b looo LIBRA^OFCONGRESS, Chap..^.. Copyright No. 'ShelfciASS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.* AUG 22 £ BORN NOV. 24. 1817. TAKEN NOV. 24, 1897. C^lfa/rT^uU t%PV4^t-£4- LIGHT IN DARK PLACES Theological Nuts, Philosophically Cracked, on the Rock of the Scriptures, with the Hammer of Common Sense BY Rev. Thomas Holmes, D. D. Prove all things, hold fast that which is good. — 1 Thess. v. 21. ANN ARBOR, MICH.: THE INLAND PRESS :D"T7 7 The I OF 136^1 Copyright, 1898, BY Thomas Holmes. TW RECEIVED. INTRODUCTION, Every doctrine of a philosophical nature is pronounced true or false as it agrees or disagrees with a theory, hypothecated as a radical fact, according to which all phenom- ena pertaining to said theory are supposed to be explicable. The Ptolemaic system of astronomy was based upon the theory that the earth is the center of the universe, around which all celestial bodies revolve. Although this theory was known to be de- fective, in that certain phenomena could not be accounted for on that hypothesis, yet it could not be refuted until a theory was found that would furnish a rational and satisfactory explanation of all such phenom- ena. This the Copernican system finally accomplished; but it required the lapse of a century, and the passing away of three generations of Ptolemaic philosophers, be- fore its triumph was complete. Something very similar has also trans- pired in the theolbgical world. The theory iv Introduction. of the absolute, arbitrary, irresponsible Sovereignty of God, actuated by supreme devotion to his own glory, according to which, as elaborated by John Calvin, God foreordained whatsoever comes to pass, and predestinated, from eternity, the salvation of a portion of our race and the damnation of another portion, individually, notwith- standing the shocking conclusions to which it logically led, has prevailed and been re- garded as irrefutable for three hundred years, for the want of the careful working out of a better theory. In the following lectures the author believes he has thrown light upon many dark, mysterious, unsettled questions, through the application of the philosophy of Moral Agency. When Galileo announced to an aston- ished world that Jupiter had four moons, and his statement was disputed with great vehemence by others, because they could not see them, his unanswerable reply was, ''Look through my telescope." In leaving this little volume behind me, as I step off "the stage of action," I want to make the same request. Let not the reader hastily Introduction. v pronounce the doctrines false that are taught in the following pages, because they do not all agree with popular opinions, with the teaching of some other author, or with his own ideas respecting them. Orthodoxy is progressive. Truths plainly taught in the Scriptures may yet remain undiscovered, for lack of the lens that is adapted to find them. The churches of two hundred years ago would not have received as private mem- bers, much less as pastors and theological teachers, the most distinguished theologians and preachers of the present day. The fact that some of the views here presented are new, and differ from doctrines the reader has been taught, lacks a great deal of being evidence that they are false. Satellites had revolved in their orbits around Jupiter for untold ages before Galileo published the fact on this planet; and there are, undoubt- edly, satellite truths revolving around the fundamental doctrines of the gospel, clearly revealed in the Word of God, yet undiscov- ered. The topics here discussed furnish an in- viting field for original investigation; be- vi Introduction. cause the key that unlocks their mysteries, the light that reveals their nature and log- ical connections, is now better understood, more clearly seen, than ever before since the world began. That light is acquaintance with the nature and philosophy of Moral Agency, and its practical bearings upon the relations of man to his God and to his fel- low men. These lectures deal mostly with disputed questions, and questions that are regarded, by many at least, as beyond the reach of human investigation. The author has no expectation that his views will receive the immediate assent of all his readers; nor that all his views will receive the immediate assent of any one of them. He hopes, however, when he does not convince, to awaken thought and investigation that will ultimately lead to progress along all these lines. Whatever may be found herein that seems to the reader heretical will not be the result of reckless disregard of the Scriptures of divine truth; nor of a determination to make out a case or carry a point, regardless Introduction. vii of evidence, or of the opinions of others; nor of the legitimate effect of the doctrines taught upon Christian faith, and upon the Chris- tian lives of those who may believe them. We fully believe that faith in the doctrines here taught will result in a far more intelli- gent, and for that reason in a far more con- sistent, successful and acceptable Christian life than can possibly result from belief of the errors here refuted. Of all conceivable attitudes of the human mind towards the facts, realities, conditions, circumstances, relations, obligations, and final awards of a human life, that which is most momentously important is a willing- ness, an earnest and intense desire and de- termination, to know the truth, the exact truth, and nothing but the truth, in regard to everything that has a bearing upon the welfare of the soul, both in this life and in the life to come. Error is no advantage to any one. Deception, whether self-imposed or practiced upon us by another, has no other than evil tendencies. Truth may not always be agreeable to us; may not always flatter our hopes or encourage our desires viii Introduction. and wishes, but it is always the best for us in the end, the very thing we need to know, to accept, to believe, to act upon. In investigating the questions discussed in this volume, we have endeavored to look at them from this standpoint, and from this standpoint we ask our readers to look at them. The views here presented are the result of more than three score years of study; nearly all of which was intended to be original investigation. An unbiased at- titude of mind, in matters that have been subjects of thought and discussion for ages, may possibly be unattainable, but it surely may be approached. A heart thoroughly consecrated to truth, not its apprehension only but its practice; a persistent purpose to embrace in premises every fact and circumstance obtainable, that has a bearing upon the conclusion sought, with large opportunities for obtaining such facts; an honest and resolute determination to hold every opinion previously formed sub- ject to such modification as new light, from any source, may demand; long and patient labor, with frequent re-examination of work Introduction. ix already performed; earnest and constant prayer for divine illumination; the whole prompted by at least a hope that the con- clusions arrived at may stand for truth dur- ing ages yet to come; are elements and necessary conditions of independent investi- gation. How far these have had sway in the mind and heart and labor of the author final results will determine. As postulates of procedure, the author has had frequent recourse to the follow- ing: 1. Nothing should be rejected because it is old, nor received because it is new; neither should any doctrine be regarded as unalterable because it is old, nor rejected because it is new. While the fact that a doctrine has for ages been regarded as es- tablished is prima facie evidence of its truth, every doctrine, old or new, must yield the ground, when the evidence in its favor is overweighed by reliable evidence against it. 2. Theorems in ethics and theology, in the light shed upon them by the nature and philosophy of moral agency, are as demon- strable as theorems in geometry. x Introduction. 3. There is not a truth in the universe, whether it relates to Creator or creature, that God is not willing we should know, if we will find it, and bring it to the light. Hence there is nothing too sacred for the most free and searching investigation. We should investigate all truth reverently, but should not let undue reverence hinder thor- oughness. Above all things, we need have no fear nor hesitation in inquiring into the nature, essence, constitution, attributes, motives and methods of the Deity. There is nothing about God that he is unwilling we should know; and the more we know about him the more we shall revere him, the more perfectly shall we love him, and the more intelligently and acceptably shall we be able to serve him. 4. No statement can be true t at dia- metrically contradicts reason and our knowl- edge of positive facts. Respecting the heresies my readers will think they find here, I want to say a few words. I am as well aware as any of my readers can be that, measured by the ac- cepted standards of "orthodoxy," many of Introduction. xi the conclusions here stated with great posi- tiveness must be pronounced erroneous; some of them perhaps dangerous. This fact has been the greatest stum- bling block in - the way of publishing the book. The approbation of others is very pleasant to me. I never realized the meaning of what has been called "the cour- age of conviction," until I faced seriously the question, Shall I give to the world the candid, honest, solemn conclusions at which I have arrived ? I am sure that no one who has never been brought face to face with such a question has any idea of the courage required to be true to God, true to convic- tion, true to the world, in the full con- sciousness of the possibility, perhaps the certainty, that dear and valued friends will cry out, "Away with him! Crucify him!" While some of the nuts that we believe we have successfully cracked have been en- veloped in a very thin shell, others have been incased in a very strange, unreasoning and unreasonable faith, or, more truly, appearance of faith — faith falsely so called — that has for ages prevented the least Xll Introduction. approach to a careful, thorough investigation. As such doctrines are held in an unreason- ing, unquestioning state of mind, any pro- posal to inquire into the soundness of the foundation upon which they rest is repelled at once, and refused consideration. By such persons many doctrines are declared to be too mysterious for comprehension, and must be taken on the ipse dixit of others who have enveloped them in mystery, but declared them to be true. This idea we have rejected entirely. We know of no mysteries, connected with God's methods of redeeming the fallen race of man, that may not be inquired into with the con- fident expectation of finding them conceiva- ble and reasonable. We admit that many things, facts that are to be believed, are of so high a grade of wisdom that we may not, in our present state of knowledge, or more properly ignorance, fathom and comprehend their philosophy; but we maintain, and work upon the hypothesis, that nothing can be true that squarely and positively contradicts our reason. He who made truth that per- tains to his creatures has given those to l?itroduciion. xiii whom it pertains reason to apprehend it. We accept willingly a paradox. We like to study a paradox. Its apparent contradic- tion contains a truth, and is a most impres- sive method of teaching it. Such a nut must necessarily require a certain degree of intelligence to crack it, in some cases more than in others, but it may be cracked, and its meat will be a luxury; its reasonableness will be clear and impressive. This is very different from an absurdity that squarely and positively contradicts reason, ignores well- known and universal facts, and defies the affirmations of common sense. It is useless to wrap such statements in " mystery," and declare them to be incom- prehensible to finite minds, but still truths that must be believed, the doubting of which should be branded as heresy. He who thus defies the demands of Christian charitable- ness is himself the worst of heretics. It is far worse to be disloyal to love than to dog- ma. Dogma may be false, but love is always true. 4 ' Now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love." Some may inquire why I have not, in xiv Introduction. formal statement, arraigned the errors that stand over against the truths here presented. My reply is, My object is not controversy. I do not believe the controversial method ol handling religious questions, or any other questions, to be the best. The moment you arraign a supposed error, in that manner, you put its advocates upon its defense; and soon the attitude of the parties is not that of mutual inquest for truth, but which shall down his antagonist, whether by fair means or foul. My purpose is, if possible, to secure a candid hearing, by diverting the attention of an opponent from his fortifications, and, by a flag of truce, lure him into the open field, where we may confer together, not in a war- like but in a peaceable and reasonable man- ner. If I succeed in presenting my view of the question in a clear, convincing, unan- swerable manner, any candid reader will probably see, by looking through my tele- scope, objects that he cannot find in the one he has been using, and rejoice in the revela- tion of truth not previously apprehended. When you wish to light up a dark room, carry in a light, and the darkness will flee Introduction. xv away, without any argument, persuasion, threat or fight for possession. Error is dark- ness, truth is light. Let in the light, and there will be no darkness to fight. Of my critics I want to ask this favor. Lay aside, while reading this book, the glass through which you are accustomed to look at the questions here discussed, and look through my telescope; consider them in the light in which I have presented them. " Prove all things, hold fast that which is good." If you and I differ, one of us must be wrong. We may both be wrong, but it is impossible that we should both be right. If we carefully compare views, we may dis- cover where the error lies, and both find the truth. There is not a doctrine advanced, in the entire book, that the author will not re- nounce, if greater weight of truth and rea- son can be found against it than for it. Has the reader the moral courage to take the same attitude? If so, give us your hand. It is a bargain. I will look through your tele- scope, if you will look through mine. "Come and let us reason together." With these words of introduction and xvi Introduction. explanation, we lay our offering upon the altar of free, untrammeled inquiry, with the earnest prayer and hope that it may be ac- cepted of God, receive his benediction where- ever it may find a reader, and be helpful to all who are earnest seekers after truth. Chelsea, Mich., January, 1898. CONTENTS. LECTURE I. MORAL AGENCY. Conditions of— PAGE - i. Intelligence i 2. Free will 2 3. Opportunity to make a choice 5 Such was the tree of forbidden fruit . . 6 This story veritable history 9 Questions answered n LECTURE II. SOUL, BODY, AND SPIRIT. Confusion of ideas respecting 16 Jews and Christian fathers, trichotomists. . 17 What is the Soul? 19 Suggestion to psychologists 21 What is the body? What are its uses?. ... 23 What is the spirit? 24 It is a human spirit 25 It is the gift of God 26 Uses of the spirit 27 The spiritual body 29 The man complete 30 Thus constituted, must be a moral agent. . 32 Brutes di-chotomous, cannot be moral agents 33 Certain passages of Scripture 35 xviii Contents. LECTURE III. THE FALL. Moral condition in which Adam and Eve were created 3^ Temptation necessary 4° The transgression 4 2 Physical death not the result of sin 44 "Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return" was no part of the curse 47 LECTURE IV. LAW. Physical laws 51 Ceremonial laws 61 Moral laws . 64 Not enactments of a sovereign 65 Arise from relations. God subject to them as well as men 66 Law makers should understand this 70 The ten commandments 72 The fourth commandment 73 Fallacy of Sabbatarians 76 Reasons and authority for the change. ... 77 LECTURE V. PENALTIES. Governments exist for the benefit of the governed 82 Penalties of divine law not punitive 83 Divine idea of punishment disciplinary. . . 84 Treatment of incorrigible offenders 86 No treatment of sinners inconsistent with love 88 Contents. xix LECTURE VI. THE ATONEMENT. The word denned 90 Parties to be reconciled 91 Sin; its misery and bondage. This is hell 92 Moral agency not destroyed by the bond- age of sin 92 Seventh chapter of Romans not Christian experience 93 Jesus, the Christ, comes to deliver 96 Justice and Mercy not antagonistic 96 God's purpose is to secure, by merciful means, the ends demanded by justice. . . 98 The exact situation described 100 When Justice and Mercy are both satisfied, nothing more is necessary 102 How did Jesus, the son of man, effect this? 104 The incorrigible not benefitted by the atonement 107 Love more potent than dread of punish- ment to secure loyalty 108 Grateful loyalty more potent than the strong- est resolutions to resist temptation in A better end reached than justice ever dreamed of 112 The lost compelled to acknowledge the justice of their condemnation 112 Merciful agencies move the sinner to pen- itence, which punishment never does. . . 113 These points gained, pardon is safe t 14 Multitudes now saved, when all would nave been lost 115 The plan of salvation not an after-thought 116 xx Contents. Jesus' sacrifice and suffering voluntary 117 That no sacrifice was necessary, a fallacy.. 119 Remarks 121 LECTURE VII. REGENERATION — CONVERSION. These words not synonymous 129 Moral condition of the unregenerate 131 No happiness in this condition 135 The steps of this progressive change; viz., the begetting of a new life by the Spirit, heeding the call, penitence, repentance, prayer for pardon, pardon, faith, wit- ness of the Spirit, are treated in their order 137 to 155 LECTURE VIII. ANGELS. Who are the angels? 156 Are they moral agents? 158 Some of them sinned and became demons 160 Personality of the devil 166 Who made the devil? A silly question .... 170 Why are demons allowed to tempt us?. ... 173 LECTURE IX. THE GODHEAD. The word Godhead suggests, and the word Elohim expresses plurality of persons. . 178 The first person is the Infinite ONE 179 His necessary attributes 182 His moral attributes 191 Is God a moral agent? 193 The Executive Deity — the Word — the Son 202 Contents. xxi The second person in the Godhead 204 A distinct, self-conscious person 205 Esposition of John 1 : t, The Word was God 206 The Holy Spirit — His personality 225 Uses of the phrase Holy Spirit 229 Whence does the Holy Spirit "proceed?".. 241 Is the Holy Spirit a third person in the Godhead ? 246 Objections answered 252 LECTURE X. ETERNAL PUNISHMENT. An important error disposed of 256 The sin against the Holy Spirit 259 Eternal punishment means eternal sin. . . . 260 Moral agency shows its possibility 261 Jesus taught its certainty 263 Same result reached by another argument.. 265 Who are the lost? 267 This eternal doom self-inflicted 270 LECTURE XL FUTURE PROBATION. Eternal sin means eternal moral agency. . . 272 This question of no significance to those who have made their choice 273 Classes to which this question pertains.. . . 274 To what source shall we look for light?. . . 275 Moral agency means probation; hence, every moral agent, good or bad, will be eternally on probation 281 This fact assures moral stability 283 ERRATA. Page 6 1. — Change 2 to II. Page 64. — Change 3 to III. LECTURE I. MORAL AGENCY. Many have confused ideas on the sub- ject of moral agency, because they suppose an agent to be one who transacts business for another, and that the employer is res- ponsible for the acts of the agent. This is not the primary use of the word. The Standard Dictionary defines thus: — "Agent. I. One who or that which acts or has the power to act; an active power or efficient cause of any thing. 2. One who or that which acts for another." In speaking of a moral agent, the word is always used in its primary sense. A moral agent is a voluntary actor, whose acts may have moral character; that is, may be right or wrong. This will be more clearly understood as we proceed to consider THE CONDITIONS OF MORAL AGENCY. I. An indispensable condition of moral agency is a kind and degree of intelligence that will enable its possessor to receive in-- 2 Moral Age?icy. struction by precept. He must understand, from preceptive instruction, what to do, why he should do it, and that consequences de- pend upon obedience or disobedience. Brutes learn only from experience; hence moral agency is to them impossible. Not to be able to understand the import of a command, and the nature of an obligation, until the consequences of obedience or disobedience are learned from experience, would be an anomaly and absurdity in morals. The intelligence of a moral agent must also be sufficient to enable him to reason a priori. The connection between cause and effect must be obvious to him, and hence the nature, importance and sacredness of an obligation will be apprehended through a rational perception, and his act of obe- dience or disobedience will be intentional, in consideration of or in disobedience to his sense of obligation, as apprehended by his intelligence. 2. Another indispensable condition of moral agency is what is called the Free Will. By free will is meant will acting in the pres- ence of an alternative — the soul so situated Moral Agency. 3 that it can choose this or that. Two ways, or more, are open before it; either, or any one, of which it can enter or refuse to enter. This is also called Will in Liberty; because the will is at liberty to make choice of either of two, or any one of several, objects or courses of conduct. The Free Will, Will in Liberty, resembles very closely a judge, considering a case as presented by contend- ing advocates. Each advocate pleads his case, giving his reasons why decision should be rendered in his favor, and the judge de- cides in favor of one as against the others. In making its choices, the will is abso- lutely, unqualifiedly self-determining. It is defiant of any authority, human or divine, or any coercive influence that can be brought upon it. It can be influenced by reason, if it choose to listen to reason; but in spite of all the demands of reason that which is unrea- sonable may be chosen. It matters not what direful consequences may impend; how dreadful to the thought, how painful to the feelings, how torturing to the flesh, how maddening to the conscience; the will; that is, the soul in the exercise of its choice, may 4 Moral Agency. still maintain an attitude of resistance, de- fiance, insubordination. On the other hand, the will is just as capable, just as indepen- dent, just as potential, in its choice of that which is right, when it so determines. The world, the flesh and the devil, all the hosts and powers of darkness, are impotent to compel its assent to that which is wrong. The will of a moral agent cannot be coerced. The brute will must yield to the demands of the flesh; the human will may refuse obe- dience to the demands both of the flesh and of the spirit, even the Spirit of God. Few people seem to have any conception of this wonderful sovereignty of the will. In the freedom of its action, in its choices, it is as independent of the will of God, as the will of God is independent of the will of man. This will in liberty, this power of unrestrained, uncoerced, independent choice, is the most wonderful of all the creations of the Infinite One, of which we have any knowledge. This unlimited sovereignty of choice is the neces- sary, the unalterable condition, the consti- tutional basis, of every act that has moral character. For such acts, and such only, Moral Agency. 5 the actor, the agent, is responsible and accountable. He who is thus endowed, and he only, is a moral agent. This peculiarity of man, this capacity for moral agency, is "the image of God" in which he was created. The positive, and the only positive, proof of this freedom, this sovereignty, is consciousness. There is not a moral agent in the universe, who has not the conscious- ness that he possesses the power to thus make his own choices, irrespective of the Commands, the wishes, even the persuasions, of any other person in the universe or of all others united. 3. The third condition of moral agency, or more properly of a moral act, is oppor- tunity to make a choice; that is, the pres- ence of an alternative. Whatever may be the degree of intelligence with which the Creator has endowed the creature, unless an alternative of action is present, no act that the creature can perform can have moral character. Such opportunities are present, whenever intelligent beings are in such circumstances as create an obligation 6 Moral Agency. to pursue a given course of conduct. Only in such circumstances has the free will op- portunity to make a choice for which it alone — that is, the soul thus exercising choice — is responsible. The necessary alternative is found in these circumstances. They con- stitute the opportunity. Such opportunities are all comprised in one's duties to God, to other intelligences human or angelic, to any sentient creature, and to himself. His loyalty to God, to righteousness, to self, is thus tested; and his loyalty or disloyalty is made manifest. Men do not even know themselves until thus tested; much less are they known to others. The tree of forbidden fruit, mentioned in Gen. 2: 16, 17, is intended to illustrate both the fact and the nature of such oppor- tunities. God has often been blamed for placing that temptation before our innocent first parents. Men say, "Why did God place a tree in the garden of Eden, the fruit of which should be forbidden ? Manifestly our parents were happy, until they partook of that fruit. Why not let them continue happy? Does not this act, if we ^ive Moral Agency. 7 credence to the story, directly and positively antagonize the oft asserted claim that God is infinitely wise and benevolent? Surely this must have been a blunder that compromises his wisdom, or an act of malevolence that contradicts his goodness." Thus "bold, bad men" question the claims of Christianity, in regard to this act of Providence; while others, whose confi- dence in God is so firm and unshaken that they avow faith in what seems to them to contradict reason, observation and experi- ence, are quite unable to reconcile the para- dox. To both these classes let me say, All the mysteries of this extraordinary transac- tion are easily solved in the light of the na- ture and principles of moral agency. This tree of forbidden fruit furnished the opportunity for our first parents to prove their loyalty to their Creator and Sovereign; their worthiness of the exalted position they occu- pied in the creation; and also to greatly in- crease their own happiness. The question to be tested was whether they would obey God or disobey him. Obedience would have made them holy, and brought to their con- 8 Moral Agency. sciousness his approving smile, which would have been life to them. . "Thy favor is life." The blissful satisfaction that results from doing right would have been theirs. Instead of this, they disobeyed, and found out immediately that "the wages of sin is death," just as God had predicted. The serpent had assured them positively, 4 ' Thou shalt not surely die"; but the act was dis- pleasing to God, they lost his favor, they were dead. This act of disobedience was entirely voluntary, their own act. No one could be blamed for it but themselves. The tempter was responsible for the lie he told, and for soliciting them to disobey; but the act of transgression was theirs. This is account- ability. Hence comes character. Without this test (or some other) to do wrong, to disobey, moral character would have been impossible. Note well, however, any one of ten thousand other tests would have ans- wered the same purpose; and would, un- doubtedly, have been followed by the same result. Manifestly God chose this because the nature of the whole transaction could be Moral Agency. 9 easily understood and comprehended by the human mind, even in the infancy of our race. If asked if I believe the account of the temptation and fall, as given in the third chapter of Genesis, to be veritable history, I answer, Certainly. The questioning of the reliability of the account given us of this transaction is one of the many instances of inexcusable ignorance, that result from thoughtlessness and neglect to exercise com- mon sense. The record of the transaction is given to reveal to the race two facts, that it is of the greatest importance to them to understand. These are the nature of an obligation, and the freedom of a moral agent to obey or disobey. These are the most important facts. Of minor importance is the fact that our first parents, like all their posterity, fell into sin. Is it not most rea- sonable to suppose that the facts in the case would be given to the world just as they oc- curred ? What would be gained by giving a fictitious account of the event instead of a true one ? Of the ten thousand tests pos- sible, only one was necessary to test the io Moral Agency. point in question. What reason can any one give for supposing that .the method act- ually employed was suppressed, and a fiction substituted ? Is that like God ? How could a falsehood serve a better purpose than the truth ? What would be gained by recording a lie in order to teach an important principle of morals ? Would it not be a queer exam- ple of the wisdom of the Sovereign ruler to bring so great and important an event about in such a manner that it became necessary to hide the facts in the case, and reveal the nature of the transaction by means of a falsehood ? How much would that lack of doing evil that good might come ? Are not facts better adapted to teach morals than fables ? Let us also bear in mind the well known fact that opportunity, as a condition to moral agency, is just as essential and just as omni- present in the case of every son and daugh- ter of Adam as it was in his case. Nor is forbidden fruit presented only at the com- mencement of responsibility. Trees of for- bidden fruit, speaking now figuratively, are standing not only in every man's garden of Moral Agency. i r Eden, but on either side of the pathway of life, all the way from the cradle to the grave. These are constant tests of loyalty to God, to our fellow men, to ourselves; and the choices we make, when the opportunities are before us, will determine our character and our destiny. A question is often asked that, although indirectly answered already, should, perhaps receive a little more attention. "If there must be opportunity to sin, why did not God make man so that he could not sin?" The only meaning this question can have, if it has any meaning at all, is, Why did not God make another order of brutes, instead of making a creature that is capable of possess- ing moral character, a creature that is res- ponsible for his conduct, in short, a moral agent ? The probability is that God had created all the brutes he wanted. How would it do to suggest that, knowing the end from the beginning, God saw that man would be quite ready enough to make a brute of himself ? Since ability to sin is just as essen- tial to a moral agent as opportunity to sin, he must either endow him with the power to 1 2 Moral Agency. sin, that is with a free will, or not make him a moral agent. On this very ground we assert the sovereignty of the human will over its choices, and the impossibility of its coercion. The moment the will of any intelligent being should be coerced, overpowered, so that it should not enjoy absolute freedom of choice, moral agency, and consequently account- ability, would cease, and only a brute would be found, where a moral agent had been and should be. Another question, and one of no little im- portance, well deserving careful attention, is, ' ' Did the Creator know, when he created man, that he would sin? If he was aware of that dreadful fact, involving, possibly, the eternal despair of multitudes of deathless souls, what can justify him in giving exist- ence to our race?" To this question I answer, Most assuredly God knew, when he created man, that he would sin. Omniscience is one of his nec- essary attributes. Were it otherwise, he would be finite, and like other finite. beings, would know nothing he did not learn. He could forecast nothing, only as the probable Moral Agency. 13 results of causes, with the existence of which, and with the laws of whose operation, he was already acquainted, having previously learned them; and such forecast, like the presience of man, would be very limited. Such a be- ing would hardly be sufficient for the plan- ning and construction of a universe like this, in which we have our being, and of which we form a part. As to his justification, in giving existence to our race y under such fearful possibilities and certainties, this is found in the very fact that he is infinitely wise and good. Like all moral agents, God is under obligation to himself, as well as to his intelligent crea- tures, to seek the highest good of the great- est number. He must seek the greatest ag- gregation of well-being. The good of being is the motive of all his works, of all his re- quirements, and of all his dealings with his intelligent creatures. Because it was ap- parent to his infinite foresight that more good than evil would result from the creation of moral agents, he created them. Much as we lack of the infinite benevo- lence that moved him to the vast undertak- 14 Moral Agency. ing, there is not one of us who would not do the same, under the same circumstances; if we had the same foresight and the same ability. Suppose the entire list of inventors, from the Marquis of Worcester to Robert Fulton, who were instrumental in the dis- covery and successful working of steam- power, could have foreseen all the terrible, shocking, heart rending, agonizing, indes- cribable accidents, by land and by sea, that would inevitably result from their experi- ments; and at the same time, could have had also the companion vision of all the benefits that the world would realize from their discoveries and devices, would any one justify them, had they been deterred by the grief and suffering that would result, and suppressed the great and beneficent improve- ments, that were brought into use by their agency; and left the world destitute of all their advantages, as we enjoy them to-day ? If no moral agents had been created, brute satisfaction, simply sensuous gratification, would have been the highest enjoyment known in the whole range of sensuous crea- tures. Moral Agency. 15 Keep ever in mind that a moral agent who can not sin is an impossibility. Thus we see not only that the wisdom and good- ness of God, in creating man a moral agent, are vindicated, but that he himself would have been censurable in the highest degree; condemned, an infinite sinner, if he had not made man just as he has. We also see that the planting of the tree of forbidden fruit was one of the indispensable features of his wise and wondrous plan. Men do not " fall upward " when they fall into sin; but every opportunity to sin is also an opportunity to show their loyalty to God, and to attain a standard of virtue and holiness that can be attained only in the face of such opportunity. Ability and opportunity to sin are the indis- pensible conditions of holiness. LECTURE II. SOUL, BODY AND SPIRIT. These words are often used in the scrip- tures; sometimes together, sometimes sepa- rately. In Heb. 4:12, we read of "the di- viding asunder of soul and spirit," and in 1 Thess. 5:23 we read, "I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless." Who has not paused, after reading these passages, and asked himself, Do these three words — soul, body, spirit — include all there is in the essence of man ? and does each word both fully express its own concept, and completely exclude the concept of each and both the other words ? If such is the fact, if each of these words is thus inclusive and thus exclusive, great con- fusion respecting the boundaries that limit the scope and realm of each exists to-day. If it is not the fact, why should their usage be characterized by a discrimination so mani- fest and so carefully observed throughout the word of God? In common usage, to- Soul, Body and Spirit. 17 day, no distinction or discrimination what- ever is made in the use of the words soul and spirit. Learned preachers, theological professors, commentators and common peo- ple, use these words as though they were perfect synonyms. In the word of God this is not the case. Throughout the entire scriptures we believe there is no instance, when rationally interpreted, in which these two words are used interchangeably. The word soul is never used to name the spirit; and the word spirit is never used to name the soul. The truth is they are separate parts of the man, as distinct and unlike as are the soul and the body. The Jews held well denned ideas as to the existence of a tripartite nature in man; but precisely what psychological facts and functions were attributed to soul and spirit separately I have been unable to ascertain^ Josephus (Ant. I. 1,2) affirms that Moses says,. " God took dust from the ground and formed man, and inserted in him a spirit and a soul. "' The early Christian Fathers; Justin Martyr,. Clement, Origen and others, were clear-cut; trichotomists; but the farther down the T S Soul, Body and Spirit. stream of time we come, the more turbid we find its waters upon this subject. Commentators, essayists, preachers and exegetes of every class have treated the sub- ject, some more intelligently and profoundly than others, but among them all no one has given a definition clearly discriminating be- tween the soul and the spirit. So far as dis- tinction is attempted, the soul is supposed by some to be the seat of the affections and passions, the lower region of the inner man, while reason and conscience and volition are assigned to the spirit. Some suppose the soul and spirit united constitute the undying, imperishable part of man, while others main- tain that the soul perishes with the body, and that the spirit only enters into a future life. In our discussion of the question, we propose to turn from the conflicting opinions of uninspired men, and consult only the Di- vine Oracles. These contain, in our estima- tion, the most clear, definite, positive infor- mation on the subject, to be found any- where. Our first inquiry is, Soul, Body and Spirit. 19 WHAT IS THE SOUL ? The soul is an organic essence, substan- tial but not material. The word soul (Hebrew, Nephesh; Greek, psuche) is ap- plied, in the scriptures, to every creature that has animal life. In the fifth epoch of creation, God said (Gen. i. , 20, ) ' ' Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath Nephesh, soul; and in the sixth epoch (Gen. i., 30), when the creation was com- pleted, God gave the green herb for meat to every beast of the earth, every fowl of the air, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is Nephesh, soul. Every beast of the earth, every fowl of the air, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth, then, has soul. Does this include man ? In Gen. ii., 7, we read, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul," (Nephesh). Since, then, brutes and men alike have souls, the inference is safe that some of the pre- dicates of this word will be found in every creature that has animal life. This does not necessarily imply that all its predicates must 20 Soul, Body and Spirit. be found in each living creature, since the diversity of capacity, in the different orders of the animal kingdom, is almost infinite. The soul of the snail can not be as compre- hensive as the soul of man. It is, never- theless, a soul; and, reasoning from analogy, some of the predicates of the soul of man should be found also in each brute. What, now, are the facts in the case ? In- quire carefully into the psychology of brutes and note what you find. The brute sees, hears, feels, tastes, smells, perceives, thinks, experiences pleasure and pain, joy and sor- row, delight and anger, desire and gratifi- cation of desire, arrives at conclusions which is a function of reason, plans and executes plans, makes choices and forms purposes; and all these in the exercise of mere con- stitutional endowments. Of course the scope and limit of these psychological mani- festations are always determined by the en- dowment of each individual. Note now, the agent of all these activities in the brute is the soul. Not one of them can be pre- dicated of the body. Turning our attention to man, we find all Soul, Body and Spirit. 21 these activities predicated of his soul. The soul is the real man, the inner man, the seat of thought, the center of feeling, the throne of judgment, the mysterious subjective Ego, that wills, and originates all the choices and activities of the entire organism. At this point I want to make a suggestion to psychologists. They uniformly use the word mind, instead of soul, to represent the thinking, feeling, willing man. From care- ful study of the scriptures, I believe this is an error. The scripture discrimination, when carefully studied in the languages in which they were written, is this: — The three activities — thought, emotion, volition — are attributed to the soul. The soul thinking is the mind. The soul in the exercise of emotion is the heart. The soul willing is the responsible man. The whole constitutes the moral agent. This distinction, it is true, will call for a different translation of several passages of scripture, a revision of definitions in our dictionaries, and some changes of phraseology in theological statements, as well as a new work on psychology, but what of that ? Should not all these, and com- 22 Soul, Body and Spirit. mon parlance 'too, conform to truth, at whatever cost ? This is surely the best, if not the only, way to let light in upon dark places. Ignorance and error are darkness; knowledge and truth are light. Let the light shine. The soul, then, is the one mind psycho- logists tell us about, having three capacities, three modes of activity — thought, emotion, volition. All psychological exercises, active and passive, are attributed to it. In the soul lies the individuality; in the case of man, the personality. Man is soul; he has body and spirit. The admission of these facts, and they can not be successfully dis- puted, necessitates a conclusion that, used logically, must inevitably clear away the be- wilderment and perplexity with which this question has for ages been invested, and establish, beyond dispute or doubt, the doc- trine of the trichotomy of man. Before passing to our next inquiry, it may be well to note that the word soul is often used to denote the whole man. "All the souls of the house of Jacob, which came into the land of Egypt, were three score and Soul, Body and Spirit. 23 ten," (Gen. xlvi., 46:27), is only one of a large number of instances of this usage. Our next inquiry is WHAT IS THE BODY ? The human body is a material organism, adapted to the uses of the human soul, in the present state or stage of its existence. It is the house in which the soul lives, its material dwelling place, while passing through its mortal life. Through the ma- terial organs of sense — the nerves of sight, hearing, tasting, smelling and feeling — the soul becomes conscious of the material uni- verse, and acquaints itself with the qualities and attributes of matter, in its various forms, changes, uses and laws. These are its re- ceptivities. By means of other organs of the body, each soul manifests to other souls the products of its own three modes of ac- tivity — intelligence, sensibility and will. These are its activities. By a mysterious and, up to this time, inexplicable connec- tion, the soul imparts to the body a condi- tion that we call life, rendering the body thoroughly subservient to the uses and will 24 Soul, Body and Spi?'it. of the soul, within certain prescribed limits of activity. On this account the word soul is used to signify life itself, anima, as well as the living creature, animus. This life is declared in the scriptures to be in the blood. In Lev. xvii. , n, we read, "The life of the flesh is in the blood;" and in Deut. xii., 23, "The life is the blood." Now, mark well, right here, though the soul gives life to the body, and uses the body as the servant of its own purposes, it imparts to the body none of its own powers or func- tions. The body knows nothing, feels nothing, wills nothing. The soul is a vital essence, the body a mere instrument. Sub- servient to the will of the indwelling soul, the body is as the staff in the hand, with- out knowledge, without feeling, without motive, without purpose, without account- ability. The third and last constituent of man is THE SPIRIT. The Hebrew word translated spirit is Ruach, the Greek, pneuma. The thing thus named is, like the soul, an organic essence, substantial but not material. We come Soul, Body and Spirit. 25 now to disputed ground; the real nature and offices of the human spirit. That much error exists here is evident from the fact that scarcely two writers on the subject agree. Of all the theories advanced, only one can be true, and our opinion is that not one of them all is true. The spirit is the distinctive feature of man, the element of his constitution that makes him human. All the characteristic differences that distinguish men from brutes are effected through the spirit, due to it. These differences are not inherent in the spirit; but the presence of the spirit, as a distinct part of the man, furnishes the neces- sary occasion for the differences. It sup- plies the conditions that enable the soul to exercise those functions that do not belong to the brute, and that we call human. Res- pecting the spirit we note the following pecu- liarities: 1. It is a human spirit. It is not the spirit of God, nor in any sense the Divine spirit. It is not "a spark of divinity," struck off from the Divine mind, and im- planted in man. In the scriptures, it is 26 Soul, Body and Spirit. never called the Spirit of God, nor a Di-2 vine spirit, but often the spirit of man. It pertains to and is found in no other crea- ture than man. To him, however, that is, to his manhood, to everything that elevates him above the condition of a brute, every- thing that we call human, it is essential. 2. The spirit of man is the gift of God. In Zechariah xii., I, we read, "The Lord formeth the spirit of man within him." In Numbers xvi., 22 and xxvii., 16, he is called "The God of the spirits of all flesh"; in Hebrews xii. , 9, " The father of spirits ' ' ; and in Ecclesiastes xii., 7, we -are told that, at death, "The spirit shall return to God who gave it." This is language that is never used with reference to the soul, and seems to intimate that, while the soul and the body are the product of generation, the spirit is given, as in the case of Adam, when God breathes into his nostrils the breath of life, and man becomes a living soul. As to the exact time when the spirit is given, is implanted in man, whether before or at the time of birth, we have no hint, and it would be folly to be wise above what is written. Soul, Body and Spirit. 27 3. The uses of the spirit are plainly indi- cated in such passages as these: Job xxxii., 8, "There is a spirit in man, and the inspira- tion of the Almighty giveth them understand- ing. " Romans viii. , 16, "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit." A very significant and impressive text is Proverbs xx., 27, "The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord." The idea that I get from these passages is that the spirit of man is the medium of communication between the spirit world and the soul of man, just as the body is the me- dium of communication between the soul and the material universe. This is the key to all that is new in my theory and treat- ment of this subject. The human spirit is not an intelligence. We have seen that all intellectual, emotional and volitional pow- ers and functions are predicted of the soul. Can they, or any part of them, belong to the spirit also ? It is too clearly a matter of course tor argument, and almost too manifest to require statement, that no in- stance can be found, in all the handiwork of God, where he has duplicated his work by 28 Soul, Body and Spirit. endowing with the same faculties or func- tions two distinct elemental parts of the same creature. If the soul thinks, the spirit does not think. If the soul feels, the spirit does not feel. If the soul wills, the spirit does not exercise the power of volition. The soul of the brute does all these things; and can the soul of man do less ? Moreover, since the soul is furnished with material organs, through which to hold communication with material existences, is not that very fact a hint that it must have spiritual organs through which to hold com- munication with spiritual existences? If such organs are necessary, where shall we look for them, but in the spirit? What other rational use can be found for the spirit? The perplexing question, in all ages, has been, What are the functions or uses of the spirit? and for lack of a rational and con- sistent answer to this inquiry the most ab- surd theories have been devised, we may with propriety say, "conjured up." The one fundamental error, lying at the bottom of all these theories, is the assumption that the spirit is endowed with intelligence; that Soul, Body and Spirit. 29 it is a part of the mind, and that certain mental and moral attributes belong to it. Yield this point, abandon this hypothesis, and the whole subject is cleared of mist and doubt immediately. 4. We are now prepared for our last and most startling statement. It is this: The spirit of man is the spiritual body, spoken of by the Apostle Paul, 1 Cor. xv. , 44, "There is a spiritual body." We support this proposition by the following considera- tions: (1) The spirit, as already shown, is the medium of the same receptivities and the agent of the same activities, in the spiritual world, as the body is in the material world. Through the organs of the spirit the soul sees spiritual objects, hears spiritual voices, feels spiritual influences, tastes the heavenly manna that sustains the spiritual life, and smells the odors that are exhaled from the fields of Paradise. By means of the spirit it manifests to the spiritual world, and to this world also, its choices of good or evil, and its works of righteonsness or of iniquity. The generally received idea is that the 30 Soul, Body and Spirit. spiritual body will be given to man at the resurrection and not before. Undoubtedly that is the body with which he shall come forth. The error lies in the hypothesis that he has no spiritual body now. The Apostle says, " There is a spiritual body," not, There shall be a spiritual body. (2) That the functions of the human spirit are analogous to those of the human body is, also, a most convincing evidence that the human spirit is the spiritual body. Why should the organism through which the soul manifests itself be called a body in the one case and not in the other? More- over, if there is a spiritual body, what can it be, and what must be its object and uses, other than such as are predicated of the spirit? and if the object and uses are the" same, must not the substance be the same also? THE MAN COMPLETE. A complete man now stands before us, tripartite in his constitution, and with each of his three elemental parts distinctly de- fined. Whatever defects may be found in our theory, whatever it may lack of com- Soul, Body and Spirit. 31 mending itself to the superior judgment of my fellow-seekers after truth, it certainly has this merit; the sphere and scope of each concept is clearly consistent and de- finite. Confusion of contents is impossible. This is strong evidence of its. truth; and more than can be said in favor of any other theory that has ever been presented. Does error ever resemble truth so closely, in these respects and particulars? Whether this is the true man — man as God made him — must, however, be further tested, by careful inquiry as to whether he is competent, in the relations and uses of .his several parts, and under his circum- stances as related to God and to his fellow- men, to meet the demands of his situation. If he fail in this particular, the failure must be admitted to be complete. It matters not how fine a piece of mechanism may be constructed, nor with what ingenuity and skill its parts may be adapted and adjusted, each to the others, if the machine fail to per- form the work it was devised and intended to perform, it must be pronounced a failure. On the other hand, if it accomplish the 32 Soul, Body and Spirit. purpose for which it was constructed, and surpass all other machines ever constructed for that purpose, its success should be frankly acknowledged, though the model should be quite new and unlike any that had preceded it. Have I not a right to demand the application of the same principle, in re- gard to this subject? If others dare submit their theories to this test, I will cheerfully take my chances. We proceed then, to in- quire, Can this man be A MORAL AGENT? Here our triumph is complete. He not only can be, but he must be a moral agent: and the how and the why are so easily ex- plained that a child can comprehend and understand the problem and its solution. The mysteries of self-consciousness, con- sciousness of right and wrong in self and others, reason, will in liberty, that is, in the presence of an alternative, conscience, ac- countability, sin, regeneration, holiness, and all the potentialities, experiences and activi- ties, that distinguish man from the brute, and ally him to angels and to God himself, Soul, Body and Spirit. 33 are made so plain, so easy of comprehen- sion, that wayfaring men, though not blessed with high literary attainments or scholastic degrees, may revel in them with delight. The brute is di-chotomous, constituted of soul and body only; hence desire and volition are prompted in one direction only. His intercourse is with the material world through the material body; hence no alter- native is possible. Every desire has its origin in the flesh, is of the earth earthy; and the will, without opposition, assents to its gratification. Volition is possible only in this direction; and the whole life is neces- sarily sensuous. Desire is checked only by instinct; and volition, by experience. Pain- ful consequences may lead to self-restraint; but experience is the only school in which he learns. For these reasons, a choice, re- specting which right or wrong could be pre- dicated, such choice as would give moral character as its product, is impossible.. Hence the brute neither is nor can be a moral agent. In man the case is different. Through the spiritual body, in the use of spiritual 3 34 Soul, Body and Spirit. senses, the human soul is in communication with spiritual things; while, at the same time, through the material body, in the use of physical senses, it is in communication with the world of matter and all that per- tains to it. One soul dwells in two bodies. Two worlds, two spheres of life, two classes of influences, directly opposite in their char- acter, the one earthly and degrading, the other spiritual and ennobling, lie open be- fore him, and urge their claims upon him. Thus he has an alternative. The conditions of actual choice are now fulfilled. The sov- ereign Will now asserts itself in liberty, un- der a solemn sense of responsibility. Rea- son weighs the consequences of either choice. Conscience presents its smiling approval, on the one hand, or its terrible scorpion sting, on the other. The enlightened soul is con- scious that it is standing face to face with a terrible alternative, involving, as the conse- quences of its choice, the approving smile or the condemning frown of Almighty God. This is Moral* Agency, pure and simple, with all its necessary conditions. The soul, in the exercise of its sovereign functions, sits Soul, Body and Spirit. 35 upon the throne of judgment; while the flesh, on the one hand, pleads for sensuous, degrading indulgence, and the spirit, on the other hand, moved by influences from above, pleads for righteousness, truth, purity, virtue. "The flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, and these are contrary the one to the other." Thus situa- ted, thus influenced, the soul makes its fear- ful decision, with character as the imme- diate and eternal destiny as the ultimate result. Such choice is possible only to a moral agent. Verily, this is the true man, God's man, fully competent for all the de- mands of his Creator. CERTAIN PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE. Respecting certain passages of scripture, of which there is a very large number, that attribute intellectual processes, emotional experiences, and volitional functions to the spirit, they are to be disposed of in the same way as we dispose of the passages, of which there is also a large number, that attribute the same functions to the flesh. The ear hears, is attentive, seeketh knowledge, is 36 Soul, Body and Spirit. obedient, understands, receives the word of the Lord. The eye sees, perceives, waiteth for the twilight, gave witness, is bountiful, mocketh, is satisfied or not satisfied, doth spare or not spare, mourns, offends. The mouth tastes, speaks wisdom, speaketh lies, is froward, is wholesome or perverse, is de- ceitful, unruly. The hands shed innocent blood, and the feet run to evil. Thus the various members of the body are accredited with nearly all the intellectual activities of the soul; yet, everybody knows that these organs are no more responsible for a single one of them than the bludgeon, in the hand of a highwayman, is responsible for the death of the unfortunate traveler who is smitten to the earth by it. Thus it is, also, with the spirit. It faints, revives, is troubled, is sad, is sorrowful, is joyful, is willing or re- bellious, is hasty or patient, is haughty or humble, is steadfast or not steadfast, is faithful, excellent, dilligent, fervent, broken, contrite. Yet, all these, like those men- tioned above, are the functions of the soul, not of the spirit. This remarkable analogy, the use of the Soul, Body and Spirit. 37 same trope, metonomy, in both cases, to express acts, experiences and functions of the soul — in the one case as related to the material world, and in the other as related to the spiritual, is another evidence, of great force and weight, in support of our hypo- thesis that there is now a spiritual body, as well as a temporal or material, and that the soul lives in and uses either or both, in the alternatives of life, as occasions may afford opportunities; and that its experiences are according to its choices, influenced also by its environments. If this is not the ideal man, as he came from the hand of his Creator, and was de- clared to be ''very good," we challenge the world, especially those who refuse to accept our theory, to construct one, who shall more completely meet the demands of the situation, and for each particular of whose make-up a better reason can be found than we have given. LECTURE III. THE FALL. The foreseen (not necessary) result (not consequence) of the creation of moral agents actually occurred. Man fell from his first estate. Using his power of freedom of choice, he chose to disobey his Creator, his King, his God. Respecting the nature of this transaction, great men, good men, have differed widely. It is a matter of sincere congratulation, to-day, as we believe, that those differences are gradually but rapidly disappearing. This is due largely, if not wholly, to a better understanding of the na- ture of moral agency than the world has ever had before. In this lecture we propose to examine, in the light thus shed upon them, the facts respecting this fall, as they are made known to us in the scriptures. i. Our first inquiry will be respecting the moral condition of Adam and Eve, in the garden of Eden, as they came from the hand of their Creator, before they had exer- The Fall 39 cised a single choice, of which moral char- acter could be predicated. They were fur- nished by their Creator, as we have seen (Lecture I.), with the endowments neces- sary to moral action; namely, intelligence and free will. They were surrounded by circumstances that furnished the necessary alternative of choice. The fair fruit of ''the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" hung temptingly before their eyes. No alternative involving a moral choice had ever been presented before. No character had been formed. The wily serpent, en- dued with Satanic power to charm and de- ceive, declared to them, "Thou shalt not surely die." The moment of decision had arrived. The momentous choice to obey or disobey the command, "Thou shalt not eat thereof" awaits only the action of the will. What was their moral state, at that inter- esting moment? The answer usually given to this inquiry is, "God created them holy." This is a great and fundamental error; and like every other error has been the source of incalcu- lable mischief. God never created an in- 4 o The Fall. telligent being holy. From the very nature of holiness, as an attribute of a moral agent, that is an impossibility. Holiness is a quality, or attribute, of character acquired by obedience. They were not holy for they had performed no act of obedience. Nor were they sinful, for they had, as yet, disobeyed no mandate. They were children, in development, that had just reached the moment, at which ac- countability commences. They were sim- ply innocent. (Why could not theologians have discovered that a thousand years ago? How much of error and confusion and strife it would have prevented). Should the question arise, Was there, at this time, any natural inclination to either holiness or sin? the answer must be an un- equivocal No. In their constitution there could be no bias; and heredity had not even commenced its work. It was just as natural, just as easy, for them to do right as wrong. 2. Our next inquiry is respecting the temptation; and our first postulate respect- ing it is, Temptation is impossible where there is no alternative. The necessity of an The Fall. 41 alternative, in order to the development of moral character, has been clearly shown in Lecture I. The alternative, in this case, is furnished by the prohibitory command, Gen. iii. 16, 17, "Of every tree in the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." At this point in our inquiries, it should be stated that, while this transaction clearly illustrates the nature of an alternative, and is recorded in order to make that nature evi- dent to all, we are not to suppose that no other form of alternative would have served the same purpose. From the temptation of our Saviour we may learn that at least three kinds of alternative may be employed, to test the loyalty of the soul to its God; namely, the appetites of the flesh, the am- bitions of the soul, and presumption. It is evident, also, that these tests may be em- ployed in almost innumerable forms. One form, however, is sufficient as such test; for he who disregards the mandate of his Sover- eign in a single instance makes his lack of 42 The Fall. loyalty evident. . Whether innocent or holy before, he is a sinner now. 3. The transgression. They disobeyed the command of their God. This was sin. "Sin is the transgression of law." 1 John iii. 4. 4. The consequences. With the very purpose to pluck and eat that forbidden fruit, innocence took its flight. As soon as the act was committed, a terrible conscious- ness of guilt, fearfulness, uneasiness, shame, horror, seized upon them. This was con- science. They had shown themselves un- worthy of the confidence and approving smile of their best friend, their Creator, their God. What could now be done? The dreadful act could not be recalled. Despair, dark and dreadful, hovered over them as a cloud; surrounded, enveloped them as mid- night. When they heard the sound of the approaching footsteps < ' of the Lord God, walking in the garden in the cool of the day, the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God amongst the trees of the garden." No one can imagine their feelings, at that moment, who has not The Fall. 43 known, in the very depths of his soul, the awful meaning of the words ' ' condemned already. " 5. This loss of God's favor is called death. It was the execution of the pre- dicted penalty, "In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." The pro- priety of giving this name, death, to the condition into which they brought them- selves by the foolish and wicked act of diso- bedience they performed, will be apparent to any one who will give it a little careful, close thought. The Psalmist says (xxx. 5), "In his favor is life." If the favor of God is life, the loss of that favor must be death. This is the exact concept of these two words, wherever found in the scriptures, used in a spiritual sense. Life is the favor of God; eternal life is the favor of God extended through eternal ages. Death is the loss of that favor; eternal death is alienation from God perpetuated, by the continued, persist- ent choice of the rebellious spirit, through the ages of eternity. Misled by an erroneous interpretation of Romans v. 12, "By one man sin entered 44 The Fall into the world, and death by sin," many have supposed the death here predicted in- cluded temporal death, the death of the body; and that the mortality of the race is due to that transgression, and is a part of the penalty. Common, almost universal, as these opinions are, we must here record our dissent from them, and state our reasons for our dissent. We firmly believe that Adam was just as mortal before he sinned as he was after- wards. Whether it was possible for him to protract his earthly life indefinitely, by eat- ing of the fruit of "the tree of life," we will not stop now to discuss. Our reasons for believing that he was mortal are the following: (i). This transgression did not bring physical death into the world. It is impos- sible to so interpret the language of the apostle, above quoted. The science of geo- logy furnishes evidence, just as indisputable as the inspired word of God, that death had prevailed over animal life for unknown ages before the earth was in condition to be oc- cupied as a residence for human beings. Eleven miles in thickness of the earth's The Fall. 45 crust was made of the remains of animals that died ages before God said, "Let us make man"; and they are to be found to- day incorporated into some of the great mountain ranges of the earth. This is a fact so well known that a single citation of evidence to support it is unnecessary. (2). The body of Adam was made of the same 4 ' dust of the ground " as the bodies of the dead animals, whose remains, at that very time, he was treading beneath his feet; the same as that of which every mortal body, whether of brute or man, has been ' 'formed" from the introduction of animal life into the world unto the present time. Why should the body of man, whether in innocence, holiness, or sin, be less perishable than that of the brute, which is made of the same material, the same chemical elements? It is the nature of everything that is formed of matter, and endowed with life, whether it be animal or vegetable, to grow until it reaches a state of maturity, then descend the scale of life, by regular degradations, until life becomes extinct, and "dust re- turns to the earth as it was." 46 The Fall. Suppose that, in one of the great seismic upheavals of the earth's crust, that must have been very frequent at that period, the earth had opened beneath his feet, and Adam had been swallowed up in the chasm, and crushed to powder between the tum- bling rocks, would it not have killed him? It is no answer to say that God would not have permitted such a catastrophy. To admit that the Providential arm was neces- sary to protect him is to admit his destructi- bility. Being the sovereign of his own choices, suppose he had determined to eat nothing, would he not have starved to death, just as you or I would? The suppo- sition that he was not mortal is in itself an absurdity. (3). The warning given them was, "In the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." The meaning of many a pro- phecy has been clear only in its fulfilment. The only death that followed the transgres- sion, "in the day" of its occurrence, was spiritual death, the loss of the favor of God. This may have hastened, undoubtedly did hasten, the dissolution of the body, but not The Fall. 47 to any great extent in the case of Adam, or of any of the antediluvians, of whom we have any record. Heredity had not done its fatal work at that time as it is doing it to-day. (4). The reference to the literal render- ing of the Hebrew, ' ' dying thou shalt die, " has no force whatever. The usage of that Hebrew idiom is solely that of emphasizing the fact expressed by the finite verb. It is correctly translated, "Thou shalt surely die"; and emphasizing the fact of dying must emphasize also the time of its occur- rence. "To-day" does not mean anytime within a thousand years. The death pre- dicted came upon them at once. Com- mentators agree that its literal fulfilment was spiritual death, but usually assume that the seeds of decay and dissolution were at the same time sown in his body. This as- sumption is based upon the fact that he did die; a fact much more naturally accounted for on the ground that he was always mortal. (5). Again, it is said that "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return," was a 48 The Fall. part of the penalty pronounced upon Adam for his transgression. From this interpre- tation I must also be permitted to dissent. Read the whole verse. Gen. iii. 19, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." That little word "till" manifestly takes what follows it out from under the curse that precedes it, and refers it to the natural order of events that would have occurred, if no sin had been committed. That particu- lar curse would rest upon him, until the close of his natural life. Then follows the statement, without any reference to the curse, given only as the reason why, in the nature of his constitution, he would and must "return unto the ground; for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." A careful study of Rom. v. 12-25, wm " a l so show that the more natural, if not the only consistent, interpretation of that whole passage is found on the hypothesis that spiritual death only is referred to. The death mentioned is the death that came "through sin; and so death, passed unto all The Fall. 49 men, for that all sinned." That spiritual death was the direct result of sin is not dis- puted; that physical death was, is contra- dicted by the very constitution of the human body. " Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." LECTURE IV. LAW. This is God's world, God's universe. "The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof; the world and they that dwell therein." He is sole proprietor and sole manager of the whole: the material and the immaterial; the animate and the inanimate; the intelligent and that which has no intel- ligence; the mortal and the immortal; the body, the soul and the spirit; the holy and the sinful; all are in his hands, subject to his government, creatures of his care. He is working the whole, managing the whole, with a definite aim and purpose, in the ex- ercise of his own judgment as to what is best for each and for all; and with a free- dom, independence, sovereignty, that is well illustrated by the farmer upon his farm, the mechanic in his shop, the merchant in his store, the teacher in the school-room, and the mother in the midst of her family and household affairs. Viewing God thus, seated Law. 51 upon his throne, at the head of the universe, the living, planning, guiding, controlling Manager, Director, Sovereign, of the whole, it is evident to the most casual observer and thinker that he must have many laws. Of God's laws, there are three kinds, three distinct and separate systems: physi- cal laws, ceremonial laws, and moral laws. These three systems of laws differ radically in their nature and object. We shall treat them separately, and in the order presented above. I. Physical laws. These are (1) laws that seem to inhere in matter itself; and according to which the material universe is organized. As to their nature and practical utilities in human affairs, they are discussed at length and in particular in scientific works on Physics. The concept of physical law should include (2) every case where conse- quences necessarily follow antecedents, the relation being that of cause and effect. Our treatment of this class of laws will refer chiefly to their moral bearings. In this line of inquiry, it is important to notice the following: 52 Law. i. Physical laws, whether considered as pertaining to events in the material, mental or spiritual world, are linked directly with the divine will, and are constant. Under similar circumstances or conditions, similar results may always be relied upon. Water, at a temperature of 3 2° Farenheit, with a downward tendency, will freeze; and ice, at the same temperature with an upward ten- dency, will melt. Mental inactivity will re- sult in mental weakness. The wages of sin is death. These are examples of the con- stancy of physical law. They will always be true, whether in this world or any other. 2. The material universe is undoubtedly an immense system of object lessons; each law and each fact pertaining to matter cor- responding with and intended to teach a fact or law pertaining to spiritual conditions and life. There is a very important sense in which Pope's view of the relations of God to the material universe is true, when he says, "All are but parts of one stupendous whole, Whose body Nature is, and God the soul." Law. 53; With this view we conceive that a mote, a planet, a sun, a system of material worlds, each and all are as subservient to the will of God as my hand or my tongue is subservient to my will. Whatever may be the laws to which each mote or each world may be or- dinarily subject, moved by the will of God it forgets them all, and leaps from its wonted course, as a railroad train leaps from its ac- customed track when a sufficient obstruction lies in its way. He who made matter and the laws of matter is superior both to his work and to the laws that regulate it. Nor is this power to work against ' *. the laws of nature," as they are frequently called, found in God alone. We possess that power, and' are continually using it._ Thus, and thus only, do we employ the forces of Nature to supplement our own strength in any mechanical operation. While laws may be constant, the forces that may be brought to bear upon or against them are variable. These forces may or may not be sufficient to counteract and over- come the laws. The force with which any portion of mat- 54 Law. ter is attracted to the earth is called its weight. The force that may be exerted by a man in raising or attempting to raise a given portion of matter from the earth is called his strength. Now the strength of my arm may or may not be sufficient to raise one hundred pounds from the earth. If it is sufficient, I am able to overcome the law of attraction, as pertaining to that body. This shows that the laws of matter are not invincible. They may be overcome and rendered ineffectual; or they may be ob- structed by an opposition not sufficient to overcome them, and their force employed to subserve the will of man, as when we use wind, water, steam, electricity, or the attrac- tion of gravitation itself, to* work machinery, propel vehicles of travel or transportation, convey messages, or for any other purpose. These are the laws referred to, when peo- ple talk of the impossibility of God acting, except in accordance with his laws. As this is a very great and very damaging error, it is worth our while to give it some attention. Many, among whom may be found Christian people, and Christian ministers too, inquire Law. 55 in this wise: ''How can such an event as men call ' special providence ' occur ? Will God disregard his own laws ? Can I ask him to set aside a just penalty, that he has himself attached, as a natural consequence, to a righteous law, that I have broken ? How can such a thing be ? In this way God would undeify himself, abrogate his own statutes, destroy his own goverment. Prayer, in such cases, is not piety but pre- sumption." Now, what is the matter with people who talk thus ? The error into which they have fallen may be a very natural one, but it is very mischievous. That error is the assumption that God is limited in his action by the laws here referred to — his physical laws. The remedy for this error is the fact stated above, that physical laws are not in- vincible. As regards the relation of a law- giver to laws of his own enactment, bear this maxim always in mind, The law-giver is superior to his laws. Object lessons that teach this fact are abundant on all hands. They are found in every organized system of labor in the world. The farmer has laws 56 Law. for the management of his farm. The work- men in his employ are expected to conform their labor to these laws, unless excused from doing so, and he may generally observe them himself; but when the interests of the farm, the successful working of his plans, requires it, he disregards them utterly and gives new orders to his workmen. Thus he changes or disregards his own laws, accord- ing to the dictates of his judgment and the exigencies of occasions. The same is true of the mechanic, the merchant, the builder, the manager of a corporation, anybody who has workmen under him, and who says to one "Go, and he goeth, and to another, Come, and he cometh." This, in fact, is the meaning of the mysterious remark made by the Centurion to Jesus, Matt. viii. 8, 9. ' ' Say the word, and my servant shall be healed. For I also am a man under au- thority, having under myself soldiers; and I say unto one, Go, and he goeth; and to an- other, Come, and he cometh; and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it." What connection has this remark with his request that he should come and heal his servant? Law. 57 His meaning is, The forces of Nature, the diseases with which men are afflicted, are subject to your will and word, just as ser- vants who are uider my authority are subject to my command. The forces of Nature are your servants, as these men are mine. Perhaps the best illustrations of this prin- ciple and fact are found in the school-room and in the family. The teacher has many rules, and strictest observance of them is es- sential. Order is of first importance; and prompt, unquestioned obedience cannot be dispensed with. Still the teacher is superior to his law; and the fact is so fully recognized that no pupil hesitates, at any time when neces- sity or convenience requires, to ask release from obedience to any law; nor do the other pupils gape with wonder, when such request is granted. Precisely the same thing is true in the family. The numerous regulations that are necessary for the management of her multifarious and complicated household duties do not interfere with the ability of the mother to hear the petitions of her children, or of her servants, and perform acts of spec- 58 Law. ial providence for them, whenever the wel- fare of the family requires it. All parental interests and functions be- long to God, and what did Jesus say? " If ye know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father, who is in heaven, give good things to them that ask him?" The laws of Nature, as they are called, like the ordinary regulations of a family, are, under ordinary circumstances, adapted to and sufficient for the occasions that arise under them; but, when exigencies arise, and they prove inadequate, the higher interests of the souls of men call for the special providences of God. The law-giver is superior to his laws. Neither has God given to men powers that he does not pos- sess himself. If men are superior to their laws, God is surely superior to his. This view of the providence of God fur- nishest the only rational and consistent ex- planation of miracles. Instead of being "performed according to laws with which we are unacquainted," they are performed in accordance with no law at all. They are simply single instances, where God has per- Law. 59 formed an act, brought about an event, directly by the fiat of his Sovereign Will, re- gardless of, sometimes contrary to and in defiance of, his well established laws. The scriptures are full of examples that are thus, and only thus, to be accounted for. What was the fiat, ' ' Let there be light?" What was the flood? the building of the ark and the voluntary resort of the wild beasts of the earth to its sheltering apart- ments? What was the destruction of Sodom? the sparing and exaltation of Jo- seph and Moses? the burning bush? the giving of the law on Mt. Sinai? the manna in the wilderness? the healing by the bra- zen serpent? the heaping up of the waters of the Jordan? the tumbling down of the walls of Jerico? the fire from heaven that consumed the sacrifice of Elijah? the trans- lation without death of Enoch and Elijah? the rescue of Daniel from the lions and of the faithful three from the seven-fold heated furnace? the delivery of Peter from prison and of Paul from the bite of the poi- sonous reptile? and the hundreds of other similar events that transpired in those days, 6o Law. and the thousands that have occurred since and are daily occurring in the experiences of God's people? what were they all? what are they now? but examples of the Will of God, meeting the necessity of a single case, by the exercise of his sovereign right, authority and power? THE LAW-MAKER IS SU- PERIOR TO HIS LAWS. Nothing can can be more manifest to one who thinks^ observes, and dares exercise the reasoning powers with which his Creator has endowed him than that every molecule of matter and every immense globe is just as obedient to the Will of God as my hand or my foot, when in a healthy condition, is to my will. Such is the relation of the Will of God to. matter and to the laws of matter. Physical law is the immanent will of God. From all these facts it is evident that God is working out moral problems and not physical. The material universe was not made for itself. It has no value only as a means to moral ends. Hence it is that all its laws and in- terests yield, stand aside, when the higher demands and interests of moral, or sentient creatures of any grade require it. When Law. 61 we speak of " the good of being," only sen- tient beings are included. Inanimate mat- ter, matter that is destitute of animal life, knows nothing of either good or bad. 2. Ceremonial laws. These may have their origin in the Will of God or the will of man. They may be enjoined by authorita- tive enactment or by common consent or custom. They may pertain to religious worship, social intercourse, courts of justice, and many other relations of human life. We shall consider them only so far as they may be the laws of God; that is, laws divinely enacted for the observance of his people. Under the old dispensation, certain days were to be observed sacredly, in commemo- ration of important events; and certain sac- rifices were required, some of them as grate- ful acknowledgements of divine blessings, others as typical of the great atoning sacri- fice that was to be made in the fullness of time. Under the new dispensation, ceremo- nial laws, enacted by divine authority, are few. I find only the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper, unless marriage 62 Law. should also be included. All other require- ments of the Christian religion come under the head of Moral laws. The observance or non-observance of ceremonial laws may be ethical, not on ac- count of the thing required, but because it is required. Our relations to God require that we respect his will, regardless of the thing he may have commanded. He has a reason for every command he has given; hence, when we cannot discover what that reason is, confidence iu his wisdom, and in his devotion to our welfare, as well as un- questioning loyalty to his Sovereignty, should prompt obedience; and neglect or re- fusal to recognize this obligation must be sin, however trivial the thing commanded may appear to us. When the Savior would wash his disciples' feet, Peter, undoubtedly feeling that the act, on the part of his Lord, was quite too menial, said, "Lord, thou shalt never wash my feet." The reply of Jesus was most remarkable, as indicating the fact that it matters not how trivial may be the act required, refusal to perform it is rebellion against the divine authority, and Law. 63 disloyalty to the government of God. "If I wash thee not," said he, "thou hast no part with me." This was a serious state of things, and Peter realized it. He did not wish to imperil the salvation of his soul for so trivial a matter as refusing to permit his Lord and Master to wash his feet; and with most humble submission he cried out, ' 'Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head." Thus a ceremonial law may also have indirect connection with moral charac- ter. Ceremonial laws are symbolical. They employ a formal service to represent and impress spiritual ideas. Sometimes their purpose is the commemoration of an event that has already transpired; sometimes it is to symbolize an event, of which it is also prophetic; and sometimes both of these ob- jects are included. The keeping of the pass- over illustrates the three ideas. It com- memorates the sparing of the Israelites, when the destroying angle went through the land of Egypt, and slew the first-born of every family; it symbolized the salvation of believers and the destruction of unbelievers, 64 Law. under the gospel dispensation; and it was prophetic of the atonement that was to be made by the suffering and death of the ' ' Lamb of God" on Calvary. Ceremonial laws are also temporary. When the end is fulfilled for which they were intended, they cease to be obligatory. Christ fulfilled the ceremonial laws given to Moses, hence his followers never observe them. They are no longer obligatory. It is to this Jesus refers when he says, Matt, v. 17, " Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to de- stroy but to fulfill. 3. Moral laws. The system of laws with which we have most to do, in the dis- cussion of theological questions, is what are commonly called moral laws. This does not mean that these laws are moral or immoral; but that they are of such a nature that obe- dience to them cannot be refused without incurring guilt. When written, they define the duties that intelligent beings, moral agents, owe to one another, to themselves, and to the animal kingdom in general. This system of laws differs so widely from those Law. 65 we have been considering, that very few, even of those "who seem to be pillars," have really apprehended their nature. They relate entirely to intelligent beings, who are able to comprehend the nature of a moral obligation. They are not the enactments of a Sovereign, nor are they established by the concurrent voice of a community, a na- tion, or the entire assemblage of all the in- telligences in the universe. Yet they are uniform and universal. Wherever intelli- gent beings may be found, there these obli- gations exist. They are no respecter of persons. They are just as binding upon God and angels as upon men. They exist in the nature of things, have always been and will always be the same as they now are. They are immutable and eternal. No au- thority can abrogate them, no enactment set them aside. As they do not originate in a Sovereign Will, nor by any governmental authority, they are in no way or degree sub- ject to any interference by any power in heaven or on earth. Do you ask, Whence do they come? and how do they exist? I answer, they arise out. 5 66 Law. of the relations of intelligent beings to one another. If there were but one sentient and intelligent being in the universe, there could be no moral law. If there were no sentient beings except brutes, there could be no moral law. Every obligation of man to God, of God to man, of man to man, or of man to brute, must arise directly and spon- taneously out of the relations that each sus- tains to each and to all the rest; and perfect conformity, obedience, to these obligations, laws, on the part of those between whom the relations exist, is absolutely, immutably and eternally necessary to their happiness and welfare. As the offspring of God, man owes alle- giance, obedience, to him, as his Father, and his Sovereign Ruler. This is the prompting of love, as well as of a wise regard on the part of man, for his own happiness and well- being. These are the relations of man to God. The relations of God to man are those of a parent to a child, a King to his subjects who are dependent upon his provi- dence for their existence and for the supply of every want of their natures. He is also Law. 67 related to them as the Infinite to the finite, the strong to the weak, the wise to the igno- rant, the one in whose hands are all the resources of the universe to those who have no resources of any kind. These obliga- tions rest upon him because he is a moral agent. A single instance of disregard or neglect of the welfare of one of his intelli- gent subjects would convict him of sin, and bring upon him self-condemnation and the condemnation of every intelligent creature in the universe. Hence we may well believe that ' ' No good thing will he deny from them that walk uprightly." On the same princi- ple, every sentient creature, even the most insignificant insect, is the object of his care; and ' ' not a sparrow falls to the ground without his notice." The relations of each man to each and all his fellows constitute the foundation of the obligations of each to all the rest. These obligations are found in the fact that the welfare of each of my fellows is as im- portant to him and to all the rest as my welfare is to me and to all the rest. Every individual of our race is dependent upon 68 Law. the rest of the- race, as well as upon God y for his or her highest' well-being. Thus each is made to care for all and all to care for each. This is the moral law. Con- formity to this law is the highest standard of human life, and promotes the most per- fect condition of human welfare. This is the doctrine of both the first and second commandments, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Thus " Love is the fulling of the law." It is also the doctrine of that wonderful paradox, the most extraordinary that ever fell from lips of clay, "He that seeketh to save his life shall lose it; and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it." In the language of experience, as it appears in all the affairs of men, this may be paraphrased thus: Selfishness defeats the end at which it aims, but benevolence secures, without direct effort, the end at which selfishness aims in vain. It is found also in the language of the apostle, iCor. x. 33, "Not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of the many." This should be the aim, the pur- Law. 69 pose, the constant effort of every person of our race; and he who ignores this law, and refuses to accept it, and conform his whole life, in every wish, in every motive, in every act, to this obligation, stands convicted of sin, before his fellows, before his God, and before the bar of his own conscience. This is hell, as a condition of consciousness, whether in this life, or in the life to come. Are these the laws of God ? They are no more the laws of God than they are the laws of men and of angels. They grow spontaneously out of the relations of each intelligence to each and all the rest. No personal Sovereign has enacted them; and no power in the universe can either annul or change them. They are called the laws of God, because God, in fulfilment of the obligation resting upon him as Father, Sovereign, the Infinite, the All-wise, to seek and promote the highest happiness and well-being of his offspring, creatures, subjects, has promulged them, published them abroad, that we might know them, and be without excuse, if we disregard them. Apropos of this thought is the significant 70 Law. fact that the Hebrew word torah, trans- lated law, signifies instruction. God has ordained physical law by the immanence of his own sovereign will; he is also the author of certain ceremonial laws; but he has not enacted, nor even originated moral laws. These have their origin, even their suggestion, in relations. They grow from the intuitive affirmation of the reason of every moral agent in the universe, that rights may not with impunity, be violated by either God or angels or men. They may be called the laws of God only in re- cognition of the fact that he has made them known to us, and assured us that they must be regarded or evil consequences must follow: This should be the understanding of monarchs and legislators. Their business as law-givers is not to make laws, except ceremonial laws. The only legislative au- thority with which they are invested, outside of ceremonial laws, is to ascertain what are the rights of their subjects, in their various relations to their sovereign and to each other, and require their observance. In the Law. 71 observance of these rights, each and all will find their highest well-being. Civil law is a branch of moral law. The same is true in the family, the school, and wherever the authority of one person over another is recognized. Capital and labor may be perfectly harmonized on this principle, and no other. When this princi- ple is fully understood and fully obeyed, by ruler and subject, by employer and em- ploye, the millennium will be not a dream but a reality; and every recognition of this principle, and every effort to realize it, in the affairs of daily life, is a step in that direction. This is also the key-note to a correct life, the key-note to a Christian life. It was sounded by Jesus when he said, ' ' I came not to be ministered unto but to min- ister;" by Paul when he said, respecting Jesus, ' ' He who was rich, for our sakes became poor, that we, through his poverty, might be rich;" and again by Paul when he said, "Ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake;" and again, "Not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of the many." This is 72 Law. the condition of things in heaven; and full and cheerful conformity to this principle will make any place in the universe heaven. In the light of the above, we see how utterly unfounded and false is the assump- tion that the "Ten Commandments" were included in the law that was so fulfilled in Christ that it was no longer binding upon any body, Jew or Gentile. From the classi- fication of laws, as given above, it is readily seen that such fulfilment could refer only to the ceremonial law. Neither of the other kinds of law could be included, because neither of them is capable of abrogation. Physical law must exist so long as effects follow causes; and moral law must be obli- gatory, in all its particulars, without any possible shadow of change, just so long as moral agents exist. In any particular rela- tion it is the same, yesterday, to-day, and forever. The only question, then, as touch- ing the decalogue, is whether it consists of ceremonial or moral precepts, whether they are edicts of ceremonial observances, or obligations that grow out of relations. On examining the "commandments" Law. 73 with reference to this point, no difference of opinion is likely to arise respecting any of them except the fourth. That there is something of the ceremonial in this, we freely admit. The seventh day was chosen as the particular day of the seven to be ob- served, "for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day; wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it." This, however, was not the whole of it, nor the important part of it. If there had been no necessity for a Sabbath day, no day would have been named for its observance. The necessity of both labor and rest underlies the commandment, and that necessity is found in the relations of man to himself, his fellow man, and his God. Let us examine each of these points. I. There is, perhaps, no physiological fact more clearly and firmly established than that the bodily welfare of a laborer demands that each seventh day be devoted to quiet and rest. Both mind and muscle, that are subjected habitually to severe taxation, day after day, must have one day in seven for 74 Law. recuperation. We admit that it looks para- doxical, but experience has often proved its truth, that more work can be done in six days than in seven. Hence, rest on the sev- enth day is just as imperative, for one's wel- fare, as labor during the other six. 2. Consideration of the welfare of others, in every community, and of the world at large, imposes upon each member the obli- gation to observe the day of rest, and cir- cumstantially the same day; because no one can disregard the precept without infringing upon the quiet, the repose, the rights of others. The moral law requires that the welfare of all (domestic animals included) must be regarded by each. On this point we find a very significant passage in Exodus xxiii. 12, "Six days thou shalt do thy work, and on the seventh day thou shalt rest, that thine ox and thine ass may rest, and the son of thy handmaid and the stran- ger may be refreshed." 3, The most sacred of all our obligations to "Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy" is found in our relation to God him self. The idea is clearly expressed in Exo- Law. 75 dus xxxi. 13, 14, " Verily ye shall keep my Sabbaths, for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generation, that ye may know that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you. Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore, for it is holy unto you." The history of the world shows that the human race ' ' did not like to retain God in their knowledge." Knowing that this would be the disposition of men, God so constituted man that a peri- odical day of rest would be necessary for his welfare, and then gave him this command- ment, that they might through its influence be helped to remember him, and keep the day sacredly, " keep it holy," as his day, not theirs. Hence he instructed them, Isaiah lviii. 13, "If -thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sabbath a delight, and shalt honor it, not doing thine own ways nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speak- ing thine own words; then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord, and I will make thee to ride upon the high places of the earth; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." For this reason, also, God has ordained 76 Law. this day as- a day of worship. Lev. xxvi. 2, "Ye shall keep my Sabbaths, and rever- ence my sanctuary;" xxiii. 3, "The seventh day is the Sabbath of rest, and holy convo- cation." Ezek. xlvi. 1, "The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days, but on the Sab- bath it shall be opened. " Thus rest and wor- ship are required of men, not ceremonially, but for moral reasons; especially that men may remember their dependence upon God and their obligation, for their own physical and moral welfare, to reverence, adore, and love him. The above discussion shows just where the falacy lies of those who contend so earn- estly, and so conscientiously, that the Jew- ish Sabbath should still be observed. We have admitted that there is a ceremonial feature in the commandment. The day which the Jews were required to observe for rest and worship was the seventh day of the week, according to their reckoning, in com- memoration of the day on which figuratively, God rested from the work of creation. While the command to observe a Sabbath Law. 77 is founded deep and solid on relations that make it a moral precept immutable, the day selected was a memorial day, subject to be changed or abrogated entirely. Hence, when the greater work of redemption was com- pleted, and the ceremonial law nullified, the necessity of a Sabbath of rest and worship being the same as from the beginning, the most natural and appropriate thing imagin- able was that the first day, as a memorial of the resurrection, should be appointed of God as the day on which such rest and wor- ship should occur. Apropos of this thought, let me here re- cord a suggestion that has often impressed me deeply and solemnly respecting this change. No one is unaware of the deep- rooted prejudice that is formed by long-es- tablished habit, even when that habit is not sanctioned by divine authority. That such habit should be a thousand fold stronger, when sanctioned by divine authority, espec- ially by direct and positive command, will also be admitted. The strength of the con- viction, in every Jewish mind, that the sev- enth day, and no other, should be observed 78 Law. as the Sabbath, may be conceived in the light of these facts. Now lay beside these admissions the fact (undisputed, we think, by all who have not been deluded and de- ceived by the fallacies of modern Sabbata- rians) that from and after the resurrection, commencing on the evening of the very day on which it occurred, the followers of our crucified and risen Lord have observed the first day, as their accustomed day of rest and worship, with a unanimity that has never characterized any other similar change, in the history of the world. The efforts of late years to dispute this statement have re- sulted in masterly failures, for by far stronger evidence exists that for the first three hun- dred years after the ascension, no discension among the Christians of those early times had arisen on this question, while the evi- dences of its observance, during nearly all that time, are overwhelming. My suggestion, based upon these facts, is, that this change was not without author- ity, as it is supposed to be. Every person is familiar with the fact that but a small portion of what our Savior said and did, Law. 79 while here upon the earth, was ever recorded. Paul exhorts the Ephesians, Acts xx. 35, " Remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, It is more blessed to give than to receive;" a precept not found in either of the gospels. From the record given, we would naturally suppose that he was somewhere here on earth forty days af- ter his resurrection, but of his words and works during that time we have almost noth- ing. Now, taking into consideration the fact that those Jewish followers of his, steeped in the habit that was originally in- stituted by God himself, and had come down to them through fifteen centuries, increasing in intensity all the way, of observing the seventh day as the Sabbath; is it supposa- ble that they all, numbering five thousand within two months of his resurrection, prompted by no other idea than the propri- ety of commemorating the resurretion by that means, should agree, without dissent, to no longer keep the time-honored, heaven- ordained Sabbath holy, but transfer its hon- ors and sacredness to the first day? and all this without a hint from their revered and 80 Law. mourned Lord- and Master? Did not Jesus himself, in one, perhaps several, of the nu- merous interviews he must have had with his disciples, during those memorable forty days, suggest to them the propriety of such a change, substantiating the suggestion by showing them the greater importance of his resurrection over the creation rest day? Truly, I cannot conceive that so great, so important a change, could have been made, with such unanimity, upon any other hy- pothesis. Leaving out this suggestion, or rather instruction, from Jesus himself, and the effect is overwhelmingly too large for the the cause. The change could not have been made, so suddenly, so completely, so har- moniously, without his authority. In concluding this Lecture, let me say, I hope those of my readers, who have doubted the divine authority and sanctity of the Christian Sabbath, because a direct com- mand to keep it holy is not found in the New Testament, will consider the moral basis on which we have placed it. The re- lations of man to man, and of man to his God, were not affected in the least by Law. 8r the fulfilment and abrogation of the ceremo- nial law, the ' ' law of commandments con- tained in ordinances." That which is cere- monial may pass away or be changed; but moral obligations are unchangeable and eternal. LECTURE V. PENALTIES. Many erroneous notions prevail respect- ing the penalties that are attached to law, as the consequence of its transgression. The prevailing idea is that the infliction is intended to be of the nature of something deserved. " I will pay you for that," says one school boy to another, who has played some trick upon him. " There, take that," says a passionate parent to an unruly child; "it is not half what you deserve." A thief "deserves" imprisonment; a murderer "de- serves " death. "Justice demands that law shall be satisfied." Now, we apprehend that all this is quite foreign from the divine idea of the consequences of transgression. Governments, including the divine govern- ment, exist for the welfare of the governed, not to gratify the ambition, sustain the dig- nity, or promote the glory of a ruler; nor to furnish occasion to wreak vengeance upon an offender. " Whosoever of you will be Penalties. 83 the chief est, shall be the servant of all." One of the concomitants of the maxim, " Might makes right" was " The chief end of man is to glorify God." Undoubtedly man should glorify his Creator, by devoting himself to the end for which he was created, but not by recognizing in him an arbitrary, tyrannical Sovereign, who can be glorified by the abject, slavish servitude of his subjects. We think it is safe to say that, Jn all the penalties attached to divine law, there is no such principle recognized, or even hinted, as punitive justice — the infliction of pain, damage, discomfort or inconvenience, simply as a punishment deserved — so much pain for so much sin. All God's penalties are corrective. First they warn the offend- er, chastening him for his profit. If he will not be profited by chastisement, they cut him down, as a warning to others, the wel- fare of the whole, the greatest good of the greatest number, or the greatest profit to the highest interests, being always the ulti- mate motive. Penal, vengeful punishment, is incon- sistent with and antagonistic to the nature, 84 Penalties. of moral agency. Such punishment could have no other object, nor could it have any other effect, than to coerce the will, and compel an outward show of conformity to a requirement, through dread of consequences, while true obedience, obedience that can justly claim the reward of virtue, must be through love, engendered by a conviction of the judgment and a holy purpose of heart, conditions that can never be secured by the dread of punishment. The divine idea of punishment, as stated above, is disciplinary; nothing more; noth- ing less. "It is for chastening that ye en- dure; God dealeth with you as with sons. . . . We had the fathers of our flesh to chasten us, and we gave them reverence; shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us as seemed good to them; but he for our profit, that we may be partakers of his holiness " ( Heb. xii. 7-10). If asked how this view of God's deal- ings with transgressors, and especially with the incorrigible who will not be reformed, Penalties. 85 can be reconciled with passages that speak of God as "taking vengeance on them that know not God," as saying "venge- ance is mine, I will repay," and many other like passages, I reply, just as we reconcile the very numerous passages that speak of him as "being angry," "the wrath of God," etc., with the fact that God is love, and is never moved by such passions as men call wrath and anger. Men seem often to forget that God loves the innocent as well as the guilty, the obedient as well as the disobedient, the loyal as well as the dis- loyal. "God is love;" "his tender mercies are over all his works." To protect the rights of the loyal, it is often necessary to so deal with the disloyal that they may be hin- dered from doing the harm they would be glad to do. "Surely the wrath of man shall praise thee; the remainder of wrath shalt thou restrain." So long as the wicked- ness of the wicked may be made to react upon the world for good, God permits the sinner to have his liberty and work his dia- bolical plots; but when that limit is reached, through love for the faithful, the welfare of 86 Pe?ialties. the whole, he removes the worker of ini- quity, and places him where his influence for evil will be restrained; at least, where it will not vex the righteous. This seems to short sighted mortals as wrath, anger, ven- geance, and thus they have named it. The necessity of dealing thus with criminals is neither unjust nor strange nor mysterious. There is not a government upon earth, that has not the same provision for dealing with the same class of characters. Who ever heard of a government, a state, a kingdom, that had not a prison, a place in which to confine incorrigible transgressors? Who de- nounces such a governmental arrangement as despotic, cruel, tyrannical? Hell is God's state prison. Some one has called it, with a propriety that all ought to understand and approve, "God's asylum for incurables." Nor is it necessary to drive, with force of arms, the finally impenitent into the dread- ful pit of woe. As "like loves like," and "birds of a feather flock together," so each of them will "go to his own place" of his own accord, when he is no longer permit- ted to work his diabolical schemes for the Penalties. 87 ruin and destruction of others. Enter hea- ven? You could not force him through the pearly gates, to look for a single moment upon the glories of the saved, and listen to the praises of him that hath redeemed them. People who can not endure the imperfect devotions of a prayer meeting, or the tedious story of the cross for an hour on a Sabbath morning, are not in much danger of being driven, except by their own inclinations, "from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his power." Heaven would be to them the severest part of hell. It is the compassion of God, even for those that hate him, and revile him, and curse him, that permits them to retire from the glory of his presence, which is far too bright for their diseased eyes, and take what comfort they can in the hateful society of one another. "He that sinneth against God wrongeth his own soul." With Judas they "go to their own place." The object, therefore, of the penalties that are attached to God's laws, is (1) to prevent their transgression by fear of the consequences; (2) to cause the offender to 88 Penalties. relent and forsake his evil ways; and (3) to protect the innocent and loyal from the baleful and ruinous influences of the incor- rigibly evil-disposed. It should also be kept in mind that, while the means necessary for the protec- tion and welfare of the loyal may not be re- garded as the natural and necessary effect of sin upon the sinner, as ' ' the wages of sin is death," neither are they to be attributed to anger, wrath, resentment, vengeance, and payment of deserts. No act of God, no treatment of either the righteous or the wicked, ever was or ever will be incon- sistent with Infinite Love. The highest well-being, the greatest happiness, of the whole, and of each, so far as each will per- mit, is the ultimate motive and object of every thought, desire and purpose, of the Infinite Father and Sovereign of all. LECTURE VI. THE ATONEMENT. We are now prepared for the discussion of what is justly regarded as the most diffi- cult of all theological questions. Since God was fully aware, before he created man, that he would sin; and since the race was created for the happiness that would result from its existence, it is but natural to sup- pose that God would devise some way to counteract the effect of the fall, and even to turn this manifest evil to some good ac- count. This is just what he did. The plan of redemption was not an afterthought. Without this the acme of his glory would not have been reached. The problem of creation was a great one, but the problem of redemption was almost infinitely greater. This problem is the highest, the most sublime, the most difficult, of all the problems ever brought to the attention of a finite intelligence. Men think some of the questions, presented for 9