Conclusion of Reply to Messes Stobo and Co's Innate Immortal Soul Hobby.

We are taxed by Messrs Stobo and Co:, "that we endeavor to relax the bonds of eternal justice." Do you mean, sir, that you represent your god as dealing justly, in that he cannot be even satisfied with the eternal agonies of the transgressor, and that irrespectively of whether a man has sinned a penny's worth, or a million of pounds worth, he has to suffer in each case alike eternal agonies? But such is not the God of the Bible, in whom we believe, because our God "will judge the world in righteousness," and every one shall have to bear the evil that he has done in his lifetime in his own body; and not in his soul or ghost man. And thou when you see the righteous judgments of God, you who have preached cruel traditional gods of [unclear: a] theology, will, according to prophet, "have to hide your i idols in the mole holes," and the shame, when you shall see all your castles of the creeds swept [unclear: for] away. No, reader, we do [unclear: not] God's law of justice. No, [unclear: we] it, we uphold it, by allying it according to Holy Writ with equity, mercy, justice. Do we imperil man's frit our God and in his [unclear: Christ?] attributes of his do we attack? have shown that his justice [unclear: is] attacked. Is it his love? Is it part of love to inflict [unclear: eternal] his justice can be satisfied other? Or is it his mercy? Is that then of God that can never [unclear: be] with the misery of others? [unclear: Is] holiness? Would that be [unclear: holin] keep evil, sin, and moral pollution ever in existence by the innumerical millions cursing and [unclear: blaspheming] holy name to all eternity? reader, such is not our God, the of the Bible whom [unclear: we] though Augustine's God, [unclear: the] god, Calvin's god, and [unclear: Messrs] and Co's gods are such, all being boundless injustice, caprice, cruelty. The reader will see by [unclear: the] that I and others of the same faith not "the raving infidels "that Stobo seems to brand us. No, believe with all our hearts in [unclear: the] and in the Christ of the Bible, and the doctrines contained in it concentrating our salvation from death. But do not believe in the gods (idols) of the traditional creeds, the [unclear: cobwebs] out by some hair-brained theology In regard to these, we confess we thorough infidels: so that in the respect Mr Stobo has said [unclear: the] for the first time. Do we [unclear: then] gate scopticism? No, but we page 37 deavor to turn men from the worship [unclear: of] the idols of these creeds which they [unclear: mentally] worship; and we propagate [unclear: faith] in the only true God and in his [unclear: Christ] of the Bible, who really died for [unclear: man,] (and not like the traditional Christ, whose little earth only died for [unclear: them)] and thereby is able to save men [unclear: from] a real death. Hundreds who by the preaching of a traditional fool's theology were made sceptics, believe now the glad tidings of the gospel, i.e., salvation from death. And almost daily they come and confess, that they believe every word we have said and Kitten; because it harmonizes with the dicta of the Bible, and is not contrary to reason.

The doctrine of an inherent [unclear: immortality] man, is, as I have shown, not [unclear: in] doctrine of the Bible. Neither was [unclear: it] a doctrine contained in any creeds [unclear: of] the churches up to 1513. [unclear: Yet] from the fourth century upward, it [unclear: was] existing in a mere controversy of a [unclear: speculative] theology, or rather [unclear: philosophy,] as the question then was Spidered a [unclear: metaphysical,] rather than religious one; but some centuries later it commenced to assume a [unclear: religious] character, and some of the Western Churches began to claim the immortality of the soul as an optional [unclear: article] of faith which the Church of [unclear: Rome] permitted on sufferance. And it [unclear: was] not till 1513 that Pope Leo X. [unclear: cut] short the dispute, as to whether these pagan eggs laid by Homer, and [unclear: Plato,] were it food for a Christian [unclear: poach]. These he placed under a [unclear: council] of Cardinals and Bishops in [unclear: that] great nest called the Vatican, and [unclear: net] them on the eggs to hatch out four chickens, christened immortal soul, immediate heaven, hell, and purgatory, after men's death: and these were added as new articles to the confession of the Christian faith. What all the theologians could never have settled, and about which they had disputed for eight centuries, viz., whether these pagan eggs were fit food for a Christian stomach, these, the council under Pope Leo hatched out in one swoop, and brought forth four palatable chickens for the Church. Many voices loud and strong soon arose in the Church against this new heresy, which the dungeons of the Holy Inquisition as speedily silenced. W. Tyndall, well known as the translator of the Bible, protested strongly against this new ongrowth of articles of faith, which he calls "pagan philosophy." Luther was even more severe in his censure, calling them, "A parcel of monstrous opinions, proceeding from the Roman dunghill of decretals, the hatched out brood as suitable meat for the Pope and his Church." Now as soon as men found, that they had their immortality assured to them by the decree of the Church, they had no further need of a Saviour to save them from death. And thus we find the Church soon beginning to promulgate another new heresy, that Jesus had not come, suffered, died, and risen again from death, in order that the believer in him should be saved from death; (because man was already in possession of immortality;) but to save him from eternal hell fire. So that the Jesus of the New Testament was no longer required for that purpose, because he saves man from death by his suffering and dying in Adam's sin's flesh. So the Church had again to set to and manufacture also a Jesus of their own, such a one, as was a real God-man, who had not one particle of Adam's sin's flesh in his body; and in order to produce such a Jesus, the Pope had again somewhere about 18 years ago to assemble his Cardinals and Bishops, and to set them again in page 38 the neat, the Vatican, to hatch out an immaculate conceived Virgin, who thereby became qualified to bring forth for the Church an immaculate Jesus, a real god-man without one particle of Adam's sin's flesh. And it is this Jesus which became not only the Saviour of the Church of Rome, but the Saviour of almost all Protestant Churches also. And it is about this traditional Jesus that our theologians are so much at loggerheads, in that some assert that this their god-man never died at all, but that it was only his little earth (the body) that did die; while at the same time their real Jesus was alive in heaven, or Paradise. But others again do positively assert that with their god-man (their Jesus) the very God himself died. For thus we find it stated in many hymns: for instance, "O! grosse Noth, Gott selbst ist todt, am Creutz ist er gestorben," i.e., O! great calamity, God himself has died, no died on the cross. And in some "Passion week meditations" we find it said more than a dozen times "that the very God himself had died." Such ideas no doubt appear very grand, solemn, and awe-imposing for silly women and little children: in my early school days I thought so too; at 15 I had some doubts as to its truth; at 20 I could no longer believe it; while at, 24, it became utterly impossible to believe such a story, that without a God the universe with all its creatures should remain in existence: for had God himself died with Jesus, would not the universe have fallen with a crash into one chaotic mass of irrecoverable ruins, and no such fools would be left to say, "that God himself, the very God, has died." So that the very unmitigable nonsense" that the very God himself died "is the surest proof that he never died. But thank God, we find no such [unclear: theological] webs in the Bible. For [unclear: Paul] us, that Jesus died without, [unclear: or] from God. And Esaias says of that, "he all alone had to tread winepress." And Jesus, when he claims on the cross, "My God, God, why hast thou forsaken [unclear: me,"] forms us, that he had to suffer and without, or apart from [unclear: God.] years ago I discussed this [unclear: subject] a Trinitarian D.D., who [unclear: insisted] it that Jesus died both as God man. I asked him, how it could possible to have died as God? see that God is immortal? To which replied, That Jesus laid down his himself. I told him, that upon own showing, his Jesus must [unclear: have] committed suicide. This [unclear: he] blasphemy, and would listen til further proof: but ran [unclear: away] Quite true that Jesus said," [unclear: No] takes it (my life) from me, [unclear: bat] it down myself!" But have understand this as in a [unclear: direct] while all the contexts on this sub forbid us to do so. Peter savs [unclear: to] Jews in the temple "whom [unclear: you] All the apostles use the like exempsions concerning the death [unclear: of] And Jesus always said, [unclear: "that!] sought to kill him, yet could they do it as long as his [unclear: immortal] God dwelt in him, but [unclear: Jesus] ted, that his Father should [unclear: withdraw] from him, and thus he laid down life, in that he became helpless mortal like any other man of [unclear: A] flesh. God having left him, he been exposed to the fury of the murder Jews, his enemies, and they slew Forsaken of God, Jesus [unclear: died,] his Father God, in whom [unclear: he] did not leave him in the [unclear: pow] death, but raised him up from dead. It was not Jesus wool page 39 had man could raise himself from the dead. No, it required the immortal God to do it;—and not as our Platonians rant it from their pulpits on the Easter—Sundays, "That Jesus, the prince of life (while he was yet a dead man) burst asunder the bars of the grave, which were not able to hold him, coming forth triumphantly and victorious over death and the grave." Assertions like these require indeed an immense amount of childish faith before man can believe that a dead man can burst asunder the bars of the grave, &c. Is it any wonder that people become sceptics when they have to listen to such ebullitions of a fools theology: and are taught such absurd legerdemain by theological mountebanks?

These mountebanks, when they describe their Platonic theory, use a jargon contrary to the plainest logic, contrary to reason, and in evident conviction to the dicta of the Bible. They make of death a mere harlequin's jest. So that a dead Jesus can burst asunder the bars of the grave; a dead God can govern and uphold the universe; and dead men are in a position to sleep in their graves, and at the same time be alive, and enjoy their bliss in heaven, or suffer torment in all,—while death in Holy Writ is everywhere described as a penalty, a curse—the sentence put in execution which God pronounced upon man's transgression—from which the believer hopes to be redeemed by means of his faith in Jesus. A fool's theology teaches "that death is their angel of Exemption." As Calvin says, "Whomsoever believes in Christ ought to be so minded, that at the mention of death, he should lift up his head rejoicing at the news of his redemption." Jesus on the contrary informs us "that it is at his coming we are to lift up our heads, because then our redemption from the power of death draws near. And Paul informs us that believers groan, waiting for their redemption at the day of the resurrection: while Calvin wants to persuade us, that we "have to regard the day of our death as our redemption." According to Holy Writ, death is our enemy; Calvin tells us, it is our best friend. In short to such men as Calvin, J. Wesley and Co., there is no death; it is a mere transition from a bad country to a better one. Death to them is only birth to a perfected life. As the Wesleyans sing, "Mortals cry a man is dead! Angels sing a child is born," which, according to the Scriptures means just as much. When Scripture says, A man is dead, fools assert a child is born. These mountebanks have in fact turned the awful sentence of death which God pronounced upon men because of transgression into a mere burlesque, a joke, seeing that they have made of death a saviour and a blessing, the door to eternal life. Such is the language of our modern mockers, who by the study of Plato's Phœdo, have become wiser than the God of the Bible: by asserting that black is white, and white is black. Such is the language of our modern saints. But how different is the language of the saints of the Bible! Of them we read how they shuddered at the terror of death, when they exclaim, "Return, O Lord! deliver my soul (life); oh, save me for thy mercy's sake: for in death there is no remembrance of Thee. In hades who will give Thee thanks? Like sheep (they say), they are laid in hades." But animated by the assurance of the promise that "through faith they should live again," they exclaim hopefully, "He has not given me over unto death, for thou page 40 wilt deliver my soul from death." "God will deliver my soul from the power of hades, for he shall receive me," &c. These did not consider God's threatenings of death as a joke: they believed that God's threatenings were real, and that without faith in his promises they would remain irrecoverable in the power of death. By these comparisons I hope the reader will be able to see that a traditional doctrine of an innate immoriality, and the doctrine of the prospective immortality of the Bible, are two very different doctrines. The latter is compatible with logic and reason; while the former, innate immortality, as advocated by Messrs Stobo and Co., is only like some erratic meteor which may dazzle the eyes of a bewildered public for a few days, while it roams through the traditional heavens of ecclesiastical creation, but [unclear: which,] like so many brilliant [unclear: phenomena] the Churches, explodes like all en meteors, as soon as a spark of divine truth is applied to it: a *devil-ridden generation see [unclear: no] it, though they may scan the eccleratical heavens from the horizon to zenith in search of it. Yet the [unclear: sion] thereof left such a [unclear: nauseous] behind, that it scared away [unclear: a] number of a *devil-ridden generation from Mr Stobo's church.

*Thus Mr Stobo in [unclear: public] designates those who, for a [unclear: few] days, left his church in order to be popular preacher.

John A. Richte

Waikiwi, near Invercargill, J Zealand, the 19th of October, 1870

This Pamphlet is open for republishing and translation, as no copyright been reserved.