But after all the seeming difficulties which infidelity on the one hand, and sectarian ignorance and superstition on the other have thrown over the subject, a few reflections will be sufficient to show that every truth in theology, and every truth in philosophy mutually strengthen, illustrate, and confirm each other: for instance, the fact that a human body in the course of seventy years is composed of matter sufficient for the formation of seven bodies of the same size, or nearly so, shows clearly that six parts out of seven will not be occupied by one individual, and will therefore afford sufficient materials for the formation of six other human structures in the resurrection.

Thus there will not be the least occasion for two individuals to necessarily claim the same materials, or in other words, for one resurrected body to be composed of the materials which are necessary for the formation of another, seeing each individual would need but about one-seventh of that which he had occupied in the course of his temporal life.

Thus all are abundantly provided for as to materials out of which to compose a new human structure.

The principal objection which still arises in regard to this view of the subject is, that the new body is not composed wholly of the same materials which constituted the old one. An argument might therefore be started that it could not be considered as the same individual, or as a resurrection of the same body, because partly constituted of other particles of matter, as well as dispensing with part of that which had constituted the old body. But if this objection proves any thing it proves too much, and comes in at last in favor of the resurrection; for the same objection might arise, and with the same degree of propriety, in regard to individuals in this life—for instance, a man has not the same body at the age of fifty that he had at twenty-five; and shall we therefore argue that he is not the same person? The philosopher would prove before any intelligent jury that in the course of twenty-five years the entire system had twice passed away and given place to a new one: and yet the jury would recognise an individual at the age of fifty to be the same person that he was at the age of twenty—the authorities would recognise him to be the same—the same criminal—the same debtor—the same prisoner—the same heir at law. The mother would claim him as her child—the wife as her husband, &c. Indeed, he would feel conscious himself that he was the same person in reality, and no argument, however strong, would cause him to waver or doubt his own identity for a moment.

Now, it is this conciousness that constitutes the same person in reality, both in his own estimation and that of all his acquaintances.

The man new risen from the tomb with a material body composed of the old one, or rather of a germ of the old one, will no doubt, stand forth in all the conciousness of existance, and of his own identity that he posesses in this life, and probably with far more acute and perfect conceptions and energies of mind, the n tellect [intellect] not being clogged and retarded by the [c]orruptions and infirmities of mortality. He will feel and know himself to be the same individual, and all intelligent beings who have known him will identify him as the same that was born of a woman, and that returned to the dust.

Even God himself, who is the standard of philosophical and all other truths, will recognise him as the same individual, and will judge him for the deeds done in the old body.

Here, then, at the high court of heaven, the philosopher’s plea that he is not the same individual in his resurrected body that he was in his natural body, (on account of having parted with some of the materials of his original tabernacle, and taken other particles of matter in their stead), will vanish away, and fall to the ground as unheeded, as a similar plea would in this life, when presented to a virgin bride, to convince her that the object dearest to her heart is not the same person after ten years absence.

From the text we quoted at the head of this article, and from the foregoing remarks, it will be readily perceived that Paul and the Latter Day Saints, so far from being ignorant of the laws of nature, or coming in contact with the philosophy thereof, have rather reconciled or harmonized the revelations of God with the laws of nature, and have been enabled to point out a mutual agreement, or unison between them.

As the seed falls into the earth and dies, and by this very operation sends forth a sprout or germ which, with other particles of matter, is sure to produce its own likeness; so the human system dies and is again quickened, and reproduced in its own likeness by the power of the resurrection: and as the seed of grain is necessary for the production of its own kind, so the corruptible body is indispensibly necessary as a germ from which the glorious immortal body is formed.

And as each seed produces its own kind of grain, so the flesh of birds, beasts, fishes, and man, each differ in its kind, and each starting into new life will be in its own likeness, and move in its own sphere.

The mysterous works of God in the formation, progress, changes, and final destiny of creation are all wonderful and miraculous in one sense. The formation of the natural body in embryo, or even of a plant or flower, is as much a miracle as the creation or re-organization of a world, or the resurrection of the body. Each effect has its cause, and each cause its effect; and the light, spirit, or truth which proceeds from Deity is the law of life and motion, the great governing principle of the whole machinery of the universe, whether natural or spiritual, temporal or eternal. It is the cause of causes, the main spring of nature’s time piece. By it we live, in it we move and have our being.

Let man be placed upon a lofty eminence, surrounded with the original elements of uncreated worlds—let him contemplate the con [p. 770]