This article was originally published in the Spring ’08 issue of Revisions, The Pursuit of Happiness.
If it is indeed the case that death is a natural part of life, then the fact is that life would have no lasting meaning.
If there is an answer for anything, if we are going to view any meaning at all in the world, any hope or beauty or brilliance; if we are going to find fulfillment, if we are not just hoping to be among the lucky and the strong; if there is a reason for living, then there must also be a reason for dying. We have to believe that growing old is not any more random than being born. We have to know that there is a purpose for the inevitability of fading away.
Otherwise, we will only live for today. If there is no reason for death, if our existence will someday just arbitrarily cease, then we will simply have to make the best of it while we can—to work hard, play hard, and offer no excuses for slowing down; to seek, as Henry David Thoreau put it, “to live deep and suck out the marrow of life.”
And for those who can’t do that—the three billion or so who scrape by on two dollars a day ((World Bank Report, 2004.)) — well, they lose out.
And behold I saw the tears of the oppressed and they had no one to comfort them; and on the side of their oppressors there was power, but they had no one to comfort them. So I congratulated the dead who are already dead more than the living who are still living. But better off than both of them is the one who has never existed, who has never seen the evil activity that is done under the sun (Ecclesiastes 4:1–3).
That’s not good. Well maybe we should simply strive to make sure that as many people as possible can… live for today. Perhaps we should accept that it is up to us to make things better for all in the fleeting time that we have. And so perhaps we have to be relentlessly zealous for the truth: Death is just a natural part of life.
This answer certainly has a cryptic, Zen-like coolness to it. One generation can depart to make room for the next while passing on the wisdom and wealth gained in the grand and glorious circle of life. Even a child can grasp that!
Nevertheless this answer also has some huge problems. For one, it has no basis in reality, such as the fact that one fifth of the planet consumes one percent of its goods while another fifth consumes 86 percent.1 That is to say, this answer has only ever worked for the wealthy. It is the opium of the elite.
But more to the point is a deeper problem: this view doesn’t actually make any sense. No matter how you look at it, no matter how much science one tries to rest it on, saying that death is a natural part of life is about as coherent as saying that black is a natural part of white.
Are we just going to pretend it makes sense?
A Game of Make-Believe?
The scientific community is still divided over whether the inevitability of death through aging is deliberate or not. Many argue that aging is a defect, an unavoidable, adverse side effect of life. But a growing number of biologists think that aging is designed by nature (which was Darwin’s stance) and programmed into our genes.
Regardless, neither of these answers would necessarily help resolve our dilemma, for we still have nothing that lasts and have no reason not to make it our highest ambition seize simply seize the day. Let us eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.
If it is indeed the case that death is a natural part of life, then the fact is that life would have no lasting meaning. We can only pretend it has purpose—whether through religion or philosophy or politics—but it’s all about as substantial as a Hollywood movie. So grab a box of popcorn and have another drink, for all is temporal. What meant something yesterday means nothing today. And for those who are suffering, they are just terribly unlucky.
I again saw under the sun that the race is not to the swift and the battle is not to the warriors, and neither is bread to the wise nor wealth to the discerning nor favor to men of ability; for time and chance overtake them all. Moreover, man does not know his time: like fish caught in a treacherous net and birds trapped in a snare, so the sons of men are ensnared at an evil time when it suddenly falls on them (Ecclesiastes 9:11–12).
On the one hand, we can just acknowledge that if death is the natural end of things, if this life is all there is, then it is all terribly unfair, unjust, and thus utterly and completely futile.
On the other hand, that assessment is, paradoxically, a meaningful assessment. That is to say, it depends completely upon the belief that there is in fact a transcendent standard of justice. After all, the context of unfairness is fairness and the context of meaninglessness is meaning. We can’t see injustice in the world unless we believe there is a source of justice—a source that reigned before we were born and that will continue to reign after we die.
And so the search for a rational explanation of death is inextricably linked to the search for a rational explanation of justice. We have very good reason to believe that both can be found, and that it is not just a game of play-pretend.
The Beliefs that Make Up Our World
First, we have very good reason to believe that death is not a natural part of life.
Why? The converse simply does not make any sense. And if science has taught us anything at all over the past 2000 years it has taught us to expect life to make sense. It has taught us to have faith that no matter where we look in nature we will discover rational, creative explanations, such as “Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared”. Whether we look through a telescope or through a microscope or just take a walk in the woods, we find such breathtakingly beautiful communication everywhere—just waiting to be perceived, translated (such as into English, Chinese, HTML, etc.), and used. It is precise, elegant, and as objective as a chunk of granite. Yet if we declared that death is a natural part of life, in doing so we would render life itself devoid of any objective meaning.
Second, if human history has revealed anything at all, it has revealed that words such as justice, fairness, and truth simply cannot be removed from our vocabulary, for they have as much influence on us as does gravity. And unless a person is unabashedly self-righteous he will have to admit that we are no more the authors of justice than Albert Einstein was the author of relativity. Words like “justice” and “fairness” as well as sentences like “E = MC²” all had meaning before we were born and will continue to have meaning after we die.
So why do we know all this? Why is it a non-negotiable feature of life that we will find meaning everywhere? “The eternal mystery of the universe,” said Einstein, “is that it is comprehensible.”
Another way to consider the mystery is simply to ask: Who authored all these explanations? If we are not the rational, creative authors of all the explanations that we find in nature, then who is? Likewise, if we are not the authors of freedom and justice, if we do in fact hold these truths to be self-evident, then who is that Self?
Dealing Justly and Reasonably with Death
The Bible says that death is inextricably linked with justice. It is a righteous consequence of our desire to judge good and evil—to, in effect, usurp the Creator and be self-righteous (Genesis 3:1–5). In response, to maintain justice, God commanded that every living thing must die.2 “For the wages of sin is death…” (Romans 6:23). But that death is not natural. It is a grievous outrage.
The Bible also says that Jesus died so that we might live. For the joy of seeing the redeemed enter into His rest, He chose to lay down His life and pay the price for our sin. “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23). He gave us freedom to choose, so that death is not a threat to us, but rather an option.
God gives us a long time to think about this choice between living and dying, between trusting in our own wisdom and trusting in the Author of Life, between seeking worldly gain and seeking God Himself. Thoreau found all this terribly distasteful and contrary to sucking out the marrow of life. “For most men, it appears to me, are in a strange uncertainty about it,” he wrote, explaining what living deep does not entail, “whether it is of the devil or of God, and have somewhat hastily concluded that it is the chief end of man here to glorify God and enjoy him forever.”2
Most of us can hope to have about seventy years to ponder which we will choose…
[B]efore the evil days come and the years draw near when you will say, “I have no delight in them”; before the sun and the light, the moon and the stars are darkened, and clouds return after the rain; in the day that the watchmen of the house tremble, and mighty men stoop, the grinding ones stand idle because they are few, and those who look through windows grow dim; and the doors on the street are shut as the sound of the grinding mill is low, and one will arise at the sound of the bird, and all the daughters of song will sing softly. Furthermore, men are afraid of a high place and of terrors on the road; the almond tree blossoms, the grasshopper drags himself along, and the caper-berry is ineffective. For man goes to his eternal home while mourners go about in the street. Remember Him before the silver cord is broken and the golden bowl is crushed, the pitcher by the well is shattered and the wheel at the cistern is crushed; then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. “Vanity of vanities,” says the Preacher, “all is vanity!” (Ecclesiastes 12:1–9).
- So that command might support the scientific view that growing old and dying is in fact programmed into our genes. Or perhaps it is more appropriate to say that the scientific evidence points to the Bible’s teaching. [↩]
- Thoreau, Henry David. Walden. (p. 118). [↩]
