THE NATURE OF THE SOUL.
By Elder G. C. Tenney
It is, I believe, entirely in harmony with the Scripture, and hence with the truth, to say that man has a soul. And it is not necessary in assenting to this to limit the meaning of the term to the breath, nor yet to make it embrace the entire person, although it is true that the word soul does in its scriptural use often have one of those meanings. We have seen that as an animal man consists of a body animated by the spirit of life, a principle derived directly from God. But man is essentially something infinitely more than a mere animal. The very highest mark of favor and consideration was placed upon man at his creation, when the Creator decided to make man in his own image and likeness. This we believe does not refer solely to contour of frame and feature, but it has a more important signification in its reference to the faculties of the mind. Physiologists tell us that man differs from beasts in three particulars,—men walk upright, beasts go prostrate; men have chins, beasts have none; men have moral natures, beasts know nothing of right or wrong. In this last particular we have a fact that leads to a proper understanding of the subject of man's superiority to beasts. In physical endowments men are generally inferior to the lower animals. The dog with his sense of smell possesses a power of which we can hardly conceive. Their sense of hearing is the safeguard of many timid animals, which would soon be destroyed if they could hear no better than we can. The nimble dexterity of some animals puts our human acrobats to shame,36while human strength is but trifling as compared with that of the horse, the bullock, the elephant, and other quadrupeds. But man alone of all earthly creatures bears the special mark of divine favor. For man Christ died; for man the heavenly mansions are preparing. To man God gave his word and work; to him has he given a place in the heavenly family. Why all this?—Because man alone bears in his moral and mental powers the impress of the divine mind. There must, then, be a feature in human nature that is distinct and infinitely superior to anything possessed by brutes. And so it is. Man by cultivation may acquire a character that is angelic, God-like, pure; by sin he may debase himself as much lower than the brutes as it is possible through righteousness for him to ascend above them. It is this quality in man's nature that forms the distinctive characters of individuals. These qualities of the mind become the objects of love or aversion, of respect and esteem, or of contempt. We value our fellow-men according as they manifest the amiable and desirable qualities of their mental and moral powers. We may at first be attracted to an individual by his outward appearance, but real affection is based upon the beauty of the inward adorning of the heart. The color of hair, eyes, or complexion then ceases to be much of a consideration. Their bodies may waste away by fever or consumption, but the object of love unimpaired remains. Not only do we estimate people by their moral worth, but we know that God always looks at the heart to form his opinion of men and women. "Man looketh on [at first] the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart." This feature of men's nature is of itself a distinct organization, composed of various elements differently blended in different individuals, even as the blending of tints and colors forms the pictures of art. No two are alike, so no two characters possess in the same quantities the same qualities. Taken as a whole, these principles form human character, and they constitute the essential and identifying principle in the individual's being. Without this mankind is but a drove of cattle. What shall we call this feature of human existence? Shall we call it the soul? The Bible does. Micah 6:7; Acts 14:22; Heb. 13:17; 3 John 2; Matt. 10:28. But it very much more frequently calls it the heart. So we speak of it. Others may call it character. In this sense the soul is the organization of man's conscious powers, his sentient principles, which embrace intellect, will, and moral faculties. But this, like the body, is a product of growth and development. It feeds upon its surroundings, upon the facts and impressions conveyed to it by the senses. Its development is directed by prevailing influences and by the will. At the age of moral accountability it assumes control of the body and forms the eye. Says Paul, "I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection." As we read the intimate biography of a person we have never seen, we become acquainted with him. Could we read his every word, yea, his thoughts, and discern his motives, we should then know him and realize that he was in some measure peculiar from any other person of our acquaintance, and his character only could identify him in our mind. Thus the character, heart, or soul, becomes a kind of a negative from which to reproduce the man. In God's books the most intimate record of life is kept; that record is the negative, and a man who in the resurrection bears the minute impress of that record is to all intents and purposes the same man. His consciousness connects with his former experience. His friends recognize in a glorified form the same dear friend around whom their affections were entwined. Another person bearing an outward resemblance to the lost friend, but having a consciousness and character formed on a different model, would not fill the place. The preservation or salvation of the soul becomes then the real object of faith: "Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls." 1 Peter 1:9. While lexicographers give to the Greek word ψυχή (psuche) the definition of "the breath," "the animal life," they also include in its significations "the soul, the seat of understanding, the seat of passions and feeling, the genius," "the rational soul," etc.; so that in this definition we have not gone aside from the legitimate use of the term soul. But this does not teach even by implication the dogma of natural immortality. There is not the least shadow of a foundation in all this upon which to build the theory of the independent immortality of the soul. There is nothing in the nature of the soul upon which to predicate conscious existence outside of the organism with which its manifestations are inseparably connected.