The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1903-05-13

would be the loss OF everything VI AaPTS
tance. If l do not know that exist this
;s ~ nracticai annihlation, and this does not
at ali meet OF satisfy the longing OF my ma
ture. This is a theistic substitute. Now
| let me mention some atheistlc substitutes,
| substitutes that leave out God altogether:
One of these proposes the Idea OF ao-
sorption into the universe. The particles
of matter OF which we are composed WIN
| mingle with earth and air and SEA anu shy,
| and live eternally amid their ever vary.
ing changes and combinations. All TINS
son sounds we'll, but think of what it means.
Life is always dying out, and deatn aloile
persists and conquers, according to this IL
depreciation. Materialists attempt to daz'
zle us with an infinite panorama OF whiri,,
ing suns. evolving planets and Astronomical
wonders, but without the self-conscious
soul lie is nothing, series Of sepu!chers,
earth, ashes, dust. There ls nothing IN
prospect to comfort the sorrowlng heart:
Still another substitute ls absorption
into the race. Immortality of fame: Ihe
great man, it is said, will survive IN the
memory Of his: fellows. beautiful Dookss, nsa,
useful inventions aud instructive examples
these will insure the plaudlts OF poster
ity. Napoleon is said to have remarked:
my soul will pass into history and the
deathless memories OF mankind, and thus
in glory 7 shall be immortal" The ob]ec-
ton to this theory is that it makes immor-
tality the privilege of the few. The Ale1'
anders, the Caesars, the Augrstines, the
Washingtons, the geniuses, are all happily
provided for, but what of the many VINO
have written no beautiful books, who have
performed no heroic deeds, who have lett
no inspiring examples: Are they to be
blotted out, punished for not having what
was never given them, for not having what
they could not possibly get? Is immor.
tality thus a reward only for the dlstln'
guished, the gifted Jew? No, it is false
theory 1t is pathetic and surprising that
men of parts should have stopped TO con-
sole and fatter themselves in this fashion,
Fame alone, be it as great as that OF Perl.
cles or Luther, is not by itself sufficient
and satisfying return for the labor its win
ming entails; it certainly is not pay enough
for mans extinction. Fame is something
left behind anyway, and those of us who
have no fame are like the drop OF water
that dries up after it has fallen. This sub
stitute is puerile, wanting in dignity.
Another one holds that we must con-
tent ourselves with Immortality of the race.
The individual disappears, but the race
continues storing up within itself all that
is worthiest of survival. We live in others.
on to, succeeding generations the impress
of our personality. Is not that enough?
No. it is not enough. 1t is no consolation
| to think that others will live after us If
they are to be ,annihilated, too. To claim
that the race lives forever, but the individ-
ual dies forever, is to be guilty of con-
tradiction in terms. The whole of any
thing is made up of its parts; if all the
parts die, the whole is thereby necessarily
extinguished. How can the race be i'm
mortal if all it's members are mortal?
| h,f, 3pta hu fh61Gt
the materialist, the positivist, the atheist,
do not commend themselves to man Is rea.
son or sympathy. They are wanting, in
goodness, in kindness and justice. They
do not meet the conditions of mans desire
to live again. Only the immortality taught
and exemplifed by Jesus Christ, finds
glad and welcome response in the attec.
| tions of mankind.
If man die, shall he live again? As q
| Christian answer yes. Do you ask why!
Because he has right to do SO. Because
Thy way, the psalmist sings. Some INCLINE
to the view that as regards Gods dealings
with man, the latter can have nc. right,
that man is in the position OF beggar,
glad to receive anything, but without any
| legitimate claim. He must call upon God,
not because of any virtue in His character,
| but because He is all powerful. He made
US, we are His creatures; therefore, He
may act toward us and do with us as He
pleases We are duty bound to obey Him,
to be kindly disposed toward Him: but He
is under no sort of obligation to deal gen
erously or justly toward US. All such the.
cries and interpretations are misrepresen:
tations of the divine character. actual
slanders upon Gods goodness. God is
father, and no father is at liberty to neg.
lect, i'll treat, degrade a child simply be.
cause he is his own. Indeed, this very
fact is the strongest sort OF reason that
he will do just the reverse. We all recog.
nize and respect the obligations Of parent
blood To care for the chi!d's body. to
train its mind, to instill moral principle
parent. Some deny Themselves the high
privilege for fear of an inheritance OF
weakness or disease, and thereby making
the life of loved one miserable. 1t is the
veriest sophistry, it is cruel mlsrepresenta.
ton, to my mind it is unthinkab.e, that
imperfect man is of kindlier nature toward
his child than the perfect God toward His,
that the finite is under compulsion to do
right, but the Infinite is not. On the con-
trary, every rise in the scale of being de-
mands a corresponding rise in the scale
Of obligation. The wiser, the greater, the
better off the parent. the happier his child
is expected to be. The greater his ability
to do, the more L. ought to do. This is
the lesson of the parable of the talents.
| To one five, to another two, to another
one, to every man according to his several
| abilities. In proportion to the. gift so
| ought the return to be. He who has little
| of him little is demanded. He who has
much of him much is required. This IS
| an immutable law of universal application.
And God is self limited at least to the ex,
|
ought are reciprocalities of goodness which
God exacts of man because sacredly re.
| garded by Himself. If man can do and
does do SO much for his offspring: it is
hardly possible for us to conceive OF what
God can do and does do for His.
We are not mere objects-stones, sticks,
shells-but animate, intelligent beings, into
whom God breathes and builds something
that identifies us with Him and His nature.
The difference between God and man is
| more in degree than in kind. The two are
of the same spiritual essence. There are
faculties the two have i'll common: Reason,
conscience, will. are specifications in point.
Man is endowed with them and the consti-
tuition and course of nature reveal their ex-
istence in the workings of God. By resem-
blance of attribute and identity. Of life we
are proven Gods children. And will God
kill His own children? kill US before we
have fully realized what the life He has
given is? We long for happiness and yet
we we get comparatively little Of it here. We
cherish an ideal of perfection and yet we
never attain it on earth. We are but be,
ginning to understand what a grand and
noble thing life NAV be when We have to
lie down and die. We are just on the point
of reaching the rewards for which we have
waited and toiied when the end comes: and
;f yve are ever to enioy tkem it must be in
another world. Now is God in all this and
all the while deceiving us? When we de-
sire the bread of everlasting life will He
=. II. Il arln ntirn daafh2 At