Man’s Destiny by Nahum Orcutt

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 23, 1872

Man’s Destiny.

By Nahum Orcutt

In a late number of the Express and Standard, published at Newport, Vt., appeared the following local notice:

“The lecture last Thursday evening by Rev. W. C. Somerville was a good one; the principal fault to be found with it being its brevity, hardly filling half an hour. The subject, ‘Man’s Destiny,’ naturally led the speaker to the consideration of the future state of the human race. By clear, sound, and strong arguments, he demolished the doctrine of annihilation, and from revelation, science, and especially the unsatisfied longing of man’s nature, demonstrated his immortality and his capacity for a higher and nobler life than the present.”

On seeing this, Bro. N. Orcutt, of Jamaica, Vt., prepared the following article and sent it to that paper, whereupon the publishers suddenly became aware that newspaper controversy was unprofitable, and declined to publish it.

MESSRS. EDITORS: Among the local items in your paper of Feb. 13, 1872, I notice a brief mention of a lecture delivered at Newport the Thursday evening previous, by Rev. W. C. Somerville, upon “Man’s Destiny.”

Had it been my privilege to listen to the lecture, perhaps I might have seen and accepted the speaker’s conclusions as reported. As it is, perhaps a brief statement of my difficulties in the columns of the Express and Standard may call forth from the writer of the above-mentioned report, or some other person, a reasonable, scriptural solution of my difficulties.

While I can see that the nature of his subject would naturally lead the speaker to consider somewhat, “the future state of the human race,” I am unable to see from what premises some of the inferences stated were drawn. But the arguments are said to have been clear, sound, and strong. If so, they must have carried conviction to those who listened.

Two prominent points are mentioned by your reporter as the result of the lecturer’s effort: the demolition of the doctrine of annihilation, and demonstrating of man’s immortality and capacity for a higher and nobler life than the present. I see readily that the doctrine which was demolished (annihilation) is not only at variance with the principles of sound philosophy, but lacks the essential element of being in harmony with, and sustained by, the Scriptures of truth, upon which we are dependent for our knowledge of the future state of the human race.

But I am at a loss to conceive who has been found advocating this doctrine. I am led to query whether the lecturer has not been demolishing a man of straw. If he would substitute the word destruction, a term which is found in the Scriptures, for the one he is reported as dealing with (annihilation), perhaps the subject would assume a more tangible form, a form not so easily demolished. See 2 Thess. 1:5–10.

It is said of the second point that he demonstrated man’s immortality from “revelation, science, and especially the unsatisfied longing of man’s nature”—a strong array of witnesses.

But we wonder how the idea of man’s immortality could have been demonstrated from revelation, if by revelation is meant the Scriptures, the written word. If it is there plainly taught, then we may safely accept of inferences drawn from the same source, or from science, or the unsatisfied longings of man’s nature, as sustaining a great truth already established. If not there plainly, definitely taught, is it safe to conclude that the point is demonstrated by inferences professedly based upon the word, or testimony drawn from any other source?

Is the immortality of man demonstrated by Romans 2:7: “To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life”? Would a rational man, acting understandingly, seek for that which he already possessed?

Or do we find the proof in 1 Cor. 15:53, 54: “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”? Does the intelligent man talk of putting on, or having put on, that which is an inherent attribute of his nature—that which he knows he cannot put off if he would?

Or shall we look for the evidence to demonstrate this point, to the utterance of Paul in 2 Tim. 1:10: “By the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel”? Immortality brought to light by the Saviour, by his appearing, when it has been an essential, inherent property of the constitution of every son and daughter of Adam?

Or, again, do we find it in the language of the same apostle, 1 Tim. 6:16: “Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light,” &c.? Who? “The blessed and only potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of lords.” Verse 15. How is this great principle demonstrated to be true by the inspired declaration that God the Father “only hath immortality”?

If not demonstrated by some one, or all, of these instances, where the inspired penmen have used the word to express this assumed attribute of man’s nature, where shall we look for the proof? The word immortality is not found in the written word, save in the five instances above mentioned. And immortal is found but once, in 1 Tim. 1:17: “Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God,” &c. Neither of these words is, in the Scriptures, applied to man in a manner to convey the idea, or justify the inference, that he has any such attribute, or will have until he seeks for it by patient continuance in well-doing, as it is brought to light through the gospel, and has put it on at the time when this mortal shall have put on immortality.

Even a casual examination of the six instances where these two words occur, must convince any one that the above statement is correct.

For any definite declaration to demonstrate this proposition, we must look, then, to some other source than the Scriptures, perhaps to that revelation which is claimed by modern spiritualism to have come through the same source as the Scriptures, communications from the spirits of the dead through mediums, which mediums, in consequence of being better developed, are able to give us a revelation more reliable than the former(?). I confess myself unprepared to enter into an exploration of this field for evidence to demonstrate the point in question, and unwilling to base my faith upon testimony drawn therefrom.

Passing to the other sources from whence it is reported that your lecturer drew his proof to demonstrate man’s immortality, we inquire: Has God left us to infer from science what he has failed to reveal plainly and definitely in his word? True science will be found always in harmony with all truth. Would it not be well, before accepting any conclusion drawn from this source not in harmony with the definite statements of the word, to re-examine the matter in the light of Paul’s admonition to Timothy (1 Tim. 6:20, 21)?

Respecting the unsatisfied longings of man’s nature as demonstrating the doctrine of man’s inherent immortality, it seems to me but little need be said, when we remember that “the carnal mind is enmity against God,” &c. Rom. 8:7.

But waiving this consideration, some queries suggest themselves, which, although it may betray ignorance, I cannot forbear to mention. Grant, for the time, that man’s unsatisfied longings for immortality prove that he has it, that it is an inherent property of his nature—and what follows? Man desires riches. Does that prove that he has the wealth of this world? He desires worldly honor. Does that demonstrate that he is highly esteemed of his fellows? The starving thousands of destitute Persia desire food above all things in this world. Shall we conclude from this that they have an abundance wherewith to satisfy this unsatisfied longing of their nature? The sufferers from the recent railroad disaster near Alton, Ill., would have told us, when, unable to extricate themselves from the debris of the wrecked and burning car, a horrible death stared them in the face, that they desired—longed for deliverance from the fearful, impending doom of being roasted alive. Did that unsatisfied longing return them safely to their homes? The unsatisfied longings of man’s nature would desire the possession of every conceivable good and exemption from every possible evil. But what does that demonstrate? That he has, or ever will have, all that he desires to enjoy? That he is exempt from every pain and sorrow? Ask the world where “the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.” Rom. 8:22.

NAHUM ORCUTT.

Jamaica, Vt., Feb., 1872.