The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1896-03-29
is THE SOUL ANNIHILATED
Whence That Dread Of Some
thing After Death?
WHO SHALL WIN IMMORTALITY
Hon. A. M. WaddelI and MIR. @. r. Won
Hermann Make Some Comments
in Reply to Or. Yates
Article.

or a "Swedenborgian, or to be classed
among those whom DR.. Yates
designates by the phrase, id
genus omne. may, however,
be among the "half informed per-
sons to whom he refers as being led
into error upon the subject of future
punishment. certainly do not claim
TO have that intimate knowledge of lie
design of the Almighty irr the organi-
cation and plan of His government
which the confident assertions of some
persons on the subject would Justify
us in supposing that they possess. The
only authoritative statements known
to me in regard to the spiritual nature
of man, and his condition after his
earthly course is finished, are con-
tanned in the Bible. Upon those state
ments I rest. Men have different con-
ceptions in regard to Our Father and
His attributes, but all who believe that
the Bible is His word ought to accept
what it says when the language is
plain, and especially when in treating
of particular subject that language
is repeated over, and over again, and is
never, even apparently, contradicted.
The title of DIR. Yates's article is
"Annihilation of the Soul" IF
it had been 'Annihilation of
Man" il would have correctly
indicated the position of his opponents,
although it would not have been sus-
tanned by his argument Those whom
he is antogonizing do not believe that
the soul will be resurrected as sepa-
rate entity from the body. They be-
ceive of any other sort of resurrec-
ted and judged. They cannot con-
ceive Of any other sort of ressurrec-
ton, nor of man at all except as
creature endowed with body, and
moral nature. We are told that the
body will be raised a spiritual body
but what that is we do not know, nor
do we know what the soul or the
spirit is, although we do know that the
Bible speaks of them as distinct things,
one from the other, and from the body,
but as together with the body consti-
tuting the man.
Dr. Yates lays down what he justly
calls "the broad proposition" that
s'the whole scheme Of redemption, i'm
yolying Gods moral government, as
sumes and teaches necessarily the inn
mortality of the SOUL" but he wisely
refrains from attempting to cite any
Scriptural authority for it, The reas-
on he gives for thus refraining is, that
it has been well done by others. Now.
he is hereby respectfully challenged
10 point out one passage Of Scripture
which teaches the immortality of thea
soul, or that the wicked shall live for
ever.
This assertion that the Scriptures
teach the immortality of the soul has
seldom been made, and is remarkable
in face Of the fact that so far from
teaching III, they teach the directly
contrary doctrine, with absolute uni-
formity, from the beginning of Gene
sis to the end of Revelations. But he
says they assume" 1T. That is the
usual answer to the challenge for
Scriptural evidence of the doctrine;
bat how can any man undertake to say
that the Scriptures assume" as true
a thing, which they positively contra
dict? There is, undoubtedly, assump-
tion here, but the Scriptures are not
chargeable with it.
There is no possible way to escape!
subject of immortality except by refus-
ing to give to plain words their natural
, and obvious meaning, and by assigning
10 them an unnatural, or figuratiye
meaning. A great deal Of symbolic
is to be found in the Book; but those
passages which refer to the doom of
the wicked as contrasted with the
life of the righteous, are not to be mis-
understood except by placing a forced
and unreasonable-and sometimes a
directly opposite--meaning upon them
to that which the same words every
where else convey.
And now, let us come to the ques-
ton of "Annihilation' word which
seems to excite, not the honor which
ought to attach to it as the possible
fate of human being, but the con-
tempt Of the advocates of eternal tor
ment as being no punishment at all,
besides being, philosophically, impos-
sible. mo created thing is ever anni-
Inflated" says DIR. Yates, and "a thing
created is a thing forever" and he
states the philosophic maxim about
the conservation Of substance, as well
as of force and heat, in support of it,
Whether this is true or not / don't
know, nor does DR.. Yates, or the phil
osophers although they appear to
have proved it,; but, true or false, III,
does not affect the question at issue.
Admitting ii to be true, and taking
one of DR.. Yates own illustrations Of
it, let ms see. lie says God changes
forms, but does not annihilate sub.
stance and that man, who was made
in his image does the same. For in
stance, he says, man can make house,
and then burn 1T to ashes, but there
is just as much Of The matter of the
house in existence as there was before
it was burned Very well, but is not
tire house as house, annihilatedP
Would Or. Yates deny that the house
is aunihilated2 The ultimate par
ticles which compose 1t are disposed Of
by Gods law governing such things,
but the house has certainly ceased to
exist And so with the wicked after
"the second DEATH" God says, in a
hundred or more places IN the Bible