SECTION III.

On the various opinions which have been entertained respecting the nature of man's soul; its immortality; its condition after death; whence such opinions originated; and how they came to be incorporated with the Christian religion.

We have seen from the preceding Sections, that the Bible does not teach the immortality of man's soul, its happiness, or misery in a disembodied state. Here our investigations might end. But curiosity has led us to inquire into the origin of such opinions. Let us

1st. Notice the opinions which have been entertained respecting the nature of man's soul. Concerning the nature of the soul Dr. Good, in his Book of Nature, thus writes, p. 360, "Is the essence of human soul material or immaterial? The question at first sight, appears to be highly important, and to involve nothing less than a belief or disbelief, not indeed in its divine origin, but in its divine similitude and immortality. Yet I may venture to affirm that there is no question which has been productive of so little satisfaction, or has laid a foundation for wider and wilder errors within the whole range of metaphysics. And for this plain and obvious reason, that we have no distinct idea of the terms, and no settled premises to build on." He adds, p. 367, "It is something more than matter, observes one class of philosophers, for matter itself is essentially unintelligent, and is utterly incapable of thought. But this is to speak with more confidence than we are warranted; and unbecomingly to limit the power of the Creator.-On the other hand, it is as strongly contended by an opposite class of philosophers, and

the same train of arguments has been continued, almost without variation, from the days of Epicurus, that the principle of thought or the human mind must be material; for otherwise the frame of man, we are told, will be made to consist of two distinct and adverse essences, possessing no common property or harmony of action. But this is to speak with as unbecoming a confidence as in the former case." The Dr. p. 369, gives us the following theory in place of these: "The idea that the essence or texture of the soul consists either wholly or in part of spiritualized, etherial, gaseous, or radient matter, capable of combining with the grosser part of the body, and of becoming an object of sense, seems to avoid the difficulties inherent to both systems." It would be tedious to detail the endless speculations respecting the soul of man. On the subject of this whole Section, we refer the reader to Stanley's and Enfield's works respecting the philosophers, where many of these are detailed. Calmet on the word soul.

See also

2d. Let us notice the opinions which have been entertained respecting the immortality of the soul. Mr. Stanley says the Egyptians were the first who asserted that the soul of man was immortal, and cites in proof Eusebius, Diodorus Siculus, and Halicarnassus. Other authors say it was done first by Pherecydes, the philosopher; and others that Pythagorus was the first inventor or asserter of that doctrine. Some say the Brachmans instructed him in it, as also the doctrines of rewards and punishments, in his travels to acquire knowledge. For > this purpose, it is said he travelled into Egypt, Phenicia, Chaidea, &c. and lived there twenty-two years, and that he was a disciple of Sanchedes, an Egyptian arch-priest. It is certain that one of the most eminent seats of learning began in Egypt, and

that the learning of the Egyptians was famous in the days of Moses, Acts 7: 22. If the Egyptians taught the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, one thing is certain, that they could not learn it from Moses, for it is not taught in his writings: and if the doctrine had been true, it would not have been entirely overlooked by him. Mr. Stanley says the Chaldaic philosophers taught the immortality of the soul long before the days of Moses; and it seems universally allowed that the Chaldean, Egyptian, and heathen philosophers in some shape or other held it. It is said, Thales was the first of the heathen philosophers who taught it, having brought it from Egypt, and that Pythagorus, Socrates, and Plato only cultivated and perfected the doctrine after him. Socrates flourished four hundred and thirty years before Christ, and the philosophical doctrines came then universally to prevail. He taught the immortality of the soul and its pre-existence to the body. Some say Socrates only hoped, but was not positive that the soul existed after death.

Tertullian believed that the soul of Jesus at his death descended to those of the patriarchs. That the soul of Adam came from God, and that the breath

of God was a vapor. The church in the days of Origen had not determined, whether the soul was eternal, or created for a certain time; whether it was the cause of life, or was merely confined in the body as a punishment for previous transgressions. Origen himself taught, that all souls had existed from all eternity, and were imprisoned in the body as a punishment for their sins. On the immortality of the soul, Dr. Good says, p. 372-" But there is a question of far more consequence to us than the nature of the soul's essence, and that is, the nature of its duration. Is the soul immortal? Is it capable of a separate existence? Does it perish with the body

as a part of it? Or if a distinct principle, does it vanish into nothingness as soon as the separation takes place? What does philosophy offer upon this subject? This too has been studied from age to age; the wisest of mankind have tried it in every possible direction: new opinions have been started, and old opinions revived; and what, after all, is the upshot? The reply is as humiliating as in the former case; vanity of vanities, and nothing more; utter doubt and indecision,-hope perpetually neutralized by fear."

4th. Let us now pay attention to the opinions which have been held, respecting the condition of souls after death. Concerning the doctrine of transmigration:

Some say it was invented, and others only established by Pythagorus. It was thought to solve the difficulty, how good and bad were to be rewarded and punished after death. Lucian condemns the souls of the rich who oppressed their neighbors, into asses, to bear all burdens, and become the most contemptible beasts, for their pride and oppression here. As they did well or ill in the body, they were to be rewarded or punished in the next body or transmigration. The Mahometans believe in transmigration. And the Moors and Negroes believed, that their bodies should return home again under ground to their former habitation; and hence had pipes, rum, and tobacco buried with them. Some of the Jews it is said believed, that if buried any where else than in Judea, that their bodies would be conveyed under ground or otherwise to rise there in the resurrection. Some of the heathens taught, that the body was the prison of the soul, and while shut up in it, was surrounded with darkness as in a dungeon. But some believed that souls were very anxious to Occupy an earthly tenement. According to Virgil

and others, but few souls retained possession of elysium; the rest returning into mortal bodies after a thousand years; but before they revisited the upper region, they were compelled to drink of the wa ters of Lethe; an oblivion of former impressions being deemed necessary to prevent them repining in their new habitation. Sallust observes, that were it not for these transmigrations, the deity would be under the necessity of creating a soul for every new body; and that as in time this number would be infinite, they could not be contained within a finite world. The rational souls, he observes, never migrate into the bodies of irrational animals, but follow those irrational bodies without, as demons who possess or attend men. Some imagined indeed that the soul at last, after wearing out a number of bodies, would, in time wear out itself, and perish for ever. Others gave it a body, and sent it to the clouds, to the stars, to some happier region, and some to the regions in the bowels of the earth. Some also said that the soul after its separation remained without a body. It appears from Matt. 16: 14, and 14: 2. John 9: 1-3, with other texts that the doctrine of transmigration was held by some among the Jews. It need not surprise us if they also held many other of the heathen opinions, respecting souls and their state after death.

Adam, in his Roman Antiquities says, "The Romans paid the greatest attention to funeral rites, because they believed that the souls of the unburied were not admitted into the abodes of the dead; or at least wandered an hundred years along the river Styx, before they were allowed to cross it; for which reason, if the bodies of their friends could not be found, they erected to them an empty tomb." As to the corpse 66 a small coin was put in his mouth, which he might give to Charon, the ferryman of hell,