Section II.

An Argument Founded on the Intellectual Powers of the Mind-Matter Cannot Think, is not Intelligent.

If matter be intelligent and can think, thought must be an essential property of matter, or, it must be the result of some peculiar modification of matter; neither of which can be maintained. If thought be an essential property of matter, every part and particle of matter must think. If thought be essential to matter, what does not think, is not matter. This is too absurd to need a refutation.

Is thought, then, the result of some modification of matter Certainly not, for thought is now admitted not to be an essential property of matter, and no modification or refinement can add to any substance more than its essential qualities. Matter under every modification is no more than matter, and of course can possess only the properties of matter. Matter is known by the phenomena it exhibits, and all modifications and refinements are but modifications and refinements of these phenomena, without increasing or diminishing their number, and as it is destitute of thought at the commencement, it must remain destitute of thought through every change and modification. If anything essential to matter be taken away, it must cease to be matter, and if something be added which is not essential, that something must have its own essential properties as a separate identity or substance, and can form no part of matter; and if that something which is supposed to be added, be thought, it is not matter that thinks, but something that is added to it. This is just what we hold; that in the composition of man, a rational soul is joined to matter, and that it is the soul that thinks, and not the matter. Whatever is essential to matter must be matter, and hence, to say that something not essential to matter, is added to it, so as to become a property of matter, is to say that something is matter which is not matter. This shows that thought, not being a property of matter, cannot become such, otherwise matter without thought would be less than matter, or matter with thought would be more than matter.

The admission that matter is or can be intelligent, must draw after it consequences startling in their nature, if not fatal to our common religion. The intelligence of matter has heretofore been contended for, only by Infidels; and is in fact the doctrine of Atheism. To meet the argument in favor of the existence of God, drawn from the marks of intelligence everywhere impressed upon the visible creation, they have asserted that matter is intelligent. Those who deny the immateriality of the human soul, join the Infidel, and maintain, that matter may possess a very superior degree of intelligence. If this be so, who can prove that there is anything but matter in the universe, and that what has been deemed the spiritual world is, after all, only a world of materiality There are the same proofs that the human soul is a spirit, that there are that God is a spirit. Let us look at this point in the light of reason. Atheism admits the existence of matter, but denies the existence of spirit, while christianity insists that "God is a Spirit," not matter, but above matter, who created matter, and gave to it its modifications. Now our point is, that every argument which is commonly resorted to, to prove the existence of God, will prove the immateriality of the human soul. To show this let us suppose a conversation between an Atheist and a Christian who holds to the materiality of the human soul.

Christian.- "There must be a God, for as nothing can never produce something, the visible creation proves that there must he a Creator who made all these things."

Atheist.- "It is as easy for me to conceive that nature, or what you call the visible creation, is eternal, and that it contains within itself the cause of all the phenomena which it exhibits, as it is to suppose there is another being which is eternal, whom you call God, or a spirit, but whom I never saw and never expect to see."

Christian.- "It is not possible for us to comprehend eternal existence, yet reason tells us that something must be eternal, and that it is not the visible universe that is eternal, as you suppose; but God who is a Spirit, is proved to be the Creator by the signs of intelligence and marks of design everywhere to be seen upon the very face of creation."

Atheist.- "Matter itself is intelligent under some of its modifications, as you admit, and hence all the phenomena of the universe may be accounted for without supposing anything superior to matter. If matter may possess one degree of intelligence, it may possess a still greater degree, even perfection of knowledge, which you attribute to your supposed God. The human mind presents the highest degree of intelligence of which we have any personal knowledge; it presents the phenomena of thought, feeling, reason, volition, self-determination, self-action, moral sentiments, love, hatred. These, in kind, are all that you pretend to claim for your supposed God; you only insist that he possesses them in a higher degree, and as you contend that all these are possessed by matter, the human mind being only matter, the marks of intelligence which the visible universe exhibits are no proof of an intelligent Spirit, prior and superior to matter, whom you call God. Take an illustration: suppose you refer me to the solar system with the sun for its centre, and all the planets revolving around it with the regularity of a well adjusted clock, with comets to note the centuries and other periods, and tell me there must be a Creator who made this machine of the universe, who cannot be matter, but who must be spirit. In reply I exhibit to you a time-piece, and tell you that it is a model of the solar system; it has various and complicated wheels, all moving with perfect order, with the moving power so encased as to be hid from your view; one pointer tells the lapse of every second; another points out the flight of minutes as they depart one by one; a third notes the lapse of hours, and still another counts the days as they pass one after another, so that by looking upon its face, you can read the second of the minute, the minute of the hour, the hour of the day, and the day of the month. This curious machine which gives the most clear proof of intelligence and design, is not only matter itself, but the designer and artificer matter and nothing but matter, as you insist that the human mind is not spirit but matter. If then, matter compressed into so small a compass as the human brain, can design and execute after such a manner, it only requires an organization of this matter, on a larger scale, which may exist somewhere as the great soul of the universe, to account for all the phenomena which you consider proof of the existence of a Spirit-God."

It is seen from the above, that when we, as christians, deny that man has a soul which is not matter, but which is an immaterial spirit, we break down the great dividing line between christianity and scepticism. How a man can prove the existence of God from the works of creation, when he attributes to matter, wrapt up in the small compass of the human brain, every essential attribute in kind, which he attributes to his God, we need more light to understand. It appears to us that we must admit the immateriality of the human mind, or be driven by infidelity to adopt its theory of a material universe, with a material God, mysteriously folded up in its bosom, or equally mysteriously diffused among its living orbs. He who contends for the materiality of the human soul, may say that he relies upon none of these proofs to support his belief in the existence of God, but relies wholly upon the Scriptures. Well, this issue shall be met in due time, when we will attempt to prove that the Scriptures as clearly teach that the human soul is a spirit, as they do that God is a spirit.

Having urged the doctrine of the immateriality of mind, in an original argument founded upon the fact, that matter is not intelligent, we will, at this point, introduce another argument to the same effect, which we quote from Rev. Richard Watson. We have insisted that to admit that matter can be intelligent, is to give up our strong proofs of the spirituality of God, and break down the principal barrier between Christianity and Atheism; and it will be seen that Mr. Watson arrives at the same conclusion, though by a different process of reasoning. He is treating of the spirituality of God, and remarks as follows:-

"Among the discoveries, made to us by Divine Revelation, we find not only declarations of the existence and unity of God, but of his nature or substance, which is plainly affirmed to be spiritual, ' God is a SPIRIT.' The sense of the Scriptures in this respect cannot be mistaken. Innumerable passages and allusions in them show, that the terms spirit and body, or matter, are used in the popular sense for substances of a perfectly distinct kind, and which are manifested by distinct, and, in many respects, opposite and incommunicable properties: that the former only can perceive, think, reason, will, and act; that the latter is passive, impercipient, divisible, and corruptible. Under these views and in this popular language, God is spoken of in holy writ, lie is spirit, not body; mind, not matter. He is a pure spirit, unconnected even with bodily form or organs; 'the invisible God whom no man hath seen or can see,' an immaterial, incorruptible, impassable substance, an immense mind or intelligence, self-acting, self-moving, wholly above the perception of bodily sense; free from the imperfections of matter, and all the infirmities of corporeal beings; far more excellent than any finite and created spirits, because their Creator, and therefore styled, 'the Father of spirits,' and 'the God of the spirits of all flesh.'

"Such is the express testimony of Scripture as to the Divine Nature. That the distinction which it holds between matter and spirit should be denied or disregarded infidel philosophers, is not a matter of surprise, since it is as easy and as consistent in them to materialize God as man. But that the attributes of spirit should have been ascribed to matter by those who, nevertheless, profess to admit the authority of the biblical revelation, as iii the case of the modern Unitarians and some others, is an instance of singular inconsistency. It shows with what daring an unhallowed philosophy will pursue its speculations, and warrants the conclusion, that the Scriptures in such cases are not acknowledged upon their own proper principles, but only so far as they are supposed to agree with, or not to oppose, the philosophic system which such men may have adopted. For, hesitate as they may, to deny the distinction between matter and spirit, is to deny the spirituality of God, and to contradict the distinction, which, as to man, is constantly kept up in every part of the Bible, the distinction between flesh and spirit. To assert that consciousness, thought and volition, are the results of organization, is to deny also what the Scripture so expressly affirms, that the souls of men exist in a disembodied state: and that in this disembodied state, not only do they exist, but that they think, and feel, and act without any diminution of their energy or capacity. The immateriality of the Divine Being may, therefore, be considered as a point of great importance, not only as it affects our views of his nature and attributes, but because when once it is established, that there exists a pure Spirit, living, intelligent, and invested with moral properties, the question of the immateriality of the human soul may be considered as almost settled. Those who deny that, must admit that the Deity is material; or, if they start at this, they must be convicted of the unphilosophical and absurd attempt, to invest a substance allowed to be of an entirely different nature, (the body of man,) with those attributes of intelligence and volition which, in the case of the Divine Being, they have allowed to be the properties of pure unembodied spirit. The propositions are totally inconsistent, for they who believe that God is wholly an immaterial, and that man is wholly a material being, admit that spirit is intelligent and that matter is intelligent. They cannot, then, be of different essences, and if the premises be followed out to their legitimate conclusion, either that which thinks in man must be allowed to be spiritual, or a material Deity must follow. The whole truth of revelation, both as to God and his creature man, must be acknowledged, or the Atheism of Spinosa and Hobbes must be admitted.

"The decision of Scripture on this point is not to be shaken by human reasoning, were it more plausible in its attempt to prove that matter is capable of originating thought, and that mind is a mere result or organization. The evidence from reason is, however, highly confirmatory of the absolute spirituality of the nature of God, and of the unthinking nature of matter.

"If we allow a First Cause at all, we must allow that cause to be intelligent. This has already been proved, from the design and contrivance manifested in his works. The first argument for the spirituality of God is, therefore, drawn from his intelligence, and it rests upon this principle, that intelligence is not a property of matter.

"With material substance we are largely acquainted; and as to the great mass of material bodies, we have the means of knowing that they are wholly unintelligent. This cannot be denied of every unorganized portion of matter. Its essential properties are found to be solidity, extension, divisibility, mobility, passiveness, &c. In all its forms and mutations, from the granite rock to the yielding atmosphere and the rapid lightning, these essential properties are discovered; they take an infinite variety of accidental modes, but give no indication of intelligence, or approach to intelligence. If then, to know be a property of matter, it is clearly not an essential property, inasmuch as it is agreed by all, that vast masses of this substance exist without this property, and it follows, that it must be an accidental one. This, therefore, would be the first absurdity into which those would be driven who suppose the Divine Nature to be material, that, as intelligence, if allowed to be a property of matter, is an accidental and not an essential property, on this theory it would be possible to conceive of the existence of a Deity without any intelligence at all. For, take away any property from a subject which is not essential to it, and its essence still remains; and if intelligence, which in this view is but an accidental attribute of Deity, were annihilated, a Deity without perception, thought or knowledge, would still remain. So monstrous a conclusion shows, that if a God be at all allowed, the absolute spirituality of his nature must inevitably follow. For, if we cannot suppose a Deity without intelligence, then do we admit intelligence to be one of his essential attributes; and, as it is easy for every one to observe that this is not an essential property of matter, the substance to which it is essential cannot be material.

"If the unthinking nature of unorganized matter furnishes an argument in favor of the spirituality of Deity, the attempt to prove, from the fact of intelligence being found in connection with matter in an organized form, that intelligence, under certain modifications, is a property of matter, may, from its fallacy, be also made to yield its evidence in favor of the truth.

"The position assumed is, that intelligence is the result of material organization. This, at least, is not true of every form of organized matter. Of the unintelligent character of vegetables, we have the same evidence as of the earth on which we tread. The organization, therefore, which is assumed to be the cause of thought, is that which is found in animals; and to use the argument of Dr. Priestly, 'the powers of sensation, or perception, and thought, as belonging to man, not having been found but in conjunction with a certain organized system of matter, the conclusion is, that they depend upon such a system.' It need not now be urged, that constant connection does not imply necessary connection; and that sufficient reasons may be given to prove the connection alleged to be accidental and arbitrary. It is sufficient, in the first instance, to deny this supposed constant connection between intellectual properties and systems of animal organization; and thus to take away entirely the foundation of the argument.

"Man is to be considered in two states, that of life, and that of death. In one he thinks, and in the other he ceases to think; and yet for some time after death, in many cases, the organization of the human frame continues as perfect as before. All do not die of organic disease. Death by suffocation, and other causes, is often effected without any visible violence being done to the brain, or any other of the most delicate organs. This is a well-established fact; for the most accurate anatomical observation is not able to discover, in such cases as we have referred to, the slightest organic derangement. The machine has been stopped, but the machine itself has suffered no injury; and from the period of death to the time when the matter of the body begins to submit to the laws of chemical decomposition, its organization is as perfect as during life. If an opponent replies, that organic violence must have been sustained, though it is indiscernible, he begs the question, and assumes that thought must depend upon organization, the very point in dispute. If more modest, he says, that the organs may have suffered, he can give no proof of it; appearance are all against him. And if he argues from the phenomenon of the connection of thought with organization, grounding himself upon what is visible to observation only, the argument is completely repulsed by an appeal in like manner to the fact, that the organization of the animal frame can be often exhibited, visibly unimpaired by those causes which have produced death, and yet incapable of thought and intelligence. The conclusion, therefore, is, that mere organization cannot be the cause of intelligence, since it is plain that precisely the same state of the organs shall often be found before and after death; and yet, without any violence having been done to them, in one moment man shall be actually intelligent, and in the next incapable of a thought. So far, then, from the connection between mental phenomena, and the arrangement of matter in the animal structure, bein 'constant,' the ground of the argument of Priestly and other materialists, it is often visibly broken; for a perfect organization of the animal remains after perception has become extinct."

Little need be added to what has been quoted above from Mr. Watson. It will be seen that he maintains the same view which we have urged, namely, that to admit the materiality of the human soul, or to insist that matter may be intelligent, is to disarm ourselves of the arguments by which we, as Christians, are wont to defend ourselves against infidelity, which denies all spiritual existence. Certain it is, that the materiality of the human mind is the doctrine of all Infidels of the Hobbes school. This has been in all ages of the Church, a dividing line between Christians and this class of Infidels, and those, professing to be Christians, who deny the immateriality of the human soul, as an intelligent spirit distinct from the body, in this particular, strike hands with the worst opposers Christianity ever had, and join with Hobbes, in saying that, "dying is taking a leap into the dark."

*What is here said, is doubtless true of the English Unitarians, but it is true of only a part of the Unitarians in this country. Some of them, at least, are firm believers in the immateriality and immortality of the soul.