p. 1 | Origin of the Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul and Eternal Misery

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Dec 8, 1863

Origin of the Doctrine of the Immortality of the Soul and Eternal Misery.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

It HAVING already been proved that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul and eternal misery is not taught in the Scriptures (see Which? Mortal or Immortal?) the question arises, Where did it originate? and how came it in the church? For that such a doctrine is almost universally received by the professed Christians of this age, will not be denied.

These questions are easily solved by the unprejudiced reader of history. Let us examine a few facts on this subject. If I mistake not, we shall find that this doctrine originated with the idolatrous Egyptians, was received from thence and enlarged upon, by the Greeks; from Greece it was taken to Rome and introduced into the church along with other heathen institutions.

1. First, then, let us see what the Egyptians did believe on this point. "That the thinking principle in man is of an immortal nature, was believed by the Ancient Egyptians." Thomas Dick.

"The Egyptians believed that at the death of men, their souls transmigrated into other human bodies." Rollin's Anc. Hist. Vol. 1. p. 141.

"The priests adopted the doctrine of the transmigration of the soul, while the belief that it will endure as long as the body exists, obtained with the people.">—Mitchell's Anc. Geog. p. 60.

"The Egyptian religion at this time (about 1600 or 1800 years B. C.) was the worship of a crowd of gods, of which some were stone statues and others living animals; and it was against these and other Egyptian superstitions, that many of the laws of Moses were directly pointed.">—Howe's Bartlett's Glimpses of Egypt.

From these testimonies, it appears that the doctrine was not yet fully established, as a majority of the people believed that the soul existed only as long as the body could be kept from decaying; and hence their great care to embalm the body. Even the priests had not yet advanced so far as to suppose that the soul could exist separate from the body. From these facts, I say, it is evident that the doctrine was then in its infancy; and that it was not yet comprehended in all its beauty and sublimity! as it was taught by Socrates and Plato, who had the glory of bringing it to perfection. I suppose it is not very flattering to immortal-soulists to know that the "foundation of their religion," originated with a set of such gross idolators as the Egyptians were: but I do not know how they can successfully deny the fact.

It may be objected that the Egyptians living at this early period, might have obtained this doctrine by tradition from their fathers, who had worshipped the true God. But the reader will bear in mind that immortal-soulists do not believe in the transmigration of the soul, and hence will not allow that this part could come from God. That the early books of the Bible, or those written by Moses, do not reveal the immortality of the soul, is acknowledged even by the advocates of natural immortality. And if these books did not teach it, certainly it could not have been obtained from this source.

Gibbon justly remarks that "we might naturally expect that a principle so essential to religion, would have been revealed in the clearest terms to the chosen people of Palestine, and that it might safely have been entrusted to the hereditary priesthood of Aaron. It is incumbent on us to adore the mysterious dispensations of Providence, when we discover that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is omitted in the law of Moses.">—Decline and Fall. Vol. 1. p. 530.

In his note on this passage of Gibbon, the learned H. H. Milman says, "This remarkable fact as far as the law of Moses, is unquestionable. . . . Modern writers have accounted in various ways for the silence of the Hebrew legislator on the immortality of the soul." He accounts for it by supposing that it might have been "more pernicious than useful to the people"—a supposition which is fully corroborated by its baneful effects at the present time.

The inquiry naturally arises, If such a doctrine was never taught by divine authority, how did the idea of a future life come to be so universally received by the human family? A conditional promise of a future life was made to Adam, Gen. iii, 15, but it was to be through the resurrection. Acts xxvi, 6-8. 1 Cor. xv, 21, 22.

The idea of a future life would naturally be remembered, while the means by which it was to be obtained would be easily forgotten. This we find to be the case; while nearly all nations have some idea of a future life, the notions as to how that life is to be obtained and what its occupations are to be, are as numerous as the nations themselves.

2. Did the Greeks obtain their religion from Egypt? They did, the basis and main pillars of their system. Of course their own national customs and peculiarities were interwoven with them; but the main point—the immortality of the soul—was retained and enlarged upon.

"It is well known, that Plato, Socrates and other Greek philosophers, held the doctrine of the soul's immortality.">—Dick's Works Vol. 1. p. 18.

"The elements of their (the Greek's) religious worship were derived by the Greeks either from Asia or Egypt.">—Mitchell's Anc. Geog. p. 80.

"In the time of Moses, the Egyptians were renowned for their learning, and from them the Greeks derived nearly all the elements of their knowledge.">—Id. p. 59.

"It is to Egypt that Pythagoras (a Grecian philosopher) owed his favorite doctrine of the metempsychosis, or transmigration of the soul.">—Rollin's Anc. Hist. Vol. 1. p. 141.

"The worship of Bacchus was brought out of Egypt to Rome.">—Id. p. 26.

Plato the renowned Grecian philosopher, the great advocate and expounder of this doctrine, received the first ideas from the Egyptian priests. "Plato Ægyptum peragravit ut a sacerdotibus Barbaris numeros et coelestis acciperet."—Cicero de Finibus. V. 25. Plato traveled through Egypt in order that he might learn from the barbarous priests, numbers and heavenly things. "The genius of Plato, informed by his own meditation, or by the traditional knowledge of the priests of Egypt," &c.—Gibbon.

"Egypt was ever counseled by all the ancients as the most renowned school for wisdom and politics, and the source from whence most arts and sciences were derived. This kingdom bestowed its noblest labors and finest arts on the improvement of mankind; and Greece was so sensible of this, that its most illustrious men, as Homer, Pythagoras, Plato; even its great legislators, Lycurgus and Solon, with many more whom it is needless to mention, traveled into Egypt to complete their studies, and draw from that fountain, whatever was most rare and valuable in every kind of learning.">—Rollin's Anc. Hist. Vol. 1. p. 136.

The priests were at one and the same time the depositaries of religion and the sciences; and to this circumstance was owing the great respect paid them by the natives as well as foreigners, by whom they were alike consulted upon the most sacred things relating to the mysteries of religion, and the most profound subjects in the several sciences.—Id. p. 141.

From this it is plain that the Greeks obtained many of their ideas, institutions, and doctrines from the Egyptians; and that among them was that of the immortality of the soul. Indeed, I believe that this is not denied by any one.

That Rome or the Catholic church received the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, purgatory, and eternal misery, &c., from the Greeks, is evident from the perfect similarity of the two systems. Between other nations who believe in the future existence of man, we find the greatest dissimilarity. Thus the Japanese

believe that the souls of the wicked transmigrate, after death, into the bodies of animals, and at last, in case of amendment, are translated back again into human bodies. Many of the Indian tribes believe that after death, they will be transported beyond the most distant mountains to inhabit a thousand islands filled with an abundance of game. The Gallas of Abyssinia entirely reject the idea of future punishment. Buddhism which numbers the most disciples of any religion on the globe, teaches that the "chief end of man," is to obtain "Nicban," or annihilation. The New Zealanders believe that the third day after the interment of a man, the heart separates itself from the corpse and is carried to the clouds. The Persians are said to leave one part of their graves open, from a belief that the dead will be reanimated and visited by angels who carry them to their future abodes.

Thus we see the greatest discord exists among nations on this point. But between Plato and the Catholic church and her daughters, there exists the greatest harmony. Let us make a few comparisons.

Plato represents Socrates as saying, "When the dead are arrived at the rendezvous of departed souls, whither their angels conduct them, they are all judged. Those who have passed their lives in a manner neither entirely criminal, nor absolutely innocent, are sent into a place where they suffer pains proportioned to their faults, till, being purged and cleansed of their guilt and afterwards restored to liberty, they receive the reward of the good actions they have done in the body.">—Rollin's Anc. Hist. Vol. iv.

"Those who are found guilty of crimes, great indeed, but worthy of pardon, who have committed violences, in the transports of rage, against their father or mother, or have killed some one in a like emotion, and afterwards repented—suffer punishment; but for a time only, till, by prayers and supplications, they have obtained pardon from those they have injured." Here is the doctrine of "purgatory" clearly stated, and doubtless all Protestants, as they have rejected this heathen tenet, will be ready to allow that this was the true origin of this doctrine.

Now read the same in the Catholic Catechism p. 111:

"Ques. Whither go such as die in venial sins, or not having fully satisfied for the temporal punishment due to their mortal sins which are forgiven them? Ans. To purgatory till they have made full satisfaction for them, and then to heaven."

How striking is the agreement of these two statements? so much so that they must both have come from the same source. But might not Plato have obtained this doctrine from the church? No! because he lived more than four-hundred years before Christ. Did he not obtain it from the Jews? No! because the Jews never held the doctrine of purgatory.

Socrates proceeds, "Those who are judged to be incurable, on account of the greatness of their crimes, the fatal Destiny that passes judgment upon them, hurls them into Tartarus, from whence they never depart."

Exchanging "Destiny" for "God," and "Tartarus" for "hell-fire," we have a familiar extract from a Catholic Catechism in a modern orthodox sermon!

"Question. What is mortal sin? Ans. Any great offence against the law of God; and is so called because it kills the soul, and robs it of the spiritual life of grace. Quest. Whither go such as die in mortal sin? Ans. To hell for all eternity, as you have heard in the creed.">—Catholic Catechism. p. 111.

Such language is so common among orthodox Protestants that we need not quote any.

When Socrates was about to drink the fatal hemlock, "Crito, having asked him in what manner he wished to be buried, 'As you please,' said he 'if you can hold on me, and I do not escape out of your hands.' At the same time looking upon his friends with a smile, 'I can never persuade Crito,' says he, 'that Socrates is he who converses with you and disposes the several parts of his discourses; for he always imagines that I am what he is going to see dead in a little while. He confounds me with my carcass and therefore asks me how I would be buried.'"—Rollin's Anc. Hist. Vol. iv.

Now go and listen to an orthodox funeral sermon, as the eloquent minister consoles the mourning friends. Does he "comfort them with the words" that "the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout and with the trump of God and the dead in Christ shall rise first?" O, no; it is after this fashion: "Dear friends, weep not for your daughter. Your loss is her eternal gain. This is not your Mary that you see before you; it is only the dust which she animated. Mary is now in heaven [Acts ii, 34] with the angels singing God's praises." [Ps. cxv, 17.]

However much we may wish to avoid the conclusion, we cannot fail to see that this language is only borrowed from the heathen philosopher.

But is there any historical proof that these pagan philosophers and teachers have been consulted by the church, on this and other theological questions? Yes; there is an abundance of it.

"In the second and third century the respectable name of Plato was used by the orthodox, and abused by the heretics, as the common support of truth and error; the authority of this skillful commentator, and the science of dialectics were employed to justify the remote consequences of his opinions and to supply the discreet silence of the inspired writers.">—Milman's Gibbon's Rome. Vol. ii. p. 309.

We are not left to guess that the writings of Plato have been studied and copied by so-called Christians; for it is a notorious fact that it has been done. Not only the writings of Plato were studied, but those of all the celebrated pagan teachers. "Lactantius, who has adorned the precepts of the gospel with the eloquence of Cicero; and Eusebius, who has consecrated the learning and philosophy of the Greeks to the service of religion; were both received into the friendship and familiarity of their sovereign (Constantine)."—Id. p. 268.