p. 149 | Man as Created by J. H. W.

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Oct 6, 1863

Man as Created.

By J. H. W.

A QUESTION has been introduced in connection with the subject of the atonement, and of the necessity for an atonement arising out of man's nature, which, though of no practical importance, has yet troubled many minds, and led to confusion and error. J. M. Stephenson in his work on the atonement, avers that man was created neither mortal nor immortal; that is to say, neither subject to death nor exempt from it: which is a manifest absurdity. The reason he gives is the following:

"Now if Adam was mortal, he must, from his very nature, die, whether he obeyed or disobeyed; but that he was not mortal is evident from the fact that he had the privilege of eating of the tree of life, and living forever. That he was not immortal is evident, 1. from the fact, that the penalty for disobedience was death, which could not have been executed had man been immortal; for every definition of immortality excludes the possibility of death." p. 20.

The reason here given to show that man was not mortal, viz. that he had the privilege of eating of the tree of life and living forever, seems to me rather to be evidence that he was mortal. For the privilege of eating and living forever was a conditional prospective grant of immortality, proving that he had it not then. But if he had not immortality then, he was mortal, for these terms express opposite states, as life and death are opposites; and there is no intermediate ground.

The reason given that man was not immortal, to wit: that if he was immortal, sentence of death could not be executed upon him, is not conclusive; for that is to say that God could not inflict death upon an immortal being. But if he was immortal it was by the power and gift of God; and it will be readily conceded that God could have made him immortal; so we should thence conclude that God could confer a nature on man of which he could not deprive him, that he could make a creature beyond the reach of his own power! But Mr. Stephenson has abundantly disproved his own position in the same work. I quote a few passages in relation to the Son of God.

"In reference to his nature, it has been shown to be divine, and being such it must have been immortal. Indeed this proposition is self-evident, for he who is divine must be immortal." p. 127.

"We may reasonably suppose that he became flesh; that the Divine nature was made human. . . . He must have been Divine and immortal as a whole being, and human and mortal as a whole being." p. 135. That is, the Divine, immortal, became human, mortal.

"Then the exalted being brought to view in verse 6, [Phil. ii], actually became a mortal man and died." p. 138.

"But how could he change his nature and yet retain his personality? Ans. Just as easily as our nature can be changed from mortal to immortality; from flesh to spirit, without losing our personal identity. Just reverse the process of making a mortal being immortal, and it would make an immortal being mortal. God can just as easily do one as the other." pp. 142-3.

Thus it appears that he thinks God could inflict the penalty of death upon an immortal being. I do not notice this because I think Adam was immortal; for I do not think he was. But I quote to show to those who have been misled, the fallacy of his position. Indeed, we can only suppose that he believed it himself by supposing that while writing one part of his work he did not know what he had written in another part.

I am led by Paul's words to believe that man was created mortal. My mind was called to this fact by Bro. B. F. S., of Iowa. Said the apostle "The first

man is of the earth, earthy." 1 Cor. xv, 47. χοικός, (choikos,) here translated earthy, Greenfield defines thus: "of dust, earthy, terrestrial, and by imp. corruptible, frail, mortal." From the connection I must believe that Paul used the word in this sense, i. e., that the first man is of the earth, corruptible, frail, mortal; because he says we have borne the image of the earthy, and shall bear the image of the heavenly; And this he refers for fulfillment to the resurrection, (which is the subject of his argument), when this mortal shall put on immortality, and this corruptible shall put on incorruption. The mortal corruptible nature we inherit from the first Adam who was made of the earth, mortal, corruptible: but the immortal, incorruptible, we get in the resurrection, from the second Adam, who is a life-giving spirit. Thus, the nature in which Adam was made is contrasted with that which the saints put on in the resurrection. This seems to be decisive on this subject.