“Knowing the burden and sorrow of earth, brooding -in dim solicitude over the far times and men yet to be, -we cannot recklessly utter a word calculated to lessen the -hopes of man, pathetic creature, who weeps into the -world and faints out of it. It is our faith--not knowledge--that -the spirit is without terminus or rest. The -faithful truth-hunter, in dying, finds not a covert, but a -better trail. Yet the saintliness of the intellect is to be -purged from prejudice and self-will. With God we are -not to prescribe conditions. The thought that all high -virtue and piety must die with the abandonment of belief -in immortality is as pernicious and dangerous as it is -shallow, vulgar, and unchristian. The view is obviously -gaining prevalence among scientific and philosophical -thinkers, that life is the specialization of the universal in -the individual, death the restoration of the individual to -the whole. This doubt as to a personal future life will -unquestionably increase. Let traditional teachers beware -how they venture to shift the moral law from its immutable -basis in the will of God to a precarious poise on the -selfish hope and fear of man. The sole safety, the ultimate -desideratum, is perception of law with disinterested -conformity.”--<cite>Doctrine of a Future Life</cite>, pp. 652-661.</p> - -</div> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_357'>357</span> - <h2 class='c008'>INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED.</h2> -</div> - -<ul class='index c022'> - <li class='c023'>Alger, W. R., <a href='#Page_264'>264</a>, <a href='#Page_345'>345</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Alleine, Jos., <a href='#Page_257'>257</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Andrews, S. J., <a href='#Page_140'>140</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Augustine, <a href='#Page_273'>273</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Baptist Confession, <a href='#Page_219'>219</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Barnes, A., <a href='#Page_117'>117</a>, <a href='#Page_317'>317</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Benson, <a href='#Page_302'>302</a>, <a href='#Page_303'>303</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Bloomfield, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a>, <a href='#Page_147'>147</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Buck, Chas., <a href='#Page_47'>47</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Bush, Geo., <a href='#Page_43'>43</a>, <a href='#Page_101'>101</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Butler, Wm. A., <a href='#Page_314'>314</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Carmichael, A., <a href='#Page_233'>233</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Chaldee Paraphrase, <a href='#Page_76'>76</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Chapin, E. H., <a href='#Page_335'>335</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Cicero, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a>, <a href='#Page_273'>273</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Clarke, A., <a href='#Page_32'>32</a>, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a>, <a href='#Page_43'>43</a>, <a href='#Page_86'>86</a>, <a href='#Page_90'>90</a>, <a href='#Page_140'>140</a>, <a href='#Page_167'>167</a>, <a href='#Page_257'>257</a>, <a href='#Page_295'>295</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Conant, T. J., <a href='#Page_32'>32</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Constable, H., <a href='#Page_303'>303</a>, <a href='#Page_340'>340</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Crellius, J., <a href='#Page_206'>206</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Cruden, <a href='#Page_294'>294</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Dalton, <a href='#Page_328'>328</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Dobney, H. H., <a href='#Page_8'>8</a>, <a href='#Page_263'>263</a>, <a href='#Page_328'>328</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Douay Bible, <a href='#Page_76'>76</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Eusebius, <a href='#Page_285'>285</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Gesenius, <a href='#Page_51'>51</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Greenfield, <a href='#Page_283'>283</a>, <a href='#Page_292'>292</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Ham, J. P., <a href='#Page_331'>331</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Hobbs, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Hogg, James, <a href='#Page_327'>327</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Homer, <a href='#Page_285'>285</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Hudson, C. F., <a href='#Page_278'>278</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Kitto, <a href='#Page_41'>41</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Landis, R. W., <a href='#Page_45'>45</a>, <a href='#Page_58'>58</a>, <a href='#Page_59'>59</a>, <a href='#Page_61'>61</a>, <a href='#Page_64'>64</a>, <a href='#Page_73'>73</a>, <a href='#Page_77'>77</a>, <a href='#Page_89'>89</a>, <a href='#Page_94'>94</a>, <a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_122'>122</a>, <a href='#Page_162'>162</a>, <a href='#Page_170'>170</a>, <a href='#Page_172'>172</a>, <a href='#Page_175'>175</a>, <a href='#Page_203'>203</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Law, Bishop, <a href='#Page_205'>205</a>, <a href='#Page_242'>242</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Lee, Luther, <a href='#Page_101'>101</a>, <a href='#Page_140'>140</a>, <a href='#Page_210'>210</a>, <a href='#Page_274'>274</a>, <a href='#Page_323'>323</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Leeland, <a href='#Page_333'>333</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Liddell & Scott, <a href='#Page_292'>292</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Locke, John, <a href='#Page_228'>228</a>, <a href='#Page_328'>328</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Longfellow, <a href='#Page_224'>224</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Luther, <a href='#Page_76'>76</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Mattison, H., <a href='#Page_36'>36</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Moncrieff, W. G., <a href='#Page_326'>326</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Muller, Dr., <a href='#Page_233'>233</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Newton, Bp., <a href='#Page_318'>318</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Olshausen, <a href='#Page_49'>49</a>, <a href='#Page_321'>321</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Parkhurst, <a href='#Page_51'>51</a>, <a href='#Page_53'>53</a>, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a>, <a href='#Page_293'>293</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Priestly, Dr., <a href='#Page_206'>206</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Pritchard, <a href='#Page_328'>328</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Robinson, <a href='#Page_53'>53</a>, <a href='#Page_293'>293</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Saurin, <a href='#Page_317'>317</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Scott, Thos., <a href='#Page_32'>32</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Schrevelius, <a href='#Page_292'>292</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Schleusner, <a href='#Page_293'>293</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Seneca, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Septuagint, <a href='#Page_76'>76</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Socrates, <a href='#Page_9'>9</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Smith, Sidney, <a href='#Page_324'>324</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Smith, Wm., <a href='#Page_49'>49</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Stuart, Moses, <a href='#Page_8'>8</a>, <a href='#Page_296'>296</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Syriac Version, <a href='#Page_76'>76</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Taylor, I., <a href='#Page_319'>319</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Taylor, Dr. J., <a href='#Page_51'>51</a>, <a href='#Page_229'>229</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Tillotson, Bp., <a href='#Page_337'>337</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Trench, <a href='#Page_167'>167</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Tyndale, Wm., <a href='#Page_233'>233</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Vincent, Thos., <a href='#Page_301'>301</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Wahl, <a href='#Page_294'>294</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Wakefield, <a href='#Page_147'>147</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Warburton, Bp., <a href='#Page_324'>324</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Watson, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Watts, Isaac, <a href='#Page_228'>228</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Wesley, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Wetstein, <a href='#Page_285'>285</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Whately, R., <a href='#Page_333'>333</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Whedon, D. D., <a href='#Page_224'>224</a></li> -</ul> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_358'>358</span> - <h2 class='c008'><span class='large'>INDEX</span> <br /> <span class='small'>--OF--</span> <br /> THE PRINCIPAL TEXTS OF SCRIPTURE <br />ILLUSTRATED OR EXPLAINED.</h2> -</div> - -<table class='table1' summary=''> -<colgroup> -<col width='11%' /> -<col width='44%' /> -<col width='44%' /> -</colgroup> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>GENESIS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'> </td> - <td class='c015'> </td> - <td class='c025'><span class='sc'>Page.</span></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>20, 21, 24, 30,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_43'>43</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>26, 27,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_21'>21</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_67'>67</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_31'>31</a>, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>16, 17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_218'>218</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_14'>14</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>19,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_221'>221</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>9, 10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_117'>117</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_24'>24</a>, <a href='#Page_70'>70</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>7:</td> - <td class='c015'>15, 21, 22,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_33'>33</a>, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_26'>26</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_50'>50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_123'>123</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>22,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>18:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>18:</td> - <td class='c015'>25,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_312'>312</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>23:</td> - <td class='c015'>8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_50'>50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>25:</td> - <td class='c015'>8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_122'>122</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>25:</td> - <td class='c015'>17-20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_165'>165</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>32:</td> - <td class='c015'>24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>35:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_48'>48</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a>, <a href='#Page_101'>101</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>37:</td> - <td class='c015'>35,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_157'>157</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>EXODUS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>32,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_145'>145</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>22:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_129'>129</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>23:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_50'>50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>9-11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_28'>28</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>31:</td> - <td class='c015'>14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>32:</td> - <td class='c015'>32,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_307'>307</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>33:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>33:</td> - <td class='c015'>21-23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_28'>28</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>LEVITICUS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>19:</td> - <td class='c015'>31; 20: 27,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_129'>129</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>NUMBERS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_41'>41</a>, <a href='#Page_50'>50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>22,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_91'>91</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>30, 33,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_157'>157</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>19:</td> - <td class='c015'>13,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_119'>119</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>22:</td> - <td class='c015'>31,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>25:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_131'>131</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>27:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_91'>91</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>DEUTERONOMY.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>18:</td> - <td class='c015'>9-12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_129'>129</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>32:</td> - <td class='c015'>22,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_158'>158</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JOSHUA.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>30,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_123'>123</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JUDGES.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>7-15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_162'>162</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>6, 13,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 SAMUEL.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_159'>159</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_135'>135</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>26:</td> - <td class='c015'>24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_77'>77</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>28:</td> - <td class='c015'>3-20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_127'>127</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 KINGS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>36-46,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_223'>223</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_48'>48</a>, <a href='#Page_103'>103</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>22,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_103'>103</a>, <a href='#Page_143'>143</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'><span class='pageno' id='Page_359'>359</span>2 KINGS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>34,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_143'>143</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_162'>162</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 CHRONICLES.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>13,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_134'>134</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>2 CHRONICLES.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>36:</td> - <td class='c015'>19: 21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_280'>280</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JOB.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>11-18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_236'>236</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>11-19,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_160'>160</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>7:</td> - <td class='c015'>21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_214'>214</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>8-11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>12-15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_159'>159</a>, <a href='#Page_237'>237</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_236'>236</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>13-16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_160'>160</a>, <a href='#Page_237'>237</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>19:</td> - <td class='c015'>25, 26,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_250'>250</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>26:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_52'>52</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>30:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_50'>50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>32:</td> - <td class='c015'>8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_66'>66</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>33:</td> - <td class='c015'>18, 20, 22,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>34:</td> - <td class='c015'>14, 15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_57'>57</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>PSALMS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_158'>158</a>, <a href='#Page_238'>238</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>7:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_301'>301</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_156'>156</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_240'>240</a>, <a href='#Page_250'>250</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>27:</td> - <td class='c015'>12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_50'>50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>30:</td> - <td class='c015'>2, 3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_157'>157</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>31:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_77'>77</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>31:</td> - <td class='c015'>17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_159'>159</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>37:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_305'>305</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>37:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_281'>281</a>, <a href='#Page_306'>306</a>, <a href='#Page_309'>309</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>49:</td> - <td class='c015'>14, 15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>49:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>58:</td> - <td class='c015'>7, 8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>64:</td> - <td class='c015'>1,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_78'>78</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>68:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>78:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>88:</td> - <td class='c015'>10-12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_160'>160</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>89:</td> - <td class='c015'>48,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_157'>157</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>89:</td> - <td class='c015'>88,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>90:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_125'>125</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>106:</td> - <td class='c015'>28,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_131'>131</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>115:</td> - <td class='c015'>17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_159'>159</a>, <a href='#Page_238'>238</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>139:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>145:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_303'>303</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>146:</td> - <td class='c015'>3, 4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_33'>33</a>, <a href='#Page_159'>159</a>, <a href='#Page_236'>236</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>PROVERBS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>25,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>31,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_309'>309</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>20:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_52'>52</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>23:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_50'>50</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>ECCLESIASTES.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>19, 20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_35'>35</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_72'>72</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_126'>126</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>5, 6, 10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_84'>84</a>, <a href='#Page_114'>114</a>, <a href='#Page_237'>237</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_48'>48</a>, <a href='#Page_56'>56</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_315'>315</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>ISAIAH.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>30, 31,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_158'>158</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>20-24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_309'>309</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>25,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_301'>301</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>9-20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_158'>158</a>, <a href='#Page_164'>164</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_282'>282</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>13,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>26:</td> - <td class='c015'>19,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_238'>238</a>, <a href='#Page_250'>250</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>34:</td> - <td class='c015'>9, 10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_290'>290</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>34:</td> - <td class='c015'>12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>38:</td> - <td class='c015'>10-19,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_159'>159</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>38:</td> - <td class='c015'>17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_51'>51</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>38:</td> - <td class='c015'>18, 19,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_238'>238</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>42:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_92'>92</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>44:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>51:</td> - <td class='c015'>8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_282'>282</a>, <a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>53:</td> - <td class='c015'>10-12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_93'>93</a>, <a href='#Page_139'>139</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>57:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_50'>50</a>, <a href='#Page_69'>69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>61:</td> - <td class='c015'>1,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_92'>92</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>66:</td> - <td class='c015'>24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_282'>282</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JEREMIAH.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17</td> - <td class='c015'>27,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_280'>280</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'><span class='pageno' id='Page_360'>360</span>31:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_146'>146</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>31:</td> - <td class='c015'>15-17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_165'>165</a>, <a href='#Page_253'>253</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>EZEKIEL.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>18:</td> - <td class='c015'>26,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_299'>299</a>, <a href='#Page_315'>315</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>20:</td> - <td class='c015'>47, 48,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_281'>281</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>31:</td> - <td class='c015'>15-18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_158'>158</a>, <a href='#Page_165'>165</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>32:</td> - <td class='c015'>18-32,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_158'>158</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>DANIEL.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>7:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_82'>82</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_235'>235</a>, <a href='#Page_268'>268</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>HOSEA.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>AMOS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>4, 6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_230'>230</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>OBADIAH.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_305'>305</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JONAH.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_158'>158</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_78'>78</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>HABAKKUK.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_98'>98</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_117'>117</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>ZECHARIAH.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_180'>180</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>1,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_64'>64</a>, <a href='#Page_66'>66</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>MALACHI.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a>, <a href='#Page_310'>310</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>MATTHEW.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>17, 18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_165'>165</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>22, 29, 30,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>28,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>40, 47, 49,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>25, 26,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_110'>110</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_137'>137</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>18:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>22:</td> - <td class='c015'>23-32,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_149'>149</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>23:</td> - <td class='c015'>15, 33,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>26,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_96'>96</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>30, 31,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_169'>169</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>25:</td> - <td class='c015'>31, 34,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_261'>261</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>25:</td> - <td class='c015'>41, 46,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_269'>269</a>, <a href='#Page_271'>271</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>26:</td> - <td class='c015'>24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_267'>267</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>26:</td> - <td class='c015'>38,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_93'>93</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>27:</td> - <td class='c015'>52, 53,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_231'>231</a>, <a href='#Page_285'>285</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>MARK.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_96'>96</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>43, 45, 47,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>43, 44,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_279'>279</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>23-25,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_152'>152</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>LUKE.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>11, 13, 28, 29,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>18-21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_92'>92</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>49,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>7:</td> - <td class='c015'>14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_144'>144</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>8:</td> - <td class='c015'>40, 45,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_144'>144</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>4, 5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_105'>105</a>, <a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>28,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_171'>171</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>13, 14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_252'>252</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_164'>164</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>19, 31,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a>, <a href='#Page_154'>154</a>, <a href='#Page_161'>161</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>27, 29,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>20:</td> - <td class='c015'>35,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_153'>153</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>23:</td> - <td class='c015'>39-43,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_172'>172</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>23:</td> - <td class='c015'>46,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_48'>48</a>, <a href='#Page_77'>77</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>29,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>39,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_95'>95</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>43,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_139'>139</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JOHN.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_68'>68</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_304'>304</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>36,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_267'>267</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a>, <a href='#Page_98'>98</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>27, 29,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_142'>142</a>, <a href='#Page_144'>144</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>28, 29,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_232'>232</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_78'>78</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_231'>231</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'><span class='pageno' id='Page_361'>361</span>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>38,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_78'>78</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_256'>256</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>21:</td> - <td class='c015'>18, 19,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_214'>214</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>21:</td> - <td class='c015'>22, 23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_257'>257</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>ACTS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>9-11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>27, 31,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a>, <a href='#Page_156'>156</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>29, 34, 35,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_239'>239</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>7:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_77'>77</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>7:</td> - <td class='c015'>60,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_235'>235</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>7-9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>36,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_124'>124</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>46,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_312'>312</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>17:</td> - <td class='c015'>31,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_63'>63</a>, <a href='#Page_260'>260</a>, <a href='#Page_271'>271</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>23:</td> - <td class='c015'>8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_97'>97</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>21:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_144'>144</a>, <a href='#Page_232'>232</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>24:</td> - <td class='c015'>25,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_260'>260</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>26:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_232'>232</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>26:</td> - <td class='c015'>23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_146'>146</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>ROMANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_93'>93</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_15'>15</a>, <a href='#Page_20'>20</a>, <a href='#Page_30'>30</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_17'>17</a>, <a href='#Page_230'>230</a>, <a href='#Page_304'>304</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_68'>68</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>12-14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_227'>227</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_230'>230</a>, <a href='#Page_300'>300</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>8:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a>, <a href='#Page_94'>94</a>, <a href='#Page_248'>248</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>8:</td> - <td class='c015'>22, 23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_185'>185</a>, <a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>8:</td> - <td class='c015'>29,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_143'>143</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>8:</td> - <td class='c015'>38, 39,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_210'>210</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_308'>308</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 CORINTHIANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_98'>98</a>, <a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>25,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_15'>15</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_131'>131</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_26'>26</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_240'>240</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>20, 23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_143'>143</a>, <a href='#Page_235'>235</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>32,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_254'>254</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>35, 36,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_247'>247</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>42-44,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_19'>19</a>, <a href='#Page_42'>42</a>, <a href='#Page_248'>248</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>46, 47, 49,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_25'>25</a>, <a href='#Page_42'>42</a>, <a href='#Page_249'>249</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>50,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_19'>19</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>51-55,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_15'>15</a>, <a href='#Page_17'>17</a>, <a href='#Page_19'>19</a>, <a href='#Page_108'>108</a>, <a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>2 CORINTHIANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>8, 9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_251'>251</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_251'>251</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_212'>212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_69'>69</a>, <a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_183'>183</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_315'>315</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_173'>173</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>2-4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_195'>195</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>GALATIANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_291'>291</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>19, 21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_99'>99</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>EPHESIANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>22, 24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_25'>25</a>, <a href='#Page_193'>193</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>27,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_251'>251</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_20'>20</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>PHILIPPIANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>21-24,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>5, 6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_100'>100</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>21,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_42'>42</a>, <a href='#Page_85'>85</a>, <a href='#Page_249'>249</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_231'>231</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>8-11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_251'>251</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>COLOSSIANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>15, 18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a>, <a href='#Page_143'>143</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>27,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_212'>212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_97'>97</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_103'>103</a>, <a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>9, 10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_24'>24</a>, <a href='#Page_212'>212</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 THESSALONIANS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>13, 14, 16, 17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_142'>142</a>, <a href='#Page_169'>169</a>, <a href='#Page_200'>200</a>, <a href='#Page_212'>212</a>, <a href='#Page_235'>235</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 TIMOTHY.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_147'>147</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_15'>15</a>, <a href='#Page_30'>30</a>, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'><span class='pageno' id='Page_362'>362</span>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>1,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_18'>18</a>, <a href='#Page_56'>56</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>2 TIMOTHY.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_18'>18</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_213'>213</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>7, 8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_200'>200</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>TITUS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_20'>20</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>HEBREWS.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_30'>30</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_143'>143</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>7, 14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>14,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_311'>311</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_270'>270</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_270'>270</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>8:</td> - <td class='c015'>1,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_29'>29</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_271'>271</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>9:</td> - <td class='c015'>27,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_259'>259</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>10:</td> - <td class='c015'>39,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_304'>304</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_293'>293</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_153'>153</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>11:</td> - <td class='c015'>35,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_231'>231</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>12:</td> - <td class='c015'>9, 23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_91'>91</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JAMES.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_300'>300</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_145'>145</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 PETER.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_139'>139</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_91'>91</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>4, 23,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_16'>16</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>23-25,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_68'>68</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_16'>16</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>18-20,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_87'>87</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>17,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_298'>298</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_254'>254</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>2 PETER.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>16,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_141'>141</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>4, 9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_109'>109</a>, <a href='#Page_215'>215</a>, <a href='#Page_261'>261</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_287'>287</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>5, 6, 12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_306'>306</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>3:</td> - <td class='c015'>7-12</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_261'>261</a>, <a href='#Page_310'>310</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>1 JOHN.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>11, 12,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_192'>192</a>, <a href='#Page_304'>304</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>JUDE.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_261'>261</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_286'>286</a></td> - </tr> - <tr><td> </td></tr> - <tr><td class='c024' colspan='3'>REVELATION.</td></tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_143'>143</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>1:</td> - <td class='c015'>18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_93'>93</a>, <a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>2:</td> - <td class='c015'>7,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_173'>173</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>4:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>5:</td> - <td class='c015'>6,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_27'>27</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>8,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>6:</td> - <td class='c015'>9-11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_113'>113</a>, <a href='#Page_169'>169</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_289'>289</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>13:</td> - <td class='c015'>14-18,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_289'>289</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>4,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_145'>145</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>1-5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_289'>289</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>14:</td> - <td class='c015'>11,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_288'>288</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>15:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_312'>312</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>16:</td> - <td class='c015'>3,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_44'>44</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>20:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_144'>144</a>, <a href='#Page_215'>215</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>20:</td> - <td class='c015'>10,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_291'>291</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>20:</td> - <td class='c015'>11-15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_108'>108</a>, <a href='#Page_109'>109</a>, <a href='#Page_158'>158</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>21:</td> - <td class='c015'>4, 15,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_291'>291</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>21:</td> - <td class='c015'>5,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_309'>309</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>22:</td> - <td class='c015'>1, 2,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_174'>174</a></td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c016'>22:</td> - <td class='c015'>8, 9,</td> - <td class='c025'><a href='#Page_215'>215</a></td> - </tr> -</table> - -<div class='chapter'> - <span class='pageno' id='Page_363'>363</span> - <h2 class='c008'>GENERAL INDEX.</h2> -</div> - -<ul class='index c022'> - <li class='c023'>Abraham’s ancestors idolaters, <a href='#Page_123'>123</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Abel’s blood cried from the ground to God, <a href='#Page_117'>117</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Absent from the body, meaning of, <a href='#Page_183'>183</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Adam threatened with literal death, <a href='#Page_228'>228</a>, - <ul> - <li>testimony of Locke, Watts, and Taylor, <a href='#Page_228'>228</a>,</li> - <li>his condition in his creation, <a href='#Page_229'>229</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>A dishonorable perversion, <a href='#Page_53'>53</a>, <a href='#Page_54'>54</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Aion</em>, meaning of, according to Greenfield, Schrevelius, Liddell and Scott, Parkhurst, Robinson, Schleusner, and Wahl, <a href='#Page_292'>292</a>, <a href='#Page_293'>293</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Aionios</em>, meaning of, <a href='#Page_295'>295</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Analogies of nature, <a href='#Page_335'>335</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Analogy between sleep and death, <a href='#Page_235'>235</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Anecdote of the reasoning powers of brutes, <a href='#Page_327'>327</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Annihilation impossible, <a href='#Page_337'>337</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Angels not the ancient prophets, <a href='#Page_215'>215</a></li> - <li class='c023'>An ancient case of modern spiritualism, <a href='#Page_136'>136</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Anastasis</em>, meaning of, <a href='#Page_231'>231</a></li> - <li class='c023'>A clean universe at last, <a href='#Page_311'>311</a></li> - <li class='c023'>An illustration on future punishment, <a href='#Page_315'>315</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Anomalies of the present state, <a href='#Page_336'>336</a></li> - <li class='c023'>A spirit, or spiritual being, what, <a href='#Page_27'>27</a></li> - <li class='c023'>A spirit hath not flesh and bones, <a href='#Page_95'>95</a>, - <ul> - <li>note by Bloomfield, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>A threefold death disproved, <a href='#Page_219'>219</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Attempt to understand the popular idea of a spirit, <a href='#Page_326'>326</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Athanasia</em>, <em>aphthartos</em>, and <em>aphtharsia</em>, use and meaning of, <a href='#Page_15'>15</a>, <a href='#Page_19'>19</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Bible views of future punishment produce the best effect, <a href='#Page_319'>319</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Can the soul be killed? 105</li> - <li class='c023'>Capacities of the soul, <a href='#Page_330'>330</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Christ the express image of God, <a href='#Page_29'>29</a>, <a href='#Page_30'>30</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Christ, the first-fruits, first-begotten, and first-born, how, <a href='#Page_143'>143</a>-145</li> - <li class='c023'><span class='pageno' id='Page_364'>364</span>Christ first raised from the dead, exposition of Acts 26:23, <a href='#Page_146'>146</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Christ and the Sadducees 149</li> - <li class='c023'>Clarke on Gen. 2:7, <a href='#Page_32'>32</a>, - <ul> - <li>on Heb. 12:22, <a href='#Page_86'>86</a>,</li> - <li>his key to the words forever and ever, <a href='#Page_295'>295</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Comma, in its present form, when invented, <a href='#Page_179'>179</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Conant on Gen. 2:7; Isa. 2:22, <a href='#Page_32'>32</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Connection between our present and future being, testimony of Bishop Law, <a href='#Page_205'>205</a>, - <ul> - <li>Crellius and Priestly, <a href='#Page_206'>206</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'><a id='corr364.10'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='Cirticism'>Criticism</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_364.10'><ins class='correction' title='Cirticism'>Criticism</ins></a></span>, a desperate case of, <a href='#Page_176'>176</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Cruden on the words eternal, everlasting, and forever, <a href='#Page_294'>294</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Day in Gen. 2:17, meaning of, <a href='#Page_223'>223</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Date of Samuel’s ministry, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Date of Saul’s reign, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Death a punishment, <a href='#Page_272'>272</a>, - <ul> - <li>Augustine’s testimony, <a href='#Page_273'>273</a>,</li> - <li>no relief to the sinner, <a href='#Page_278'>278</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Deeds done in the body only to be judged, <a href='#Page_315'>315</a></li> - <li class='c023'>David not ascended to Heaven, <a href='#Page_239'>239</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Departing and being with Christ, <a href='#Page_199'>199</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Death of Adam, the same that is threatened against the sinner, <a href='#Page_299'>299</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Departure and return of the soul, <a href='#Page_100'>100</a>, - <ul> - <li>note by Luther Lee, <a href='#Page_101'>101</a>,</li> - <li>by Prof. Bush, <a href='#Page_101'>101</a>,</li> - <li>by Parkhurst, <a href='#Page_102'>102</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Destiny of the wicked: they shall be destroyed, <a href='#Page_303'>303</a>, - <ul> - <li>shall perish, go to perdition, and be as though they had not been, <a href='#Page_304'>304</a>,</li> - <li>their doom set forth in language that is not figurative, <a href='#Page_305'>305</a>,</li> - <li>they are compared to the most inflammable substances, <a href='#Page_305'>305</a>,</li> - <li>they shall be consumed and devoured by fire, <a href='#Page_308'>308</a></li> - </ul> - </li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Earthly house, what, <a href='#Page_185'>185</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Eternal torment threatened to no one, <a href='#Page_289'>289</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Eternal suffering not proportioned to the sins of a finite life, <a href='#Page_313'>313</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Eternal fire, Jude 7, - <ul> - <li>illustrated and explained, <a href='#Page_286'>286</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Everlasting fire, <a href='#Page_270'>270</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Everlasting punishment, <a href='#Page_271'>271</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Evil tendency of the doctrine of the destruction of the wicked, <a href='#Page_338'>338</a></li> - <li class='c023'><span class='pageno' id='Page_365'>365</span>Expressions used to describe the final condition of the wicked, <a href='#Page_303'>303</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Future punishment eternal, <a href='#Page_267'>267</a>, - <ul> - <li>it consists in death, <a href='#Page_299'>299</a></li> - </ul> - </li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Gathered to his people, meaning of, <a href='#Page_120'>120</a>, - <ul> - <li>sees corruption, <a href='#Page_124'>124</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'><em>Ge-enna</em>, the hell of Mark 9:43, <a href='#Page_44'>44</a>, - <ul> - <li>meaning of, <a href='#Page_283'>283</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>God not a God of the dead but of the living, meaning of, <a href='#Page_153'>153</a></li> - <li class='c023'>God’s dealings with his creatures, <a href='#Page_312'>312</a></li> - <li class='c023'>God a person, <a href='#Page_28'>28</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'><em>Hades</em> and <em>sheol</em>, meaning of, <a href='#Page_156'>156</a>, - <ul> - <li>use of the word <em>sheol</em>, <a href='#Page_157'>157</a>,</li> - <li>who go there, and the duration of its dominion, <a href='#Page_157'>157</a>,</li> - <li>its location, <a href='#Page_158'>158</a>,</li> - <li>condition of the righteous there, <a href='#Page_158'>158</a>,</li> - <li>general character of, <a href='#Page_159'>159</a>,</li> - <li>no knowledge there, <a href='#Page_160'>160</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Hell, words so translated, <a href='#Page_107'>107</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Hinnom, valley of, a figure of the place of future punishment, <a href='#Page_283'>283</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Holam</em>, Hebrew, corresponding to aion, defined by Gesenius, <a href='#Page_294'>294</a></li> - <li class='c023'>House from Heaven, what, <a href='#Page_185'>185</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Idumea, threatenings against, <a href='#Page_290'>290</a>, - <ul> - <li>the language illustrates Rev. 14:11, <a href='#Page_290'>290</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Immortal and immortality, how often used in the Bible, <a href='#Page_13'>13</a>-20</li> - <li class='c023'>Immortality assumed, <a href='#Page_337'>337</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Immaterial souls of brutes, <a href='#Page_323'>323</a>, - <ul> - <li>the testimony of Bishop Warburton, <a href='#Page_324'>324</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Instinct not the only reasoning power possessed by brutes, <a href='#Page_329'>329</a></li> - <li class='c023'>In the body and out, <a href='#Page_195'>195</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Is Abraham in hell? <a href='#Page_123'>123</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Judgment, doctrine of, contradicted by the popular view, <a href='#Page_63'>63</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'><em>Katephagen</em>, Rev. 20:9, defined by Stuart, <a href='#Page_309'>309</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Kolasis</em>, Matt. 25:46, meaning of, <a href='#Page_274'>274</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Language of appearance, <a href='#Page_136'>136</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Lazarus carried to Abraham’s bosom, when? 169</li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'><span class='pageno' id='Page_366'>366</span>Matter cannot think, <a href='#Page_324'>324</a>, - <ul> - <li>the proof rests with the skeptic, Sidney Smith’s testimony, <a href='#Page_325'>325</a>,</li> - <li>W. G. Moncrieff’s testimony, <a href='#Page_326'>326</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Milton’s translation of Eccl. 3:21, <a href='#Page_76'>76</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Mind determined by sensation to belong to the lower animals, <a href='#Page_328'>328</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Moses and the prophets on the place and condition of the dead, <a href='#Page_154'>154</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Moses was raised from the dead, <a href='#Page_142'>142</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Nature sheds no light on the future state, <a href='#Page_8'>8</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Necromancy defined by Webster, <a href='#Page_128'>128</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Nephesh</em> defined by Parkhurst, Taylor, and Gesenius, <a href='#Page_51'>51</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Origen’s restorationism, an enlarged purgatory, <a href='#Page_316'>316</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Parable, case of the rich man and Lazarus, a, <a href='#Page_163'>163</a>, - <ul> - <li>how to be used, testimony of Clarke and Trench, <a href='#Page_167'>167</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Paradise, where situated, <a href='#Page_173'>173</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Paraphrase of Phil. 1:21-24, <a href='#Page_209'>209</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Paul’s departure, <a href='#Page_213'>213</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Personification used in the Bible, <a href='#Page_117'>117</a>, <a href='#Page_162'>162</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Peter’s tabernacle, its putting off, <a href='#Page_213'>213</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Pharisees confess spirit, <a href='#Page_97'>97</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Plasso</em>, definition of, <a href='#Page_65'>65</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Punctuation of Luke 23:43, <a href='#Page_179'>179</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Punishment for sins in hell not threatened, <a href='#Page_314'>314</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Punishment, degrees of, <a href='#Page_276'>276</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Purgatory, an invention to relieve the great wrong of conscious eternal misery, <a href='#Page_316'>316</a>, - <ul> - <li>borrowed from Plato by Augustine, adopted by Rome, <a href='#Page_316'>316</a></li> - </ul> - </li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Reasons why the doctrine of future punishment should be agitated, <a href='#Page_320'>320</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Reformers adopted Augustine’s hell without his purgatory, <a href='#Page_316'>316</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Rebellion against God, not eternal, <a href='#Page_311'>311</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Resurrection proved by Christ, <a href='#Page_151'>151</a>, - <ul> - <li>from what words translated, <a href='#Page_231'>231</a>,</li> - <li>a prominent doctrine of the Bible, <a href='#Page_234'>234</a>,</li> - <li>Clarke’s testimony, <a href='#Page_257'>257</a>,</li> - <li>not impossible, <a href='#Page_262'>262</a>,</li> - <li>objections against answered, <a href='#Page_244'>244</a>-247,</li> - <li><span class='pageno' id='Page_367'>367</span>object of the Christian’s hope, <a href='#Page_250'>250</a>,</li> - <li>time of reward to the righteous, <a href='#Page_252'>252</a>,</li> - <li>comfort of mourners, <cite>id.</cite>,</li> - <li>time when crowns of glory are to be given, <a href='#Page_254'>254</a>,</li> - <li>basis of Scripture promises, <a href='#Page_255'>255</a>,</li> - <li>inseparably connected with the coming of Christ, <a href='#Page_256'>256</a></li> - </ul> - </li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Samuel and the woman of Endor, <a href='#Page_127'>127</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Scott’s note on Gen. 2:7, <a href='#Page_32'>32</a></li> - <li class='c023'><em>Semeron</em>, meaning of, <a href='#Page_179'>179</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Sense of right and wrong possessed to a degree by the lower animals, <a href='#Page_328'>328</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Separation from the love of God, <a href='#Page_210'>210</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Shame and everlasting contempt, Dan. 12:2, <a href='#Page_268'>268</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Sins in hell committed faster than God can punish, Benson, <a href='#Page_302'>302</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Sodom and Gomorrah turned into ashes by eternal fire, <a href='#Page_287'>287</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Soul and spirit, meaning of, <a href='#Page_46'>46</a>, - <ul> - <li>times of their use in the Bible, <a href='#Page_50'>50</a>-55</li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Souls under the altar, <a href='#Page_113'>113</a>, - <ul> - <li>note by Barnes, <a href='#Page_117'>117</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Spirit, how formed, <a href='#Page_64'>64</a>, - <ul> - <li>returns to God, <a href='#Page_56'>56</a>,</li> - <li>for what purpose? <a href='#Page_62'>62</a>,</li> - <li>not conscious, <a href='#Page_61'>61</a>,</li> - <li>committed to God, <a href='#Page_77'>77</a>,</li> - <li>saved in the day of the Lord, 1 Cor. 5:5, <a href='#Page_98'>98</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Spirits of just men made perfect, <a href='#Page_80'>80</a>, - <ul> - <li>spirits in prison, <a href='#Page_87'>87</a>,</li> - <li>note by Clarke, <a href='#Page_91'>91</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>State to which death reduces us, Law’s testimony, <a href='#Page_242'>242</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Tendency of the doctrine of eternal misery, testimony of Saurin and A. Barnes, <a href='#Page_317'>317</a>, - <ul> - <li>it cannot be believed, testimony of Bp. Newton, <a href='#Page_318'>318</a></li> - </ul> - </li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>The image of God, <a href='#Page_21'>21</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The breath of life, <a href='#Page_31'>31</a>, - <ul> - <li>possessed by all animals, <a href='#Page_33'>33</a>, <a href='#Page_34'>34</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>The living soul, <a href='#Page_36'>36</a>, - <ul> - <li>dead soul, <a href='#Page_41'>41</a>,</li> - <li>applied to all orders of animals, <a href='#Page_43'>43</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>The transfiguration, <a href='#Page_137'>137</a>, - <ul> - <li>a miniature of the kingdom of God, <a href='#Page_140'>140</a>,</li> - <li>no disembodied souls there, <a href='#Page_141'>141</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>The rich man and Lazarus, <a href='#Page_161'>161</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The dead rise up to meet the king of Babylon and Pharaoh in <em>sheol</em>, <a href='#Page_164'>164</a>, <a href='#Page_165'>165</a></li> - <li class='c023'><span class='pageno' id='Page_368'>368</span>Thief on the cross, <a href='#Page_172'>172</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The inward man, what? <a href='#Page_212'>212</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The unjust reserved to Judgment, <a href='#Page_215'>215</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The death of Adam, <a href='#Page_216'>216</a>, - <ul> - <li>his sentence, <a href='#Page_218'>218</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>The dead as though they had not been, <a href='#Page_236'>236</a>, - <ul> - <li>have no knowledge, <cite>id.</cite>,</li> - <li>not in Heaven nor hell, <a href='#Page_237'>237</a>,</li> - <li>without a resurrection are perished, <a href='#Page_240'>240</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>The Judgment a future event, <a href='#Page_258'>258</a>, - <ul> - <li>objections answered, <a href='#Page_259'>259</a>,</li> - <li>destroys the idea of the conscious-state theory, <a href='#Page_262'>262</a>,</li> - <li>testimony of Dobney, <a href='#Page_263'>263</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>The doctrine of the immortality of the soul leads to erroneous conclusions on future punishment, <a href='#Page_266'>266</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The wages of sin, <a href='#Page_264'>264</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The undying worm and quenchless fire, <a href='#Page_279'>279</a>, - <ul> - <li>a figure borrowed from the Old Testament, <a href='#Page_280'>280</a>,</li> - <li>testimony of Jeremiah, <a href='#Page_280'>280</a>,</li> - <li>of David and Ezekiel, <a href='#Page_281'>281</a>,</li> - <li>of Isaiah, <a href='#Page_282'>282</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>The two deaths mentioned in Eze. 18:26, <a href='#Page_299'>299</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The wicked, how recompensed in the earth, <a href='#Page_309'>309</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The claims of philosophy, <a href='#Page_322'>322</a></li> - <li class='c023'>The soul immaterial, <a href='#Page_323'>323</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Them that sleep in Jesus brought with him, <a href='#Page_212'>212</a></li> - <li class='c023'>“Thou” and “thy,” meaning of in Gen. 3:19, <a href='#Page_225'>225</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Tormented forever and ever, Rev. 14:11, <a href='#Page_288'>288</a>, - <ul> - <li>of whom spoken, <a href='#Page_289'>289</a></li> - </ul> - </li> - <li class='c023'>Traduction <em>vs.</em> creationism, <a href='#Page_69'>69</a>-71</li> - <li class='c023'>Trees represented as appointing a king over themselves, <a href='#Page_162'>162</a></li> - <li class='c023'>True spirit of inquiry, <a href='#Page_11'>11</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Tunes learned by birds, <a href='#Page_328'>328</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Tyndale’s pungent inquiry, <a href='#Page_233'>233</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Universal belief and inborn desire, <a href='#Page_333'>333</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Unquenchable fire, meaning of the word <em>asbestos</em>, <a href='#Page_284'>284</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>Vincent’s description of hell, <a href='#Page_301'>301</a></li> -</ul> -<ul class='index c000'> - <li class='c023'>We fly away, Ps. 90:10, meaning of, <a href='#Page_125'>125</a>-127</li> - <li class='c023'>White robes of Rev. 6:11, meaning of, <a href='#Page_119'>119</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Who knoweth? Eccl. 3:21, <a href='#Page_72'>72</a></li> - <li class='c023'>Word translated perceive, in 1 Sam. 28:14, <a href='#Page_133'>133</a></li> -</ul> -<div class='pbb'> - <hr class='pb c000' /> -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div><span class='pageno' id='Page_369'>369</span><span class='xlarge'>CATALOGUE</span></div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div>Of Books, Pamphlets, Tracts, &c., Issued by the Seventh-Day</div> - <div>Adventist Publishing Association,</div> - <div>Battle Creek, Mich.</div> - </div> -</div> - -<hr class='c026' /> -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Hymns and Tunes</span>; 320 pages of hymns, 96 pages of -music; in plain morocco, $1.00.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>A Complete History of the Sabbath and First Day -of the Week.</span> By J. N. Andrews, $1.00.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Spirit of Prophecy</span>, Vols. 1 & 2. By Ellen G. White. -Each $1.00.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Thoughts on the Revelation</span>, critical and practical. -By U. Smith. 328 pp., $1.00.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Thoughts on the Book of Daniel</span> critical and practical. -By U. Smith. Bound, $1.00; condensed edition, paper, 35 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Nature and Destiny of Man.</span> By U. Smith. 384 -pp., bound, $1.00, paper, 40 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Life Incidents</span>, in connection with the great Advent -movement. By Eld. James White. 373 pp., $1.00.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Autobiography of Eld. Joseph Bates</span>, with portrait -of the author. 318 pp., $1.00,</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>How to Live</span>; comprising a series of articles on Health, -and how to preserve it, with various recipes for cooking healthful -food, &c. 400 pp., $1.00.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Sabbath Readings</span>; or Moral and Religious Reading for -Youth and Children. 400 pp., 60 cts; in five pamphlets, 50 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Appeal to Youth</span>; Address at the Funeral of Henry N. -White; also a brief narrative of his life, &c. 96 pp., muslin, 40 -cts.; paper covers, 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Game of Life</span>, with notes. Three illustrations 5x6 -inches each, representing Satan playing with man for his soul. -In board, 50 cts., in paper, 30 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The United States in Prophecy.</span> By U. Smith. Bound, -40 cts.; paper, 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_370'>370</span><span class='sc'>Hymns and Spiritual Songs</span> for Camp-meetings and other -Religious Gatherings. Compiled by Eld. James White. 196 -pp. Bound, 50 cts., paper, 25 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Refutation of the Age to Come.]</span> By J. H. Waggoner. -Price 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Progressive Bible Lessons for Children</span>; for Sabbath -Schools and Families. G. H. Bell. Bound, 35 cts., paper, 25 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Advent Keepsake</span>; comprising a text of Scripture -for each day of the year, on the subjects of the Second Advent, -the Resurrection, &c. Plain muslin, 25 cts; gilt, 40 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>A Solemn Appeal</span> relative to Solitary Vice, and the -Abuses and Excesses of the Marriage Relation. Edited by Eld. -James White. Muslin, 50 cts.; paper, 30 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>An Appeal</span> to the Working Men and Women, in the Ranks -of Seventh-day Adventists. By James White. 172 pp., bound, -40 cts; paper covers, 25 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Sermons on the Sabbath and Law</span>; embracing an outline -of the Biblical and Secular History of the Sabbath for 6000 -years. By J. N. Andrews. 25 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The State of the Dead.</span> By U. Smith. 224 pp., 25 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>History</span> of the Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul. -By D. M. Canright. 25 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Discussion on the Sabbath Question</span>, between Elds. -Lane and Barnaby. 25 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Atonement</span>; an Examination of a Remedial System -in the light of Nature and Revelation. By J. H. Waggoner. 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Our Faith and Hope</span>, Nos. 1 & 2.--Sermons on the Advent, -&c. By James White, Each 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Nature and Tendency of Modern Spiritualism.</span> -By J. H. Waggoner. 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Bible from Heaven</span>; or, a dissertation on the Evidences -of Christianity. 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Discussion on the Sabbath Question</span>, between Elds. -Grant and Cornell. 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Review of Objections to the Visions.</span> U. Smith, 20 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_371'>371</span><span class='sc'>Complete Testimony of the Fathers</span>, concerning the -Sabbath and First Day of the Week. By J. N. Andrews. 15 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Destiny of the Wicked.</span> By U. Smith. 15 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Ministration of Angels</span>; and the Origin, History, -and Destiny of Satan. By D. M. Canright, 15 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Messages of Rev. 14</span>, particularly the Third Angel’s -Message and Two-Horned Beast. By J. N. Andrews. 15 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Resurrection of the Unjust</span>; a Vindication of the -Doctrine. By J. H. Waggoner. 15 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Sanctuary and Twenty-three Hundred Days.</span> By -J. N. Andrews. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Saints’ Inheritance</span>, or, The Earth made New. By -J. N. Loughborough. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Seventh Part of Time</span>; a sermon on the Sabbath -Question. By W. H. Littlejohn. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Review of Gilfillan</span>, and other authors, on the Sabbath -By T. B. Brown. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Seven Trumpets</span>; an Exposition of Rev. 8 and 9. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Date of the Seventy Weeks of Dan. 9</span> established. -By J. N. Andrews. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Truth Found</span>; the Nature and Obligation of the Sabbath -of the Fourth Commandment. By J. H. Waggoner. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Vindication of the True Sabbath.</span> By J. W. Morton. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Sunday Seventh-day Examined.</span> A Refutation of the -Teachings of Medem, Jennings, Akers, and Fuller. By J. N. Andrews. -10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Matthew Twenty-Four</span>; a full Exposition of the chapter. -By James White. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Key to Prophetic Chart</span>; the symbols of Daniel and -John explained, and the prophetic periods determined. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Position and Work of the True People of God</span> -under the Third Angel’s Message. By W. H. Littlejohn. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>An Appeal to the Baptists</span>, from the Seventh-day <a id='corr371.33'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='Bapists'>Baptists</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_371.33'><ins class='correction' title='Bapists'>Baptists</ins></a></span>, -for the Restoration of the Bible Sabbath. 10 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Milton on the State of the Dead.</span> 5 cts.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='pageno' id='Page_372'>372</span>FOUR-CENT TRACTS: The Two Covenants--The Law -and the Gospel--The Seventh Part of Time--Who Changed the -Sabbath?--Celestial Railroad--Samuel and the Witch of Endor--The -Ten Commandments not Abolished--Address to the Baptists.</p> - -<p class='c011'>THREE-CENT TRACTS: The Kingdom--Scripture References--Much -in Little--The End of the Wicked--Infidel Cavils -Considered--Spiritualism a Satanic Delusion--The Lost Time -Question.</p> - -<p class='c011'>TWO-CENT TRACTS: The Sufferings of Christ--Seven -Reasons for Sunday-Keeping Examined--Sabbath by Elihu--The -Rich Man and Lazarus--The Second Advent--Definite Seventh -Day--Argument on Sabbaton--Clerical Slander--Departing and -Being with Christ--Fundamental Principles of S. D. Adventists--The -Millennium.</p> - -<p class='c011'>ONE-CENT TRACTS: Appeal on Immortality--Brief -Thoughts on Immortality--Thoughts for the Candid--Sign of the -Doy of God--The Two Laws--Geology and the Bible--The Perfection -of the Ten Commandments--The Coming of the Lord--Without -Excuse.</p> - -<p class='c011'>CHARTS: <span class='sc'>The Prophetic, and Law of God Charts</span>, -painted and mounted, such as are used by our preachers, each -$1.50. The two charts, on cloth, unpainted, by mail, with key, -without rollers. $2.50.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Way of Life.</span> This is an Allegorical Picture, showing -the way of Life and Salvation through Jesus Christ from -Paradise Lost to Paradise Restored. By Eld. M. G. Kellogg. -The size of this instructive and beautiful picture is 19x24 inches. -Price, post-paid, $1.00.</p> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c022'> - <div><b>Works in Other Languages.</b></div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The Association also publishes the <cite>Advent Tidende</cite>, Danish, -monthly, at $1.00 per year, and works on some of the above-named -subjects in the German, French, Danish, and Holland -languages.</p> - -<p class='c011'><span class='large'>☛</span> Any of the foregoing works will be sent by mail to any -part of the United States, post-paid, on receipt of the prices -above stated.</p> - -<div class='lg-container-r'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'><span class='large'>⁂</span> Address REVIEW & HERALD,</div> - <div class='line in38'><span class='sc'>Battle Creek, Mich.</span></div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='pbb'> - <hr class='pb c000' /> -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div><span class='pageno' id='Page_373'>373</span><span class='large'>PERIODICALS.</span></div> - </div> -</div> - -<hr class='c004' /> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>The Advent Review & Herald of the Sabbath</span>, weekly. -This sheet is an earnest exponent of the Prophecies, and treats -largely upon the Signs of the Times, Second Advent of Christ, -Harmony of the Law and the Gospel, the Sabbath of the Lord, -and, What we Must do to be Saved. Terms, $2.00 a year in -advance.</p> -<p class='c020'><span class='sc'>The Youth’s Instructor</span>, monthly. This is a high-toned, -practical sheet, devoted to moral and religious instruction, -adapted to the wants of youth and children. It is the largest and -the best youth’s paper published in America. Terms, 50 cts. -a year, in advance.</p> -<p class='c020'><span class='sc'>The Health Reformer.</span> This is a live Journal, devoted -to an Exposition of the Laws of Human Life, and the application -of those laws in the Preservation of Health, and the Treatment of -Disease. The <span class='sc'>Reformer</span> will contain, each issue, thirty-two pages -of reading matter, from able and earnest pens, devoted to real, -practical life, to physical, moral, and mental improvement. Its -publishers are determined that it shall be the best Health Journal -in the land.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Terms, $1.00 a year, in advance. Address, <span class='sc'>Health Reformer</span>, -Battle Creek, Mich.</p> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> -<div class='nf-center c022'> - <div><b><span class='large'>BOOKS FROM OTHER PUBLISHERS.</span></b></div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c011'><span class='sc'>Future Punishment</span>, by H. H. Dobney, Baptist minister -of England. The Scriptural Doctrine of Future Punishment, -with an Appendix, containing the “State of the Dead,” by John -Milton, author of “Paradise Lost,” extracted from his “Treatise -on Christian Doctrine.”</p> - -<p class='c011'>This is a very able and critical work. It should be read by every -one who is interested in the immortality subject. It is also -<span class='pageno' id='Page_374'>374</span>one of the best works upon the subject to put into the hands of -candid ministers, and other persons of mind.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Price, post-paid, $1.00.</p> -<p class='c020'><span class='sc'>The Voice of the Church</span>, on the Coming and Kingdom -of the Redeemer; or, a History of the Doctrine of the Reign of -Christ on Earth. By D. T. Taylor. A very valuable work, highly -endorsed on both sides of the Atlantic.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Price, post-paid, $1.00.</p> -<table class='table2' summary=''> -<colgroup> -<col width='86%' /> -<col width='13%' /> -</colgroup> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Great Reformation, by Martin, 5 Vols.,</td> - <td class='c025'>$ 7.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>D’Aubigne’s History of the Reformation, 5 Vols.,</td> - <td class='c025'>4.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Scripture Biography,</td> - <td class='c025'>4.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Cruden’s Concordance, sheep,</td> - <td class='c025'>2.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c027'>” ” muslin,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Bible Dictionary, sheep,</td> - <td class='c025'>2.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c028'>” ” muslin,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Cole’s Concordance,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Prince of the House of David,</td> - <td class='c025'>2.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Pillar of Fire,</td> - <td class='c025'>2.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Throne of David,</td> - <td class='c025'>2.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Court and Camp of David,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Old Red House,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Higher Christian Life,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Pilgrim’s Progress, large type,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c027'>” ” small ”</td> - <td class='c025'>.60</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Biography of George Whitefield,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>History of English Puritans,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Story of a Pocket Bible,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Captain Russell’s Watchword,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Upward Path,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Ellen Dacre,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.25</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Brother’s Choice,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.15</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Climbing the Mountain,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.15</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Two Books,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.15</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Awakening of Italy,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><span class='pageno' id='Page_375'>375</span>White Foreigners,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Lady Huntington,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Young Man’s Counselor,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Young Lady’s Counselor,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Paul Venner,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Among the Alps,</td> - <td class='c025'>1.00</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Poems of Home Life,</td> - <td class='c025'>.80</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Edith Somers,</td> - <td class='c025'>.80</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Nuts for Boys to Crack,</td> - <td class='c025'>.80</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Anecdotes for the Family,</td> - <td class='c025'>.75</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Pictorial <a id='corrc7.11'></a><span class='htmlonly'><ins class='correction' title='Naratives'>Narratives</ins></span><span class='epubonly'><a href='#c_c7.11'><ins class='correction' title='Naratives'>Narratives</ins></a></span>,</td> - <td class='c025'>.60</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Bertie’s Birthday Present,</td> - <td class='c025'>.60</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Songs for Little Ones,</td> - <td class='c025'>.60</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Memoir of Dr. Payson,</td> - <td class='c025'>.60</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Mirage of Life,</td> - <td class='c025'>.60</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Huguenots of France,</td> - <td class='c025'>.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Boy Patriot,</td> - <td class='c025'>.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Springtime of Life,</td> - <td class='c025'>.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>May Coverly,</td> - <td class='c025'>.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Glen Cabin,</td> - <td class='c025'>.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>The Old, Old Story, cloth, gilt,</td> - <td class='c025'>.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Poems by Rebekah Smith,</td> - <td class='c025'>.50</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Charlotte Elizabeth,</td> - <td class='c025'>.40</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Save the Erring,</td> - <td class='c025'>.40</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Blanche Gamond,</td> - <td class='c025'>.40</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>My Brother Ben,</td> - <td class='c025'>.40</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Hannah’s Path,</td> - <td class='c025'>.35</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Star of Bethlehem,</td> - <td class='c025'>.30</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'>Father’s Letters to a Daughter,</td> - <td class='c025'>.30</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p class='c011'><span class='large'>☛</span> A more full Catalogue of books of this nature, for -sale at this Office, can be had on application.</p> - -<div class='lg-container-r c029'> - <div class='linegroup'> - <div class='group'> - <div class='line'>Address, REVIEW & HERALD,</div> - <div class='line in31'><span class='sc'>Battle Creek, Mich.</span></div> - </div> - </div> -</div> - -<div class='pbb'> - <hr class='pb c000' /> -</div> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div><span class='pageno' id='Page_376'>376</span><b><span class='large'>HEALTH REFORM PUBLICATIONS.</span></b></div> - </div> -</div> - -<hr class='c013' /> - -<p class='c011'><b>The Hygienic System.</b> By R. T. Trall, M. D. Recently -published at the Office of the <span class='sc'>Health Reformer</span>. It is -just the work for the time, and should be read by the million. -Price, post-paid, 20 cents.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>The Health and Diseases of Woman.</b> By R. T. Trall, M. D. -A work of great value. Price, post-paid, 20 cents.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Tobacco-Using.</b> A philosophical exposition of the Effects -of Tobacco on the Human System. By R. T. Trall, M. D. -Price, post-paid, 20 cents.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Cook Book</b>, and Kitchen Guide: comprising recipes for -the preparation of hygienic food, directions for canning -fruit, &c., together with advice relative to change of diet. -Price, post-paid, 20 cents.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Hydropathic Encyclopedia.</b> Trall. Price, post-paid, $4.50.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Water Cure for the Million.</b> Trall. Price, post-paid, 30 -cents.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Uterine Diseases and Displacements.</b> Trall. Price, post-paid, -$3.00.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Science of Human Life.</b> By Sylvester Graham, M. D. -Price, post-paid, $3.00.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Valuable Pamphlet.</b> Containing three of the most important -of Graham’s twenty-five Lectures on the Science of Human -Life--eighth, the Organs and their Uses; thirteenth, Man’s -Physical Nature and the Structure of His Teeth: fourteenth, -the Dietetic Character of Man. Price, post-paid, 35 cts.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Hydropathic Family Physician.</b> By Joel Shew, M. D. -Price, post-paid, $3.50.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Domestic Practice.</b> Johnson. Price, post-paid, $1.75.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Hand Book of Health</b>--Physiology and Hygiene. Published -by the Health Reform Institute, Battle Creek, Mich. -Price, post-paid, 75 cents; paper cover, 40 cents.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Water Cure in Chronic Diseases.</b> By J. M. Gully, M. D. -Price, post-paid, $1.75.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Cure of Consumption.</b> Dr. Work. Price, post-paid, 80 cts.</p> -<p class='c020'><b>Reform Tracts</b>, by mail, in packages of not less than 200 -pages, post-paid, at the rate of 800 pages for $1.00.</p> -<p class='c020'>Address, <b>Health Reformer</b>, <em>Battle Creek, Mich.</em></p> - -<div class='pbb'> - <hr class='pb c000' /> -</div> -<p class='c011'><a id='endnote'></a></p> -<div class='tnotes'> - -<div class='nf-center-c0'> - <div class='nf-center'> - <div><span class='large'>Transcriber’s Note</span></div> - </div> -</div> - -<p class='c011'>The few words in Greek have been reproduced here as printed. Several -lack the necessary (and occasionally the correct) diacritical marks.</p> - -<p class='c011'>There are also occasional lapses in the quotation of Biblical passages, -where opening or closing quotation marks are misplaced or missing. -The King James Version, which is used by the author, has been employed -here as well to more accurately punctuate them.</p> - -<p class='c011'>The General Index, in the original text, used a tabular form. This -has been re-cast as an indented list.</p> - -<p class='c011'>Errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been corrected, and -are noted here. The references are to the page and line in the original.</p> - -<table class='table3' summary=''> -<colgroup> -<col width='12%' /> -<col width='69%' /> -<col width='18%' /> -</colgroup> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_27.28'></a><a href='#corr27.28'>27.28</a></td> - <td class='c015'>and which are [“]sent forth</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_30.23'></a><a href='#corr30.23'>30.23</a></td> - <td class='c015'>man in 'hi[sim /s im]age stamped him with immortality,</td> - <td class='c017'>Spaced moved.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_51.19'></a><a href='#corr51.19'>51.19</a></td> - <td class='c015'>'1 Kings [17[, /:]21, 22;</td> - <td class='c017'>Replaced.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_79.23'></a><a href='#corr79.23'>79.23</a></td> - <td class='c015'>God.[”] Col. 3:3. [“]And when will the believer</td> - <td class='c017'>Added/Removed.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_79.24'></a><a href='#corr79.24'>79.24</a></td> - <td class='c015'>[“]When> Christ who is our life</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_131.4'></a><a href='#corr131.4'>131.4</a></td> - <td class='c015'>the father of all the lies in the world[./,]</td> - <td class='c017'>Replaced.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_131.5'></a><a href='#corr131.5'>131.5</a></td> - <td class='c015'>by assiduously circulating them[,/.]</td> - <td class='c017'>Replaced.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_153.14'></a><a href='#corr153.14'>153.14</a></td> - <td class='c015'>[“]Wherefore, God is not ashamed</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_160.7'></a><a href='#corr160.7'>160.7</a></td> - <td class='c015'>together is in the dust.[”] Job. 17:13-16; 4:11-19;</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_160.14'></a><a href='#corr160.14'>160.14</a></td> - <td class='c015'>whither thou goest.[”] Eccl. 9:4-6, 10.</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_191.16'></a><a href='#corr191.16'>191.16</a></td> - <td class='c015'>O grave, where is thy victory[./?]</td> - <td class='c017'>Replaced.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_212.3'></a><a href='#corr212.3'>212.3</a></td> - <td class='c015'>under the unfortu[n]ate necessity</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_213.21'></a><a href='#corr213.21'>213.21</a></td> - <td class='c015'>[P/B]ut as Paul does not here intimate</td> - <td class='c017'>Replaced.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_264.20'></a><a href='#corr264.20'>264.20</a></td> - <td class='c015'>What fate awaits us when we die?<b>[”]</b>--<cite>Alger.</cite></td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_285.2'></a><a href='#corr285.2'>285.2</a></td> - <td class='c015'>Homer, in the [Illiad],</td> - <td class='c017'><em>sic</em>--Iliad</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_285.13'></a><a href='#corr285.13'>285.13</a></td> - <td class='c015'>fire as cannot be extingu<b>[i]</b>shed</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_294.21'></a><a href='#corr294.21'>294.21</a></td> - <td class='c015'>this time forth even forever, [”/’] that is,</td> - <td class='c017'>Replaced.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_317.13'></a><a href='#corr317.13'>317.13</a></td> - <td class='c015'>when I see in the lukewarmness of my devosions,</td> - <td class='c017'><em>sic</em>--devotions</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_320.24'></a><a href='#corr320.24'>320.24</a></td> - <td class='c015'>exerting all his divine attri[tri]butes</td> - <td class='c017'>Removed.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_327.22'></a><a href='#corr327.22'>327.22</a></td> - <td class='c015'>gloomy gorges and craggy h[e]ights of the mountains,</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_338.9'></a><a href='#corr338.9'>338.9</a></td> - <td class='c015'>we simply affirm that they will be anni[hi]lated</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_349.11'></a><a href='#corr349.11'>349.11</a></td> - <td class='c015'>carniv[e/o]rous crime</td> - <td class='c017'>Replaced.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_364.10'></a><a href='#corr364.10'>364.10</a></td> - <td class='c015'>C[ir/ri]ticism , a desperate case of, 176</td> - <td class='c017'>Transposed.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_371.33'></a><a href='#corr371.33'>371.33</a></td> - <td class='c015'>from the Seventh-day Bap[t]ists,</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> - <tr> - <td class='c015'><a id='c_c7.11'></a><a href='#corrc7.11'>c7.11</a></td> - <td class='c015'>Pictorial Nar[r]atives>, .60</td> - <td class='c017'>Added.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -</div> - - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The state of the dead and the destiny -of the wicked, by Uriah Smith - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE STATE OF THE DEAD *** - -***** This file should be named 54373-h.htm or 54373-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/5/4/3/7/54373/ - -Produced by KD Weeks, MFR, Bryan Ness and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - -</pre> - - </body> - <!-- created with ppgen.py 3.56k on 2017-03-22 12:05:08 GMT --> -</html> diff --git a/old/54373-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/54373-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index 4cbc734..0000000 --- a/old/54373-h/images/cover.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/54373-h/images/i_0344.jpg b/old/54373-h/images/i_0344.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index bcc75b2..0000000 --- a/old/54373-h/images/i_0344.jpg +++ /dev/null diff --git a/old/54373-h/images/i_title.jpg b/old/54373-h/images/i_title.jpg Binary files differdeleted file mode 100644 index d600201..0000000 --- a/old/54373-h/images/i_title.jpg +++ /dev/null |
