Immortality proved by the testimony of sense : $b In which is contemplated the doctrine of spectres and the existence of a particular spectre — John Shaqi
Immortality proved by the testimony of sense : $b In which is contemplated the doctrine of spectres and the existence of a particular spectreCummings, Abraham
Religion
Immortality proved by the testimony of sense : $b In which is contemplated the doctrine of spectres and the existence of a particular spectre
Cummings, Abraham
Apparitions; Immortality; Spiritualism
“Fear not
them which kill the body, saith our Lord, but are not able to kill the
soul.”[4] But why? What is the reason they are not able to kill the
soul? If soul and body die together--if death destroys the essential
properties of the soul as well as of the body, certainly they, who are
able to kill the body, are able to kill the soul. But the words now
cited were uttered by him who could not err; and for the writer it is
impossible to conceive how words could be framed to make a proposition
more plain and intelligible. But in this age of light and darkness,
many, who believe in immortality and the separate state, utterly deny
that any departed soul ever returns or becomes visible to our bodily
eyes. Of this persuasion are the authors of the American Cyclopedia.
Their arguments, which demand attention, are the following: The first
argument contemplates the ignorance and vulgarity associated with the
opinion which maintains the existence of Spectres. “It is true there
were many Christians in former times, who gave full credit to such
narratives; these were times of great ignorance and superstition. But
since philosophy and christianity have walked hand in hand, the faith
of ghosts has been more and more renounced, invariably.” So it seems
that if a pious man has learning enough, he is perfectly secure from
all such delusions. But is this representation entirely consonant with
facts? That christian literature has invariably renounced this opinion
is by no means correct. Not only was the faith of Spectres supported
by some of the most learned and eminent characters of antiquity, but
moderns, illustrious both in theology and philosophy, even since the
Protestant Reformation, have given their decided opinion in favor
of this doctrine. Among others, are Doctor Lightfoot, Mr. Flavel,
Mr. Hervy, Mr. Addison, Doctor Samuel Johnson, and the excellent Mr.
Swedenbourg. Will it be proved that all these modern names are entirely
ignorant either of theology or philosophy?
“What more frequent in times of popery than apparitions? Says President
Mather, it would fill a volume to rehearse them; yet we may not run
into the other extreme, that all such reports have no reality.” But
what do philosophers know respecting this affair more than other
people? What lesson in the whole circle of science has ever determined
the question, whether sounds or forms were ever produced by unembodied
spirits? What ancient Sadducee or modern materialist has ever yet
proved that the human thoughts have not a separate existence by
vehicle, or in some other way?
Had our authors told us that the belief of Spectres has been rejected
invariably wherever philosophy and modern infidelity have gone hand in
hand, the sentence would have been perfectly accurate. The christian
world affords no infidel who would not ridicule the following letters.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account