The Nature of Man as to Life and Death
By George W. Rine
Misconstrued Scripture Passages
IN the preceding article of this series it was shown, by copious citations from the Scriptures, that man in his present state is mortal, and that the dead ARE dead and "know not anything." No man can be both dead and alive at the same time, for the terms "death" and "life" are always used in the Bible as antithetical to each other, and therefore mutually exclusive. They are always set over against each other as hopelessly hostile contraries. The Scriptures assure us that when the spirit, or breath, or life principle, leaves the body the man dies, and would never live again were it not for the grace of God through a Redeemer; that the dead, both the just and the unjust, remain under the dominion of death till God shall again breathe into them the breath of life, when, as in the vision of dry bones (Ezekiel 37), they shall live again — the righteous in their spiritual and immortal bodies to live and reign forever with Christ; and the unjust to die again, the "second death," from which there is no restoration. It is by the misconstruction of a few Bible passages, that the heathen dogma of original human immortality attempts to find support from Scripture; while the tenor of Scripture teaching from beginning to end contradicts it, and represents man as one undivided and indivisible personality, consisting of body, soul, and spirit, all of which are essential to his life, not only now but also in the life to come. One of these inspired passages is the record of the conversation that took place between our Lord on the cross and the penitent thief. The dying malefactor, recognizing Jesus as the Saviour of sinners, looked into His face, and prayed, "Lord, remember me when Thou comest in [wrongly translated into] Thy kingdom." The Lord's answer to this penitential prayer was, "Verily I say unto thee to-day, Thou shalt be with Me in Paradise." This promise to the dying5thief is yet to be fulfilled, for it is only the false punctuation that makes it read as tho he should be in Paradise that day. The marks of punctuation are not a part of the original Scriptures, and hence were not inserted by divine inspiration. The comma was first used about 1490. By placing the comma after "to-day," the sense of the original is expressed in harmony with the whole tenor of the Scriptures. The adverb "to-day" is thus made to qualify the verb "say," which fact gives it special significance. At the very time that our Lord made this momentous promise, He was apparently at the mercy of His implacable foe, the devil. His enemies were passing by, wagging their heads, and mocking Him. He was about to bow His head in death. Men and devils believed that they had finally and forever disposed of Him. Even His disciples were utterly disheartened, and anxiously asked one another whether their beloved Master was after all the One "who was to come" — the long-promised Messiah. That day was to the Redeemer a day of apparent defeat, of ignominy, of death. All the sinister powers of earth and hell were arrayed against Him. It was to Him a day of blackness and thick darkness, of horror and agony. All the circumstances of that day conspired to spell DEFEAT and HOPELESSNESS. How wondrously significant, therefore, is the Saviour's use of the adverb "to-day" in His answer to the penitent culprit's prayer! It was equivalent to saying that "tho to-day I am apparently helpless under the powers of death, My promises of a coming kingdom seemingly belied, and My hopes apparently crushed, yet to-day, even on this day of blackness and agony and death — TO-DAY I say unto you, Thou shalt be with ME in Paradise." After His resurrection Jesus in unqualified terms declared to Mary that He had not yet ascended to His Father. John 20: 17. Hence He could not have been in Paradise since His crucifixion, inasmuch as the Father's throne is in the midst of Paradise. Compare Rev. 2: 7 and 22: 1, 2. However, the Master's promise to the conscience-stricken sinner on the cross will be gloriously fulfilled in that day when He shall say to those on His right, "Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." Matt. 25: 34. The inspired story of our Lord's transfiguration on the mount is often cited in corroboration of Plato's dictum, "There is no death." The record affirms that Moses and Elijah appeared with Christ on the mount. Hence the champions of the theory of human deathlessness contend that at least Moses must have appeared there as a disembodied spirit, since the Scriptures explicitly inform us of the death and burial of Moses. But they overlook the fact that the Lord Himself declared the transfiguration scene to have been a vision, which usually means an unreal appearance. Even if it were to be considered real as to Moses and Elijah, it must be remembered that the latter never passed through the ordeal of death, but was translated to heaven, and that the Scriptures clearly intimate that Moses had been raised to life. In the ninth verse of Jude it is stated that Michael the Archangel, at some time, contended with the devil respecting the body of Moses. Now, by comparing Daniel 12: 1 with 1 Thess. 4: 16 it will be seen that "Michael the Archangel" is one of the several titles of Christ. Christ "is the resurrection and the life." Satan is the author and ruler of death. Heb. 2: 14. Hence if Christ had a dispute or contention with the devil regarding the body of Moses, it must have been caused by the Lord's reclaiming the body of Moses from the power of death, by a resurrection. Satan, claiming the dominion of death as peculiarly his own, would naturally dispute the right of Jesus to rescue His servant Moses from that dominion. Of course it is inconceivable that Christ should ever suffer defeat in any contest with Satan. Hence the conclusion that the Master had His way is inescapable — and Moses was raised to life and immortality. Even Dr. Adam Clarke, who held the dogma of inherent immortality, admits that Moses was probably raised from the dead. All Bible Christians are agreed that the transfiguration scene constituted a miniature picture or representation of the coming kingdom of Christ. How appropriate, then, that Elijah should be there as the representative of those who, without tasting death, shall be translated to that kingdom at the coming of the Lord, and that Moses should appear there as the representative of all those who shall be raised to glory and immortality at the second appearing of our Lord. See 2 Peter 1: 16-18. Another Bible passage often given a forced construction in order to make it do service in support of the hoary heathen theory of death in life, is found in Matt. 22: 23-32, and in Luke 20: 27-38. The party of the Sadducees, in the time of Christ, believed in no future life at all. Death was to them the end of all being. In verse 23 of Matthew 22, it is expressly declared respecting the Sadducees that they "say that there is no resurrection." They well knew that Christ taught the doctrine of a final resurrection from the dead. That they might perplex and confound Jesus in respect to His position on this doctrine, they brought to Him the supposed case of a woman, who, after marrying seven brothers in succession, died at last herself; and asked Him, "Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her." The reply of Christ is deserving of special study in its bearing on the question in hand. He first asserts: "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 He still further replies, as recorded in Luke: "Now that the dead are raised, even Moses showed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living." It should be noted here that Christ says nothing regarding the state of the dead, for in respect to this question He and the Sadducees are in perfect agreement. But as the text clearly shows, His object was to refute their teaching to the effect that there is no resurrection. They professed to believe the writings of Moses. Christ reminds them that Moses wrote that God is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; and that He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. But they all (Christ and the Sadducees) knew that these patriarchs had long been dead. Hence if God is the God of the living, He must, in order to be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, RAISE THEM FROM THE DEAD. Thus Jesus proved incontestably that there must be a resurrection of the dead. That both the Pharisees and Sadducees understood the reply of our Lord as meeting the point the Sadducees had raised, "as touching the resurrection of the dead," is evident from the sequel; for it is said, "After that they [Sadducees] durst not ask Him any question at all." "But when the Pharisees had heard that He had put the Sadducees to silence, they were gathered together," etc. Christ's argument in proof of a resurrection of the dead may be expressed thus: God is declared to be the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and He is also the God of the living. Since these patriarchs are dead, God, in order to be their God and yet the God of the living, must sometime raise them from the dead. Hence there will be a resurrection. The Spirit Returns to God Who Gave It
Speaking of the dissolution of man in death, Solomon says, "Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it." Eccl. 12: 7. It should first be noted that what the wise man here predicates of man he predicates of every man, the unrighteous as well as the righteous. The "spirit" of every man returns at death to God. If the spirit here spoken of is a conscious personality independently of the body, and as such returns to God at the death of the body, then evil as well as good spirits go to God. This of course proves too much. But let us catch Solomon's meaning, which is of course the obvious meaning. He is describing dissolution of man by tracing back the steps taken in the creation of man, as set forth in Gen. 2: 7. Thus: "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." How simple is Solomon's thought when placed by the side of this citation. In the simplest of words he tells us that at death man's body goes back to the elements of which it was originally formed, and that the spirit, or life-giving breath, originally imparted to the body by God, returns to God, the Giver. Observe please that what returns to God, is what God originally "gave" to man. Did God, in the creation of man, breathe into his inanimate body a rational, conscious intelligence? We all instinctively answer, No. Then it is precisely what God breathed into man's nostrils that returns to Him at the death of the individual. The "spirit" that returns to God is simply the "breath of life" breathed into man by his Creator. We all know that the "breath of life" never came from the dust of the ground as did the body, and hence can not, in the very nature of things, return to dust. We thus find that the Scriptures are beautifully consistent throughout. They contain no ambiguity, no contradiction. They contain nothing at variance with the declaration found in Ps. 146: 3, 4, to the effect that when a human soul dies, in "that very day his thoughts perish." But let us thank God for His unspeakable gift, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is to every believer "the RESURRECTION and the LIFE."