The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1875-01-14
NUTS FOR AEN1H1LAr1oN1srs.
Number Two.
BY J. H. ACTON.

A great ado has been made by our opponents
over the fact that there is not single text oil
which clearly states the souls eternal
substance. Hudson in his debate with Cobb
quotes Olshausen saying, 1.-The doctrine OF
the immortality of the soul and the name are
alike unknown to the entire Bible" He seems
quite satisfied with himself after such forInida-
BILE testimony. A sufficient reply is, orthodox
writers have never contended there was such
proof, but they do contend that there is no text
which disproueS it, and silence is no testimony
either pro or con.
The passage in Gen. ii. Z, "and the Lord God
made man out of the dust of the ground and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and
man became living SOUL" is explained by an
to mean no more than that Adam
was created a living spirit; and that all ani-
mails have living spirit, they prove by refer
ence to Eccl. iii. 2l, hence the conclusion is'
that spirit means life, and man has life only in
common with other animals; and since accord
ing to the 10 verse of the iii chap. of Eecl ''as
dieth the one so iieth the other" therefore,
both will be annihilated. On the passage in
Genesis, Mr.. Hudson says, "that 1t should get
into Scripture Manual as a proof text that
man will live as long as God does, > shows
either sad state of traditional reasoning, or
great meagreness of orthodox argument. He is
quite satisfied to leave the subject with this at
tempted flourish. How he knows that even
beasts will be annihilated, Mr.. II. does not tell
us. 1t might be of advantage to his argument
to inform us; certainly it shows want OF mod
esty to quietly assume it, fully equal to the or
thodox ignorance of which he complains
If the passage in Ecclesiastes proves anything
for annihilationists, it proves too much; for 1t
proves nothing unless taken literally, and
when taken thus, man is in no sense above the
brutes that perish, and Mr.. Darwins theory of
natural selections has link not claimed for it
even by its author. This Mr. Hudson will not
admit.
We have referred to this passage with its
mode of treatment by those who do not admit
independent soul life, rather as sample of
their mode of disposing of such passages than
for the purpose of arguing the question on this
ground. The distinguishing term in Gen. ii. 7,
is breathed, and it is this that marks out the
line between brute and soul life. When Mr.. III.
will show us where God ever breathed in a
brute's nostrils to give 1t life, 1t will be time
enough to commence a critical examinatioRuf
this text There is however question inyolv-
ed in the argument drawn from Ecel. xii. !,
which it would do well for our friends to ex-
anime in connection with their much priced
iii. chapter and 10Th verse.
1t is here said, ''then shall the body return to
the dust as it was, and the spirit return to the
God who gave it," 1t will not be denied that
here is distinction between the returning of
soul and body We know the process through
which a body decomposes and returns to dust
as it was, but what of the soul, or as our oppo-
nents say the spirit or r1tdhs Does ii return to
God in the same way? Win the anninilation-
ist endorse the ancient doctrine OF 'transmi-
grafton" to keep up the analogy? Weshall see.
Mr.. Ellis has the following: Snow i God in
tends to restore this rasah to the man s THAT he
may live again, where does God bring bis Y-uah
from? We shall see that it is not Ie same
quah but rudh of the same kind, thosI h per-
haps less diluted with atmospheric a hD The
proof texts adduced are of that CLASP und in
Eek. prophecy unto the wind" kFome o
wind" etc. II
But what does all this metaphysical h1 gIom-
crate mean? Their theory clearly Il ated is
simply this; mans body dies and j llrns to
dust as it was, his soul is air and gel to the
four winds to mingle in the commoi tmos-
phere. 1t is utterly useless to prevail ,ee, for
if the teaching Of these writers means ffthing
this is all. Let us analyze it. Eartl COM
posed of oxygen with metallic base; ai1a a. COM
posed of oxygen and hydrogen. What beau
tifuI distinction is here. These writers live us
page after page to show that soul and bdiy are
mortal but not the same in substance, ami then
as the inevitable conclusion of the whde, in
form us that both soul and body are 'pf the
earth earthly" 1t was doubtless glimbse OF
this conclusion which caused Ellis, as quoted
above to say, perhaps less diluted with dtmos-
pheric air." He desired to get rid of thd earth
element he had fastened upon the soul. Had he
said perhaps it is air or something else, he
might have told all he knew and yet have been
| on the side of truth.
| Hear him further: iTThe spirit shall tauru
unto God who gave it. This is as true 4 the
wicked man of the good, and it just Auly
proves universal salvation as 1t proves Sat a
man is alive when dead. Let me ask, eIas II
| (the spirit) in conscious state before 4 was
| given? if not, how can il be proven that was
| in conscious state after it returns?"
The force of the argument is in the la, sn.
| tence. What does he mean ZEvidentl hi
what he says, but, was the soul in a con. bio.
state before it was created? We answerp ne
but it was created before it was given, uYlles
the two acts were performed at the same eine
and in either case when the soul was c n tc
and not until then, it came from the b k5io
God and when it returns 1t returns as it bpre
a living soul. The fallacy of this argur ~ ii
in the assumption that the act of giving ON lee
the soul, and the act of returning muster&Fie
fore uncreate it. In
Another writer says: "The fact of thei j
returning to God who gave does not pr III
conscious happiness or unhappiness !; inoJ !
of this he quotes: He gathers to himseben en1
breath of all f1esh,' and then asks, 'mbvenn II
thence conclude that the breath is conscic' ut,
| WaiVing the fact that this last QuOtatiOnao..
in the Bible, but was manufactured for t,,
casion, we reply, the fact of spirit retur L
to God proves that it had conscious exise ~
and this is all that is claimed. 4
Happiness and unhappiness depend III
something else than simply returning to5
If spirit means more than life, as claim,vl
, Anhihilationists, then life returns to Godat
life without conscious existence is a contrs-k
ton. 4
The utterly senseless character of this reas
ing is yet to be seen. Mr.. Ellis admits as ali.
quoted, that the rudh given at the resurrect,
is not the same rltGh as the first, but ruah Of NJ
same kind; he also admits that this ,-4ah col
r to God to be judged. What then is the sat-
ment here? Plainly that mans breath
. judged and as breath is air, and at death m,
: giles with the common atmosphere thereto,l
{ one rtsdh, breath, air, or wind vi
I please-is judged for the sins of another NJ
fore such reasoning the gravity of the subject
: not sufficient to prevent a smile.
The passage in Matthew K. %: "Fear mr.
them which kill the body but are not abb, I
kill the soul; but rather fear him which IL a,l
to destroy both soul and body in hell, % IL eopa
| If,v| |ota 70 10 Annfhflafsonfef 7