Untitled article by R. F. Cottrell

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Feb 9, 1864

Are the Dead Conscious? No. 6.

By R. F. Cottrell

"For that which befalleth the sons of men, befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast; for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?" Eccl. iii, 19-21.

This text asserts that one event happens both to man and beast, and that event is death. How do they die? Is there a difference in the manner of their death? Does one die wholly and the other only in part? Is death a cessation of life and consciousness to the beast, but to man only a separation of the living, conscious soul from the lifeless body? The answer to these questions is, "As the one dieth, so dieth the other." It refers to the manner of their death. It is not merely, The other dieth also; but, "So dieth the other." They die alike. Why? Because "they have all one breath." The breath of life that was breathed into Adam's nostrils, is the very same that every beast possesseth. In these things "a man hath no pre-eminence above a beast; for all is vanity"—all are subject to death.

The next question is, Where do they go respectively at death? Do they go in different directions? No. "All go unto one place." Where is that? to Heaven. No; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again." This is the one place to which both man and beast go.

But, says a friend, read the next verse, and you will learn that the spirit of man goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast goeth downward to the earth. No, my friend, it affirms nothing of the spirit of man or beast, it only asks a question.

And here we have a specimen of the reasoning of those who are filled so full of a false theory that there is no room left for the truth. Prejudice, like a cork in the neck of a bottle, will not let anything in or out. If any way can be devised to remove that cork, the oil of truth may be poured in, till the light and gaseous vapor of error all runs out. For truth is like gold, and mankind are like tumblers brimfull of water. Drop in the gold, and an equal bulk of water must run out.

Prejudice can infer from the question in verse 21, a doctrine which boldly contradicts the positive declarations of the two preceding verses. It can rest satisfied with the inference that man and beast have different spirits or breaths, (Heb. roo-agh), while verse 19, positively affirms, "They all have one breath," roo-agh; and that one goes up and the other down, while verse 20, declares positively, "All go unto one place; all (both man and beast) are of the dust, and all turn to dust again." How shall we arrive at the truth in matters of revelation, unless we are guided by the obvious meaning of the words of inspiration?

But says an objector, I believe the expression, They have all one breath, means what it says; it does not mean that all have one spirit; but when the spirit of man that goeth upward is spoken of, it means something besides the breath that leaves man at death—something that is immortal and conscious.

Have it so, if you will. But the beast has a spirit, too; and if this text proves that the spirit of man is conscious after death, it proves the same of the beast; for there is nothing more to hinder the consciousness of a spirit down somewhere, than there is up somewhere. Indeed our opponents make men conscious down in some subterranean sheol or hades, as well as up in some aerial or immaterial Heaven; and, to make out an argument, they will have them in both these places at the same time—the time between death and the resurrection. (See Landis on the "Immortality of the Soul.")

That teaching which deifies dead men was already in the world when Solomon wrote. Hence he affirms with positiveness the opposing truth, a truth which effectually uproots spiritualism, declaring that in death man has no pre-eminence above a beast, that as dieth the one, so dieth the other, that they all have one breath, (roo-agh, translated spirit in verse 21,) that all go to the same place, that all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. He then triumphantly challenges the opposition, that is, the whole heathen world, with, "Who knoweth?" "Who knoweth if the spirit &c.," as the Douay version has it. Who can vouch for the truth of the opposite doctrine—a doctrine that teaches that men go to be with the gods at death, and that beasts go down into the earth. This seems to be the import of the language of the text.

Now, which will we receive? the positive declaration of the text, or the unnecessary and unwarranted inferences which traditionary prejudice draws from a question, and which, if true, would prove those positive assertions to be false? The word of God does not contradict itself—it does not teach both sides of this, or any other question. It is safe to believe what it affirms, and very unsafe to hold a tradition which contradicts it. R. F. COTTRELL.