lTI J 1 Ihlii- Lijii. 1 I (wiwq«W(swj(a!*!*«^tHg[S4!*aass^^ Jsra^swaap^s^^Hsssti^sssraiBR rn 1 fyxmll mmmxi^ ^ihux^ BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME FROM THE SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND THE GIFT OF Henrg M. Sage 1891 /i. i..^:..z.s...9. ^.^5:±f...... BR J a/ /-^ J-g'^^i^^t^^ n CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES VIEWED IN EELATION TO MODERN THOUGHT. Works hy tlie same Author. THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF DIVINE INSPIRA- TION, as stated by the Writers, and Deduced from the Tacts of the New Testament. Longmans. THE JESUS OF THE EVANGELISTS: His Historical Character Vindicated ; or, an Examination into the External Evidences of Our Lord's Divine Mission, with reference to Modern Controversy. V. Norgate. THE MORAL TEACHING OF THE NEW TESTAMENT Viewed as Evidential to its Historical Truth. Christian Knowledge THE SUPERNATURAL IN THE NEW TESTAMENT Possible, Credible, and Historical ; or, an Examination of the Validity of some Recent Objections against Christianity as a Divine Revelation. F. Norgate. THE PRINCIPLES OF MODERN ATHEISTIC AND PAN- THEISTIC PHILOSOPHY (published by the Victoria Institute). Sarckiiicke. THREE LECTURES delivered at Norwicl. Cattedral ; being the Seventh Series of the Norwich Evidential Discourses on " The Truth of Christianity proved by the admissions of Unbelievers." Hamilton, Adams, and Co. FIVE LECTURES delivered at the Request of the Christian Evidence Society (pnbhshed in their Evidential Series). Hodder amd Stoughton. REASONS FOR BELIEVING IN CHRISTIANITY, addressed to Busy People ; a Course of Lectures delivered at St. Paul's Cathe- dral at the request of the Dean and Chapter. Chmoh of England Swnday School Institute. CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES '■■■ 1 i VIEWED , , . , , IN RELATION TO MODERN THOUGHT. EIGHT LECTURES PREACHED BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY OE OXFORD IN THE YEAR 1877 ON THE FOUNDATION OF THE LATE REV. JOHN BAMPTON, M.A., CANON OF SALISBURY. BY THE REV. C. A. EOW, M.A., Pembroke College, Oxeokd ; Pkebenoary of St. Paul's Cathedral. LONDON : FREDERIC NORGATE, 17, BEDFORD STREET, CO VENT GARDEN : WILLIAMS & NORGATE, 20, FREDERICK STREET, EDINBURGH. 1877. /\.SsXS^ LONDON : NORMAN AND SON, FBINTER8, MAIDEN LANE, COVENT GABDEN. EXTRACT TROM THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OP THE LATE REV JOHN BAMPTON, C4N0N OF SALISBURY. " I give and bequeath my Lands and Estates to " tlie Cliancellorj Masters, and Scholars, of the University " of Oxford for ever, to have and to hold all and singular " the said Lands or Estates upon trusty and to the intents " and purposes hereinafter mentioned ; that is to say, I "' will and appoint that the Vice-Chancellor of the Univer- " sity of Oxford for the time being shall take and receive " all the rents, issues, and profits thereof, and (after all " taxes, reparations, and necessary deductions made) that " he pay all the remainder to the endowment of eight " Divinity Lecture Sermons, to be established for ever " in the said University, and to be performed in the " manner following : — " I direct and appoint, that upon the First Tuesday " in Easter Term, a Lecturer may be yearly chosen by the " Heads of Colleges only, and by no others, in the room " adjoining to the Printing-House, between the hours of " ten in the morning and two in the afternoon, to preach " eight Divinity Lecture Sermons, the year following, at " St. Mary's in Oxford, between the commencement of the VI EXTEACT PEOM CANON BAMPTON S WILL. " last montli in Lent Term, and the end of tlie third week " in Act Term. " Also I direct and appoint, that the eight Divinity " Lecture Sermons shall be preached upon either of the " following subjects — to confirm and establish the Chris- " tian faith, and to confute all heretics and schismatics — " upon the divine authority of the holy Scriptures— upon " the authority of the writings of the primitive Fathei-s, " as to the faith and practice of the primitive Church — " upon the Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ " — upon the Divinity of the Holy Ghost — upon the " Articles of the Christian Faith, as comprehended in the '' Apostles' and Nicene Creed. " Also I direct, that thirty copies of the eight Divinity " Lecture Sermons shall be always printed, within two " months after they are preached j and one copy shall be " given to the Chancellor of the University, and one copy " to the Head of every College, and one copy to the " Mayor of the city of Oxford, and one copy to be put "into the Bodleian Library ; and the expense of priating " them shall be paid out of the revenue of the Land or " Estates given for establishing the Divinity Lecture Ser- " mens ; and the Preacher shall not be paid, nor be " entitled to the revenue, before they are printed. " Also I direct and appoint, that no person shall be " qualified to preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons unless " he hath taken the degree of Master of Arts at least, in " one of the two Universities of Oxford or Cambridge ; " and that the same person shall never preach the Divinity " Lecture Sermons twice." CONTEXTS. LECTURE I. THE OBDEE OF THE CHRISTIAN AEGUMENTj ITS NATURE AND' EXTENT. Introduction, 1. The Christian reTelation progressiTe according to the analogy of the divine working in nature, 3. Necessity of accommodating our evidential position to our increasing light, 6. The question — What constitutes the inner life of Christianity, as distinct from the vehicle through which it has been communicated, considered, 7. The essence of the Christian revelation consists not iu a body of formulated dogmatic truth, but in a personal history, 12. The bearing of this on the limits of the Christian argument, 14. The relation in which theology stands to revelation, 16. Various points which are eagerly discussed among theologians extraneous to the Christian argument, 20. The moral miracles of Christianity constitute the most important attestation to its divine character, 25. Facts capable of verification ought to be placed in the forefront of the Christian argument, 29 . Reasons for assigning a primary place to the argument from the moral aspects of Christianity, and a secondary one to that from miracles, 30. Supplement I. THE evidence AFFORDED BY THE WRITINGS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT THAT THE ESSENCE OP THE CHRISTIAN REVELA- TION CONSISTS IN THE OBJECTIVE FACT OF THE INCARNATION. The affirmations of St. John in his first epistle, 39. Those in his Gospel, 41. Our Lord's direct assertions on the same subject, 42. Further proof from the numerous incidental references made to it by St. Paul, 44. St. Paul's direct assertions on the same subject, 45. Christianity not an afterthought for the purpose of repairing the failure of God's creative plan, 47. The effects of the incarnation not limited to the human race, 49. The views propounded on this subject in the epistle to the Hebrews, and in the Apocalypse, 50. The testimony of the epistle of St. Peter, and of the Acts of the Apostles, 51. The views of the writers of the Synoptic Gospels in strict harmony with th ose of the other writers of the New Testament, 53. Vlll CONTENTS. Supplement II. THE CONCEPTION OP A MIEACLB INVOLVES NEITHER A SUSPEN- SION OF THE FOECES, NOE A VIOLATION OF THE LAWS OF NATURE. The confusion which has been introduced into the controversy about miracles by the use of ambiguous terms, 54. The distinction between the laws and the forces of nature, 57. The mockis operandi of God in the performance of a miracle ought not to form a portion of its definition, 59. The question, whether, under the term nature, man and his free agency are meant to be included, all-important in this controversy, 61. Man capable of modifying the order of nature by imparting a new direction to its forces, 63. The laws of nature not violated, nor its forces suspended by the performance of a miracle, 65. The distinction between God's modus operandi in his ordinary provi- dence and in performing miracles, unknown in the Old Testament, 68. The New Testament does not represent the forces of nature as suspended during the performance of miracles, 69. The theism of the Bible represents God not only as standing external to the universe, but as immanent in its forces, 71. LECTUKB II. THE SUPERHUMAN ACTION OP JESUS CHEIST VERIFIABLE IN THE HISTOEY OF THE PAST AND THE FACTS OF THE PRESENT. The principles on which the argument is based, 73. The self-evidencing character of Our Lord's person the highest evidence of his divine mission, 75. Our Lord's direct affirmations on this subject as reported in the fourth Gospel, 76. Similar principles underlie his teaching in the Synoptics, 80. Large numbers of his miracles not performed for purposes directly evidential, 81. The views propounded in the epistles of St. John and St. Paul as to the self- evidencing character of Our Lord's divine person, 82. The evidential value assigned to miracles in the Acts of the Apostles, and in the epistle to the Hebrews, 83. Certain classes of miracles wrought rather for providential than for evidential purposes, 85. The supernatural gifts, how far evidential, 86. General summary of results, 88. The superhuman action of Jesus Chnst m history a fact capable of verification, 89. The argument concisely stated, 90. Christianity based on a personal history— the unique character of this fact, 92. The mighty influence which this history has exerted on man- kind, 93. The source of this influence, 95. The testimony of history to the solitary grandeur of Jesus Christ-Mr. Lecky's admissions, 96. Jesus Christ the sohtaiy character in history who for eighteen centuries has inspired the hear s of men with an nnpassioned love, 98. He is the one Catholic man capable of acting on every condition of human nature, 99. He alone is the embodiment of hohness in his human life, and its perfect example 101 Not only so, but he alone of men is capable of exerting a moral a;d spiritual CONTENTS. IX power mighty for the regeneration of mankind, 102. His energetic action in the moral and spiritual worlds testified to by the history of 4he past, and the facts of the present, 104. The Church amidst its corruptions has found in the person of its Founder an ever enduring principle of regeneration, 106. The altematiTe propounded by unbelief to the acceptance of Christianity, 108. Supplement I. THE EVIDENTIAL VALUE OP MIEACLES AS APPECTED BY ANSWERS TO PEATEE. The analogy between special providences and miracles, 109. The difficulty of discriminatmg between miracles, and answers to special prayers, which involve modifications in the action of the forces of the material universe, 110. A series of such answers in favour of a, particular person would constitute a ariiiilov, 111. The case of the Bristol Orphan Asylum, 112. How far such answers to prayer affect the value of miracles as the sole attestations of a divine Kevelation, 115. Supplement II. MIRACLES WEOUGHT IN THE PHYSICAL UNIVEESB NOT THE EXCLUSIVE ATTESTATION OF OUE LOEd's DIVINE MISSION. Brief statement of the views propounded in the Lecture on this subject, 116. The opposite view which affirms that certain doctrinal statements contained in the New Testament can only be accepted as true, on the evidence of physical mu-acles, 118. The positions of Professor Mozley considered, 119. Our Lord's afSrmations respecting himself to be accepted on the ground of his perfect truthfulness, and the adequacy of his knowledge, 122. While such assertions would have been incredible on the simple affirmation of an ordinary man, Our Lord was not an ordinary man, but his human life contained throughout a manifestation of the divine, 124. Our Lord's appeal to his sinlessness as an evidence of his veracity, 125. The change in the value of miracles as evidential to a divine Revelation through our inability to witness them, and the consequent difficulties with which their proof is attended, 126. The Mission of John the Baptist affirmed to have been divine, yet destitute of a miraculous attestation, 127. LECTURE III. THE CONTRAST BETWEEN THE TEACHING OP CHRISTIANITY AND THAT OP THE PHILOSOPHERS VIEWED EVIDENTIALLY. The truth of Our Lord's affirmation that he is the Light of the World, and the Light of Life, verified by eighteen centuries of history, and verifiable in the facts of the present, 130-132. The continuity of the moral world — its changes take place in conformity with moral laws, 133. The teaching of Christianity involves a break in the continuity of the chain of moral causes 134. Such a break in continuity a proof of the presence of the X CONTENTS. superhnman, 136. The condition of thonght out of which Christianity must have been evolved if it owed its origin only to the ordinary forces energizing in man, 137. The ability of man to discover moral truth without the aid of revelation, instead of constituting a difficulty, confirmatory of this argument, 138. The moral teaching of Christianity, 141. First contrast between its teaching and that of the philosophers— its earnestness, method, and aim, 141. Its appeal to the entire moral nature of man contrasted with the method of the philosophers, 143. Second contrast— its freedom from all attempts at political legislation, 144. Yet Jesus Christ professed to be the founder of a kingdom— contrasted in this respect with all previous lines of thought, 147. The mode in which Christianity deals with great social questions, 149. Third contrast— Jesus Christ the founder of the everlasting religion of humanity, 148. Fourth contrast — the all-comprehensiveness and self-deter- minative character of the Christian law of duty, and the basis on which it is erected, 149-151. Duty measured by the love of self, 151. Duty measured by love to Jesus Christ, 152. The teaching of Christianity incapable of evolution out of the atmosphere of Jewish thought by the forces energizing in man, 154. Fifth contrast— the importance which Christianity assigns to the milder virtues compared with the political and heroical ones, 154. The mild and heroic virtues combined in the person of Jesus Christ, 157. Philosophy wrong in its preference of the heroic virtues, and Christianity right in assigning the first rank to the milder ones, 158. Sixth contrast — the views taken by Jesus Christ and the philosophers of their respective missions, 159. Jesus Christ the originator of all attempts to ameliorate the condition of the masses of mankind, 1 60. Seventh contrast — ^Christianity the Creator of a mighty moral and spiritual power, 161. The philosopher deeply conscious of his inability to operate on the masses of mankind, 162. The weakness of the moral forces at his command to struggle with the violence of passion, 1 63. The principle of habit, the only moral force recognized by philosophy, impotent to eileet the regeneration of the human race, or the individual, 165. The political character of the ancient, and several modern systems of Ethics, 167. The New Testament propounds the principle of faith in contradistinction to that of habit as capable of effecting the regene- ration of mankind, 170. The mode of its action corresponds to the necessities of man's moral constitution, 172. The religious principle in man in its bearing on moral action, 173. The results of the contrast of the teaching of Chris- tianity with that of the philosophers viewed evidentially, 174. The concessions of Mr. Mill, 176. LECTURE IV. THE UNITY OP THE CHARACTER OP CHRIST A PROOP OP ITS HIS- TORICAL REALITY ; AND THE LOGICAL VALUE OP THE ARGUMENT PROM PROPHECY. The principle of verification recognized by the writers of the New Testament, 178. While the evangelists have given us no formal delineation of the character of Jesus Christ, its presence in their pages is a patent fact, 179. It CONTENTS. XI has been created by the simple juxta-position of the materials which compose the Gospels, 180. This character is as deeply impressed on the miraculous narratives of the Gospels as on the remaining portions of their contents, 181. The character delineated in the Gospels is an essential unity, 182. Any theory which attempts to account for the origin of the miraculous narratives is invalid, unless it can also account for the unit)' of the character, 183. The mythic and legendary theories fail to account for the unity of the delineation, 185. The four Evangelists present us with four portraitures of the same historical reality taken from different points of view, 187. The argument unaffected by the question whether the Gospels were composed by the aid of written docu- ments, or out of traditional reminiscences, 188. The absurdity of the supposi- tion that a number of mythologists, acting independently, can have excogitated a number of legends impressed with the same lofty moral ideal, 189. State- ment of the various points in which the mythologists must have concurred in their delineations, 191. Contrast presented by the delineations in the apocry- phal Gospels, 194. The theory of tendencies equally inconsistent with the facts and phenomena of the Gospels, 197. The meaning of the writers of the New Testament when they affirm that the prophetic and typical delineations of the Old have been fulfilled in Jesus Christ, 200. The logical value of the argument from prophecy unaffected by various questions respect- ing the date and authorship of various books of the Old Testament, 206. A common idea underlies the books of the Old Testament, such as can be found in no other set of writings which extend over an equal space of time, 208. The nature and character of its predictive elements, 209. Its typical pro- phecies, 211. Their evidential value dependent on the degree in which they con- verge in a common centre, 215. Jesus Christ was the ideal of the institutions of the Old Testament, 216. And of the aspirations which underlay its entire system, 218. The force of the prophetic argument, 219. Sqpplement I. THE IDENTITY OF THE POETEAITUEE OF THE JESUS OF THE FOUETH GOSPEL WITH THE JESUS OP THE SYNOPTICS. The allegation that the Jesus of the Fourth Gospel differs from the Jesus of the Synoptics considered, 221. Points in which the two delineations form an essential unity, 221. The Johannine discourses the counterpart of the Synop- tical delineation, 223, Points where the two delineations exactly coincide, 224. A perfectly human character ascribed to Our Lord in the Pourth Gospel, 226. The Johannine and the Synoptical delineations of the Passion compared, 227. Supplement II. THE MESSIANIC ELEMENTS OP THE OLD TESTAMENT INADEQUATE AS A MODEL TO IDEOLOGISTS FOR THE DELINEATION OF THE CHEIST OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. The materials which were open to mythologists to aid them in the delineation of an ideal Christ, 234. The Jesus of the Evangelists not manufactured out of Xll CONTENTS. the Messianic delineations of the book of Enoch, 235. Nor of those of Esdras, 239. Nor of Daniel, 240. Nor of that of the Servant of Jehovah, 242. Nor from the other Messianic delineations in Isaiah, 245. Nor from the other Messia- nic prophecies of the Old Testament, 2'i6. Nor fi'om its typical characters, 247. LECTURE V. THE EVIDENCE AEFOEDED BY THE WETTINGS OP THE FATHERS, WHO FLOURISHED BETWEEN A.D. 90 AND A.D. 180, THAT THE CHURCH WAS IN POSSESSION OF AN ACCOUNT OP THE ACTIONS AND TEACHING OF OUE LORD ANALOGOUS TO THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN OUR PRESENT GOSPELS. Mr. Mill's positions respecting the evidence necessary to establish the truth of miracles, as set forth in his Logic and ' his posthumous Essays, accepted as the foundation of the present argument, 249. Miracles require a stronger attestation than ordinary facts, 252. The d priori difficulties removed by the considerations adduced in the preceding Lectures, 254. Paley's work the model of modern evidential treatises; its defects, 256. WhUe martyr testimony is a perfect guarantee against fraud, it is by no means equally efficacious as a safeguard against delusion, 257. Paley's proof that we are in possession of the testimony of the original witnesses imperfect as against the positions taken by modern unbelief, 261. His position, that miracles constitute the only adequate evidence of a revelation, renders it necessary not only to prove the truth of the Christian miracles but the falsehood of all others, 262. The difficulties with which this is attended, 263. The necessity which the form of his argument imposes on him of proving by the testimony of the Fathers that the Gospels were the work of the persons whose names they bear ; and the imperfection of his method, 266. State of the patrisitic argument, 267. The Gospels fully recognized by the great Church writers who flom-ished at the conclusion of the second century, 268. The fact that Marcion's Gospel was a mutilated edition of our present Luke clearly established, 269. The value of the testimony of Papias, 270. The Clementine homilies render it nearly certain that their author used one of our present Gospels, 272. While the writings of Justin Martyr render it very highly probable that he used one or more of our Gospels, the evidence comes short of a moral demonstration, 273. The same is true of the earlier extra canonical writings, 275. The Importance of proving that the Fathers actually quoted our Gospels has been over-estimated by both sides in this controversy, 277. While the writings of Justin only afford a high probability that his " Memoirs of the Apostles" contained one or more of our Gospels, they afford a moral demonstration that they contained an account of the actions and teaching of Our Lord which for all the purposes of history was identical with them, 278. The larger the number of his authorities, the more complete is the guarantee of the truth of the facts, 280. The testimony of the earlier Fathers affords a moral demon- CONTENTS. XIU stration that the account current in the Church was substantially the same as that contained in our Gospels, 281. The accounts of Our lord's ministry originally handed down by the Church in an oral form, of which the Synoptics are three different Tersions, 282. No legendary matter, inTcnted between A.D. 80 and a.d. 180, has been incorporated into the Gospels, 283. The existence of the Chnrch as u corporate society a guarantee of the accurate transmission of the events of its Pounder's life such as is possessed by no other, 284. Such transmission was a necessary condition of its existence, 286. The impossibility of imposing a mass of fictions on the Church in place of the real events during the interval in question, 287. LBCTUEB VI. THE NATUEE AND VALTJE OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES AS HIS- TOEICAL DOCUMENTS ; AND THE EVIDENCE THEY AFPOED THAT THE ACCOUNT OP OUE LOEd's ACTIONS AND TEACHING WHICH WAS ACCEPTED BY THE CHURCH BETWEEN A.D. 30 AND A.D. 90 WAS IN ITS MAIN OUTLINES SIMILAE TO THAT IN OUK GOSPELS. The sixty years which follow the Crucifixion lie completely within that period during which traditionary reminiscences possess the utmost freshness, 289. During this interval it would have been impossible for the real facts of the ministry of Our Lord to be superseded by myths and legends, 292. The entire period is covered by the testimony of St. Paul's epistles, 293. The genuineness of the four great epistles admitted by an overwhelming majority, and that of four more by a considerable number of learned unbelievers, 294. The historical value of the other writings in the New Testament, 295. The shortness of the interval which separates these letters from the events of Our Lord's ministry, 297. The value of original letters as affording materials for history, and the special value attaching to those of St. Paul, 298. They afford incontestable proof of his sincerity, and of the calmness of his judgment, 299. The value of incidental allusions as affording testimony to historic facts, 302. The existence in the Churches to which these epistles are addressed, of parties strongly antagonistic to St. Paul, renders their incidental allusions invaluable as testimony to facts, 303. These letters prove beyond question that St. Paul was firmly persuaded that he was in the habit of working miracles during the entire com-se of his ministry, 305. This fact fatal to the legendary theory, 308. They likewise prove that St. Paul and his opponents were persuaded that a number of supernatural endowments habitually manifested themselves in the Church from its foundation, 309. The epistles prove the presence in Chris- tianity of a mighty regenerating power, 313. The direct allusions in these epistles to events in Our Lord's ministry — their nature and value, 314. The indirect references to it very numerous,— their character, and historical value, 317. They presuppose that the Church was in possession of a well-known XIV CONTENTS. account of the chief events of Our Lord's ministry analogous to that contained in the Gospels, 320. And prove that it was the same as that which was handed down by the primitiye followers of Jesus, 321. The proof furnished by them that the Church was reconstmcted on the basis of the Resun-ection immediately after the Crucifixion, 322. The strength of the belief in the Kesurrection in the Corinthian Church proved by St. Paul's peculiar mode of reasoning, 326. Sum- mary of results, 328. The facts of the epistles leave only two alternatives— that the Resurrection was an objective fact, or that the belief originated in some form of mental hallucination, 329. Supplement. THE INCIDENTAL ALLUSIONS IN ST. PAUl's EPISTLES TO THE ACTIONS AND TEACHING OP OUR LORD. The proof afEorded by the epistles that the Christ who was accepted alike by St. Panl and his opponents was a superhuman Christ, and a worker of miracles during his earthly ministry, 330. The fact that the Christology of the epistles is not formulated proves that in its chief outlines it was accepted by the various parties in the Church, including St. Paul's opponents, 334. The incidental allusions to this Christology, 335. The Christology of St. Paul's opponents represents that of the primitive followers of Jesus, 339. The Gospel which was " another Gospel," and yet not another, 340. Additional proof furnished by the epistle to the Philippians, 341. The evidence furnished by the Apocalypse, 342. Proof furnished by the epistles that the account which the Church possessed of the actions and teaching of Our Lord must have been one of considerable fulness, and analogous to that con- tained in the Gospels, 344. Proved by the indirect allusions with which the epistles abound, 347. Proof furnished by the exhortations t» follow Christ as an example, 349. The facts of Our Lord's ministry formed an habitual subject of Christian instruction in the Apostolic Churches, 351. And especially to converted heathen, 353. Further incidental allusions, 354. The assumption of the truth of the Resurrection underlies every portion of the epistles, 356. LECTURE VII. THE THEORY OP VISIONS CONSIDERED AND REPUTED. The historical facts which must be accounted for by those who deny the objective reality of the Resurrection, 358. The solution propounded by the theory of visions, 361. The state of mind of the disciples of Jesus on the days which followed the Crucifixion, the starting-point of our inquiry, 362. Assump- tions necessary to impart plausibility to this theory, 364. Not only is it neces- sary that it should account for the belief in the Resurrection, but for the reconstruction of the Church on the basis of this belief, 366. The inadequacy of the three principles of fixed idea, prepossession, and expectancy, to effect this result, 367. The theoiy that Mary Magdalene mistook a vision of the risen CONTENTS. XV Jesus for an external reality, considered and refuted, 368. The fact to be accounted for is not only that single persons mistook such visions for realities but that the disciples did so in bodies, 370. The difficulties with which such a supposition is attended, 372. The importance of the existence of the Church as a visible institution as a testimony to the reality of the Resurrection, 374. The objection that Mahometanism is a great institution which has been founded on a visionary delusion considered, 375. Further difficulties with which this theory is encumbered, 377. Objections urged from the standpoint of Dr. Carpenter's explanations of the phenomena of spiritualism, and other kindred delusions considered, 379. Answer to these objections, 383. The state of mind of the followers of Jesus during the days which followed his Crucifixion the opposite of that which would have caused them to see visions of him risen from the dead, and to mistake them for realities, 387. The points in which the evidence of the Resurrection is contrasted with that of all visionary appearances which have been mistaken for realities, 389. Solution of the difficulty that Our Lord was not easily recognized by his disciples after his resurrection, 392. The theory that Our Lord did not die from the effects of crucifixion, but slowly recovered, and that his recovery was mistaken for u. resurrection con sidered, 393. This theory unknown to the Jewish and Pagan opponents of Christianity, 394. Its inherent difficulties, 395. Presupposes that the belief in the Resur- rection owed its origin to a deliberately concocted fraud, 397. Results of the foregoing reasonings, 399. Supplement I. THE VALUE OP ST. PAUL's TESTIMONY TO THE PACT OP THE EESUEEECTION. The circumstances attending the appearance of Our Lord to St. Paul different from those of his appearances to the other Apostles, 400. The theories which have been propounded by unbelievers inconsistent with the unquestionable facts of history, 403. The objection that St. Paul was incapable of distinguishing between visions and objective realities considered, 407. Supplement II. DK. CAEPENTEE's OBJECTIONS TO THE EVIDENCE OP THE CHEIS- TIAN MIEACLES CONSIDEEED. Dr. Carpenter's objections stated, 410. The fallacy of urging objections against the miracles in the Bible in a mass as though they were all equal in point of attestation and evidential value, 414. The question whether some of the miracles in the New Testament may not have had a foundation in certain natural agencies, as for example, the action of the mind on the -body, 417. The influence which powerful faith is capable of exerting on our bodily frames, 240. The question of Possession, 422. The existence of numerous narratives of false miracles does not justify us in rejecting all nairacles in a mass, irrespec- tively of the evidence on which they rest, 423. XVI CONTENTS. LECTURE VIII. POPULAE THEORIES OP INSPIRATION THEIR RELATION TO SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT. The important bearing of existing theories of inspiration in the controTersy between Christianity and scientific unbelief, 428. The functional character of inspiration analogous to the mode of the divine action in the constitution of our ordinary faculties, 432. The real points of danger in the controversy, 433. The positions laid down by Butler respecting the nature of inspiration adequate to meet the chief difficulties, 437. Nine propositions which he has enunciated on this subject, 439. Stated generally, they affirm the invalidity of all purely Apriori theories as to what must be the extent of the supernatural assistance afforded to those through whom a revelation is communicated, 441. The mechanical and verbal theories, 443, The dynamical theory, 444. " Plenary" inspiration, 445. The theory of superintendence, 446. The theory of special inspiration vouchsafed to the writers of the books of the New Testament as distinct from their ordinary inspiration, 447. All these theories invalidated by their d priori character, 449. The results to which they inevitably lead when applied to the facts of the universe: Mr. Mill's reasoning on this subject, 448. Principles which are invalid when applied to the facts of the universe, and lead to false conclu- sions as to the mode in which God must have acted in His creative work, must produce similar results when applied to the phenomena of revelation, 449. A careful induction of the facts and phenomena of the New Testament the only safe guide in constructing a theory of inspiration, 451. No definite theory as to the nature or extent of inspiration laid down in the Bible, 452. Our Lord's promises of supernatural assistance made to the Apostles— their extent, 455. The assertions made on this subject by the sacred writers in the Epistles, 456. The nature of the inspiration afforded by the supernatural gifts of the -Spirit, 458. Application of Butler's principles to the first chapter of Genesis, 460.' The alleged antiquity of man— its bearing on this question, 455. The gradual growth of civnization and language, 466. The Bible not pledged to a system of chronology, 468. The universality of the deluge-its bearing on the question of inspiration, 470. Similarly, the question of the authorship of the Sacred Books, 471. The alleged discrepancies in the Gospels, 472. Conclusion, 474. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE. REMARKS ON PROFESSOR MOZLET's LECTURES ON ^' RULING IDEAS IN EARLY ages" . tS"? 475 LECTURE I. " Jesus sailli unto them, Have ye understood all these things ? They say unto him, Yea, Lord. Then said he unto them, Therefore every Scribe which is instructed unto the kingdom of heaven, is like unto a man that is an householder, which bringeth out of his treasure things new and old." — Matt. xiii. 51, 53. The subject wliicli it will be my duty to bring before you in the present course of Lectures, is " Cbristian Evidences viewed in relation to modern thougbt." Not only will the treatment of sucb a subject carry out the intention of the Founder of this Lectureship, but its careful examination is imperatively demanded by the exigencies of the times in which we live. We are all of us painfully aware, that a large number of men who are eminent in various depart- ments of philosophy, science, and criticism, have ceased to believe in Christianity as a divine revelation. Nor is it less certain that the wide diffusion of their principles has had the effect of suggesting anxious doubts, and even of shaking the faith of a still larger number of persons who would not willingly range themselves in the ranks of unbelief. That this latter class is a very numerous one, is a fact which it is impossible to question. Such persons have a right to our utmost sympathy, especially in those cases, which I fear are numerous, where many of the difficulties which they ex- perience have their origin in some imperfection in our mode of stating the Christian argument. Nor is it less our duty, in accordance with the emphatic warnings of our divine Master, to do our utmost to remove every stumbling-block out of the way of professed unbelievers, by placing before 1 2 THE OKDEE OF THE CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT, thorn in the simplest form, the grounds on which we claim their acceptance of Clristianity as a divine Eevelation. It is useless to close onr eyes to the fact, that the progress of philosophical, scientific, and critical inquiry during the present century has suggested difficulties which were unfelt when our great defences of Christianity were composed. We need not therefore wonder that they are inadequate to meet them. On the other hand, it is no less certain that the same causes have disclosed reasons for the acceptance of Chris- tianity which were only imperfectly appreciated by our predecessors. This being the case, a careful reconsideration of the Christian position in relation to the requirements of modern thought is become indispensable. I propose, therefore, as far as the conditions imposed on me by these Lectures will allow, to take a view of our posi- tion^ in relation to the chief difficulties which the progress of modern thought has suggested in connection with the evidences on which we have been accustomed to rest the claims of Christianity to be accepted as a divine revelation ; and to point out the nature of the ground which the new positions which have been taken by opponents, require us to occupy in its defence. In doing this it will be requisite that I should take a careful survey of those points in the Christian position which require to be defended as essential ; and that I should separate from them those whichj however interesting they may be in relation to several important questions of theology, are really non-essential to the defence of Christianity as a divine Eevelation. It will then be my duty to examine how far our old forms of evidence are valid for the purpose of meeting the difficulties which have been suggested by modern philosophical and critical thought, and to sketch the general outUne of the defence necessary to meet the exigencies of our present position. To this latter point the seven concluding Lectures of this course will be exclusively devoted. I am deeply conscious of the responsibility which is ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 3 involved in the treatment of this subject, which renders it necessary that I should deal with several of the most critical points of modern controversy. Still it has become the plain duty of Christian men, not to hesitate to meet all difficulties honestly, fearlessly, cautiously and calmly. The time is past for propounding inadequate solutions or for attempting to hold ground which is evidently untenable. Such a course can only be damaging to the Christian cause. Its abandonment, instead of weakening, will strengthen our position. If on the other hand there are important branches of evidences which have been but imperfectly recognized by our predecessors, our duty is without delay to assign them their proper place in the Christian argument. To effect this object these Lectures wiU be directed. In the mode of treatment I shall take the text as my motto. It contains a profound and far-seeing truth, which theologians have been greatly prone to overlook. In it the great Teacher affirms that it is the duty of every subordinate teacher of his Gospel to bring out of his treasures things both new and old. Not the old only : for then progress would be impossible. Not the new only : for this would destroy that principle of continuity by which the works of God are linked together j but the new in union with the old, and the old in union with the new. Such a union it is the special glory of Christianity to have effected. Eevelation, as it is recorded in the Bible, has not been imparted to us at the first complete and entire, as a rigid code irrespective of the ever-changing conditions of humanity ; but it is a plant which has grown in a succession of gradual stages until its culmination in Jesus Christ, just as the Creator has effected His work through a succession of developments, each one of which has been closely interwoven with that which pre- ceded it, until it has culminated in man. In maintaining this analogy to the workings of God in nature Christianity stands in striking contrast to all other professed Kevelations ; and even to the opinions of no inconsiderable number of those who accept it as divine. Our Lord Himself affirmed 1 * 4 THE ORDER OP THE CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT, that He came not to destroy the law or the prophets ; but that on the contrary His purpose was to fill the ideal, oi which they only contained an imperfect outline, up to the very full. Hence it has resulted that Revelation has been historical ; and therefore it can be only rightly read and understood when it is contemplated in its historical aspect. Consequently Christianity does not consist of a mass of abstract doctrines or precepts, but of a body of historical facts, the proper meaning of which it is the function of theology to explain. But while Christianity presents no break in point of continuity with former revelations, it vastly transcends them, in the same manner as man who, in respect of his bodily frame is closely allied to the inferior animal races, is raised to an immense elevation above them, both intellectually and morally. It is hardly possible to over-estimate the impor- tance of this continuity of Revelation in relation to modern thought. The doctrine of continuity in nature is one of very recent growth ; yet continuity in religion was fully accepted as the mode of the divine working by those who composed the records of the Christian Revelation. Nothing is more certain than that they have linked together a series of gradually progressive revelations, each growing out of that which preceded it, without a single break in the con- tinuity of the historic chain. Such an analogy to what modern science affirms to have been the order of the pro- duction of the various forms of being which are possessed of life, is a very striking one ; and one which at the time when the New Testament was written, would have been beyond the reach of the shrewdest guess, and to which no other religion can put in a claim. The developments of the great religions now existing in the world are developments of retrogression; Christianity alone is a development of progress. "Many prophets and kings," says Our Lord, " have desired to see the things which ye see, and have not seen them ; and to hear the things which ye hear, and have not heard them." ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 5 Bat furtherj while every image employed by the great Teacher implies that the growth of His kingdt)m would be a slow and gradual process, it is no less clear that He felt assured that it would ultimately penetrate to the centre of humanity. If such be its characterj can we wonder that the Christian revelation should contain truths, of which the fulness, like the great works of creation and providence, can only be fully recognized after the lapse of time, and as the result of careful investigation ? That great reasoner, Bishop Butler, clearly perceived that it is only in conformity with the analogy of nature, that a book which has been so long in the possession of mankind as the Bible, if it contains a Revelation from God, should contain truths as yet undis- covered ; and that events, as they come to pass, should open and ascertain the meaning of Scripture ; and that such discoveries should be made " in the same way as all other knowledge is ascertained, by particular persons attending to, comparing, and pursuing intimations, scattered up and down in it, which are overlooked and disregarded by the generality of the world."* * I subjoin the entire passage. "And as it is owned tliat tlie wliole scheme of Scripture is not yet understood, so if it ever comes to be understood before the restitution of all things, and without miraculous interventions, it must be in the same way as natural knowledge is come at, by the continuance and progress of learning and liberty, and by particular persons attending to, comparing and pursuing intimations scattered up and down, which are overlooked and disregarded by the majority of the world. For this is the way in which all improvements are made by thoughtful men, tracing on obscure hints, as it were dropped to us by nature accidentally, or what seems to come into our minds by chance. Nor is it incredible that a book which has been so long in possession of mankind should contain many truths as yet un- discovered, for all the same phenomena and the same faculties of in- vestigation from which such great discoveries have been made in the present and the past age, were equally in possession of mankind several thousand years before. And possibly it might be intended that events as they come to pass should open and ascertain the meaning of several parts of Scripture." — Analogy, Part II., chap. iii. These remarks are worthy of the deepest attention both of theologians and men of science. 6 THE OEDEE OF THE CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT^ Of this prediction we in the present age are witnessing the fulfilment. Science and research of every kind are throwing hght on the pages of the Bible, and we are now viewing many of its supposed affirmations in an altered aspect. Astronomy alone has shown that many positions which were supposed in former times to be deduced from its phraseology, as infallibly certain, were utterly devoid of justification. Numerous others have shared the same fate. Who then can venture to affirm, with the history of the past before us, that additional light may not yet be cast on the contents of the sacred page ? Nay, the great apostle affirms that the fulness of the meaning of Eevelation will be only gradually unfolded during the ages of the future.* If the knowledge of the full meaning of Eevelation, like that of the created Universe, be thus slowly and gradually progressive, it is clearly our duty to accommodate our evidential position to our increasing light, instead of raising an outcry against evei-y fresh discovery of science, as if it was fatal to the claims of Christianity to be accepted as a divine revelation. If the principles which have been laid down by the foresight of the good Bishop, more than a century ago, had been kept steadily in view by theologians, a large proportion of those disputes which are now raging between theologians and men of science would have been rendered impossible. This power of self-accommodation to the ever -varying aspects of human thought which is possessed by Chris- tianity has a most important bearing on the general character of our evidential position. Nay, it forms one of the strongest proofs of the superhuman insight which was possessed by its Pounder, that He has not anchored his religion to the rock of the immovable, as has been done by others, but that He has founded one which is capable of adjusting itself to the entire condition of man. By doing so, he has become the Founder of the eternal religion of * Ephcsians i. 10. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 7 human nature. Such a religion must be capable of pre- senting itself J not in a single and unvarying aspect, but in a manifold and varying one ; and consequently the mode of exhibiting its claims which was fitted to one aspect of thought, must become unsuited to another, rendering it necessary that we should bring the new as well as the old out of our treasures. In considering this subject, it is clear that my first duty must be to institute an inquiry into what constitutes the inner life of Christianity, as distinct from its accessories, and the vehicle through which it has been communicated — what in fact is its essence ? The importance of rightly determining this cannot be over-estimated in reference to our mode of stating the Christian argument, for it is evi- dent, whenever we undertake to defend a position, that it is essential to ascertain what portion of the ground constitutes its key ; and on it to concentrate our entire force. What then, I ask, constitutes the essence of the Christian Revelation ? Is it a mass of dogmatic, or abstract truth after the manner of other religions ; or of reasoned truth, as elaborated by the various philosophic schools ; or is its essence to be found in its moral teaching, as numerous unbelievers are in the habit of affirming ; or is it an historic life, which constitutes its inner temple, and forms its dis- tinguishing characteristic — in fact, is it the manifestation of a divine being on the sphere of the human, who is the source of all the moral and spiritual power which it con- tains ? This question suggests another : — Must our defence embrace the wide range of everything which is contained in the Bible, in all the multifariousness of its contents ; or is there an inner temple of Christianity, which also con- stitutes its citadel and fortress, on which if we can maintain a firm hold we shall retain the command of the entire Christian position ? The answer to these questions will not only be of the highest importance in its bearing on our general conception of Christianity, but it will determine what must be the only 8 THE ORDER OP THE CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT, correct metiod of conducting its defence. Our entire evidences will require to be marshalled and arranged in con- formity with the views we entertain on this subject. To use a military metaphorj the extent of the ground which it is necessary to occupy, forms the most important consideration in the mode of posting the forces at our command. A garrison of five thousand men may be capable of holding a particular fortress against the most numerous army ; but if the lines are carried five miles in advance, they may be broken through at every point. Precisely the same is it with the defence of Christianity. If we confine it to its central position with the forces at our command its citadel will be impregnable ; but if we extend our defences over an indefinite mass of subject matter, only incidentally con- nected with it, and for that purpose proceed to enlist into our service reasonings of only doubtful validity, we shall thereby endanger our entire position. The question as to what constitutes the inner life of Christianity, is one which amidst the Babel of the sects that distract the Church, each with intemperate zeal propound- ing its own formulated system as constituting its essence, is one which at first sight might appear difiicnlt if not impossible to answer. Tet surely an intelligent reader of the New Testament, who perused it for the first time free from the prepossessions of theological systems would return no ambiguous reply. He would afiirin as a matter of certainty that one prominent idea pervades its pages and underlies every portion of its teaching — the divine person of Jesus Christ our Lord ; and that the central life of Chris- tianity, as it is there depicted, consists neither in a body of dogmas, or precepts, but in an historic life. This point is so obvious that it seems almost unnecessary to give a formal proof of it. Still as it is vital to my argument, and one which is so generally overlooked by popular theology' I must draw your attention to a few of its salient traits! What then are the points which would force themselves on the attention of my supposed reader ? They are indisput- ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 9 ably these. He would observe tbat the four most prominent treatises in the volume are four memoirs, whichf give a four- fold account of the actions and the teaching of Jesus Christ, by which he founded Christianity as a religion, and the Church as a Society. These evidently constitute the essence and foundation of the religion, for nothing can be more certain, than that every other portion of the New Testament presupposes the existence of this divine life as the founda- tion on which it rests. Next follows another historical work, which details to us the means through which the Church was constituted a visible Institution in the world. One idea is fundamental to the entire book, that Jesus is the Christ, or in other words, that He is the Ruler of God's spiritual kingdom, on which is founded the summons consequent thereon to men to enrol themselves as His subjects. To this idea, and to this pur- pose, all the other details of the book are plainly subordi- nated.* To these follow twenty-one writings of an historical cha- racter in the form of letters. They contain a mass of teach- ing, doctrinal and moral, pervaded and dominated by one idea which runs through them, that of Jesus as the personal Christ. While they contain doctrinal statements, it is worthy of particular remark that not one of them contains a formulated statement of what constitutes Christianity as a system of dogmatic or abstract truth. On the contrary, such doctrinal statements as are found in them, are wholly wanting in systematic form, and are evidently called forth * This is evidently tlie burden of the entire book, from the first opening speech, of St. Peter to the concluding one of St. Paul. The following passages are summaries of its teaching : — " And daily in the temple and from house to house they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus to be the Christ.'' (Acts v. 42). " This Jesus whom I preach unto you is Christ." (xvii. 3). "And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ." (xviii. 5). "To whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus." xxTiii. 23). 10 THE OEDEE OF THE CHRISTIAN AEQUMBNT, by tte special circumstances of particular communities of Christians to wliom the letters are addressed. But further, every one of them presupposes a Christianity already existing, and the obvious purpose of each letter is to explain it and to accommodate it to the state of thought and feeling as it existed in each particular Church. But throughout the entire contents of these letters, composed by six different writers, each of whom possessed marked mental peculiarities, one common idea unquestionably domi- nates — that of Jesus as the living personal Christ. Every doctrinal statement is made to have its focus in Him. Every moral precept has a vitality communicated to it by being referred to Him as the centre of obligation and spiritual power. Truth is propounded, but it is truth as it is in Jesus. Over all Christians he reigns by sovereign right. He is the supreme motive to holiness. He is Lord of the conscience. In Him centre all God's creative and providen- tial acts. The manifested revelation of God is His historic life and actions. He is a great spiritual power, capable of acting on the human heart with energetic might. I fully admit that these points are brought out in different degrees and aspects by these writers. Yet one common thread runs through the entire series. It is not too much to say of every writer that the idea of Jesus as the Christ interpene- trates and modifies his entire thoughts, whether doctrinal or moral. To this even the Epistle of James, where it is least apparent, forms no exception. Its predominance throughout these writings is no theory, but a fact, and forms the feature which distinguishes them from every other literary composition in the world. Of the dominance of this idea we have a striking example in the epistle to Philemon. In it St. Paul asks a personal favour of a Christian friend on behalf of a delinquent slave. That favour is asked in the name of Christ. There remains one other writing in the New Testament, the Apocalypse. "Whatever opinion we may form of the purpose of its author one thing respecting it is as clear as the existence of the ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 11 sun in the firmanent — that the great prominent idea which penetrates it from one end to the other is that of Jesus as the Christ living and reigning. The removal of this idea from the pages of the New Testament would reduce the residuum of its contents to a shapeless chaos. These facts then afford the most complete proof that the person of Jesus Christ constitutes the inner centre of Chris- tianity, and underhes its entire system ; and that everything else that is connected with it, occupies a position wholly subordinate to this its inner life. From this the inference is plain, that the Revelation which constitutes the essence of Christianity is not a body of dogmatic statements or pre- cepts, but the manifestation of that divine person whose actions and teachings are recorded in the Gospels — or in other words, that the essence of Christianity as distinct from its adjuncts, consists of a number of objective facts, which have actually occurred in the history of the world. Of these facts the original followers of Jesus were the witnesses and proclaimers, and, as far as light was communicated to them by the divine Spirit, the exponents to mankind. We must be careful however to observe that in accordance with their own statements, this exposition is far from having exhausted all their meaning, for the greatest of apostolic writers affirms that a greater unfolding of it is reserved for the ages of the future.* What then is the position occupied by the other books in the canon relatively to those which contain the objective * " Having made known unto us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself ; that in the dis- pensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and in earth, even in him." (Ephcs. i. 9, 10). "And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the Mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ, to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God ; according to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Ephes. iii. 8, 9, 10. 12 THE ORDEE OF THE CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT, facts which constitute Christianity ? The Acts of the Apos- tles convey to us information how that divine Society called the Church was instituted and established in the world, as a visible institution, through whose agency these facts were to exert a mighty influence on mankind, and also inform us as to the mode in which the minds of the Apostles became gradually enlightened as to their meaning and import. The character of the Epistles is clear. They make no profes- sions of being a dogmatic revelation ; but in every case they assume the existence of a prior Christianity, which had been communicated orally to the converts, and consisting of such facts of its Founder's life as proved Him to be the Christ, and which the writers endeavour to unfold, explain, and apply in accordance with the various emergencies of the primitive societies of believers. Oae of these Churches, that at Corinth, is expressly reminded by St. Paul, that the essence of the Christianity which he had proclaimed among them consisted of a number of such objective facts.* These writings are, in the strictest sense of the term, letters which were called forth by the special exi- gencies of those to whom they are addressed ; and in them the Christian revelation is unfolded, and adapted to the requirements, habits, and modes of thought of particular Churches, or individuals, who, having originally been Jews, proselytes, or pagans, had united themselves into a society, whose one bond of union was that Jesus was its Messiah and King. My position therefore is, that like as we have a great revelation of God in the created universe, which is the mani- festation of His eternal power and Godhead; as also we have a second revelation of God, made in the conscience and moral nature of man, which at the same time affords mani- festations of the moral character of the Creator, and forms the foundation of moral obUgation, so we have a third reve- lation of His innermost moral and spiritual perfections in •* 1 Cor. XV. 1-8. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 13 the person and work of Jesus Christ our Lord. This reve- lation may be briefly summed up as consisting of the Incar- nation and its results^ by means of which the moral and spiritual perfections of God have been exhibited in the actions and teaching of a divine man ; or in other wordsj in the lifoj deathj and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If this view be correct, it follows that the personal history of our Lord must constitute the citadel of Christianity, and must therefore form the key of the Christian position, on which, if we can retain a firm hold, we shall remain masters of the entu'e ground; and other points connected with Christianity will assume their due place and proper subordi- nation. But if this cannot be maintained, the most suc- cessful defence of the remaining contents of the Bible will be so much wasted labour. On this point therefore the defence of Christianity must be concentrated. It is evident if this view is correct, that the proof that the inner temple of Christianity consists in the personal manifestation of Jesus Christ in the sphere of human history, is of the highest importance in reference to the position which ought to be taken by the Christian advocate. But such a proof can only be supplied by an examination of a large number of passages in the New Testament. If I were to do so in the body of this Lecture, it would swell it to an undue length. I will therefore adduce the full proof in a Supplement ; and assume for the purpose of this argu- ment that the essence of Christianity consists neither in a body of dogmas nor of precepts, but in a personal history which constitutes a manifestation of the divine on the sphere of the human. This being so, to prove that Christianity is a divine reve- lation, it will be only necessary to establish two points. First. That the person of Jesus Christ is not a manifestation of the ordinary forces which energise in man, but of a power which is superhuman and divine. Secondly, that the account which the Church possesses of 14 THE OEDEE OF THE CHEISTIAN ARGUMENT, His life, teaching, death, and resurrection, is not an ideal creation, but a body of historic facts. In determining the extent of the position which must be occupied by the defender of Christianity, it is of the highest importance that we should keep clearly in view the distinc- tion which exists between Revelation on the one hand, and inspiration and theology on the other. On this point great confusion of thought has prevailed; and the result has been that the line of our defence has become dangerously extended. The wide extent of the position, to the defence of which the Christian advocate is supposed to be com- mitted, forms one of the strongholds of popular unbelief. It is also undeniable that theology has in former ages claimed, as its legitimate domains, whole provinces of thought, from which it has had to beat a retreat before the steady advance of scientific knowledge. It will probably have to retire further still before it occupies its rightful position. Such retreats have been attended with disastrous results ; and with the experience of the past before us, I must claim the right — it is in fact our duty — to separate the defence of Christianity from every question which is not vitally connected with the Christian position, and to confine it to the historic facts, which form the foundation on which the Church has been erected, and the inner life of Chris- tianity, as a great moral and spiritual power, is based. The consideration of the inferences deducible from these facts is the proper function, not of the Christian advocate, but of the scientific theologian. The relation in which the popular theories of inspiration stand to science, and their bearing on Christianity as a divine revelation, I shall consider in the concluding Lecture of this course ; at present it will be only necessary for me to offer a few brief remarks on the distinc- tion between Revelation and Inspiration. I have already shown that the innermost temple of Christianity, around which the whole might of our defence must be concentrated, is the objective fact of the Incar- nation, and the historical truth of the divine life as ITS EXTENT A\D LIMITATION. 15 recorded in the pages of the Evangelists. But in addition to this great fundamental revelation some of the writers of the New Testament claim to have been the subjects of special revelations, by which the meaning of the great facts which constitute the essence of Christianity was imparted to their minds. These revelations, however, differ widely from that of which I have been speaking ; and it is very difficult to lay down a clear distinction between them and the gift which we commonly call inspiration. Thus St. Paul affirms that he received his knowledge of the great principles of Christianity by revelation, and that he did not derive them from any human source.* In other cases we can discover clear traces of the presence of a human element. Thus the slow and gradual influence of the Spirit unfolded to the leaders of the Church what constituted the essential principles of Christianity as distinct from the Judaism in which they had been born and educated. This we know from the history to have been brought about, not so much by a direct infusion of light and knowledge into their minds as by the leading of the events of Providence. Of this we have a remarkable illustration in the account which is given us of the mode in which the enlightenment of Peter was effected, which led to the reception of Cornelius into the Church. In it Peter's reason co-operated with the divine enlighten- ment. A vision was the immediate agent, of which several events of Providence suggested the interpretation. Of a * Thus he writes, " But I certify you, brethren, that the Gospel which was preached of me is not after man ; for I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ " (Gal. i. 11, 12). Again, " How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery, as I wrote before in few words, whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the Mystery of Christ" (Eph. iii. 3, 4). This latter passage implies that the two former chapters may be received as the record of this revelation. Both passages, however, definitely affirm that its subject matter was strictly limited to the communication of Christian truth, and involved no enlightenment beyond its limits. 16 THE ORDER OF THE CHRISTIAN AEGUMENT^ similar character was the revelation made to St. Paulj which led to the first preaching of Christianity in Europe. This forms a remarkable illustration of the relation in which such revelations stood to the ordinary action of the faculties of those who received them. The command to pass into Europe was not one which was given in direct terms. The historian tells us that St. Paul proposed to open a mission in two other places ; but that he was hindered by the Spirit. On arriving at Troas he saw a vision of a man of Macedonia standing by him, and saying, Come over into Macedonia and help us. From these circumstances the historian tells us that they assuredly gathered that the Lord had called them to preach the Gospel to them ; or in other words, that it was not a direct revelation of the Spirit, but an inference from the vision, united with the fact, that they had been forbidden to preach in two other places. In this case, as in St. Peter's vision, the divine and the human elements are quite separable from one another, the duty of passing into Macedonia being a rational inference from the divine facts. How far this was the case in the other revelations spoken of by St. Paul, we have no means of judging. Both these modes of communicating truth may be desig- nated revelations. Theoretically, therefore, the New Testament may be said to contain the record of two species of revelations — one, the record of those objective facts, which form God's great moral and spiritual revelation of Himself in the person of Jesus Christ — and the other, the commentary made by its authors on those facts, as far as their meaning was revealed to them by the Divine Spirit. This latter, however, is so mixed up with the question of inspiration that for all practical purposes it is inseparable from it; and must therefore be dealt with on the same principles as a branch of scientific theology. It will now be necessary for the purpose of defining clearly the limits of our evidential position 'to consider the relation in which theology stands to Revelation. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 17 If I have correctly laid down the two previous positions, that Revelation consists of the objective facts, *on which Christianity is based, and in a secondary sense, of the disclosures made to Apostolic men respecting their nature and meaning, it follows that the position of theology in relation to Christianity must consist in the elaboration of a '' body of systematic truth out of the facts and data furnished by Revelation. For evidential purposes it is of the utmost importance to keep this distinction clearly in view, and thereby to guard against that widely-spread confusion of thought, which identifies Christianity as a revelation with Christianity as a theology, and has led to the almost in- definite extension of the position which it is supposed to be the duty of the Christian advocate to defend. A.s a clear perception of the nature of this distinction is of the highest importance in relation to my argument, it is necessary that I should define the position which I take with the utmost clearness. I observe, therefore, that theology as a science must stand in the same relation to the facts of Revelation as the physical sciences do to the facts of the Universe. The function of these latter is to investigate the facts, to formulate them, and to evolve out of them the truths which they contain. Precisely similar is the function of theology to the facts of Revelation. These form its data. The duty of the theologian is to perform for them an office similar to that which the scientific investigator does for the facts of nature. This being so, the same methods of in- vestigation must be applicable to each, as far as is con- sistent with their difierent subject-matter. Both must involve rational processes ; both will be liable to the intrusion of human error ; and their successful study will be dependent on the employment of a proper method of investigation. The distinction, therefore, between Christianity as a revelation and Christianity as a theology, becomes clear. Christianity as a revelation consists of those objective 2 18 THE OKDEE OP THE CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT, facts through which God has manifested to man his moral and spii-itual character. Christianity as a theology consists of a body of formulated truths elaborated by reason out of those facts as its data. It wiU be objected that, in running this parallel, I overlook the necessity of the influence of the Divine Spirit for the purpose of illuminating the heart and the understanding in the study of theology. I by no means do so. The Baconian method teaches us that physical truth can only be success- fully studied by first dissipating those dark mists, and the various idola, which naturally brood over the human under- standing, and its founder has elaborately described their nature and character. Precisely analogous is it with the successful study of the data furnished by Revelation. Here even darker mists enshroud our understandings, which must be dissipated before our mental powers can be successfully applied to the study of Christian truth. One of these pre- conditions is a willingness to do the will of God.* We aU know how the progress of scientific knowledge has been impeded in the past by the prepossessions of those who devoted themselves to its study. Witness the failure of the acutest intellects of the ancient world to penetrate the arcana of the Universe. Similar prepossessions are equally fatal to the appreciation of Christian evidences and of Christian truth. The attention of many of the students of the physical sciences may not unfitly be directed to the closeness of the analogy j and they may well be- asked to consider whether some of their methods of dealing with Revelation are not due to prepossessions and idola * Such a precondition for the efEectual appreciation of Eevelation is distinctly laid down by Our Lord. " If any man will (ekXy wills, is earnestly desirous of doing) do God's will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God, or whether I speak of Myself" (John vii. 17). This, though pre-eminently true of religious truth, is apphcable to every kind of truth, except perhaps the evidence of mathematical demonstration. The ethical readiness to accept it is a precondition of its perception. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 19 whicli darken their mental vision^ in the same majiner as in former ages the same causes have rendered theologians insensible to the realities of physical truth. But the dissipation of these beiag presupposed in both cases, it follows that in the same manner as physical science is the result of the application of our rational powers to the investigation of the phenomena of the Universe, and mental science results from their application to the facts of mind, and moral science to those of our moral nature and con- science; so theological science is the result of the application of our reason to the data furnished us by Eevelation.* Li each case our reason is fallible, and we are liable to draw erroneous conclusions, from which fallibility neither theolo- gians nor scientists can claim exemption. In by-gone ages the latter have propounded erroneous systems in abund- ance. Can it be said that theologians have not fallen into similar errors ? Or at the present day have we any right to claim an infallibility for our various theological systems, and after the manner of the sects stake the life of Christianity on their truth ? Our only safeguard is so to profit by the errors of the past as to lead us to employ better methods of investi- gation in the future. But let it be observed that like as the errors of philosophers and scientists are unable to obscure the great truth that the Universe is a manifestation of the eternal power and Godhead of the Creator, a truth which will ever be recognized by the unsophisticated heart of man, * NotHng is more dangerous to the Cliristian. cause than the outcry ■R-hich various schools of popular theology are in the habit of raising against the use of reason in religious investigations, and the mode in which it is constantly spoken of as opposed to faith. Such persons would do well to meditate on the following passage of Bishop Butler : " I express myself with caution lest I should be misunderstood to vilify reason, which is indeed the only faculty we have wherewith to judge concerning anything, even Revelation itself, or to be misunder- stood to assert that a supposed revelation cannot be proved false from internal characters." — {Analogy, Part II. chap, iii.) Eeason is not a perfect light, nor an infallible guide ; but as it is the only light and guide which we possess, we shall not improve our condition by extinguishing it. 2 * 20 THE OEDEE OF THE CHEISTIAN ARGUMENT, despite all the theories of atheism and pantheism, so the errors of theologians are unable to hide from us the still greater truth that the moral perfections of God clearly shine forth m the person and work of Jesus Christ our Lord. In making these observations, I by no means wish to deny that the Apostolic epistles contain a theology in a rudimen- tary form. But viewed in relation to the present subject, the important point to observe is that they are a commentary on the facts of Eevelation in a very unsystematic form, just as it was called forth by the exigencies of particular Churches, and that they also form our sole record of the subordinate revelations through which the meaning of the great facts of Christianity was communicated to the primitive beUevers. I am aware that there is also another theory, which affirms that these revelations and their meaning have been handed down by the traditions of the Church, and secured from errors by the permanently abiding presence in it of the divine Spirit. But to discuss this question would be to enter into a controversy which has neither limits nor bounds. Its indefinite character alone must exclude it from forming a portion of Christian evidences. Christianity must on other / grounds be accepted as a divine revelation before it is pos- sible to accept the theory in question. My position, therefore, stated generally is. Revelation is throughout essentially divine; systematized theology is a human science. This being so, the ground which must be occupied and defended by the Christian advocate becomes clear and definite. It is not the wide range of Christian theology, nor any par- ticular theory as to the mode in which Revelation has been communicated, nor as to the degree of inspiration which has been afforded to those by whom its record has been com- mitted to writing ; but the proof of the actual presence of a divine element in Christianity. My duty is to show not only that the facts are true, but that the divine is manifested in them. All other considerations stand extraneous to the subject-matter of these Lectures. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 21 If this position be correctly taken, tlie points.of contro- versy between those who affirm and those who deny Christianity to be a divine revelation, are brought within definite limits. We are saved from the necessity of wander- ing over an indefinite range of subject-matter. Numerous controversies now raging have only an indirect bearing on the real point at issue. This, I repeat, is. Have we evidence that there is a manifestation of the divine in Christianity ? If this be so, it must be a divine revelation, and a matter of unspeakable importance to mankind. Under the inflaenoe of increasing light, whether derived from the study of the Universe, or as Butler has pointed out, of the facts of Reve- lation itself, we may have to change many of our theo- logical positions, as inadequate exponents of its great realities; but the great fact that God has spoken, and is still speaking to man in Jesus Christ will remain untouched. Such being the case, it will be desirable that I should enumerate a few of the questions which lie outside the position which the defender of Christianity is called upon to occupy. It is necessary to do so, because the identification of a large number of questions now eagerly debated between Christians and unbelievers with the truth of Christianity itself, not only in the popular mind, but by many earnest inquirers, is one of the chief causes by which the faith of multitudes has been shaken in the present day. This is the reason why I have been careful to lay down the distinction between Christianity as a revelation, and Christianity as a theology. If the view above taken is correct, the whole range of formulated theology, except as far as it is a matter of direct and positive revelation, is extraneous to the question whether Christianity is or is not a divine revelation. The determination whether its statements are legitimate de- ductions from the facts of Christianity, belongs to scientific theology, and will not afEect the divine character of the facts themselves. In a similar manner, various questions con- nected with the origin of the books of the Old Testa- 22 THE OEDEE OP THE CHEISTIAN ARGUMENT, ment, and tteir correct interpretation, however profoundly interesting in a theological point of view, form no portion of our evidential position. The defender of Christianity is by no means called upon to prove that they are free from philosophical, scientific, or historical errors, or even from moral imperfections. To use an illustration borrowed from Paley, it is most unwise to stake the truth of Christianity on our ability to prove that every miraculous narrative recorded in its pages must, beyond all controversy, be accepted as an historical fact. To do this, would involve the defender of Christianity in the necessity of maintaining the truth of some special theory of inspiration, against which it is impossible at the present time too earnestly to protest ; for its identification with certain theories extensively popular forms one of the strongholds of unbelief. So likewise I accept Paley's general positions, that the Christian advocate is only concerned with the Old Testament so far as portions of it have received the direct sanction of Our Lord. I by no means overlook the importance of these questions as far as they bear on the elaboration of a true Christian theology ; but they must not be allowed to be mixed up with the all-important question, whether Christianity contains a mani- festation of the divine, or whether it has been the mere evolution of those moral and spiritual forces which energize in man. To do so is to weaken our position by indefinitely extending it ; a movement which can only be profitable to our opponents. For the same reasons a number of very interesting ques- tions respecting the New Testament which have been made the subjects of most eager controversy form no portion of the position necessary to be maintained by the defender of Christianity as vital to its truth. It is a matter of compara- tive unimportance in reference to the real issue whether Lysanias was tetrarch of Abilene in the year when John the Baptist commenced his ministry; whether Cyrenius was twice governor of Syria; whether Our Lord cured one or two demoniacs at Gadara, or one or two blind men at ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 23 Jericho J or tlie precise mode in which Judas died. The successful solution of these and multitudes of similar ques- tions would afford an additional confirmation of the historical accuracy of some of the writers of the New Testament. But such points are often discussed as if the life of Christianity was involved in them^ whereas the only point which they really involve is the truth of a particular theory of inspiration. Nor is the question whether each Gospel was written by the person whose name it bears, nor the actual date when its contents were first committed to writing, material to the present issue. Nor is it necessary to prove that the quota- tions from the Old Testament in the New are accurate renderings of the meaning of the original, nor that the logic of the Epistles is always accurate, when estimated according to our scientific forms of reasoning.* These, and a number of other questions, are profoundly interesting in a theological point of view; but they have no direct bearing on the all-important questions, whether there is evidence that a superhuman power has manifested itself in Christianity; whether the great facts on which Christianity is based were historical realities; whether the Resurrection of Jesus Christ is a fact, or the belief in it originated in the * I have selected several of these questions, because they are those by means of which modern unbelief directs some of its sharpest attacks on Christianity as a divine revelation. This indefinite exten- sion of our position is simply to play into the hands of our opponents. They naturally prefer to raise side issues, instead of deaUng with the centre of the Christian position. Thus nothing is more common than to raise questions about miracles generally, and the imperfection of the attestation of this or that particular miracle, instead of dealing with the one great evidential miracle of Christianity, the Eesurrection, on the reality of which its truth rests. If they could prove that this was a fiction, they would force the entire Christian position. If it is a fact, Christianity will remain intact, notwithstanding aU their attacks on the other miraculous narratives in the Bible. It must be confessed, however, that the defenders of Eevelation have greatly encouraged them m this practice, by not insisting on confining the issue to the discussion of this one great question. 24 THE OKDEE OF THE CHRISTIAN AEGUMENTj hallucination of His followers. If all these things can be firmly established, it follows that Christianity must be a divine revelation; and we can afford to wait for the solution of the minor difficulties with which it is attended. To lay down clearly the distinction between points which are essential, and those which are non-essential to the defence of Chris- tianity, is at the present day of the highest importance ; because a wide -spread opinion prevails, that many of the questions that are eagerly discussed in theological contro- versies are essential to its truth. Thus ordinary Christians have been led to believe that such questions as — Whether St. Matthew was the author of the Gospel that bears his name; whether the writings of Isaiah consist of two portions, one of which was composed at an earlier, and the other at a later date; whether the Pentateuch in its present form was written by Moses; whether the commonly-received Chronology of the Old Testament is, or is not accurate; whether the book of Daniel was composed by the prophet of that name, who lived during the Captivity; whether it is possible to weave the narratives of the Evangelists into an harmonious whole; whether the references made by the earlier Fathers to events in the Evangelical history are citations from our Gospels, and not from others which must have closely resembled them — that all these, and a multitude of similar questions, are so bound up with the acceptance of Christianity as a divine revelation, that they must stand or fall together. Men hear that a vast number of accepted beliefs on these and similar subjects, have been called in question by persons of profound learning, and their faith in Christianity is shaken. What is the cause of this ? The true answer is that popular theology has widely diffused the belief that a number of points which are really non-essential to Christianity as a divine revelation are vital to its defence. Unbelievers have not unnaturally accepted this position, and in consequence have loudly proclaimed that the belief in Christianity as a divine revelation is no longer tenable. The assumption that ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 25 the defence of this wide extent of matter is essential to the Christian position, is unquestionably one of the causes which has led to that wide-spread shaking of belief which prevails at the present day. The whole question, however, as to the nature and validity of our popular theories of inspiration is a subject of which I must defer the con- sideration till my concluding Lecture. My position, therefore, is, that the ground on which the whole of our defences must be concentrated, is the historic reality of the life of Our Lord, as it has been handed down by the traditions of His primitive followers; and that this life has exerted a unique and superhuman power throughout the last eighteen centuries of history. Before, however, I can address myself to the direct proof of this, it will be necessary to consider the relative value of the evidences themselves, the order in which they should be stated, and the modifications in the mode of treatment which are rendered necessary by the requirements of modern thought. 1. The proof of Christianity has been hitherto based on what is called its miraculous attestation. Miracles have been placed in the forefront of the Christian argument, and other evidences have occupied in it a very subordinate position. This is the line of reasoning which modern apologists have all but unanimously adopted. An opinion however is becoming widely diffused among thoughtful men, that this mode of putting the argument is unsound. I am fully aware of the weight of the authorities who have taken the opposite view to the one which I feel it to be my duty to propound in these Lectures ; and who have concurred in placing the evidence of miracles in the forefront of the Christian argument. Of these Paley may be cited as a crucial example. Subsequent writers have followed closely in his steps; and have contented themselves with adduc- ing proof of the possibility of mii-acles, or with strengthen- ing his central position. Some of them, however, have handled the moral argument far more effectually than it has 26 THE OEDEE OP THE CHEISTIAN AEGUMENT^ been done by him j for the principles of his moral philosophy necessarily rendered his treatment of the moral aspects of Christianity inadequate. I am not aware that any modern writer has suggested the necessity of a complete change of front in our evidential position, although many have attached a far higher value to the moral aspects of Christianity, as evidences of its truth. As however it seems to me that the whole exigencies of modern thought render such a change of front absolutely necessary, I will briefly give reasons why I consider that the moral evidences of Christianity ought to occupy the first place, and its miraculous attestation the second, in the Christian argument. But as the three following Lectures will chiefly be devoted to the consideration of what I shall designate the moral miracles of Christianity, it will be necessary that I should briefly explain the meaning which I attach to this expression. Our evidential treatises restrict the term miracle to an occurrence in the physical universe the origin of which cannot be accounted for by the action of its ordinary forces. From such an event is inferred the presence of a power or force of a different order, capable of energizing in them, directing, controlling, and bending them in such a manner as to eiiect a particular purpose, and to bring about a result different from that which would have taken place from their ordinary action. Such an event we designate " a miracle ;" and from it we infer the presence of a superhuman power. But why the expression should be limited to occurrences of this kind as constituting the sole divine attestation of Christianity it is difficult to say. Surely there is an order in the moral and spiritual world no less than in the material. Moral and spiritual forces act no less in conformity with moral and spiritual laws than the forces which energize in the physical universe act in conformity with physical laws. If deviations from the accustomed order of the one, or the occurrence of events which cannot be accounted for by the action of any of its known forces, prove the presence of a divine power ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 27 SO must similar phenomena in tlie moral and, spiritu a worlds be manifestations of the energy of a superhuman power. Such manifestations I shall designate "moral miracleSj" by which I mean, events occurring in the moral and spiritual world, for the origin of which none of its known forces are sufiB.cient to account. If I can prove that such manifestations have taken place in connection with Christianity, it will be evidence that a superhuman power has manifested itself in it. This being so, the all-important question will be, Are we able to verify in connection with it the presence of such a superhuman power in the history of the past, or in the facts of the present ? If we can, I con- tend that it wiU afford a far stronger proof of its divine character than that which can be supplied by miracles wrought in the physical universe, which require a long and compHcated chain of historical reasoning to establish their truth. Much confusion has been introduced ftito our reasonings about miracles by the practice, which has been common to both the opponents and the defenders of Christianity, of using a number of ambiguous terms, so that it has become diflBcult to express oneself with precision on the subject.* A brief allusion to them is all that will be necessary in this place. Even the word " Supernatural " itself is one which it is almost dangerous for a theist to employ. When we use it to denote God^s mode of action in connection with a reve- * It is worthy of notice that a large proportion of the arguments em- ployed by the author of " Supernatural Religion " against miracles are founded on the ambiguous senses in wtioh. tbe various terms employed in the Christian argument are used. To this their entire plausibility is due. The inconclusiveness of his reasoning is obvious enough to close logical thinkers ; but unfortunately the great majority of the readers of such works are not such, and the large number of editions through which this work has passed proves that on them its influence has been sufficiently telling. This alone shows the import- ance of not allowing our strength to be wasted on a number of side issues, but of confining our defence of Christianity to its great central position. 28 THE OEDEE OF THE CHEISTIAN AEGITMENTj lation, as distinguished from other modes of the divine activity, we run no little danger of making the covert assumption that God is not everywhere energizing in the j ordinary forces of the Universe by which we are surrounded ; a view which is not only opposed to all sound principles of Theism, but one to which the writers of the Bible are entire strangers. If one thing is more certain than another, it is that the whole series of these writers view the forces of nature as manifestations of the energies of God. In fact the modern distinction between the Natural and the Supernatural is to them unknown.* This confusion has originated in the various senses which have been assigned to the words "Nature," " Natural," and their derivatives, and from the ambiguous use of the word " law," not only to denote the invariable sequences of events, but also the mode of the action of the forces which energize in the Universe. The all-important question on which the entire controversy turns is. What do we mean by " Nature," and what class of phenomena do we include under it ? Thus if we confine the words " Nature " and " Natural " to matter, its necessary forces and laws, we denote by them a definite class of phenomena; but if we include under them man, his freedom, his intellect, and his moral and spiritual being, we mix up with the former phenomena of a wholly different class and order. But these terms have been used by both sides in this controversy, as though they had a clear and definite meaning, and thus various classes of * This may be affirmed absolutely of the writers of the Old Testa- ment. Thus in the Book of Psalms the energy of God is represented as being quite as much manifested in the daily course of nature as in the miracles of the Exodus. This is not quite so apparent in the New Testament, in which the references to the forces of nature are compara- tively rare. But whenever Our Lord refers to nature in His teaching, He uniformly recognizes in it the presence of His Father. According ■^ to the Bible both the energies which are constantly exhibiting them- selves in the Universe, and the phenomena which we designate miracles, are ahke manifestations of the divine activity, the one differ- ing from the other merely in their mode of action. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 2 phenomena fundamentally distinct have become mixed to- gether in hopeless confusion. A similar result haS followed from the habitual use of the term " law," to denote both the invariable sequences and the forces that energize in the material Universe. Can any one wonder at the confusion of thought which has arisen in consequence ? The importance of this subject will render it necessary that I should consider it more fuUy in a supplement to this Lecture. This confusion of thought in which the whole question of miracles has become involved is a sufficient justification for placing what I have designated the moral miracles of Chris- tianity in the forefront of our evidential position. But this change seems to me to be imperatively called for by the fol- lowing reasons, in order that we may adapt our evidential position to the requirements of modern thought. All its requirements point to verification as the great test ^ of truth. The entire history of discovery has proved that theories which are incapable of being submitted to this test have failed to conduct us to the realities of things. Hence has arisen a great difficulty in the way of accepting as actual occurrences such events as, being without counter- parts in the modern world, require that their truth should be established by a long and intricate chain of reasoning, owing to the danger that exists, that among its numerous links there may be flaws which have escaped our observa- tion. The habits of reasoning which lie at the foundation of modern science have all tended to confirm the opinion that facts which can receive no kind of verification either in the realities of the present or in the palpable historical events of the past can only be accepted as true on an amount of evidence which is practically demonstrative. Whether this position be right or wrong, it is unquestion- able that such is the tendency of modern thought. This has introduced a difficulty into the proof of miracles, which was little felt in former times, as from the nature of the case they cannot be subjected to any species of verification. Very different, however, will it be with those manifestations 30 THE ORDER OP THE CHRISTIAN ARGUMENT, of a superhuman power energizing in the moral and spiritual worlds, which I shall claim for Christianity. I shall prove that they can be clearly traced in the history of the past, and in the facts of the present, in connection with the person of Jesus Christ, and the Church which He has founded. The facts are plain and simple, requiring no long or intricate historical proof to establish their truth, but admit of an easy verification. As their reality is indisput- able, the only question that can arise is. Are they manifes- tations of a superhuman power, or can they be accounted for as the results of the known forces energizing in man ? On this point I shall appeal to your judgment in the following Lectures. Their verifiable character alone forms a sufficient reason for placing them in the forefront of the Christian argument. 2. As miracles, in the sense in which that term is employed in evidential treatises, do not take place in the present day, the only mode of proving their occurrence in former times is by a chain of historical reasoning which involves the necessity of carefully weighing and balancing a large number of intricate probabilities which constitute our historical argument, a process which requires a special training for its due appreciation. In one point of view it must be conceded that modern thought has increased the value of miracles as evidential to a divine commission, if we could either witness them ourselves, or their occurrence could be proved by demonstrative evidence. In the present day our belief in the invariability of the forces of the material Universe, and in the continuity of nature, is of the strongest kind. We are firmly persuaded that this con- tinuity is only capable of being interrupted by the Creator, or by one delegated by Him. To us, therefore, if an indu- bitable miracle could be performed before our eyes, it would have the highest evidential value, as afi'ording indisputable proof of the intervention of a Being distinct from, and superior to, the forces of the material universe, i.e. God. But very different were the ideas entertained on this subject ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 31 in former ages. The belief was then all but universal, that other beings were able to interfere with and modify its forces at their pleasure. Consequently, to persons who held such opinions, a miracle only offered evidence of the presence of a superhu.man, and not of a divine, power; and its evidential value was diminished in proportion to the prevalence of this belief. As in Our Lord's days the belief was wide-spread that demons were capable of ex- ercising this power. He habitually appealed to the moral aspect of His miracles in proof that they were wrought by the finger of God. But while the course of modern thought thus assigns a higher evidential value to miracles, on the supposition that their proof is rigid and exact, this ad- vantage is far more than counterbalanced by the rigid exactitude of the proof which it requires. Nothing sets this difficulty in a stronger light than the prevailing tendency in modern times summarily to reject any account of the occurrence of a miracle without even deigning to inquire into the evidence on which it rests ; and this feeling is far from being confined to unbelievers. The Church of Rome professes to possess a continuous miraculous attesta- tion ; but whenever we hear of a Romish miracle we set it aside at once without troubling ourselves to inquire into its evidence. This tendency is in some degree increased by the unquestionable fact that this Church has encouraged the belief in miracles which are notoriously false, and therefore stands before us in the character of a convicted impostor. Still we entertain much the same feelings with respect to all similar accounts, be they reported by whom they may. Men would now accept the reahty of a miracle only on the very strongest evidence that it was not the result of delusion or imposture. From these difficulties moral miracles are exempt. The difficulty which was felt in resting the jiroof of the divine origin of Christianity on miracles alone is shown by the line of reasoning for the most part adopted by the early 32 THE OEDEE 01 THE CHEISTIAN AEGCMENT, apologistSj who lived in daily contact with the heathen, when they endeavoured to recommend Christianity to their acceptance. It is evident that with them miracles occupied a very different place in the controversy from that which has been assigned to them by modern writers. One feels a difficulty in beUeving that if Paley's argument had been placed before a Father of the second or third century, it would have commended itself to him as an efficient mode of persuading an unbeliever to embrace the Christian faith. With them the moral aspects of Christianity preponderate over the miraculous, as the chief means of winning the assent of the heathen to the Gospel. 3. The usual proof which is adduced for miracles in our common evidential treatises consists in marshalling a very complicated mass of historical evidence, requiring a course of special training for its due appreciation. This alone forms a sufficient reason why it should not occupy the van of the Christian position, while other evidences, capable of a more direct appreciation, are equally available. It is evident that the number of those who have either the ability, the time, or the means of sifting a body of evidence of this description, is comparatively small, and consequently all that others can do, is to take it at second-hand. For example: one of the necessary media of proof for this purpose is to establish the authenticity and genuineness of the Gospels by quotations from the Fathers. A mass of evidence of this description involves the careful balancing of a large number of probabilities, and in the case before us their complication is considerable; and of the effect of the whole the ordinary reader feels himself to be a very imperfect judge. But the whole current of modern thought is steadily moving in an opposite direction. It justly refuses to rest its religious convictions on the authority of others, and demands, on a subject of such profound importance, evi- dence the value of which each individual can estimate for himself. I merely adduce this as one out of many difficulties in ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 33 which the historical argument, as it is usually set forth, is involved J and which render it highly dangerous to rest upon it the chief weight of the defence of Christianity. The entire field of evidence, as we know, extends over a large body of literature, and fully to estimate its value requires the exercise of a practised judgment. This alone constitutes a decisive reason why, if we can adduce proof of the operation of a superhuman power in Christianity, capable of easy verification in the history of the past and in the facts of the present, we should assign to it the place which the argument from miracles now holds in our ordinary evidential treatises.* 4. The evidential value of miracles operates less strongly on a large number of minds at the present day, because we have not only to prove that those who have reported them honestly believed that they witnessed them; but that they * It has not been sufficiently observed that evidence which may at some former period have been perfectly satisfactory as proving a divine commission to those to whom it was vouchsafed, may have lost much of its force by lapse of time. It is one thing to witness a miracle, and from it to infer the presence of a divine power, and quite another thing to believe, as the result of carefully balancing a long and complicated mass of historical testimony, that a miracle has been performed at some distant period of time. Besides, as many of the witnesses die without leaving any record of then- testimony, the evidence is less powerful to us than it must have been to contemporaries, who had the entire evidence before them. It follows, therefore, even if it could be proved that miracles formed the chief attestation of Christianity in the Apostolic age, that it is by no means a necessary result of this that they should form its sole and all-commanding attestation eighteen centuries after they have ceased to be performed. Christianity, however, possesses this most remarkable characteristic. Precisely in propor- tion as its miracles have diminished in evidential value through lapse of time and the complicated methods thereby rendered necessary to prove their occurrence, the evidence derived from what I have designated its moral miracles becomes stronger and stronger, being testified to alike by the history of the past, and the facts of the present. Christianity is in fact the only religion in the world, the moral evidence of which increases by lapse of time. Contrast with this Mahometanism, the moral evidence of which, if it ever had any, is steadily diminishing. o 34 THE OEDEE OF THE CHEISTIAN AEdUMENT, were at the same time not labouring under any of those mental hallucinations which have unquestionably led persons under their influence to mistake the subjective creations of their own imagination for objective realities. Modern re- search has proved that such phenomena are not uncommon ; and that they have exerted no inconsiderable influence in originating many of the delusions of the past, which were once assigned to the effect of deliberate imposture. Not only is it the case that a large number of occurrences have been reported as true, which rational men now refuse to accept as objective facts ; but some of them rest on an attestation far stronger than would be necessary to establish the truth of an ordinary event. In several cases the honesty of the reporters is unquestionable. Consequently the only way of accounting for the belief in them is to assume, that under certain states of mental hallucination, the reahty of which has been fully recognized by modern science, they have mistaken impressions purely subjective for external realities. The importance of this is increased, because it is a well ascertained fact that persons are capable of labouring under delusions on particular subjects, while in other respects they are mentally sound. This principle has been applied as the explanation of some well attested narratives of miracles in past ages, the honesty of the reporters of which it would be difficult to controvert, but the reality of which it would be equally difficult to believe. But we need not wander over the ages of the past for examples of well attested miraculous narra- tives. At the present day the recently reported miracles in France, which, while they rest on a very high form of attestation, probably none of us accept as objective realities, are instances in point. Still more so are the phenomena of spiritualism, occurring as they are alleged to do, in the very midst of us. These latter, as far as mere attestation goes, unquestionably rest on one which is extremely strong. Their reality is affirmed, not only by large numbers of persons of every variety of mental cultivation, but by men ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 35 who have been accustomed to estimate legal evidence^ and by some who deservedly hold a high rank in departments of physical science, and cannot but be well acquainted with scientific processes of investigation. As their honesty is unquestionable, and on the supposition that they are not the dupes of fraud,* which in some cases is highly impro- bable, it follows that if the phenomena which they believe themselves to have witnessed are unreal, their belief in them must be owing to their having mistaken subjective im- pressions for external realities. I have selected the case of spiritualism as an illustration, because it is evident that if we view the question as one of attestation pure and simple, banishing all other considerations, some of its phenomena rest on a testimony which is unusually strong. I propose to discriminate between it and the evidence of Our Lord's resurrection when I discuss the theory of visions in my seventh Lecture. My object in noticing the subject here is to point out the difficulty and complexity which the existence of such beliefs imports into the historical argument, if we view it as a simple question of attestation. It has now therefore become necessary to show, not only that the reporters of miracles believed that they actually witnessed them, but also that it was impossible that, in accordance with the explanations which an eminent scientific authorityf has given of some well-attested spiritualistic phenomena, the belief could have originated in mistaking subjective im- pressions for external realities. It would be absurd to shut our eyes to the fact that the proof of miracles which have occurred in the distant past, if we view the question exclu- sively as one of testimony, is rendered far less convincing to a considerable number of minds by the existence of wide- spread delusions of this description, of which men of un- * I state this on the authority of Dr. Carpenter. While he attri- butes a large number of these phenomena to fraud, and others to mes- meric influences, he is of opinion that there is a considerable residuum ■which it is impossible to refer to imposture as their cause. t Dr. Carpenter's Mental Physiology. 3 * 36 THE OEDEE OF THE CHEISTIAN AEGUMENTj questionable intelligence, and no small amount of scientific eminence, are a prey. Still further: it complicates the entire question by imposing on us the necessity of clearly discriminating between the evidence of the Christian miracles and those which, although they rest on a strong attestation, we reject as unrealities. These considerations alone furnish the strongest reason why the argument from miracles, as it has been usually stated, should no longer occupy the van of our evidential position, but that it should give place to one which is capable of verification, namely, the superhuman action of Christ in history. 5. Our increased acquaintance with the power of the mind to produce important re_sults by its action on our bodily frames has tended to produce in many a distrust in the evidence of miracles alleged to have been wrought in distant ages, the precise character of which it is now impos- sible to submit to such a rigid scrutiny, as we would any miracles alleged to have been performed at the present day, before admitting their reality. The limits of this power are unknown ; but it is unquestionably extensive and capable of producing results which to ordinary minds would seem miraculous. The eminent physiologist above referred to* has expressed his belief that the stigmata, alleged to have been produced on the bodies of some media3val saints, were realities, and that a purely mental influence is adequate to produce them. On such a point I can only quote his authority J but it is unquestionable that within certain limitations, the power is a real one, and capable of produc- ing results which in former ages would have been deemed miraculous. This being so, it places a certain class of cures in an ambiguous position, and deprives them of much of their value as evidential miracles. It is clear, however that while some of the miracles recorded in the New Testa- ment may be referred to influences of this kind, others lie quite beyond the power of any action of the mind on the * " Mental Physiology." ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 37 body to have effected. Still it cannot be denied .that sucb phenomena^ the belief entertained by large numbers of intelligent men in the phenomena of spiritualismj and other kindred delusions^ and the existence of a considerable number of well attested miraculous narratives in the history of the pastj the objective reality of which it is impossible to admit, have tended to weaken the force of the argument from miracles, and to increase the difficulty of proof, render- ing it necessary, if the entii-e weight of the Christian argu- ment is to be made to rest on it, clearly to discriminate between the evidence of the one set of miraculous narratives and of the other. The complexity of such an argument is, I think, a sufficient reason why we should place a body of evidence which admits of an easy verification in the fore- front of the Christian position, and assign to that of miracles a collateral and subordinate one. By way of illustration of my general position let us sup- pose a well informed missionary, endeavouring to win over to the acceptance of Christianity an intelligent Hindoo Theist, well acquainted with all our modern objections. Is it conceivable that he would begin by placing before him the argument from miracles, as it is set forth in our common evidential treatises ? Ought he not rather to place in the forefront of his reasoning the moral and spiritual aspects of Christianity, assigning the first place to that mighty energy which eighteen centuries of history testify to be centred in the person of its Founder ? To take the former course would not only render it necessary for his proposed convert to enter into the discussion of all the a priori difficulties with which the question of miracles is attended, but also to undertake an intricate and laborious historical investigation, not only for the purpose of esti- mating the value of the evidence in favour of the Christian miracles but of discriminating between them and the mass of false miracles with which history abounds. To plunge an intelligent heathen into a vast range of inquiries of this description would surely be very unlikely to result 38 THE ORDER OF THE CHEISTIAN AEGUMENT, in his speedily embracing the Christian faith. But if the order in which the Christian argument is placed m our common evidential treatises would be an unwise mode of placing the claims of Christianity before an intelligent heathen, it surely cannot be a right mode of presenting it for the conviction of unbelievers, the confirmation of waverers, or the strengthening of the Christian in his faith. In making these observations, it is by no means my inten- tion to depreciate the argument from miracles, which I hope to show in subsequent Lectures to possess a real value when assigned to its due place, in proper subordination to that course of reasoning which the exigencies of modern thought imperatively demand. For this purpose, therefore, in conformity with Our Lord's precept, " to bring out of our treasures things both new and old," I propose in the three following Lectures to state the outlines of the argument which I contend should be placed in the forefront of our evi- dential position. In the next three, I propose to examine the argument for miracles with a view of strengthening those portions of it which the results of modern investigation have shown to be defective. My last Lecture will be devoted to the consideration of the value of existing theories of inspira- tion and the relation in which they stand to modern science. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 39 SUPPLEMENT I. The position which I hare taken, that the essence of Christianity as distinct from its adjuncts, consists not in a mere body of abstract doctrinal statements, or moral pre- cepts, but in the manifestation of Jesus Christ, his teaching and historic life, is so important, whether we view it in its apologetic or in its theological aspect, as to render it desirable to adduce a larger body of proof in support of it than would have been possible to bring forward in the Lecture itself. I have affirmed that the Christian revela- tion is not only made by Jesus Christ, but consists in his person, his actions and his teaching : in other words that he is an actual manifestation of the divine in the sphere of the human, revealing to us the innermost aspect of the moral and spiritual character of God, as far as it can be conceived of by finite intelligence. If this position is correctly taken, it has not only a most important bearing on our evidential position, but on the entire range of Christian theology. On the latter subject however I must not enter ; but confine my observations to the former. If the writings of St. John form a legitimate portion of the New Testament canon, the truth of this position must be considered as firmly established. I will therefore adduce the chief points of the evidence which they supply. The introduction to the first epistle affirms in the most direct terms that the Christian Eevelation is made in the historic life and actions of Jesus Christ ; that this constitutes the truth which underlies the entire letter, and that its subsequent portions were intended to unfold it, and to form a commentary on it. " That which was from the beginning," says he, "which we 40 THE OEDBR OF THE CHRISTIAN AEQUMENTj have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, concerning the Word of life ; for the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and show unto you that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us. That which we have seen and heard declare we ■ unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us ; and truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ. And these things write we unto you that your joy may be full.'^ Nothing can be more explicit than this statement. The following points are either directly affirmed in it, or dedu- cible from it by the strictest rules of logical inference. 1. That the subject on which the author of the Epistle was going to address those to whom he wrote was " con- cerning the Word of life,'' whom he identified with the historic Jesus. 2. That this " Word of life " was from the beginning, having existed prior to the manifestation of Jesus Christ in history. 3. That this diviae life which dwelt in the Logos was manifested to men in the person of Jesus Christ by the Incarnation. 4. That this divine life took so substantial a form that the Apostle had seen it with his eyes, looked upon it, and handled it with his hands. Further, he had had the testi- mony of his ears to the reality of this divine manifestation : for he had listened throughout the period of hi3 ministry to its heavenly utterances. 5. That the actions and teaching of Jesus Christ consti- tuted this divine life of the Logos, which was originally with the Father, and in Jesus Christ became manifested to men. 6. That the great end and purpose of his Apostolic ministry was to testify to the reaHty, the facts, and the teachings of this divine manifestation. " We have seen it, and bear witness, and show unto you that eternal life which ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 41 was with the Father, and was manifested unto us." Now the only mode in which it was possible for the Apostle to "show that eternal life" to others was by furnishing details of the actions and teaching of that person in whom it was exhibited. Consequently, as he affirms that his Apostolic ministry was a bearing witness to it, it must evi- dently have consisted in furnishing to those to whom he minis- tered details of its manifestation, and in commenting on their meaning. From this it follows that the details of this divine life which the Apostle communicated to the Church formed the essence and foundation of the Christianity which he taught. 7. The communication of what he had seen and heard, was capable of imparting to those to whom it was addressed, communion with the Father, with His Son Jesus Christ, and with one another ; in other words, it formed the bond which united the Church together and the basis on which it rested. Nothing can be more explicit than these statements. They prove that the ApostoKc writer certainly viewed the Christian Eevelation as consisting in the Incarnation, and the historic manifestation of the divine character and perfections in the Hfe of Jesus Christ. " The life was manifested and we have seen it, and bear witness." This is his fundamental conception of Christianity, which forms a striking contrast to the modern popular conceptions of it which are usually designated "plans of salvation." With statements thus ex- plicit it will be superfluous to adduce farther evidence from the Epistle that such were the views of its author, for the entire writing is a commentary on it with the introduction as its text. The concluding words will be sufficient. " We know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an under- standing, that we may know Him that is true, and we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life." Words cannot be more explicit. I now proceed to consider the testimony furnished by the Gospel. Its author makes the following affirmations in the prologue : — ■" In the beginning was the Word and the Word 42 THE OEDEE OP THE CHEISTIAN AEGUMENT, was with God and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him (Travra Si avTov iytviTo), and without Him was not any- thing made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness and the darkness comprehended it not." ..." And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth." ..." No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him." The passage here quoted, with its context, makes it certain that the author's conception of what constituted the fundamental essence of Christianity was : First, that all manifestations of the eternal Father were communicated through the divine Logos. Secondly, that He was both the life and the light of men. Thirdly, that He became man in the person of Jesus Christ. Fourthly, that the glory which shone forth in Jesus Christ in the Incarnatioa was the glory of the only begotten of the Father, of whose perfections, incomprehensible to finite in- telligences. He is the sole and adequate manifestation : or, to put the same thought in other words, Jesus Christ in His human manifestation is the objective revelation of the God- head. Fifthly, that this revelation was an objective revelation. The Apostle in his personal intercourse with Jesus Christ had beheld in Him " the glory of the only begotten of the Father," whose life and actions had been the revelation of the Father to men. Such statements can leave no doubt that the writer of this Gospel viewed the essence of the Christian revela- tion as consisting in the person and work of Jesus Christ our Lord, His teaching. His life, death, and resurrection. And not only is this so, but he has represented Our Lord as affirming the same truth in the most decisive lan- guage, of which the following are instances. "Philip saith ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 43 unto Him, Lord, show us the Father and it sufiSceth us. Jesus saith unto him, have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip ! he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father, and^ how sayest thou. Show us the Father. Believe Me, that I am in the Father and the Father in Me."— John xiv. 8-11. If these words are a real utterance of Our Lord, nothing can be more conclusive than that He claimed to constitute revelation in His own person. They form a reply to a direct request made by Philip for a revelation of the Father. " Lord show us the Father, and it sufficeth us \" Our Lord in express words affii'ms that He constituted such a revelation, " He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father." " From henceforth ye know Him, and have seen Him." " Believest thou not that I am in the Father and the Father in Me." No words could convey a more direct affirmation that the apostles during their con- verse with Our Lord had beheld in His works and character a perfect revelation of the Father. Again, Jesus stood and cried, " he that believeth on Me, believeth not on Me, but on Him that sent Me, and he that seeth Me, seeth Him that sent Me. I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth in Me should not abide in darkness." — John xii. 44-46. Again, " I am the light of the world ; he that followeth Me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life." — John viii. 12. " Then said they unto Him, Where is Thy Father ? Jesus answered. Ye neither know Me, nor my Father, for if ye had known Me, ye should have known my Father also," — viii. 19. "If I do not the works of my Father, believe Me not, but if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe the works, that ye may know and believe that the Father is in Me and I in Him."— (x. 37-38). These passages all affirm the same truth, that the perfec- tions of the Father are manifested in the person of Jesus Christ. He is the revealer of the Father; in fact. He affirms that be that sees Him, sees Him that sent Him ; and that the knowledge of Him is the knowledge of the Father. 44 THE OEDEE OP THE CHEISTIAN AEGUMENT, In this capacity He is the light of the world, and the light of life. These assertions, when put together, constitute a most direct affirmation that He is the objective reTelation of God. The author of this Gospel also ascribes to Our Lord a number of other assertions respecting Himself and His relation to the Father, all of which presuppose the same truth, but which it will be unnecessary for me to cite. A similar view runs through the entire writings of St. Paul. The passages which assert that Eevelation is made in Christ are exceedingly numerous, and what is greatly to the purpose, the allusions are not only direct but incidental, and made in every variety of form. Of these latter I cite a few examples as showing the extent to which the conception underlies the whole range of the Apostle's thought. "God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself," 2 Oor. v. 19. " For of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption, that according as it is written, he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord." 1 Cor. i. 30, 31. In whom we have redemption. Bph. i. 7. In, whom we have attained an inheritance." i. 11. " The spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him." i. 17. The working of God's mighty power "is wrought in Christ." i. 30. "In Christ, ye who sometimes were afar off are made nigh." Bph. ii. 13. "In Him were all things created." Col. i. 16. "In Him should all the fulness {i.e. the fulness of the divine perfections), dwell." Col, i. 19. " Jw wTiom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge." Col. ii. 3. "Te are complete in Him." Col. ii. 10. "The grace of our Lord was ex- ceeding abundant with faith and love in Christ Jesus." 1 Tim. i. 14. " Live godly in Christ Jesus." 2 Tim. iii. 12. "The redemption that is w Christ Jesus." Eom. iii. 24. " The law of the spirit of life in Christ Jesus." Eom. viii. 2. "I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus." Eom. xiv. 14. "The veil is done away in Christ." 2 Cor. iii. 14. " We preach Christ Jesus the Lord." 2 Cor. iv. 5. ." The glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." 2 Cor. iv. 6. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 45 Ml these passages in various forms affirm that Rev.elation was given in the person of Jesus Christ ; and their incidental ' character proves the intense familiarity of the idea to the Apostle's mind, far more than a number of directly dogma- tical assertions. They exhibit it as directly forming the basis on which his religious life was founded. They are consistent with one idea, and with one only, that Revelation was given in his person. Equally important are some of his assertions when speaking of the progressive character of revelation, and of the purposes formed in the divine mind respecting it. These must be considered in greater detail. Thus we have the remarkable assertion in Rom. xvi. 25, 26. " Now to Him who is of power to stablish you according to my Gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began (ev alwvioig xpovoig, in the eternal ages), but now is made manifest, and by the Scriptures of the prophets according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith." This passage enunciates the following truths : — 1. Revelation is no afterthought of the Divine mind, but a part of His eternal purpose, forming with creation one great harmonious plan. 2. It has been kept secret as a hidden truth {iivcsT^piov) in the divine mind during the eternal ages, but has been manifested in the proclamation of Jesus the Messiah (ev KYipVJfiaTL 'Il)(ToO XptOToiJ). 3. That this revelation is made known to all nations for the obedience of faith ; and is a manifestation of the wisdom of God through Jesus Christ. In conformity with this view the Apostle at the very commencement of the epistle declares that the subject of his writing was " concerning Jesus Christ our Lord." In Ephesians iii. 8-11 he makes the following statement: — " Whereof (the Gospel) I am made a minister according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me, by the effectual 46 THE OEDEE OF THE CHEISTIAN ARGUMENT, working of His power. Unto me wlio am less than the least of all saints is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world (otto tujv aliovwv) has been hid in God who created all things by (tv) Jesus Christ, to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord.'^ Similar assertions occur in chap. i. 8, "Wherein He hath abounded towards us in all wisdom and prudence having made known to us the mystery of His will according to the good pleasure, which He purposed in Himself, that in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are in earth, even in Him That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the know- ledge of Him . . . according to the working of His mighty power which He wrought in Christ." These passages are so important in relation to the present argument that I will enunciate in as many distinct proposi- tions the various affirmations which they contain. 1. They affirm that the Eevelation made in Jesus Christ formed one of the eternal purposes of the divine mind, coeval with those which produced his work of Creation ; in fact that Creation and Eedemption form portions of the same great whole, and that the latter is not a mere remedial measure superinduced in consequence of the failure of the purpose intended by the former. 2. That the Incarnation is the manifestation of this eternal purpose existing in the divine mind. 3. That unsearchable riches both of wisdom and goodness as yet undisclosed in God's creative work, were manifested in the incarnate Christ. 4. That so entirely coeval in the divine purposes are ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 47 Creation and tlie divine self-manifestation in Ohrjstj that the creative work of God itself was given in Him " Who created all tilings in Jesus Christ." 5. That the purpose and effects of the Incarnation are not limited to man, but on the contrary^ it is intended to be a manifestation to " the principalities and powers in heavenly places of the manifold wisdom of God." 6. The ultimate purpose of the Incarnation is^ that God might " in the dispensation of the fulness of the times gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, in Him." The views thus propounded by the Apostle stand in striking contrast to various schemes of salvation which have become widely diffused by the influence of popular theology, and which profess to give a complete rationale of redemption. Their general theory is that the revelation of God in Jesus Christ is a kind of afterthought in the Divine mind, to remedy the failure of His original creative purpose, occasioned by the Fall J in fact, a scheme devised for the mending His marred plan of Creation. StiU coarser views of the divine plan in redemption have been extensively popular, exhibiting it in the vulgar form of a bargain between two independent parties, each of whom has thereby become bound to perform his part of the contract. The whole has proceeded from the assumption that it is possible accurately to represent the purposes of the Divine mind in the formularies of human thought. Such theories belong to that worst form of rationalism which makes man and his imperfections the accurate measures of the divine purposes and modus operandi, being closely analogous to that which in a lower stage of mental development is the parent of idolatry, and which has invested deity with some of the worst attributes of human nature, representing God as altogether such a one as our- selves. These assertions of the Apostle as to the extent of the divine purposes in Revelation are of the utmost impor- tance in relation to the subject before us, for nothing has more damaged Christianity with thoughtful men than the 48 THE OEDEE OP THE CHRISTIAN AEGUMENT, idea whicli has been so generally adopted by various forms of popular Christianity, that these so-called schemes of salva- tion, not only embody the Christianity of the New Testa- ment, but are co-extensive with the divine purpose in Revelation. Assertions of a similar character are made by the Apostle in the Epistle to the Colossians. Thus he writes: "In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the for- giveness of sins, Who is the image of the invisible God, the First-born of every creature (tt/j lur oroKoe iraariQ KThiwg, the First-born before all creation) ; for in him (Iv avT(^) were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities or powers, all things were created by (8i avTov, through Him), and for Him (d^ avTov, in reference to Him) ; and He is before all things, and by Him (tv airq', in him) all things consist : and He is the head of the body, the Church, who is the beginning {apxV) the principle of things) the first-born from the dead, that in all things He might have the pre-eminence. For it pleased the Father that in Him should all the fulness dwell ; and having made peace by the blood of His cross, through Him to reconcile all things unto Himself, through Him, whether they are things on earth, or things in heaven." Col. i. 14-20. Again : " That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledging of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. As ye therefore have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him, rooted and built up in him and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving. Beware lest any man spoil ou through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, for in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily, and ye are complete in him which is the head of all princi- pality and power." Col. ii. 2-10. ITS EXTENT AND LIMITATION. 49 These passages make it certain that the Apostle, contem- plated the person of Jesus Christ as the objectiTe revelation of the Godhead. On this point he lays down the following propositions : — 1. That the fulness of the divine perfections abides in the Incarnate person of Jesus Christ our Lord. 2. That He in His incarnate person is the image (eikoiv) of the invisible God. 3. That all creation has been constituted in Him, not only this world, but the entire Universe of Being. 4. That He is the instrumental agent (Si avrov) through whom the creative work has been effected : that it has been formed in reference to Him ; and that He had a prior exist- ence to it. 5. That the same person who has been the source of Creation, the instrument through whom it has been effected, and the purpose towards which it tends, is He through whom the revelations of the Father have been commimicated, and who has carried out the great work of Eedemption. 6. That through the work of Redemption it is the divine purpose to reconcile all things unto Himself, whether things on earth, or things in heaven. This last assertion proves that according to the views of the Apostle the effects of the Incarnation were not limited to the human race, but would be consummated by uniting to God all things in heaven and earth. These propositions if accepted as the genuine utterances of the Apostle Paul, fally prove that according to the views entertained by him, the person of Jesus Christ our Lord constitutes the great objective revelation of God, which has manifested forth the divine character during the past and the present, and is destined still further to unfold it in the ages of the future. It is true that the genuineness of the two Epistles which contain the most definite aflBrma- tions on this point has been disputed by a number of unbe- lieving critics, for which one of the chief reasons is theii- advanced Ghristology. But although the statements in the 4 60 THE OEDEE OP THE CHEISTIAN AEGTJMBNT, ofcHer Epistles are somewhat less definite in form, the occa- sion and purpose of writing them not having called them forth with the same definiteness, yet there are statements, both in the Epistle to the Eomans and those to the Corin- thians, and even to the Galatians, which prove that the Apostle regarded the Christian revelation as centred in the person of our Lord. The reference which I have above made to these Epistles is far more than sufficient to prove that their author entertained the same views as are more formally enunciated in these latter vrritings. Whether Paul or any one else was the author of the Epistles to Timothy, these likewise contain a strong affirmation of the same truth. "Great," says he, "is the mystery of godliness, God (or who) was manifested in the flesh." If we suppose these Epistles to have been the work of another writer, this would prove the wide acceptance of this view of the essence of Christianity in the Church. I have not yet referred to the opinions of the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, on account of the doubts as to its authorship. It is, however, important, because, if not written by the Apostle, it proves that the Pauline and Johannine views on this subject were accepted by other sec- tions of the Christian Church ; for whoever may have been its author, its early date is unquestionable. For this purpose it will be sufficient to cite the opening of the first chapter : " God, who at sundry times and in divers manners {TroXvixtpiog koi TroXvTp6ir