Which is the Better Evidence?
By W. N. Glenn
THE latest, and, as is supposed, the clinching, evidence in favor of the immortal soul-doctrine, is the testimony of Mrs. Mary Livermore, of Massachusetts, as given in a lecture in Boston on "Immortality." And this is the point now being emphasized in a circulating item:— "In all her experience with dying men, while she was in the service of the Sanitary Commission through the war, not once did one man say or hint that he was believing he was passing out of existence."—Morning Star. Mrs. Livermore is said to be "probably the most able and eloquent speaker of her sex in the world;" so of course her testimony, backed by the fact that dying soldiers did not express certain sentiments, is evidence sufficient for that class who pin their faith to eloquence and popularity. But as nearly all the Protestant world is now studying the "Acts of the Apostles" in the Sabbath and Sunday-school lessons, it would be well to refer to Peter's testimony on the day of Pentecost. Peter spoke under the influence of the grandest demonstration of the Holy Spirit of which we have any record, and withal was no doubt very eloquent. Referring to the patriarch David, Peter says, Acts 2:29, that "he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us to this day;" and this assertion is given as proof that David referred to Christ, and not to himself, when he prophesied: "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell (hades—grave), nor suffer thy Holy One to see corruption." Ps. 16:10. Although David was a prophet, and rested upon the promises of God, Peter testified by the Spirit that he "is not ascended into the heavens." Acts 2:34. As the Holy Spirit has told us that David was a prophet, let us hear his testimony as to the state of the dead: "His breath goeth forth, he returneth to his earth, in that very day his thoughts perish." Ps. 146:4. Is it any wonder that theology grows loose, and Christianity degenerates to a "form of godliness," in these last days, when the imaginations of man's wisdom and the eloquence of the popular lecturer is made the basis of doctrine, in direct variance with the express utterances of the Holy Spirit? Which is the better foundation of belief, the inspired words of prophets and apostles, or imaginary inferences from what dying soldiers may not have said or hinted? Surely we see to-day the fulfillment of Paul's prophecy, as recorded in 2 Timothy 4:34: "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."