Scriptural Investigation.
By M. E. Cornell
While at West Union, I noticed that the doctrine of man's mortality produced a great stir among the people. In a discussion with Eld. R. Swearagen (Methodist) on the nature of man, the truth shone brighter for the scouring it received. Proposition. Do the Scriptures teach that man possesses an immortal, conscious principle? This question was discussed before Judge McClintock as moderator, for seven evenings. The investigation made sale for books and tracts, and I think the result is as good as the generality of discussions. The brethren thought we could not well avoid it, as the cause might suffer if we appeared to be afraid to meet their positions. As a full report would be tedious, I give but a brief selection from the many positions and arguments. Swearagen. "What is man?" His conscious part was made in the image of God, which consisted in righteousness, immortality, &c. Reply. This proves too much. God is omnipotent and all-wise as well as immortal. It could not be the image of righteousness, for Adam had no character until he began to act toward law. Men have to form their own character. Adam was not pronounced "good" as to character, for he had none: it was not yet formed. The "image" consisted in that which was "made" and described as male and female. "In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him. Male and female created he them." Gen. v, 1, 2. Again, that which possesses blood is in the image of God: "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God made he man." Gen. ix, 6. When God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness," &c., Gen. i, 26, he addressed his Son, who Paul says was in the express image of his person, Heb. i, 3, making it sure that man was in the image of God's person, and not of his attributes or qualities. Men are "made after the similitude of God." James iii, 9. They are in God's image by creation, while the moral image, or likeness of God's righteousness, is to be acquired or put on. "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord." Isa. lv, 8. "Be ye holy, for I am holy." 1 Pet. i, 16. It is objected that the "first man is of the earth, earthy," and God is a Spirit, and therefore man cannot be in the personal image of God. But who cannot see that a thing may be made in the perfect image and likeness of another, and yet be of entirely different material? In New York there is an image of John Wesley in marble, standing behind a Methodist pulpit. In Boston stands a metallic image of Franklin. It does not follow that Wesley was marble or the body of Franklin metallic. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body, and yet the one may be in the image and form of the other. The affirmative must show, 1. That the word soul, or spirit, in his proof texts, refers to the conscious part of man, and, 2. That it is immortal. If he could prove that the conscious part of man survived the death of the body, even then his proposition would not be any nearer established, for though it should survive the first death, it might soon fall at the second death. He must show that the conscious principle never will, and never can, cease. When this is done, all will know it. Man is a conscious being. But man is to be destroyed. Therefore a conscious being will be destroyed. But that which is destructible is not immortal. Matt. x, 28, was quoted to show that the soul could not be killed or destroyed, but a close examination shows that there is an intimation in the text itself, that God will destroy both soul and body in hell (or Gehenna). In Isa. x, 17, 18, we learn that "both soul and body" will be consumed or devoured. Dr. Clarke's comment on this text says, "This is a proverbial expression, signifying that they should be entirely and altogether consumed." On the first and second deaths Dr. Clarke says, "By the first the body is destroyed during time; by the second, body and soul are destroyed through eternity.">—Com. on Rev. xx, 14. Haywood translates as follows: "Let that great Being be the object of your fear, who can involve both soul and body in total and everlasting destruction." Luke xii, 15. That which is destructible is not immortal. The conscious, responsible part of man is mortal and ceases to act when the body dies. "Shall mortal man be more just than God?" Job iv, 17. That which can be "just" is the conscious being, and that is mortal. Again, "Let me alone that I may take comfort a little, before I go whence I shall not return, even to the land of darkness and the shadow of death: a land of darkness, as darkness itself; and of the shadow of death, without any order, and where the light is as darkness." Job x, 20–22. That which can "take comfort" is the conscious part of man, and that was going into darkness and death, where no more comfort could be taken, because unconscious. Dr. Adam Clarke says, "How do souls exist separate from their respective bodies? Of what are they capable, and what is their employment? Who can answer these questions? Perhaps nothing can be said much better of the state than is said in Job x, 21: 'A land of obscurity like darkness, and the shadow of death; a place where death rules, over which he projects his shadow, intercepting every light of every kind of life.'" Chris. Theol., p. 379. That which can praise God, and remember, and know, goes at death to the "land of forgetfulness." Ps. lxxxviii, 10–12. "The dead praise not the Lord, neither any that go down into silence." Ps. cxv, 17. Man as a conscious being goes into silence at death, and ceases to praise God, and there is no use in trying to evade so evident a conclusion. Swearagen. "Where is he?" Job xiv, 10. My friend answers, Nowhere! But Job expected to be somewhere. Reply. True, and Job shall tell where he expected to be. See verse 13: "O that thou wouldest hide me in the grave." "If I wait, the grave is mine house." Chap. xvii, 13. "They shall go down to the bars of the pit (sheol), when our rest together is in the dust." Verse 16. S. The Bible thought men had good sense. Immortal soul would be tautology. The very word soul signifies immortality. R. If "soul signifies immortality," apply the word immortal to the word soul in the following: "And they smote all the (immortal) souls that were therein with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them: there was not any left to breathe," &c. Josh. xi, 11. "He that spared not their (immortal) soul from death." Ps. lxxviii, 50. "One (immortal) soul of five hundred, both of the persons, and of the beeves, and of the asses, and of the sheep." Num. xxxi, 28. See also, "Fat (immortal) soul," "lean (immortal) soul," "faint (immortal) soul," &c. If the soul was immortal it would be so called as much as once out of eight hundred times in which the word soul occurs in the Bible. But it is not immortal, and the Bible thought some men had no better sense than to prefer "fables" to sound doctrine, 2 Tim. iv, 3, 4, and use "vain conversation," received by tradition of their fathers." 1 Pet. i, 18. The word immortal occurs but once in all the Bible, and is applied to God. 1 Tim. i, 17. Immortality occurs five times, but is never applied to man in this life. Man was shut away from the tree of life, that he might not eat and live forever. Gen. ii, 22. And now man's immortality is deferred till the resurrection. 1 Cor. xv, 52–54. S. Death is a separation of parts. R. If we admit this to be true it will prove nothing, for it would remain to be proved that one of these parts was conscious when separated. "His breath (one part)26goeth forth, he (another part) returneth to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish." Ps. cxlvi, 4. This shows that when the "separation of parts" takes place, the thoughts cease. No more thinking till the resurrection or re-uniting of the parts. The union of the parts is necessary to produce thoughts. This is all we claim. S. The account of the death of the rich man and Lazarus teaches that the soul is immortal. R. The word soul, or immortal, is not found in the text or context. The rich man died, and was buried, and in hell (hades) lifted up his eyes, &c. The same that died and was buried, lifted up his eyes. Dr. Clarke says, "In the reading of my old MS. Bible, which is supported by several versions: Forsooth, the rich man is dead and is buried in hell! And this is also the reading of the Anglo Saxon: 'And was in hell buried.' In some MSS. it reads: 'The rich man died also, and was buried in hell; and lifting up his eyes, being in torment, he saw,' &c." In Isa. xiv, 9–16, the dead in the grave are personified as seeing, "narrowly looking," and speaking. In Eze. xxxi, 16–18, "Pharaoh and all his multitude" are represented as being cast down to hell (sheol) and "comforted in the nether parts of the earth." In chap. xxx2, 18–31, a company is represented as "gone down," slain with the sword," and having "laid their swords under their heads," and "Pharaoh shall see them," &c. Sheol, where this multitude is represented as being conscious, is declared to be the grave, and corresponds exactly with hades, where the rich man was buried, lifted up his eyes, saw, called for water, &c. Dr. Clarke says, "Let it be remembered that by the consent of all (except the basely interested), no metaphor is ever to be produced in proof of a doctrine."—Com. on Matt. v, 26. It is to be observed that the account of the rich man and Lazarus is found in a noted list of parables. A manuscript of the seventh century reads, "And he spake another parable, There was a certain rich man, &c." Another of the tenth century reads, "The Lord spake this parable," &c. Being a parable, the following from Quackenbos' Rhetoric, p. 248, is applicable: "Allegory is a combination of kindred metaphors, so connected in sense as to form a kind of story. The parables of Scripture, as well as fables that point a moral, are varieties of this figure." The thief on the cross was referred to as proof of consciousness in death. But in John xx, 17, we learn that Christ himself had not ascended three days from the time he said to the thief, "Verily I say unto thee to-day, shalt thou be with me in paradise." If the thief's prayer was regarded, the answer had reference to the day of his coming. "Remember me when thou comest in thy kingdom." When is that? When he shall "judge the quick and dead at his appearing and his kingdom." 2 Tim. iv, 1. The promise of the Saviour, then, must have had reference to the day of his appearing and the judgment. Griesbach approves the following:
> "And he said to Jesus, Remember me, Lord, when thou comest in the day of thy coming. And Jesus said to him, To thee I say, So be it; this day itself, thou shalt be with me in the garden of delights." S. Christ gave up his soul, not merely his breath. He says, "I have power to lay down my life, and have power to take it again." Something was conscious to take the life again. R. His soul was the offering. "Hath poured out his soul unto death." Isa. liii, 10–12. The offering must die. The Son could take his life again when his Father gave it to him. "We have testified of God that he raised up Christ." 1 Cor. xv, 15. "Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death." Acts ii, 24. "Thou (God) wilt not leave my soul in hell (hades or grave) neither wilt thou suffer thy Holy One to see corruption." Verse 27. S. He is not satisfied when he says the soul of man dies with the body, but he rises higher in his blasphemy, and says, The soul of Christ died—that divinity died! He even kills a part of God! What awful blasphemy!! R. If it be blasphemy to say that the divine Son of God died, how much greater blasphemy is found in the Methodist Discipline—"Very God and very man, who truly suffered, was crucified, dead and buried," &c. Watson, speaking of Christ's death, says, "The death of One who partook of flesh and blood," "in that lower nature he dies." "Sufferings and death of the Incarnate Deity."—Institutes, pp. 219, 259. Dr. Clarke says, "A body was prepared for the eternal Logos, and in that body he came to do the will of God, that is, to suffer and die." Com. on Heb. x, 6. This charge of blasphemy is not only against his own Discipline, and principal theologian, and commentator, but his hymn book is full of such blasphemy. "The incarnate God hath died for me."
—Hymn 133, revised ed.
"Christ, the mighty Maker, died."—146.
"The rising God forsakes the tomb."—148.
"Down from the shining seats above,
With joyful haste he fled;
Entered the grave in mortal flesh,
And dwelt among the dead."—131.
But worst of all, this awful charge is against the Bible. In John i, 2, 14, we learn that the "Word" which "was in the beginning with God," "was made flesh." And in Heb. i, 2, 3, the Son of God, who was the "express image of his person," did "by himself purge our sins." That which was "the express image" of God, was the sacrifice, and of course had to die. In Phil. ii, 5–8, "Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men; and being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." There is nothing more clearly taught in the Scriptures than that he that came down from heaven died; that he "was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death," and was "put to death in the flesh." Heb. ii, ix [ix should be 9]; 1 Pet. iii, 18. "He hath poured out his soul unto death." Isa. liii, 12. If Christ died, soul and body, and was raised, soul and body, then man will be raised from the dead, soul and body, for Christ in his resurrection was the "first-fruits (or sample) of them that slept." 1 Cor. xv, 20. If, as Clarke says, the "Eternal Logos" did "suffer and die," it is folly to talk about an essential part of man not being subject to death. Such talk sounds much like the echo to that lie of the old serpent, "Thou shalt not surely die." S. Quotes Addison—"Why this longing after immortality?" All men have a desire for immortality, &c. R. He must be getting out of arguments. The fact that men have an inherent desire for immortality, proves they haven't got it. A hungry man desires food, and seeks for it, but when he has obtained all he can eat, the desiring it and seeking it cease. We are told to seek for immortality, Rom. ii, 7; for the very good reason that we do not possess it. If men always had in possession what they desired and longed for, thousands would be comfortable and happy, whereas they are poor and miserable. S. Quotes, "I am thy fellow-servant and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book." Rev. xxii, 9. If the spirit is not conscious when the body is dead, how could one of the old prophets communicate with John on the isle of Patmos? If this does not prove consciousness in death, no language can do it. R. I am glad, Mr. Chairman, that the affirmative has hung the question upon this text, by acknowledging that if this fails, his question is gone. We shall soon rejoice that the question is so easily disposed of. Let us see whether it was one of the old prophets that spoke to John. "I fell down before the feet of the angel which showed me these things. And he saith unto me," &c. Are the angels of God nothing but the departed spirits of dead men? The Bible Union translates this, "I am a fellow-servant with thee and with thy brethren." Tyndale translates, "I am thy fellow-servant, and the fellow-servant of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book." John was a prophet, Daniel was a prophet, and the angel visited both, with the testimony of God. Both Daniel and John, and the angel sent to them, were fellow-servants of the most high God. But to say that the spirit of one of the dead prophets was communicating to John, is to admit all that Spiritualists claim. Spiritualists present will please take notice and give us credit for making them a genuine convert. That angels are only the spirits of the dead is the universal claim of Spiritualists. If it was right for John to practise necromancy on the isle of Patmos, why was it forbidden as an abomination in the former dispensation? See Deut. xviii, 10–12. The Bible there positively forbids the practice or pretence of going to the dead for knowledge. See also Isa. viii, 19, 20. S. The body does not make the man. The term, man, does not apply to a dead body. R. This position is disproved by the account of the creation of the first man. "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground," &c. "That which was made of the dust was the man. Again, "The first man is of the earth, earthy," &c. "Thy dead men shall live." "There was a dead man carried out," &c. Luke vii, 12. "Blood of a dead man." Rev. xvi, 3. If a man dies, shall he live again?" Job xiv, 14. It is the man that dies, and the man which lives again, or is raised from the dead. If we appeal to other translations and authors for light as to the first man, of what he was composed, we shall find this position fully corroborated. Kitto, in his Cyclopædia of Biblical Literature, reads Gen. ii, 7, as follows: "And Jehovah God formed the man (Heb., the Adam), dust from the ground, and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living animal." S. "In a moment go down to the grave." Job xxi, 13. The grave in this text is sheol, and refers to the place of departed spirits. Quotes authors to prove that sheol sometimes means the receptacle of spirits. R. But sheol in this text, and in every text where it is located, is said to be "down." "Let them go down quick into sheol." Ps. lv, 15 [lv, 15 is actually lv, 15 in some versions or ix, 17]. "Her house is the way to sheol, going down," &c. Prov. vii, 27. "The way of life is above to the wise, that he may depart from sheol beneath." Prov. xv, 24. "Sheol from beneath is moved for thee." Isa. xxviii, 15. "They shall go down to the bars of sheol." Job xvii, 16. "They also went down into sheol." Eze. xxxi, 17. It is certain therefore that if my friend's "immortal spirits" go to sheol, they must go down. But this will not agree with his other proof text. "Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward?" &c. Also, "The spirit shall return unto God who gave it." If the spirit goes to God it must go upward; for the Bible always points upward to God. But my friend says God is everywhere, and therefore in sheol. Yes, but in this sense the spirit was with God all the time. If there is one place in which God is, more than in every other place, it is heaven, and it is only in this sense that the spirit (if a conscious entity) can go to God; for in the sense of his omnipresence it was with him all the time. But if it goes to sheol then the Bible has misled us in teaching that God is in heaven. But if the spirit is in sheol, it is dead and unconscious, for the Bible invariably represents sheol as the place of the dead. "But he knoweth not that the dead are there; and that her guests are in the depths of hell" (sheol). Prov. ix, 18. "Let the wicked be silent in the grave" (sheol). These texts show that the inhabitants of sheol are "dead," and "silent," and Job xvii, 16, shows that sheol is the place where men "rest together in the dust." But that sheol is a place of total unconsciousness, is evident from Eccl. ix, 10, "There is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave (sheol) whither thou goest." Whatever it is, thou, that goes to sheol, it is in a place where there is "no knowledge," a place where they "know not anything," verse 5, and where "their love, and their hatred and their envy, are now perished." Verse 6. The arguments that we oppose represent that fabled "immortal conscious principle" as going "up" to God, and down to sheol; as going to God, and yet as being with God all the time. But the word of God is not yea and nay. Truth is harmonious. Error is crooked and contradictory. S. He quotes Jer. xxxi, 15 [printed xxx, 15]—"refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not." But this does not prove that they were out of existence. Enoch "was not, for God took him." Enoch "was not" here, for he was in heaven. Those children "were not" here, for they were in sheol. R. All right. We do not deny that the children slain by Herod went to sheol, but the next verse informs us where that was: "They shall come again from the land of the enemy." What enemy? "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death." 1 Cor. xv, 26. Sheol is the land of the enemy death, because its inhabitants are dead. When that "enemy" is destroyed, then those children will come again to their own border. Amen. How can sheol be called the land of the enemy, if its inhabitants are conscious and happy, praising the Lord? Do the Scriptures teach that man possesses an immortal conscious principle? No. Every effort made to establish this proposition has signally failed. There is neither Bible nor reason in its favor. Man is a conscious being. When man dies a conscious being dies. That which is conscious while man is a living soul, ceases to be conscious when he is dead. "The living know that they shall die, but the dead know not anything." Eccl. ix, 5. Whatever it is that knows while man is living, ceases to know anything when he is dead. Hence man's "conscious principle" is not immortal. But the dead will be raised, and of the righteous it is said, "This mortal must put on immortality." Immortality is found in the resurrection, and not in death. The Bible does not teach that man possesses immortality in this corruptible earthly nature in this life, nor yet in death; but it is promised to those who seek for it, to be given at the resurrection. Immortality comes through Christ and the resurrection, and not through Adam and death. The resurrection is the gate to endless joy. Praise God for so harmonious a truth, and so glorious a hope!