"Immortality.”

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 349, 10 September 1889, Page 3

"Immortality.”

There: was a very fe.ir attendance at the Weslevan Church on Sunday morning to hear Mr Scott’s fourth and final lecture. The attention was good throughout, Mr Scott advanced twelve arguments or reasons why the Church teaches that the soul of man is immortal. (1) The nature of the soul. Pointing out that the spirit was immortal the decay and death of the body could exercise no swav on the soul. The possibility of the existence of a pure immaterial being was deducted from the fact that God had existed from all eternity ages before a particle of matter bad been created. (2.) The capabilities of the soul. The lecturer traced the forces of the universe back to the will of God. At the back of every movement, every expenditure, of energy or force there is the will. ’ The capabilities of the soul are only limited by weakness of the wi lof man. Man is only an unfinished sketch, capable of being finished, and -we look for tbs opportunity to complete the sketch. (3.) The unsatisfactory nature of this life. I! this life is the sum total of man’s existence, why do we not find those who have succeeded, from the world s standpoint, happy ? Why do we so repeatedly hear the question * Is life.worth living ?' and why does not the sensualist find happiness ? Just because this life is a preparation for another. (4.) The innate desire of man for immortality. Every nation has a form of religion, why ? “It is the divinity within us that teaches an hereafter.” (5-) Immortality has been the universal belief of mankind. The lecturer rapidly ran over the various beliefs of rude nations, showing that 2000 years before Christ the doctrine was taught. Substantially the same ideas were held by New Hollanders, Indians, Chinese, Persians, Egyptians, nations who could not have received the doctrine one from the other. They could only have received from one common source and that source must have been the sons of Noah. Presumptive evidence that the immortality of the soul was .known to them. (7.) The evidence of more civilised nations. Under this heading he showed the beliefs of the Greeks and the Jews. In dealing with ths latter he showed by profans history that at the time of Christ it was the common belief. As testified by Josephus, Philo, and Tacitus. (8.) The Old Testament teaching. It has often been said that immortality is not taught in the Old Testament.. There is however, ample evidence that it was not unknown. The doctrine was firmly believed in by the Egyptians among whom the Israelites had been reared; Moses was well learned in all the wisdom of Egypt. . When the children of Israel were formed into a nation the errors of Egyptian life and religion were discountenanced and many of their customs forbidden. If then the belief .in immortality was wrong, why do we . not find a single word condemning it 1 Again Moses forbad necromancy ; why did he not teach that it was nonsense that there were no spirits ? In Eccles, it is clearly taught. Man returns to the dust from whence he came but the spirit to God who gave it. (9). The New Testament teaching. The teaching of the New Testament was dealt with at some length, the lecturer claiming that Jesus had not to propound a new doctrine but simply to make the application of a doctrine universally believed in, And if Christ and bls disciples teach the condition and character of the endless existence of both good and bad, it is mere quibble to say that the New Testament does not teach the abstract proposition of immortality. (10). That mortality is nowhere in the Bible connected with the spirit. Here the lecturer dealt with a number of texts which had been used to show that man is not immortal, The first quoted was •• God only hath immortality.” Hero it was pointed out that if this text were driven to the full length, Enoch and Elijah would have yet to die, that the angels Michael and Gabriel were only mortal, that Moses who appeared to Christ would go back again to the grave. This teaching cannot bs accepted. Clearly the text means that God only hath immortality in that he has it inherently while man has it by gift. God is immortal, without beginning, without end ; man is immortal, but it had a starting point. Other texts were similarly dealt with. (11) If there is a condition attached to immortality there are no infants in heaven. The lecturer touchingly referred to the death of a child, pure and innocent, and the hopes of the friends to see the sweet face again. Was David mistaken when he said “I will go to it!” Was Christ wrong when he said “ Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven?" We cannot be ieve that the loving Saviour would lead us to hope for their eternal happiness, if they were to be snuffed out like a candle. (12) That Christ did not bring immortality in the Gospel, but brought it to light; the tradition of men had covered it up. The revelation of God had been progressive, and in ths light Christ Jesus, immortality was brought to light.