Dilbert Creator Scott Adams has announced he will be converting to Christianity before he dies from the aggressive cancer that’s taken hold of him in a recent, shocking, and yet uplifting video.
Are people online really arguing because they weren't paid more wages for an earlier start to their labour? And as for it being "too late," the thief on the cross was hours from death. Better even a half hearted appeal to God in the end than to die an avowed disbeliever.
He won't make it for this simple reason: "I do believe that the dominant Christian theory is that I would wake up in heaven if I have a good life."
That is not Christian theology at all. The message of Christ is that all people are unholy and therefore unworthy to be in the presence of God, who is flawlessly holy. The reason we are unholy is that we rebel against God's design for our life*. Jesus points out the terrible truth about us in his sermon on the mount where he says that any man who even thinks about adultery is guilty of it in his heart. So, the whole "I'm a good person" thing is a farce. Literally everyone, at some point in their life, would commit murder IF they could get away with it. That is a sin of the heart, even though it is not a sin of the hand. The only reason you didn't do it is because you were afraid of the consequences.
How many people would murder Trump if they could? How many would have murdered Biden if they could? How many would murder a pedophile if they could?
No one is a good person in their heart. That is why deep down, we all carry an unshakable feeling of "guilty." We know we are guilty.
And there is no way do undo what has been done. None. There is no balancing the bad with the good--the bad continues to exist in time! The just penalty for rebelling against the One who gave you mortal life is for Him to take that life that you have misused away from you. Mortal death, and after that the judgement for your soul--on to the presence of God or not? Only those who are either holy or who have been pardoned in spite of their unholiness go to heaven.
Scott (and all the rest of us) can never belong in God's presence by any of our own actions. You can't earn heaven. We are not being graded on a curve where everyone better than Hitler gets a pass for all their hatred and malice. Instead, God offers us a pardon--forgiveness--for our sins and that is counted as righteousness. Who grants this pardon? Jesus Christ. Why does he have the authority to do that? Because He paid the debt of death that we owe to our Creator with His own truly righteous life.
To receive the pardon of Jesus, all He asks for in return is that you (1) believe He is God and (2) submit your life to His service out of your love for Him. (#2 is where most Christians fail...) Someone needs to witness the hard Gospel truth to Scott before it is too late. The gate is narrow, and few will walk through.
* Why are we allowed to rebel against God's design for our life? Because love is impossible without freedom, and what God want's from us is to love Him and to love each other. Imagine a graph where each node is a person, and between every pair of nodes is a beam of light that represents love. How utterly beautiful is that picture of humanity? That is the picture Jesus has commanded us to be part of. He didn't make just one person; He made billions of people. Yes, God loves us each individually, but our love for each other is a thing of immense beauty and forms the image of the whole Kingdom of God, the whole Bride of Christ, whom He died to redeem.
Do you guys think I am not right here? That this is an intellectually honest way to talk about a stranger on the internet? You are just ganging up to take turns making personal insults simply because I said something you don't agree with, but I'm the one who lacks a theory of mind?
The real sad part, at least based on the quote here, is that it’s not even Pascal’s Wager.
“I do believe that the dominant Christian theory is that I would wake up in heaven if I have a good life. I don't necessarily have to state something in advance. And so to my Christian friends, yes, it's coming.”
That’s not salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ. That says he thinks he’s a Christian and saved because he lived a good life.
Perhaps there was something actually referring to conversion in the full video.
I agree that salvation comes from faith alone, and I recognize that it is not true to say otherwise. The second point (the one you quoted) is intended to bring up the additional important process of sanctification that begins when someone is saved, the process where the Holy Spirit transforms someone from a believer into a disciple.
"So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." (Phil. 2:12-13)
I don't think I repackaged works salvation because I did say that to believe Jesus is God is #1. Rather, the idea that you can just live however you want and get away with it by planning to say, "Oh, yeah, Jesus is the real deal," at the last second of your life seems like a legal loophole being exploited, like there is a way to have your cake and eat it, too, if you are clever about it. Likewise, the idea that you can just live however you want and get away with it by planning to just ask for forgiveness repeatedly (i.e. forgiveness without any effort to change) also seems like a legal loophole being exploited.
"If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God." (Hebrews 10:26-27)
If there is a person similar to Scott, who is the subject of the article, that truly believes in God and Jesus, would they go on living in ways that they know anger Him? Or would they declare their belief as soon as they believed it? To delay implies disbelief, I think. And Scott did not even say that he would ever declare that Jesus is his Savior. Instead, he said that if Christianity is true then he expects to just wake up in heaven because he's been a pretty good guy, all things considered.
My response, confused as it was, was trying to say that heaven is not for good people; it's for bad people who have been forgiven by Jesus because they asked Him to with conviction*, enough conviction that it motivates progress towards obedience and service after that moment.
* Or if they never knew Jesus, yet they simply loved God and tried their best to follow His ways, like Abraham and the many others who have their "faith counted for righteousness." Those listed in Romans did not just do whatever they liked and hope for or expect the best for themselves, as it sounds like Scott has done and says he will still do through his last day. Out of the sincerity of their love for God, they tried also to do right by Him.
“Everyone who could commit murder would if they could get away with it.”
There is an entire idea called “what you are in the dark,” thats people who refuse to commit evil even when they know they could get away with it. Because people can be better. Your entire theological essay sounds like something heath ledgers joker would smile and nod at.
People have had far worse, and far more idiotic starts, even close to death.
Certainly one could be well pleased to get more out of him, but that'd be for our own comfort.
"Oh, all the doctine, the faith and works are in order, and how he professes Christ is King! How wonderful!"
We might say such things and undoubtedly it's good that men be in order, that they sing forth the gospel with their burning lives even with wick short.
Undoubtedly too, it's better to have an occultist for example turn from their ways rather than incomprehensibly screaming for mercy as he dies.
We might have some comfort too in that case that the man is saved.
But all the signs are but signs.
Certainly we can act on them, warn, pray, cajole and lead the horse to waters pure.
We don't know though, the intentions deep within, the final answer. There are those who will loudly be crying his name whose had outward signs promising to men, but deep within unknown to us...
They did not accept the blood divine.
But, by all means pray for him and all others, God knows we get stupid notions.
Glory to God in the highest! As Scott has neared closer and closer to the edge of death, Satan licking his chops as he is about to claim another soul into damnation, out of his gaping maw is Scott Adams delivered from Death into Victory! Satan must be soooo mad lol
I'm a little surprised the author didn't mention Pascal's Wager. This is about as clear cut an example as you'll ever find.
While I agree with the theory of it, I doubt fake belief serves much good, so I hope it's a little more impassioned than this suggests. A death bed convert is still a convert, just so long as it's genuine, and serves as a reminder to us all about forgiveness and how people are capable of change.
I personally came to Christ by means of a sort of OPPOSITE Pascal's Wager that I tell people often.
You may not believe in the Devil, but it is undeniable that very powerful individuals in this world do, and they are taking actions appropriately. The safest and wisest thing to do then is to act in opposition to those individuals.
My very first step, believe it or not, was watching a reaction clip to Bill Nye's "Sex Junk" video, a video which was MEANT FOR CHILDREN. Sex Junk is truly undescribable in its vileness. Watch it once, and you'll never forget it.
The top comment on the reaction clip, which I have likewise never forgotten, was, "this video just converted me to Christianity."
I thank you, anonymous YouTube commenter. It took a few more years, but reading that comment was the beginning for me.
"While I agree with the theory of it, I doubt fake belief serves much good"
Pascal's wager doesn't advocate fake belief. It objectively describes the reality that belief has unlimited benefit if true (eternal salvation), while unbelief has finite benefit if true (one lifetime).
Pascal does tell people who have trouble believing to copy the actions of believers. People who don't know how to believe need training wheels to figure it out, and the religious rituals Christians practice are how we solidify our own belief and faith.
The Christian should be coaching the wagerer how to develop spiritual life, not discouraging him that it's "fake".
I should have been clearer. I honestly don't know if his belief is fake. If it is, it won't do him much good. I hope that it is genuine.
As far as Pascal, I personally tend to view that particular approach as fake. Logically, I understand the argument, but find it insincere, a kind of spiritual cover-your-ass move. Granted, hedged faith is better than no faith at all, but is that really all the higher we're going to set the bar?
Pascal's wager is pointing out that non-faith is futile even if true, while faith is not. That's no different than Proverbs pointing out that loving Wisdom is life while hating Wisdom is death. People are sheep and need constant reminding of the right direction for life.
Sincere faith does not require ignorance of cost and benefit. Jesus himself tells disciples to count the cost of following him, while also promising eternal life and other rewards.
Pascal's Wager is from a mathematician to thinkers who want religion to make sense before starting. The math is simple, and the rest is about sincerely practicing the religion like believers do instead of over-thinking it. "Taste and see that the Lord is good."
Publicly confessing Jesus is Lord despite personal doubts is an act of faith. Believers should encourage non-believers to take spiritual baby steps - even when they are not sure if it is true, take the actions that treat them as completely true and find out what happens.
I agree that baby steps are a very important starting point. I'll also concede that different individuale are going to require different approaches and a coldly logical formula would absolutely work better for certain types of people as a jumping off point.
Given that, I would still caution that this approach leaves some level of wiggle room for the newly converted, who might think of it as a sort of shortcut or cheat code to salvation.
It's a first step only, not a destination in and if itself.
Saying you're going to believe in something just because the cost/benefit analysis supports it isn't the same as heartfelt belief.
If you accept God in your heart, then you'll know God. If you accept only cold calculus in your heart and don't go further, then you'll know only cold calculus.
I do think Scott Adams is being tentative in his wording. But it's not for us to judge his heart, only encourage him to go further.
With respect to the Wager, Pascal doesn't encourage people to just talk about believe, but tells them to participate in religious rituals as if they were true, like believers do. That in of itself is actual faith. Feelings of belief are less important than taking action based on the belief.
Consider the bleeding lady who touched Jesus's cloak. There were only two things on her mind - she wanted to be healed, and she was convinced that simply touching Jesus would heal her. That was sufficient faith to grant her wish, and Jesus made sure she knew it was the faith.
Witnessing how evil this particular Bill Nye video was, and that it was being presented as a good thing for children, a lesson for them to learn, opened my eyes to the worldwide efforts of very, very evil people in very, very powerful positions.
There's no other convincing explanation for why these things are pushed so hard that doesn't include real, Satanic evil.
Either Satan is real, or these people believe he is real. Functionality, if these people control the world, what difference does it make if he's real or not? You're still forced to live in a world being bent to his whim.
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
- Ecclesiastes 12.7
The Hebrew word here is 'ruach', which was used interchangeably for for both spirit and soul. We are eternal spirit, as is God We have a soul through Adam, when he received the breath of life
,
The 'what have I got to lose?' argument has been around forever, used by both 'sides'. Not as Heaven or Hell. All men will be judged according to their faith. the reward each has will cause repentance with the realization of what was 'missed out' on, yet Jesus dries those tears
After all, we are not to compare ourselves with one another. Each one will rejoice simply because they are in the Father's presence, whatever their position in the Kingdom. God's grace is sufficient:)
Are people online really arguing because they weren't paid more wages for an earlier start to their labour? And as for it being "too late," the thief on the cross was hours from death. Better even a half hearted appeal to God in the end than to die an avowed disbeliever.
No. Sad. Tragedy. This is just Pascal's Wager.
He won't make it for this simple reason: "I do believe that the dominant Christian theory is that I would wake up in heaven if I have a good life."
That is not Christian theology at all. The message of Christ is that all people are unholy and therefore unworthy to be in the presence of God, who is flawlessly holy. The reason we are unholy is that we rebel against God's design for our life*. Jesus points out the terrible truth about us in his sermon on the mount where he says that any man who even thinks about adultery is guilty of it in his heart. So, the whole "I'm a good person" thing is a farce. Literally everyone, at some point in their life, would commit murder IF they could get away with it. That is a sin of the heart, even though it is not a sin of the hand. The only reason you didn't do it is because you were afraid of the consequences.
How many people would murder Trump if they could? How many would have murdered Biden if they could? How many would murder a pedophile if they could?
No one is a good person in their heart. That is why deep down, we all carry an unshakable feeling of "guilty." We know we are guilty.
And there is no way do undo what has been done. None. There is no balancing the bad with the good--the bad continues to exist in time! The just penalty for rebelling against the One who gave you mortal life is for Him to take that life that you have misused away from you. Mortal death, and after that the judgement for your soul--on to the presence of God or not? Only those who are either holy or who have been pardoned in spite of their unholiness go to heaven.
Scott (and all the rest of us) can never belong in God's presence by any of our own actions. You can't earn heaven. We are not being graded on a curve where everyone better than Hitler gets a pass for all their hatred and malice. Instead, God offers us a pardon--forgiveness--for our sins and that is counted as righteousness. Who grants this pardon? Jesus Christ. Why does he have the authority to do that? Because He paid the debt of death that we owe to our Creator with His own truly righteous life.
To receive the pardon of Jesus, all He asks for in return is that you (1) believe He is God and (2) submit your life to His service out of your love for Him. (#2 is where most Christians fail...) Someone needs to witness the hard Gospel truth to Scott before it is too late. The gate is narrow, and few will walk through.
* Why are we allowed to rebel against God's design for our life? Because love is impossible without freedom, and what God want's from us is to love Him and to love each other. Imagine a graph where each node is a person, and between every pair of nodes is a beam of light that represents love. How utterly beautiful is that picture of humanity? That is the picture Jesus has commanded us to be part of. He didn't make just one person; He made billions of people. Yes, God loves us each individually, but our love for each other is a thing of immense beauty and forms the image of the whole Kingdom of God, the whole Bride of Christ, whom He died to redeem.
"Literally everyone, at some point in their life, would commit murder IF they could get away with it."
No, just you and weirdos like you. This is why those with walls of texts must be avoided irl.
His entire essay is saying that whats the point of being good? You just need to love God in your heart and pray the right way. Its depressing.
This is not my position, and it is not what I said. You have put words into my mouth to make a strawman.
Yeah, could also be a schizo. There's another guy here similar, teapotsomething his name.
Do you guys think I am not right here? That this is an intellectually honest way to talk about a stranger on the internet? You are just ganging up to take turns making personal insults simply because I said something you don't agree with, but I'm the one who lacks a theory of mind?
yeah you made retarded claims and were called out on it. Woudl you prefer we agree with you instead?
If I'm wrong, please, explain how without insulting me.
I'm not as devout as you, but yes, Pascal's wager is literally the first thought that popped into my head when I heard what Adams said.
Besides, I haven't forgotten how he said he was voting for Hillary Clinton "for his own safety." He has always been a slippery character.
That said, I hope he finds peace one way or another.
The real sad part, at least based on the quote here, is that it’s not even Pascal’s Wager.
“I do believe that the dominant Christian theory is that I would wake up in heaven if I have a good life. I don't necessarily have to state something in advance. And so to my Christian friends, yes, it's coming.”
That’s not salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ. That says he thinks he’s a Christian and saved because he lived a good life.
Perhaps there was something actually referring to conversion in the full video.
"submit your life to his service"
You just repackaged works salvation. You're either saved or you're not saved. That just adds confusion.
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Romans 4:5
I agree that salvation comes from faith alone, and I recognize that it is not true to say otherwise. The second point (the one you quoted) is intended to bring up the additional important process of sanctification that begins when someone is saved, the process where the Holy Spirit transforms someone from a believer into a disciple.
"So then, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who is at work in you, both to will and to work for His good pleasure." (Phil. 2:12-13)
I don't think I repackaged works salvation because I did say that to believe Jesus is God is #1. Rather, the idea that you can just live however you want and get away with it by planning to say, "Oh, yeah, Jesus is the real deal," at the last second of your life seems like a legal loophole being exploited, like there is a way to have your cake and eat it, too, if you are clever about it. Likewise, the idea that you can just live however you want and get away with it by planning to just ask for forgiveness repeatedly (i.e. forgiveness without any effort to change) also seems like a legal loophole being exploited.
"If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God." (Hebrews 10:26-27)
If there is a person similar to Scott, who is the subject of the article, that truly believes in God and Jesus, would they go on living in ways that they know anger Him? Or would they declare their belief as soon as they believed it? To delay implies disbelief, I think. And Scott did not even say that he would ever declare that Jesus is his Savior. Instead, he said that if Christianity is true then he expects to just wake up in heaven because he's been a pretty good guy, all things considered.
My response, confused as it was, was trying to say that heaven is not for good people; it's for bad people who have been forgiven by Jesus because they asked Him to with conviction*, enough conviction that it motivates progress towards obedience and service after that moment.
* Or if they never knew Jesus, yet they simply loved God and tried their best to follow His ways, like Abraham and the many others who have their "faith counted for righteousness." Those listed in Romans did not just do whatever they liked and hope for or expect the best for themselves, as it sounds like Scott has done and says he will still do through his last day. Out of the sincerity of their love for God, they tried also to do right by Him.
“Everyone who could commit murder would if they could get away with it.”
There is an entire idea called “what you are in the dark,” thats people who refuse to commit evil even when they know they could get away with it. Because people can be better. Your entire theological essay sounds like something heath ledgers joker would smile and nod at.
The leading cause of death in the world in 2025 was abortion: 73 million. Was this morally acceptable?
The Lord will know if Mr. Adams is his or not.
All salvation is undeserved mercy after all.
But "If I'm good, I don't need Jesus. I'll wake up in heaven without having to accept Him," isn't salvation at all.
Nor is any of the other vain thoughts we have.
People have had far worse, and far more idiotic starts, even close to death.
Certainly one could be well pleased to get more out of him, but that'd be for our own comfort.
"Oh, all the doctine, the faith and works are in order, and how he professes Christ is King! How wonderful!"
We might say such things and undoubtedly it's good that men be in order, that they sing forth the gospel with their burning lives even with wick short.
Undoubtedly too, it's better to have an occultist for example turn from their ways rather than incomprehensibly screaming for mercy as he dies.
We might have some comfort too in that case that the man is saved.
But all the signs are but signs.
Certainly we can act on them, warn, pray, cajole and lead the horse to waters pure.
We don't know though, the intentions deep within, the final answer. There are those who will loudly be crying his name whose had outward signs promising to men, but deep within unknown to us...
They did not accept the blood divine.
But, by all means pray for him and all others, God knows we get stupid notions.
Glory to God in the highest! As Scott has neared closer and closer to the edge of death, Satan licking his chops as he is about to claim another soul into damnation, out of his gaping maw is Scott Adams delivered from Death into Victory! Satan must be soooo mad lol
Satan hasn't lost him yet. All he's saying is that if he's good he thinks he'll get to heaven even without Jesus. Pray for him.
I'm a little surprised the author didn't mention Pascal's Wager. This is about as clear cut an example as you'll ever find.
While I agree with the theory of it, I doubt fake belief serves much good, so I hope it's a little more impassioned than this suggests. A death bed convert is still a convert, just so long as it's genuine, and serves as a reminder to us all about forgiveness and how people are capable of change.
I personally came to Christ by means of a sort of OPPOSITE Pascal's Wager that I tell people often.
You may not believe in the Devil, but it is undeniable that very powerful individuals in this world do, and they are taking actions appropriately. The safest and wisest thing to do then is to act in opposition to those individuals.
My very first step, believe it or not, was watching a reaction clip to Bill Nye's "Sex Junk" video, a video which was MEANT FOR CHILDREN. Sex Junk is truly undescribable in its vileness. Watch it once, and you'll never forget it.
The top comment on the reaction clip, which I have likewise never forgotten, was, "this video just converted me to Christianity."
I thank you, anonymous YouTube commenter. It took a few more years, but reading that comment was the beginning for me.
"While I agree with the theory of it, I doubt fake belief serves much good"
Pascal's wager doesn't advocate fake belief. It objectively describes the reality that belief has unlimited benefit if true (eternal salvation), while unbelief has finite benefit if true (one lifetime).
Pascal does tell people who have trouble believing to copy the actions of believers. People who don't know how to believe need training wheels to figure it out, and the religious rituals Christians practice are how we solidify our own belief and faith.
The Christian should be coaching the wagerer how to develop spiritual life, not discouraging him that it's "fake".
Remember the tardy laborers who only worked for 1 hour and received the full reward that the good workers toiled for the entire day to earn?
It's a blessing that some get the full reward at the last minute, pray for many such cases.
I have no reason to believe my dad repented before he died, and yet I sometimes ask God to forgive him.
I should have been clearer. I honestly don't know if his belief is fake. If it is, it won't do him much good. I hope that it is genuine.
As far as Pascal, I personally tend to view that particular approach as fake. Logically, I understand the argument, but find it insincere, a kind of spiritual cover-your-ass move. Granted, hedged faith is better than no faith at all, but is that really all the higher we're going to set the bar?
Right, I'm defending Pascal's Wager.
Pascal's wager is pointing out that non-faith is futile even if true, while faith is not. That's no different than Proverbs pointing out that loving Wisdom is life while hating Wisdom is death. People are sheep and need constant reminding of the right direction for life.
Sincere faith does not require ignorance of cost and benefit. Jesus himself tells disciples to count the cost of following him, while also promising eternal life and other rewards.
Pascal's Wager is from a mathematician to thinkers who want religion to make sense before starting. The math is simple, and the rest is about sincerely practicing the religion like believers do instead of over-thinking it. "Taste and see that the Lord is good."
Publicly confessing Jesus is Lord despite personal doubts is an act of faith. Believers should encourage non-believers to take spiritual baby steps - even when they are not sure if it is true, take the actions that treat them as completely true and find out what happens.
I agree that baby steps are a very important starting point. I'll also concede that different individuale are going to require different approaches and a coldly logical formula would absolutely work better for certain types of people as a jumping off point.
Given that, I would still caution that this approach leaves some level of wiggle room for the newly converted, who might think of it as a sort of shortcut or cheat code to salvation.
It's a first step only, not a destination in and if itself.
Saying you're going to believe in something just because the cost/benefit analysis supports it isn't the same as heartfelt belief.
If you accept God in your heart, then you'll know God. If you accept only cold calculus in your heart and don't go further, then you'll know only cold calculus.
I do think Scott Adams is being tentative in his wording. But it's not for us to judge his heart, only encourage him to go further.
With respect to the Wager, Pascal doesn't encourage people to just talk about believe, but tells them to participate in religious rituals as if they were true, like believers do. That in of itself is actual faith. Feelings of belief are less important than taking action based on the belief.
Consider the bleeding lady who touched Jesus's cloak. There were only two things on her mind - she wanted to be healed, and she was convinced that simply touching Jesus would heal her. That was sufficient faith to grant her wish, and Jesus made sure she knew it was the faith.
A little clarification:
Witnessing how evil this particular Bill Nye video was, and that it was being presented as a good thing for children, a lesson for them to learn, opened my eyes to the worldwide efforts of very, very evil people in very, very powerful positions.
There's no other convincing explanation for why these things are pushed so hard that doesn't include real, Satanic evil.
Either Satan is real, or these people believe he is real. Functionality, if these people control the world, what difference does it make if he's real or not? You're still forced to live in a world being bent to his whim.
It's good for him. We all have our own journey in life.
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
- Ecclesiastes 12.7
The Hebrew word here is 'ruach', which was used interchangeably for for both spirit and soul. We are eternal spirit, as is God We have a soul through Adam, when he received the breath of life
,
The 'what have I got to lose?' argument has been around forever, used by both 'sides'. Not as Heaven or Hell. All men will be judged according to their faith. the reward each has will cause repentance with the realization of what was 'missed out' on, yet Jesus dries those tears
After all, we are not to compare ourselves with one another. Each one will rejoice simply because they are in the Father's presence, whatever their position in the Kingdom. God's grace is sufficient:)
Love & blessings
The Great Mercy
Katharine Tynan
Betwixt the saddle and the ground
Was mercy sought and mercy found.
Yea, in the twinkling of an eye,
He cried; and Thou hast heard his cry.
Between the bullet and its mark
Thy face made morning in his dark.
And while the shell sang on its path
Thou hast run, Thou hast run, preventing death.
Thou hast run before and reached the goal,
Gathered to Thee the unhoused soul.
Thou art not bound by Time or Space:
So fast Death runs : Thou hast won the race.
Thou hast said to beaten Death: Go tell
Of victories thou once hadst. All's well!
Death, here none die but thee and Sin
Now the great days of Life begin.
And to the Soul: This day I rise
And thee with Me to Paradise.
Betwixt the saddle and the ground
Was Mercy sought and Mercy found.