CEM EL Lyre rey LENZ £ eed OR) E AAAS AAA
Hoey
SEER ee
SS eM EOR NG. COAICUGS
; As ay ee MS
A
oy
So
ee
roe
SF
ee
ws
a ee A OOS 8 EE Ie * Tepe ee
ANA Aad > : x ¥ OAK: COE
PRY POG ES Ay Aa eae Aes AICS? EM 14 GS 4 1k ee
, ety nee a nets KER EAL EASE MC A ws Prarie, , « ? Si aatos SN ‘A RRS ReAe Nn
Surrcvalatstabbnretstelvonstrtey te CAS Receiteeuseeosns mrnrene aS Aah Das velinate
eR eS J Rat re Ak
EA Aud RA Rare A ea Weel otar eters
aa BERS AM ESAs Seesehastihes SSNS
Peryiet ERP EEEE ASSESSES OOCICIE KOM KIC
VHP PI bs CAPA PC SP Ter aeans y PA Ar ig : See eee eS
Seana ko BESOCEOL KAUR SA SSIS
prety eT Soe Ss beaks cee Ahh
Pv tet SESE ASS ad Sade ee Oa pate
aes MASE CEC OLE SERENA AA I BEERS RONG
HERA EMA RSG & SOOGC K
’ x4 he
4 Lk wy) {
AAA BAAS AES yoy ,) Bete
KSA
Dore teyty
KEKE
VINK he
Oat eed
Pe EM He et
Le AAG S + Aa
a ‘ ses ROGER GGG
Asse Me rer rierer eye sé \ , »
AM Py ‘ Dobos ARK ES aye i ERIE
Pye. SAE SAR EAR SK A PEECBER
ay ; Peers.
7 AL
reyes
Se
in ee 4
tax
ak
* Ae eer *
REAR ESE
F PP alo oeaonts
MER EEE REECE
EEEEEE LEE RCERE SR CRERRE
CEEOELS eee Weer RIE
HED 4 CER EOOOOOO OO NCE
Oe A eS OOK AD DO AR AR AAA
KEE ACEC OEL TSI DOI.
erry OOD . Pete BOC OOo
, + T Pe , ve
ISK MI
Cote vi.
BRE MECE BEER EGE
MMe eA tek uy teta att aryeary
Ne : MAK st
ts Eee
Doty At Ai BREE a
Py irshieee HpaI AG
Rs Pye PLP, PP yr ’ ’ Seige
Prey ENR aenadaend
ee ey NOES ST OSE Oe SE OK oe ok
ai PRP PP, sag hehe Porat avatar ay SAY ahaha
rete evar ECAR AREAS
of
hes athenenae ? OCR AK
PR RVR ea RE kotidateesacueies et
ty tite be) eaieatnt yr) SeeaseTe Pyaar yaaa?
POLK PLR
Rite are tits
AA ACOA RS SECOCOOCCCELT Troe
RRM NEE UMAR A REEL br piaratatarar ar braco)
COCO Oe DEO COO UOC G OC
SCCOCCHOOLOES ¥ > opp apap DOT oS
COO Ee a ee > COECECOCOOCCOCOOG HOG COGCOCUCCUGE
BEERS A RR ARE 2 BOC OOC OC Or is APP at aS Pata aha a,
Sona es os Beene
Poverty: eS SR
a tanaarr neers ») Mpc uens
SE OCG CASES BASE ae Ps OCG oe
Seance mere eee Ue ta AACE RCERECLEES
fe Ree Reeaseheeesase oy, SATA Oat
iar ye watptarniatern pre nes arava :
Pry yt wae yearns * araral x COC
VERRIER ERE Re a OCNALSEDC®,
ete PAPA Ras hasei sates ¢ EECOLOG
Ag Beets ete os
Wd SEC IES ea
eS
rope hens
eatireratatataeae nate
ot 9)
CCE SEES i
oe Oe oe et 8 ee iA ay
y eo E*
MON Raceeaeoceeseads » ; ot
toterat atetatararerel eve
SQCGECCG GUO)
Sh hb hb bbb ed
OER OBOE
PD RED MOLE Pee 7 , S COUCOS
RAR RRR hey stvataltet SeSeSeSeneSecesa CATES
BAR OQGUUR GALE GG Tare Peo oat Pa aT of ot ovarar enor an
CORRS OUR SE SERCRCSCECES SEEK GEOG
ye Y,
MARR AS : : :
Stee ee ae t ac :
Eee ei , se
Seat CII
avers re ies bey RARE
IY Brarateralelacate OS) ORC OOCOERLEL +
5
y
oe
Sa
4
; at ee
SPIES SE A as ests
SESS SGC Saree sae SOON
oe pr pe . . aoe
SE GOCE SACU CC eenuceeanet EBL IOLE
BOSE OCOCRCOG ee x
; cea seid ce ete
* CESSES ne
uw,
nS
‘SY,
NA EES
MM SELL
RIGOOOCN
oy)
SO,
¥ ry
yar
Hr
<2 ih
er
Me 5
eee RRA
LS do DED TeLarereCer ace:
gia Soha Se PST PF
Gs Q Se’ Aras! Gi
bE NS NY
LOCEOCCOCCEEC
Wat
Pe Se
pe, Fel?
POR aS
Pyar
SESE ESE
GASES
Lava
Bases
°
Sas
i,
Neves
Sara S
pa a ape i
PUR tay
amas
AANA ANAT ES
LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
PRINCETON. N. J.
PRESENTED BY
The Wi cow or F George Dugan, - AG
uO BAe, L892 VE Ons }
Living papers on present day
themes |
ie eae
Dit Fo
wh ro) c
oe
LIVING PAPERS
SEND FOR A LIST OF CONTENTS FOR ENTIRE SERIES.
A Library of Critical Learning.
LIVING PAPERS ON PRESENT DAY THEMES.
3 haat volumes should be in the library of every thoughtful
reader.
The set cannot but be desired as soon as their worth is known.
The subjects treated are the leading topics of the day, and the
writers are acknowledged authorities on the particular themes |
discussed.
You can in no other shape add to your library so much valuable |
material with so small an expenditure.
Note the remarkable list of names included among the contributors.
PRINCIPAL CAIRNS, Rev. James IverAcn, M.A.,
Rev. C. A. Row, A. H. Sayce, M.A.,
W. G. BLAcKIE, D. DLL Ds Rev. J. RapForp TuHomson, M.A.,
PREBENDARY Row, M. AL Rev. Wittiam ARTHUR,
Rev. NoAH PorTER, iby De Sir W. Muir,
Canon RAWLINSON, Rev. A. B. Bruce, IBD
S. R.- Pattison, F. ven Sy ALEXANDER MACALISTER,. MA; Mops
Dr. FRIEDRICH PFAFF, Rev. G. F. Mactear, D.D.,
DEAN OF spe apd it Rev. J. STouGHToN, D. Ds;
HENRY yeas D.D. Rev. McCuEyne Epear, M.A.,
f Rev. F. WILKINSON, M.A., Rev. Joun Cairns, D.D.,
Fe Luccz, |e) ba BY Sir J. Witiiam DAwson, EARS:
Rev. W. G. ELMsLIE, M.A., Rev. W. S. Lewis, M.A.,
DEAN OF CHESTER, — Rev. Joun KELLY,
| J. Murray MitcHe i, LL.D., Rev. M. KAUFMANN, M.A.,
F. Gopet, D.D., CANON GIRLDLESTONE,
Eustace P, ConbeER, M.A., D.Ds And others.
| The above set is put up in a neat box and will be sent, post paid,
| to any address on receipt of price.
10 Volumes, per set, $10.00.
| New York :: FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY :: Cuicaco
PREV UNG PA
ON
wy
i
present Day Tyemes ——
e
CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES, DOCTRINES
AND MORALS
VOLUME IX.
FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY
NEW YORK 5 CHICAGO
30 Union Square: East 148-150 Madison Street
Publishers of Evangelical Literature
Ph eA CE.
ny this Volume fresh contributions are made to the
branches of the Present Day Series, devoted to evolu-
tionary speculation, comparative religion, and the place
and claims of Christ. Two Tracts on questions relating to
the Lord’s Day, and one Tract on the Conflict with Unbelief
generally appear. Dr. Cairns shows, in a very convincing
manner, the incredibility of the various attempts that have
been made to trace Christianity to a merely natural origin.
Mr. Lewis shows how Revelation and Science concur in
establishing the claim of Christ to be the Crown of the Past
and the Key of the Future, and draws the inference that
He is moreover the Creator of all.
Dr. Murray Mitchell treats the subject of ancient, but
now extinct religions, and shows the unique position held
by the Jewish religion among ancient forms of belief, and
the relation of Judaism to Christianity.
The Tracts on the Lord’s Day are by Sir Wiliam
Dawson and Dr. Maclear. The former discusses the days
of Creation, the true nature of the Sabbath law, the change
and significance of the day, and draws some practical
conclusions. The latter founds an argument for the reality
v1 Preface.
of Christ’s resurrection on the continuous observance of
this day by Christians from the very beginning.
The Editor of the Series gives a bird's-eye view of the
whole conflict, the spirit of the combatants, the attitude of
the different classes of opponents to Christianity, the chief
points of attack and defence, and glances at the nearer
and more remote issues of the conflict. The references
given in this Tract to the various numbers of the Series
will make it serviceable as a guide in the use of the
Present Day Tracts. :
Two of the writers, Mr. Lewis and Mr. Kelly, contribute
to the Series for the first time.
The evidence of the great usefulness of these Tracts
which comes to light from time to time, and the wide
acceptance they have met with everywhere furnish abun-
dant reason for gratitude to God, and encourage the
Society to go forward in this work, with the hope and
expectation of still fuller and wider blessing upon it.
October, 1887
CONTENTS.
“Sse ete
XLIX.
IS THE EVOLUTION OF CHRISTIANITY FROM MERE
NATURAL SOURCES CREDIBLE ?
By tux Rey. PRINCIPAL CAIRNS, D.D. LL.D.
me
THE DAY OF REST IN RELATION TO THE WORLD
THAT NOW IS AND THAT WHICH IS TO COME.
By Sir J. WILLIAM DAWSON, C.M.G., LL.D., F.R.S.
Lt.
CHRISTIANITY AND ANCIENT PAGANISM.
By J. MURRAY MITCHELL, M.A., LL.D.
: Lil.
CHRIST AND CREATION: A TWO-SIDED QUEST.
By THE Rev. W. SUNDERLAND LEWIS, M.A.
¢
Ll.
THE PRESENT CONFLICT WITH UNBELIEF: A SURVEY
AND A FORECAST,
By THE Rev. JOHN KELLY
LIV.
THE EVIDENTIAL VALUE OF THE OBSERVANCE OF
THE LORD’S DAY.
By THE Rev. G. F. MACLEAR, D.D.
q a a ae — 7 a
. wte SaKs . . eh ak et
ey ira il a oN oi a AR SI!
; be dB Va yh ttt no ie 2 ae ten
Milpehicd Manne aldo se
maa del ¥ np ss y
J se thr Se ee
‘
¢ 4) 4 tie en A ty i i be oe of
1)? 3 Ka ee coh at col racks é,
ue , fey ky 4 ,/ ee Sere j et
‘y. ior , 3 t *
” he % al > , wer
pene Se ied Shes
hee: aha eel a iy Mierel
ace feat fete Se ee TBI ‘ 5
ee iyi ea ae. Bee ee oe Wey
he ' “fey 4 *y Ty %, 2 De aA de SiR ee ul
: R * co xe As wt ly ab .
ue Na pare ey 3 Wierd Wd oy a a
- j . Pe Sf - te aire s. wh th . s
P P « “h + * rid
ea oe te ry wg Green SSA eS ¥ ria
‘ 5.4 --pae : - 0. TN) aes See oe
a i TSS at ea
: a a SI SA Rip ee SD cee es %
cs i ps fd & Ae es ,
: : 5 1 Ree
2 bee > i oe
: ¥ * € oe i.e ate * ee ’
eae wS¥ ry
ibe rry oo Ts ‘ ie =, aa re) b
« rae eh aan ha 3 A
) : ey Po eae’ Ma f dS
7 PL A
oe 4 wt” ae ie.
eke ; Se Fre IES
id } p . a alee
“ t yy 2 ne Cer ne tn of
BRA hg pe ie ne eee
$ : UN a sie
+ ad
~
eves
aA
IS THE
EVOLUTION OF CHRISTIANITY
MERE NATURAL SOURCES CREDIBLE?
BY THE
REV. JOHN CAIRNS, D.D.
Argument of the Cract,
eormme QUI NR te
‘THE main sources to which evolutionary speculation traces
Christianity are examined, and it is shown that it cannot be
derived from Greek philosophy, because the resemblances
between Christianity and Platonism are found chiefly in that
which is not peculiar to Christianity ; that they, taken as a
whole, amount only to the theistic and ethical pre-suppositions
of Christianity ; because the distinctive doctrines of Christianity
are not to be found in Platonism,—the Incarnation has no
place in it,—the Atonement is not foreshadowed in it,—the
doctrine of grace, especially in regeneration, has no forecast in
it,—there is no Holy Spirit, and so no provision for the new
birth as the beginning of the kingdom of God in it; nor does
Platonism contain any foresight of the life and work of such a
Saviour as enters into the substance of Christianity.
It is further shown that Christianity cannot be derived in a
‘merely human and natural way from the whole of Jewish
literature, including the Old Testament, the Apocrypha, and
the Talmud, taken together as a mere human formation. ‘The
system of Strauss is examined, as the most celebrated discus-
sion of this question in recent controversy.
Its inadequacy is shown, because the scheme credited by
Strauss is not Christianity in the proper sense. The Christ
of Strauss is incongruous—a defective moral teacher, with a
sense of failure and shortcoming toward God, yet capable of
aspiring to do the work of a Messiah. Strauss’s theory of
Christianity subsequent to the point at which Christ left it is
proved to be artificial, inadequate, and inconsistent.
It is shown also that Christianity cannot be derived from
the Hellenic Judaism of Alexandria, of which Philo is taken
as the representative ; because the doctrine of the Messiah in
the teaching of Philo bears no proportion to its place in the
Old Testament ; because the doctrine of Atonement is almost
wholly lacking ; because Philo’s doctrine of the Logos in rela-
tion to God is wavering and uncertain, and the relation of the
Logos to redemption is very scantily set forth by Philo.
The hopelessness of the failure of the most plausible natural-
istic theories of the origin of Christianity, and the unique and
impregnable position of Christianity is pointed out.
[S THE EVOLUTION OF CHRISTIANITY FROM
MERE NATURAL SOURCES CREDIBLE ?
—S1FPeir—
re ce Lace eta a
vow @ ELIEF in Kvolution asa principleof natural
i = é science has recently made rapid progress
59 44| and has been supposed to be capable of
solving the greatest physical difficulties.
Its range has hardly yet been made so extensive in
the spiritual world; and it is rather in the adven-
turous way in which old problems are dealt with,
than in any absolute novelty of method, that any
change is visible. It has always been felt to be
necessary to give some plausible account of the origin
of Christianity short of its divinity. The genesis of
systems is a part of history; and if history by the
application of its ordinary methods cannot explain
this religion, as it does all others, on mere natural
- principles, it must recognise a miracle. Has this
task then, on the anti-supernatural side, been ac-
complished? If so, out of what pre-existing
materials did Christianity by a natural process of
development arise? This is the subject of the
present Tract, which takes up an inquiry at this
_ day exciting more attention than ever before, and
Progress of
the prin-
ciple of
Evolution.
The genesi#
of systems
ao
Has
Christianit
een
accounted
or by
evolution 7
4
Is the Evolution of Christianity from
a
The various
schemes of
derivation.
Greek
philosophy.
Pre-existing
Jewish
theology
morality.
Philonism,
Alleged
derivation
from Greek
philosophy.
gives reasons for holding that Christianity cannot
be explained by any natural development.
In discussing the subject we shall refer to the
various schemes of derivation; and then, on the
ordinary principles of historical criticism, seek to
test their sufficiency.
The main fountain-heads then to which specula-
tions of this kind have endeavoured to trace up
Christianity have been Greek philosophy, especially
that of Plato; pre-existing Jewish theology and
morality, especially the so-called Messianic pro-
phecies of the Jewish faith ; and the combination
of Greek and Jewish elements found in Alexandrine
thought, especially as reflected in Philo. It will
be to a brief examination of these sources and
tendencies of belief and opinion, in the light of a
possible derivation of Christianity from them, that
this inquiry will be directed. We shall endeavour,
without unfaithfulness to the conditions of strict
inquiry, and also of intelligible exposition, to —
convey the results in a brief sketch.
CHRISTIANITY NOT DERIVED FROM GREEK
PHILOSOPHY.
I. Can we find then as the result of our first
alleged origin, that Christianity can be historically
derived from Greek philosophy, and as the question
can hardly be proposed in regard to any other
EEO OU
Mere Natural Sources Credible ?
system, specially from that of Plato (B.c. 429-347)?
This is anything but a new suggestion. In point
of fact, in the first recorded encounter of Greek
- unbelief with Christianity, the Adyoc AAySie (“True
Word”) of Celsus, preserved and replied to by
Origen, and written near the end of the second
century, the assertion is made and supported by
instances, that Christianity is drawn from Platonism.
It is not wonderful that Celsus, who understood
Christianity very ill, supports this argument but
feebly, and that Origen has no difficulty in replying
to him, in his sixth book, where this discussion
occurs. Thus, for example, among other things
Celsus argues that Christ took his celebrated saying,
‘Tt is easier for a camel to go through the eye of
a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the
kingdom of God,” from the utterance of Plato in
the fifth book of his Laws, “ That for one who is
very good also to be very rich is impossible.” To
which Origen answers, that the point of the remark
is greatly weakened in Plato by the absence of the
camel, and also that it does not belong to so strict
a system as that which laid stress generally on the
strait gate and the narrow way. We learn also
from this work of Origen that reprisals had already
been made on the Platonic philosophy by Christian
writers, who traced it back to Hebrew sources,
which Plato is supposed to have studied in Egypt ;
and while Origen, who does not dissent from this
The
assertion
of Celsua.
The reply
of Origen,
Reprisals of
Christian
writers who
traced
Platonic
philosophy
to Hebrew
sources,
6 Is the Evolution of Christianity from
view, does not practically apply it, we find that it
had been attempted at some length before him in
a hortatory treatise addressed to the Gentiles
(Cohortatio ad Gentiles), which has often passed
under the name of Justin Martyr, and in which
Plato’s Plato is charged with borrowing his distinction
distinction
between 3
Reine that Detween Being that 7s only and never becomes
Paae’* from the name of Jehovah, “I AM THAT I AM,”
said to be . she . :
borrowed and also with deriving his “ideas” from the
from Moses,
pattern showed to Moses in the mount.
Eusebius As the summing up of this discussion, in the
derives
from the, early period of Christianity, we may mention the
Scriptures, elaborate effort of the Church Historian Eusebius,
in his great work entitled The Gospel Preparation
—the fullest dissertation on the relations of Chris
tianity to Paganism and philosophy which has
come down from antiquity, and written in the first
quarter of the fourth century,—in which three .
books, x. x1. and xu.., are devoted to the proof of
the derivation of the Greek philosophy, and specially
that of Plato from the Hebrew Scriptures. Here,
however, as in the case of the so-called Justin, the
plea for Plato’s dependence is carried too far,
Re blance esemblance is not derivation, unless it be so
sarily Striking as to necessitate the idea, and unless there
fenvane™ be some reasonable hypothesis of contact. Now
modern scholars are slow to admit any contact
between Plato and Hebrew thought in Egypt. The
whole scheme therefore stands or falls with re-
ee we
Mere Natural Sources Credible ?
semblance; and the question between those who
with Celsus deduce the Christian faith from Plato,
and those who with the early Fathers reverse the
process, is just this, Is the resemblance so close
as to make the idea of derivation probable, or even
irresistible? Something is to be said for and
against either view; but it does not follow that
either system must be derived from the other.
Modern opinion, on the side alike of Christian and
non-Christian thought, is against the derivation of
Plato. Must it now be held, that we have to go
back to Celsus, and accept the evolution from Plato
of Christianity?
The
question as
to whether
other worlds
may be
inhabited,
The world
before man
appeared.
The
approaching
condition of
the world,
Its history
parallel to
that of
other
worlds.
8 The Day of Rest.
which may be more or less parallel to that of all
other worlds.
This truth also appears if we consider other
The moon. planetary bodies. The moon may have been in-
habited at a time when our earth was luminous
and incandescent, but it has passed into a state of
Mars. senility and desolation. The planet Mars, which
seems physically not unlike the earth, may be in a
condition similar to that of our world in the older
Jupiter and geological periods. Jupiter and Saturn are pro-
bably still intensely heated and encompassed with
vaporous “deeps,” and may perhaps aid in sup-
porting life on their satellites, while untold ages
must elapse before those magnificent orbs can
arrive at a stage suitable for maintaining life like
that on the earth. Long after all these ages have
passed, and when all the planets have grown old
and lifeless, the sun itself, now a fiery mass, may
arrive at a condition suited for living and rational
beings.
Ait wortule Lhus the physical conditions of our planetary
wie iis system teach that if we suppose all worlds capable
of supporting life, all are not so at one time, and
that as ages pass, each may successively take up
this réle, of which in greater or less degree all may
at some time or other be capable. So when we
ascend to the starry orbs, those suns ‘may have
attendant worlds, some in one stage, some in
another. There may also be stars and nebulze
The Day of Rest.
still scarcely formed, and others which have passed
far beyond the present state of our sun and _ its
planets. Thus the universe is a vastly varied and
progressive scene. At no one time can all worlds
be seats of such life as we know; but of the count-
less suns and worlds that exist, thousands or
millions may at any one time be in this state, while
thousands of times as many may be gradually
arriving at it or passing from it. Such are the
thoughts which necessarily pass through our minds
when we consider the existence of worlds in time.
Now these ideas, though rendered more definite
by modern discoveries, are very old, and they im-
pressed themselves on the mind of antiquity before
men could measure the vastness of the universe
in space. They are also present in Divine re-
velation, and it is necessary to have them before
our minds if we would enter into the thoughts of
the writers of the Old and New Testaments when
they treat of time and eternity. The several
stages of the earth in its progress from chaos, the
prophetic pictures of its changes in the future, as
stated in the Bible, alike embody the idea of
time-worlds, or ages of God’s working. It is in
this aspect that the universe is compared to a
vesture of God, which He can change as a garment,
while He Himself remains ever the same.! It is
in contrast to the eternity of truth that the heavens
1 Psalm cii, 26.
The
universe a&
varied and
progressive
scene,
These ideas
ancient,
They are
present in
Divine
revelation,
The past
and future
stages of
the earth
according ta
the Bible
embody
the idea
of time-
worlds,
10 The Day of Rest.
and earth are said to be passing away, but the
words of the Redeemer shall never pass away.
It is with the same reference that we are told that
“the things which are seen are temporal, the
things which are unseen are eternal.” ?
The The use made of the Hebrew word o/am and the
Hebrew and s . :
Greek words (treek aion in the sense of age, or even of eternity,
olam and
aion bring brings before us still more clearly this Biblical idea
before us
the idea of . :
the idea of of time-worlds. In that sublime “ prayer of Moses
the man of God” which we have in the 90th
Psalm, God, who is the “dwelling-place of man in
generation to generation,” who existed before the
mountains were brought forth, with whom a
thousand years are “as a watch in the night,” is
said to be from “olam to olam,” from “ everlasting
to everlasting,” as the English version has it, but
more properly from age to age of those long cosmic
ages in which He creates and furnishes successive
worlds. So when God is said to be the “ High and
lofty One, that inhabiteth eternity,’* it is not
abstract eternity, but these successive olams, or
time-worlds, which are His habitation. In the
God awetls Old Testament, God as revealed to us in His works,
in the
successionof dwells in the grand succession of worlds in time,
worlds in
time.
thus continuously and variously manifesting His
power, a much more living and attractive view of di-
vinity than the mere abstract affirmation of eternity.
1 Matt. xxiv. 25. 32 Cor. iv. 18-
8 This is retained in the Revised Version, which I think .
unfortunate. * Isaiah lvii, 15.
The Day of Rest.
The same thought is taken up and amplified in
the New Testament. The writer of the Epistle to
the Hebrews, who treats very specially of the
relations of the Old Testament to the New, speaks
of Christ as God’s Son, “ whom He hath appointed
Heir of all things, by whom also He made the
worlds,” ! more literally ‘ constituted the aidns or
ages.” He does not refer, as one might conceive
from the English translation, to different worlds in
space, but to the successive ages of this world, in
which it was being gradually prepared and fitted
up for man. So Paul, in his doxology at the end
of the third chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians,
ascribes to the Redeemer glory in “all generations
of the ages or aidns ;””? and in the ninth verse of
the same chapter he speaks of the gospel as “the
mystery which from all ages hath been hid in
God who created all things.” So, also, in the
eleventh chapter of Hebrews, we are told that
by faith we understand that “the ages were con-
stituted by the Word of God.” Another fine
illustration of this idea is in Paul’s familiar and
business-like letter to Titus, where he says that
he lives “in hope of eternal life, which God, who
cannot lie, promised before the world began, but
hath in due time manifested His word.”? The
expression “the world began” here represents the
1 Heb. i. 2, R.V. margin.
2 R.V. margin. § Titus i. 2.
1]
The same
thought in
the New
Testament,
Christ con-
stituting
the ages,
in all gener-
ations of
the ages.
The ages
constituted
by the Word
of God.
12
The Day of Rest.
i
The life of
the ages,
The relation
of the whole
duration of
God’s
working
to us.
The light
thrown on
the day of
rest by the
creative
days of
geology.
“ages of time,” and the “eternal life” is the
“life of the ages.” Thus what the Apostle
hopes for is life through the unlimited ages of
God’s working, and this life has been promised,
before the beginning of the time-worlds of creation.
So the whole past, present, and future of God’s
working has its relation to us, and is included
under this remarkable idea of ages or time-worlds,
and is appropriated by faith and hope as the pos-
session of God’s people. God, who cannot lie, has
pledged Himself to us from the beginning of those
long ages in which He founded the earth; He
has promised us His favour in all the course of
His subsequent work; He has sealed this promise
in the mission of His Son, that same glorious Beg
through whom He arranged all those vast ages of
creation and providence; and in the strength of
this promise we can look forward by faith to an
endless life with Him in all the future ages of His
boundless working.
The long creative days of geology may thus be
shown to throw a most important light on the in-
stitution of the weekly Sabbath and its continuance
as the Lord’s day. If it is true that the seventh
or Sabbath Day of creation still continues, and
was intended to be a day of rest for the Creator
and for man made in His likeness, we find in this
a substantial reason for the place of the Sabbath
in the Decalogue. Further, by means of our Lord’s
The Day of Rest.
13
declaration in reply to the Pharisees, “My Father
worketh even until now, and I work,” though God
has finished His work of creation and now only
works in providence and redemption, as well as by
the argument in the fourth chapter of the Epistle to
the Hebrews, we can carry this idea forward into
the Christian dispensation. But these facts are so
important to the right understanding of our subject,
that it seems necessary to examine them in some
detail, and in a humble and earnest spirit, ready
to receive new light and to relinquish old pre-
possessions, if found to be contrary to the testimony
of Scripture.
At first sight, as already hinted, the place of the
fourth commandment in the Decalogue, and the
vast importance attached to this law by the Hebrew
writers, strike us as strange aud anomalous. The
Sabbath stands as the sole example of a ritual
observance, in those “ten words,” which otherwise
mark the most general moral relations of man to
God and to his fellow-men. Farther, the reason
given seems trivial. If it is meant that God
worked on six natural days, and rested on the
seventh, the question arises, what is He doing on
the subsequent daysP Does He keep up this al-
ternation of six days’ work and one day’s rest ; and
if not, how is this an example to us? If it is
argued that the whole reason of God’s six days’
work and the seventh day’s rest was to give an
The idea of
the Sabbath
as a day of
rest for the
Creator and
man carried
further.
The place
of the
Sabbath law
at first
sight
strange and
anomalous.
14
The Day of Rest.
The sup-
ition that
ustifies it.
How the
Sabbath
becomes the
central
point of all
religion,
The
Sabbath
he Gospel
in the
DVecalogue,
example, this conveys the absurdity of doing what
is infinitely great for an end comparatively in-
significant, and which might have been attained
by a command without any reason assigned. But
let us now suppose that when God rested on the
seventh day He entered into an eon of vast dura-
tion, intended to be distinguished by the happy
Sabbatism of man in an Edenic world, and in
which every day would have been a Sabbath; or
if there was a weekly Sabbath, it would have been
but a memorial of a work leading to a perpetual
Sabbath then enjoyed. Let us farther suppose
that at the fall of man the Sabbath Day was
instituted, or obtained a new significance as a
memorial of an Edenic Sabbatism lost, and also
as a memorial of God’s promise, that through a
Redeemer it would be restored. Then the Sabbath
becomes the central point of all religion, the
standing and perpetual memorial of an Eden lost,
and of a paradise to be restored by the coming Seed
of the woman, as well as a time to prepare our-
selves for this future life. The commandment,
‘“Remember the Sabbath Day,” called upon the
Israelite to remember the fall of man, to remember
the promise of a Saviour, to look forward to a
future Sabbatism in the reign of the Redeemer.
It is thus the Gospel in the Decalogue, giving
vitality to the whole, and is most appropriately
placed, and with a more full explanation than any
Pa ad ee
ee ee ee ee ee
The Day of Rest.
15
Le
other command, between the laws that relate to
God and the laws that relate to man.
The argument in the Epistle to the Hebrews
(ch, iv.) may help us to understand this; and it is the
more valuable that it is not an argument about the
Sabbath, but introduces it incidentally, and that
it seems to take for granted the belief in a long or
olamic Sabbath on the part of those to whom it is
addressed. It may be freely rendered as follows:
“For God hath spoken in a certain place (Gen. ii. 2) of the
seventh day in this wise: ‘And God did rest on the seventh
day from all His works ;’ and in this place again: ‘ They shall
not enter into My rest’ (Psa. xcv. 11). Seeing, therefore, it
still remaineth that some enter therein, and they to whom it
(God’s Sabbatism) was first proclaimed, entered not in because
of disobedience (in the Fall, and afterward in the sin of the
Israelites in the desert), again He fixes a certain day, saying in
David’s writings, (long after the time of Joshua,) ‘ To-day, if ye
hear His voice, harden not your hearts.’ (Psa. xcv. 8.) For if
Joshua had given them rest in Canaan, He would not afterward
have spoken of another day. There is therefore yet reserved a
keeping of a Sabbath for the people of God. For He that is
entered into His rest (that is, Jesus Christ, who has finished
His work and entered into His rest in heaven), He Himself
also rested from His own works, as God did from His own.
Let us therefore earnestly strive to enter into that rest.”
It is evident that in this passage God’s Sabbatism,
the rest intended for man in Eden, and for Israel
in Canaan, Christ’s rest in heaven after finishing
His work, the rest which may now be enjoyed by
Christians, and the final heavenly rest of Christ’s
people, are all indefinite periods mutually related,
and are all Sabbatisms of which the weekly Sabbath
is a continuous reminder and token.
The
argum
in the
Epistle to
the
er.
Hebrews.
A free
rendering
of it.
The varioua
Sabbatisms
indefinite
periods
mutually
related,
16 The Day of Rest.
Another In the repetition of the decalogue, in the fifth
reason for
th f t *
command. chapter of Deuteronomy, another reason is an-
t.
Gack nexed to the fourth commandment:
“Remember that thou wast a slave in the land of Egypt, and
Jehovah thy God brought thee out thence,”
Betis This is in perfect harmony with the reason in
between the Exodus, and merely a further development of it.
The first reason refers to the rest of the Creator,
the second to the rest from Egyptian bondage
and the promised rest of Canaan. Both are refer-
red to by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
who clearly sees the connection between them.
phe ur The mistake of supposing them to be mutually
that they contradictory is peculiar to a certain stage of
ae, modern hypercriticism.
hypercriti-
ca If this is a correct view of the relation of the
Jewish Sabbath to the Creation and the Fall, it
enables us to appreciate the force of the injunction
to “remember” the Sabbath day to keep it holy,
for in this case the Sabbath must have been no new
chee institution, but one of primitive obligation, and
obligation dating from the fall of man at the latest. It also
Sabbath. ~_ enables us to understand the prevalence of Sabba-
a tical ideas among nations independent of Hebrew
sacredness influence, and more especially among the Chaldeans,
Sabbath .
among the 270m Whom Abraham came. With them, as
cnt oka. recent investigations have shown, the seventh day
nations
outside of had a certain sacredness attached to it from very
ebrew ’
influence. early times.?
1 Bayce, Fresh Light from the Ancient Monuments,
The Day of Rest.
But what evidence does the Bible itself offer as
to this? We have no Sabbath law till the time
of the Exodus, and there is scarcely any reference
previously to other religious ordinances than those
of sacrifice and circumcision. Still there are in-
dications of a Sabbath. We need not perhaps
attach much importance to the expression “in
_ process of time,” or more literally, “at the end of
days,”! applied to the time when Cain and Abel
offered their sacrifices, as we do not certainly know
whether a weekly, monthly, or yearly interval is
intended, We find, however, Noah reckoning by
weeks in sending out birds from the ark.2 Laban
and Jacob also reckoned by weeks.2 In Joseph’s
time also, the Hebrews reckoned by sevens in the
division of time* So in the early part of the
Exodus before the giving of the law, the Sabbath
is incidentally mentioned, in connection with the
gift of the manna, and in terms which show that
it was already known as “a solemn rest, a holy
Sabbath unto the Lord.”> It is interesting, how-
ever, to observe that there seems to have been no
pre-intimation of the day, except the gathering of a
double quantity of manna on the sixth day, and
that the rulers reported the fact to Moses, as if
asking instruction, This would seem to imply either
that the day of rest had fallen into disuse in Egypt,
Genesis iv. 3. 3 Toi. viii. 12, * Tbid. xxix: 27.
4 Joid. 1. 3, 12. 5 Exod. xvi. 23, R.V.
Cc
17
Bible
evidence,
Early
indications
of a
Sabbath.
The
Sabbath
and manna;
Moses’ in-
terpretation
of the
in ij unction
with
reference
to the
gathering of
a double
portion of
manna on
the sixth
day.
18
The early
notices
casual; but
sufficient
when taken
in connec~
tion with
other
passages,
Israel in
Egypt.
‘Lhe
Hebrews’
experience
of ceaseless
labour in
Egypt.
The Day of Rest.
or that its occurrence had not at first seemed to
the people likely to be recognised as interfering
with the gathering of necessary food; but Moses
at once interprets the fact as God’s recognition
of His own day.
These early notices of the Sabbath are, it is true,
few and casual, and remind us of the informal way
in which the Lord’s Day is introduced in the New
Testament. But when taken in connection with
the statement as to God’s hallowing the day at the
close of His creative work, and with the word
“remember” in the commandment, they are suffi-
cient to show the Patriarchal origin of the rest of
the seventh day, and to carry it back to the gate
of Eden.
Israelites when enslaved in Egypt must have been,
to a great extent at least, deprived of the Sabbath
rest. The Egyptians, even if they had themselves
some notion of a Sabbatism, whether on the tenth
or the seventh day, were not likely to have con-
sulted the scruples or the comfort of their foreigu
slaves in such matters, any more than modern
pleasure-seekers are disposed to regard those of
railway employés or museum curators. The
Hebrews had thus known the bitterness of ceaseless
labour, and so are reminded in Deuteronomy of
those past sufferings as a reason for their holding
fast to the privilege restored to them in their
newly-found freedom. It would be well if those
We may further note here that the
L - -_ 2 ea wt ‘~
eee eee
The Day of Rest.
Be
modern nations which neglect the Lord’s day
could see it in this light, and receive it as a part
of that liberty with which Christ makes His
people free.
The post-Mosaic stages of Jewish history show Th
that the ideas of the connection of the Sabbath
with the primitive promise of redemption and with
the liberation of the chosen people, are carried
onward to the time of Christ. At some periods of
Jewish history the Sabbath no doubt fell greatly
into neglect, but these were times of general
decadence and of lapse into idolatry, and every
prophetic or priestly revival of religion exalted the
obligations of the Sabbath. Isaiah laments the
misuse and neglect of the day, and promises even
to the eunuchs and the strangers in Palestine that
if they will “keep the Sabbath, and hold fast by
God’s covenant ”’ implied in it, He will give them
‘*a memorial and a name better than of sons and of daughters
. an everlasting name.” ‘‘I will bring them to My holy
mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer,’
It is the same prophet who intensifies its blessings,
while connecting it with the patriarchs and with
the covenant of God, in the grand words :—
“Tf thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath,
From doing thy pleasure on my holy day ;
And shalt call the Sabbath a delight
And the holy of Jehovah honourable,
And shalt honour it, not doing thine own ways,
Nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words ;
1 Isa. lvi, 4-8.
e
Sabbath in
the post-
Mosaic
stages of
Jewish
history till
the time of
Christ.
In the time
of Isaiah.
20
The Day of Rest.
Jeremiah’s
view of it.
Ezekiel’s
view.
The
significance
of prophetic
doctrine.
The effect
of prophetic
statements.
The con-
sistency of
Bible
history on
the subject
throughout.
Then shalt thou delight thyself in Jehovah,
And I will make thee ride upon the high places of the earth,
And I will feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father,
Tor the mouth of Jehovah hath spoken it.” }
Jeremiah connects in the strongest manner its
observance, as an efficient cause, with God’s
blessing, and with prosperity, and regards the
keeping of the Sabbath as an essential condition
of national welfare? Ezekiel expressly calls the
Sabbath a sign or pledge that God would sanctify
His people. The profound significance of this
prophetic doctrine becomes evident only when we
connect the Sabbath with God’s olamic rest, with
man’s fall and with the promise of a final and
eternal Sabbatism, in the manner explained in the
passage already quoted from the Epistle to the
Hebrews. There can be no doubt that these
strong statements of the prophets were influential
with the Jews in the captivity, and were important
means of preserving them from idolatry and for-
getfulness of their God, and that when they were
again delivered from bondage they would return
with enhanced ideas of Sabbath obligation, akin
to those of their fathers at the time of the Exodus.
We see this in the legislation of Nehemiah, and in
a debased and ritualistic form in the Pharisaic
strictness of the time of Christ.
Let us further note here that there is a strict
consistency throughout in the Biblical history of
1 Isa, lviii. 13, R.V. 7 Jer. xvii. 24, 25. % Ezek, xx. 12,
The Day of Rest.
the Sabbath, from the first announcement of the
rest of the Creator in the second chapter of Genesis
till the advent of the promised Redeemer, and no
room is left here for attributing a late origin to
the Sabbath law, without throwing the whole
history into confusion. The Sabbath of Exodus is
meaningless without the Creative days, the Fall,
and the promise of Redemption. The testimony of
the Psalms and Prophets pre-supposes the Sabbath
law, and its spiritual relations. The attitude of
the post-exilic Jews pre-supposes and results from
the law and the prophets. Among the sectaries of
the time of our Lord, the Sabbath had only ex-
perienced the fate of other spiritual elements of
the old dispensation which they had ‘“ made void
by their traditions,’ substituting form for sub-
stance.
These considerations not only give a high and
spiritual significance to the Sabbath and the Lord’s
Day, and connect them with God’s great working
in the universe, and with the fall and redemption
of man, but they give us practical information
respecting the manner of keeping the Lord’s
_ Day and its relation to Christian doctrine and
practice. |
We can thus understand the attitude of Christ
Himself with regard to the Sabbath. While He
denounced that Pharisaical rigidity which made
the day a burden rather than a privilege, and which
21
The pre-
suppositions
of the
Sabbath of
the Exodus
and of the
Psalms and
Prophets,
The
Sabbath in
our Lord’s
time,
The
Sabbath
in its
various
relations,
The
attitude
of Christ
to the
Sabbath,
a2
How the
Lord’s Day
is to be
kept.
How God
occupies His
Sabbatism,
and how
Jesus
occupies
His.
The Day of Rest.
directed attention to minute details of its observance
rather than to its higher significance, neither His
example nor His teaching took away from its
sacredness or diminished its obligation, except
when opposed to works of necessity or mercy, or
of direct service to God. The Sabbath was made
for man as—
‘*a means, and not an end; worth nothing unless it conduced
to the end—man’s welfare, man’s refreshment in body, mind,
and spirit.” }
Thus if we ask how the Lord’s Day should be
kept, we are referred at once to the examples of
God the Father and of God the Son. The Creator’s
rest with reference to this world, is one of contem-
plation, and of beneficent and merciful attention
to its interests. He regards His work and pro-
nounces it good, and then enters into His rest. So
the Redeemer entered into His rest when He could
say, “It is finished.”’ God in His Sabbath sustaims
and nourishes all His creatures, and relieves their
wants. This is the force of our Lord’s reply to
the Pharisees: “My Father worketh even until
now, and I work,” and they seem so to have
understood the reference to the creation and to
Divine providence, that they had no rejoinder
to make. God occupies His Sabbatism, lost
to man by the fall, in that work of redemption
by which it is to be finally restored. The rest
1 Sunday, by Plumptre, 1866.
The Day of Rest.
into which Jesus entered is occupied in preparing
a place for us, and in acting as our great High-
Priest in the most holy place on high. In like
manner our Sabbath should bea time of communion 0
with God, and a time for acts of love and mercy
to our fellow-men. There is a Divine activity
which is not incompatible with, but a fulfilment of
the Sabbath law, and the examples given by Christ,
as that of the ox fallen into a pit, the healing of
diseases, and the Temple service, all point with
perfect consistency to the ultimate and higher
benefit of man.
This was the ground of the often-recurring con-
flict between the Christ,who knew what the Sabbath
really means, and the Pharisees, whose tradition
had turned it into a day of mere austerity and
unmeaning ritualism. Surely if this was true of
the Jewish Sabbath, it is true of the Lord’s Day.
It is to be observed in this connection that when
Christ claims the Lordship of the Sabbath, He
does this in the capacity of the Son of Man, “the
Son of Man is Lord also of the Sabbath,” for it
is essentially as Redeemer that He is the Fulfiller
of the Sabbath law, and so its Lord. May we not
also see in this a prescience on the part of Christ
of that change in the day which would be a neces-
sary consequence of His resurrection on the first
day of the week, and which world mark the com-
mencement of the new dispensation by a day com-
23
ur
Sabbath
should be
a time for
communion
with God,
and for
acts of
love and
mercy to
man.
as to the
Sabbath,
24
The
connection
between the
1d
Testament
Sabbath
and the
Lord’s Day
f
0
Christians,
How the
Lord’s Day
comes to
occupy
the place
formerly
occupied by
the Jewish
Sabbath.
What it
links
together
The Day of Rest.
memorative of this rather than of the work of
creation.
The right understanding of the Old Testament
Sabbath aids us in comprehending the con-
nection of the Lord’s Day of Christians with the
Jewish Sabbath. If the latter had a reference to
a Sabbatism lost by the fall and restored by the
Redeemer, the Son of Man must be “ Lord of the
Sabbath,” in the sense of fulfilling and realizing its
prophetic import. Therefore, the day on which
He finished His work and entered into His rest
must of necessity be that to be commemorated by
Christians, until the time when the return of Christ
shall inaugurate that final and eternal Sabbatism
which remains to His people. Thus the Lord's
Day comes to occupy the same important place
formerly occupied by the Jewish Sabbath. In this
as in other things, the Old Testament saints with-
out us are not complete, for our Lord’s Day is the
completion of their Sabbath. It links together
God’s creative work and Christ’s work of redemp-
tion ; the Sabbatism lost in the fall and restored
in the Saviour ; the imperfect state of the militant
Church, still having only a pledge of a rest to
come, and the Church triumphant, which will enjoy
this rest for ever. If the Sabbath that carried with
it the mournful memory of the first sin was holy,
much more that which points forward, through
-Ohrist’s finished work and present rest, tn a-
The Day of Rest.
25
heavenly paradise. If the obligation to remember
it was to the Hebrew equal to that of the most
binding moral duties, still more must the Lord’s
Day be a day to be remembered by the Christian,
as the memorial of Christ’s finished work, and of
our heirship of all the divine ages, past, present,
and to come. Thus we see that the moral and
spiritual dignity and obligation of the Lord’s Day
rise far above those of the Jewish Sabbath, and
we Gan understand how naturally the apostles and
primitive Christians, almost without note of the
change, and without requiring any positive enact-
ment, transferred their allegiance from the seventh
to the first day of the week.
It may be useful to mention in this connection
the strong statement in relation to the Jewish }
Sabbath contained in the Epistle to the Colossians
(ii. 16). The Christians of Colossee had appa-
rently been urged by some of their teachers to
keep the Jewish Sabbath as a matter of legal
obligation, either along with or instead of the
Lord’s Day. Paul repudiates this in the words,
‘‘TLet no man therefore judge you in meat or in drink, or in
respect of a feast day, or a new moon, or a Sabbath day ;”
adding as @ reason,
‘“ which are a shadow of the things to come, but the body (or
Substance) is Christ’s.”
There can scarcely be a question that the Old
Testament Sabbath is intended here, and the as-
The
enhanced
obligation
of the
Lord’s Day
Colossians
The Old
Testament
Sabbath
intended,
26
The
assertion
in harmony
with other
parts of
Scripture.
The
description
of the day
as observed
by
Christians,
The
meanin
of Christ’s
saying
that ** the
Sabbath
was made
for man.,”?
The
Sabbath a
spiritual
privilege to
fallen man.
sertion that it was a ‘
The Day of Rest.
—
“shadow” of the future
coming of Christ is in perfect harmony with the
testimony of other parts of Scripture, and with
the idea that when Christ, who is the Substance,
had come, the old Sabbath, as the anticipatory
shadow, must pass away. It is to be noticed, in
accordance with this, that where the day observed
by Christians is mentioned in the New Testament
it is called simply “the first day of the week,”
except in that passage of the Apocalypse where
for the first time we find the term, afterwards
general, “the Lord’s Day.”?
We learn also from this view of the day of rest
the full meaning of that weighty saying of Jesus:
‘The Sabbath was made for man, and not man
for the Sabbath.” Man, as originally created,
needed no Sabbath law, for he had entered into
the perpetual rest of the Sabbatism of his Creator.
But when he fell from this high estate the Sabbath
was made for him, not as a mere legal obligation,
For this reason
faithful men and women in Israel of old clung to
it as the earnest of the great salvation which
was to restore the lost paradise for which their
but as a great spiritual privilege.
hearts yearned, and with reference to which their
ery was, “O that I had wings like a dove, then
1 Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xvi. 2; Rev. i. 10. In the Peschito
version the expression “Lord’s Day” occurs in 1 Cor. xi
20. (Etheridge’s Translation, p. 272.)
The Day of Rest.
27
ae ee
would I fly away and be at rest”! So it 1s in
regard to the Lord’s Day. Just as we honour and
trust in the Saviour, so shall we regard the day
which commemorates His entering into His rest.
Just as we appreciate that rest which He gives us
in part here, and as our hearts long for that rest
which remains in the Father’s house, so shall we
hold in loving remembrance the day which points
to it, and which enables us to have some faint
realization of it in the midst of sorrow and trouble.
In a lower sense the Sabbath was made for man
as a relief from the heavy curse of unremitting
labour, and though the world will never gain much
spiritually by a merely legal observance of the
Sabbath, even this is of priceless value to the
working man in a moral, social, and physical point
of view. It is thus not merely an arbitrary en-
actment, but a statement of an effect depending on
an adequate cause, that the man or the nation
honouring God’s day of rest will itself be honoured
and prospered.
The primitive Sabbath of Genesis and of. the
Moral Law has thus a definite connection with
human labour and with the physical well-being of
man. “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread,”
ig the doom of fallen humanity—a doom too fear-
fully felt in the whole history of the world, and
strange to say, apparently not less so in our times
1 Psalm lv. 6, R.V.
As we
honour the
Saviour
we shall
regard lis
day.
The
Sabbath a
relief from
unremitting
labour.
The
connection
of the
primitive
Sabbath
with labour
28
The
Sabbath
the only
means of
alleviating
the life of
labour.
The law
extended
even to
domestic
animals,
The phy-
siological
necessity
for a
eriodical
mterruption
of toil
for man
or beast
attirmed.
A nation
without a
Sabbath
must pre-
maturely
decay.
The Day of Rest.
of mechanical invention and mastery over nature,
than in ruder ages. How terribly would this
doom have been aggravated had man been expelled
from Eden to a life of unremitting toil. But the
Sabbath stood between him and this fate, and so
far as human experience has shown, was the only
possible means of alleviating his life of labour.
Hence Moses impresses on his nation of emancipated
slaves the constant remembrance of this day, and
enjoins on them the extension of its benefits to
their own slaves and to strangers within their
gates, even though not believers in Jehovah.
Hence also the provisions of the law are extended
even to domestic animals, which, though destitute
of spiritual natures, have bodily organisms, which
under ceaseless labour will be worn out prematurely
and subjected to a living death while they survive.
These lower animals have no share in the moral
law directly, but it is immoral to deprive them of
the little happiness of which they are capable, and
to subject them to conditions inconsistent with
their physical well-being. The physiological
necessity for a periodical interruption of toil,
whether for man or beast, is thus affirmed in the
law, and it is verified by all that we have learned
of the constitution of living things. It is con-
firmed by the experience of all thoughtful men
and of all nations. tie |
nl
_—
eas
Christ. and Creation.
fishes, and the fowls of the air, on the one hand ;
together with the still lower life, on the other
hand, of the grass and the herbs and the trees
of the field. Nor is the case different in regard
to that higher life of which we have now been
speaking so much. Where are we to look for the
force which changes the carnal into the spiritual ;
the rudimentary into the perfect; the mortal into
the immortal ; comparative death into superlative
life? Not to anything already acting, or even al-
ready existing within. Not to any aspiration that
comes from below, but to a command that comes
from above. This is the uniform teaching of Holy
Scripture respecting the whole of this change.
It is by the presentation and special application
of truth to the mind of the natural man, eg.,
that the higher life of his inward nature is
described as brought into being (John xvu. 17;
James i. 18). In other words, those persons who
become the subjects of this unobtrusive but mighty
change are described to us sometimes as being
“born of the Spirit” or “born from above”
(John ii. 8-8); sometimes as “born again by the
word” (1 Pet. i. 23); and sometimes, with marked
reference to both the negative and positive sides
of the subject, as “born not of blood, nor of the
will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of
God” (John i. 12). Similar to this also is the
language employed in the corresponding case of |
41
The higher
life due to
the same
cause.
@
higher life
engendered
the
presentation
an
application
of truth
to the mind,
42
The new
bith of
the body.
The final
change.
The
agreement
so far of
observation
and
revelation.
Scripture
and Science
not hope-
lessly at
variance,
Christ and Creation.
the new birth of the body. That also is spoken
of, negatively, on the one hand, as a “house noé
made with hands ;” and, positively, on the other, as
a ‘‘ building of God’”/2 Cor. v. 1, 2), a “ house from
heaven,” something formed from without. And to
this same effect, finally, the apostle virtually writes
when he says on the same subject (1 Cor. xv. 52),
that “we shall not all sleep, but we shall all de
changed :”’ that passive form pointing to an active
principle which is outside of ourselves.
So many are the lines in which this “new
pattern of life” is found walking in the steps of
the old!
99
IV.
THE Position so Far.
On all the topics as yet discussed by us on the
twofold plan proposed at the beginning, we hope
it will be found, on review, that our two oracles
have been in agreement. So far as they have gone,
they have helped in every case to illustrate one
another.
Such a fact is one which appears, in every way,
to be deserving of note.
It is so, first, in itself. If Scripture and Science
were so hopelessly at variance as some have as-
serted, it would have been quite impossible to
find any succession of correspondences between them.
It is so, next, in regard to the number of the
Christ and Creation.
agreements in question. Roughly speaking, those Ts
now adduced will hardly be less than some twenty
in all. In a case such as this, which depends on
examples, this is of very great weight. How
many mattcrs of moment have been fully settled
on the strength of very much fewer P
The fact before us is also worthy of notice in
regard to the question of kind. How exceedingly
diversified is the character of the regions in which
these cases of agreement occurred! We have
found them behind and before; up and down;
here and there, as it were! In the pages of
history! In those of prophecy! Amongst the
organized! Amongst the unorganized! In the
“world” within us! In the world around us!
In questions of matter! In questions of mind!
In questions of morals! In higher realms still!
All this makes their argumentative weight a
hundredfold more than if we had discovered them
all as it were within a few yards of each other.
Once more, this succession of correspondences Th
is worthy of note in regard to the question of
source. Can any two sources of information less
apparently likely to produce such correspondences,
be easily named? It is not only, as we noticed
at first, that Revelation and Observation re-
spectively address themselves to wholly different
and even widely-separated regions of thought, in
the main. That is only half of the truth.
e
number of
the
agreements
adduced.
The variety
of the
agreements
adduced,
e
unlikelihood
of their
sources.
44
The weight
of the
agreements,
Their main
witness
therefore
true.
Christ the
Crown of
the Past
and the
Key of the
Future,
Christ and Creation.
Another and equally important half is to be
found in the fact, that, even when they do happen
to have the same subject in common, it hardly
appears, in their hands, in consequence of the
different standpoints from which they approach it,
the different fashions in which they handle it,
and the different objects they have in view to be
the same thing. The marvel is, therefore, in
the instance before us, that we should so often
have found the respective utterances of Scripture
and. Science to be, as it were, in ‘“ conjunction ”’;
and, when thus in conjunction, instead of eclipsing,
to have so illuminated each other.
not easy, as a question of evidence, to give too
much weight to this fact.
stances of agreement, on so many different points,
should be found on the part of two witnesses so
singularly independent that they only rarely have
any experiences in common, speaks volumes for
both. |
And therefore, of course, for that which we
may speak of as their common result. In such
circumstances we cannot reasonably doubt but that
It really is
That so many in-
Christ 1s indeed, as
they teach us, on the one hand, the Crown of the
Past! Christ is indeed, as they teach us, on the
other hand, the Key of the Future!
authorities, and all our researches—on these points
their main witness is true.
Both our
—are at one.
Christ and Creation.
45
V.
Curist tHE AvuTHOR oF ALL.
Tuts conclusion, however, must not be regarded
as the conclusion of all. Rather, from one point
of view, it is only the groundwork of a still further
inquiry. If Christ be all this, He may be very
much more. If He stands in these relations, He
may stand in still higher ones, to the things that
are seen. Our two authorities having brought us,
as it were, to the very verge of this question, we
are bound to see whether they can help us to settle
it too.
To see this, on the one side, let us revert again
to the vital question of “cause.” That the proxi-
mate cause of all change of type is in something
outside; and that the ultimate cause, therefore,
however remote, must be in that outward force we
call * will,” we have already agreed. What we
would ask now is, whether it is not possible for
us to see some distance beyond. The notion of
“will” seems to carry with it the notion also of
person. Every act of volition assumes an actor—
if so we may speak. It is in this direction, ac-
cordingly, that we would now endeavour to look.
Where are we to seek for the “actor” of that
A further
inquiry.
‘“¢ Will”’ the
ultimate
cause of
change of
type.
“Will”
involves
personality.
special “act of volition” to which our thoughts «< {in
have been turned ?
this “‘new man” is caused to exist ?
By whose “will” is it that
46
The onl
conceivable
e I
caelldate
for the
position is
Christ.
What
the skill of
man can do
in this line,
What
the power
of Christ
may be
expected to
do.
Christ and Creation.
If the “actor” in question is to be sought in
this world—and that “observation” of man to
which we are now referring is confined to this
world as a rule—there is but one reply, of course,
to be given. The only conceivable earthly candi-
date for such a position is to be found in the
person of Christ. On this negative side there does
not exist even a cranny for doubt.
Even on the positive side also there are not
wanting phenomena which look like indications this
way. What the skill of man can accomplish in this
connection by the judicious use of certain energies
which he finds in action both around and within
him, we have already considered. To a certain
extent he is thereby enabled to modify “life.” To
a certain extent, indeed—though only it appears in
combination with great uncertainty both of result
and duration—it is not impossible for him some-
times to cause new successions of life to come into
being. This is one of the many ways in which he
excels in action, as he excels in endowment, the
rest of the animal world. That which they are
unable even to think of, he is able to do.
What is the natural inference, therefore, when
we compare him, in this respect, with one so much
above him as Christ? Evidently that this greater
One should have the power of accomplishing very
much more in this line. In a general way, indeed,
we cannot reasonably doubt this being truly the
Christ and Creation.
case. The matter concerned is hardly one in
which there might be a lack of superiority on the
part of Christ without hurt. Could there be su-
premacy at all, in fact, if there were no supremacy
in so (literally) vital a matter ?
Ts it not clear also, uf we think of it, that this is
just the kind of superiority which befits the position
of Christ? Let it be granted, as no doubt it must
be, that the interval involved in this comparison is
something enormous. To direct the development
of a new variety of rose or pigeon, ¢g,, 18 one
thing. To bring into being such a world of “new
men” as the Scripture speaks of, is prodigiously
more. It may even be true—it most probably is
—that so enormous a degree of difference in result
points to corresponding difference of at least equal
magnitude in manner of working as well. Yet
even this, it must be evident, by no means destroys
the resemblance spoken of, so far as it goes. How-
ever different the two operations may be in dimen-
sions, their directions are alike. However diverse
also their manner and purpose, their intrinsic
natureisone. What both end in, is the appearance
of that which was not in appearance before. It
would seem, therefore, on the whole that we are
directed with double force to our present inference
on this matter. The “resemblance” spoken of
exactly agrees with the fact that Christ Himself
47
The
kind of
superiority
implied
befits the
position of
Christ.
An
enormous
difference.
A real
resem-=
blance
What the
resemblance
agrees
with.
was aman. The “difference” detected equally .
48
What the
difference
agrees with,
What their
combination
implies.
Christ as the
actual
Originator
of the
highest,
the
possible
Author of
all.
Christ and Creation.
agrees with the fact that He was so much the
highest of men! On the one hand, a merely
subordinate change, brought about with very un-
certain workmanship, and lasting (apparently) only
a limited time; that sums up, in this direction, the
whole working of man. On the other hand, an
amazingly greater transformation, brought about
with the certainty of a Master hand, and never
destined to come to an end; that is the other work,
on this line, into which we examine. Who more
fitting than “the Son of Man” to be its author
and cause ?
This probability carries with it the possibility
of wider work yet. Whatever the power which
accomplished the greater, it cannot be unequal to
doing the less. Nothing, in fact, that has ever yet
been accomplished in this cosmos of ours, can be
of a nature to be beyond the reach of that power!
This is abundantly plain. If we have really found
in Christ the actual Originator of the highest, it
also follows, of course, that we have found in Him
the possible Author of all/
And therefore—-of course, also—we have found
in Him all that this means! All it means, how-
ever vast! however transcendent! Even if it
involves ascribing to Him, as no doubt it does,
the very Highest of Names! All this is virtually
admitted when we admit His competency to be
the Author of all!
Christ and Creation.
What Revelation says to us on this subject is so
very explicit that we need not dwell on it much.
It is by the “voice” of Christ Himself, e.y.,
as addressed to men “now” (John v. 25), that
their spirits are described in Scripture as being
caused to “live” in His sight. And it is to
be by means of that “voice” also, addressed
to them hereafter (John v. 28), that the “ resur-
rection of life,” the change of the body, is to be-
come theirs. To the same effect, also, we read of
the one change, on the one hand, “ Awake thou
that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ
shall give thee light” (Eph. v. 14); and, on the
other, that ‘we are His (¢.e., God’s) workmanship,
created anew in Christ Jesus unto good works ”
(Eph. 11.10). To the same effect do we read, also
(of the other change), in such a declaration as this:
“Tf the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus from
the dead dwell in you, He that raised up Christ
from the dead shall also quicken your mortal
bodies, by His Spirit that dwelleth in you” (Rom.
vil. 11.) Or, in such another as this: “He (that
is, Christ) shall change our vile body, that it may
be fashioned like unto His glorious body, according
to the working whereby He is able even to subdue
all things to Himself” (Phil. m1. 21). Whatever
is done in this way, in short, Revelation teaches us
to regard as done in some way by Himself. Other
names may be sometimes included. His is never
E
49
The
testimony
of Scripture,
Both
resurrection
and re-
generation}
ascribed to
Christ,
The one
the conse-
quence of
the other
50
No “new
man”?
either in _
body or
spirit
except by
Christ’s
power.
All things
created by
Christ.
All things
consist by
Christ.
Observation
and
revelation
bring us
thus to
see Christ
as the
Creator
of all.
Christ and Creation.
left out. According to Scripture, in short, there
is no “new man”—either in body or in spirit—
except by His power.
Equally plain are the declarations of Scripture
respecting the origin of all the rest of creation.
Sometimes we are told, eg., that God “created
all things by Jesus Christ;” sometimes, that
“by Him God made the [ages, or] worlds”
(Heb. 1. 2); sometimes, “that all things were
made by Him,” and that “without Him was not
anything made that was made” (John i. 8); some-
times, that “all things were created by Him and
for Him” (Col. i. 16); and sometimes, finally,
that “ by Him all things consist ”’ (Col. i. 17), and
that He it is, who, seated now at the right hand
of the throne, “ upholdeth all things by the word
of His power” (Heb. i. 2).
The general issue, therefore, of this brief further
inquiry is like that arrived at before. Observation
and Revelation had already brought us so far that
little was required in order to take us a long dis-
tance beyond. The whole of that little, these two
authorities have now effectually done. The one by
its gestures, and the other by its speech, have con-
ducted us on till we see Christ presented to us as
the Creator of all!
i
|
:
i
:
=
Christ and Creation.
51
a
PAA L
Tue Postrion 1n Fut.
WE may at last fully see, therefore, in the con-
nection before us, the position of Christ.
We see, in the first place, that His relation to
creation is not a simple one, but highly complex.
To a certain extent, for example, it is one of
identification with it. Being man, Christ is what
man is, viz., akin to all that is made.
On the ‘ther hand, it is also one of vast supe-
riority to it, Even in the fact of having Himself
furnished the highest example of the present race
of mankind, Christ is above all that we see. Much
more is He so in having become, in His own
person, the beginning and model of that higher
_ race which is to appear by-and-by on the earth.
- And most of all is He so, of course, in being the
actual Creator as well of that race as of all it
excels,
It follows, therefore, of the relation in question
-hat it is something altogether unique. No other
Name exists in regard to which ai these things
san be said!
It also follows, of the relation in question, that
it is of a peculiarly intimate kind. Christ is at
once the Fellow-creature and also the Creator of
all that is made. Only one thing closer than these
_ combined relationships can be even conceived.
The full
position
of Christ.
Christ akin
to all that
is made,
Christ above
all that is
made,
The
consequent
uniqueness
of His
relation
to creation
The
peculiar
closeness of
its intimacy,
52 Christ and Creation.
universality It follows, yet again, of the relation in question,
fnfinence, that it has the widest possible scope. It may be
said, in fact, to be the keystone of the whole arch
ot existence. It is that which embraces, that
which completes, that which unifies all. The seen
and the unseen, the past and the future, the idea
of development and that of creation, the discoveries
of men and the revelation of God, are shown by it~
to be so many parts of onesymmetrical whole. In
a word, the earliest and the latest, the highest and
the lowest, the furthest and the nearest, are all
what they are because of the impress on them of
their relation to Christ. As the Psalmist says, in
another connection, “ there is nothing hid from its
heat.”
whe quent 0d it follows, finally, therefore, that all
madsduacy systems of knowledge must be miserably inadequate
ti f bs . e : ° .
knowledge Which leave this point out. A circulating system
it out. without a heart, a respiratory system with nothing
to breathe, the solar system deprived of its sun,
are none of them so deficient as is the conception
of the cosmos without Christ. Nothing but frag-
ments of knowledge can be obtained by us when
when we try to study it so. Nothing, therefore,
but what hides from us far more than it shows.
Nothing, in short, but what conveys to us more
error than truth !
Christ and Creation.
VIL.
THE Conciusion oF ALL.
A CORROBORATIVE and supplemental word may
be added, in conclusion, from a different region of
thought. Instead of symptoms of advance, we have
seen that sometimes symptoms of retrogression are
discoverable in the creation around us. Those
animals in caves, referred to before, which possess
something of the form, but none of the power of
organs of vision, appear to be cases in point. Their
sightless eyes seem the survivals, and so the indices
of a former condition of things ; the marks, as it
were, which point out to us the former height of
the tide. Similar instances are to be found, in re-
gard to the physical nature of man, in those de-
formed and stunted specimens of men which inhabit
and infest the more crowded parts of some of our
cities. And similar instances, in regard to their
moral and mental endowments, in those races of
men which are said to prefer falsehood to truth, even
as a matter of taste. Compared with races which
agree in treating deceit as both a folly and a dis-
honour, such races appear evidently to have gone
down in the scale. A strong argument for this view
of the case appears in the fact that under proper
influences they can be more or less elevated there-
from ; which is exactly parallel with what we find
to be true of certain domesticated races of animals
53
Symptoms
of retro-
gression in
creation.
Deformed
and stunted
specimens
of men.
Mentally
and morally
depraved
specimens,
The
possible
elevation
of such
people.
Christ and Creation.
Our race
a fallen
one.
Also a
condemned
one, and 80
in double
need.
Deliverance
from con-
demnation.
which have been allowed to run wild. We can
do with such races what we can never do with
those that have always been wild.
These considerations may at least help to prepare
us for hearing what Revelation has to say to us
on the point under discussion. For hearing, for
example, that the whole of our race is a fallen one.
Fallen physically, and so subject to death. Fallen
mentally, having the “understanding darkened.”
Fallen morally, and therefore standing in need of
an outward law or command. Also, in regard to
a still higher aspect of the question, they will at
least prepare us for being told that spiritually
speaking our race has lost the very conception of
what was enjoyed by it once.
These lamentable evils involve necessarily other
evils as great. In other words, besides being
degraded, we are also condemned. Dark indeed,
therefore, in both respects, are the natural pros-
pects of men. The “good tidings” themselves
begin their message by describing them so. As to
our condition, they begin by telling us that we are
“already condemned.” As to our nature, they
begin by telling us that it requires “ creating” anew.
What has been and is to be done for us in
the way of elevation and renewal we have al-
ready considered in part. What has been done
and is doing in the way of delivering us from
condemnation has not been spoken of yet; and
Christ and Creation.
5d
is indeed far too vast a subject to be fully dis-
eussed in this place. But we may at least note
here that Scripture always speaks of it as a work
of such magnitude that, compared with it, even
that of creation is small; and at the same time,
also, as a work of such necessity that even that
of renewal requires its accomplishment first. No
extremer necessity, in short, is known to men,
according to faith. Neither is there any greater
enterprize than that of supplying it, according to
faith. Here, in fact, is the “mystery,” for the re-
vealing of which, according to it, Revelation is given.
The relation of Christ to this work of works
is at once the same as that which was shown us
elsewhere, yet widely different too. The same in
regard to the unquestioned supremacy both of His
position and power. As in creation, so in re-
demption, nothing is done without Him. He is the
Saviour, the Mediator, the Redeemer of man. On
the other hand, the relation of Christ to redemption
is entirely different in regard to the manner in
which He carries it out. What He doesin the one
case by the exercise of His will, He is described as
only achieving in the other by the deep humiliation
of His Person. In the one, He is at the summit
of all; in the other, for a season at least, at its
foot. There, in the place of the King; here, in
that of the criminal. There, bestowing life ; here,
yielding it up. In the one case, in a word, the
Its
magnitude
d
an
necessity.
The place of
Christ in
redemption.
In what
respects
similar to
His place it
regener-
ation.
In what
respects
different,
56
The twofold
harmony of
this wi
our previous
conclusions,
Its
harmony
with the
unity of
His person,
and the
diversity
of His
work.
The
consequent
Sum of all.
Christ and Creation.
Sceptre is His from the first; in the other, it
does not become His till it has smitten Him first.
We look upon all this as being strikingly in
harmony with all that we have previously seen.
In Nature and Time Christ is all in all by such a
majestic and stepless advance as that which the
heathen of old days ascribed to their gods. In
Redemption and Grace Christ is all in all, by such
a weary succession of blood-stained steps as only
He could have trod. How well this agrees, on
the one hand, with the unity of the Person!
How equally well, on the other hand, with the
diversity of the work! Can any redemption be
brought about without cost? And is not such a
cost amply sufficient even for such a redemption
In their several ways, therefore, we see the
final conclusions to which our combined authorities
have now brought us.
The Secret of Creation is to be found in the
Person of Christ. The Secret of Redemption is
to be found in His Cross. There is not much
wisdom—if there be any at all—outside of these
truths! “In Hui» are hid au the treasures of
wisdom and knowledge.”
THE
_ PRESENT CONFLICT WITH UNBELIEF
A SURVEY AND A FORECAST
BY THE
_ REV. JOHN KELLY
Plutline of the Tract,
—— OO
THE Tract is intended to furnish a bird’s-eye view of the conflict,
for the use of interested onlookers and workers among the people,
who are unable to read books on its various branches.
There are three divisions in the Tract: the first, some general
aspects of the conflict ; the second, some special features of 4a
the last, the issues of the conflict.
The extent of the present conflict, the popularization of it, the
spirit of the combatants, and their attitude towards the churches
are treated in the first section. The doctrine of Evolution; the new
science of comparative religions; the substitutes for Christianity
offered ; the discussions relating to the value of Life; the Higher
Criticism ; ; Literary Criticism ; the Place of Christ in the Conflict ;
and the unique claims of Christ and Christianity are rapidly sur-
veyed in the second section.
Sone of the chief difficulties in the way of the acceptance of the
doctrine of Evolution ; the difference in kind between Christianity
and the great non-Christian systems, and the fatal defects of these
systems ; the miserable insufficiency of the offered substitutes for
Christianity are pointed out. The ever-increasing mass of evidence
in favour of the accepted dates and authorship ofthe Sacred Books,
and the failure in destructive as well as in constructive criticism of
the school of so-called Higher Criticism ; the unreasonable and mis-
chievous character of Mr. M. Arnold’s Literary Criticism ; and finally,
the impossibility of accounting for Christ on any naturalistic theory,
the contrast between Christ and the founders of non-Christian re-
ligions, and between Christianity and these religions, the practical
test and special fruits of Christianity are briefly sketched.
References are given to the various numbers of the Present Day
Series in which the subjects, more or less slightly referred to in
this Tract, are treated. Guidance is thus furnished for the use of
the PRESENT DAY SERIES as far as it has gone.
In the last section of the Tract the possible issues of THE
PRESENT CONFLICT WITH UNBELIEF are glanced at; and it is
shown that while the final issue is~certain, the nearer issues are
uncertain; and the need of something more than argument to
bring men to heartfelt obedience to the faith, and to save them
from their sins—even the Gospel, received “in power, and in the
Holy Ghost, and in much assurance ”—is pointed out.
THE
PRESENT CONFLICT WITH UNBELIEF
& Survey and a Forecast,
INTRODUCTORY.
gy #| SUBJECT so vast as THE Present Con-
FEE. f FLICr witH UNBELIEF can only be
SC fa) treated in a very brief and compendious
way within the limits of a Tracr. A
bird’s eye view of it, however, indicating its salient
general aspects and chief special features, and
glancing at its possible issues, will be interesting
to the onlooker, who hears of the conflict on every
side, but has not time to read books on its various
branches. Such a view will also be helpful to
those who are working among the people, and meet
with persons who are unsettled or sceptical on one
or other of the subjects in dispute.
Every combatant in the Christian army is not
placed in a position whence he can see the whole
of the battle; his immediate concern is to quit
himself like a man at his own post of duty;
but he will not be less fitted for his own proper
work in the conflict by taking, as occasion serves,
The vastness
of the
subject,
A bird’s eye
view useful
to onlookers
and workers,
4
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
The
impressions
of an
observer of
ordinary
intelligence,
The range
of subjects
now brought
into the
conflict.
a wider survey of it, and estimating the strength
and resources of the assailants of Christianity
with which he believes his own highest well-being
and the highest well-being of his fellow-men to be
inseparably connected.
I.
SOME GENERAL ASPECTS OF THE
CONFLICT.
1. Tue Extent or THE Present ConFtLicr.
On looking round at the struggle now going on
between faith and unbelief, an observer of ordinary
intelligence, who does little more than dip here and
there into the higher periodical literature of the
day and notice the lists of books that are in circu-
lation, can hardly fail to be struck by the extent of
the present confiict.
It is no longer limited to questions concerning
natural and revealed religion, the historical evidences
of Christianity, the genuineness and authenticity
of the sacred writings; it extends to the question of
the existence and character of God, the possibility
of miracles, the origin of the Universe, the age and
origin of man, the nature of mind, the source, basis,
and sanction of morals, the origin of religion in all
its forms, the nature of the differences between the
various religions of the world, whether there be
any radical and essential difference between them
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
between Judaism and Christianity on the one hand,
and the great non-Christian religions of the past
and the present on the other. The conflict with
unbelief at the present time, in short, goes down
deeper and covers a far more widely-extended
area than it ever did in any previous period of
Christian History.
2. Tue PoruLARIZATION oF It,
A second aspect of the conflict with unbelief that
must strike such an observer as has been supposed, is
the popularization of tt.
In his valedictory article on resigning the direc-
tion of the Fortnightly Review in October, 1882,
the gifted Editor, referrmg to the influence of
Reviews, of which the Fortnightly was the first
English type, wrote:
“They have brought abstract discussion from the library to
the parlour, and from the serious student down to the first man
in the street. The popularity of such Reviews means that really
large audiences, le eros public, are eagerly interested in the radi-
cal discussion of propositions which twenty years ago were only
publicly maintained, and then in their crudest, least true and
most repulsive forms, in obscure debating societies and little
Secularist clubs. Everybody, male and female, who reads any-
thing at all, now reads a dozen essays a year to show with
infinite varieties of approach and of demonstration that we can
never know whether there be a God or not, or whether the soul
is more or other than a mere function of the body. No article
that has appeared in any periodical for a generation back, ex-
cited so profound a sensation as Mr. Huxley’s memorable paper
on ‘The Physical Basis of Life,’ published in this Review in
1869. It created just the same kind of stir, that, in a political
The
conflict
deeper and
wider than
ever before,
The
influence of
the new
monthly
reviews,
6
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
SL
The
conflict
among the
masses.
The
Secularist
weeklies and
monthlies.
epoch, was made by such a pamphlet as the ‘Conduct of the
Allies,’ or the French Revolution. This excitement was a sign
that controversies which had hitherto been confined to books |
and treatises were now to be admitted to popular periodicals ;
that the common man of the world would now listen and have
an opinion of his own on the bases of belief, just as he listens
and judges in politics or art or letters. The Clergy no longer
have the pulpit to themselves, for the new Reviews become
more powerful pulpits, in which heretics were at least as wel-
come as the orthodox. Speculation has become entirely
democratised.”
Mr. Morley in this article was addressing the
educated public. He did not take into account
the masses of the people, among whom also an
active conflict is going on. There are two weekly
papers exclusively devoted to an anti-theistic
propaganda, and a third pretty equally devoted
to political and social questions, and to atheism.
The Secular Review and The Freethinker are
the exclusively anti-theistic ones; Zhe National
Reformer, edited by Mr. Bradlaugh and Mrs.
Besant, the politico-atheistic one. The announce-
ment is made in every number of the National
Reformer that its editorial policy 1s Republican,
Atheistic! and Malthusian. There are also two
monthly magazines: Progress; or, The Freethought
Magazine, and Our Corner. Our Corner discusses —
political and general subjects, as well as questions
in controversy between faith and unbelief.
1 It is only right to state that Mr. Bradlaugh says that he has —
never declared that there is no God. He only denies that there
is a personal Creator and moral Governor. He inclines, we ©
believe, to accept the system of Monism—a kind of idealised —
Materialism.
a a re lO A Bt oe it ilk By I a, Sa
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
The Freethought Publishing Company issues
and actively promotes the circulation of works
regarded as fitted to further the cause on the lines
of Mr. Bradlaugh’s politico-social-atheistic pro-
gramme. The conflict among the masses of the
people is also carried on by means of tracts,
pamphlets, lectures, printed and delivered, and
public discussion. In their workshops and in
their homes there is much free discussion, on all
the vital questions in dispute, among working-men.
Unbelief thus may be said to have free access
to all classes of the people, and free course among
them. Time was, not so long ago, when the
avowal of unbelief in many circles brought social
discredit, if not complete social ostracism, on the
man who was bold enough to make it. It is not
so now. Many object to be called infidels and
atheists, but Agnostic! is a designation which they
do not disclaim.
3. Tue Sprrir or THE CoMBATANTS AND THEIR
ATTITUDE TOWARD CHURCHES.
A third aspect of the present conflict with un-
belief which must strike an onlooker ts the spirit in
which it is carried on by the combatants on etther
side, by the lecturers and writers who address them-
selves chiefly to the educated classes on the one hand,
1 See Present Day Tract, No. 29, The Philosophy of Mr,
Herbert Spencer Ewamined, by Rev. J, Tyerach, M.A,
The
Freethought
propaganda.
Unbelief
has free
access to
all classes,
The terms
Atheist and
Agnostic.
8
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
The
fairness and
courtesy
of the
writers in
the higher
reviews.
The licence
of writers
in the
Secularist
press.
The
courteous
spirit
displayed in
the public
discus3ions.
and by those who write in the Secularist press and
speak on the Secularist platform on the other.
The amenities of controversy are observed in the
literature for the educated. A spirit of fairness
and courtesy, as a rule, distinguishes them. The
new conditions under which the conflict is con-
ducted —the champions of faith and unbelief
agreeing to fight the battle in the pages of the
same Review and speaking in their own names
without any disguise—conduce to, if they do not
absolutely necessitate, this mutual courtesy.
The state of matters among the Secularists is
quite different. In their press, the most outrage-
ous and outspoken blasphemy, of the coarsest and
most revolting kind, pictorial caricature of the most
sacred subjects and themes, of God and of Christ,
and the expression of the most unmeasured per-
sonal ‘contempt for the champions of Christianity,
are not indeed the only weapons used, but are
weapons constantly in use. In the public dis-
cussions with the advocates of Christianity, which
form so marked a feature of the conflict as carried
on among the masses, the rules of courtesy seem
to be generally observed, as far as can be judged
from the printed reports, but unbridled license
is resorted to by many writers in the Secularist
press.
Dr. Flint, in the Lecture on Secularism in his
* Anti-theistic Theories,” speaks of the temperate
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
and becoming language employed in the National
Reformer and Secular Review. He would with-
draw this description, so far at any rate as the
Secular Review under its present management is
concerned, were he to re-write his lecture now.
Its style of controversy is frequently, in its way, as
offensive to Christian feeling as the pictorial cari-
catures which appear in the Preethinker. A spirit
of mildness and toleration on the one hand, and of
bitter and uncompromising opposition on the other,
marks the attitude assumed towards the Church
by the representatives of cultivated Agnosticism
and working-class Secularism respectively. The
former, it would appear, in many cases at least,
go to church, and give a kind of support to the
clergyman, at least in the country; some actually
go to Communion. The latter have not a good
word for the Church or any Evangelical denomina-
tion or society, but oppose her root and branch.
They regard her as a fountain of manifold evil,
and would sweep her away altogether.
Striking illustrations of the attitude towards the
Church of the two forms of unbelief have been
given within the last three or four years, in articles
by able writers. In the Mineteenth Century, during
the year 1882, three articles appeared, entitled
“The Agnostic at Church.” The first was by Louis 7
Greg. He puts the question, “Is an Agnostic
justified under any ordinary circumstances in
The
attitude of
Unbelief
towards the
Church,
The spirit of
cultivated
Agnos-
ticism,
The spirit
of working-
class
Secularism,
8
Agnostic at
Church,
10
The Present Conflict with Unbelvef.
i
Mr. Louis
Greg’s
conclusion
that the
Agnostic
should go
to Church,
His reasons
for coming
to this
conclusion,
Mr.
Shorthouse’s
conclusion
that the
Agnostic
should go to
communion.
attending regularly the worship of a God, whom
indeed he does not absolutely deny, but of whom
he knows nothing?” ‘The conclusion he comes
to is, that for the sake of example to the lower
and lower middle classes, who cannot frame their
lives on an abstract idea, im order to co-operate
with the parson, and strengthen his influence, the
Agnostic should go to church, in the country at
least. He grounds his conclusion on the fact that
the parson is the natural leader in all work that
is to be done for the moral and physical well-
being of the people in the village, and that the
Church does more good than harm directly and
indirectly. He also thinks that his own know-
nothing attitude of mind on the subject of religion
justifies the conclusion. He repudiates the author-
ity of the Bible and Prayer-Book, but recognises
the beauty of thought and language which cha-
racterises them, and the beneficence of the influence
they have exercised. He would not repeat the
Creeds nor offer himself as a communicant, and
would absent himself on the days when the
Athanasian Creed was read.
The second article was by Mr. Shorthouse. He
expresses his general agreement with Mr. Greg,
but goes further. He argues that the Agnostic
should offer himself as a communicant, on account
of his sympathy with the sacramental principle, —
which, he says, underlies all Church worship.
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
‘« This,” he adds, ‘‘is the great underlying principle of life,
by which the commonest and dullest incidents, the most un-
attractive sights, the crowded streets and unlovely masses of
people become instinct with a delicate purity, a radiant beauty,
become the outward and visible sign of inward and invisible
grace, This principle, which underlies all things, is concentrated
in the supreme act of Church worship.”
Li
Mr.
Shorthouse
on the
sacramental
principle.
The third article was, we believe, by a lady, and J. H
is signed J. H. Clapperton. She controverts Mr.
Greg’s reasoning, and maintains that truthfulness,
which must form part of the creed of the Agnostic,
requires conformity of outward personal conduct
to the inward state of thought and feeling. On
moral grounds, this writer’s conclusion is irre-
fragable.
Mr. Greg, for reasons which he assigns, confines
his discussion to attendance at the services of the
Church of England, and sets aside the considera-
tion of attendance at Roman Catholic and Non-
If the
truth were fully known, we believe it would be
found that Agnostics are in the habit of attending
the services both of Roman Catholic and Noncon-
formist churches.
Mr. Goldwin Smith, in his article, “ England
Revisited,’ in Macmillan’s Magazine, October,
1886, referring to the rapid spread of scepticism
and the passion for ritual, which he suspects to be
symptomatic of a loss of interest in prayer and
preaching, making show and music needful, says,
conformist, except Unitarian services.
Olapperton’s
contention
that outward
conduct
should re-
flect inward
thought and
feeling.
Agnostics
go to other
than Church
of England
Services.
12
Mr. Goldwin
Smith’s
view.
The
reticence
of the
Agnostic.
The
qualities
needful for
dealing with
unsettled
minds.
The proposal
of the
Editor of the
Secular
Review,
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
“When the Agnostic goes to church, it is to a
Ritualistic church he goes.” It is not always so.
On Mr. Greg’s principle, he would go to the parish
church, whatever Church party or school of
thought might be represented in it.
Startling revelations would be made as to the
state of belief or unbelief among the people in
large and influential congregations, Evangelical as
well as Ritualist, Nonconformist as well as Church
of England, if the truth on the subject were fully
known. The Agnostic who goes to church is
generally reticent—he does not open his mind to
everybody. One of the ablest living Christian
apologists in this country, once told the present
writer his own experience of the unsettled and
sceptical state of many minds in the large Evan-
gelical congregation of which he was a member.
People spoke freely to him, because they believed
him to be open-minded and liberal. People will
speak to one who has the open-mindedness re-
sulting from thorough familiarity with the subject
in dispute, appreciation of the points of difficulty,
candour in dealing with them, and sympathy with
the doubts and perplexities of unsettled minds.
The attitude of the Secularists towards Christian
churches may be more briefly but very strikingly
illustrated. A few years ago the editor of the
Secular Review proposed a new departure in his
paper; viz., that Secularist candidates should
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
13
come forward for seats in Parliament as the
avowed advocates of Atheism, and that a measure
should be promoted for placing all churches and
chapels under the operation of a Permissive Bill,
in the same way as the United Kingdom Alliance
desires to place public-houses. Opinion on- the
subject among the party was found to be too much
divided to proceed further, and the proposal was
dropped. It illustrates, however, the spirit and
attitude of some at least of the most advanced
wing of Secularists towards Christian churches,
and shows what things would come to if they had
their way. 7
The tolerance which distinguishes the com-
batants in the higher forms of literature may
fairly suggest the question as to the depth of
conviction which it covers. On this point Mr.
Morley says, in the article already quoted:
** How far it goes, leb us not be too sure. Intellectual fair-
ness is often only another name for indolence and inconclusive-
ness of mind, just as a love of truth is sometimes a fine phrase
for temper. ‘To be piquant counts for much, and the interest
of seeing on the drawing-room tables of devout Catholics and
high-flying Anglicans” (he might have added others as well)
‘‘ article after article, sending divinities, creeds, and churches all
headlong into limbo, was indeed piquant. Much of all this
elegant dabbling in infidelity has been a caprice of fashion. The
Agnostic has had his day with the fine ladies, like the black
footboy of other times, or the spirit-rappers and table-turners
of our own. When we perceived that such people actually
thought that the churches had been raised on their feeb again
by the puerile apologetics of Mr. Mallock, then it was easy to
Division of
opinion
among the
Secularists
on the
proposal,
How far the
tolerance in’
the writers
in the higher
forms of
literature
goes,
14
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
Is the
conflict a
tournament
or a battle ?
The reali
of the battle,
Mr. W. R.
Greg’s
account of
the struggle
through
which he
passed.
see that they had never really fallen. What we have been
watching, after all, was perhaps a tournament, not a battle.”
It is satisfactory to read, on Mr. Morley’s
testimony, that the churches have not fallen.
There is no doubt that there has been much of
the caprice of fashion in contemporary infidelity.
Mr. Morley, in forsaking the editorial chair, and
pursuing the course he has subsequently taken,
has indicated pretty plainly his own conviction
that the present conflict between faith and unbelief
is a tournament rather than a battle.
Making all allowance, however, for the element
of fashion and unreality, there can be no doubt
that there has been and is a real battle going on.
Some distinguished champions of unbelief bear the
scars of the fierce struggle through which they
passed before they renounced the more or less
orthodox forms of Christianity in which they were
trained, and took up the negative ground ultimately
occupied by them. To cite one instance alone—
Mr. W. R. Greg, in the preface to his book, Zhe
Creed of Christendom, its Foundation and Super-
structure, after stating the conclusions at which
he has arrived, says,
‘One word in conclusion. Let it not be supposed that the
conclusions sought to be established in this book have been
arrived at eagerly, or without pain or reluctance. The pursuit
of truth is easy to a man who has no human sympathies,
whose vision is impaired by no fond partiality, whose heart is
torn by no divided allegiance. To him the renunciation of error
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
15
presents few difficulties, for the moment it is recognised as
error its charm ceases. But the case is very different with the
searcher whose affections are streng, whose associations are
quick, whose hold upon the past is clinging and tenacious. He
may love truth with an earnest and paramount devotion ; but he
loves much else also. He loves errors which were once the
cherished convictions of his soul. He loves dogmas which were
once full of strength and beauty to his thoughts, though now
perceived to be baseless or fallacious. He loves the Church
where he worshipped in his happy childhood ; where his friends
and his family worship still; where his grey-haired parents
await the resurrection of the just ; but where he can worship
and await no more. He loves the simple old creed of his
earlier and brighter days, which is the creed of his wife and
children still, but which inquiry has compelled him to abandon.
The Past and the Familiar have charms and talismans which
hold him back in his career, till every fresh step forward
becomes an effort and an agony ; every fresh error discovered is
a fresh bond snapped asunder ; every new glimpse of light is
like a fresh flood of pain poured upon the soul. To such a
man the pursuit of truth is a daily martyrdom—how hard and
bitter let the martyr tell. Shame to those who make it doubly
so! Honour to those who encounter it, saddened, weeping,
trembling, but unflinching still ! ”
We cannot doubt that many a champion of
unbelief bears scars of a similar kind of the
struggle through which he has passed, though
few have given such touching expression to their
feelings. We can sympathise with the struggle and
the pain of such a thinker, though we believe him
to have missed the truth which he thought he
had found, and to have embraced positive error.
How real the battle is among the flower of our
young men, every believing teacher of influence
at the great centres of intellectual life knows;
how severe is the struggle many of them have
The struggle
in Mr. W. R,
Greg’s mind,
Others
doubtless
have passed
through
similar
experiences
The battle
among
young men,
16
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
Infidelit
has made
progress.
The
Christian
antecedents
of many
leaders in
Unbelief,
Uneasiness
and un-
settlement
of mind
within the
Church,
to retain the faith they brought with them from
their homes to the University; how many are
worsted in the conflict, make shipwreck of their
faith, and go to swell the ranks of those who are
labouring to overthrow Christianity, The fact
that any man thinks it worth while “to dabble in
infidelity,” is a proof that a real battle is going on,
that infidelity has made considerable progress—an
amount of progress which may well cause anxious
thought to all who have at heart the interests of
the kingdom of Christ and the truth to which He
came into the world to testify.
One of the saddest facts in the conflict is this,
that not a few of the leaders of the army of
unbelief were born and trained in the Christian
fold, and once professed the faith they now seek
to destroy.
Another proof of the reality of the present con-
flict is the uneasiness and unsettlement of mind
felt by many people within the Christian Church,
who, although they have neither tacitly nor openly
embraced any form of infidelity and see enough
in Christianity to keep them within its fold, see,
at the same time, more in the facts and argu-
ments brought forward against it than they are
able to meet.
ee
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
II.
SPECIAL FEATURES OF THE CONFLICT.
1. THe Doctrine or Evouurion.
It is now time to look at the more important
special features of the conflict. One of these is the
part played in tt by the theory of Evolution.
The theory is at once so simple and so com-
prehensive, so easily apprehended and so far-
reaching in its application; the conception it gives
of the processes by which, according to it, the
Universe came to be what it is, and of the period
of time necessary to bring about the result, is so
magnificent, that it is little wonder that many
minds are fascinated and overpowered by it, that
the facts that make for it are made the most of,
and the difficulties in the way of its acceptance
minimised. These difficulties are indeed formidable. 7
The following are some of them. Every effort to
prove that life has ever originated from anything
but life has hitherto completely failed. All the
evidence we possess on the subject goes to prove
that man appeared suddenly; and the earliest
human remains known to us, show that primitive
man was in all essential respects the same as the
man of to-day.1 The “rock record of plant-life”
1 See The Age and Origin of Man Geologically Considered. By
S. R. Pattison, Esq., F.G.S., and Dr. Friedrich Pfaff, Professor
in the University of Erlangen,—Present Day Tract, No, 13,
0
17
The
fascinations
of the
theory of
Evolution.
e
difficulties
of the
theory.
18
The
evidence for
the truth of
the theory
incomplete.
It is neces-
sary to be
on our
guard
against
being
carried away
by the
theory.
The number
and nature
of the
missing
links
formidable.
The theory
neither non-
theistic, nor
anti-theistic.
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
does not show that there has been a development
from the less perfect to the more perfect forms
of vegetable life.
Evolutionists meet difficulties like these by the
expression of a hope that the complete proof of
the doctrine at present lacking will one day be
forthcoming. We may be excused for declining
to receive the doctrine till the evidence is complete.
The imposing character of the theory should put
us on our guard against being carried away by
it, and lead us to keep in mind that although
Evolution is treated as a practically demonstrated
truth by many men of science, both believers and
unbelievers, it is as yet simply an hypothesis await-
ing conclusive proof—proof which perhaps may
never be forthcoming, because it may not exist.
The number and nature of the missing links im
the chain of evidence necessary to demonstrate the
theory are so formidable as to make the amount of
faith needed to receive it as an established truth
so great as to savour almost of credulity.
Atheism and Agnosticism use the theory for
their destructive and negative purposes; but it is
well to remember that it is not necessarily a non-
theistic, or an anti-theistic theory. Indeed, it may
be said to require Theism to make it. workable.
Most defenders of the Christian faith take pains
to show that it is consistent with Theism, though
they may think that it removes God to an im-
ee a
.
;
|
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
19
eee
mense distance from us. Some avail themselves of
the teachings of distinguished non-Christian evolu-
tionists to prove that it is not inconsistent with
faith in Providence and in the efficacy of prayer.
Thus Dr. Matheson uses such teaching. He
Says :
‘When Mr. Spencer speaks of an inscrutable force lying at
the basis of all things, what does he mean? Not simply that
the first stage in the evolution of the world encloses an un-
fathomable mystery, but that every stage in the evolution of
the world encloses an unfathomable mystery. To Mr. Spencer
the primal force is not merely the first force, but the basal force,
the force that lies at the root of every phenomenon. In every
movement of matter, in every pulsation of life, in every
movement of consciousness, there is in the view of this
philosopher an unexplained something, a region which is per-~
fectly inscrutable ; the mystery which we commonly attribute
to creation is with him a universal presence. Now, let us under-
stand what this amounts to; nothing less than this, that the
material chain of effects and causes is not in itself adequate to
explain any phenomenon of nature or of life ; that in point of
fact the principle of external continuity is every moment tran-
scended, but not superseded, by another mysterious principle
of whose character and modes of action we are profoundly
ignorant. Here, then, within the chain of nature there is a
margin not only for that which transcends experience, but,
what is of more importance, for our actual communion with
that which transcends experience.
‘‘ Let us remember that on the principle of Mr. Spencer this
inscrutable force in nature, however incomprehensible to us, is
one that already comprehends us. If we agree to call this force
inscrutable and unsearchable will, we shall already have estab-
lished a scientific basis not only for belief in a guiding providence,
but for the possibility of an efficacious prayer.” ?
Argument of this kind, which does not necessarily
imply that those who use it accept the theory of
1 From an Address delivered at Belfast, 1884.
Admissions
of non-
Christian
evolution-
ists.
How Dr.
Matheson
turns them
to account,
20
Wherein the
theory of
Evolution is
inconsistent
with the
teaching of
Christianity.
The study of
the great
non-
Christian
systems.
The
purpose of
unbelief in
the study.
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
Evolution as established, has its value in the con-
troversy. It wrests the chosen weapons of un-
belief from its hands, and turns them against
itself. It is open to doubt, however, to say the
least, whether the theory of Evolution is consistezxt
with the whole teaching of Christianity—its whole
teaching concerning man,' for instance—concerning
the origin of the human race, the Fall, the first
and second Adam, etc.”
2. THe New Science or ComMPARATIVE RELIGIONS.
Another special feature of the present conflict is
the part the new science of comparative religions plays
im it.
The great non-Christian religious systems are
carefully studied, not only for their own sakes,
as an interesting and important branch of human
knowledge, but, on the unbelieving side, to prove
that the difference between them and Christianity
is only one of degree, and not of kind—that all
religious systems alike are the product of the
human mind merely; and, on the Christian side,
‘See Present Day Tracts on Man, Nos. 12, Zhe Witness of
Mam’s Moral Nature to Christianity, by Prof. Thomson, M.A;
30, Man not a Machine, but a Responsible Free Agent, by
Prebendary Row; 39, Man, Physiologically Considered, by
Prof. Macalister.
* For contributions to the Theistic controversy see Present
Day Tracts, Nos. 5, Zhe Existence and Character of God, by Pre-
bendary Row ; 17, Modern Materialism, by Rev. W. F. Wilkin-
son, M.A.; 20, The Religious Teachings of the Sublime and
Beautiful in Nature, by Canon Rawlinson,
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
21
to show by a comparison and a contrast between
them and Christianity, that the difference between
them and it is vital and essential ; that Christianity
contains every element of truth which they embody
and teach ; that it contains truth which they lack,
and supplies a remedy for moral evil and a motive
power for moral living of which they are wholly
destitute. The strength of the case on the side of
unbelief les in the ethical teaching of some of
these hoary systems, particularly Confucianism.!
But while acknowledging to the fullest extent
everything that can be truly said concerning the
excellence of this moral teaching, as far as it goes,
the Christian apologist can show that what Chris-
tianity has to offer is better than the best in these
great religions.
In discussing these subjects we again meet with
the theory of Evolution as we do in the discussion
of many other subjects,” but we are able to point
out facts that seem inconsistent with it. We are
able to point to the fact, that the further back we
1 See Present Day Tracts, Nos. 14, Rise and Decline of Islam,
by Sir W. Muir ; 18, Christianity and Confucianism Compared in
their Teaching of the Whole Duty of Man, by James Legge,
LL.D. 3 25, The Zend-Avesta, and the Religion of the Parsis, by J.
Murray Mitchell, LL.D. ; 33, The Hindu Religion, by J. Murray
Mitchell, LL.D.; 46, Buddhism, by Dr. H. Robert Reynolds ;
49, Is the Evolution of Christianity from mere Natural Sources
Credible? by John Cairns, D.D. ; 51, Christianity and Ancient
Paganism, by J. Murray Mitchell, LL.D.
* See Present Day Tract, No. 48, The Ethics of Evolution
Examined, by Rev. J. Iverach, M.A,
The purpose
of Christian
believers in
the study.
The strength
of the case
on the
unbelieving
side.
What the
Christian
apologist
can show.
The theory
of Evolution
in relation to
this study.
22
Facts
inconsistent
with the
theory of
Evolution
derived from
the study of
the great
non-
Christian
religions
The
testimony of
Sir Monier
Williams.
His
experience
as a student
of the Sacred
Books of
the East,
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
goin the historical development of these ancient
religions, the nearer we get to the sources of
them, the purer they are found to be. A full
investigation of the oldest religions of the world
furnishes evidence of the all-but, if not the ab-
solutely universal prevalence of monotheistic
beliefs! All this is exactly as it ought not to be
on the assumption of the truth of the doctrine of
Evolution, and exactly as we should expect it to
be on the assumption of the truth of Christianity,
as it has hitherto been generally received and
understood.
It is worth while quoting here the testimony of
an eminent specialist in the science of Comparative
Religions with reference both to the theory of
Evolution as applied to the subject and to the
contrast rather than the comparison of the Bible
with the sacred books of other religions. At the
annual meeting of the Church Missionary Society
in Exeter Hall on the 8rd of May, Sir Monier
Williams said,? referring to the subtle danger that
lurks beneath the duty (of missionaries) of studying
the non-Christian religious systems :
‘Perhaps I may best explain the nature of this danger by
describing the process my own mind has gone threugh whilst
engaged in studying the so-called Sacred Books of the East, as I
have now done for at least forty years. In my youth I had been
1 See Present Day Tract, No. 11, The Early Prevalence of
Monotheistic Beliefs, by Canon Rawlinson.
* Record, May 6, 1887,
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
23
accustomed to hear all non-Christian religions described as
‘inventions of the devil.’ And when I began investigating
Hinduism and Buddhism, some well-meaning Christian friends
expressed their surprise that I should waste my time by
grubbing in the dirty gutters of Heathendom. Well, after a
little examination, I found many beautiful gems glittering
there—nay, I met with bright coruscations of true light flashing
here and there amid the surrounding darkness. Now, fairness
in fighting one’s opponents is ingrained in every Englishman’s
nature, and as I prosecuted my researches into these non-
Christian systems I began to foster a fancy that they had been
unjustly treated. I began to observe and trace out curious
coincidences and comparisons with our own Sacred Book of the
East. I began, in short, to be a believer in what is called the
Evolution and Growth of Religious Thought. ‘These imper-
fect systems,’ I said to myself, ‘ are clearly steps in the develop-
ment of man’s religious instincts and aspirations. They are
interesting efforts of the human mind struggling upwards
towards Christianity. Nay, it is probable that they were all in-
tended to lead up to the One True Religion, and that Christianity
is, after all, merely the climax, the complement, the fulfilment
of them all.’ :
‘*Now, there is unquestionably a delightful fascination
about such a theory, and, what is more, there are really
elements of truth in it. But I am glad of stating publicly
that I am persuaded I was misled by its attractiveness, and
that its main idea is quite erroneous. The charm and danger
of it, I think, lie in its apparent liberality, breadth of view,
and toleration. In the Zimes of last October 14 you will find
recorded a remarkable conversation between a Lama priest and
a Christian traveller, in the course of which the Lama says
that, ‘Christians describe their religion as the best of all
religions ; whereas among the nine rules of conduct for the
Buddhist there is one that directs him never either to think or
to say that his own religion is the best, considering that sincere
men of other religions are deeply attached to them.’ Now, to
express sympathy with this kind of liberality is sure to win
applause among a certain class of thinkers,
‘*We must not forget, too, that our Bible tells us that God has
not left Himself without witness, and that in every nation he that
feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with Him.
Yet I contend, notwithstanding, that a limp, flabby, jelly-fish
He discovers
beautiful
gems,
Observes
coincidences
and
comparisons
with the
Bible.
Regards
Christianity
as the climax
of them all
The main
idea of
Evolution
erroneous,
Spurious
liberality.
The
testimony of
the Bible,
24
The Present Conflict with Unbelies.
The
manliness of
the Bible,
It points to
one only
Saviour.
How non-
Christian
sacred books
are to be
studied,
Reasons for
contrayven-
ing the
favourite
philosophy
of the day.
tolerance is utterly incompatible with the nerve, fibre, and
backbone that ought to characterise a manly Christian. I
maintain that a Christian’s character ought to be exactly what
the Christian’s Bible intends it to be.
“‘Take that Sacred Book of ours; handle reverently the
whole volume ; search it through and through, from the first _
chapter to the last, and mark well the spirit that pervades the
whole. You will find no limpness, no flabbiness, about its
utterances. Even sceptics who dispute its Divinity are ready to
admit that it is a thoroughly manly book. Vigour and manhood
breathe in every page. It is downright and straightforward, bold _
and fearless, rigid and uncompromising. It tells you and meto ~
be either hot or cold. If God be God, serve Him. If Baal be
God, serve him. We cannot serve both. We cannot love both.
Only one Name is given among men whereby we may be saved.
No other name, no other Saviour, more suited to India, to
Persia, to China, to Arabia, is ever mentioned, is ever hinted at.
‘‘What! says the enthusiastic student of the science of religion,
do you seriously mean to sweep away asso much worthless waste
paper all these thirty stately volumes of Sacred Books of the Kast _
just published by the University of Oxford? No—not at all—
nothing of the kind. On the contrary, we welcome these books. _
We ask every missionary to study their contents, and thankfully
lay hold of whatsoever things are’ true and of good report in
them. But we warn him that there can be no greater mistake
than to force these non-Christian bibles into conformity with
some scientific theory of development, and then point to the
Christian’s Holy Bible as the crowning product of religious
evolution. ‘ So far from this, these non-Christian bibles are all
developments in the wrong direction. They all begin with
some flashes of true light, and end in darkness. Pile them, if
you will, on the left side of your study table; but place your
own Holy Bible on the right side—all by itself—all alone—and
with a wide gap between.
** And now, with all deference to the able men I see around
me, I crave permission to teil you why, or at least to give
two good reasons, for venturing to contravene, in so plain-
spoken a manner, the favourite philosophy of the day. —
Listen to me, ye youthful students of the so-called Sacred
Books of the East; search them through and through, and
tell me, do they affirm of Vyasa, of Zoroaster, of Confucius,
of Buddha, of Muhammad, what our Bible affirms of the
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
20
Founder of Christianity—that He, a sinless Man, was made
sin? Not merely that He is the Eradicator of Sin, but that
He, the sinless Son of Man, was Himself made sin. Vyasa and
the other founders of Hinduism enjoined severe penances,
endless lustral washings, incessant purifications, infinite repe-
titions of prayers, painful pilgrimages, arduous ritual, and sacri-
ficial observances, all with the one idea of getting rid of sin.
All their books say so. But do they say that the very men who
exhausted every invention for the eradication of sin were them-
selves sinless men made sin? Zoroaster, too, and Confucius,
and Buddha, and Muhammad, one and all bade men strain
every nerve to get rid of sin, or at least of the misery of sin ;
but do their sacred books say that they themselves were sinless
men made sin? Understand me, I do not presume as a layman
to interpret the apparently contradictory proposition put forth
in our Bible that a sinless man was made sin. All I now con-
tend for is that it stands alone; that it is wholly unparalleled ;
that it is not to be matched by the shade of a shadow of a
similar declaration in any other book claiming to be the expo-
nent of the doctrine of any other religion in the world.
“Once again, ye youthful students of the so-called Sacred
Books of the East, search them through and through, and tell
me, do they affirm of Vyasa, of Zoroaster, of Confucius, of Bud-
-dha, of Muhammad, what our Bible affirms of the Founder of
Christianity—that He, a dead and buried Man, was made Life,
not merely that He is the Giver of life, but that He, the dead and
buried Man, is Life? ‘Iam the Life,’ ‘When Christ, who is
our Life, shall appear.’ ‘He that hath the Son hath Life.’ Let
me remind you, too, that the blood is the Life, and that
our Sacred Book adds this matchless, this unparalleled,’ this
astounding assertion: ‘Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of
Man and drink His Blood, ye have no Life in you.’ Again, I
say, I am not now presuming to interpret so marvellous, so
stupendous a statement. All I contend for is that it is abso-
lutely unique, and I defy you to produce the shade of the
shadow of a similar declaration in any other sacred book of the
world. And bear in mind that these two matchless, these two
unparalleled, declarations are closely, are intimately, are indis-
solubly connected with the great central facts and doctrines of
our religion—the Incarnation, the Crucifixion, the Resurrection,
the Ascension of Christ. Vyasa, Zoroaster, Confucius, Buddha,
Muhammad, all are dead and buried ; and mark this, their
What the
Bible aftirins
of Christ.
What the
books of
other re-
ligions say
their
founders
enjoined,
Further
testimony
of the Bible
concerning
Christ.
No such de-
clarations in
any other
sacred book
in the world.
26 The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
bones have crumbled into dust, their flesh is dissolved, their —
Christianity bodies are extinct. Even their followers admit this. Chris-
alone com- as : 5 E
memorates tianity alone commemorates the passing into the heavens of its
al sev divine Founder, not merely in the spirit, but in the body, and
heavens of ‘ with flesh, bones, and all things appertaining to the perfection
i Divine —_ of man’s nature,’ to be the eteynal source of life to His people.
“ounder, Z
Bear with me a moment longer.
ae dag “‘Tt requires some courage to appear intolerant—to appear
Bible and unylelding—in these days of flabby compromise and milk ca
ee eage of and water concession ; but I contend that the two unparalleled —
religions declarations quoted by me from our Holy Bible make a gulf —
impassable. between it and the so-called Sacred Books of the East which 7
sever the one from the other utterly, hopelessly, and for —
ever—not a mere rift which may be easily closed up, not —
a mere rift across which the Christian and the non-Chris-
tian may shake hands and interchange similar ideas in regard
to essential truths, but a veritable gulf which cannot be
bridged over by any science of religious thought. Yes, a bridge=
less chasm which no theory of Evolution can ever span.
“*Go forth, then, ye missionaries, in your Master’s name; go
forth into all the world, and after studying all its false religions D
and philosophies, go forth and fearlessly proclaim to suffering —
humanity the plain, the unchangeable, the eternal facts of the _
Gospel—nay, I might almost say the stubborn, the unyielding, —
the inexorable facts of the Gospel. Dare to be downright with —
all the uncompromising courage of your own Bible, while with _
it your watchwords are love, joy, peace, reconciliation. Be fair; ¥
be charitable, be Christ-like; but let there be no mistake.
He who Let it be made absolutely clear that Christianity cannot, must
hb deed not, be watered down to suit the palate of either Hindu, —
false to the Buddhist, or Muhammadan, and that whosoever wishes to pass
“ties eee from the false religion to the true can never hope to do so by the
in faith. rickety planks of compromise, or by help of faltering hands held —
out by half-and-half Christians. He must leap the gulf in
faith, and the living Christ will spread His everlasting arms —
beneath and land him safely on the Eternal Rock.”
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
27
8. SUBSTITUTES FOR CHRISTIANITY.
Another special feature of the present conflict, ts
the recognition by unbelief of man’s need for religion
of some kind, and of the necessity of offering some
substitute for Christianity.
The so-called religion of Humanity?! is the only
fully-fledged substitute in the field. It offers col-
lective humanity, or the abstract idea of humanity,
instead of God, as the object of worship.
It is provided with a ritual, a pontiff, a priest-
hood, with a calendar, festivals, and sacraments.
It is needless to describe it in detail; its absurd-
ities have been adequately exposed by many pens.
‘* Almost the only noble characteristic about it,” says
Dr. Flint in his ‘‘Anti-thetstie Theories,” ‘‘is the spirit of dis-
interestedness which it breathes, the stress which it lays on
living for others. In this respect it has imitated, although
longo intervallo, the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But unlike the
Gospel, although it enjoins love to one another with the urgency
which is due, it unseals no fresh source, and brings to light no
new motives of love.”
Referring generally to modern substitutes for
Christianity, Dr. Flint thus sums up the matter :
‘
there is the most perfect balance of all the powers,
and in whose character there is every conceivable
perfection without one single flaw. To what
other conclusion can we come but that Jesus of ©
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
39
Nazareth was all that He claimed to be, all that
His followers in every age have believed and con-
fessed Him to be. The portraiture of Jesus Christ
contained in the Gospels has won the admiration
of all the best minds in the ranks of unbelief.
Testimony has been given to it by them which is
really inconsistent with the principles they hold
and teach, and is strong enough, we believe, to lead
an inquirer to the conviction that Jesus Christ is
the Son of God and the Saviour of the world.
Only one writer! in the higher ranks of unbelief
has ventured to breathe a suspicion against the
perfection of Christ’s charaeter. The Scecularists
in this country have hitherto enjoyed the monopoly
of the use of gross and revolting pictorial carica-
ture. They too were the only assailants of Chris-
tianity who questioned, in carrying on the con-
troversy in this country, the sanity of our Lord
—until an article discussing the subject was
recently admitted into the Fortnightly Review,
Every theory propounded by unbelief to account
for Jesus Christ as He is pourtrayed in the Gospels
utterly breaks down. He cannot be accounted for
on any naturalistic theory whatever. He is not
the product of Evolution. He made a demon-
strable breach in the law of continuity, and rose
heaven-high above his earthly environment. He
was in advance of His own age and of all ages.
1 Francis Newman.
The
testimony of
the best
minds in the
ranks of
unbelief to
Christ.
One exce
tion in the
higher ranks
of unbelief,
unaccount-
ableness
of Christ on
any natural«
istic theory.
40
—
Christ
absolutely
unique in
human
history.
The claims
of Christ un-
paralleled.
Sustained by
clear and
intelligible
evidence.
His power
over the
moral and
material
world, and
over human
hearts,
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
He stands out an absolutely unique character in
human history. He is the key of human history,
the origin and end of all things. In the testimony
of the risen Saviour Himself alone can we find the
most fitting words to bring Him fully before us:
“T am the First and the Last, and the Living One;
and I was dead, and behold, I am alive for evermore,
and I have the keys of death and of Hades.”!
8. Tue Uniquz OCnaims or CHrist AND
CHRISTIANITY.
Here then the Christian may take his stand.
None of the founders of the great non-Christian
religious systems has ever advanced such claims as
Christ to be perfect man and trae God—a Divine
and all sufficient Saviour. The claims of none of the
founders of the great non-Christian religious systems
have ever been sustained by evidence so clear and in-
telligible., Christ’s character has been subjected to
the keenest criticism for eighteen centuries, and no
one has been able to prove that any flaw is to be
found in it.
No founder of any other great religious system
has ever displayed such power alike over the moral
and the material world—a power purely beneficent
in its character? His works have a moral stamp
worthy of the perfection of His character, they are
’ Revelation i. 18 (R.V.).
The Present Conflict with Unbelief. 4}
an integral part of the revelation of the Father
made by Him.? His power over human hearts is
as great to-day as it was in the days of His flesh,
and is experienced by a vastly greater number of
persons.
No system but Christianity provides an ade- The
provisions
quate remedy for the universal malady of sin, true Patty
and efficacious help and consolation in all the """*
sorrows and trials of life, a moral ideal for the
guidance of life, so lofty,’ and a motive power of
such potency to produce obedience and self-sacrifice.
No other system holds out the hope of a blessed
and glorious future of endless existence, the
supreme attraction of which is the unclouded
vision of Him who is the brightness of the glory
of God the Father, and participation in His
perfect holiness.‘
Christ subjects His religion to the practical test : thes le
“ By their fruits ye shall know them.” This is a »y Christ
_ test which any one can apply. Practice, not mere
_ profession, is the ultimate test to which Christ
1 See Present Day Tract, No. 1, Christianity and Miracles at
the Present Day, by Dr. Cairns.
2 See Present Day Tracts, Nos. 35, The Divinity of our Lord
in Relation to His Work of Atonement, by Rev. W. Arthur. No.
44, The Doctrine of the Atonement Historically and Scripturally
Examined, by Dr. Stoughton.
3 See Present Day Tract, No. 40, Utilitarianism, by Prof.
Thomson,
4 See Present Day Tract, No. 45, Zhe Resurrection of Jesus
_ Christ in its Historical, Doctrinal, Moral, and Spiritual Aspeets,
__ by Rev. R. McCheyne Edgar, M.A,
42
The
evidence of
Christian.
philan-
thropy.
influence of
ty. much of the philanthropic effort that has no
-of the indirect influence of the Gospel of Christ —
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
submits his religion. Love is the all-comprehensive
fruit which Christianity is intended to produce—
holy, practical, self-sacrificing love—a love inspired
by unreserved trust in Christ, which shows itself by
obedience to all His commandments. What other
religion has produced so plentiful a crop of labours —
of love of every kind as the religion of Christ?
Philanthropy as we know it, as it has been deve-
loped during the last eighteen centuries, is the —
peculiar fruit of Christianity. Perhaps there
never has been a more abundant growth of it than —
in our own day. There can be little doubt that
formal connection with Christianity is the result —
on the thoughts and conduct of men.!
IIl.
CONCLUSION.
Tuer Issues OF THE CONFLICT.
Berore closing this rapid survey of the Present
Conflict with Unbelief, it may be well to consider
1 See Present Day Tract, No. 4, Christianity and the Life
that now is, by Dr. Blaikie. No. 6, Zhe Success of Christianity
and Modern Explanations of it, by Dr. Cairns. No. 7, Chiis-
tianity and Secularism, by Dr. Blaikie. No. 23, The Vitality —
of the Bible, by Dr. Blaikie. No. 31, The Adaptation of the —
Bible to the Needs and Nature of Man, by Dr, Blaikie.
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
43
the possible issues of it. Of the ultimate triumph
of the truth, however long the conflict may endure,
no Christian can have any doubt.
It is not the ultimate issues, however, so much
as the nearer and more uncertain issues that we
would consider. We would glance at a few of
those indications which may help us to form an
opinion as to the possible earlier issues of the
conflict, and confine our view to those indications
as affecting our own country.
When we think of the prevalence of unbelief
and of the present conflict with unbelief, we think
chiefly of the cultured classes on the one hand, and
of the masses of working people among whom the
Secularist propaganda is carried on on the other.
Touching the former classes, the state of mind
that prevails is delineated in a striking manner in
an article that appeared in the Spectator of the 20th
November, 1886, entitled, “ Will Culture outgrow
Christianity ?”
The article was occasioned by a eau on the
subject, addressed to the students of Manchester
New College, by Professor Upton. The writer
says:
‘* While Professor Upton chooses strong ground when he uses
the very conception of Evolution to refute the view that this
process should have produced a religious being only to dis-
appoint cruelly all the religious instincts it had fostered, he
seems to us to ignore in some degree the strength of the evidence
that for some time back Culture has been so far outgrowing
The
ultimate
triumph of
Christianity
certain.
The state of
mind
among the
cultured
classes,
Professor
Upton’s
address.
The
speculation
on the
subject,
44
The
considera=
tions pressed
on the man
of culture.
The effect
upon him,
Will culture
outgrow
Christianity?
The Present Conflict with Unbelies.
ee a
Christianity as to deprive a much larger portion of the cul-
tivated world of its Christian faith than ever was deprived of
that faith by culture, at least since the revival of learning.”
Contrasting the days of Butler with our own, the
writer in the Spectator says, referring to the former,
“ Tt was less culture than cynicism that paralyzed Christiar
feeling.”
And goes on to add:
‘* But now it may be said in a very real sense that it is culture —
which endangers Christianity ; that the consciousness of the
wideness of the field of knowledge, of the number and minute-
ness of the difficulties in the way of conviction, the daunting
uncertainty that not even the most learned man can survey,
much less grapple with, the multitude of the considerations
which may be fairly and honestly said to bear directly on the
truth or falsehood of the Christian creed. Libraries may be
collected on but one aspect of the question ; philology, scholarship,
critical learning be heard on one great class of questions ;
philosophy, psychology, physiology, put in their claims to a
hearing on another. Then comes science with the @ priori
improbability—or if it be very rash, it will say impossibility—
of the Christian story ; and then finally, the student of the
mythologies and of the various superstitions of the different
savage tribes claims to have his account of the matter heard, in
order that the believer may learn from it a legitimate self-
distrust. Amidst this wilderness of evidence of all kinds, the
man of culture not unnaturally gets dazed and paralyzed by all
these cross-claims on his judgment, and so it happens that in
his mind Culture tends to outgrow Christianity. In relation to
all aspects of it, he finds in himself a number of half-matured
thoughts and half-finished trains of reasoning, and his mind
becomes a mass of suspended judgments and postponed investi-
gations. Is it or is it not likely that Culture will outgrow
Christianity? It can hardly be denied that in our own age
culture has frequently outgrown the political doctrines of the
last age, and the social conditions on which the cohesion of
society rested ; and that in many cultivated minds Nihilism-
Socialism, Anarchism have been the result while in a very
Lhe Present Conflict with Unbelief.
45
ae
much larger number of cultivated minds a deep despair of ever
attaining to certainty solid enough to convince the multitude
has superseded all the old and firmly-established convictions.
Will not the same process unsettle still more effectually religious
conviction? Will any clear guiding belief grow out of the
crowd of suspended beliefs in which the tournament of contro-
versialists has ended.”
In answer to these questions of the writer in the
Spectator, we may say for ourselves, viewing the
conflict as a merely intellectual one from its merely
human side,—without for one moment granting that
the weight of argument on any position in dispute
is on the side of unbelief, or that Christian faith
will ever become extinct, even for a time,—religious
convictions may become more unsettled, and it is
possible enough that no clear guiding belief may
grow out of the crowd of suspended beliefs; un-
belief may become more generally prevalent—may
win what may be regarded as a triumph for a
time. At the worst it will only be for a time, but
its temporary wider spread is, to say the least, a
possibility. We can point to great names in the
ranks of culture, literary and scientific, that are
Christian; we can point to many hopeful signs at
our universities and elsewhere; but making all
allowance for the hopeful signs, facts do not
justify the most sanguine anticipations concerning
the earlier and nearer issue of the present conflict
with unbelief in the cultivated classes, especially
among those who may be so described in the
higher and stricter sense, and whom the writer in
Unbelief
may become
more
prevalent.
Scientific
and literary
Christians of
eminence, *
46
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
The state of
the masses.
ist leaders.
The ibility
possi
of their }
being won
ower to
Secularism.
the Spectator had probably in view, rather than
the educated classes generally.
Touching the masses among whom the Secu-
larists chiefly work, those who know their state
of mind best tell us that, viewing them as a
whole, and making all allowance for the measure
of success which certain Christian agencies have
had among them, their feeling in relation to
Christianity is one of indifference, more than of
positive unbelief—that they are prejudiced against
the churches. A contingent of them, as we know,
is actively opposed to all religion. The masses
are specially open to the influence of the Secu-
larist leaders, who identify themselves with their
most advanced political aspirations and principles.
The question is, Are they likely to be won over to
the camp of positive, anti-theistic unbelief P
We cannot see how, looking at their actual
condition, and their practical relation to Christianity
and to Christian agencies, the possibility of this
can be denied. It would be gomg much too far
to say that there is a likelihood of their going
over in a body to the camp of Secularism. Much
special effort is being put forth by churches,
societies, and agencies of various sorts to win them
to Christ and the Gospel. Never, perhaps, was
more earnest thought and effort directed to this
end; but as yet there are few signs of a general
breaking-up of their indifference, of a general
The Present Conflict with Unbelief.
47
abandonment of their prejudices, and a general
disposition to accept Christianity. There is much in
the spirit and efforts of the Christian community to
excite hopes, but surely there is much in the state
of the masses of the people to excite misgivings.
The true state of the case should be fairly and
fully looked at; if so looked at, the champion of
Christianity and the herald of the Gospel will not
be unmanned, but rather nerved for the conflict.
Any under-estimate of the strength and resources
of the foe, any exaggerated estimate or a too con-
fident reliance on the human and material resources
of the Christian Church, and any too sanguine
anticipation of the speedy and complete triumph
of the truth, are likely to lead to defeat and disap-
pointment. The final triumph of the truth is certain,
but the conflict may be long, and, judged by the
numbers of avowed followers on either side, the
fortunes of the fight may fluctuate.
In one view it is not altogether satisfactory that
at this time of day so many of the best and finest
minds in the Church of Christ, are engaged
in the defence of the truth against the assaults
of unbelief, instead of being given to its procla-
mation and exposition. It argues the existence
of already widespread unbelief and still wider
unsettlement in men’s minds. In another view
it is a very hopeful sign, showing as it does that
Christianity has champions who can meet on equal
The facts
should be
ra
The conflict
may be long,
its fortunes
may
fluctuate.
An
unsatis-
factory sign.
48
The Present Conflict with Unbelief,
tS SSSSSSSSSFNISNNSSIESRGnes
What argu-
ment can do.
What is
needed for
salvation
from sin,
What is
most to be
desired.
terms the foremost leaders of unbelief, and that
the taunt of the Secularists, that the Gospel can
be “preached, but not defended,” is unfounded, and
encouraging us to believe that men capable of
maintaining the faith in face of the fiercest opposi-
tion will always be raised up in the time of need.
The work of defending the faith can never be
wisely neglected by the Christian Church; but it
must ever be remembered that it can at best only
confirm the believer, silence the gainsayer, and pro-
duce intellectual conviction in the doubter. Some-
thing more than argument is needful to bring men
to heartfelt obedience to the faith, to save men
from their sins, to overcome the inherited bias to
evil native to the human heart, which leads to
resistance to the truth of God, even the Gospel
“received in the Holy Ghost, and in much assur-
ance.” It will be a very hopeful sign when the
need and the demand for apologetic work become
less and less, and the need and the demand for
positive and constructive work become more and
more, because men, conscious of a darkness which
no mere advance of knowledge can ever dissipate,
and of needs which no human or earthly resources
can ever supply, are disposed to learn of Him who
is “the Light of the world,” and are hungering
for “the Bread of Life.”
THE EVIDENTIAL VALUE
OBSERVANCE OF THE LORD'S DAY
BY THE
REV -G, F. MACLEAR, D-D.,
Argument of the Wract,
—4< 4
Tue force of the evidence in favour of a belief derived from
public services contemporaneous with its origin, and uninter-
ruptedly perpetuated throughout the body which holds it, is
pointed out. The earliest evidence for the observance of
the Lord’s Day is adduced. ‘The testimony of St. John and
St. Paul on the subject, in the light of their nationality and
training, and the significance of the term “‘ The Lord’s Day,”
are examined. It is pointed out that the observance of the
Day, though not enacted by a law in the Apostolic
Church, yet grew up and made its way by the intrinsic weight
of some overwhelming reason for it. The question, What
was this reason? is answered, and the conclusion is arrived
at that the historical fact of the Resurrection of the Lord
alone affords an adequate exnlanation of its origin and
observance.
THE Evi{DENTIAL VALUE
OF THE
IBSERVANGE OF THE LORDS DAY.
—VYorow—
SECTION I.
pe—=rAr has truly been observed that “no
ea| evidence of the power and reality of
va ae a belicf can be less open to suspicion
"than that which is derived from
public services, which, as far as all evidence reaches,
were contemporaneous with its origin, and uninter-
ruptedly perpetuated throughout the body which
holds it.” Amongst these public services none is
more striking than the observance amongst all
Christian nations of “ the Lord’s Day.”
11. However the observance of this particular
day may have originated, here it is. It has lasted
through more than eighteen hundred years. It
has survived many storms and revolutions, During
these centuries the most diverse political systems
have been established and overthrown. Empires,
dynasties, kingdoms have passed away. New
worlds have been discovered. The very languages
' Weatcott’s Gospel of the Resurrection, pp. 181, 1382. Kid. 3.
The value
of publie
Services as
evidence of
the power
and reality
of a belief,
The fact
of the
observance
of the
Lord’s Day.
Its long
continuance
It survives
all changes,
Enactments
with
reference
to the
observance
of the day.
The
obligation
of the day
recognized
not ordained
by the
Council
of Nicea,
The Hvidential Value of
which were spoken during the early period of these
centuries have given place to others. Habits,
manners, modes of thought, theories, opinions,
philosophies have changed. But the observance
of this day, “the first day of the week,” as a day
set apart for religious worship, still survives,
Except for a brief period of madness during the
reign of terror in France, the observance has
known no discontinuance, and has won for itself
the reverent acquiescence of some of the greatest
intellects the world has ever seen.
m1. During these eighteen hundred years there
have been various enactments put forth respecting
the observance of this day. Passing over those of
modern and medizval times, let us take one which
is found amongst the decrees of the first Gicume-
nical Council of Nicwa, a.p. 825. We find it laid
down by the Fathers there and then assembled,
that,
‘*Forasmuch as some on the Lord’s Day bow the knee in
prayer, as also on the other Days of Pentecost, for the sake of
uniformity they now shall stand to offer their prayers to God.” !
tv. What is noticeable here is that the members
of the Council, assembled as they were from the
most diverse parts of the Roman world, yet make
no doubt as to the obligation of this day. They
do not ordain it. They do not defend it. They
assume it as an existing fact, and refer to it quite
incidentally for the purpose of regulating an indif-
1 Council Nic. Can. xx,
The Observance of the Lord’s Day. 5
a EE ee Seta a Oto ol a eh Li oN 2
ferent matter—the posture of Christian worshippers
on this day.
v. Four years previous to this Council, we find oe
the Emperor Constantine, a.p. 321, laying it down ©*tantine.
in an edict, which was to apply to Christians as
well as Pagans, that there should be on the first
day of the week a cessation from business on the
part of functionaries of the law and of private
citizens. The Emperor does not indeed call it the
first day of the week. He terms it the “venerable
Day of the Sun.” But he does not anticipate that
his Christian subjects will misunderstand him, or
object to the observance here prescribed. Nor tbc sfiay
do we anywhere read of their doing so. They egos sy:
acquiesce in the prohibition of business on this
day, and therefore we may presume they deemed
they had reason for doing so. The expression
“Day of the Sun,” our Sunday, was quite familiar
to the Christians in the times of the Emperor, and
in this edict he calls the day by a name which, as
it was in ordinary use, could not possibly offend
his heathen subjects.1 What is worthy of remark pe het
here is that, like the authors of the Nicene Canon, the dae al
Constantine offers no word in defence of the obli- “4°
*“Omnes judices urbanwque plebes et cunctarum artium
officia venerabili die Solis quiescant.” ‘Let all judges and
pecples of towns, and the duties of all professions cease on the
venerable day of the Sun.” See Richard Baxter’s remarks on
this decree in his treatise on Zhe Divine Appointment of .the
_ Lord's Day, p. 41.
6
The Evidential Value of
a
The
testimony
of various
bishops of
the early
Church to its
observance.
The
testimony
of Pliny the
Younger,
gation to observe the day. With them he equally
assumes that this will be at once recognised.
vi. Pursuing our course still further back we
find, in the year a.p. 300, Peter, bishop of Alex-
andria, saying, “We keep the Lord’s Day as a day
of joy,”! and in a Synodical letter, issued in A.p.
253, we have Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, mention-
ing as a notorious fact the celebration of “ the Lord’s
Day,” which is at once “ the eighth and the first.’’”
Tertullian, speaking about fifty years before (4.D.
200), of the solemnity of the Lord’s Day, calls it
sometimes “Sunday,” sometimes “the first day
of the week.”® About the year a.p. 170, Melito,
bishop of Sardis, puts forth a treatise respecting the
day, and Dionysius, bishop of Sardis, writing to the
Church of Rome, mentions its observance quite
casually and without any word of explanation. Ii —
we go back thirty years, we come to Justin Martyr,
who flourished in a.v. 140. He mentions the first
day of the week as the chief and first of days, and
states that on it is held an assembly of all who
live in the cities and in the rural districts, on
which the writings of the Prophets and the
Memoirs of the Apostles are read.* Still earlier,
about a.p. 112, Pliny the Younger, writing as
governor of Pontus and Bithynia, to the Emperor
1 Thy kupiakhy xapnoouvys jucpay &youer.
2 See Dr. Hessey’s Bampton Lectures, Lect. i, id.
3 Tertull. Apol. c. 6; De Cor. c. 3.
4 Justin Martyr, Apol.i.; Dial. c. Tryph.
The Observance of the Lord’s Day. i
RIN SoBe SE ESE diate PULSE os Seat SCRA Seas Oe
Trajan, describes the Christians as accustomed to
meet together on “a stated day” (stato die) before
it was light, for the purpose of worship.
vil. The catena is thus fairly complete during
the second century. From the letter of this
heathen Proconsul it is but a step, whether we
take the earlier or the later date of its composi-
tion, to the Apocalypse of St. John, Writing from peste
his place of exile to the Seven Churches of Asia St John
Minor, he says without a syllable of comment or
explanation, as though his meaning would be at
once understood, “I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s
Day.’ But still earlier, in a letter writen by St. Cai hiyie
Paul from Ephesus, a.p. 57, to the Church of tte Corin-
Corinth, the Apostle says, “ Upon the first day of
the week, let every one of you lay in store as God
hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings
when I come.” The authenticity of this letter is not
denied by the most remorseless modern criticism ;
and as he assumes that the Corinthians observe this
day, so we find the Apostle observing it himself,
Thus we read of his spending a week at Troas, and St. Paul’s
when “on the first day of the week” the disciples Practice.
were “‘gathered together to break bread,” “he
discoursed with them.’
vil. Now what is very singular is that we
1 Pliny’s Letters, xevi.
‘Eyevouny év Tvetuars ev rH xupraxy juepe. Apoc. i. 10.
& Acts, xx.'7,
8 The Evidential Value of
The never find the dedication of this day to religious
observance
oP oo worship made a matter of question or argument.
Lord’s Day
never made
never made Ttis never elaborately defended against objectors.
avrament in Lt is accepted without dispute by St. Paul, St.
the Apos-
tolic or sub- Luke, and St. John, by writers of the sub-Apostolic
Apostolic
age, DY ne, ABCs by Constantine in his imperial decrees, by the
or the, Fathers of the Council of Nicza in their Canons.
Spe I say the assumption of a valid reason for the
observance of this day, without any explanation or
laboured apology, is very remarkable. It is obvious
that for some cause or other, it was deemed that the
observance of the day could command an instinctive
assent. The inquiry, therefore, naturally suggests
itself, What were the grounds that justified it?
SECTION II.
See 1. Tuat its observance needs justification will
Feestrena VT apparent on very little reflection. For St. Paul,
Web ace who thus speaks of the “first day of the week,”
St. Paul and : i
st. Fauland and St. John, who represents himself as having
been in the Spirit on “ the Lord’s Day,” had been
brought up in the strictest principles of Judaism.
u. Let us deal first with St. Paul. Finding it
necessary on one occasion to defend himself against
certain false teachers, who prided themselves on —
The purity their purely Jewish extraction, he emphasizes with
H b = © . > .
descent, | particular minuteness the purity of his own descent.
“Are they Hebrews?” he asks, and replies, ‘‘So
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they
the seed of Abraham ? so am I.”! On another
occasion, writing to the Galatians, he describes
himself as being “advanced in the Jews’ religion
beyond many of his own age among his countrymen,
being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions
of the fathers.”? Once more addressing the men
of his nation at Jerusalem, he says, “I am a Jew,
born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this
city at the feet of Gamaliel, instructed according
to the strictest manner of the law of our fathers.’
On yet another occasion he says, “I am a Pharisee,
the son of Pharisees.”’* Thus St. Paul was a
Hebrew of the Hebrews.
uu. Next let us take St. John. Though he
never was, like the great Apostle of the Gentiles,
at one of the Rabbinical schools, yet he was a Jew
of Northern Palestine, and while unacquainted with
the glosses of tradition, he kept the old simple faith
in the letter of the law. Once and again his zeal
broke out against those who did not think as he did,®
and against those who, like the Samaritan villagers,
refused to treat his Master with hospitality.® In the
Acts we find him keeping the feast of Pentecost,”
frequenting the Temple, observing the Jewish hours
of prayer, and conforming to Jewish usages.®
FS) CO «XI ey) LO
2 Gal. i. 14. R.V. * Acts xxii. 3. 4 Acts xxiii. 6, R.V.
5 Mark ix. 38; Lukeix. 49. §& Luke ix. 54. 7 Acts fi, lh.
8 Acts ii. 46; iii. 1.
9
His
proficiency
in the Jews
religion,
The strict-
ness of his
Jewish
education,
St. John—
a Jew of
Northern
Palestine.
His zeal,
His
conformity
to Jewish
usages,
10
The age of
St. Sohn
and 8t.
Paul.
The Puritan
period of
the Jewish
Church,
The Hvidential Value of
iv. The writers, then, who first employ these
remarkable expressions were of Jewish nationality,
and had been brought up under all the influences
that moulded the life of the Elect Nation. Now,
undoubtedly it is true that the forefathers of the
Nation had been unable to resist the spell of the
various idolatries practised by the peoples lying
around the Holy Land, and had neglected the
observance of the time-honoured Sabbath. But
the Jerusalem of the age of the Prophets was not
the Jerusalem of St. John and St. Paul. It was
necessary for the Prophet Isaiah to utter solemn
warnings against the profanation of the day,’ and
for Jeremiah and Ezekiel to denounce the violation
of it as one of the greatest of the national sins.’
But during the dreary years, when the people went
into captivity and “hanged their harps by the
waters of Babylon,” all this was changed. The
same impulse seized them under which the Christian
world of the sixteenth century sprang back, over the
whole of the Middle Ages, either to the Primitive
or to the Apostolic times. The return from the
Captivity marks the rise of the Puritan period of
the Jewish Church.*
v. After the times of Nehemiah and Ezra,‘ there
is no evidence of the Sabbath being neglected by
4 Jsa. lviii. 13, 14. 2 Jer. xvii. 21-27.; Ezek. xx. 12-24,
8 Stanley’s Jewish Church, iii, p. 31.
4 Neh. x. 31; xiii. 15-22.
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
il
the Jews, except by such as fell into open apostacy.'
From the Gospels we learn that the Jews in our
Lord’s time laid the most marked stress upon the
observance of the Sabbath, and the minute rules
imposed respecting it, and the slightness of the acts
whereby its sacredness could be impaired, receive
constantly recurring illustration. The nation
might be opposed and apparently crushed by the
stern power of Idumzean or Roman rulers, but the
slightest effort to enforce customs not authorized by
the Mosaic law was the signal for an outbreak of
zeal and fanaticism which bore down everything be-
fore it, and from which even the boldest statesmen
recoiled. The Maccabeean generals at first declined
to fight against Antiochus or to defend themselves
on the Sabbath,
‘* Because,” says Josephus, “they were not willing to break
in upon the honour they owed the Sabbath even in such dis-
tresses, for our law requires that we rest on that day.” ?
Later leaders, Mattathias and Jonathan, allowed
their countrymen to repel, but not to attack an
enemy on that day. The Jewish historian, how-
ever, bears the most complete testimony to the
strictness with which the day was observed,? and
the sneers of Horace, Juvenal, and Persius‘ bear
11 Mace. i. 11-15, 39-45. 2 Jos. Ant. xii. 6, 2.
* Jos, “Ant:-xiv.6)2 3 xvit. 9), 2:
4 ‘*Hodie tricesima Sabbata. Vin tu
Curtis Judzis oppedere ?”’—Hor. Sat. i. ix. 69.
** To-day is our thirtieth Sabbath. Do you desire to offend the
circumcised Jews?”
The stress
laid on
Sabbath
observance
in our
Lord’s time,
Opposition
to the
enforcement
of customs
not author-
ized by the
Mosaic law.
The
testimony
of Josephus
to the
strict
observance
of the day.
12
The Lvidential Value of
The
observance
of the
Sabbath the
pledge of
the Jew’s
nationality,
Excitement
produced by
placing the
Roman
eagle on
one of the
portals of
the temple,
and by the
introduction
of the
military
standard
into Jeru-
salem.
out the statement that wherever the Jew went, the
observance of the Sabbath became the most visible
pledge of his nationality.
vi. So great, indeed, was the re-action after the
return from the Captivity, so intense the readiness
to resent the slightest departure from the enactments
of the law, that the Idumzan Herod could not set
up in the theatre the representations of the victories
of Cesar, or place the Roman eagle on one of the
portals of the Temple without producing a violent
outbreak of popular excitement. On another
occasion, the Roman governor Pilate, under cover
of night, ventured to introduce the military stand-
ards into Jerusalem.! In the morning the populace
awoke to the consciousness of this insult to their
strongest prejudices. Abstaining from all violence,
they sent a deputation to the governor at Casarea,
intreating him to remove the standards. For
days the ambassadors crowded his pretorium; and
when Pilate brought out his troops to overawe and
disperse them, they flung themselves with one
accord upon the ground, and there remained im-
** Quidam sortiti metuentem Sabbata patrem
Nil preter nubes et cceli numen adorant.”—Juvenal Sat. xiv. 96.
“ Some, whose lot it is to have a father paying respect to Sabbaths,
Worship nething except the clouds and the divinity of the sky,”
and Ovid A. A.i. 76, ‘‘ Cultaque Judeo septima sacra Syro”—
‘* And the festival of the seventh day observed by the Syrian
Jew ;” Persius Sat. v. 184, ‘‘ Labra moves tacitus recutitaque
Sabbata palles,”—‘“ You move your lips in silence and turn pale
at the circumcised Sabbath.”
1 Jos, Ant. xv. 8, 2.
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
moveable for five days and as many nights, declaring
with vehemence that they were ready to die rather
than sanction any infringement of their law, so
that in the end Pilate was constrained to withdraw
the obnoxious emblems.! Later still, the insane
edict of Caligula, demanding that he should receive
divine honours, and that a golden statue of himself
should be placed in the Holy of Holies,? while
in other provinces of the Empire it met with little
or no resistance, excited amongst the Jewish nation
the most violent hostility. The polished Athenians
sighed to see the heads of some of their noblest
images struck off, and the trunks carried to Rome,
to be united to the features of a barbarian Emperor.
But it was a sigh for the insult offered to art, taste,
and feeling. It was nota sigh for the profanation
of their religious principles which they resented.3
The Jews, on the other hand, were ready to resist
even unto blood any insult offered to their national
faith and the Mosaic law.
vu. But what were the violations of the religious
sentiment of the nation either actually carried out
or attempted by a Herod, a Pilate, a Caligula, com-
pared with the conduct of those who for the first time
practically transferred the honour due to the ancient
Sabbath to “the first day of the week?” What
1 Jos. Ant. xvii. 3, 1, 2; Bell. Jud. ii. ix. 2-4,
2 Philo in Flacc. c. 7. Leg. ad Caium 26; Sueton. Calig, xxii.
® Merivale’s Romans under the Empire, vi. 45.
18
The hostility
to the edict
of Caligula,
The
profanation
of their
religious
principles
resented by
the Jews.
The
violation of
religious
sentiment
involved in
the transfer
of the
honour due
to the
ancient
Sabbath to
the first day
of the week.
14
The Kvidential Vatue of
The Jewish
training and
practices
of the
innovators,
Their
disregard
in one
particular of
the fondly
cherished
tradition
of the
nation.
What the
Sabbath
was to the
Jew.
was the ignorant disregard of time-honoured
scruples on the part of heathen rulers, compared
with the startling practices of these daring innova-
tors? They, at any rate, could not plead ignorance
or unconsciousness of the popular feeling. Brought
up from earliest childhood in the strictest observ-
ance of the Mosaic law, they retained many of
their religious customs They were found at the
fixed hours of prayers joining in the Temple
worship; they observed the great annual festivals,?
they conformed even in minor points to many legal.
and ceremonial enactments.. And yet, in one most
momentous particular, they did not scruple to dis-
regard the fondly cherished tradition of the nation.
To the Jew the Sabbath was the weekly commem-
oration of the rest of God after the Creation.
“Remember,” said the Great Lawgiver, “that
thou keep holy the Sabbath day. For in six days
the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all
that in them is, and rested the seventh day;
wherefore the Lord blessed the seventh day and
hallowed it.”* “Israel was the people to whom
God had revealed the mystery of creation; that
master-truth by which human thought is saved
now as of old from the sin and folly of confound-
ing God with his works. It brought before the
mind of the Jew the ineffable majesty of the
1 Acts i. 14; iii. 1, 2 Acts xx. 16. 3 Acts xxi. 26.
4 Exod. xx. 3, 11.
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
Great Creater, between whom and the noblest work
of His Hands there yawns an impassable abyss. ” 4
And yet, though no one could have felt the force
of this more completely than St. Paul, he does not 7?
scruple to run counter to the prejudices and feel-
ings of his nation on the subject.
vil. He seeks out his countrymen, it is true, in
their synagogues ? on-the Sabbath, and there ex-
pounds to them the Hebrew Scriptures; but when
he celebrates a service of his own, what do we
find? Take the case when he reaches Troas, and
abides there seven days. What does he do? How
does St. Luke’s narrative run? Does he say,
**On the last day of his stay, Paul called the disciples to-
gether to break bread, and preached unto them ?”
Is this what we find? Instead, we read,
‘*On the first day of the week Paul preached unto them.”
When again he bids the Galatians and Corinthians‘
make a religious collection for the poor saints at
Jerusalem, he directs that it shall be carried. out
on the self-same day.
1x. How comes it to pass that the first day of
the week has already become the stated day of
Christian assembling ® for breaking the Bread, for
1 Liddon’s Easter Sermons, ii. 92.
2 Acts xiii. 14, 42, 44; xvi. 13. ; xvii. 2.; xviii. 4.
P Acta zx.i74 0771 .Cor,,, xvir, 2.
See Hessey’s Bumptom Lectures, p. 40,
15
8t. Paul’s
conduct in
relation to
His
observance
of the first
day of the
week,
His
instructions
as to the
collection
for the
poor to the
Galatians
and
Corinthians
The Evidential Value of
receiving instruction, for collecting alms? Why
do we never find the Apostle inculcating the
carrying out of these duties on the seventh day?
What motive had he for making or even conniy-
ing at this change from the seventh to the first day P
When we reflect on the traditions amidst which
ate the Apostle had been brought up from his earliest
years, on the force of the religious ideas which had
been to him as the atmosphere he breathed, the
fact that he acquiesces in the change and gives
no elaborate explanation of it is very remarkable.
That such a revolution of sentiment should have
emanated from such a soil as Judaism is very
startling. It calls for some adequate explanation
consistent with its occurrence at the time it did,
and at an historic epoch ot which we can assign
the date.
SECTION III.
1. Bur there is something still more surprising.
St. John speaks of himself at the outset of the
Apocalypse, and says in the passage to which
reference has already been made, “I was in the
isle that is called Patmos, for the Word of God
and the testimony of Jesus. I was in the Spirit
on the Lord's Day.”
u. What did he mean by this expression ?
There is no real reason for doubting that by “the
Lord’s Day” St. John meant what St. Paul terms
1 Apoc. i 9, 10.
ee ee ee ee
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
“the first day of the week.”! But what is es-
pecially noteworthy is the solemn and momentous
name which St. John applies to it, and which the
Christian Church in every age has agreed to bestow
upon it. He calls the first day of the week
fy Kupcaxy iyépa,? “the Lord’s Day,” and thus con-
nects it by its very name with a Person.
m1. What did he mean by this term? It is a
very uncommon one. It occurs here, and here only.
The adjective Kvptaxdg denotes “ belonging to a lord
It occurs in two places only throughout
the entire New Testament. It is found here, and
St. Paul uses it in the eleventh chapter of his
First Epistle to the Corinthians, where he calls
the Eucharistic feast the “Supper of the Lord,”
ro Kuptaxoy detrvove Now the name Kupie, Lord,
is applied to Christ frequently in the New
Testament.
Thus (a) there are texts in which He is called
Lord in the various acceptations of Master over
or ruler.”
1 Some indeed, as Eichhorn, understand the Lord’s Day to
refer to Easter Day, but this is quite improbable. Others
maintain that it means the Day of Judgment. But the great
‘‘Day of the Lord” in this sense is expressed by 7 juépa Tod
Kuptov, 2 Thess. ii. 2 ; or 7 juépa Kuplov, 2 Pet. iii. 10 ; or, the
‘*Day of Christ,” quépa Xptorod, Phil. ii. 16; never by ) Kupiarh
nuepa.
2 Apoc. i. 10. ) Kupiaxh juépa = in Latin, dies dominica, from
which in the Romance languages the first day of the week
derived its name. Ital. Domenica; Span. Domingo; Fr.
Dimanche.
c
17
“*The Lord’s
Day ”
equivalent
to the ‘‘first
day of the
week,”?
He connects
it with a
person,
It signifies
‘belonging
to a lord or
ruler,”
The name
Lord
applied to
Christ in
the New
Testament,
18 The Evidential Value of
The sex.<. servants;' of prophet, or teacher.? Again (6)
in W Y
ae ey
eae et gen is 80 called as One who has acquired a
peculiar right to those over whom He exercises
authority in virtue of the price which He has paid
for men?
Sek pie iv. But there is a still higher sense in which
ord in the ‘ ; 4
meheste an, Christ is Lord. Of the names of God, Jehovah is
the most sacred and the most solemn. A Jew who
believes in Judaism will not pronounce it. Those
who read Hebrew with him are at once warned
that they are expected to substitute for it the word
Adonai. The name itself was long ago withdrawn
from the popular speech of the nation, and even
from their writings, till at length it lingered only
in the mouth of the High Priest, and was only
uttered by him on rare and necessary occasions,
such as the Day of Atonement,> while as he
uttered it, those who stood near cast themselves
with their faces on the ground, and the multitude
responded, ‘ Blessed be the Name, the glory of His
Sienifieance Kingdom is for ever and ever.’® This Name, as
Ichovah, applied to God, denotes that He is “the Eternal,”
“the Self-existent,’ the great I am.? By the
1 Matt. x. 25; xxiv. 45, 46.
* Matt. viii. 25; xvi. 22; Luke ix. 54; x. 17,40; John xi. 12;
xiii. 6, 9, 13; xxi. 15-17,
$ Eph. vi. 9.; Col. iii. 24; iv. 1; Rom. xiv. 9.
* See the little treatise of the Bishop of Derry on the Divinity of
our Lord, p. 27.
> Stanley’s Jewish Church, iii. 162.
* Edersheim’s Temple Service,p.271. 7? Exod. iii. 13, 14.
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
Septuagint writers it was translated Kuvpioc,
Lord, and the translation was adopted by the
writers of the New Testament, and applied to
Christ so repeatedly that it became His usual
designation. Thus St. Thomas, addressing Him,
says, ‘My Lord and my God;”! St. Peter speaks
of Him as “ Lord of all,’ ? ‘whose is the glory and
the dominion unto the ages of the ages ;”? and St.
Paul affirms that whereas He was originally, before
His Incarnation, ‘‘in the absolute form of God,”
“God blessed for ever,’® as the reward of His
humiliation ‘“‘God gave unto Him the Name
which is above every name, that in the Name of
Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven
and things on earth, and things under the earth,
and that every tongue should confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.’’ ®
v. Now it is a word recalling this Name,
surrounded by all these august associations, that
St. John does not scruple to apply to the first day
of the week, when he says he was in the Spirit
on the Lord’s Day. He not only connects the day
with a Person, but that Person is One, with whom
Divine attributes could be associated, and would
be so associated by those who read or heard the
term he employs.
1 §t. John xx. 28, * Acts x. 36. *1 Pet. iv. 11.
* Phil. ii. 6, év poppy Oot drdpxwy, see Bishop A note
on the force hers of popph and tmdpxwy,
® Rom. 1x. 6. 6 Phil. ii. 11; vomp. Acts il. 36; Rom. x, 9.
19
The
rendering
of the name
in the
Septuagint
and the New
Testament,
This name
recalled by
St. John’s
use of the
term ‘‘ The
Lord’s
Day.”
20
No day
ever kept
by the Jews
in honour
of a single
person.
The breach
with the
past in
advancing
the claims
made for
the Lord’s
Day.
The Evidential Value of
vi. But there is still something to be added.
It is true that the Jewish nation had days for
commemorating great and rare passages of Divine
Providence in their past history. But what single
day had the Jews ever kept in honour of any
particular person, however holy or exalted ? Where
is to be found any trace of the celebration of a day
in honour of Abraham, the father of the faithful ;
or of Moses, the great law-giver; or David, the
founder of the royal line; or of Judas Maccabeeus,
the restorer of the national glories? ‘True it is
that they had days on which they commemorated
mighty deliverances and signal marks of the Divine
favour. But on which of these had their thoughts
ever been directed to a single Person, with whom
they could associate, as indicating His day, words
which, whether we take tkeir lower or their higher
sense, had been ever associated with Deity ? What
powerful and constraining motive could have
induced men trained in Judaism to detach them-
selves from every association of the past, and pass-
ing by the honour due to the time-honoured
Sabbath, advance higher claims to observance for
a day hitherto unheard of in connection with sacred
memories ?
vii. Had St. John defended the expression with
a long and laboured apology it would not have been
so surprising. The necessity of the case would seem
to have called for it. But we have not a word of
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
explanation, not a syllable of defence. He does
not assume that his readers will be the least sur-
prised at it, or take offence at his use of it. Art-
lessly, fearlessly he mentions it in the most inci-
dental manner. The expression falls from his pen
so casually and unconsciously that we almost
forget what it implies. The boldness of the claim
made for the day, that it could be connected with a
Person, and that He could be for some reason en-
titled to the “ Ineffable Name,” which his country-
men could not even pronounce, passes all conception.
They to whom the writer was chiefly addressing
himself, knew and felt that the Jewish covenant
was the most sacred thing in the universe, and the
Sabbath one of its most characteristic institutions,
and yet without a single word of explanation he
speaks to them of another day, which he does not
scruple to consecrate by a name of sacred and
mystical meaning, and to associate with a person.
Are we not justified in asking, Did something occur
on the first day of the week to the Person thus
commemorated, which could justify its being termed
His day? If there was something, the application
of the term is in some degree accounted for. If
there was not, its use by St. John remains an in-
soluble enigma,
21
The
expression
used by 8t.
John with-
out apology
or defence
and in an
incidental
manner.
The views
and feelings
on the
subject of
the Sabbath
of those to
whom S8t.
John wrote
did not lead
him to
explain,
How is St.
John’s use
of the
phrase to be
accounted
for?
The
agreement
of the
Churches
that the
Lord’s Day
was the
Day of
the Lord
Jesus,
St. John’s
connection
with Jesus.
His call by
John the
Baptist.
This
obedience to
the Baptist’s
testimony
to Christ.
The Evidential Value of
SECTION IV.
1. Wo, then, was this Person? The answer
to the question will not be disputed. All the
Churches, Western and Oriental, agree with un-
broken unanimity that the day called by St. John the
Lord’s Day, was the day of the Lord Jesus Christ.
uu. How had St. John been connected with
Him? Huimself the son, apparently the younger
son, of Zebedee and Salome,! natives of Northern
Galilee, he had been brought up in the simple
Jewish faith of the simple-hearted people of the
neighbourhood of the Lake of Tiberias. Devoted
to his father’s pursuits as a fisherman on the
Lake,* he yet shared the passionate longings and
enthusiastic hopes of his countrymen as regards the
coming of the Messiah. When the voice from the
wilderness proclaimed his Advent, St. John at once
responded to that voice, and moving southwards,
ranged himself amongst the Baptist’s disciples.
11. But he did more than this. Though simple
and unlettered,? and unskilled in the traditions
and speculations of the schools, he had grasped
with singular power the spiritual import of the
Baptist’s message. He no sooner heard the mys-
terious words, “Behold the Lamb of God,” than
he obeyed the sign and followed his new Master. 4
? Mark xy. 40; xvi. 1, compared with Matt. xxvii. 66.
® Mark i. 19. 5 Acts iv. 13. * Jolin i. 37.
——————e ee le ee ee ee ae ie ll ee”): — ce _
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
23
iv. After remaining with Him for a time, he
seems to have gone back to his old employment.
From this he is again called to become a fisher
of men,’ and to form one of the Apostolic body.
In this body he forms with his brother James and
St. Peter ‘the chosen three,” who at the raising of
Jairus’ daughter,” at the Transfiguration,? and in
the Garden of Gethsemane,t are admitted into
nearer relationship with the Lord than the rest.
But in this group, though St. Peter takes the lead,
it is St. John who is nearest and dearest to the
Lird, “the disciple whom Jesus loved.”? On more
than one occasion, as has been already indicated,®
he displays loyal and true though undisciplined
zeal, and reveals the ardour of his Galileean temper,
and his burning love for his Master.
v. On the occasion of the last journey to Jeru-
salem, Salome, as the mouth-piece of her two
sons,° begs that they may sit, the one on the
Master’s right hand, and the other on His left
in His kingdom. This reveals, in spite of his close
relationship with Christ, the earthly ambition of
the son of Zebedee, and the fact that he had
failed to comprehend the nature of His kingdom.
But it is important. For it makes manifest the
sort of kingdom to which he is looking, and the
sense in which he would at this time have inter-
1 Matt. iv. 19; Luke v.1-11. ® Mark y.37. % Mark ix. 2."
* Matt. xxvi. 37. ° See above p.9. © Matt. xx. 20; Mark x. 36.
Called to be
a fisher of
men,
His nearness
to the Lord,
His burning
love to Him.
His views
of Christ’s
kingdom,
24
The sense
which St.
John would
have
attached to
the term
“‘ the Lord’s
Day.”’
The
Crucifixion
of Christ.
The
testimony
of Tacitus
Suetonius,
etc.
The Evidential Value of
preted such an expression as “the Lord’s Day.”
He would have regarded “the Lord’s Day”
meaning the day on which the Master, to whom
he was so devotedly attached, did actually assume
the sceptre and ascend the throne, to which in
His Messianic dignity He laid claim.
vi. But did his Lord assume a sceptre or ascend
a throne? Did He, as an earthly sovereign, place
one of the sons of Salome on His right hand, and
the other on His left ? We will not seek an answer
from any Christian writer. Tacitus, the Roman
historian, shall reply to the question. We turn to
the xv. Book of his Annals, and the 44th chapter.
He is describing the burning of Rome in the reign
of Nero, and the circulation of a rumour that it
was brought about by an Imperial order—
** To get rid of the report,” he writes, ‘‘ Nero fastened the guilt
and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for
their abominations, called by the populace Christians.”
Then he adds—
“ Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme
penalty during the reign of Tiberius, at the hands of one of
our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.’’
vir. Has the fact thus recorded ever been dis-
proved? Has its accuracy ever been invalidated ?
Never. The reign of the Emperor Tiberius has been
described not only by Tacitus, but by Suetonius,
and other authors of good repute, and the cruci-
fixion of Him, whom St. John called his Lord, is
mentioned by them as a matter of common notoriety,
~~ iS ee eS eS ee ee ee ]
ee Le eee
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
20
and gives point to many a cruel and opprobrious
epithet directed against His followers.!
vit. The mention of the reign of the Emperor
Tiberius fixes the chronological limits of the date of
this Crucifixion, and of the infliction of the extreme
penalty which Tacitus records. It cannot be pushed
much further back than the year, a.p. 30, and
this is the year generally accepted as its date.
It is important to notice this. It places us in dis-
tinetly historic times. It is not a period hidden
in the mists of fabulous ages. It is a period of
which we know a great deal. It had its archives,
its registers, its monuments. We can examine
them and cross-examine them, and the statements
of Tacitus relate to the actions of one of the most
practical people the world has seen, at the most
practical period of their history, when their roads,
their bridges, their baths, their aqueducts were
scattering the memorials of those who erected them
in all parts of the world. |
1x. Does St. John anywhere deny what Tacitus
records? Nowhere. What the Roman historian
_ mentions in a single paragraph, he proclaims where-
_ ever he goes. In his own narrative of his Master’s
_ life, it is described with the minute particularity
of a diary. Three other Evangelists also give
equally full descriptions. However condensed their
1 Comp. Lucian, de Morte Peregrini c. 11.; Origen ¢. Celsum
vii. 40; Arnob adv Gentes, i. 36.
* See Canon Liddon’s Bampton Lectures, viii. 475.
St. John
gives a full
account,
26
None of the
evangelists
practise any
concealment
with refer-
ence to the
death of
Christ.
St. John
was at the
Oross,
The
Epistle of
Pliny.
The Evidential Value of
accounts may be in recording other portions of our
Lord’s life, here they agree to relate fully every
detail. Without attempting to conceal a single
particle of its shame, the writers record carefully —
the fact of their Master’s death. One of His
disciples, they tell us, had betrayed Him to his foes.
One of them, and he one of the chosen three, had
basely denied that he ever knew Him. Where was
St. John? He was by His cross. Where were
the rest? They had forsaken Him and fled
This is his own account of the matter in his own
Gospel. He neither hides nor disguises, he neither —
palliates it, nor excuses it. With singular openness,
with unexampled particularity, he tells us the —
story of the cowardice and faithlessness of his
companions. What interest he had, or others who —
have told the story with him, in describing the
actors as worse than they really were, it is difficult
to see, and it is impossible to understand.
x. But there is still another document to be put
in, which has been already alluded to, and which,
like the testimony of Tacitus, comes to us not from
a Christian but from a heathen writer. About the
year A.D. 112, the younger Pliny,” then acting as
governor of the province of Pontus and Bithynia,
informs the Emperor Trajan of the appearance
1 Observe the singular force of St. Matthew’s words, xxvi. 56.
* Pliny’s Epist. ad Traj. xevi.
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
27
— Re Noes STE cere, seer rere ee Ce LE ae a
within his province of a new and strange super-
stition, which
“had already affected many of all ranks, and even of both sexes, had
caused many of the temples to be almost deserted, the sacrifices to
cease, and the sacrificial victims to find few purchasers.”’
Respecting the members of this strange sect he
had, after inquiry, discovered
“‘that they were accustomed to meet together on a stated day
(stato die) before it was light, and to sing hymns to Christ
as to a God, and to bind themselves by a sacramentum, not for any
wicked purpose, but never to commit fraud, theft, adultery ; never
to break their word, or to refuse, when called upon, to deliver up
their trust.”
x1. What is worthy of note here is that the
celebration of a particular day by the Christians,
for of these Pliny is speaking, had become so
marked as to impress the heathen with its dis-
tinctive character as a “status dies,” and that this
day was the first day of the week, the Lord’s Day,
is indisputable. The votaries of this strange super-
stition sang hymns to Christ “as to a God.” The
day therefore was regarded as a day of festal joy
and thanksgiving.
xu. But what reason could they have given for
singing on this day hymns in token of joy and
thanksgiving ? Had not the Christ in whose name
they met together been crucified ? How comes it to
pass that they can salute Him as a God? Suppose
any one of those early Christians had unfolded a
scroll containing the memoirs which were then in =
circulation of Him who died, what would he have
Pliny’s
reference
to the
Lord’s Day.
The day
shown to be
one of
joy and
thanks-
giving.
How did
it come to
have this
character ?
28
The Evidential Value of
Anbeante found to have been the condition of His disciples at
the disci
at Christ’s
death.
Their state
a few days
after.
The
sacredness
of the
Mosaic
Sabbath
transferred
to the first
day of the
week
His death? According to their own confession, he
would have read that they were stupefied with
despair, and overwhelmed with disappointment ?
Why then did they not try to efface all recollection
of the terrible fact? Why did they not acknow-
ledge that they had been the victims of delusion in
accepting Him as their Lord, and own their un-
toward mistake? Would not this have been ~ :
natural? Is it not what we should have expected
under the circumstances? How comes it to pass, —
then, that instead of this, the self-same men, who
confess their stupefaction at His death, are found,
‘
’
4
*
after a brief interval, in the very city where there —
would be the greatest disinclination to believe and
the greatest solicitude to confute their statements,
where the counterproofs were all in the hands of
their enemies, proclaiming their belief in Him who
had died the death of the malefactor and the slave,
and electing a fresh member of their body in place
of one who had betrayed Him ? ?
x11. How comes it to pass that we find that after —
the hopeless ignominy of the scene on Calvary, one
like St. Paul could have been induced to transfer
to the first day of the week the sacredness of the —
Sabbath of the Mosaic law, and onit to celebrate the
Kucharistic feast which, except on one supposition,
commemorated the complete disappointment of the
1 Acts i. 14. * Acts i, 21-26,
Ae
;
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
hopes of the Christian body? What could have
induced St. John to call this first day of the week
the Lord’s Day, which could only, except on one
supposition, serve to remind him and the members
of the Asiatic Churches of a terrible and tragical
reversal of all his expectations as to the setting up
of his Master’s kingdom ?
xiv. I say, except on one supposition. What is
this? Except on the supposition that after the
scene on Calvary, some event took place as certain
and as historically true as the Death there enacted,
glorious enough to transfigure the desolation of that
scene, and powerful enough to turn all its sorrow and
shame into joy and triumph. Tf such an event took
place, then we can understand how St. John came
to speak of the first day of the week as the Lord’s
Day without adding a word of comment or explan-
ation, as though he was alluding to a custom
already well understood and already accepted by
the Christian Church. If such an event took
place, then we can comprehend why those votaries
of a strange superstition in Pliny’s province, “sang
hymns to Christ as a God,” and met on a fixed
day to celebrate His memory. The words of
Tacitus it is plain, though undisputed for their
historical accuracy, cannot contain the whole
account of the matter. They do not give us a
shadow of a shade of reason for the mysterious
observance of this particular day ever since
29
One
supposition
only can
explain the
facts.
On this
supposition
we can
understand
St. John’s
references
Christ as a
God.”
oU
The Evidential Value of
aan ence peer ees ee ee a ee
There was
an event
that
explains
everything,
The burial
of Christ.
Apostolic times. The motive for the observance
of the old Sabbath of the Law on the seventh day
was clear and intelligible. It rested on a Divine
ordinance. To alter it was unpardonable, unless
there was an overwhelming. reason for making the
change. But what was this reason? Did any
event occur which made the change imperative P
SECTION Y.
1. Was there, I repeat, such an event P
The Christian Church in every age has assured
her children that there was. The author of the
Epistle which contains the earliest allusion to the
observance of “the first day of the week,” informs
us that after the Crucifixion, He “who suffered
under Pontius Pilate” was buried.1 Herein he
agrees with the narrative of the four Evangelists,
who, one and all, tell us that the holy Body of
their Master was taken down from the Cross, and
laid in a tomb hewn out of the rock in a garden
hard by Calvary, in the possession of J oseph of
Arimathea.
i. They are careful to inform us—with what
object it is difficult to see, unless it is true—that
even this act of kindness and consideration was
due not to any of the original Apostolic body,
but to secret disciples and comparative strangers ?
'1 Cor. xv. 4. * Matt. xxvii. 57-61; Mk. xy. 42-47-
Luke xxiii. 50-56; John xix. 38-42.
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
31
a
—Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus. The
former, who had begged the Body of Pilate,! and
the latter, who had brought a “mixture of myrrh
and aloes”? to embalm it, made the necessary
preparations, and conveyed the holy Body to the
tomb, placed it in a niche of the rock, rolled a
great stone against the entrance, and went their
way.
m1. In that tomb the Body lay during the
Friday night that followed the Crucifixion, and
the succecding Saturday and Saturday night, pro-
tected by a guard of Roman soldiers, whose pre-
sence had been requested by the Jewish rulers,
from the intrusion alike of friends and enemies.’
1v. But early in the morning of the first day of
the week * the stone was found to have been rolled
away, and the sepulchre was discovered to be
empty. If, however, the sepulchre was empty,
where was He who had been laid therein? He
was no longer there. He had risen, even as He
had said. This is the unanimous testimony of the
four Evangelists, and of St. Paul in his indispu-
tably authentic letter to the Corinthians. This is
the fact which, in spite of contempt and obloquy,
the loss of caste, and the sacrifice of all that
makes life tolerable, in spite of the bitterest hatred
1 John xix. 38. 2 John xix. 39. 3 Matt. xxvii. 62-66.
* Matt. xxviii. 1; Mark xvi. 2; Luke xxiv.1; John xx. 1.
Each of the four Evangelists lays special stress on the fact that it
was the first day of the week.
The body
in the
tomb two
successive
nights,
It was
missing on
the first
day of the
week,
That
Christ had
risen unani
mously
testified by
the four
Evangelists
an
Paul,
32
The
Resurrection
transfigured
she Cruci-
fixion.
His five
appearances
to chosen
witnesses
on the
world’s first
Easter Day.
M. Renan’s
axiom.
The Hvidential Value of
and the keenest persecution, the first disciples
made it their business to proclaim as no less his-
torical than their Master’s Passion. This is the
event which, as they affirmed, transfigured the
shame of the Cross, and turned its desolation
into triumph.
vy. But not only did He rise again on the first
day of the week, but on the self-same day He
revealed Himself on five distinct oceasions to
‘chosen witnesses.’+ On this day He was seen
by Mary of Magdala,? by the other ministering
women,® by the two disciples journeying to Em-
maus.! On this day He appeared to St. Peter?
separately, and to the ten Apostles gathered to-
gether in the Upper Room at Jerusalem.® He
was seen indeed afterwards. But on no day is He
recorded to have “ manifested Himself” so often.
Never was He busier than on the world’s first
Easter Day. No day would be associated in the
memories of the first disciples with more frequent
proofs of His triumph over death. No day by the
record of more multiplied incidents established its
claim to be ealled “the Lord’s Day.”
vi. On the third day He rose again from the dead /
M. Renan, in his Life of Jesus, lays down this
axiom, “Great events have always great causes.” ?
' Acts x. 41. * Mark xvi. 9, 10; John xx. 11-18,
S Matt. xxviii. 8-10. * Mark xvi. 12; Luke xxiv. 13-35.
52 Cor. xv.5; Luke xxiv. 34. °* Luke xxiv. 36-43; John xx. 19-23.
7 See Godet’s Lectures in Defence of the Christian Faith, p. 128.
ee
eet
eS. ee ee
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
We have been seeking an adequate cause for one
of the most striking phenomena of religious life
amongst the most cultivated nations of the earth—
the observance of the first day of the week as the
Lord’s Day; and in the Resurrection of Christ
we find it. In each of the Epistles to the Corin-
thians, Galatians, and Romans—a group recog-
nised as genuine by the most sceptical writers and
eritics—the literal fact of tie Resurrection is
regarded as the groundwork of the teaching of the
Apostle Paul. He does not treat the fact ideally, but
historically. He does not regard it as the embodi-
ment of a great hope, or as the consequence of
some preconceived notion of the person of Christ.
On the contrary, he rests his hope on the fact, and
deduces his view of Christ’s nature from the literal
event of His rising again.}
vir. Twice when our Lord was asked by the
Jewish authorities for a miraculous sign in attesta-
tion of His Divine claims, He referred those who
pressed Him for such a sign to His resurrection
from the dead. His other 1airacles were “ signs.”
This was to be “the sign.” Ii He gave it, and
rose triumphant from the tomb, we have the clue
to what has taken place. If He did not, to what
are we to look for the origin of the observance of
the first day of the week as His day? When we
The
Resurrection
of Christ
an adequate
cause of the
observance
of the
Lord’s Day.
The
Resurrection
the ground-
work of
St. Paul’s
teaching.
Our
Saviour’s
references
to the Re-
surrection as
a sign,
It is the
clue to
what had
taken place.
remember the soil in which the observance of the
1 See Westcott’s Gospel of the Resurrection, p. 109,
D
The
religious
observance
of the
Lord’s Day
by a man
like St.
John inecon-
ceivable if
Christ did
not rise
from the
dead.
No other
reason could
account for
it.
The Hvidential Value of
day first took root, we have a measure of the
depth of conviction which must have been
needed to break with old and time-honoured
associations, and bring about its institution at
all.
vil. If, after undergoing all He did on the hill
of Calvary, He in whose honour the members
of the strange sect in Pliny’s province of
Bithynia, “sang hymns as to a God,” passed away
like other men, and still “lies in the lorn Syrian
town,” how is it conceivable that a man like
St. John could have kept the Lord’s Day as one of
religious obligation? What would have justified
him in the countenancing the change of day
from one already consecrated by the Divine law ?
What could have induced him to sanction an
institution which must have involved a shock
to the prejudices of every pious member of his
nation ?
1x. What possible reason could he have urged
as imperative for inaugurating or countenancing
so unique an observance? Was it because the
death on Calvary was a martyrdom? But what
aspect of a martyrdom did it present to the
eyes even of the most attached disciple of Him
who died? It sealed no national cause. It
crowned no patriotic rising. It recalled no daring
enterprise vainly, though courageously, under-
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
taken against the Roman power.! The bandits
indeed, who died by the side of the Christ, were
not improbably regarded by the bystanders as
martyrs. We read of no mockery of them.
We hear of no bitter gibes cast in their teeth.
Blasphemy and scorn were reserved for Him who
His death was the
last drop in the cup of a complete and crushing
occupied the central Cross.?
disappointment of all the hopes and aspirations of
His followers. Were they likely to enshrine in
such an institution as “the Lord’s Day” what
could only have been the tale of their defeat, and
the memory of their error ?
x. Was the honour due to the seventh trans-
ferred to the first day of the week because He
who died thereby inaugurated a new covenant
between God and man? ‘The seventh day, indeed,
as kept by the Jews did commemorate a covenant
ratified by God through the hands of a Mediator,
But what proof of the acceptance of His death as
a sacrifice was vouchsafed if, in spite of all that
He had said, death proved in the case of Christ, as
in that of all others, ‘‘ the great conqueror?” Could
the death on Calvary, if it stood alone, and nothing
followed, be claimed as inaugurating a new and
pvetter covenant? ‘A whole world of the most
1 See the Evidential Value of the Holy Eucharist, the Boyle
Lectures for 1879.
* See Archbishop Trench’s Studies in the Gospels, pp. 298, 294.
oH)
Christ’s
death a
disappoint-
ment of Ii:
disciples’
hopes.
No proof
of an
accepted
sacrifice if
Christ did
not rise
from the
dead,
36
The Kvidential Value of
The earliest
beginnings
of the
observance
of the
Lord’s Day.
Its early
observance
unintelli-
gible
without the
Resur-
rection.
Divine ideas,” it has been said, ‘‘ lies in our seeing
aright the distinction between the Sabbath and the
Lord’s day!” And yet that distinction came in
a moment to the Twelve! Within nine days after
the Voice had been heard saying, “ I¢ is finished ;
Father, into Thy hands I commend My spirit,”
we trace the earliest beginnings of the observance
of the first day of the week.?, But on what pos-
sible ground did the Apostolic body meet again on
that day, if, after disappointing every hope they
had ever cherished, their Master died, and was no
more seen? What valid answer to the question is
there, if nothing distinguished the first day of the
week from all others ?
x1. The early observance of the Lord’s Day,
whether we reflect on the period when it began,
or the previous training of those who first accepted
it, or the renunciation of old beliefs which it
unplied, or the total and overmastering change of
thought and feeling in reference to a time-honoured
institution like the Sabbath, which it involved,
remains, and for ever must remain, an absolutely
unintelligible phenomenon without the fact of the
Resurrection. It can be accounted for neither by
an imaginary death nor by a visionary resurrection.
A visionary resurrection runs up in the last analysis
into a fraudulent resurrection, connived at by the
1 Professor Milligan’s Lectures, p. 68.
*Comp. John xx. 26, “And after eight days again the disciple
were within.”’
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
most passionate teachers of the duty of veracity.
The observance of this day is tvo solid a fact to
repose on a foundation of mist. A “splendid
guess,” a “vague but loving hope,’ the dream of
an enthusiast, the vision of credulous disciples—
these will not account for an objective fact as
indubitable as the institution and continued ob-
servance through so many centuries of a day so
peculiarly designated as the Lord’s Day. They
will not bear the weight of the superstructure
they have to support.
x1. The Resurrection, on the other hand, by
the fact of the absence of any human agent as
its author, takes its place on a level with the
most prodigious of miracles—that of Creation. To
summon into life and to recall to life are two acts
of the same nature. ‘Creation is the victory of
Omnipotence over nothingness ; the Resurrection
is the victory of the same power over death, which
is the thing most like to nothingness that is known
to us.”! Science has done wonders, and in the
world of science much has been accomplished to
justify the words of Sophocles,
‘* Many the things that mighty be,
And none is mightier than man.” ?
But no man of science cherishes even the distant
' Godet’s Lectures, p. 43.
* Sophocles’ Antig. 332:
TIOAAG 7d Sed, Kovdty drvOperou
Sewdrepov wéAtt.
The
observance
too solid a
fact to
repose on @
foundation
of mist.
The
miracle of
Resurrection
on a level,
with
Creation.
The
Resurrection
a creative
act of the
first order,
Links
the first
Creation
with the
new
creation,
The
Resurrection
alone
explains all
the facts
connected
with the
Lord’s Day.
The Evidential Value of
eee ee
hope that he can undo the work of death, or keep
death indefinitely at bay. The Resurrection is u
creative act of the first order. It cannot stand as an
isolated fact. He who said, “I have power to lay
down My life, and I have power to take it again,”
spake as never man did or could speak. By His
taking again His life He proved that He was more
than man, that He was—Gop. He linked together
the first Creation, which is the primordial fact in
the history of the Universe, with a new creation, of
which He too is the Author and the Source. The
old Sabbath, with its commemoration of rest after
the works of the first creation, was swallowed up in
the new creation wrought by the Lord of Life on
the first Lord’s Day. The light streams in on the
unique expression of the beloved disciple, and we
see what he intended, we feel we “stand no longer
at the foot of Sinai, but by the empty tomb in the
garden outside Jerusalem.”
xi. ‘Let us sum up. The Resurrection alone as
an actual fact explains how it came to pass that
the Lord’s Day
(1) grew up naturally from the Apostolic times ;
(2) gradually assumed the character of the one
distinctively Christian Festival ;
(3) drew to itself, as by an irresistible gravita-
tion, the periodical rest, which is enjoined in the
fourth commandment under the Mosaic Law ;
John x. 18,
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
(4) could as an observance be alluded to by
St. Paul and St. John without a word of comment
or explanation ;
(5) and, though not enacted by any law in the
Apostolic Church, could grow up and make its way
by the intrinsic weight of its own reasonableness.
xtv. With the fact of the Resurrection the early
observance of the Lord’s Day runs smoothly into the
context of the world’s history, and we can explain
(1) How the startling change of religious senti-
ment was brought about ;
(2) How in spite of the shame of the Cross the
Christian society could gather up and concentrate
itself in adoration round the Person of Him Who
died upon the Cross ;
(3) How St. Paul could speak of Him, Who so
died, as “the firstfruits of them that have fallen
asleep,” for “as in Adam all die, so in Christ
shall all be made alive.” } |
(4) How He, whom the Apostle John saw in
vision on the Lord’s Day, could say of Himself, “T
am the First and the Last, and the Living One ;
and I was dead, and behold I am alive for ever-
more.””
(5) How since this event took place ten thou-
sand times ten thousand Christian congregations
have gathered themselves together on the Lord’s
1 1 Cor. xv. 20, 22. * Apoe. i. 18.
39
With the
fact of the
Resurrection
the Lord’s
Day runs
smoothly
into the
world’s
history.
40
The Observance of the Lord’s Day.
Professox
Freeman’s
testimony.
No other
account
than the
Resur=
rection, but
what is
imaginary
and
invented,
can explain
the facts of
history.
Day in all quarters of the world, and have joined,
if not in the words, yet in the spirit of the Hymn—-
On this day, the first of days,
God the Father’s name we praise,
Who Creation’s Lord and spring,
Did the world from darkness bring.
On this day the Eternal Son
Over death His triumph won ;
On this day the Spirit came
With His gifts of living flame.
xv. Can anyone explain how otherwise these
facts are to be accounted for?
‘‘The miracle of miracles,” says Professor Freeman,? ‘‘ greater
than dried-up seas and cloven rocks, was when the Augustus
on his throne, Pontiff of the gods of Rome, himself a god to
the subjects of Rome, bent himself to become the worshipper
of a crucified provincial of his empire.”
But why did he so “bend himself,” if that
Crucifixion was followed by no event which trans-
figured its shame? Why did he sanction the ob-
servance of the first day of the week as a day of
joy and triumph? Why have the most civilized
nations of the world acquiesced in its observance P
The question demands an answer. But without
the Resurrection what answer can be given that
is not imaginary merely, and invented ?
1 Chief Periods of European History, p. 67.
A SELECTION FROM
FLEMING H. REVELL COMPANY’S
CATALOGUE
New Books for —
— Thinking Minds.
WHAT ARE WE TO BELIEVE? or, The Testimony of Ful-
filled Prophecy. By Rev. JoHN URQUHART. 16mo., 230 pages,
cloth, 75 cents, net.
“‘ This book, so small in bulk but so large in thought, sets forth a great mass of such tes-
timony in lines so clear and powerful that we pity the man who could read it without
amazement and awe. It is the very book to put into the hands of an intelligent Agnostic.”
— The Christian, London.
MANY INFALLIBLE PROOFS. By Rev. ArTHur T. Pierson,
D. D. 317 pp. 12mo. Cloth, $1.00; paper, 35 cents, net.
‘* Tt is not an exercise in mental gymnastics, but an earnest inquiry after the truth.”—
Daily Telegram, Troy, N. Y.
‘“He does not believe that the primary end of the Bible is to teach science ; but he
argues with force and full conviction that nothing in the Bible has been shaken by scientific
research.’’—/udependent.
HOW I REACHED THE ‘MASSES: Together with twenty-two
lectures delivered in the Birmingham Town Hall on Sunday after-
noons. By Rev. CHARLES LEAcH, F. G. S. 16mo., cloth, $1.00.
There is much of very welcome good sense and practical illustration in these addresses.
Pithy and pointed in admonishment, and wholesome in their didactic tone, they ought to
exercise a good influence.
ENDLESS BEING; or, Man Made for Eternity. By Rev. J. L.
BARLOW. Introduction by the Rev. P. S. Henson, D. D. Cloth,
16mo., 165 pages, 75 cents.
An unanswerable work; meeting the so-called annihilation and kindred theories most
satisfactorily, The author held for years these errors, and writes as one fully conversant
with the ground he covers. It is a work which should be widely circulated,
PAPERS ON PREACHING. By the Right Rev. Bishop BALDWIn,
Rev. Principal Raryy, D. D., Rev. J. R. VERNON, M. A., and others.
Crown, 8vo, cloth, 75 cents.
‘Preachers of all deaominations wili do well to read these practical and instructive
disquisitions. ‘The essay on “ Expression in Preaching”’ is especially good.— Christian.
THE SABBATH; its Permanence, Promise, and Defence.
By Rev. W. W. ‘EVERTS, D. D. 12mo., 278 pages, cloth, $1.00.
No phase of the Sabbath question is left undiscussed, while every topic is treated in the
briefest manner, and every touch of light shows the hand of a master.
‘* An incisive and effective discussion of the subject.”’—N. VY. Odserver.
‘* A thoughtful Christian defence of that divine institution.” —Christian Advocate.
QUESTIONS OF THE AGES. By Rev. Moszs Situ.
Cloth 12mo, 132 pages, 75 cents.
What ts the Almighty? Ls there Common Sense in Religion?
What ts man ? What ts Fatth ?
What ts the Trinity ? Is there a Larger Hope ?
Which ts the Great Commandment . Is Life Worth Living?
What Mean these Stones ?
‘Discusses certain of the deep things of the Gospel in such a wise and suggestive
fashion that they are helpful. One, answers negatively and conclusively the question, Is
there a larger hope? ’—Zkhe Congregationadist.
new york. :: Fleming H. Revell Company ¢: cuicaco. |
3
|
REFERENCE BROOKS
FOR
BIBLE STUDENTS.
JAMIESON, FAUSSET & BROWN’S Popular Portable Com-
mentary. Critical, Practical, Explanatory. Four volumns in neat
box, fine cloth, $8.00; half bound, $10.00.
A new edition, containing the complete unabridged notes in clear type on good paper,
in four handsome 12 mo. volumes of about 1.000 pages each, with copious index, numerous
illustrations and maps, and a Biblé Dictionary compiled from Dr, Wm. Smith’s standard
work,
Bishop Vincent of Chautauqua fame says: ** The Jes# condensed commentary on the
whole Bible is Jamieson, Fausset & Brown,”
CRUDEN’S UNABRIDGED CONCORDANCE TO THE
HOLY SCRIPTURES. With life of the author. 864 pp., 8vo.,
cloth (net), $1.00; half roan, sprinkled edges (net), 2.00; half roan,
full gilt edges (net), $2.50.
SMITH’S BIBLE DICTIONARY, comprising its Antiquities, Biog-
raphy, Geography and Natural History, with numerous maps and illus-
trations. Edited and condensed from his great work by WILLIAM
SMITH, LL. D. 776 pages, 8vo, many illustrations, cloth, $1.50.
THE BIBLE TEXT CYCLOPEDIA. A complete classification of
j Scripture Texts in the form of an alphabetical list of subjects. By
Rev. James InGuis. Large 8vo, 524 pages, cloth, $1.75.
The plan is much the same as the ‘‘ Bible Text Book”’ with the valuable additional
help in that the texts referred to are quoted in full. Thus the student is saved the time and
labor of turning to numerous passages, which, when found, may not be pertinent to the
subject he has in hand.
THE TREASURY OF SCRIPTURE KNOWLEDGE; consist-
ing of 500,000 scripture references and parallel passages, with numer-
ous notes. 8vo, 778 pages. cloth, $2.00,
A single examination of this remarkable compilation of references will convince the
reader of the fact that ‘‘ the Bible is its own best interpreter,”’
THE WORKS OF FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS, translated by WILLIAM
WHISTON, A, M., with Life, Portrait, Notes and Index. A new cheap
edition in clear type. Large 8vo, 684 pages, cloth, $2.00,
100.000 SYNONYMS AND ANTONYMS. By Rt. Rev. SAMUEL
Fattows, A.M., D.D. 512 pages, cloth, $1.00.
A complete Dictionary of synonyms and words of opposite meanings, with an appen-~
dix of Briticisms, Americanisms, Colioquialisms, Homonims, Homophonous words, Foreign
Phrases, etc., etc, .
‘* This is one of the best books of its kind we have seen, and probably there is nothing
published in the country that is equal to it.’—Y. JZ. C. A, Watchman,
new york. :: Fleming H. Revell Company +: cutcaco.
SUGGESTIVE BOOKS ==
«= =- FOR BIBLE READERS.
NEW NOTES FOR BIBLE READINGS. By the lateS. R. Briccs,
with brief Memoir of the author by Rev. JAs. H. Brookgs, D, D.,
Crown 8vo, cloth, $1.00; flexible, 75 cents.
‘‘ New Notes’? is not a reprint, and contains Bible Readings to be found in no other
similar work, and, it is confidently believed, will be found more carefully prepared, and
cherefore more helpful and suggestive. : :
Everyone of the 60,000 readers of ‘‘ Notes and Suggestions for Bible Readings” will
welcome this entirely new collection containing selections from D. L. Moody, Major Whittle,
J. H. Brookes, D, D., Prof. W. G. Moorehead, Rev. E. P. Marvin, Jno, Currie, Rev. W. J
Erdman, Rey. F. E, Marsh, Dr. L. W. Munhall, etc.
NOTES AND SUGGESTIONS FOR BIBLE READINGS. By
S. R. Bricecs and J. H. E.uiorr.
Containing, in addition to twelve introductory chapters on plans and method of Bible
study and Bible readings, over six hundred outlines of Bible readings, by many of the
most eminent Bible students of the day. Crown 8vo, 262 pp. Cloth, library style, $1.00;
flexible cloth, .75; paper covers, .50.
THE OPEN SECRET; or, The Bible Explaining Itself. A series
of intensely practical Bible readings. By HANNAH WHITALL SMITH.
320 pp. Fine cloth, $1.00.
That the author of this work has a faculty of presenting the ‘‘ Secret Things”’ that are
revealed in the Word of God is apparent to all who have read the exceedingly popular work,
“The Christian’s Secret of a Happy Life,”’
BIBLE BRIEFS; or, Outline Themes for Scripture Students. By
G. C. & E, A. NEEDHAM. 16mo., 224 pages, cloth, $1.00.
The plan of these expositions is suggestive rather than exhaustive, and these suggestions
are designed to aid Evangelists at home and missionaries abroad, Bible School Teachers, and
Christian Association Secretaries and Workers.
BIBLE HELPS FOR BUSY MEN. By A.C. P. Coote.
Contains over 200 Scripture subjects, clearly worked out and printed in good legitle
type, with an alphabetical index. 140 pages, 16mo.; paper, 3(c.; cloth flex., 60c
*‘ Likely to be of use to overworked brethren.””—C. H. SpuRGEON,
*‘Given in a clear and remarkably telling form.’’— Christian Leader.
RUTH, THE MOABITESS; or Gleaning in the Book of Ruth.
By HENry MoorHousE. 16mo., paper covers, 20c.; cloth, 40c.
A characteristic series of Bible readings, full of suggestion and instruction.
BIBLE READINGS. By Henry Moornouse. 16mo., paper covers,
30 cents; cloth, 60 cents.
A series by one pre-eminently the man of one book, an incessant, intense, prayerful
student of the Bible.
SYMBOLS AND SYSTEMS IN BIBLE READINGS.
Rev. W. F. Crarrs. 64 pages and cover, 25 cents.
. Giving a plan of Bible reading, with fifty verses definitely assigned for each day, the
Bible being arranged in the order of its events, The entire symbolism of the Bible ex-
plained concisely and clearly,
New york. :: Fleming H. Revell Company ::.cnicaco.
eHAND BOOKS FOR BIBLE STUDENTSDe
THE LIFE ‘OF CHRIST. Rev. Jas. STatker, M. A.