The Scripture Doctrine of a Future Life

MANY learned men who believe in the immortality of the soul, have frankly confessed that it is not taught in the Bible.

Olshausen, in his comments on 1 Cor. 15:13, says: "The doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and the name, are alike unknown to the entire Bible." This is a good confession, and here is another of the same kind. Bishop Tillotson says: "The immortality of the soul is rather supposed, or taken for granted, than expressly revealed in the Bible."—Tillotson's Sermons, Vol. II., Sermon 100.

This is virtually admitting the whole question. Dr. Bagnall, in the Methodist Quarterly Review for April, 1852, while advocating the natural immortality of man, makes this confession: "In the Bible, we think there is no passage which can be strictly said to declare that all human souls are immortal."

The celebrated Richard Watson corroborates this statement thus: "That the soul is naturally immortal, . . . . is contradicted by the Scripture, which makes our immortality a gift dependent on the will of the giver."—Theolog. Inst. Vol. II., Part 2, Ch. 18, p. 83.

Mr. Alger, in his late book says: "The whole tenor and drift of the representations in the Old Testament show that the state of disembodied souls is deep quietude. Freed from bondage, pain, toil, and care, they repose in silence."—Doc. Fut. Life, chap. 7, p. 153.

Archbishop Whately says: "To the Christian, indeed, all this doubt would be instantly removed, if he found that the immortality of the soul, as a disembodied spirit, were revealed in the word of God. . . . In fact, however, no such doctrine is revealed to us; the Christian's hope, as founded on the promises contained in the gospel, is the resurrection of the body."— Quoted by Horne in the Watch Tower, p. 8.

Bishop Lowth, in his "Lectures on Hebrew Poetry," says, "We there find no exact account, no explicit mention, of immortal spirits."—Ibid. p. 12.

This is a significant confession, since the bishop was a firm believer in the soul's immortality. Dr. Neander says, "It was an old Jewish notion that immortality was not founded upon the nature of the soul, but a peculiar gift of divine grace."—Church Hist. p. 444.

Here is another good admission from an orthodox writer: "We would express our conviction that the idea of the immortality of the soul has no source in the gospel; that it comes, on the contrary, from the Platonists." —Dorby's Hopes of the Church.

Says Gibbon, "We discover that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is omitted in the law of Moses."—Decline and Fall, Vol. I., chap. 15, p. 530.

In his note on this passage from Gibbon, the orthodox Milman thus admits the same: "Modern writers have accounted in various ways for the silence of the Hebrew legislator on the immortality of the soul."—Ibid, note.

Nemesius, bishop of Emesa, in the fifth century, thus states the doctrine of the Jews: "The Hebrews say that originally man was evidently neither mortal nor immortal; but on the confines of either nature; so that, if he should yield to the bodily affections, he should share also the changes of the body; but if he should prefer the nobler affections of the soul, he should be deemed worthy of immortality." De Natura Hominis, chap. 1, quoted by Hudson, Debt and Grace, p. 310.

This plainly shows the faith of the ancient Hebrews, as well as the doctrine of the Bible on this point. Dr. Edward Beecher, in a late excellent work upon the subject of Scriptural Retribution thus frankly confesses that the Bible does not teach the natural immortality of the soul: "But before doing this, it will be expedient to consider the real foundations of any reliable belief in immortality. Plato sought to find them in the inherent nature of the deathless soul, existing from eternity to eternity. Others have sought them in the aspirations of the soul, and the imperfect development of retribution in this life. But the fundamental positions of the system of the Bible are not of this kind. It does not recognize, nay, it expressly denies, the natural and inherent immortality of the soul. It assures us that God only hath immortality. (1 Tim. 6:16.)"—Doc. of Script. Ret., p. 58.

Again he says: "There are passages in the Old Testament which were regarded of old, and still are by many, as teaching the ultimate annihilation of the wicked."—Ibid., p. 72.

So manifestly true are the foregoing statements that many pious and learned Christian men who have carefully examined the Bible upon this subject, have become thoroughly satisfied that it does not teach the immortality of the soul. Hence they have written many books abundantly showing that no such doctrine is taught in the Bible, but the reverse.

We object to the popular doctrine of man's natural immortality for many reasons which to us seem conclusive against it.

1. IT IS UNREASONABLE.—It is not reasonable that the all-wise Creator should bestow unconditional immortality upon all the race without regard to their moral character, and before any of them had been tested to see what they would develop. What good could come of it none at all, but much evil. The Scriptures plainly teach that man was placed upon probation. Good and evil were set before him. He was left to develop his own character and determine his own destiny for eternity. The Creator certainly knew that it was possible for man to develop an evil character. If, then; he should first make him immortal, sin and evil would thus become immortalized. God would then have an eternal foe of his own creating. Through the endless cycles of eternity this evil, corrupt, and God-hating creature must continue to insult Heaven and pollute the fair universe of God. Such a supposition, to our mind, impeaches the wisdom of the Creator. And it is answerable for the following erroneous doctrines.

(1.) Eternal Misery.—Growing out of the supposition of man's natural immortality is the horrid doctrine of an endless hell of torment for the lost. The Bible plainly teaches that a large share of men will be damned, being found utterly unworthy of the kingdom of God. Just as plainly it declares that all such shall go into a lake of fire. Now if all men are immortal by their very nature, then all who are lost must continue to live in unutterable anguish and eternal burnings through unending ages. And this is the very doctrine that is professed by the churches of the day, and taught with all its unmitigated horrors by the preachers. We believe it to be a reproach to God, and a stone of stumbling to thousands of thoughtful people. We do know that large numbers are driven into infidelity by this very doctrine.

(2.) Universalism.—The unscriptural and unreasonable doctrine of universal salvation has grown out of the doctrine of man's natural immortality. Assuming that all men must, by their very nature, live eternally, the Universalists, being shocked by the horrors of the endless hell theory, have tried to twist the Scriptures to make themselves and others believe that all men, without regard to character, or faith in Christ, will be ultimately saved.

(3.) Spiritualism.—The very corner-stone of Spiritualism, the foundation on which it rests, the very tap-root which supplies it with nourishment and vigor, is the theory of the natural immortality of the soul. Assuming that the soul is the real man, that it lives when the body dies, they ask why this living soul cannot come back and communicate with men in the flesh. Granting these premises, their conclusion is a reasonable one, and hence has grown up the abominable system of modern Spiritualism, with all its blasphemous assumptions and moral pollutions. The doctrine of the immortality of the soul is responsible for the whole thing.

(4.) Purgatory.—At the door of this same theory of natural immortality, may be laid all the abominations of the papal purgatory. It supposes that when the body dies the soul goes into a place of suffering where it is purified from its sins. The prayers, the money, the sacrifices of its friends on earth can aid in releasing it from this horrible place. Hence the Romish purgatory.

All the above and some other abominable doctrines which have cursed the world, have had their root in this theory of natural immortality. If man is mortal, if the dead are unconscious, then all the above theories fall to the ground in a moment.

2. It contradicts some of the Fundamental doctrines of the Bible —The common theory is not only that the dead are conscious, actually living, but that the wicked go straight into hell at death, and the righteous immediately into heaven. Now if this be so, it virtually nullifies the doctrine of a future judgment. One of the plainest doctrines of the Bible is that there is to be a future, definite, grand day of judgment in which all men, good and bad, will be arraigned before God and judged for the actions of this life. But we ask, What would be the use of a future judgment if men are sent immediately to heaven or hell when they die? Shall God torment a man a thousand years and then call him up to be judged to see whither he should be punished or not? Shall God reward a man in heaven for ages, and then call him down to earth, and judge him to see what his doom should be? How utterly unreasonable is all this. We repeat that it virtually nullifies the future judgment.

Moreover, if the soul is the real man, the thinking, intelligent, active man; if it can live as well or better without the body than with it; if the body is only a prison, a cage, a clog; then what is the use of a future resurrection. If the soul is ever freed from this old body why should God ever put it back again? Why raise this clog of clay and again imprison the immortal soul within it? Such a theory naturally leads to the rejection of the Bible doctrine of the resurrection of the body, than which nothing is more plainly taught throughout the Holy Scriptures.

Furthermore, if the saints go immediately to heaven at death, if they become like angels, and dwell in the presence of God, what will they care for the second advent of Christ to earth? It can be of no account to them.

They are with him already, safe, immortal, and unspeakably happy. Why should they long for the return of the Master? This doctrine, it will be seen, throws its whole weight directly against the literal return of Jesus to this earth. But on turning to the Bible, we find the second advent of Christ to be the grand central theme, the all absorbing hope of every Bible writer, while all of them are entirely silent with regard to the immortality of the soul. These two doctrines do not naturally go together; hence we invariably find that the stronger a man believes in the immortality of the soul, the less he cares for the judgment, the resurrection, and the second advent. These facts alone lead us to look with suspicion upon that theory.