p. 280 | A Part of God by James White

International Tract and Missionary Society · Oakland, California · May 13, 1886

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 12, No. 18.

"A Part of God."

By James White

Is God divisible? May he be separated into parts, and these parts become subject to the frailties, the vices, and the sufferings of fallen creatures?

These queries were suggested to my mind by the following incident. Speaking of the destiny of the wicked, I had quoted Rev. 20:9; 2 Thess. 1:9, and 2 Peter 3:7-10, to show that the lake of fire into which they will be cast is this earth in its melted state, and the fire coming down from God out of Heaven is the element or means of their everlasting destruction. A gentleman approached me at the close of my remarks, and inquired:—

"What part of man do you think will be destroyed?"

"I think the man will be destroyed," was the reply.

"But what will become of the soul?" he inquired.

"If the soul is any part of man it will be destroyed also."

"What, do you think God will destroy a part of himself?" was the next question.

"By no means. But what has that to do with this subject?"

"It is generally conceded," said he, "that the soul is a part of God, and cannot be destroyed, for God cannot destroy a part of himself."

Then followed the queries in turn, Is the soul a

part of God? Is God divisible? Can a part of God sin? And will God punish a part of himself for evil doing? Such monstrous conclusions ought to suppress the utterance of such an idea. Yet this was an educated man; he could draw a conclusion. And this shows how thoughtlessly men will take an absurd position to sustain a popular error.

A view more generally advocated than that here advanced is this: The soul is an independent creation; or, each soul of mankind emanates directly from God. This doctrine is supposed to be free from the defect which is so apparent in the other. Though this does not lead to the same conclusion as the other, it leads to one which is very erroneous, and, like the other, makes God directly responsible for all the sin which exists in the world. This defect has been discovered, and the doctrine itself combatted on that account, by some who are considered orthodox in regard to the nature and destiny of the soul. The Ladies' Repository, a well-known Methodist journal, of February, 1859, said:—

"The general opinion held seems to be that the soul is created, and does not come by transmission from parents, as the body does. The Roman church has steadily received and taught it."

"If the body only is derived by transmission from Adam, while each separate soul is a direct work of creation, then original or hereditary depravity, so far as the soul is concerned, is a thing impossible. If each soul is created by God as it comes into existence, then it must be holy, or God must be charged with making it unholy, and thus being the author of evil."

This is sound reasoning, to which no exception can be taken. But the product cannot rise above the producer. If the whole being or person (the soul and the body) is transmitted from the parents, then the whole being, soul and body, is subject to the conditions of the parents. That which is begotten, or produced by natural generation, is mortal, subject to death.

God is dishonored by this doctrine of the inherent immortality of the soul, whether the soul be impiously called "a part of God," or whether it be considered a direct creation of God. In either case God is made the direct producer of a sinful being; the sin of the soul is traced to God as its originator. And if the soul is transmitted from its parents, or begotten, then it can be immortal or held in existence by the direct power of God. "In him we live, and move, and have our being." If he withdraw his power we cease to exist. And hence, if a sinful being lives forever it is because God perpetuates the sin. But "every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up." Let every soul respond, Amen, "true and righteous are thy judgments." J. H. W.