THE FORMATION OF THE SPIRIT.
In a search for testimony relative to the nature of man, with the
purpose of ascertaining whether or not he is immortal, those texts first
demand attention which are claimed as proof that he is above and beyond
the power of death. Zech. 12:1, is introduced as positive testimony on
this side of the question:
“The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which
stretcheth forth the heavens and layeth the foundations of the earth,
and formeth the spirit of man within him.”
With an immense flourish this text is introduced by Mr. Landis, p. 152;
and with an air of triumph he adds that materialists are in the habit of
passing it in silence. We think we can answer for them that they have
seen in it nothing to answer, and hence have declined to spend their
time beating the air. As to the nature of the spirit which God forms in
man, its characteristics and attributes, this text affirms nothing.
Above all, respecting the main inquiry, Is this spirit immortal? the
text is entirely silent. Why then is it introduced? Because it contains
the word spirit. But, as has been shown (chapter vi), nothing is proved
by the mere use of the words soul and spirit, till some affirmation can
be found in the Scriptures that these terms signify an independent
entity, which has the power of uninterrupted consciousness, and the
endowment of immortality. For men to take these terms and give them
definitions and clothe them with attributes which are the offspring of
pagan philosophy, or figments of their own imagination, and then claim
that because the Bible uses these terms it sustains their views, is to
us, at least, a very unsatisfactory method of settling this question.
But, from the persistency with which it is followed by those of the
opposite view, one might conclude that it is the only way they have of
sustaining their position.
God formeth the spirit of man within him. So the text asserts. The word,
form, is in the Septuagint, _plasso_. The definition of this word, as
given by Liddell and Scott, is, “To form, mould, shape, Lat. _fingere_,
strictly used of the artist who works in soft substances, such as earth,
clay, wax.” The word, then, signifies giving shape and form to something
already in existence; for the artist does not create his clay, wax, &c.,
but only changes its form. The second definition seems, however, to be
more applicable to the case in hand. Thus, “II. generally, to bring into
shape or form, πλ. τὴν ψυχὴν τὸ σῶμα, to mould and form the mind or body
by care, diet, and exercise.” Thus God makes man the crown of creation
by forming in him (through a superior organization of the brain) an
intellectual or mental nature, and we can still further form or mold it,
by care and cultivation. There is nothing here to favor the idea of the
creation of a separate immaterial and immortal entity, and its insertion
into the human frame.
This text is illustrated by Job 32:8: “But there is a spirit in man; and
the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding;” not “giveth
it [the spirit] understanding,” as we heard an immaterialist in debate
not long since read it; but “giveth them [the men] understanding.” That
is, men are endowed with a superior mental organization; and by means of
that God gives them understanding.
Since, however, Zech. 12:1, is used by immaterialists, to prove that
souls are specially created, it raises the question, which may as well
be considered in this connection as any other, whence the spirit,
whatever it is, is derived. In the text under consideration, the present
tense is evidently used for the past; and hence it might be read, “The
burden of the word of the Lord ... which stretched forth the heavens,
and laid the foundations of the earth, and _formed_ the spirit of man
within him.” If now this means the creation of an immortal entity to be
added to man, called his spirit, it applies only to the first man, the
man formed at the creation of the world. The question then remains, How
do all succeeding members of the human race, how do we, get an immortal
spirit? Is it by a special act of creation on the part of God, or is it
by generation from father to son? Has God, for every member of the human
race since Adam, by special act created a soul or spirit? They who say
he has, contradict Gen. 2:2, which declares that all God’s work of
creation, so far as it pertains to this world, was finished in the first
week of time. If this testimony is true, it is certain that God has not
been at work ever since creating human souls as fast as bodies were
brought into existence to need them, the greater part of the time
thousands of them every day.
Has God thus made himself the servant of the human race, to wait upon
their will, caprice, and passions? for how many of the inhabitants of
this earth are the offspring of the foulest iniquity and the most
unbridled lust! Does God hold himself in readiness to create souls which
must come from his hand immaculate and pure, to be thrust into such vile
tenements, at the bidding of godless lust? The reader will pardon the
irreverence of the question, for the sake of an exposure of the
absurdity of that theory which prompts it.
But if we say that the soul is transmitted with the body, then what
becomes of its incorruptibility and immortality? for “that which is born
of the flesh is flesh.” John 3:6. And Peter says (1 Pet. 1:23-25):
“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the
word of God which liveth and abideth forever. For all flesh is as grass,
and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth,
and the flower thereof falleth away; but the word of the Lord endureth
forever.”
There could hardly be a plainer testimony that man as a whole is mortal
and perishable. He is born of corruptible seed. But more than this, it
is added, “All flesh is as grass.” Should it be said that this means
simply the body, we reply that the term flesh is frequently used in the
New Testament to signify the whole man. Thus, Rom. 3:20: “By the deeds
of the law there shall no flesh be justified.” Paul does not here talk
about the justification of bones, sinews, nerves and muscles; he refers
to the whole responsible man. In the same sense the term is used in many
other passages. But Peter himself, in the passage just quoted, cuts off
its application exclusively to the body; for after saying that “all
flesh is as grass,” he continues, “and all the glory of man as the
flower of grass.” The glory of man must include all that there is noble
and exalted about his nature. If the soul is the highest and most
godlike part of man, it is included in this glory; but lo! it is all
like the flower of the grass, transitory and perishable.
The word mortal, which means liable to death, occurs five times in our
English version, and in every instance is used to describe the nature of
the real man. Rom. 6:12; 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:53, 54; 2 Cor. 4:11. It occurs
in the original in one other instance (2 Cor. 5:4) where it is rendered
“mortality.”
The texts usually relied on to prove that souls are immediately created
are Eccl. 12:7; Isa. 57:16; Zech. 12:1. The first of these was examined
in the last chapter. The word translated “form” in the last of these
passages, as shown in this present chapter, is not a word that signifies
to create, but only to put into form, mold, and fashion. Isa. 57:16,
speaks of the souls which God has made. But there are numerous other
texts, as Job 10:8-11; Isa. 44:2; 64:8; Jer. 1:5, &c., which speak in
the same manner of the body. But if such expressions can be used with
respect to the body, produced by the natural process of generation, the
same expression with reference to the soul contains no proof that that
is not also transmitted with the body.
God said to our first parents, and the commission was repeated to Noah
after the flood, “Be fruitful and multiply.” Multiply what? Themselves,
of course. Did that mean that they should multiply bodies, and God would
multiply souls to fit them? Nothing of the kind; but they were to
multiply beings having all the characteristics, endowments, and
attributes of themselves. So Adam, Gen. 5:3, “begat a son in his own
likeness, after his image, and called his name Seth.” This son was like
Adam in all respects, having all the natures that Adam possessed; and
that which was begotten by Adam was called Seth. But according to the
doctrine of creationism, Adam begat only a body, and God created a soul,
which is the real man, and called his name Seth, and put it into that
body. Neither this text nor any other gives countenance to any such
absurdity.
Some prominent theologians, both ancient and modern, have adopted the
doctrine of traduction as opposed to that of creationism, believing the
latter to be contrary to philosophy and revelation, but the former to be
in harmony with both. In Wesley’s Journal, Vol. v., p. 10, is found the
following entry:--
“I read and abridged an old work on the origin of the soul. I never
before saw anything on the subject so satisfactory. I think the author
proves to a demonstration that God has enabled man, as all other
creatures, to propagate his whole specie, consisting of soul and body.”
The testimony of Richard Watson (Institutes, pp. 362, 3) is equally
explicit. He says:--
“A question as to the transmission of this corruption of nature from
parents to children has been debated among those who, nevertheless,
admit the fact; some contending that the soul is _ex traduce_; others
that it is by immediate creation. It is certain that, as to the
metaphysical part of this question, we can come to no satisfactory
conclusion. The Scriptures, however, appear to be more in favor of
traduction. ‘Adam begat a son in his own likeness.’ ‘That which is born
of the flesh is flesh,’ which refers certainly to the soul as well as to
the body.... The tenet of the soul’s descent appears to have most
countenance from the language of Scripture, and it is no small
confirmation of it, that when God designed to incarnate his own Son, he
stepped out of the ordinary course, and formed a sinless human nature
immediately by the power of the Holy Ghost.”
The evidence is thus rendered conclusive from both reason and Scripture,
that the soul is transmitted through the process of generation with the
body. What then, we ask again, becomes of its immortality? For “that
which is born of the flesh is flesh,” and mortality cannot generate
itself to a higher plane and beget immortality. This is not saying that
mind is matter; for the results of organization are not to be confounded
with the matter of which the organization is composed.