W"

FRAGMENTS.

I.

ITH God" one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." Some regard this as an intimation that with God there is no such thing as Time: that with him past and present are meaningless terms, for all is one "Eternal Now" in his sight. I lately read somewhere, that the judgment day is no event of the future with God, for it is actually spread out before him in present vision, and the doom of the impenitent already pronounced. Whatever meaning this idea may represent to some minds, to me it is utter confusion, and seems like attempting to concentrate infinite eternity into one finite point of time; and then, to get quit of the difficulty of such a finiteness, styling it an "eternal now;" in other words, an infinite finiteness, which is a contradiction in terms. This would also make man eternal, for in God's sight he was,—that is, he existed,-before the actual creation. A profound and pious Scottish metaphysician and divinity professor, confessed to a feeling of sacred awe which possessed him when first he met with this idea; and stated with what horror, and almost loathing, he regarded a youth who treated it with flippancy. The professor must have seen more of mystery, and the youth more of mystification, than meaning in it; and each conception produced its own appropriate effect. The whole view of the case seems a confounding of cause with effect; or the co-existence of events with God's foreknowledge; thereby making the actual to pre-exist, not in the ideal but in the real-an impossibility. The Scripture quoted will answer well enough, I think, if understood as implying that the Divine Being is not affected by days or centuries in his mighty workings, nor does time weaken or impair his memory, if we may so express it, as with man.

II.

I have heard it asserted from the pulpit with reference to religious beliefs, that creeds determine deeds; in other words, that our life is necessarily as our doctrine, the latter being but root to the former. And not only so, but that apart from sound doctrine there is no sound life to correspond. Now, granting that it be in a general way true, that we do go in the direction of our beliefs-be they true or false-is this invariably the case? Do we not frequently, in matters of supremest interest, act quite contrary to our belief? and how often, alas, not up to our belief! Does not this prove the existence of some mighty force auterior and superior to our belief, at work within us, at times over-riding and mastering it, and so leading us captive? Faith may sometimes feed this life, but the life itself is "more than meat," and will assert its independence and power; and, when directed aright, will reveal itself in grand impulses and true actions and divine longings. The Master recognised this power within us,-call it instinct, intuition, the logic of the heart, or what you will,—I think, when he said: "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine." This secret yet strong persuasion of the heart cometh .not from doctrine but from duty. Good deeds are good creeds.

III.

God's revelation to the man-whether from Nature or in the Biblemust have due regard to the revelation already within him; otherwise it forfeits its claim to acceptance. Therefore, whatever in the Bible apparently violates those first principles, or breaks the true harmony in the soul of man must be rejected as unworthy of God. For instance, were it stated as true that God is hatred and not love, it would be no truth to me, for he who made me has revealed a prior truth within my heart which contradicts that assertion and makes it impossible for me to believe a lie. In order, therefore, to make it a true revelation to me, my moral sense would require reversing; in fact I must be unmade. But, it may be argued, the light that is in me has become darkness, or otherwise the outward revelation would be perceived. Supposing it were so which I do not concede-I am not responsible for that, and it still holds true that the revelation is nothing more to me than light is to a blind man, and I must reject it as worthless.

*

IV.

May not "original depravity "-which by the bye is a contradiction in terms-be only another name for original ignorance, which, like darkness, is of a privative character? Adam, who began life-as is supposed -a man and not a babe, and consequently without the babe's ignorance, was without this original depravity of nature. Nevertherless he sinned. Is not sin, then, the less sinful in those who begin life, unlike Adam, with this original depravity? Yet I have heard it stated that David's sin was the less to be palliated for that "in sin did his mother conceive him!"

V.

Why is a right faith the right thing-that in us which God requires? I suppose for two reasons chiefly, that it is indicative and provocative. It reveals a latent or revealed disposition of heart towards that which is right; and provokes to the doing of it. And more than that: in a right faith directed towards God as its object there is a tendency to assimilate the possessor of it to the nature of God. When faith is kindled the heart is reviving, and its true pulse beginning to beat. Till then, "many mighty works cannot be done," for their meaning would be misunderstood or perverted. "The light that is in thee is darkness."

VI.

Spiritual instincts or natural perceptions of truth, which come through a pre-established harmony with or submission to the will of God, are less fallible than human teaching from the written word; for the latter is dependent upon the weakness of human intellect and reason, but the former upon the direct action of great spiritual forces, producing as it were a kind of spiritual gravitation to truth. I suspect, however, that the written word is capable of being, in part at least, absorbed into the spiritual instincts and thus becoming assimilated to them. It is important, then, that we allow our moral instincts full play, and send them out into the highways of truth, that we may be strengthened in the

* Ah! and we may add-without the babe's inheritance. W. M.

inner man, and be the better qualified "to approve the things that are excellent.'

VII.

Religious truth, like all truth, is spherical not cubical, for there are no sharp points and angles in it. It is capable, therefore, of being viewed from many stand-points, each of which brings before us some particular part, and each part as it were runs into another, so that we see not where it begins nor where it ends,-like the fleeting meteor in the infinite sphere of space. Happy they who seeing but a part mistake it not for the whole, but "walk in the light" which it sheds around them. But though there are no sharp points in the sphere, it does not follow that some parts are not more luminous than others; for as in the firmament of heaven, 66 one star differeth from another star in glory," and yet each is but a part of the infinite blue into which all are set; so is it in the realm of truth. And again, as the old and new worlds bring each its own constellations to view, so the new world will hereafter reveal new truths which in this world "eye hath not seen."

VIII.

Some good people seem to have formed a conception of God's character which, if it does not fully satisfy them, they are at least content to live by. To others the same estimate would be almost intolerable. In another sphere we have something analogous to this, where, what is food to one is poison to another.

* A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND.

TEMPORAL DEATH NOT TOTAL EXTINCTION.

MR. MILL resumes discussion with a paper entitled: "Death the entire extinction of life." We admit it, and have never pleaded to the contrary. The life that it assails and vanquishes, it quenches, yea, totally extinguishes. Nevertheless it is restricted in its compass. And if it attacks a being of trifold life in the lowest range of that life, and so far overcomes, it does not at all follow that the entire extinction of that stage of life involves the destruction likewise of the higher and the highest life of this fearfully and wonderfully complex being-man. Nay, the Lord of life, the living Word of Truth, testifies expressly that he who can destroy the animal life of man, cannot destroy the soul-life. And the spirit-life of his renewed ones, no power ever can or shall destroy. This latter assured fact even Mr. Mill has not attempted to controvert.

It being conceded, then, that the spirit at least of the new-born man survives his physical death; the question at present in debate is, Whether his soul also survives in conjunction with his spirit, or whether it perishes in the body's death? It seems impossible to believe that the latter alternative is true, in view of our Lord's words-applying indifferently to "1 human souls-that men are not able to kill the soul! If the souls of

men survive, therefore, they must survive in some condition, they must be in some intermediate state of living existence. Nor should the circumstance that the precise nature of the condition is as yet shrouded for us in impenetrable mystery, lead us to deny that there is such a condition. And let it not be said that this is a short and simple method of proof, and on that account is hardly satisfactory against such a profusion of able reasoning to the contrary. If it be indeed proof, grounded on the testimony of God, it ought to be conclusive for faith.

Now let us note some of the concessions made by our withstanding brethren. Mr. Mill expresses himself as "much pleased with the candid remarks of Mr. J. J. Hobbs in the March RAINBOW, headed, The Secondary Question."" Some of these frank remarks "on the secondary question of the intermediate state," are:- "That there seem both Scripture and reason in the views so strongly insisted on by Mr. Hobson, none can fairly deny; but at the same time we must be careful not to mistake the survival of the soul or spirit and its continued individuality with the popular notions of its consciousness and capacity. Many Scriptures appear to teach that when the spirit returns to God, individuality is still retained (not so, we think, does Mr. Constable teach); and more than this, the spirit is identified with the man, and in some secondary sense is regarded as the man. How else are we to understand such well-known passages as, Absent from the body,'' putting off this my tabernacle,' and the like? Let us willingly admit the force of these Scriptures, even though we be driven into difficulties. Common honesty in dealing with the Bible demands this. Nevertheless, spiritual survival and soul individualism, do not necessitate consciousness or capacity." These candid remarks are plainly in support of what I have been contending for as the true teaching of Scripture,-the survival of the individual soul and spirit of man over the death of his body of flesh, which hath its foundation in the dust, and which thither returns; and the identity of the spirit. of man with the man, so that in some sense it is regarded as the man. Mr. Hobbs says that the spirit is regarded as the man in some secondary sense. And we quite admit that man, apart from body, is certainly not perfect man. But this holds equally true (and some of us think far more momentously true) of the body of man apart from spirit,-from fully developed life in spirit. And so it is that in this case too, the imperfect man, man who has not the spirit, is spoken of nevertheless as "man." In 1 Cor. iii. 4, St. Paul speaks of men, regarded as destitute of the spirit of God, very emphatically as (mere) "men;" for such should be the reading, instead of "carnal." Whilst confessing that there are great mysteries in regard of the intermediate state of man, which are not yet plainly revealed and which none have been able to fathom, we have yet ever read "the Bible through in the light of a belief" in the actual intermediate state of man, and could not understand its doctrine of the soul of man apart from this belief. Nor can we understand the language which speaks of an intermediate unclothed state for man within a period when the man, who is conceived of as in that state, is asserted to be absolutely non-existent. He is not, yet he is in intermediate condition, unclothed.

Our convictions, like Mr. Mill's, are Bible-derived; and we hold undoubtingly that "the general tenor of Divine teaching" is against him.

The mortality of the soul of man as necessarily coincident with that of his body, we have not found to be taught anywhere in the Scripture. On the contrary, we read "that the wicked is reserved to the day of destruction. They shall be brought forth to the day of wrath." (Job xxi. 30.) For "the Lord knoweth how to reserve the unrighteous unto the day of judgment to be punished" (2 Pet. ii. 9); as he is reserving likewise the angels that sinned" to the same end. (Verse 4.) If the wicked are in reserve until they be brought forth to judgment, how are they, the intermediate while, extinct?

Mr. Mill critically observes upon the texts chosen to head my paper in March (p. 131) that they "have no bearing upon the subject " discussed. We used them as motto texts, and think them perfectly appropriate. Whilst believing that the immediate historical reference of the language of Scripture is by no means to be overlooked; we are convinced that that language for the most part has further a prophetic and much more important reference for us. Be it that Mr. Mill has correctly interpreted the text from Habakkuk (chap. i. 12) in its relation to the occasion that called it forth; it certainly does not follow that we, believers now, have no true interest in these striking words of inspiration-" We shall not die." Nay, "whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope." And on these very words, therefore, together with others of like import, we ourselves build most precious hope. "We shall not die;" but shall suffer "judgment" and "correction," so as that (chap. ii. 4)" the just shall live by his faith;" and ultimately we may exclaim (chap. iii. 18, 19), “I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation. The Lord God is my strength. . . and he will make me to walk upon mine high places." Is all this grand encouraging language to be restricted to a mere temporal sensible meaning, and confined exclusively to Israel? If so, where is the ancient Scripture testimony to be found concerning Jesus and his Church and kingdom? Where are the prophecies of the grace unto us to which the Apostle Peter makes reference (1 Epis. i. 10)-" concerning which salvation ?"

Certainly St. Paul does not confine the living of the just by faith to the exemption of the Jews from impending slaughter by their Chaldean foes. Surely, then, we may set, "We shall not die" of the Old Testament prophet in the balance over against the utterance of the Old Testament sage, "The dead (quoad dead) know not anything."

Let us observe by the way that this famous passage (Eccles. ix. 5) will not really bear the stress that is put upon it; it will not weigh fairly against the other with which we have just contrasted it. For its writer, "The philosopher and preacher of Ecclesiastes, gave his heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things done under heaven; but after every effort he declares the search to be in vain; for, as far as can be learned, there is nothing better for a man than to eat and drink, and enjoy the fruit of his labour all the days of his life, for that is his portion; and no man can tell what shall come after.' (See a wellwritten article by Mr. Mill in the February RAINBOW, p. 90.) How utterly futile, then, to endeavour to prove the condition of man after physical death, by the words of one who professed that neither he nor any other knew anything of the matter. "In their origin, in their life,

19