RELIGIOUS WORLD.

Auckland Star, Volume LVI, Issue 162, 11 July 1925, Page 22

RELIGIOUS WORLD.

» ■ PRESENT DAY OUTLOOK. (Contributed.) r* THOUGHTS ON EffiMORTAIITY. .- "If a man die, shall he live again?" t (Job xlv. 14). This was the text from \ which tho Rev. E. Drake preached a ? striking sermon in the Epsom Methodist * Church on Sunday. Mr. Drake said the \_ question which formed his text was ''■ wrung out of a soul's bitter experi- '" ence. Job was a lonely soul, lonely in his - sorrow and suffering, fighting a lone . battle for his faith. He could not account for his suffering, and in his con- -_. ception, only a hope of life after the £ death that seemed inevitable, could b satisfy him. Only thus could tho ilia of f- time bo remedied. The same cry for ima mortality has been wrung from many I. hearts during all the centuries of human tv history. Several answers have been g given to tho question asked by Job. X- (1) Materialism gives a direct negate' tive. But the materialistic conception *• is contrary to all the best instincts of i human nature, and cannot, therefore, lie \ correct. God hath set eternity in the f heart. ,M (2) There is the answer of spiritism. i Because there is alleged communication ?. between tho unseen and the seen it is f. argued that there ia life after* death. '. The Bible never denies the possibility of [' such communication, but always forbids I its practice. There is grave danger to reason and nerve force in association \ with the wizards that peep and mutter I. (Scripture language for the ventrilof quism of tho mediums). Unfortunately, h the revelations of the best spiritists are ' of very little value, and certainly make \ one wonder why intelligent men can be . attracted by such worthlessness. Spiritv ism is grossly materialistic, for the ' spiritist refuses to believe in tho spiritual at all unless it is materialistic. i Moreover, it refuses to acknowledge Jesuß Christ as Lord, and hates the doctrine of His atonement. Spiritism has no satisfying answer to Job's question. (3) There is the teaching of Theo- _ .sophy, and of Indian religious philosophy j, generally. Many Indians now tend toi' wards a belief in a personal immortal- _' ity. Theosophists claim to emphasise a .; perfection that is, rather than a perfec- |. tion that is to be. Men do survive k death—to go through a series of incarj nations, until perfection of character is reached. Unfortunately, perfection means the loss of consciousness and of personality —that is the supreme happiness. There are three main objections to this contention, (a) It fails to preserve a real continuity of personal experience from one life to another. How one can improve upon a previous incar- ! nation without knowing what happened therein is not clear. It seems that we aTe the victims of caprice, (b) It condemns the soul to a long, if not perpetual bondage to the law of birth and death, (c) It can only point forward to the destruction o:_ personality as the one thing to be desired. We must have some doctrine of the future that will conserve the fullness of human personality and self-consciousness beyond the grave. I submit three arguments in this direction. .1) The first argument is based on the nature and constitution of man. This argument is used by writers other than Biblical. Plato, for example, had the idea of perfection in mind. That was not attained in human experience, so far as he was aware. Nothing in life entirely satisfies; why then an idea of perfection? Surely, that we may strive after perfection, here and hereafter. Then, there is the indisputable fact that man is a moral being. There is a judgment seat in the heart of every man, where a verdict is pronounced on every moral act. There is a still, small voice which is at once accuser and judge. /The sense of duty imposes obligation. That is surely the water-mark of endless lifft in man. The command of God implies human ability, and that takes more than a single human life to work out. We cannot but see that there is something wrong in life. Many men ' never had a chance. All through life they struggle with adverse conditions. Others do not arrive—children, youths, who never have an opportunity to Bhow what is in them. Surely this instinct for justice demands another life for its ( demonstration. Those who pass out of . life with powers unexhausted cannot be cast as rubbish to the void. There must 1 be another life. Jesus says wo are right. "If it were not so, I would have told you." (2) The second argument is based upon what we know of God as revealed in the Scriptures. The saints i of the Old Testament had a belief in the future life, but for the most part [ it was vague. Still some Psalmists reasoned that because of what we know God to be He will never allow men to perish. "As for mc, I shall behold Thy face; I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with Thy likeness." "This God is our God for ever and ever; He will be our Guide over death." But Job's problem was much more serious than that of the Psalmists. They could reason from what they knew of God through fellowship with Him. But Job's suffering caused him to set the God of his theology over against the God of the facts of life. He felt sure that, for some unexplained reason, the Divine i anger would pursue him to the grave. On this side of death there seemed no I hope of the restoration of the Divine 1 favour. Eventually, Job saw light as he uttered the great words:—"l know I that my Redeemer liveth." Jesus confirmed this hope by declaring that God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ must want the fellowj ship established on earth to continue. (3) The third argument is based upon i the experience of Christ. Tho apostlo declared that Christ rose from the dead, ■j. the first fruits of them that sleep. * Wherever he went, that was the burden 1 of St. Paul's message. In his view, '. that explained Christianity. The experience of Christ takes the doctrine of the future life out of the regions of inference and places it in the region of historic l ' ™ •' }, Was not merel y the survival of Christ s spirit. He Himself lived again. The grave was empty. He took His body away with Him. True, it Mas changed: it was a spiritual body; yet men saw the wound points in hands and side Jesus died and came to life again. "If the Spirit of Him who raised up Christ from the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ from tho dead shall I -r.l °..1 v A cken y° ur mortal bodies by His lfve dW _ lletll in y° u -" The dead 1 place g ' and each £° eat 0 his own