66 sign in the formation of the uviverse." He says further on p. 161, Archelaus, of Miletus, taught that the earth was at the beginning a muddy mass, whence living animals were produced and nourished; and that animals have souls which differ in their powers according to the structure of the bodies in which they reside." "The Socratic school or sect." See chapter 4. Enfield says, p. 185, 186-" concerning the human soul, the opinion of Socrates, according to Xenophon, was, that it is allied to the divine being, not by a participation of essence, but by a similarity of nature; that man excels all other animals in the faculty of reason, and that the existence of good men will be continued after death, in a state in which they will receive the reward of their virtue. Although it appears that, on this latter topic, Socrates was not wholly free from uncertainty, the consolation which he professed to derive from this source in the immediate prospect of death, leaves little room to doubt that he entertained a real belief and expectation of immortality. The doctrine which Cicero ascribes to Socrates, on this head, is, that the human soul is a divine principle which, when it passes out of the body, returns to heaven; and that this passage is most easy to those who have, in this life, made the greatest progress in virtue." It is well known that Socrates was unjust * Concerning the confidence of Cicero and Socrates in the truth of the soul's immortality, and their arguments in support of this doe trine, let us hear professor Stuart He says in his Essay on aion and aionios, published in a late number of "the Spirit of the Pilgrims," p. 407, 408, "Cicero, incomparably the most able defender of the Soul's immortality of which the heathen world can yet boast, very ingenuously confesses, that after all the arguments which he had adduced in order to confirm the doctrine in question, it so fell out, that his mind was satisfied of it, only when directly employed in contem plating the arguments adduced in its favor At all other times, he fell unconsciously into a state of doubt and darkness. "It is notorious, also, that Socrates, the next most able advocate among the heathen for the same doctrine, has adduced arguments to ly condemned to death by the Athenians. Enfield, p. 180-182, gives an account of his last moments, to which I refer the reader. "A story," says Cicero, "which I never read without tears." From the school of Socrates many sects arose. In chapters 5, 6, and 7, Enfield gives an account of the Cyrenic sect, the Megaric or Eristic sect, and the Eliac and Eretric school, but says nothing respecting their views of the soul. These sects were of short duration. In chapter 8, he gives an account " of the Academic sect," and sect. I," of Plato and his philosophy." Enfield says, p. 211-" when other sects fell into oblivion, the Platonic philosophy, united with the Peripatetic, still flourished. Even to the present day, Plato has many followers: his writings still give establish the never ceasing existence of the soul, which will not bear the test of examination. Such is the argument by which he endeavors to prove, that we shall always continue to exist because we always have existed; and this last proposition he labors to establish, on the ground that all our present acquisitions of knowledge are only so many reminiscences of what we formerly knew, in a state of existence antecedent to our present one. Unhappy lot of philosophy, to be doomed thas to prop itself up, with supports so weak and fragile as this! How can the soul be filled with consolation, in prospect of death, without some better and more cheering light than can spring from such a source? How can it quench its thirst for immortality, by drinking in such impure and turbid streams as these? Poor wandering heathen! How true it is-and what a glorious, blessed truth it is that life and immortality are brought to light in the gospel! It is equally true, that they are brought to light only there. And may I not be permitted to say-"poor wandering Christian," who still goes back to the heathen, yea, to lost revelations, to support the doctrine of the immortality of the soul and a future retribution? It is indeed a "glorious, blessed truth" that "life and immortality are brought to light in the gospel." But if they are brought to light only there," I call on Messrs. Stuart and Hudson to show if they can, that any other life or immortality are brought to light in the gospel, except life and immortality by a resurrection from the dead. Either show that there is a life and immortality founded on the immortality of the soul revealed in the gospel, or renounce this doctrine. If the reasons of Cicero and Socrates in its support, "will not bear the test of examination," produce yours, that we may see if they are any better. a tincture to the speculations and language of philosophy and theology." This part then demands at tention. It was asserted by you that the ancient heathen derived their opinions from the Jews. It seems this was asserted also respecting Plato. But if you consult Enfield from p. 214-218, you will see that he formally refutes this opinion. And on p. 232, 233, declares, that Plato" collected the tenets of other philosophers which were, in many particulars, contradictory, and could by no exertion of ingenuity be brought to coalesce; and that, out of this heterogeneous mass he framed a confused system, destitute of form or consistency." In p. 234, he says-" wisdom in the strict Platonic sense of the term, is the knowledge of those things which truly exist and are comprehended by the intellect, particularly those which respect God, and the human soul as distinct from the body." He adds, p. 235-" in meditation, the soul converses with itself; thought flows through the lips by means of the vocal organs. Intellection is the operation of the understanding contemplating intelli. gible forms, or ideas. It is two-fold; the first, that of the soul contemplating ideas before it descends into the body; the other, that which it exercises after it is immersed in the body, which may be also termed natural knowledge. This kind of knowledge consists in the recollection of those things which the mind had known in its pre-existent state, and differs from memory in the object; memory being employed upon sensible things, reminiscence upon things purely intelligible." But Enfield, p. 246-248, gives us the following account of Plato's opinions respecting the soul.Plato refers to the head of the philosophy of nature his doctrine concerning the human soul; a doctrine which he treats obscurely, on the ground of his assumed hypothesis concerning spiritual emanations from the divine nature. He appears to have taught, that the soul of man is derived by emanation from God; but that this emanation was not immediate, but through the intervention of the soul of the world, which was itself debased by some material admix, ture; and consequently, that the human soul, receding further from the first intelligence, is inferior in perfection to the soul of the world. He conceived the soul of man to be, in the material parts of its nature, formed for conversing with sensible objects, and, in its intellectual part, capable of spiritual contemplation, but what he meant by ohema, the material vehicle of the soul, is uncertain. The relation which the human soul, in its original constitution, bears to matter, Plato appears to have considered as the source of moral evil. Since the soul of the world, by partaking of matter, has within itself the seeds of evil, he inferred, that this must be the case still more with respect to the soul of man. Upon the great question, in what manner the soul acts upon the body, Plato speaks obscurely and inconsistently, but it is probable that, as he conceived the soul of the world to produce the motion of the earth, and the heavenly bodies, by means of that part of its nature which is material; so he supposed the power of moving bodies, which belongs to the human soul; to be the effect of its material principle. "To account for the origin and present state of human souls, Plato supposes, that when God formed the universe, be separated from the soul of the world inferior souls, equal in number to the stars, and assigned to each its proper celestial abode; but that these souls (by what means, or for what reason, does not appear) were sent down to the earth into human bodies, as into a sepulchre or prison. He ascribes to this cause the depravity and misery to which hu man nature is liable; and maintains, that it is only by disengaging itself from all animal passions, and rising above sensible objects to the contemplation of the world of intelligence, that the soul of man can be prepared to return to its original habitation. "Not consistently with the preceding doctrine, our philosopher frequently speaks of the soul of man as consisting of three parts; the first, the seat of intelligence; the second, of passion; the third, of appetite; and assigns to each its proper place in the human body. The first of these portions or faculties of the soul (for Plato speaks of them under both these denominations) he conceived to have been derived from God; the second and third, from matter. The irrational parts of the soul, in the Platonic system, are not, however, to be confounded with the blood and nerves, which they were supposed to inhabit, and to move. 66 Lastly, Plato teaches, in express terms, the doctrine of the immortality of the rational soul; but he has rested the proof of this doctrine upon arguments, drawn from the more fanciful parts of his system. For example in nature, all things terminate in their contraries; the state of sleep terminates in that of waking; and the reverse: so, life ends in death, and death in life. The soul is a simple indivisible substance, and therefore incapable of dissolution, or corruption. The objects to which it naturally adheres are spiritual and incorruptible; therefore its nature is so. All our knowledge is acquired by the reminiscence of ideas contemplated in a prior state; as the soul therefore must have existed before this life, it is probable, that it will continue to exist after it. Life being the conjunction of the soul with the body, death is nothing more than their separation. Whatever is the principle of motion, must be incapable of destruction. Such is the substance of the arguments |