looking a fool when he answered that question. He declared boldly on two occasions, (so the myth which he left behind reports), that man becomes immortal. He probably got the idea from Isaiah, who said much the same thing, also on two occasions. So one is bound to ask whether this was just wishful thinking on Christ's part, or could he have been right? If he was right, did he wish to be understood literally, or metaphorically?
It is comparatively easy to persuade university philosophy dons to agree that immortal thoughts are necessary to keep the mind and imagination alive. For instance, eternal thoughts about a friendship will regard it as lasting indefinitely, and will be concerned therefore with its preservation and enjoyment. Temporary thoughts will be concerned with what can be got out of it. Eternal thoughts about the countryside are concerned with its beauty and conservation; temporary thoughts with its exploitation. If a man thinks only in terms of the usefulness of things and people, and disparages thoughts of beauty and goodness as unproductive, his imagination atrophies, and in the end his judgment even in everyday affairs is affected. Art is a necessity of life, not a luxury, because man cannot live by bread alone. But philosophy dons do not go on to agree that immortality may be literally possible or desirable; only metaphorically.
However outside the garden wall of a university it is seldom possible to get people to accept even metaphorical immortality. In Yorkshire, in particular, ugliness in buildings seems almost irresistibly attractive. For those in charge of anything, intimations of immortality may seem an unnecessary luxury; the day to day problems are always so pressing and so intractable, there is little time for anything except expediency. But there must be time. There are many problems in running a community, even a set of barristers chambers; there are the problems of organisation and survival, …