August 1925
TH E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
349
ogy lost its soul, then it lost its mind, then it lost conscious ness; it still, has behaviour of a kind.” (Psychology, the Science of Mental Life, p. 2, footnote.) The problems of m a tte r and motion can be known only th rough th e mind. The hum an body consists of m a tte r; it possesses energy which may resu lt in walking or runn ing ; and it, also, has mind. We have not tried to discrim inate between mind and soul. Are m atter, motion, and soul one thing or th ree things? Is th ere any evidence to show th a t the body and soul can exist separately? Yes, th ere is. When I studied physiology in th e elem entary school I was ta u g h t th a t the body changes completely once in seven years. Physiologies now state th a t th ere is a complete change every year. If th is is true, the tissues of my body have changed ten times during the la st decade. But I am th e same person from year to year. W hat is it w ithin me .that enables me to know th a t I am the same person? W hat is it th a t enables me to think, and will, and remember? It is th e m ind or soul. I t is something which endures. A leg, or an arm may be removed, yet the soul rem ains the same. The definition of sp iritu al is th a t which exists or can exist w ithout m atter. Therefore, th e soul is a “ super m aterial and imm ortal principle,’”' which may exist inde pendent of th e body and, consequently, survive the death of- the body. The Bible, also, teaches th e separate existence of soul and body. In the Old Testam ent we read th a t: “E lijah said, O Lord, my God, I pray thee, let th is child’s soul come into him again. And th e Lord heard the voice of E lijah; and th e soul of th e child came into him again,; and he revived.” (1 K ings 17:21, 22.) And in the New Testam ent, we read th a t Jesus took the young woman “ by the hand and called, saying, ‘Maid, arise,’ And h er Spirit came again, and she arose straightw ay; and he commanded to give her m eat” (Luke 8:54, 55). We have recently read th a t if a person is revived a cer ta in number of m inutes after the h e a rt has ceased to beat, both body and soul are prolonged. If th e tim e is increased a trifle, the body lives on bu t not th e soul. This, if true, is a practical dem onstration of the separation of body and soul. Now, the question arises, which is cause and which is effect? Such scholars as Draper, Tyson, Lotze, Wundt, P rey, and C arpenter m aintain th a t th e soul is the cause and the body is the effect. They consistently m aintain th a t th e soul exists before the body and shapes the body in its growth, and exists a fte r th e body and separate from it. In th e hum an body th ere are many kinds of cells. How is it th a t some are building muscle tissue, some nerve, some brain, while others are building afte r th eir kind? Why is it th a t they work in harmony, each building its portion, no less, no more? We aré told th a t these cells have the same chemical* composition, yet they build different tissues of different sizes and shapes. Who or w hat tells them when and how, and how much to build? Is it the mass particles in motion th a t do th is or is it th e ego or soul? “But if th e hum an m ind or soul is spiritual, it is clear th a t it cannot be a product of organic evolution, any m o re ' th an it can be a product of p aren tal generation. On th e con trary , each and every hum an soul must be an immediate creation of th e A uthor of N ature, not evolved from the in tern al potentiality of m atter, bu t infused into m atter from w ithout. The hum an soul is created in organized m at te r, bu t not from it.” (O’Toole, “The Case Against Evolu tion ,” p. 193.)
IV. The Mind of God A little group of people are walking along the street. Suddenly each becomes conscious of th e fragrance of lilacs. They look about and discover a hush in full bloom. All are conscious of the same fragrance, the same color, the same shape and name of flower. . Why is this? Do these impres sions come ready made from the lilac bush or do they come from the separate m inds of th e individuals? Sir Isaac Newton discovered th e laws of gravitation, and Gregor Mendel, certain laws of heredity. These men discovered w hat was already there. Back of the m inds of Newton and Mendel was .the Mind of God. The human mind, then, becomes conscious of certain phenomena because it is in tune, so to speak, w ith the Infinite Mind. This idea is not new. It was ta u g h t by P lato and his .School. “ On th is point th ere is a consent of all wise men when, doing honor to the m ind which is in man, they acknowledge a sim ilar Mind pervading heaven and earth. F o r can we possibly conceive th e universe >enslaved to unreasoning chance? Must we not ra th e r agree w ith those who have gone before us in adm itting a certain marvelous Intelligence which m arshals all things into place and order? Mind it is, most certainly, which proportions into beauty all things. Mind is forever Monarch of all.” (Phileb. 28 c. d.) Modern doubters who See nothing b u t psychology in the world about them , could learn much by reading ancient history. One of the conclusions of Socrates was: “Your own soul rules in you; yet you have never seen it. Learn hence not to question unseen beings, b u t ra th e r from the P acts of N ature to appreciate th e ir power and venerate th e Divine w ithin them .” (Xenophon. Mem. Socratis. 1, 4, 3-6.) Materialism claims th a t m a tte r alone really exists and th a t m ind is bu t a resu lt of a portion of th e body, th e n er vous system. “To say th a t m ind is the by-product of mass particles is to assume th a t th e whole super-physical realm of hum an and cu ltu ral life and values . . . is the blindly pro duced. . . effect of impacts and tensions in a realm of ghostly entities which is itself the offspring of th e constructive, imagination of th e physicist. Surely th is is making the ca rt draw the horse w ith a vengeance.” (Joseph A. Leigh ton, The Field of Philosophy, p. 183.) There are many references in the Bible th a t apply espe cially to the m aterialist. H ere is one: “B u t the n atu ra l man receiveth no t the things of th e Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him ; n eith er can he know them, .because they are sp iritually discerned. But he th a t is sp iritual judgeth all things, yet he him self is judged of no man. F o r who h ath known th e m ind of the Lord, th a t he may in stru ct h im ?” (1 Cor. 2:13-16.) Imm ortality of th e Soul Jam es Harvey Robinson speaks for th e evolutionists in general, when he states th at, “The facts indicate th a t m an’s m ind is quite as clearly of anim al extraction as h is body.’* F rom Darwin and Huxley down to th e present evo lutionary w riters have sought to minimize th e m ental dif ferences between man and the animals. They do th is to make the evolutionary ascent of man as easy to believe as possible. Darwin devotes th ree en tire chapters of his “Descent of Man” in trying to show th a t the difference in th e m ind of man and animals is “ one of degree and no t of kind.” Huxley and Haeckel le n t th e ir support to th is argum ent, and it was not un til the tim e of W undt, Morgan, and Thorn dike th a t a reaction set in against th is teaching. Man has always known th a t in many ways he is like th e animals. He has also known th a t in some ways he is differ-
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker