LECTURE III.

ECCLESIASTES, XII. 7.

Then shall the dust return unto the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave

it.

THAT man is destined to exist throughout eternity, is a point on which all denominations of Christians are agreed. But whether his cONSCIOUS existence ceases at the moment of death, and after a long slumber of insensibility, is resumed at the hour of general resurrection; or whether, when once called into existence he never ceases to be conscious, is a question agitated between Orthodox Christians on the one hand;—and Deistical Christians, spoiled by false philosophy, on the other. This question, philosophically considered -involves another, concerning the na

ture of the human soul. Is the soul or spirit a mere attribute of the body-a rational intelligence produced by natural consequence from the exquisite structure of the visible frame? In other words-is it "material?" Or is it a distinct emanation from heaven,-superadded to the living man, and placed within his animated frame-like an intelligent engineer-who conducts a machinery exquisite in itself? In other words, is the principle of rationality and of moral feeling in man, Immaterial?

To enter at this TIME-into a philosophical discussion of this question-would be a vain effort to compress within the limits of half an hour, a comprehensive subject, which could not, in such a space, be treated otherwise than superficially. To discuss it philosophically-in THIS PLACE, would perhaps be to speak in an unknown tongue-to the great bulk of the auditory.

Our chief concern is to inquire-how far the immateriality of the soul-its

capability and power of existing independently of the corporeal organs,—is set forth by revealed religion ?—and how far the same authority warrants us to conclude that the spirit will actually exist, in an intermediate state, between death and judgment?

But what do we mean by the "soul," or "spirit?" Not the mere principle of animal life-possessed by man in common with the other animals. That is breathed away, at death, alike by a fly, a worm, or any of the human species: and in this sense quibblers might get rid of the expression in our text, by affirming-that "the return of the spirit to God who gave it,"-signifies no more than the dispersion of the principle of life in all animals, into the great atmosphere of vitality. What, then, is to be understood by the soul" or "spirit" of Man?

We read in the second chapter of the book of Genesis, "that the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground; and breathed into his nostrils the breath

of life; and man became a living soul."* Now this expression, being used with reference to man only, and to no other living animal, implies the divine afflation of a spiritual intelligence,-superinduced upon that principle of vitality, which is common to man, and to the whole animal creation.

From this position-it is a necessary consequence, that by the return of the spirit, at the hour of dissolution, to God who gave it-is signified, the survivance and continued separate existence of that particle of heavenly intelligence, so distinct from the breath of animal life;together with all those recollections and feelings acquired in life,-which by being synonimous with consciousness, constitute the very stamp and essence of identity. Whatever, therefore, may be minutely meant by the return of this spirit unto God who gave it—in whatever part of the universe it may be placed,

* Verse 7.

it exists immediately after death in a distinct and disembodied state, as a thinking, conscious, individual being.

The main strength of those who hold the opposite argument, and link Materialism with Christianity-rests in the pains taken by Scripture, to prove a proper resurrection of the body which, they maintain, is a doctrine of no importance, if the conscious spirit-have never died, -but enjoys a separate existence. What would any man care, what became of his dust; or why should so vain an inquiry be made about the process of its resuscitation and recomposition, if the purer part, all that thinks, and knows, and reasons, and feels, exists independently of union with that dust? Nay, if the conscious spirit survives death,-capable of enjoying the happiness of eternity,to prove a resurrection of the body is worse than of no signification. It is to introduce a doctrine, not only superfluous, but repulsive. It is to assert a labour to be performed by God-not