THE INGHAM LECTURES.
A
COURSE OF LECTURES
ON
THE EVIDENCES
OF
NATURAL AND REVEALED RELIGION.
DELIVERED BEFORE THE
OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY,
DELAWARE, OHIO.
CLEVELAND:
INGHAM, CLARKE AND COMPANY.
CINCINNATI: HITCHCOCK & WALDEN.
NEW YORK: NELSON & PHILLIPS.
1873.




Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year I872,
BY WILLIAM A. INGHAM,
In the Office of the Librarian of Congress, at Washington.




PREFACE.
T   HE Ohio Wesleyan University and the public
are indebted for this volume to the liberality
of WILLIAM A. INGHAM, ESQ., of Cleveland, Ohio.
Besides other benefactions and provisions for the
future growth of the University, of which he is one
of the trustees, Mr. Ingham placed, four years ago,
at the disposal of the Faculty of the University, a
very generous sum, to be expended in securing the
delivery, before the University, of a course of lecture' on the Evidences of Natural and Revealed Religion. The selection, both of the lecturers and of
the sevdral themes, he referred wholly to the Faculty.
This foundation for a course of lectures met one
of the wants of the University, and received the
hearty approval of the Faculty and other friends of
the institution.
The Faculty, holding their positions by the appointment of the Church, as educators of the young
men of the Church, have always felt that the most




iv                 PREFA CE.
important part of their work was to secure the religious culture and establish the religious faith of
the hundreds of minds annually committed to their
care. To this end, there has been, from the beginning of the University, among the stated religious
exercises, a regular appointment, on the Sabbath
afternoon, of a lecture, for the discussion of topics
connected with the faith,-the evidences, doctrines,
and morals of Christianity.  This lecture, usually
delivered by the President of the University, or one
of the professors, has embraced, besides other religious instruction, not only occasional single discourses
on the Evidences of Religion, natural or revealed,
but, from time to time, several series of discourses on
the different branches of the great argument. These
efforts of their own, for the religious instruction of
the students, and especially their establishment in
the faith, the Faculty were very glad to supplement
with a course of lectures in this direction by distinguished men from abroad. They accordingly very
gratefully accepted the duty imposed on them by Mr.
Ingham, and prepared a programme for the course,
and selected the lecturers.
The limits which the Faculty had to prescribe to
themselves, as well as the special aim of the course,
determined the themes to be selected. The subjectmatter of the Evidences of Religion is, no doubt,
practically inexhaustible; yet each age has its own
particular phase of the one great conflict between




PREFA CE.                  v
faith and unbelief. The great battle of the present
age is fought on these three questions: I. The
existence of a personal God; and, that being conceded, 2. Whether he can make, and has made, a
special revelation of himself; and, a revelation being
granted, 3. The person and position of Christ.
These are the live questions discussed in this volume. It is needless to state here the bearing and
the shape which each argument assumes, as this
is'so much better, and more fully, done in the
pages following. The lecturers are competent to
speak for themselves; and, unless we have much
mistaken the ability and conclusiveness of the discussions, they have well and satisfactorily uttered
what will be accepted as the thought of the common Church, in defense of the faith, on.these great
vital questions.
Each lecture, except the first three by Bishop
Foster, is independent of the others, and complete
in itself. If there be found some repetition in the
course of thought in the volume, as is almost inevitable in the case of many writers discussing cognate themes without previous consultation, there is
certainly no collision of views; and the parallelism
will, at least, not detract from the force of the several arguments, or from the value of the book.
The lectures were not delivered in the order in
which they are here given. As there was no necessary interdependence in the lectures, the conven



VI                 PREFA CE.
ience of the authors was consulted as to the time
and order of their delivery. Yet they have been
restored, in the published volume, to the order which
the logical sequence of the subjects seems to indicate.
By the arrangement of the publisher, the profits
of this volume are to be devoted to the purposes of
the original foundation, and will lead to additional
lectures, from time to time, before the University,
on the great themes found in the department of
Apologetic Theology.
W. G. WILLIAMS.
OHIO WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY,
-Delaware, 0., Yune I, I872. |




CONTENTS.
PAGE.
I. PERSONAL CAUSE,.......3
BY THE REV. RANDOLPH S. FOSTER, D. D., LL. D.,
President of the Drew Theological Seminary, Madison, N. J.
II. ORIGIN OF LIFE: AN EXAMINATION OF HUXLEY,.........  41
BY THE REV. RANDOLPH S. FOSTER, D. D., LL. D.
III. ORIGIN OF SPECIES: AN EXAMINATION OF
DARWINISM,... 73
BY THE REV. RANDOLPH S. FOSTER, D. D., LL. D.
IV. THEISM AND ANTITHEISM IN THEIR RELATIONS TO SCIENCE,..... o09
BY THE REV. ASA MAHAN, D. D., President of Adrian
College, Adrian, Mich.
V. MIRACLES,.                               39
BY THE REV. BISHOP EDWARD THOMSON, D. D.,
LL. D., Delaware, Ohio.
VI. THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD,.. 169
BY THE REV. BISHOP DAVIS W. CLARK, D. D., Cincinnati, Ohio.
VII. SCRIPTURE INSPIRATION,....     215
BY THE REV. WILLIAM F. WARREN, D. D., President
of the School of Theology, Boston University, Boston, Mass.




VIII                CONTEZNTS.
PAGE.
VIII. THE ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCIPTURE, 249
BY THE REV. FALES H. NEWHALL, D. D., Olin-Professor of Rhetoric and English Literature, Wesleyan
University, Middletown, Conn.
IX. ADAPTATION OF THE SCRIPTURES TO MAN'S
MORAL AND SPIRITUAL NATURE,.. 289
BY THE REV. DANIEL CURRY, D. D., Editor of the
Christian Advocate, New York City.
X. THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST,.. 317
BY THE REV. WILLIAM D. GODMAN, D. D., President
of Baldwin University, Berea, Ohio.




LECTURE I.
PERSONAL CAUSE.
BY THE
REV. RANDOLPH S. FOSTER, D. D., LL. D.,
President of the Drew Theological Seminary,
MADISON, NEW JERSEY.








YECTURE I.
PERSONAL CAUSE.
THE Bible is either the most adventurous and
astounding fraud that has ever gained currency
among men, or the most sublime and momentous
system of verities that has at any time appeared
upon earth. If the former, it ought not to be impossible to expose the imposture; if the latter, it ought
to be possible to command for it the respect of unprejudiced reason and the acceptance of rational faith.
That after so many ages it is still in debate, might, to
a superficial observer, seem to be to the discredit of
its claim. A more astute and careful judge would
find the explanation to consist, in part, of the unique
nature and intrinsic difficulty of the claim itself, and,
in part, of the peculiar relations of the jury to the
question in dispute.
The claim laid by the Bible is, that, entire, it is
either a direct revelation from God, delivered by inspiration to different persons in widely separated ages,
or a statement of facts under authority of Divine
sanction, and that it is of complete and permanent
authority over the faith and conduct of men on all the
subjects of which it enunciates.
3




4             INGHAM LECTURES.
The compositions are in some parts historic, in
some poetic, in other some didactic. They meddle
with all subjects.  Adventuring beyond the highest
sweep of imagination, they lay bare the secrets of the
infinite. Beginning with the primal creative act, they
boldly announce a cosmogony; detail the order and
method of the origination of worlds'; give the history
of cosmical development and changes anterior to life;
state the chronological order of the advent of the different kinds of animate existence. Especially, they
minutely describe the origin of man, his place in the
scale of being, the mysterious junction of spirit and
matter in his composition, and his inauguration to the
lordship and sovereignty of the world. Then follows
the history of the first forty centuries, tracing all
existing nations to root-stock, specifying the rise of
the earliest arts and inventions; the probable origin
of written and spoken language; the institution of
sacrifice; the inauguration of the moral law; deific
appearances to men at many times' and in divers
manners; inspirations, and miracles attending; the
incarnation of the Godhead; his utterances and supernatural works while in the flesh; his death, with preternatural signs accompanying; his resurrection and
translation; the publication of the Gospel; and signs
authenticating the apostolic ministry, with an endless
minutia of public and private events spread over four
millenniads. They discourse of all occult questions;
of the nature and perfections of God; of the source
and origin of evil; of fundamental ethics, divine and
human; of the origin and significance of pain and
death; of the immortality of man; of the unique




PERSONAL CA USE.               5
doctrine of the resurrection; of a final universal judgment; of angels and demoniac spirits; of the employments and limitations of each order; of heaven and
hell; in a word, of almost all subjects that have ever
interested human thought, as matters either of speculative or practical concernment.
It can not be occasion of surprise that an utterance so manifold, passing upon so many difficult- and
vexed subjects, claiming such exactness and perfection
of truth, and withal, boasting an origin so unique and
pre-eminent, should have been met, not with simple
challenge alone, but confronted with spontaneous objurgation, and resisted with long-continued and unrelenting opposition, especially by a race to whom not
alone were its ethical requirements grievous, but its
historical statements criminatory, and the future it
held forth, threatening and alarming in the extreme.
The broad, almost infinite, area of its discussions,
both as to time and space, opened so many sides to
attack; introduced so many points irritant of opposition; placed it in so many short antagonisms with
ancient prejudices and fondly cherished superstitions,
faiths, and practices; brought humanity into such
angry and uncomfortable moods with itself in sd many
ways, that it can create no astonishment if the unextinguished resentment of centuries burns still fiercely
to-day; if the defenders of the faith find themselves
still beleaguered byarmies of defiant and derisive enemies.. The hate and persistent oppugnance the revelation has encountered is what, a priori, was to be
expected.
Nor ought it to excite wonder or discouragement




6             INGHAM LECTURES.
if the chosen defenders of the faith have not always
been most wise and skillful in their methods. If the
revelation was God-given, we ought not to forget that
the trust was committed to men. It may even be a
question, whether friends or foes have most weakened
the holy keep; whether the defenders or assailants of
the sacred trust have most postponed the day of its
coronation; the former by their follies, or the latter by
their hate. In fact, the fables man-invented, not the
faith God-given, have protracted the struggle. The
human filaments inwrought into the holy vestments
have been their weakness.  The debris piled about
the walls are the fragments of the human stucco,
daubed over the hewn stone. It is time to have done
with this expensive folly.
As might have been anticipated, the phases of attack have been constantly changing. One form of
opposition has been obviated only to make way for
another. Olympus has been stormed, and its mob
of mythic gods put to the rout, only to discover the
strongholds of more insidious adversaries. To-day the
battle rages along the whole line of Christian defenses
as really and as fiercely as when Paul went up and
down from Syria to Rome, preaching, against pagan
idols, the new doctrine of Jesus and the resurrection.
Past successes forbid us to doubt the issue; but it
is not to be disguised that, finally to silence, and, more
still, to convince, disputants fecund of every scholarly
art, and animated equally by pride, ambition, and hate,
will continue to lay under tribute the best brain, the
broadest learning, and most noble and tireless zeal
Christendom can elaborate. As has been well said by




PERSONAL CA USE.              7
the late learned and excellent Doctor Barnes: "The
battle, under a new form, may be to be re-fought in
each successive generation. The triumph of Christianity at any one time is by no means a permanent
triumph, or even in itself a proof of permanent triumph
at all; and the apparent triumph at any time of infidelity is by no means a demonstration of permanent
and ultimate victory. Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian
act their part and disappear; Hobbes, Chubb, and
Morgan follow, and then vanish from the stage; Volney, Gibbon, Hume, attack the system and retire from
the conflict; Strauss and Renan, Hegel and Comte,
follow after. A host of scientific warriors rushes on
the arena for an attack on the religion that is fixed
and unchangeable, deriving their means of attack from
a system that is fixed and unchangeable as Christianity itself; and the warfare assumes new forms, and is
to be fought with new weapons. Whether these two
systems, equally fixed and unchangeable, are really in
conflict, or will be found ultimately to coincide and
harmonize, is the question which is now before this
age, and which is perhaps to be before the world in
the development of future ages."*
The favorite form of attack in our time is that which
patronizes religion, but throws contempt on revelation.
Its boast is, that science has obsoleted the Bible.
There are two ways in which it is supposed that
science reaches this result, and so closes the ages'
long debate. The first disports itself with compliments; it acknowledges that the Bible was once a
very respectable book, much superior to the age in
* "Evidences of Christianity, pp. 362, 363.




8             INGHAM LECTURES.
which it was written; that it contained many useful
lessons, and did good service; but insists that it belongs to the childhood of the world, and has only
shared the inevitable fate of every good thing in its
supersedence by something better; its nursery-clothes
have simply become too small for the grown-up man,
and must be laid aside. Moses and Isaiah were great,
and Jesus and Paul, in their respective periods; but it
was their misfortune to have lived too early, and so
they must retire-be snuffed, put out, or lost amid the
blaze of modern luminaries. This was a darling idea
of Theodore Parker, and often appears rehashed in
the orations and essays of the Boston litYtrateurs, who
still wax lustrous in the sheen of his profane babblings.
There is so much semblance of truth in this arrogant
and dangerous flattery, that it goes further than many
arguments. -The world is wiser than it used to be;
the child has become the stalwart man; the nurseryrattle will no longer suffice; the fables and the thumbscrews have been cast away; a new and glorious day
has come. Since the world began, there has been no
parallel to the progress of the time in which we live.
But it does not follow that the new age has no further
need of the old master who inaugurated its splendors,
and set the coronet of its glories upon its brow. Who
knows what other inexhaustible riches are still to be
dug from the same mines which have already enriched
the ages? The second method would retire the venerable Book, not alone because the world has found
something better adapted to its ripeness, but because
science has found its staple facts to be fables-that it
is even false as it is useless.




PERSONAL CA USE.              9
This is the precise point I am here to discuss. It
is incisively presented in the question: Do the discoveries of science collide with the statements of the
Bible, and so vacate its claim as a revelation from
God? By the discoveries of science, we mean those
facts and theories which have become established by
the inductive or Baconian method; the knowledges,
as distinguished from conjectures. There is a dispute
among scientists themselves as to precisely where the
boundary is between philosophy, which aims at ultimate cause, and science, which aims at the knowledge
of definite facts and laws. We include under the
term all knowledge founded on experiment and observation, and such generalizations as are arrived at by a
fair use of the inductive method.
Before we proceed to examine the point in dispute,
it will be proper to mention a few things as incidental,
and yet important to the right conduct of the discussion. First, it ought to be noted, that if it should be
found that there is no such conflict as is alleged by
the enemies of the Word, this discovery will not leave
the Christian cause in the same condition in which it
was before-simnpy uninvalidated, but, on the contrary, must greatly redound to its advantage; must,
indeed, become a most conclusive and unanswerable
proof in support of its claim to inspiration. If the
contradiction of science would vacate its claim, as we
admit it would, its coincidence with science establishes its claim. This would not be a sequitur in
every case, but certainly is in this. It is so important
a point that we must beg especial attention to it.
The position we assume is this: the Bible, if unin2




10            INGHAM LECTURES.
spired, would inevitably have violently collided with
the modern findings of science; if, therefore, it be
found not so to collide, it must be because it was inspired-indited by a higher than human intelligence.
The ground upon which we rest this position is
briefly this: The Biblical writings were indited at a
time when there was no knowledge extant on the
subjects of which modern science treats; at a time
when it was impossible that the writers, if dependent
merely upon human resources, should have been able
to reach even proximate truth; at a time when, it
is now known, all conjectures were shallow, empty,
and false; in the very nfancy of knowledge on all
subjects. Now, if it shall so turn out that these
writers, under the circumstances, alone of all men,
announced in substance what after-ages of great scientific research prove to be true, there is no way of
accounting for this fact except on the hypothesis of
inspiration; what they did not know themselves, and
could not, for want of access to the means of knowledge, they must have received from a supernatural
intelligence. Thus the coincidence of the story read
from the rocks to-day, and from the very particles of
matter, with what was written on the sacred pages
ages before, supports the authority and inspiration of
the record.
The next point to be noted is this: It is most important that the disputants in the case do justice to each
other and to the common cause of truth, which ought
to be equally dear to both. They have no right to
assume the attitude of factionists.  Truth is one and
harmonious wherever found, whether in the Bible or




PERSONAL CA USE,              I I
in the rocks, and can not conflict.*  Some scientists
ill conceal a discreditable animus against the Biblean animus just enough as against priestly ignorance
and intolerance, but the grossest injustice as against
revelation. Some theologians, so called, on the other
hand, exhibit venom against science, and cease not to
denounce it as atheistic. Let us have done with this.
In debating the point whether the findings of science
collide with the statements of revelation, the disputants
insult their readers and stultify themselves when they
interlard the discussion with caricatures of each other.
The scientist finds his facts and laws. He does
so with perfect independence and freedom. He asks
no permission from any class of men, or from any
book. His only business is to find out truth and make
it known to his fellows, and his only limitation is to
be faithful and honest in his chosen work. All good
men must rejoice in his success. The theologian has
a book which he believes to be inspired, and therefore
infallible. His business is to ascertain its contents, expound and defend them,; but he has no other interest
in it than is found in its truth; his obligation to defend
it has no other ground than its truth. If it be true, it
can not disagree with other truth; therefore his pledge
to it can not make it necessary that he should make
war upon other truth. But it is said that science takes
away his book and destroys his occupation! Let his
book go, then, and the sooner the better, and let him
seek some other and more worthy occupation. But
before he surrenders his book and his occupation, he
surely has the right to see whether any such necessity
* "Reign of Law," chap. ii.




12            INGHAiM LECTURES.
exists.  If he may not denounce or renounce the
science, he certainly may look searchingly into the
question whether it requires him to renounce himself
or not. Now, in conducting that examination, there
is both a true and a false method.
The false method is not uncommon with the theologian, and betrays conscious weakness. It shows fear
that the book can not stand the test of trial by the
rigorous requirements of criticism. It would therefore
deny the venue.  It will have nothing to do with
science-it will ignore it. As well might the criminal
ignore the executioner. The book can not survive
such a method as this. It can not preserve its life by
skulking in the dark. It must reign in the blaze of
day with the homage of enlightened faith, or must
relinquish its throne, willingly or reluctantly, to another and more deserving king. Of the same kind is
the defense which has been attempted on the ground
that the Bible is not a scientific book, and, therefore,
can not be required to agree with science; as if it
might be false to science and yet true to truth. To
take such a position is the most damaging thing that
could happen to the book, for it shows two fatal weaknesses: first, that the defender himself believes that
facts are against him; and second, that he is stupid
enough to hold on to his faith against the facts. The
Bible will accept of no such defense as this!
While it would be unreasonable to object to any assumed revelation on the ground that it did not contain
an exhaustive treatment of the encyclopedia of science,
when it professes only to announce certain spiritual
laws, it would be perfectly legitimate to discard it as




PERSONAL CA USE.              13
false and wholly unworthy of trust, if it could be
shown that it had uttered as fact any statement which
after-knowledge proved to be not fact, even though the
fact had no bearing on the special subject of which it
claimed to make revelation. But its announcements
must be interpreted, even in such cases, by just rules
of criticism. "Ab uno disce omnes," is in this case a
just rule. "Falsus in uno,falsus in omnibus."  There
may be no reason why the revelation should make an
announcement; but if it announce at all, it must be in
accord with truth. No error can have the sanction of
a "Thus saith the Lord."
It is not with a pretended revelation as it is with a
confessedly merely human essay. The latter may be
known to err, and yet retain a measure of respect and
authority. It has more truth if it has some error. A
revelation acquires all its authority from the fact of its
divine source.  When you convict it of error in a
single instance, you destroy the sanction of divinity,
and its entire authority is taken out of it. It may have
good and truth in it; but it is not what it pretended
to be, a revelation.
We must be content with the most rigorous criticism; hold ourselves amenable to the same tests we
apply to others. We do not hesitate to say that the
defenders of the Bible, if they were so disposed, can
not afford to "whistle science down the wind."  No
clearly established truth of science can be set aside by
any evidence now known as spporting the truth of Biblical utterances. In an absolute conflict, it is not a
question which must ultimately go to the wall. The
evidence for the Divine authority of the Bible is




14            INGHAM LECTURES.
assumed to be clear and conclusive; but once demonstrate that its statements collide with fact, and its
evidences crumble in a moment as "the baseless fabric
of a vision."
The utmost the defenders of revelation can demand is, that in any supposed or seeming conflict
between its received statement and a newly discovered
knowledge, they have time for re-examination and a
new departure, aided by the light the new knowledge
furnishes. If they can make it appear that the conflict is only one bearing against their interpretation,
but not against another construction which the text
will allow, they are entitled to ask that the text be not
held responsible for their ignorance. Candid criticism
will not dare to push the objection, when it perceives
that it is the interpretation and not the word that is at
fault. But in such a case the discoverers of the new
knowledge have a right to ask that the old error of interpretation be abandoned, and that they receive the
credit to which their discovery entitles them. Had
this been the uniform custom, I doubt not a better
understanding would prevail between Biblical and
scientific critics.
It is proper we should say yet further: the discussion is not a causeless one. There is, confessedly
in several cases, the appearance of conflict between
the two records. There is positive conflict between
the popular rendering of the one and the unequivocal
conclusions of the other. So much ought to be admitted before any discussion is commenced; and consequent on the admission ought to be the unreserved
renunciation of the traditional interpretational faith,




PERSONAL CAUSE.               I5
and candid and grateful recognition of the service rendered in exposing its error. But it ought also to be
remembered, that if believers have made mistakes of
construction, and have not always been apt scholars
in discovering their blunders, and prompt in correcting them, scientists themselves have not always proved
to be safe masters. All literature is full of vagaries,
once proclaimed scientific verities. So-called science
often turns out to be nescience. So, while we must
hold ourselves ready and eager to close with any and
every new truth, we have a right to ask that we be
allowed time to scrutinize carefully each pretender,
before we join the mob of its following. Especially,
as we think we have very high proof of the authority
of our book, if an unknown guide should ask us to
renounce it, it can not be unreasonable that we demand
a little time to get familiar with his voice. It ought
to suffice that we accept conclusions when they are
reached; or, at most, no more ought to be required of
us than that we aid in reaching them.
Once more: it is important at the outstart that we
be guarded against a mistake into which some have
fallen, and into which the very terms of the question
in debate are liable to plunge us-the mistake of supposing that scientists, as a class, and by virtue of their
science, are unbelievers in the inspiration of the Bible; or, what is the same, that they believe there is
irreconcilable disagreement between their findings and
Biblical statements. There could be no greater mistake than this. It is not only certain, as we expect
to show, that there is no such conflict, but it is also
true that the best and most learned devotees of




16            INGHAM LECTURES.
science are, and have been, the purest and noblest
Christians, the simplicity of their faith keeping step
with the breadth and depth of their researches. The
scientists who have attained to eminence in their respective departments, who reject the sacred record,
may be counted on the fingers of the two hands,
whilst those who bow to its authority are both numerous and pre-eminent. Here, then, we make our departure, having full confidence in the inspiration and,
hence, infallible truth of the Bible; and having full
and cordial sympathy with the spirit, and unalloyed
and hearty confidence in the success, of science; in
the truth of its already grand discoveries, and awaiting with eager desire its yet greater triumphs,-here, I
say, we take our departure, to show that between these
two revelations, the one by inspiration, the other by
discovery, there is, and can be, no conflict; because
both are true. The true scientist shall lead nowhere
where we will not follow.
That there has been a wonderful enlargement of
knowledges within a century or two, on all subjects,
can not be disputed. Especially has material nature
been cultivated with marvelous results. Not only
have scientific methods conducted to solid and certain
knowledge of the facts of nature as extended in space;
the elements and composition of bodies; the forcesmechanical, chemical, and vital; the structural arrangements and functions of organisms; the laws of propagation, variation, and destruction in the realm of life,
and whatever besides is existing within and around
us in the processes of both mind and matter; but the
same methods have conducted to a knowledge of




PERSONAL CA USE.              17
events as extended in time of almost incalculable
duration. " Thus it is that we have those great sciences
which extend themselves beyond the limits of our experience, and from slight signs educe the knowledge
of what has been, but never met the eye of man; and
of what will be, but will never meet the eye of him
who predicts it; which does not even in imagination
come before the eye of the thinker as he predicts it,
but is understood through symbols only. Astronomy,
geology, botany, zoology, are among these. The distance in space or time; the long sequences of causes
through the ages; the metamorphoses which the forms
of nature, animate or inanimate, have gone through
in the progress to their present state, are rendered
comprehensible by such sciences as these."" They
have carried us back along the march of ages too
great for our arithmetic, and disclosed to our view the
monumental remains of races and creations, extinct
myriads of millenniums before our race became denizens of the earth. We can not too much admire the
vast progress that has been made, and is constantly
making, in all the departments of knowledge.
Upon any theory but the inspiration of the Bible,
inevitable conflict, as we have seen, must have arisen
between its statements, made in the time of ignorance,
and these wonderful discoveries. No other book has
survived intact a single century. Nor could it have
been more fortunate if merely a human book. What,
then, are the points upon which it is assumed there is
conflict? It is strange they are so few. They may be
reduced to four; and these are so related as without
ATOorit Brilish Review, Oct.'70.
3




1S8           ZIA GHAAI LECTU'RES.
great strain to be brought to unity. The sixty books
and the thousand pages, hailing from patriarchal climes
and patriarchal times, pass the ordeal of scientific
criticism with but four signs of dissent. And our
hope is to show that with regard to these the collision
is imaginary; a strife, in fact, between groundless interpretations of the text and science, and not the text
itself.
The points upon which there is supposed conflict
may be reduced to the following:
First. The question of a personal God, distinct
from, and the creator of, all other being.
Secozd. The question of the time and manner of
creation, or the origin and method of the cosmos.
Third. The question of the origin of man, and the
unity, development, and antiquity of the race.
Fourth. Some incidental allusions to astronomical
facts, and the question of miracles in general.
There have been other points mooted; but they
have either been retired by a fair reconcilement, or
are too trivial to require special attention. The above
are the grand points which are at present occupying
the thought of the learned world. Let us- consider
them in their order. Our limits will necessitate brevity, and we must assume for our audience a considerable amount of learning on the subjects under discussion; but we will endeavor fairly to present, and, on
the part of the Bible, relieve the supposed difficulty.
First. We are to consider the question of a personal God, distinct from, and the creator of, all other
being.
It is just to say that the question here is rather a




PERSONAL CAUSE.-              19
question as between philosophy and the Bible, than
between science and the Bible; but science, as positivism, has become so far a party in the interest of
philosophy, that it fairly joins the issue as against the
Bible, and must be known in the answer.
The postulate of the Bible, repeated in so many
forms that it is impossible to mistake it, is: "A personal God, self-existent and eternal, the absolute creator
of all other being and beings, visible and invisible."
Positivism, by the school of Auguste Comte, and
developmentism, by its most conspicuous expounders,
Darwin and Huxley, attempt to show that science
reaches a solution of the problem of the origin and
permanent order of the cosmos without any such being. They are careful not to deny his existence, and
even to profess faith in it; but the whole drift and
boom of their reasonings serve to create the impression that he is a needless factor; that, in reality, for
the purposes assigned in the Bible, he is not required,
absolutely not found, non est. This they boldly and
constantly assert upon the authority of science. They
scientifically construct the universe without God. The
conflict between science and the Bible, made thus by
them, is found in this, that the Bible positively assigns one cause for the cosmos; science, it is alleged,
demonstrates a totally different one.
Here we join issue. The exact point of the issue
we make is this: We deny that scientists of any school
are able to account for the cosmos without including
the exact quantity set forth in the Bible as a personal
God, an absolute creator. We insist, rather, that
science leads us directly to him, and does him rev



20             INGHAM LECTURES.
erent homage and worship. Let us examine the case.
The importance of the issue must be apparent on the
slightest reflection. It involves the key-stone of the
arch. Demonstrate that the Bible is false in its postulate, and of course the debate is closed.
We have already said, and now wish to repeat it
with greater emphasis and fullness, that the Bible postulates the existence of a personal God, the absolute
creator of all other existence. It declares him to be a
spirit; non-material in his essence, eternal in duration, infinite in power and knowledge. It differentiates between the substances of the uncreated and the
created, as fundamentally distinct and different; the
one wholly unlike the other in the sources of being,
and in the perfections and modes of being; the one
unoriginated, the other caused. This Biblical thesis
of a personal God, it is declared, has" been set aside by
the discovery, scientifically made, of the essential unity
and eternity of all substance, which substance either
consists of, or inherently possesses, certain eternal,
impersonal, and necessary forces, and is known as
matter, by the action of which all cosmical changes
have been and will be produced. We deny that any
such discovery has been made, and will proceed to
show that the thing supposed is absolutely impossible
in fact, and that the conjecture is destroyed by the
very science which is made to assert it.
It is conceded that there is such a substance as
matter, and that it is invariably characterized by certain necessarily-acting impersonal forces, known as
chemical and mechanical; and that it is found occasionally to have associated with it another force, or cluster




PERSONAL CAUSE.               21
of forces, known as vital. But it is denied that it is
the only substance, or that it is eternal, or that the
inhering forces are original to it, or that it accounts for
all cosmical changes. The ground of our denial is
not simply that the case is not made out, but that it
is self-destructive and impossible. How this appears
we will proceed to show. In two ways science demonstrates, with absolute certainty, that the material
cosmos exists under the conditions of time, both as to
its substance and fashion.
By means of geological records we are conducted
back over the track of cosmical history, through a
succession of well-defined changes, until, having penetrated below the earliest memorial of life, we find ourselves standing upon the glowing crystals of a newly
formed world. The demonstration is complete, that
all life, and all conditions of possible life, had beginning. In fact, we find the dates legibly traced when
each event occurred. Science is no more certain of
any thing than it is of this. Chemical science takes
up and continues the history. It conducts us to a still
more primitive condition. Seizing the solid substances
of the glowing mass, it decomposes them, and reduces
them t6 their original molecular elements. This, it
tells us, was the primal condition of the universe, the
original state of all known compounds. The demonstration thus carries us not simply to the dawn of life,
but to a period antedating the organization of matter
itself. All that remains to us are the ultimate atoms,
the primordial elements, the absolute protoplasts. But
these immediately discover to us that each and every
infinitesimal part is the home of a definite force,




22            INGHAM LECTURES.
which will unerringly, and without shadow of varia.
tion, determine its alliances and necessitate its combinations forever. It is a truth, therefore, that when
we form the acquaintance of matter in its most rudimental and primitive state, it is the home of a force,
or, rather, forces, which necessarily evolve.
But now observe the insurmountable objection to
the supposition that matter and the forces are original
and eternal-the irresistible demonstration, in fact,
that the forces at least had a beginning. We have already seen that, guided by geological science, we are
able to go back over the line of all the effects which
have transpired in the cosmos, up to the very dawn of
cosmical phenomena! Chemical analysis takes us by
the hand, and leads us back through other changes,
until we are brought to discrete elements, behind
which it is impossible there should have been any
evolutions or changes of any kind. The whole history
of the evolution of forces lies before us, therefore under our gaze, and falls within the limits of time. We
have traced the river to its source; we have mounted
the stream of consecutive. effects until we have found
the beginning, the fissure in the rock whence it bursts.
Standing here at the top of the ages, and looking backward over the dreary wastes of an eventless eternity,
we raise the question, how these forces, assuming
them to have existed, which is the postulate of science,
were employed during this immeasurable duration.
They could not have existed, and yet have remained
inactive; for science postulates that activity is their
necessity. They were not active; for we have found
them in the very act of their primal evolution.  The




PERSOtNAL CAUSE.              23
demonstration is, therefore, that they were not at all.
They are themselves creations, and so far from accounting for the cosmos, they.are but an included part
of it which needs to be accounted for.
The case is thus put by an American scientist of
growing eminence and merited distinction. Having
propounded the molecular condition of matter, he
says: This condition of matter is necessarily primordial. As matter could not have remained in such a
condition-as, in fact, it did not remain in such a condition-the career of matter must have had a commencement. Its evolutions are not from eternity. As
its earliest existence involves an evanescent condition,
the existence of matter had a commencement. It began to exist only when it began to change."  However it may be with regard to the very substance of
matter itself, the demonstration is complete and perfect, that what are called the inhering forces fall.under the category of time; that they are not and
can not be eternal; and if they are necessary quantities in the constituency of matter, as scientists declare,
then by necessity matter itself is demonstrated to fall
within the category of time; but whether it do or
not, it is demonstrated to be no cause of the cosmos.
But, given matter and what are called inherent and
eternal forces, we are still as far as ever from accounting for the cosmos. We have found a cause, but not
the cause. A cause that is not the cause to the effect
in question, is no cause. The cause carries in it the
entire effect; for as the effect can have nothing which it
does not derive from its cause, it must then have been
Prof.iWihchell, of the Michigan University.




24            INGIHAM LECTURES.
in the cause. An unskilled laborer is a cause; but as
to the production of a chronometer, or an oration of
_Eschines, or Leonardo Da Vinci's Last Supper, he is
no cause. The forces are a cause, but not the cause,
of the cosmos. They are cause to definite effects, but
not cause to this culminated effect. There is that in
this effect which is no more in them than Handel's
Messiah is in the accidental rattle of the farmer's cart,
or one of Mozart's great symphonies, or Haydn's Oratorio of the Judgment, in the jingle of sleigh-bells.
For, observe, the completed cosmos is not simply a
mass held by force of gravitation, massed by cohesive
attraction, assorted by chemical affinity, magnetized
by electro-galvanism, turned into globes by evolutions
of force; it is more than all this: it is an arranged
and adjusted unity, reached by taking the discrete
forces and combining them into one great, universal
whole, of ineffable ingenuity and skill; a plan in which
each distinct part exists for a purpose, is controlled
by a purpose, is subjugated to a purpose! We must
find the home of this purpose-this factor that subjugates and makes slaves of all the other forces-if we
would account for the cosmos. The purpose displayed
is as veritable a.fact, as well known and accredited a
reality, as chemical affinity, or cohesive attraction, or
electricity, and can no more be ignored in solving the
problem than can gravitation. But while it is as much
a reality as the other forces, it is discrete, is a force
itself; not a mere resultant, not an accident. Nay, it
is seen to be not only a force discrete, existing apart
from the others in its own right, but seen to be the
most masterful of all, taking the others and compelling




PERSONAL CA USE.              25
them to do its behests. Now, this august power,
this causa cazsarzum., must be accounted for; this omnipotent purposing agent, forcing all forces to work
out its design, to accomplish its will, nay, his will, for
we are beyond things; he will insist that we notice
him. Where shall we find his home?    Is he, like
gravitation, a discrete quantity of all matter? Science
goes forth with its instruments of inquisitorial torture,
and subjects all substances to the "experimentzim
crucis," and each atom, even to the last, responds, It is
not in me. All, with one accord, point backward, and
declare with one voice, We know not of either our beginning or the cause that we are as we are. Each
respondent says, I am not my own master; I am the
slave of another whose bidding I do. This is the testimony of all nature extorted by science; nay, not extorted, though delivered in the processes which wrench
atom from atom, but joyously uttered in the ear of
reason. Thus it is discovered that a pre-existing willforce, guided by unerring intelligence, lies behind all
so-called natural forces, giving them  existence, or
guiding them as it will to the accomplishment of its
own imperial behests. No approach is made toward
explaining cause until we reach the unific force in its
transcendental home.
But we have only begun to intimate the insuperable
difficulties which science herself interjects against the
theory that inherent forces of matter account for the
cosmos, without the aid of a personal cause. I will
name one more.   Starting with the protoplastic, or
primordial, state of matter, we have the molecules in
severance, each with its definite affinity; the whole




26             iVGIA AM LECTURES.
lying disseminated over the infinite fields of spacewider than the boundaries where outermost suns now
flame their glare upon the fields of ancient night.
Forthwith, by a uniform necessity, atom rushes to the
embrace of atom; the infinite abyss trembles into
visible fiery forms; masses segregate and press inward toward their centers; each severed mass becomes the nucleus of a system of worlds. It is the
splendid exordium of creation's pomp. Then follow
ages-how long, science will only aid us to conjecture,
but tells us, almost eternal-before the flaming vortices became orderly, quiet, globes of glowing homogeneous matter; myriads of ages more, and the
molten masses have cooled, and their solid surfaces
present the appearance of a crystal cosmos, each
globe a radiant.flaming crystal in itself; infinite ages
more muster out to the drum-beat of the rolling
spheres, and yet it is an azoic cosmos; ages how long
since the morning broke, and yet no eye to behold the
pomp; a universe without life! Whence shall life
come? The universe says, It is not in me; each crystal world says, It is not in me; the mechanical and
chemical forces cry out, It is not in us; we fashioned
these worlds, but we have no power to make a tree,
or even a seed, an embryo, or an animal. Thus,
science again tells. us, we must find help ab extra.
There is a curious problem right in this connection,
which we would be pleased to have solved by that
class of scientists who would explain all being by inherent laws of matter, or by inherent forces acting uniformly and necessarily; it. is this: How, that is, in
what order, did they, the forces, introduce life? Did




tPERSONAL CA USE.             27
they first evolve a seed, and from it grow a plant; or
did they first make a plant without a seed? We are
curious to know the answer. One of the two alternatives must have been the order at the beginning; for
in no other way could life arise. But whichever alternative be taken, science presents a difficulty which is
insurmountable. The thesis of science is, the forces
act uniformly and necessarily; but now, it is known,
no forces make a seed-life without a parent plant to
produce it, and no forces make a plant-life without a
seed to grow it. The necessary and eternal forces, if
they be sole factors, it is thus seen, must have changed
their method; and this is what science says can not
be. Nothing is more settled, or scientifically certain,
than that there was a time when there was no life on
this planet, and that there was a time when it began;
and no man is warranted in saying that any explanation has been given of its origin, except by absolute
creation. To pretend the contrary is unscrupulous
audacity, or unaccountable dullness.
I quote from Chadbourne another form of putting
the same point: "Life is only manifested in connection with organization. Did the vital principle seize
upon matter and organize it?  this would imply that
it resides somewhere free from matter. Is vitality a
force accidental in its manifestation, correlated to some
other force developed by the relationship of different
kinds of matter; or was matter first organized by a
creator, and then life joined to- it? There are those
who accept the second supposition, and believe in
spontaneous generation, the' production of life from
matter and physical forces, and:the evolution of higher




28             IrNGHAM LECTURES.
types by development from lower. We pass, for the
present, the geologic argument, which we believe to
be conclusive against this theory, and ask its supporters how it comes to pass that the physical forces tend
to originate an organism, when, the moment it is produced, they tend to destroy it. And it is a remarkable
fact, that some authors who have expressed their belief in the production of life through chemical forces,
have also expressed their belief in the antagonism of
life and those forces. We leave to them the task of
harmonizing their own views. The organic being
struggles for existence, and lives only because the
vital principle holds in abeyance the physical forces,
and makes them its servants. In a certain sense, it
is true that the physical forces build up all organic
structures; but the moment vitality is gone, they tear
down the structures which they have unwillingly labored to construct under its control, and they cease
not their work until every particle has taken the inorganic form. In the perfectly adjusted steam-engine,
moving the ship against wind and tide, or weaving
finest fabrics with iron fingers, it seems to the
thoughtful observer that the steam is a willing servant, bending its energies to the work. But the mission of the steam is to shatter and destroy. It rushes
into the cylinder, not to move the machinery, but in
the very hatred of itself, and struggles to escape. It
is the genius of man that controls the struggling monster by bands of iron too strong for him to break, till,
in his rage, he lifts the piston and moves the swift
machinery as he darts howling into the air. Thus,
also, does vitality control and use the adverse forces




PERSONAL CA USE.              29
of the inorganic world. As well might we think that
the steam which drives the piston originated the locomotive, or the locomotive the engineer that controls
it, as to think that life is the offspring of electricity
or any'other physical force. It is latest born of all
the forces, if it is proper to call it a force at all; and
the time may come when it will vanish from our globe,
and leave the physical forces victors on the field. But
while it is here it holds its ground by warfare. It
builds up only through the agency of the physical
forces. They build organized beings only under its
control. We have of late had the announcement made
that we must expunge from our text-books the assertion that the vital principle overrides or controls the
chemical forces. We may expunge it from the textbooks; but we might as well expunge the satellites of
Jupiter or the planet Neptune from our astronomies.'
How the absurdity grows as our examination
advances! Even yet we have not seen its utmost
folly. Suppose, now, we could account for life, or if
not account for its introduction, let us agree that in
some way it did arise from the impersonal forces, or
was itself, as the old Anaximandrian or Democritical
speculatists conjecture, a primitive, plastic, or spermatic matter. In any event, when the time arrived
for its achievements, it was here. It came in among
the old forces as soon as they had made suitable arrangements for its advent. It was one of those ancient, beautiful mornings, when the crystal hills and
valleys were all aglow, and the tepid rivers were running into the boiling seas, that it came. The older
forces had completed their work. It had taken a great




30           ZINGZ!AAL LECTUC'RES.
time; but there it was, a grand accomplished fact
Gravitation had parceled out the ancient mass into
suitable divisions; cohesive attraction had welded
them into separate unities; chemical affinity had gone
among the particles, and sorted them into homologous
compounds; electro-galvanic force had magnetized the
whole with its wizard spell; motion, resultant of all
the forces, had rounded them into orbs; order had
arisen out of chaos; the suns had taken their allotted
stations, and, as became the dignity of such grave
bodies, had adjusted themselves to fixedness; the secondaries and their satellites had come to know their
orbits and seasons; the climatic and atmospheric conditions were balanced and orderly; the whole machine
was finished and lubricated and running beautifully,
without a creak or jar. Throughout the infinite system there was not a pin out of order, or a cord or
pulley astray. It was a wonderful piece of mechanism, seeing that it was the blind forces that did it,
without intending to do any thing of the.kind. Could
an infinite mind have done better? It was a beautiful morning, we said. The old forces had gathered
together to hold a jubilee. Great was their joy over
the works of their hands. But it soon became appairent that they were not content. This.might seem
unreasonable; but, then, they were mere forces of dull
matter, how could they be expected to be reasonable?
Gravitation broke the silence in an address, it may be,
something like the following:
" Most noble peers! great and mighty potentates!
I have called you together, as seemed to be most fitting, that we might rejoice together over the completed




PERSONAL CA USE.             31
work of our hands. Was ever any thing more glorious? Your royal highness, Cohesive Attraction, could
not have acted more admirably. You have consolidated your atomic subjects, and bound them up in
bonds more indissoluble than steel or iron. And what
shall I say of the perfection of skill and taste displayed
by your majesty, Chemical Affinity? But, most worshipful peers, is there nothing more that we can do?
Have our resources entirely failed, and must we now
subside into inglorious indolence?  You see, we have
already used up all the atoms; and if we are not
henceforth to content ourselves in listless inaction, we
must hit upon some new device, which, by its ingenious contrivance, will give us permanent employment,
and, by its kaleidoscopic changes, give us ever new
delight."
The suggestions of the president were listened to
with profound attention, and gave great satisfaction.
They sat for many days in council, and were sore put
about by the difficulty of devising how to proceed.
Gravitation said: "I wish I could do something more;
but your royal highnesses know that, though my power
is very extended, embracing and holding all these worlds
under my absolute authority, yet, in duty I confess it,
this is the only thing that I can do; eternal necessity limits me. I can hold the vast system that
we have built in harmonious movement forever;
every atom is my slave; but'directly as the mass,
and inversely as the square of the distance,' is my
necessity."
Cohesive Attraction expressed regrets also, but
found it impossible to do more than he had already




32            INGHAM LECTURES.
done. "I can not transcend my necessity, which is,
to weld the mass into unity and solidarity."
Attention being turned to Chemical Affinity, he
said: " Most worthy colleagues, you have proof of my
industry, and also my skill; but I, too, am limited,
as yourselves. I unite affinitive particles, and make
curious compounds, but the stubborn atoms will obey
me only according to definitive and ancient compacts.
They have strange antipathies, as well as strong
friendships; and I can neither coax nor drive them
out of their prejudices."
They were in despair at this speech; for they had
found their colleague so fecund of great and curious
devices, that they had made much reckoning on his
reserved power. There was yet one hope: Electricity
might meet the emergency. All eyes were turned to
this gay cavalier. What he said was not reported,
and men have never been able to find out; but it
suffices, by some strange device-a marriage of some
kind-a sub-rosa, star-chamber, secret -arrangement,
whose mystery has never been lifted-they did, among
them, hit upon a happy expedient. When the curtain
was lifted, a new personage was discovered in the
council-his imperial highness, Vital Force. Great
was the joy of his welcome. For millions of ages
the lifeless orbs had revolved through space untenanted, beauteous in crystal forms, and lustrous with
the radiance of many suns, but empty of flower and
plumage and song. The new artist entered at once
upon his work. First he went out over the hills and
valleys on a tour of observation, to see what it would
be wise to do. He found that Atmospheric Action,




P'ERSONAL CAUSE.             33
Force of Gravity, and Mechanical Attrition had broken
off the crystals, and formed loose earth; and that
Chemistry had prepared a transparent fluid, which
often became vapor, and, rising up into the air, was
drifted by the winds over the lands, until, condensing,
it fell in showers, moistening the fragments, and
spreading them out. into soft and movable soils, and
he said, "These singular conditions are just to my
hand;" so Vital Force filled his apron full of seeds,
and with the speed of wind he flew around the world,
and planted it all over with most various and curious
germs, and told them to grow; and when the earth
had passed half-way through its annual orbit, it was
coated with beautiful grasses, and many-colored and
scented flowers and herbs; and Gravitation and Cohesive Attraction and Chemical Affinity and Magnetism clapped their hands, and shouted themselves
hoarse, until the universe was filled with the resounding echo, "Eureka! Eureka!" Then they said: "It is
a beautiful cosmos; but why should flowers bloom, and
trees and herbage grow, purposeless? Go to, now, let
us do something more wonderful still."  Then they
summoned their great captain again, and told him how
delighted they were with his matchless work; but lest
he'might be proud and vain in his imagination, they
gently reminded him that, whatever he was in greatness and skill, he was their offspring. But it occurred
to Electro-Magnetism, who, somehow, seemed to
have special pride in Vital Force, possibly because he
had engendered him-be that as it may, it occurred to
him to suggest whether it was not possible that some
other kinds of living things might be made. Vital
4




34           ZiANGHAJM LECTURES.
Force said he would think about the suggestion, and
put his head to.work to see what might be done, and
report at a future mneeting; and all retired well pleased.
Vital Force went immediately to his study, and
noted down the hint of Electro-Magnetism, and set
apart a day for its consideration. The more he
thought, the more interested he became. The curious
things that came into his head, and mustered before
his imagination, were almost suggestive of'intelligence. Finally, after a long time-no doubt ElectroMagnetism had forgotten all about the hint dropped
ages before-the whole matter opened with the clearness of sunrise upon the view of the unwearied
student. Taking his hand from his aching head, and
leaping into the air with a flash, he shouted, "Eureka!"-he had learned the word from the old forces.
He had discovered how to make creatures, having
power of locomotion, who should subsist on the very
herbs which he had already set growing on the earth,
and in the sea; creatures that could swim in the seas,
and fly in the air, and run up and down the world
on legs; creatures with stomachs and mouths and articulated frames; with eyes and ears and song; of
many kinds, fiom the littleness of a mote to the largeness of a whale. So he went out one morning, when
the trees were waving in the sunlight, and the grasses
were growing thick along the brooks, and commenced
his work. He never told any body the secret, so we
know not how he began. But begin he did; and directly the seas and the air and the earth were swarming with all manner of fishes and birds and beasts.
It seemed almost as if the old forces had some dim




PERSONAL CA USE.             35
prophecy, and, in fact, as if they had worked with reference to this state of things; as if the soils were made
on purpose for the seeds, and the herbs for the stomachs, and light for the eyes, and air for the lungs.
It really looked like it; but of course it was not so.
Blind forces do work so strangely sometimes!
But we have not reached the greatest puzzle yet.
When the forces came together again to rejoice over
the grand whole, the completed cosmos, they were in
ecstasies; and then they bethought them, that a thing
of such beauty and manifold purpose ought to have a
sovereign; and they joined together on the spot, and
made a man, and set him over it all. Then they
stopped creation, and went into the trades. They
became farmers and boss-carpenters, and workers in
stone and brass and iron, and dealers in curious instruments, and projectors of great traffic; inventors
and artists and authors; they built railroads and
steam-ships, and wove a web of electric telegraph
over the surface of the world; built cities, founded
commonwealths, wrote laws; they made telescopes,
and constructed astronomy; they speculated on their
own doings, and wrote books about it, and laughed at
the jokes they practiced on each other. Among their
grand feats in authorship were Milton's matchless
dream, and Shakspeare's witching tragedies. The
world, in all its highways and byways, is full of their
creations. In song, they composed Handel's Messiah; in color, they painted Raphael's Madonna. It
is strange, is it not, what the blind forces did and
what they still are doing! One can hardly credit
what he sees and hears of them.




36            INGHAM LECTURES.
A bold attempt to reach unity of substance appears in a late number of the North British Review,
and ingenious as bold. The writer says: "All true
philosophy seeks to be universal, to contemplate the
universe as a whole, possessed of an intrinsic unity.
Hence, all true philosophy must assume that the dualism of mind and matter is only an apparent dualism,
and that beneath lies a more comprehensive unity..
There are two ways in which a philosopher may attempt, as far as he is able, to exhibit the unity of matter and mind, or, to use a better term, spirit. He
may set down matter as an ultimate, and make spirit
a function of matter; or he may set. down spirit as
ultimate, and make matter a function of spirit." For
himself he says: " I hold, then, that all substratum or
substance is of a spiritual nature; that the external
world is definable as the perpetual interchange of impressions between spiritual beings. Body is strictly
definable as the manifestation of spirit to spirit.
Wherein does positive existence consist? I reply, in
the spiritual basis of phenomena. Phenomena are the
impressions which spirit makes upon spirit." Another late writer, an American, holds: "The inmost
principle is the Divine life itself; not the Divine essence, as the pantheist would say, but an effluence
from it, whence all the qualities of matter are but as
leaves and blossoms fiom a stem.  And is it not
therefore true-not that he created it once out of
nothing-but that he creates it every moment out of
himself? And does not the. great truth begin to
dawn upon us, that the relation of creator and created
subsists all the while, and if suspended for a single




PERSONAL CA USE.              37
instant, the universe vanishes, like a bubble that
breaks in air?"
So far forth as these and similar utterances, which
may be found interlarding the spiritual philosophy, so
called, and the advanced theology of the times, simply
mean to affirm that God is ultimate, we accept them;
but so far as they are pantheistic-deifying matter or
materializing Divine essence-we discard them as unscientific, as puerile nescience.
Between God and all finite existence there is absolute otherness, and not identity.  They have no
attribute in common.  Science finds God nowhere
among things; but it finds nothing that does not
point onward to him. The telescope of the astronomer, sweeping the scope of sidereal heavens, nowhere
gets a glimpse of their Maker; but every shining orb
proclaims his invisible presence and power. The microscope of the naturalist has no lens strong enough
to take the tissue of his essence, but announces his
sustaining agency under every infinitesimal life. The
retort of the chemist decomposes all substances, without disclosing his essence; but it finds no nicest grain
of impalpable matter that bears not his impress. He
hides behind the lightnings, and the luminiferous
ether is but the sheen of his garment.
The wild dream of atheism and pantheism is as
ancient as speculative thought. Long before Democritus and Leucippus, the elder atomists, it flourished
in the East. No age has been without its advocates.
The weird and marvelous developments of modern
science furnished it a new opportunity to repair its
broken fortunes, and, with amazing genius, it sought




38             INGZHAM LECTURES.
to suborn the new evangel. But it has signally failed.
Science scorns the alliance. Against the profane attempt to merge the infinite and the created into unity,
it is as loud and angry in its protest as its older-born
and diviner sister, revelation.  Equally they forbid
the banns. Causation is scientifically, as well as Biblically, severed from matter. Its home is determined
in the transcendental, metaphysical. Force comes to
unity in spirit. As every invention first comes to
reality in thought before it bodies in form; as every
end exists first in idea before itbecomes incorporate,
so it is a dictum of science, and a necessity of thought,
that all material atoms, having affinities or ends, were
first ideal, mental, existent simply in thought, and
were evolved into reality by the fiat of the thinker. If
any thing is demonstrated, it is, that personal cause is
the necessity of the universe, and that the universe,
existing by personal cause, is distinct from it.
I have not designed, of course, to give the argument, but only to indicate the relations of modern
science to the question. While the heavens spread
their starry arches above us, and the earth and the
air and the sea pulsate with life and thought about us,
God will not be without a witness. Every lane of
science is finger-boarded, "This way leads to God."




LECTURE II.
ORIGIN OF LIFE:
(n BExamitnatitol of tuxlep.
BY THE
REV. RANDOLPH          S. FOSTER, D.D., LL. D.,
President of the Drew Theological Seminary,
MADISON, NEW JERSEY.








LECTURE II.
ORIGIN OF LIFE.
EXAMINATION OF HUXLEY.
HAVING established the existence of eternal,
spiritual, intelligent will-force, as alone spontaneous, and as causative of all material forces, which
have their evolutions in time, and which are necessitated in their evolutions, and which also are subordinated to the ends of ultimate and complex plans and
arrangements, for a higher unity, we are prepared to
advance to the discussion of the mode in which this
great factor proceeded to construct living organisms.
There are two questions, not always separated in
thought, but extremely distinct, lying in the embrace
of this great problem. They need both to be dealt
with, and in severance; the closing of neither, alone,
ends the great debate. The first, relates to the origin
of life; the second, to the origin of the diversified
forms in which life shrines itself.
The first is treated by Professor Huxley, more
specifically; while the second is the main subject of
Darwin's elaborate dissertations. In the current par-:ance, they are jointly spoken of as Darwinism.
5                  4I




42            INGHAM LECTURES.
The conclusions of these noted, perhaps we should
say eminent, scientists, are received by multitudes of
admirers, as final on all questions with regard to
which they express opinions. It is, indeed, deemed
real impertinence, in some circles, to intimate a doubt,
or raise a suspicion, that possibly they may not be
quite infallible; and it would be a bold venture in
even a specialist, to dissent from them on a scientific
issue. But they are not the only eminent scientists
who have uncovered a weak spot in attempting to prescribe mere conjectures for science. Even Achilles
was vincible in his heel. Scientists, mighty in their
special line, become like other men when they dream.
We are bold to examine their, conclusions, and declare
non-concurrence, even without pretending to comparable scientific attainments, on the ground that they
have abandoned Bacon, and fallen into a poor imitation of Bunyan.
It may be proper, before we proceed to the examination of their conclusions, and premises as well-but
especially their conclusions, since it is assumed that
they have quite-retired the Bible, demonstrated it
false and baseless in its teachings-to ascertain what
its teachings are on the points in dispute; especially
since we hope to show that they are neither baseless
nor false, but the very truth, to which their science,
rightly so called, does reverent homage.
The Scriptural theory is, that, primitively, there
existed one only being; an Eternal Spirit, who, by the
sole force of his will, in a manner ineffable and inconceivable to us, created the very essence of all other
being; imparting to the essence so made all included




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              43
forces and tendencies, insomuch that they are precisely what and as they are, in these respects, because
he so determined; and so that there is nothing that
he did not create and make. The product is not a
part of himself, but a product of his power, which, as
it was originated, may at any time be retired without
affecting his being. It includes two distinct and easily
differentiated substances, with discrete and conspicuously separate and separable classes of attributes.
These are entities, and not merely mystical or ideal
things. The creation is of solid and real being, but
which has no other root except the infinite will which
caused and continues it.
These substances are forever subject to his control, and under his government, but not in the same
manner; the one existing and acting under direct and
necessary impulses from him-mere slaves; the other
invested with a power of spontaneous and perfectly
free action, but held to limitation and responsibility
by him.
Out of the created material substance, he fashioned the material cosmos, subordinating the included
forces to that end, and making them the perpetual
slaves of his purpose, so that, whatever they seem to
do of themselves, they are really but modes of the
manifestations of his power, visible expressions of his
invisible will.
The time when this most primitive creative act
occurred is called "the beginning;" but how remote
it was from the present, as we count time, by the
revolutions of the earth in its orbit, or the infinitely
grander solar and sidereal cycles, is not anywhere




44             ING HA  LECTURES.
intimated. There are Biblical as well as scientific
reasons for placing it at an almost infinite distance in
the remote past.
There is equal silence on the method of the Divine
procedure.  Whether the creative fiat struck the
spheres, "full-orbed in all their round of rays complete," into being in one instant of time, and sent
them on their magnificent circuits through the fields
of space, as is the poet's brilliant dream, or rolled
them up into solid resplendent balls, from a fire-mist
of infinitesimal monads, disseminated over immensities of space, through eras of almost infinite length,
as is the probable discovery of science-if true, the
most sublime of its achievements-the record says
not a syllable. What it declares, in words as concise
as the event is majestic, is: " In the beginning, God
created the heaven and the earth."  With this statement it was content, and left it for the inquisitive
wonder of adoring or irreverent men to search out
the mystery of his ways, and develop the method of
his power.
The order is not omitted. The declaration is express that in process of time, by a subsequent creative
fiat, he who made the heavens and the earth, created
life upon the earth; each of the kinds, vegetable and
animal, in the order named, and their included kinds
in an order of eminence specifically mentioned. But
here again, as before, the precise method is left in
obscurity, while the fact and order are incisively
enunciated. Whether the differentiated species were
discretely evolved by the creative fiat, in their several
and perfect forms, at once, or simply germs of life




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              45
were created, from which- starting at unity, all diversities of form have arisen by slow and tedious development, through almost infinite ages of time, as is the
fascinating dream of Darwin, is nowhere stated. It is
asserted by M'Cosh, and other not less eminent defenders of the Bible, that if science should establish
the theory of evolution, it would not in the least conflict with the inspired text. Some even suppose that
the text strongly hints the idea. It must be admitted
that the language employed is very remarkable.
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass,
the herb yielding seed, and the fruit-tree yielding fruit
after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth:
and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass,
and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree
yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind."
(Gen. i, II, I2.)  "And God said, Let the waters
bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath
life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open
firmament of heaven. And God created great whales,
and every living creature that moveth, which the
waters'brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and
every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it
was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and
let fowl multiply in the earth:" (Gen. i, 20, 21, 22.)
"And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living
creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and
beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And
God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and
cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth
upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it




46.            INGHAM LECTURES.
was good." (Gen. i, 24, 25.) This is the entire of
what is said on the subject of the introduction of life
upon the earth, except the particular account of the
creation of man. Any after-references to the subject
are such as simply allude to, or reiterate, the fact that
God is the absolute creator of life in its various forms.
Now, it is a remarkable fact that, in this account, the
two things distinctly stated are, that God commanded
life into being in a certain order of time, and in all
the varieties of kind in.'which it is found to exist;
indicating, also, the law of its propagation; but no
statement is made as to how he fashioned the diverse
organisms-whether he made each organism     by a
several creative act, or evolved them all, in their diverse kinds, from a primitive seed of life, which he
made to contain them.- The sum of the statement is,
that he commanded the unliving elements of the
earth and the sea to bring forth the diverse kinds,
and his command was a creative fiat. The diverse
kinds were contained in the fiat; but how, is not said.
That each several species was the product of a
discrete creative act, we do not-find reason to'doubt;
but the text is not shut up absolutely to this hypothesis. " Suppose it proved," says Doctor M'Cosh, "that
there is such'a thing:as spontaneous generation;
would religion thereby be overthrown, either in its
evidences, its doctrines,.or its precepts.I have
doubts if it would.. The great body of: thinkers in
ancient times even those most inclined to theismseem to have believed:that lower creatures. sprang
out of the dust of the earth, without the need of a
previous germ. Some of the.profo.undest theologians




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              47
and ablest defenders of religion in the early Church,
were believers in the doctrine of spontaneous generation; which may be consistently held in modern times
by believers in natural and revealed religion." " Plants
and animals," he goes on to say, "are now formed
out of germs; or, if you can show it to be so, out of
wisely endowed and carefully prepared matter. But
how are they propagated? is the next question. By
special acts of creation, or by development? I do not
know that religion, natural or revealed, has any interest in holding by any particular view on the subject, any more than it has in maintaining any special
theory as to the formation of strata of stone in the
earth's surface. It is now admitted that Christians
may hold, in perfect consistency with religion and
Genesis, that certain layers of rocks were formed, not
at once by a fiat of God, but mediately by water and
fire, as the agents of God. And are they not at
liberty to hold always, if evidence be produced, that
higher plants have been developed from lower, and
higher brutes from lower, according to certain laws of
descent, known or unknown, working in favorable
circumstances? There is nothing irreligious in the
idea of development, properly understood.* It would
not appall our faith, if it should be discovered that all
the forms of life below man could be traced to a spontaneous generation from the unliving monads, and
that from unity they were developed into diversity;
given, that the spontaneous movement, from its inception to its ultimatum, emanated from, and was
guided by, the Divine factor.  We should still hold
" Christianity and Positivism," pp. 36-8.




48            INGHAM LECTURES.
that the Bible story was the true and authentic account of creation, uncontradicted in a single syllable:
more, we should find in the fact, if possible, additional
support to our faith, because of the peculiar structure
of the statement contained in the inspired text. We
feel not the slightest alarm  at the furor which has
been awakened on the subject, and do not enter the
arena to defend a faith, which has been put in peril
by scientific discoveries, but only to aid in fixing the
true status of the question, as between science and
the Bible.
We advance with entire composure to the examination of the supposed scientific discoveries of "the
origin of life," and the development of the organic
forms in which it manifests itself "upon earth."
The origin of life is a subject which has interested
the wisest and most thoughtful men, from the earliest
ages. There have always been two, perhaps three,
schools of thinkers in relation to it; materialists, who
have accounted for it as either inherent in, or the
product of, matter, by evolution; theists, who have
believed it to be the immediate product of the gods;
with, perhaps, an intermediate school, of pantheists,
who. blended the two. The doctrines which are just
now awakening so wide attention, almost panic, are
not new; in one phase or another, they date back to
Anaximander, or the elder atomists.  Several times
they have invaded and disturbed Christian thought.
Lamarck propounded them with great confidence, in
the last century; and less than thirty years ago,
within the memory of the present generation, they
were reproduced with marvelous brilliancy, by an




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              49
anonymous author, under the style of "The Vestiges
of Creation;" a work not less widely read at the time,
and producing a scarcely less profound agitation, than
the books of Darwin, Huxley, Spencer, Tyndall, and
others, to-day. The wave passed by, and left no ripple-marks. Professor Huxley, now, with, it may be,
more learning, and many new facts-evidence of the
progress of the times in which we live-renews the
combat with brilliant promise, and is greeted with
paeans of victory, before the ink is dry upon his pages.
He has discovered the origin of life; the ages-old
problem has finally reached a scientific solution. It
is a bold venture.
What, then, is his solution? "The Physical Basis
of Life," is the style of the essay in which he develops
fully the theory which had been propounded, in part,
in his discussion of "The Origin of Species," and
other writings. The title suggests the idea of the
treatise. He seeks, and professes to have found, the
basis of life in matter, or, as his thesis requires, a
composition of matter which underlies and originates
life. In the unity of the composite substance he
finds the unity of all life, as in the composition he
finds the cause of all life; one invariable cause of one
identical effect, manifesting itself in a variety of forms.
He gives to the substance the name "protoplasm,"
or "matter of life." It is important to be remembered, especially as we shall not always find him consistent with himself, that the conditions of the problem
are, not that he find the plasm, or matrix, in which
life is cast, but that he find the origin of that which
takes form in the mold. He advances not a step




50            ZNGHAM LECTURES.
toward the origin of life, by discovering the components of the matter in which it invariably makes its
home, if it were possible to do that. It is requisite
that he should show, further, that the plasm, by virtue
of its composition, is living, or that it becomes life;
the protoplasm must be not simply the home of life,
but it must originate, or in substance be, the occupant of the home; or the question remains, Whence
the occupant? Precisely what Professor Huxley professes to do is, to identify life and protoplasm; to
demonstrate that life is not something added to protoplasm, but is a component part. 
This appears in many paragraphs of his writings,
but in none more explicitly than the following:
"It will be observed that the existence of the
matter of life depends on the pre-existence of certain
compounds; namely, carbonic acid, water, and ammonia. Withdraw any one of.:these three from the world,
and all vital phenomena come to an end. They are
related to the protoplasm of the plant, as the protoplasm of the plant is:to that of the animal. Carbon,
hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen are all lifeless bodies.
Of these, carbon and oxygen unite, in certain proportions-and under certain conditions, to give rise to carbonic acid; hydrogen: and oxygen produce water;
nitrogen and hydrogen give:.rise to ammonia. These
new compounds, like the elementary bodies of which
they are composed, are lifeless. But when they are
brought together, under certain conditions, they give
rise to the still more.complex body, protoplasm, and
this protoplasm exhibits the phenomena of life."
This sentence is pregnant of significance. It is




ORIGIN OF LIFE.             51
true, that when he declares that protoplasm exhibits
the phenomena of life, he introduces the qualifying
phrase, "under certain conditions;" which might relieve him of the imputation of identifying protoplasm
with life, or life with the matter of protoplasm; but
what.follows commits him inextricably. Says he:
"I. see no break in this series of steps in molecular
complication, and I am unable to understand why the
language which is applicable to any one term of the
series may not be used to any of the others. We
think fit to call different kinds of matter carbon, oxygen, hydrogen, and nitrogen, and to speak of the
various powers and activities of these.substances as
the properties of the matter of which they are composed. When hydrogen and oxygen are mixed, in a
certain proportion, and the electric spark is passed
through them, they disappear, and a quantity of water,
equal in weight to the sum of their weights, appears
in their place. There is not the slightest parity between the passive and active powers of the water and
those. of the oxygen and: hydrogen, which have given
rise to it. At 32~ Fahrenheit, and far below that temperature, oxygen and hydrogen are elastic, gaseous
bodies, whose particles tend to rush away from one
another with great force. Water, at the same temperature,,is a.strong, though brittle solid, whose particles tend to cohere into definite geometrical shapes,
and sometimes build up frosty imitations of the most
*comnplex forms of vegetable foliage."
Attend closely to the following sentence: 
"Nevertheless, we:: call these, and many other
s.trange phenomena, the properties of water; and we




52            INGHAM LECTURES.
do not hesitate to believe that, in some way or another, they result from the properties of the component elements of the water."
Nothing can be more obvious than that he means
to be understood as holding, that, even as the compound body, water, has nothing in it apart from the
oxygen and hydrogen components; that, as the combination of these two gives rise to all the peculiar
qualities of the resultant, without the addition of anything else; so the compound substance, resultant
from the union of unliving water, ammonia, and carbonic acid, derives all its qualities, life included, from
the combination; the life is not something apart from
the component elements, but is of them, and but waits
for the union for its manifestation. That that is precisely his meaning, the thesis, to account for the origin
of life, requires, and his further statement still more
expressly declares:
"We do not assume that a something called'aquosity,' entered into, and took possession of, the
oxide of hydrogen as soon as it was formed, and then
guided the aqueous particles to their places in the
facets of the crystal, or among the leaflets of the hoarfiost. On the contrary, we live in the hope and in
the faith that, by the advance of molecular physics,
we shall, by and by, be able to see our way as clearly
from the constituents of water to the properties of
water, as we are now able to deduce the operations of
a watch from the form of its parts and the manner
in which they are put together."
Note the words following:
" Is the case in any way changed when carbonic




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              53
acid, water, and ammonia disappear, and in their
place, under the influence of pre-existing living protoplasm, an equivalent weight of the matter of life
makes its appearance?
"It is true that there is no sort of parity between
the properties of the components and the properties
of the resultant, but neither was there in the case of
the water. It is also true that what I have spoken of
as the influence of pre-existing living matter, is something quite unintelligible; but does any body quite
comprehend the unodus operandi of an electric spark,
which traverses a mixture of oxygen and hydrogen?"
Nothing could be more obvious than all this, and
especially in connection with the question which is
immediately added:
"What justification is there, then, for the assumption of the existence in the living matter of a something which has no representative, or correlative, in the
not-living matter which gave rise to it? What better
philosophical status has'vitality' than'aquosity?'
"If scientific language is to possess a definite and
constant signification whenever it is employed, it seems
to me that we are logically bound to apply to the
protoplasm, or physical basis of life, the same conceptions as those which are held to be legitimate
elsewhere. If the phenomena exhibited by water are
its properties, so are those presented by protoplasm,
living or dead, its properties.
"If the properties of water may be properly said to
result from the nature and disposition of its component molecules, I can find no intelligible ground for
refusing to say that the properties of protoplasm




54             INGHAM LECTURES.
result from the nature and disposition of its molecules. 
"But I bid you beware that, in accepting these conclusions, you are placing your feet on the first rung of
a ladder which, in most people's estimation, is the reverse of Jacob's, and leads to the antipodes of heaven.
It may seem a small thing to admit that the dull, vital
actions of a fungus, or a foraminifer,'are the properties of their protoplasm, andd are the direct results of
the nature of the matter of which they are composed."
Here we are told, in direct terms, that the vital
action is a property of protoplasmic matter. And
now follows the most remarkable and the most
important sentence in the treatise:
"But if, as I have endeavored to prove to you,
their protoplasm is essentially identical with, and
most readily converted into, that of any animal, I
can discover no logical halting-place between the
admission that such is the case, and the further concession that all vital action may, with equal propriety,
be said to be the result of the molecular forces of
the protoplasm  which displays it. And, if so, it
must be true, in the same sense and to the same
extent, that the thoughts to which I am now giving
utterance, and your. thoughts regarding them, are the
expression of molecular changes in that matter of life
which is the source of our other vital phenomena."'
This language, if terms have any meaning, convicts its author of teaching that all vital phenomena,
mental as well as physical, sensation as well as respir*"The Physical Basis of Life:" in "Lay Sermons "-pp. I35i38-Appleton's edition.




ORIGIN' OF LIFE.            55
ation, thought as well as, digestion-all vital phenomena, from the contraction of a nerve to the
highest flight of imagination or profoundest intuition of reason  are but the result of the molecular
forces of protoplasm which displays them.
Tyndall, a name not less potent than either of
the two distinguished masters already quoted, is, if
possible, more bold. "Supposing, then," he says,
"the molecules of the human body, instead of replacing others, and thus renewing a pre-existing form, to
be gathered first-hand from nature, and put together
in the same relative position which they occupy in
the body; that they have the self-same forces and
distribution of forces, the self-same motions and
distribution of motions,-would this organized concourse of molecules stand before us as a sentient,
thinking being? There seems no valid reason to
believe that it would not. Or, supposing a planet
came from the sun, and set spinning round its. axis,
and revolving round the sun at a distance from him
equal to that of our earth, would one of the consequences of its refrigeration be the development of
organic forms? I lean to the affirmative. Structural forces are certainly in the mass, whether or not
these forces reach to the extent of forming a plant or
an animal. In an amorphous drop of water lie latent
all the marvels of crystalline force; and who will
set limits to the possible play of molecules in a cooling planet? If these statements startle, it is because matter has been defined and maligned by philosophers and theologians, who were equally unaware




56             INGHAM LECTURES.
that it is, at the bottom, essentially mystical and
transcendental."*
Stebbing, one of the admiring adherents of the
school, thus states his interpretation of the theory:
"The problem   upon which many thoughts and
speculations of science are for the moment converging, is the origin of life. There are some who believe that, under certain chemical conditions, living
creatures are continually coming into existence, ungenerated by any living parent; born, as it were, without
birth; acquiring an animated existence, with powers
of motion, feeding, and reproduction, from substances
previously wanting in one or all of the capacities,such creatures, in short, as, if asked for their parentage, would but answer each for itself, My father was
an atom, and my mother a molecule. It should be
remembered that the little animals, supposed to arise
in the manner described, first become visible, if at
all, as the tiniest objects that the microscope can detect. But whether there is or is not, in these days, a
continual coming into existence of these infinitesimal
pigmies, they are just such productions as the theory
of development would suppose to have arisen originally, constituting the first outburst of life upon the
globe, ancestral to the noblest forms of animated
nature now extant, progenitors in an unbroken line
of man himself."t
We have quoted thus extensively in our desire to
do perfect justice by the eminent names whose opinions we combat, and that our readers may know the
" Fragments of Science;" article, "Vitality," page 441.
t" Essay on Darwinism," page 94.




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              57
grounds upon which we interpret their theories; and
especially because we shall soon find them taking
back their own postulates and repudiating their own
conclusions.
For a moment, before we advance to the rebuttal,
we desire to present, free from all gloss, and nakedly,
what we have found to be their teaching.
The basis of life is protoplasm. All the phenomena of life are resultant of protoplasm. All
thoughts and feelings, as well as motions-all forms
of activity, moral and mental, as well as physical-are
properties of protoplasm; that is, of carbonic acid,
ammonia, and water, chemically combined. Carbonic
acid, water, and ammonia, apart, are lifeless bodies,
subject to the common law of gravitation. Lying
inert and dead in the common mass of matter, they
enter into a copartnership, and go walking and flying,
exhibiting all the phenomena of life. They were,
when separate, involuntary and impassive and unintelligent; united, they think and will and feel. One
parcel of carbonic acid, water, and ammonia, is cunning, shy, deceptive; another, dull, stupid, idiotic.
One parcel, timid, hesitating, cowardly; another, bold,
fearless, brave. One parcel, selfish, sinister, knavish;
another, disinterested, magnanimous, cosmopolitan.
One parcel, the slave of lust, of appetite, of passion,
given to rapine, cruelty, and war; another yields to
the sway of the ideas of the right, the beautiful, the
true, and gives himself to the arts of peace and deeds
of charity and love. One parcel loves song, and
becomes a Handel, a Mozart, a Haydn; another is
enamored of poetry, turns into a Homer, and writes
6




58            INGHAM LECTURES.
the Iliad; into a Shakspeare, and composes the
immortal tragedies; into a Milton, and creates the
dream of heaven and hell. And yet another is imbued with the divine fervor of eloquence, and pours
Ciceronian, Demosthenian, Websterian thunders down
along the ages. Carbonic acid, water, and ammonia,
that is all! One set of protoplasms indite laws, philosophies, religions, and set up governments, constitutions, and dynasties; another set invent steamships, printing-presses, electric telegraphs; and yet
another hoard of brigand protoplasmic cells let loose
the dogs of war, and, rushing with the frenzy of hate,
fatten the fields of Marathon, Waterloo, Gettysburg,
and Sedan, with their carbonic acid, water, and ammonia-protoplasmic dust!
Of this marvelous thesis, we are bold to say, you
will search in vain, not only through all the pages of
these eminent men, but no less fruitlessly through
all science, and over the entire field of nature, for a
particle of proof. Neither experiment nor observation
has ever been able to point to a single instance of the
origin of life from the mere union of carbonic acid,
ammonia, and water. It is an assumption without
the shadow of proof, and an assumption beset with
the most trenchant difficulties that ever confronted
any hypothesis.
The entire of what is known of life is, that it is a
force which never, under any chemical or other conditions of matter, comes into existence or manifestation
in unliving matter, except as it is propagated by living
matter.' Dead matter, organic or inorganic, has not
now, and, so far as the proof extends, never did have




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              59
power, under any conditions, to originate it; or, if so,
the fact has never been made known to man, and
rests upon no other foundation than unwarranted
conjecture. The proof is positive that it can not be
so; it is demonstrable that the hypothesis is false.*
Thought is the topmost phenomenon of being-mentality. It as certainly antedates all cosmical wonders,
from the primitive monad upward, as it pre-dates,.in
the inventor's brain, the mechanism he creates. "The
physical basis" is too slender to support the superstructure. Protoplasm is a high compound, set apart
and divinely designated to an honorable use; the
palace of life, nothing more. The transcendental
king comes to his palace and throne, beautifully and
wondrously built up of the dead carbon, oxygen,
hydrogen, and nitrogen, from afar, and sets light in
its windows more lucent than diamonds, and makes
all its telegraphic nerves dance and thrill with ecstasies
of feeling and thought. But he was not born here;
he is the bridegroom, coming with a shining train, to
his waiting bride; his entrance wakes music and life
in all the halls and along the corridors of his beautiful home.
We know nothing of final cause, we are told.
Science ignores every such idea. Cause is transcendental; we know only what we touch and handle and feel,-that is science. Is it so? I see a
graded way across a continent; the hills are leveled
and tunneled; the rivers and streams arched with
masonry and bridged with wood and iron; rails of
For an exhaustive view of spontaneous generation, see Mivart and
Figuier.




60            INGHAAI LIECTURES.
steel are laid upon ties of timber; a locomotive and
train of cars, with strong wheels carefully fitted to the
tram-ways, rush, with almost lightning speed, from
one end of the land to the other; there are switches
and turn-tables and tanks, and depots for men and
merchandise. These things I see and know to exist.
Do I know that the locomotive was made to draw the
train; the trams made for the wheels; the cars for
freight and passengers? I thought I did. It did
seem to me that the purpose for which a thing was
made might be known as well as the thing itself;
that mind and thought were as really revealed, as the
thing which they produced for a definite purpose;
that even as I know there are eyes, I know they were
for seeing; that the final cause, in innumerable cases,
is as obvious to reason as matter bodying it is to
sense. This, we are certain, is the common sense of
mankind, which they will be slow to renounce at the
bidding of pompous names. There is nothing better
known to our experience and consciousness both, than
that final cause, which is henceforth to be expunged
from our knowledges, in the dream  of the blatant
experimentalists and positivists of modern notoriety.
Will it surprise you when. I say that, after all,
Professor Huxley himself acknowledges that he has
failed; and, in concluding his elaborate researches,
admits that the life which he sought in, and declared
to be of, matter, has a metaphysical source? He shall
confess for himself:
"In seeking for the origin of protoplasm, we must
eventually turn to the vegetable world. The fluid
containing carbonic acid, water,and ammonia, which




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              6 
offers such a Barmecide feast to the animal, is a table
richly spread to multitudes of plants; and, with a due
supply of only such materials, many a plant will not
only.maintain itself in vigor, but grow and multiply
until it has increased a million-fold, or a million million-fold, the quantity of protoplasm which it originally possessed; in this way building up the matter of
life, to an indefinite extent, from the common matter
of the universe. Thus, the animal can only raise the
complex substance of dead protoplasm to the higher
power,.as one may say, of living protoplasm; while
the plant can raise the less complex substances-carbonic acid, water, and ammonia-to the same stage
of living protoplasm, if no.t to the same level,"*
The plant, then, a living being, is factor of protoplasm; so protoplasm, in place of originating life, is
elaborated only by life. To the same effect are these
words, taken from another work by the same writer:'( The horse makes up its wastes by feeding; and
its foodis grass or at  or perhaps other vegetable
products;. Therefore, in the long run, the source of
all this, complex machinery lies in the vegetable kingdom. But where does the grass or oats, or any other
plant, obtain this nourishing, food-producing material?
At first it is a little seed, which soon begins to draw
into itself, from the earth and the surrounding air,
matters which, in themselves, contain no vital properties whatever; it absorbs into its own substance,
water, an inorganic body; it draws into its substance,
* "The Physical Basis of Life," "Lay Sermons," p. I34, Appleton's
edition.




62            INGHAM LECTURES.
carbonic acid, an inorganic matter; and ammonia,
another inorganic matter, found in the air; and then,
by some wonderful chemical process, the details of
which the chemists do not yet understand, though
they are near foreshadowing them, it (the living seed)
combines them into one substance which is known
as'proteine,' a complex compound of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen, which alone possesses the
property of manifesting vitality, and permanently supporting animal life. So that you see that the waste
products of the animal economy, the effete materials,
which are continually being thrown off by all living
beings, in the form of inorganic matters, are constantly
replaced by supplies of the necessary repairing and
rebuilding materials drawn from the plants; which, in
their turn, manufacture them, so to speak, by a mysterious combination of those same inorganic materials.
Thus we come to the conclusion, strange at first sight,
that the matter constituting the living world is identical with that which forms the inorganic world."*
" Notwithstanding all the fundamental resemblances
which exist between the powers of the protoplasm in
plants and in animals, they present a striking difference in the fact that plants can manufacture fresh
protoplasm out of mineral compounds; whereas animals are obliged to procure it ready made, and hence,
in the long-run, depend upon plants. Upon what
condition this difference in the power of the two great
divisions of the world of life depends, nothing is at
present known."t
* Huxley: "Origin of Species," pp. I5-17.
t "The Physical Basis of Life:" "Lay Sermons," p. I26.




ORIGIN OF LIFE.              63
Finally, he says of these teachings of his:
"I should not wonder if'gross and brutal materialism' were the mildest phrase applied to them in
certain quarters. And, most undoubtedly, the terms
of the propositions are distinctly materialistic. Nevertheless, two things are certain: the one, that I hold
the statements to be substantially true; the other,
that I, individually, am no materialist, but, on the
contrary, believe materialism to involve grave philosophical error.
"This union of materialistic terminology with the
repudiation of materialistic philosophy, I share with
some of the most thoughtful men with whom I am
acquainted. And, when I first undertook to deliver
the present discourse, it appeared to me to be a fitting
opportunity to explain how such a union is not only
consistent with, but necessitated by, sound logic. I
purposed to lead you through the territory of vital
phenomena to the materialistic slough in which you
find yourselves now plunged, and then to point out to
you the sole path by which, in my judgment, extrication is possible."
This is very remarkable language, as disclosing
the fact that, after all, Huxley does not believe that
he accounts for life without a metaphysical cause. He
employs materialistic language, but only for convenience of terminology, while he has a reserved metaphysical sense; he plunges us into the slough of
materialism by its use, but tells us in the end, it is
only a trick of logic, in which he, personally, has no
faith at all; indeed, knows to be misleading and false,
*" Physical Basis of Life:" "Lay Sermons," p. I39.




64             INVGHAMI LECTURES.
but from which the only escape is to continue to employ the misleading terms.
" If we find that the ascertainment of the order of
nature is facilitated by using one terminology, or one
set of symbols, rather than another, it is our clear duty
to use the former; and no harm can accrue, so long
as we bear in mind that we are dealing merely with
terms and symbols. In itself, it is of little moment
whether we express the phenomena of matter in terms
of spirit, or the phenomena of spirit in terms of matter.; matter may be regarded as a form of thought,
thought'may be regarded as a property of matter,each statement has a certain relative truth. But with
a view to the progress of science, the materialistic
terminology is in every way to be preferred; for it
connects thought with the other phenomena of the
universe, and suggests inquiry into the nature of those
physical conditions, or concomitants of thought, which
are more or less accessible to us, and a knowledge of
which may, in future, help us to exercise the same
kind of control over the world of thought as we
already possess in respect of the material world;
wvhereas, the alternative, or spiritualistic, terminology
is utterly barren, and leads to nothing but obscurity
and confusion of ideas.
"Thus, there can be little doubt that the further
science advances, the more extensively and consistently will all the phenomena of nature be represented
by materialistic formulae and symbols.
" But the man of science, who, forgetting the limits
of philosophical inquiry, slides from  these formulae
and symbols into what is commonly understood by




ORIGIN OF LIFE,.              65
materialism, seems to me to place himself on a level
with the mathematician who should mistake the x's
and y's, with which he works his problems, for real
entities-and with this further disadvantage, as compared with the mathematician, that the blunders of
the latter are of no practical consequence, while the
errors of systematic materialism may paralyze the
energies and destroy the beauty of a life."*
The question comes back with all its original difficulty, therefore, as is here confessed: Whence did the
vegetable world get its original protoplasm, the matter
of life in which it started as a factor of protoplasm?
As living, it is able to extract the nutriment of its life,
by a chemistry peculiar to itself, from inorganic substances, to make its protoplasm; but this is no account
of its origin, but only of the mode of its sustentation.
It in turn becomes transmuted into the tissues of the
living animal; but the fact that it becomes nutriment
to the animal life, does not account for the origin of
that which it nourishes. The substance of all which
is, that there is matter without life and matter with
life, the only differentiation being life; the one dead
protoplasm, the other living protoplasm. Whence the
life is, remains unexplained by science, and has no
solution except that, like matter in which it dwells, it
was created-not evolved from unliving forces.
If, then, all should be granted that is claimed as
known by these savans, what disquietude ought it
give to our faith? None at all. What warrant does
it give for their boast that life is a phenomenon,
evolved from the forces of unliving matter? None at
* "Physical Basis of Life:" "Lay Sermons," pp. I45, 6.
7




66           AINGIAM LECTURES.
all. This appears, and it is no great addition to former knowledge: there is a composition of matter
which is the basis of life, as being a form of matter in
which life manifests itself; let it be called protoplasm,
the name is harmless. This protoplasm is'formed from
unliving matter; its chemical constituents are water,
ammonia, carbonic acid; it is the same in fungus and
man, or nearly so; the plant derives it from the unliving elements, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, carbon;
the animal takes it from the plant; when plant or
animal dies, the protoplasm returns to unliving dust;
each vegetable elaborates its own protoplasm, and
never that of some other vegetable; each seed has a
chemistry of its own; each animal, in turn, devours
the protoplasmic plant, or some other protoplasmic
animal, and restores its own wastes, or propagates its
own protoplasm. That is all, and it is not new. How
these living beings got their first protoplasmic capital,
or how the chemically prepared proteine got its indwelling life, does not appear at all; the solution is
not touched, and, we hesitate not. to say, never can be,
until we go behind matter, and find its cause in the
only cause, ultimate spontaneous will. It is a quantity-life is-alien from, and unknown to, matter; no
chemistry detects it; no microscope discovers its advent.  Chemically and atomically, the protoplasm in
which it shrines is precisely the same before and after
its advent. It comes from abroad,ab extra, and seizes
a protoplasmic cell, and from it, builds itself a bodyit may be this or that-but each seed or ovum, its own,body. This is acknowledged by both Darwin and
Huxley, and is contradicted by no fact as yet known




ORIGIZ:N OF LIFE.              67
to any scientist. Here, then, we rest as to the origin
of life, in transcendental cause. The force of the argument is, confessedly, with theism; all the phenomena of life emanate from an extra material fountain;
wherever found, in rudimental cell or archangel, it
acknowledges one Fatherhood; and with every tongue
of its million million mouths, proclaims the Godhead
of its source.*
Sir William Thomson, President of "the British
Association for the Advancement of Science," in his
late inaugural, reflected the very latest phase of scientific thought on the subject; and his words are of so
much value that we give them a place here:
"A very ancient speculation, still clung to by
many naturalists-so much so that I have a choice
of modern terms to quote in expressing it-supposes that, under meteorological conditions very different from the present, dead matter may have run
together or crystallized, or fermented into'germs of
life,' or'organic cells,' or'protoplasm.' But science
brings a vast mass of inductive evidence against this
hypothesis of spontaneous generation, as you have
heard from my predecessor in the president's chair.t
Careful enough scrutiny has, in every case up to the
present day, discovered life as antecedent to life.
Dead matter can not become living without coming
under the influence of matter previously alive. This
seems to me as sure a teaching of science as the
law of gravitation. I utterly repudiate, as opposed
to all philosophical uniformitarianism, the assumption
*See Stirling's "As Regards Protoplasm;" and M'Cosh's "Positivism," pp. 24, 25, 26.  t Professor Huxley, I870.




68                INGHAM    LECTURES.
of'different meteorological condition'-that is to say,
somewhat different vicissitudes of temperature, pressure, moisture, gaseous atmosphere-to produce or to
permit that to take place, by force or motion of dead
matter alone, which is a direct contravention of what.
seems to us biological law. I am prepared for the answer,' Our code of biological law is an expression of
our ignorance as well as of our knowledge.'       And I
say, Yes; search for spontaneous generation out of
inorganic materials. Let any one not satisfied with
the purely negative testimony, of which we have now,
so much against it, throw himself into the inquiry.
Such investigations as those of Pasteur, Pouchet, and
Bastian, are among the most interesting and momentous in the whole range of natural history; and their
results, whether positive or negative, must richly
reward the most careful and laborious experimenting. I confessed to being deeply impressed by the
evidence put before us by Professor Huxley; and I
am ready to adopt, as an article of scientific faith,
true through all space and through all time, that life
proceeds from life, and from nothing but life.*
" I feel profoundly convinced that the argument of
design has been greatly too much lost sight of in
*In the inaugural address here referred to, after an immense array
of facts and experiments, all pointing in the same direction, Professor
Huxley concedes that "the evidence, direct and indirect, in favor of
Biogenesis ['life from life, and from nothing but life'], for all known
forms of life, must be admitted to be of great weight." But that is no
reason why the great inductive philosopher should abandon his theory!
He proceeds: "But though I can not express this conviction of mine
too strongly, I must carefully guard myself against the supposition
that I intend to suggest that no such thing as Abiogenesis [spontaneous generation] has ever taken place in the past, or will take place




ORIGIN   OF LIFE.                   69
recent zoological speculations. Reaction against the
frivolities of teleology, such as are to be found, not
rarely, in the notes of the learned commentators
on Paley's'Natural Theology,' has, I believe, had a
temporary effect in turning attention from the solid
and irrefragable argument so well put forward in that
excellent old book. But overwhelmingly strong proofs
of intelligent and benevolent design lie all around us,
and if ever perplexities, whether metaphysical or scientific, turn us away from them for a time, they come
back upon us with irresistible force, showing to us
through nature the influence of a free will, and teaching us that all living beings depend on one everacting Creator and Ruler."
in the future....  If it were given me to look beyond the
abyss of geologically recorded time to the still more remote period
when the earth was passing through physical and chemical conditions,
which it can no more see again than a man can recall his infancy, I
should expect to be a witness of the evolution of living protoplasm from not
living matter.... That is the expectation to which analogical
reasoning leads me; but I beg you once more to recollect that I have
no right to call my opinion any thing but an act of philosophic faith."
(Spontaneous Generation: Lay Sermons, pp. 364-366.)








LECTURE III.
ORIGIN      OF   SPECIES:
it EBxanatr tiotn t f Maxrfittim.
BY THE
REV. RANDOLPH S. FOSTER,.D.., LL. D.,
President of the Drew Theological Seminary,
MADISON, NEW JERSEY.








LECTURE III.
ORIGIN    OF SPECIES.
EXAMINATION OF DARWINISM.
E have seen that the Bible, as to the origin of
life, finds no foe in, and has no litigations
with, science. On this point they are at one.
The next question to be discussed relates to the
origin of the diverse organisms in which. life appears,
called, in the terminology of science, Species.
This is the special subject to the elucidation of
which Darwin devotes himself. Starting with the
concession that life is transcendental or metaphysical
in its source, he confines himself to the subject of its
evolutions in matter; more specifically he seeks to
show that, and how, all organic forms have arisen by
the sole agency of this factor. The idea, as we have
already seen, is not original to him. It has cropped
out many times and in many places along the ages.
He has the merit of giving it the most elaborate
expression and impressive defense it has yet received.
It takes his name, not so much because it is his as
that he is its most eminent expounder.
His theory, in brief, is, that all the organized livzig
73




74            INGHAMf LECTURES.
forms, now, or at any past time, peopling the earth,
were evolved from a simple primitive mass of living
matter. This substance, impregnated of life, was the
most rudimental possible. It was disseminated over
the whole surface of the earth. Each infinitesimal
part was a factor, containing in itself, potentially, all
possible organisms; and from these atomic centers,
in fact, all organisms have emanated.
He thus states it: "There is a grandeur in this
view of life, with its several powers, having been
originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms,
or into one; and that, while this planet has gone
cycling on, according to the fixed law of gravity,
from  so simple a beginning, endless forms, most
beautiful and most wonderful, have been, and are
being evolved."*  At the time of this utterance, Darwin had not reached the real point of departure
for his theory.  He evidently saw it dimly, but
hesitated. He had traced the beginning of life to
a few forms-primitive, created organisms; he saw
the foreshadowing of a possible unity; but the venture was too bold. Later,- all uncertainty seems to
have disappeared, and the few forms were surrendered, and one only remained. The final utterance
is in a note, supplemental to the treatise, and in
these words: "I should infer, therefore, that probably all the organic beings, which have ever lived on
this earth, have descended from some one primordial
form into which life was first breathed by the Creator."
It is fair to say, that, among the numerous expounders of this hypothesis, there is not perfect'a "Origin of Species," chap. xiv, in fine.




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.             75
harmony along the entire line of its assumptions, reasonings,; and conclusions. At:bottom, there are at
least three fundamentally distinct schools: one of
which is sheerly materialistic; another, semi-materialistic; the third, theistic, and, with a liberal construction, Christian,-all agreeing in the general
theory of evolutionism'.
The former knows only of matter. It finds it existing, with its inherent constituent forces, among
which is life. From  the co-action of the forces, it
evolves the entire cosmos; the life-force coming in as
the last factor, and acting from the others as fulcrum.
The theory knows no such being as a creator, and
no such idea as creation. It is baldly atheistic. That
one organism, or what seems to be one system  of
related organisms, exists rather than another,: is the
result of no purpose resident anywhere, but the accident, merely, of blind forces, which act from a necessity internal to themselves.
This was, in a former lecture, shown to be not simply the height of unreason, but absolutely unthinkable
and impossible. The attempt to unify substance by
locating intelligence in matter, does not relieve the
difficulty. For the characteristic of the newly supposed force is, that it is a force which acts not from.
necessity, but intelligently; that is, from a perception
of ends to be reached, and in order to the perceived
ends; therefore, spontaneously. Now, this new-willfactor must be supposed to be primitive, and always
masterful, in the substance of which it is integral;
subordinating other forces to its ends; or, otherwise,
resultant of the action of the more ancient forces.




76             INGHAM LECTURES.
If the former case be supposed, then we have a spontaneous worker originating the cosmos; which is the
theistic idea, and the very thing denied by the theory
under. consideration. If the latter, then we have the
double difficulty of accounting for the order or adaptation of means to ends, which preceded the advent
of the factor, by which alone the adaptation could
exist; and, what is more serious, we have the difficulty of supposing a cause, which, as to the effect, is
no cause; since that which is not intelligent, can not
be cause to intelligence; and, what is yet more serious
still, we have the difficulty of supposing that all the
intelligence in the universe, that which organized all
order, and that which we are conscious we possess
ourselves, came out of non-intelligence, sheer and
utter; and, yet still more, we are beset with the necessity of denying action from will, or spontaneity,
against our consciousness of voluntary activity.
What I would call the second school of evolutionists, must be ranked as theistic. It differs fundamentally from the school just described, in that it
holds that both matter and life are created; matter,
as a substance possessing definite forces; life, as an
extraordinary and superadded force.  But the lifeforce, thus lodged, by a new creative fiat, in matter,
was not primitively placed in definite and discrete
organisms, such as it afterward appeared in; but was
at first placed in mere formless protoplasm, or particles of matter, from which, as so many innumerable
centers, it unintelligently elaborated diversified forms
for itself. Thus, the life-force was theistic in its origin,
but atheistic in its evolutions. God placed it in form



ORIGIN OF SPECIES.             77
less matter, as a power to elaborate forms, but left it
to itself to work out such forms as might come from
the blind operation of an unguided force; so that the
actual result of all existing organisms is expressive
of the action of no final, intelligent will-factor. This
is certainly the hypothesis of Darwin, and indicates
the ground of the charge, made against him by one
class of his critics, of undiguised atheism; at the same
time that another class of his admirers pronounce him
a devout theist. In fact, as tried by his scientific
writings, he is both, and neither.
The third school of evolutionists-horrified by the
gross materialism of the first, and unsatisfied with the
equivocalness of the second, and yet fascinated by
the glittering generalizations of both, and confused by
the array of indubitable facts which seem to support
their conclusions-attempts a consistent theistic hypothesis; a theory of evolutionism, which, at the
same time that it meets the demands of science, is
uncontradicted by revelation.
They assert the direct agency of final cause, both
in the origin and method of matter, and all the evolutions of its contained forces. Every phenomenon of
being is traced to natural law, but all natural law has
its home and forth-putting in God. The grand structure of the universe was evolved and fashioned to
precisely what it is, both as to the vast masses of inanimate matter and each of the innumerable myriads
of living forms, by the necessary evolution of natural
forces; but these forces, each and all alike, were, and
are, simply the fixed methods in which the Divine
factor carries out his plan. He is the ultimate worker,




78            IVGIJHAM LECTURES.
but forever conceals himself behind these visible subagents. He created the primitive monads, and shrined
in them certain'definite forces, which tended, as to
themselves, to necessary evolution along predetermined lines, ultimating in a foreseen, perfectly adjusted
cosmos. Among the.forces thus set at work, but appearing later in the plan, when the atmospheric, climatici and electrical conditions were suitably adjusted,
he introduced, by a final creative fiat, the new transcendental force, called life-transcendental, metaphysical, mystical-as not included in the original forces
constituent of matter. This new factor-clothing itself in matter, as the electric force robes itself in iron
mail when it rushes from hemisphere to hemisphere of
the globe, but more spiritual than its magnetic kinsman-was endowed with a potency peculiar to itself,
and commissioned to perform manifold mysterious
functions; among which were these: It had the power
of self-perpetuation, translation, and indefinite increase;
it could pass out of the particles of its original investiture into other particles where it was not, but which,
by the alchemy of its contact, became at once impregnated; it could also organize these impregnated atoms
into unity, and thus, from infinitesimal centers, by
annexation and organizatidn, concentrate and subordinate their aggregate force to one end; thus evolving
forms of wondrous beauty and strength and activity,
to fill the earth, the air, and the sea. But, in all these
weird and marvelous functions, it was itself the slave
of law, imposed.by its creator, and worked along
lines preordained by him, to the accomplishment of.his purpose, and not its own; whatsoever it did, it




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.             79
did for him, and by him; it was, in fact, the infinite.creative force and intelligence polarized or concreted:in certain atoms of matter, from which it manifested
itself in all possible forms of life. This is the theory
of some evolutionists, who are both devout theists
and believers in revelation.  They see no contradiction, in this view, to the statements of the Bible. We
are not entirely sure that there is any necessary conflict.  It is, certainly, a wonderfully brilliant and
beautiful conception. Its boldness fascinates us. It
appears to lessen the mystery of the phenomena of
life, and to find favor in many of the facts connected
therewith; but, after all, we are convinced that it is a
speculation, of which the utmost that can be said is,
that the creator might conceivably have laid the foundation of life in this way. The vanity which attempts
to dogmatize it as science, is only equaled by the
vanity which asserts that it certainly could not be.
We neither reject nor accept it, but accord to it
hearty admiration, as an ingenious speculation on a
point which must forever be clothed in mystery-the
nodus operandi of the creative act. Neither its truthfulness nor falsity is of consequence to our Christian
faith; and as neither can be ascertained, we are content to leave it undisputed and unaccepted.
The second' theory is that which we propose to
discuss, and which we reject, as utterly at variance
with all known facts. The thesis is, that life in its
most primitive form appeared, by a creative fiat, in minute particles of matter, each particle being an. egg,
or seed (so far we have no controversy with it-it
may have been so); that these quickened seeds, or




80            INGHAMH LECTURES.
infinitesimal cells, had a tendency to increase and
grow into indefinite organisms; and that from them,
as so many centers, life's tree grew to its topmost
flower, man; all the diverse organisms growing from
the same primitive root, by almost imperceptible
variations, until they reached their utmost difference.
Specific organisms were not contained in specific
seeds; but each quickened atom contained potentially, all possible organisms-was the seed of whatever type might happen to result from its accidental
evolution; and that the development has been as it
has been, implies nothing of special provision or
endowment or direction in the several life-centers.
Nevertheless, there was, in fact, for some reason or
by a strange accident, a seeming method in the simultaneous movements of the blind factors.
We are left to infer the actual progress, but not
without hints to guide us. It is probable that it was
thus: At the first essay, the cell-factors, with marvelous unanimity, considering that there was no plan or
guidance, evolved the minutest and most rudimental
fungus-a kind of mildew of vegetation-microscopic
mushrooms, toad-stools, and lichens, over the shallow
pools and marshy surfaces of the earth. These, by
slow process, transformed themselves into mosses,
liverworts, and various kinds of algae. In due time,
and by force of persistent effort, these grew into the
endless variety of those ancient cryptogams, the great
flowerless ferns of the coal period, from whose primeval forests were corded away the carbon which furnishes our homes and workshops with the thermal
agents necessary to our modern civilization.  Then




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            8I
followed flowering and fruit-bearing shrubs and trees
and plants, by easy and natural transformation, in the
abundance and diversity in which they have flourished
along the millenniads even to this day.
At some point, along the infinite ages, the animal
variety mysteriously appeared.  Whether it was a
transformed plant, or fruit of some ancient tree, or
exalted diatom, or evolution of a primitive cell-factor,
science has not yet been able to find out with entire
certainty; but, in either case, its first form was the
most rudimental and microscopic possible. Whatever
its origin, it immediately displayed marked difference
from its congeners of the vegetable variety; not a
difference of form alone, but of fundamental law of
life. The vegetable cell-factors set up life on a modest scale, and extracted their humble fare from the
unsavory particles of water, carbonic acid, and ammonia, in the crude state, building up thus their delicate and luscious tissues into shapely and beautiful
forms. The animal pigmies were both more dainty
and more ambitious.  They scorned the unsavory
elements, and went foraging remorselessly on the
succulent protoplasmic plants and fatty joints of their
less robust kinsmen. When they first appeared, they
were an exceedingly low, and altogether ungainly, mob
of extremely minute but murderous marauders: protozoans they are called by their learned descendants;
rhizopods and foraminifers, in some of their varieties.
In process of time, the more prosperous and robust
members of this most ancient house, by a succession
of intermarriages, established a new order, known in
palzontological heraldry as radiates, the old and hon8




82            INGHAM LECTURES.
orable house of echinoderms, polyps, and acalephs.
There were adventurers among these also, who, discontented with the pre-eminence of their family name
and hereditary condition, and becoming, by imperceptible changes, extremely unlike their brother zoophytes, ceased to marry with them. These swells,
confining their amours among themselves, determined
to set up a third house-the well-known molluscan
family, which still flourishes, in almost infinite varieties, of marvelous beauty and strength, in all the seas
of the globe.
Up to this period, our ancient kinsmen were content to dwell in the waters; but the oldest and most
primitive branch of all-the vegetable cells —had
extended themselves over the lands, spreading out a
table of rich and abundant protoplasm along the
shores of the rivers, and up among the hills and valleys, which, some of these rowdy and voracious molluscans perceiving, their cupidity became inflamed,
and they determined to make incursions on the inviting pastures of their prosperous and unsuspecting
neighbors. These pioneers of land-life soon became
a community among themselves; and, under the new
conditions in which they found themselves, thought it
wise to establish a fourth dynasty-the respectable
order of articulata, of which are the illustrious
branches, trilobites, lobsters, insects, decapods, tetradecapods, entomostracans, and a great variety of descendants, living in respectability, both on land and
in the seas, even to our day.
The infinite ages rolled on.  The struggle for
existence among these old empires waxed more and




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            83
more fierce. Great warriors arose under the pressure
of the feuds and necessary strife for victory. Internecine wars divided and developed the bands of contending articulates.  The result was, that, growing,
by dint of need and effort and improved air and other
altered conditions, some of the victorious households
became proud, sloughed their articulated shells, made
themselves back-bones, and declared a fifth dynastyvertebrata.
This was a grand advance in the realm of life. It
was, in fact, in its possibilities, a new departure; a
splendid affair altogether; the founding of a magnificent empire of cosmopolitan life and enterprise.
Some individuals of the new order inherited the seafaring propensities of their early ancestors. These
betook themselves to the deep, and from them have descended all the piscine, saurian, and reptilian branches
of the family, from the smelt to the whale and plesiosaurus. Some were fond of aerial sports, and
they grew wings to themselves, and propagated ornithological varieties, from the humming-bird to the
eagle. Other some neither cared to fly nor yet to
swim: they feared things that are high, and they were
troubled with a malformation of the respiratory organ,
which made it difficult for them to remain long in the
water; they betook themselves to the woods, and
turned themselves into mammals, from the mouse to
man. Thus it all came about; and this is the simple
story of how we all got to be. Topsy explained it all
in a single sentence: "I'spects I growed."
This is the genealogy which Darwin and the evolutionists of all schools furnish us. It must be con



84             INGHAMl LECTURES.
fessed that it is not flattering to our pride; that, as a
matter of fact, it requires the surrender of timehonored prejudices, of boasted titles, and heraldic
emblazonry; and, more than all these, the surrender
of the pre-eminent distinction of a differentiated spiritual and immortal life. Is there need for the sacrifice? Has science traced our pedigree to the spore
of the "polliwog" so certainly that we are absolutely
shut up to the fact; or are we only mocked, insulted,
and traduced by the effrontery of base and scurrilous
nescience?
What are the facts from which Darwin deduces
these strange conclusions? If the theory is really
scientific, it rests on no uncertain data; it is not
wanting in proof. Science wastes no time in stammering and muttering of conjectures and possibilities;
that is the method of doubt, not of knowledge. Its
sanctions are imperative. It proudly points to the
facts, and enforces faith.
What are the facts upon which it is demanded that
we accept the conclusion that our most primitive ancestor was a polliwog? our most modern progenitor
an ape?-our genealogical line including all the intermediate species between these odious extremes?
Has he discovered the family record, and traced the
flower of humanity to this ancient root? Has he
discovered, by experiment, or authentic observation
any where, that it is so? The facts alleged to support the thesis are these: First, he posits the wellknown fact that there is a tendency in the offspring
of all living beings to depart from an exact resemblance to their progenitors. This he styles " the law




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            85
of variability of species." He asserts, and it is not
disputed, that any offspring may vary, in any conceivable direction, in a minute degree from its parent,
and, by consequence, that all the descendants of any
progenitor will, and do, differ minutely among themselves. This position is sustained by a brilliant array
of exceedingly interesting illustrations. It is established beyond the possibility of dispute. It is fairly a
fact of science; but his arguments were wholly unnecessary; for nobody ever doubted it. He gives rich
interest to the subject, and introduces many new
facts; but he furnishes no data for new conclusions.
His next position in logical order is, that, where
the offspring is numerous and the ratio of increase
great, a struggle for existence must immediately
ensue, in which many must perish. This, as his first
position, is perfectly obvious, and is never questioned.
The point, it has long been known, was early reached
in the history of developing life, where but the millionth seed could find a foot-hold for existence on the
soil that gave it birth. The prodigality of life, in
all its forms, and especially the lowest, has been a
theme for poets and moralists, as well as naturalists,
from immemorial ages. The earth is a greedy mother,
devouring most of her children as soon as they are
laid upon her bosom; or perhaps it were better to say,
she has a passion for maternity, and her fecund womb
is more prolific than her means for sustenance; her
matrix larger than her breasts; her mouths more
numerous than her pap. Where few can survive and
the million must perish without gaining a permanent
hold on life, it becomes a question which will have




86             INGHAM LECTURES.
the fairest chance of success, and which must probably succumb.   Only the successful can establish
dynasties. This gives rise to what Darwin names
his third law, or, what is the third in logical order,
the law of "natural selection," called by Herbert
Spencer, more happily, "survival of the fittest;"
which means, simply, that certain facts of nature
determine which of her offspring shall survive and
which perish. Selection seems to imply intelligence,
deliberation, comparison, and election; natural selection, if this were the meaning, would imply that nature, which is another name for matter and its phenomena, as used by these authors, is intelligent, and
works to rational lines. This is not their meaning.
By selection is not meant intelligently choosing, but
only this, that the nature of the case determines that
seeds of life will thrive in suitable conditions, and
perish in unfavorable conditions; that the strong will
have a better chance than the weak; that the probabilities of permanence to a given seed will be according to the ratio of its inherent vigor, and the favorableness of the circumstances in which it is found to
exist, and vice versa.  Darwin' has many curious
remarks on the subject of sexual selection, which he
treats as a branch of natural selection; of the amours
of plants and of microscopic insects, monads indeed; with the courtships, coquetry, and.embraces of
birds and beasts; the fastidiousness of their tastes as
to color, form, and motion, and the strange arts by
which they conduct their wooing and reach their winning,-which are either mere imaginings, or indicate
that he has consumed a great deal of time and been




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            87
extremely minute in his observations. We are quite
willing to accept all his facts, and therefore need raise
no questions on this branch of his elaborate researches. It suffices that nature, in one way and
another, determines wvhich of her offspring shall sur'
vive in the struggle for existence, and which shall
come to grief, or extinction.  The best-conditioned
varieties gain the ascendency, and the earth becomes
full of their children, who inherit their victorious
qualities; and so, on the whole, the tendency is upward. Let it be so; what then?
The answer is obvious, and it expresses Darwin's
fourth law; namely, that, where divergence or variation is perpetual, it only requires time to reach the
utmost extreme of difference possible. Given infinite
ages, the polliwog, by a series of minute changes in
each successive generation, will ultimately reach the
form of man, or, possibly, in some remote future, a
type so transcendently superior to the lordly human,
that our unborn descendants will redden as deeply
with shame and scorn at the imputation of Adamic
kinship, as we do at the supposition of ancestral unity
with the toads and lizards of the long-vanished past.
To these laws Darwin adds a number of facts, which
he finds supporting his conclusion.
First. He names what he calls atavism, or reversion. He means by this, the appearance, occasionally,
in every family, of an individual who reproduces a
remote ancestor in typical form, and whose extreme
unlikeness to the present generation marks the progress of the change which has been imperceptibly
going on.




88            INGHtA1 LECTURES.
Second. Rudimental structure, or the appearance,
in the lower forms, of rudimental members, which, in
process of time, might develop into the perfectly
formed corresponding members of developed species;
or, in some instances, precisely the reverse, rudiments
of what were once perfect members, but, by reason of
altered circumstances and disuse, lapsed into mere rudiments; the fact, in both cases, showing the marvelous
power of the organism to advance or retreat, and take
upon itself extreme modifications.
Third. Embryonic phenomena, which prove that
the primary embryonic condition of all living beings
is identical; and that the embryonic changes are so
similar that, at any given periods, all creatures have
a precise resemblance; from which it is inferred that
any embryonic being might, under favorable or unfavorable circumstances, develop upward or downward
into any living form.
Fourth. General resemblances among all orders,
as they appear in living species, showing a closely
articulated chain of fundamentally similar links, consecutively differentiated by almost imperceptible diver-,
sities; so that, beginning at the inferior extreme, we
are enabled to see how, by a slight departure, each
successive modification arose, until the superior extreme was reached.
Fifth. The fact that is now made certain by geological research, as revealed in the rocky strata of
the earth, that most anciently the crudest and lowest
typical forms alone existed; and that the actual order
of the appearance of life has been that of an ascending scale from the beginning until now.




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.           89
These are the supposed laws and ground-facts
upon which the theory is assumed securely to rest.
It must be admitted that they not only have the
appearance of great plausibility, but that they give
the hypothesis the semblance of solidity and strength,
in a very high degree. It is not to be wondered at,
that, to many minds, the fascinating dream seems to
be demonstrated reality; that, yielding themselves
to what appears to be irresistible argument, they
account resistance and hesitation in others the result
of blind prejudice or willful ignorance.
The theory stands upon this high vantage-ground,
that its facts are, indisputably, substantially as posited,
and they appear to go directly to the conclusion.
Why are we not convinced?   The question is a
reasonable one. The assault upon hereditary opinions
is so far effective that the demand is fully made out,
that we attend to the case and put in an answer,
or allow judgment to be entered up against us by
default.
We have already stated, that of the first two of
these positions there can be no dispute; they rise
above mere conjecture into the region of assured
certainty. The third is probably true. Species are
not confined to one variety. They have wide margins, of considerable possible and actual difference.
From the same primitive root —stock, it is safe to
infer, have proceeded many quite unresembling but
fundamentally resembling varieties. Individual peculiarities propagated, and peculiarities created by circumstances, have been perpetuated along wide and
far-extended lines, and become, in some instances, so
9




90            INGHAM LECTURES.
great a departure from the stock-pattern as almost to
obliterate the genealogy. The human species is an
example, but not by any means the strongest.
It is in the fourth predicate that we find the fatal
fallacy, which breaks the chain in the midst; namely,
where divergence is perpetual, it only requires time to
reach the utmost variation possible. Hence, given
infinite time-which means no more than geological
time, which is practically infinite-the divergence
might, nay, certainly would, reach from the polliwog
to man; one minute change following another, such
as we observe taking place, would ultimately traverse
the whole distance, and reach the end. This looks
like a statement which expresses a necessary truth;
but a little examination will suffice to show that it
contains a fundamental fallacy. The variation in the
individuals of a species from the stock-pattern is not
a longitudinal one, which carries them further and
further away from the stock-pattern into fundamentally new types, which is the assumption here, but it
is variation of a fundamentally permanent pattern.
The law of'disresemblance among living beings of
the same stock is not that of the disresemblance of
beings of diverse stocks. The change or variation perpetuated through infinite ages, is variation within a
circle, not along a line. This is a most important
fact; so trenchant that, if it be a fact, it is absolutely fatal to the whole hypothesis of evolutionism.
All the elaborate and learned dissertations that have
been written on the subject, dash into foam and spray
upon this rock.
That it is a fact, we allege, is in positive proof, in




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            91
that not a single instance has been found, in the entire
history of life, of the offspring of one stock-pattern
taking upon it the form of a fundamentally different
type. No man has ever observed a single instance of
the kind. Geology declares unequivocally, as is the
testimony of all the masters in that science, that it
knows of no such event in all the ages of life. Numerous attempts have been set on foot, by means of artificial selection, breed-crossing, change of condition,
and all other possible artifices, to divert nature from
her established order, but utterly without success.
Minute variations have been produced, but no fundamental departure has been attained, either per saltum
or by long and tedious processes. Some species, as
man, dog, horse, pigeon, have shown remarkable facility
of variation, capacity to take on new and marked peculiarities, which come to comparative permanernce, under
changes of condition, place, habit, food, and matters
of this kind; but they have never been known to become something else than man, dog, horse, pigeon.
Neither accident nor methodical effort has developed
a new species, so far as has become known to man.
In some instances, two neighboring species of close
general resemblance have married, and progeny has
been the result; the offspring taking on some resemblances to each of the progenitors. But in every such
case the hybrid has been infertile; so that, even when
the stock-patterns of life have run so close together as
to be almost identical, it has been impossible to break
over the fixed bounds. This is admitted by Darwin,
and, indeed, can be disputed by none.
All known facts, thus, we positively aver, stand




92            INGHAM LECTURES.
solidly against the hypothesis. How, it will be asked,
does Darwin reply to this damaging allegation? In the
easiest manner possible, by manufacturing another assumption; namely, that the confessed absence of proof
is not because there is no proof; not because the case
is not as supposed; but because, in the first place, we
have not lived long enough to note the changes which
have taken place in infinite ages; and, in the second
place, the geological record has only been discovered
in scraps and fragments. If we could but find a witness of sufficiently broad experience, or an unbroken
record of the facts, we should find them supporting
his hypothesis. And yet, further, that the absence
of positive proof is not the absence of proof; that
though it be admitted as true that no instance is
known of a translation of species, yet it must be
allowed that such remarkable variations do often take
place as to make it probable. What are the cases?
Darwin devotes many pages to this particular point,
and it may be presumed that he brings the most
forcible facts known for its maintenance. He has
himself, in a brief period, by crossing the breeds of
pigeons, produced new varieties, with shorter beaks,
gayer plumage, and a few more feathers in the tail;
therefore, he infers that, if he could carry on the
process for a great number of ages, he could certainly
turn a pigeon into a man; and as the variability of
sheep has been shown to be fully as great as that of
pigeons, the argument is just as clear that a Southdown might, nay, certainly would, in an endless succession of generations, become bimanous, erect of
posture; rational, and employ the tailor to make his




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            93
clothes; and as florists have been able to variegate
roses and geraniums, both as to bloom and fragrance,
there is reason to believe that a time might come, far
along the. eternities, when they would compose oratorios, wear silks and satins, and take their protoplasm
with knives and forks.
The argument from resemblance of structure is
considered of great value by Darwin. He thus puts
it in his " Descent of Man:"
"The homological construction of the whole frame
in the members of the same class, is intelligible, if we
admit their descent from a common progenitor, together with their subsequent adaptation to diversified
conditions. On any other view, the similarity of pattern between the hand of a man or monkey, the foot
of a horse, the flipper of a seal, the wing of a bat, etc.,
is utterly inexplicable. It is no scientific explanation
to assert that they have all been formed on the same
ideal plan. With respect to development, we can
clearly understand, on the principle of variations supervening at a rather late embryonic period, and being
inherited at a corresponding period, how it is that the
embryos of wonderfully different forms should still
retain, more or less perfectly, the structure of their
common progenitor. No other explanation has ever
been given of the marvelous fact, that the embryos of
man, dog, seal, bat, reptile, etc., can, at first, hardly
be distinguished from each other. In order to understand the existence of rudimentary organs, we have
only to suppose that a former'progenitor possessed the
parts in question in a perfect state, and that under
changed habits of life, they become greatly reduced,




94            INGHAM LECTURES.
either from simple disuse, or through the natural selection of those individuals which were least incumbered with a superfluous part, aided by the other
means previously indicated.
"Thus, we can understand how it has come to
pass, that man, and all other vertebrate animals, have
been constructed on the same general model, why they
pass through the same early stages of development,
and why they retain certain rudiments in common.
Consequently, we ought frankly to admit their community of descent; to take any other view, is to admit
that our structure, and that of all animals around us,
is a mere snare, laid to entrap our judgment.
"The conclusion is greatly strengthened, if we
look to the members of the whole animal series, and
consider the evidence derived from their affinities or
classification, their geographical distribution and geological succession. It is only our natural prejudice,
and that arrogance which made our forefathers declare
that they were descended from the demi-gods, which
lead us to demur to this conclusion. But the time
will come, before long, when it will be thought wonderful that naturalists, who were well acquainted with
the comparative structure and development of man
and other mammals, should have believed that each
was the work of a separate act of creation."
It is not merely in the physical organism that he
traces a minute resemblance between all living beings,
from a mushroom to a man; but it is no less striking
in what are called the mental and ethical powers. If
a giraffe or an alligator is a close physical copy of the
Apollo Belvidere, the perfect human type, so the




ORIGIN O' SPECIES.            95
mental resemblances are equally strong. Carlo barks
in his sleep; therefore Carlo has the power of imagination; therefore he resembles Milton; therefore some
future pup, Newfoundland or terrier, in the infinite
ages, may write the "Paradise Lost."  Carlo has a
hang-dog look when he is chided; therefore he feels
the sentiment of shame; therefore he is a moral being; therefore the time will come when his descendants will write books, like Hopkins's "Law of Love,"
build temples, and quarrel on questions in ethics and
casuistry. The ape uses a stone to crack the shell of
a cocoa-nut; therefore he is an inventor; therefore he
will, in the ages to come, build steam-ships, railroads,
and printing-presses. In a word, every living thing is
an incipient man, and has a close physical, mental, and
moral resemblance to man, and, in infinite time, will
come to the estate of man. Is it absurd?  Do not
imagine that I misrepresent Darwin when I assert it
is precisely his argument, stripped of disguises, and carried to its legitimate end. His position is, that there
is a fundamental unity among all things living, and a
diversity, which, in infinite ages, returns to unity;
each living thing containing in itself, incipiently, all
the possibility of every other living thing, and only
requiring time and conditions to attain the topmost
possibility. A pig, taken miles away from home, will
return on a mathematical line; therefore he is an incipient mathematician, knows astronomy, and understands the axiom, "A straight line is the shortest
distance between two points;" and, some millenniads
hence, one of his descendants will write the " Principia," or project a geometry of the heavens.  In




96            INGHAI A LECTURES.
on-coming ages, the progeny of mice and men, quarrelsome landlord and tenant now, will worship in the
same pew, preach over the same pulpit, and give their
sons and daughters in wedlock. It is only a question
of time.
We confess that we are not convinced. Even at
the hazard of appearing dull and obstinate and unscientific, we must profess disability to see the point.
It may be a natural defect, or an acquired infirmity;
but whether from one cause or the other, it is a fact
that we are unable to discern the remarkable resemblance alleged in the case. To our strangely distorted powers of discernment and perception, there
does seem to be a difference, quite noticeable, between
a flea and a mastodon, a mosquito and a finner-whale,
a maggot and a man. The resemblance between Sir
Isaac Newton and a kangaroo does not, to our thought,
necessitate a common parentage. In fact, we labor
under the strange hallucination that, given the design,
in a creative mind of infinite power, to people the
world with life -in the greatest possible physiological
variety, embracing the widest conceivable extremes,
he could not have either multiplied or intensified the
disresemblances. Neither unity of type nor poverty
of invention appears to be a fact noticeable in the
scheme of creation. Certain stock features must
characterize all life; as, arrangements for gestation,
locomotion, alimentation, sensation, and propagation.
To accomplish these ends, amid whatever diversity,
there must be remote similarity of plan. For locomotion, for instance, the arrangement must be for
propulsion either in the air, or in water, or on the




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            97
solid earth; and for these, all diversities must include
either wings, fins, sails, legs, or sinuosities, or something of the kind. Is there not variety enough in the
kinds, number, and fashion of these, from the gossamer wing of the butterfly to the double-braced pinion
of the eagle; from the hair-like leg of the centipede
to the mill-post limb of the elephant? Is it a fact
that a human hand, the antennae of a spider, a bat's
wing, and a tiger's claw, are so fashioned after one
model, that I must suppose them originally one, or
slur the Architect of the universe with charges of
sterility of contrivance?
The argument from embryonic phenomena is no
more convincing. We accept the very questionable
facts as posited: most primitively of all, every life, of
every species, to all appearance, is identical; in the
germ there is no sign of difference. What of it?
Why not? Each higher development passes through
all the embryonic changes of all lower forms in reaching maturity; is successively polyp, tadpole, fish, bird,
quadruped, man. Be it so; what then? Are there
not marked differences and invariable peculiarities
enough? Who ever heard of an embryo of one species stopping short of its type, or transcending it?
Is it so that there is really such a correspondence
between the act of a shad in spawning its young, an
eagle in incubating and breeding young eaglets, an
English rabbit and other animal varieties in propagating their kinds, and a daughter of Eve in giving birth
to her human children, that we can see no difference,
or at most only a slight modification, which time and
circumstances will account for?  Allow  that the




98            INGIAM LECTURES.
young Adam takes on all known embryonic stages in
reaching his superior perfection of organism; that he
is, when mature, microcosmic, the embodiment of all
types; does that fact show community of root?
Where is the proof? To infer it is an instance of
hasty generalization, which savors more of presumption than wise induction. No more convincing is the
fact that life did certainly begin with the lowest organisms, and progress in an order of eminence till it
reached man. And why not? Can any one show a
reason why these diverse orders should not exist, or
why they should not be introduced in the precise
order that has actually obtained? We are not able to
see it. Is their presence in the time and place so
manifest a blunder that we must find folly in the
cause? or is the ever-improving type a reason for
dispensing with a creator? Is not progress, climax,
the most fitting conception of a great drama? How
could the Infinite, who has eternal ages for his evolutions, and immensities of space for the theater of his
operations, and immeasurable resources of power and
invention with which to diversify his wonderful cosmos, and no need of haste to the conclusion of his
manifold creations,-how could he more fittingly proceed to inaugurate, and lead on to its culmination,
creation's pomp, than by the adoption of the method
actually pursued? Most primitively of all, he laid the
foundations of his magnificent temple in the atomic
stones, out of which he was to beautify its walls
and hang its dome with diamonds. He was in no
haste, so he took ages to bring forth the top-stone of
the material structure, with shouting of Grace, Grace,




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            99
unto it! It was worthy of God as it hung, blazing
with the radiance of its thousand suns, above the
brow of ancient night; more worthy yet, as it swept
in sublime circuits, orb wheeling in concert with lucent orb, to the fraction of a moment in the completion of a revolution, which light only would trace in
millions of years. Then opened the drama of life.
Why should not the algae, humblest of its kind, lead
out the floral pomp of endless Springs? Why not
verdure first fringe the golden streams with banks of
moss, and then cover the hills and valleys with the
woody fiber of stalwart oaks and cone-bearing pines?
Why should not protozoa come forth, with their headless train, and mustering after them, adown the longdrawn ages, fishes of every fin, birds of every plumage,
mammals of every spot and form, until-grandest of
all, and that for which the rest were made-the Adam
should march through opening ranks to his palace
and his throne?
To our conception, there is infinite harmony and
beauty in the successive acts from protozoa to the
human age. Each lifting of the curtain thrills us
with fresh pageants more brilliant than the last. The
great artist, in the unity of his plan, but inexhaustible
diversity of the figures, and ever-increasing impressiveness of the growing drama, more and more holds
us breathless in expectation of the coming act.
When the curtain of the grave drops, is that the
end? So says Darwin and all his worshipers. So
we should say, had we no light but the feeble flicker
of earth-born science. It quenches its torch in the
tears and darkness of the grave. So says not faith.




100           INGHAM LECTURlIiS.
With an eye undimmed by death, it pierces the
darkness of the tomb, and reveals a realm of more
transcendent beauty than the drama of life has yet
unfolded. Upon its gaze there rise invisible splendors; and the great God and maker of all walks
among his rejoicing children, " wiping away tears from
all faces; and there is no more death, nor pain, nor
sorrow; for the former things are fled away."
After all human efforts, and as the sum total of
the results of human endeavor, to fathom the mystery
of life, we have these facts, and no more: First, that
life exists in connection with matter; second, so far
as known, it, in no case, has appeared in unliving
matter except by transmission; third, it appears, in
the first stages of an organism, as a minute germ;
fourth, the germ invariably emanates from an organism previously matured; fifth, the germ advances by
growth and several stages of development to a substantial resemblance to the organism which produced
it, and in no case to one substantially different;
sixth, it has appeared on the earth in an order, as to
time, of progressive perfection of organic structure
and vital power; finally, while each individual differs
from every other of its kind, and is subject to modifications, in some instances in a remarkable degree, from
the stock pattern, the difference, in no case, is fundamental. These are the things that are known, and
they are also the things that are revealed. What life
is, whence it came, and how it arose, no solution has
been furnished, though many times attempted, other
than that which is given in revelation.
In the absence of positive proof that our imme



ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            0 I
diate ancestor was an ape, we confess to the weakness
of tempered zeal in pushing the claim to kinship.
The advantages do not appear so great as to make us
anxious to strain the argument, or desirous to enter
upon the proffered honors before our claim is fully
established.  The Adam, whatever our prejudices
might dictate, we are constrained to admit, seems to
have a tolerably clear title to our allegiance. In any
event, we must be allowed time to look about before
we make a final surrender of the venerable faith
which has become sacred by so many memories, and
which, even to this hour, makes so brave a fight for
the life which others would take away.
We have said nothing in this discussion of the
positive argument, which buttresses the citadel of
revelation, and which for ages has made it invincible
to its assailants, and which becomes more and more
impregnable by each successive assault. We have been
content to take the new enemy upon his chosen ground,
and upon his own facts have shown that, however
proficient in science, in this case, by departing from
science, he becomes a mere bastard pretender, without
claim to the ambitious title which he assumes. Science disowns him, and throws its protecting arms
around the Bible he asperses and seeks to slay.
Let scientists proceed with their investigations;
let them, by patient observation and tentative experiment, educe all possible laws and facts, and they may
be assured of rich rewards of gratitude and praise
from their fellow-men.  Every true advance they
make enriches the present and future ages; exhumes
wealth and blessing from the earth; extracts health




102           INGHAM LECTURES.
and power from the atmosphere, and draws down culture and benediction from stars and globes above us.
Let them go on with their brave and humanizing
work; but let them not, becoming bewildered by their
brilliant vocation and almost miraculous achievements,
transcend their calling, and undertake to palm off
mere conceits for knowledge. As often as they have
undertaken to do this-and the instances are not fewfrom being justly admired for their discoveries they
have come to be pitied for their empty boastings. The
good they have done has been made the instrument
of injury; and from being the friends, they have come
to be the enemies, of mankind: Physical science is a
magnificent department, and, to him who has the skill
and patience to pursue it well, is ordained a high
vocation; but it is a department only, not the whole.
Its earnest culture calls into requisition talents of a
peculiar kind; and these it absorbs so completely and
employs so exclusively, that but little time or occasion
is left for the development of other and not less noble
powers. So long as the scientist remains in his realm
of material laws and facts, he is a king; but when he
attempts to extend his scepter over the departments
of mind and ethics and faith, he becomes illegitimate,
a vain braggart and pretender, and his power departs
from him; his voice, that was as the voice of God, becomes as the unmusical croakings of odious things.
Let him not imagine, because we listen with delight,
and behold with rapture, when he discourses to us,
with tongue or apparatus, of the wonders of chemistry, astronomy, geology, or other of his arts, that we
therefore will obsequiously accept him as master when




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.           I03
he promulgates his crudities on subjects of which, if
he were modest, he would confess that he knows nothing. The highest proof of his unfitness and incapacity is, that he presumes to dominate when he ought
to be silent; to impugn powers and authorities, which,
in their department, are not less regal than he is in
his own.
Two things, rest assured, science can never do:
it can not employ nature to expunge God; it can not
suborn matter to displace mind. Rightly pursued, it
will go forward with its retorts and pick and reagents,
lifting the cloud of ignorance from the face of nature,
and pouring light into every dark recess of being; but
the further it goes, and the more profound its discoveries, the more resplendently shall it find shining the
glory of His power and wisdom, who made all. And
even as it discovers him, so, it is our firm belief, it will
discover, in the future as in the past, the exact and
beautiful conformity of his revelation to the facts and
wonders of his creation-a harmony as complete as
the author is glorious. Certain it is that, up to this
hour, every advance of knowledge into the realm of
nature; the lifting of the veil from each secret that
has yet been discovered; the exposure of all the mistakes that have yet been made; the detection of
every previously unknown law and force,-has only
brought into more brilliant manifestation the reality
and regality of mind, the glory and eternity and infinite majesty of transcendental cause.  Each new
knowledge has come, like the pilgrim magi, bearing in
its arms precious gifts and kingly trophies, to crown
and do reverent homage to noble faith. No; it is not




104           INGCHAM LECTURES.
science that has been an enemy to faith, that has put
in peril the idea of mind as a reality distinct from
matter, and final, personal cause of all that is;-but
idle conjecture only, and a brazen-faced presumption,
which deserves only rebuke for its profanity,and h-orror for its blasphemy. It is a slander against science,
which we resent; and a protest against the dishonor
of its name, which we make.
The instance in hand comes with more boldness
than usual, and parades, with measured pomp, august
names and sounding titles; but it is not an exception,
either as to the grounds or measure of its presumption.
That were a bold conjecture, indeed, which pertinaciously insists upon its right to be respected, when
it stands rebuked before the best-known facts of
science, and finds not a single voice of nature or reason raised in its support, from the beginning of the
world until now; but only a wild acclaim of angry
protest from every mouth of animated being.
Given all the facts claimed by evolutionists, we
make no approach to the conclusion adduced. The
blasphemous theory fails at its own venue. When its
witnesses come to the tribunal, they rebel against the
indictment, and glow with rage against the prostitution attempted. As they. come mustering down the
ages at the summons, and answer to the call, each fact,
with loud and sonorous voice, declares against the
profane thesis which implores its support. The rocks
cry out, and the grave-yards of a million generations
rattle their bones in anger; and not a single recusant,
from protozoa downward, comes to the rescue of the
infamous cause.




ORIGIN OF SPECIES.            105
No; it is a brilliant conjecture, but it is not true.
Scientists babble when they count out God. They
seek in vain to explain either the origin or the ordering of the universe, without him. In their folly, they
have endeavored, time and again, to eliminate faith
from the world, and dethrone the Infinite from the
universe he had built for himself; but as often, they
have lost their way, and become confused and confusing.  Great and grand, almost divine as religion
itself, when it is content to interpret him, their science
staggers and stammers the pitiable jargon of gibbering idiocy itself, when it attempts to supplant him.
The granite facts stand brawn and bold, when the
silly dream and sillier dreamer come, and vanish away.
Each dead and living thing, from mite to archangel
and from atom to sun, lifts up its voice against the
folly and the wrong; and ever, louder and louder
still, from all worlds and all orders of life, comes the
resounding confession, "The Hand that made us is
divine."
The forces, which play so conspicuous a part in
naturalism, by which all phenomena of change are
accounted for, which build worlds and round dewdrops, and, more mysteriously still, form the facets of
minutest crystals and the tissues of all life,-the forces
themselves declare that they are not many, but one;
not perishable, but permanent; not material, but transcendental; not necessary, but spontaneous; that their
home is the bosom of the Eternal Will-factor, who
speaks, and it is done; who commands, and the foundations of the universe stand fast forever; out of
whom   there is nothing, and by whom  all things
I0




106                INGHAM    LECTURES.
consist; of whose invisible and intangible substance
the whole frame of the material cosmos is but projected shadow; who only has being in himself, and
in whose will alone all else that is has root and hold
of existence; who, if the thought of his non-existence
could become reality but for a moment, would carry
down with him, in his fall, the universe itself, and
leave but the dark and dreary pall of utter nothing
over all the regions where suns flame and angels utter
forth their ecstasies; and in whom, because he is, from
eternity to eternity, unchangeable-a God of infinite
love and power-we may rejoice for evermore; to
whom be glory and majesty and dominion, as it was
in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world
without end!*
*The isms exposed in these brief lectures are already receding,
and, from having alarmed, even now only amuse; but to any one who
may be curious to see how they infolded, with pomp of promise, and
how they withered in a day, we would suggest the careful perusal of
such books as "Vestiges of Creation," Darwin's several treatises,
Huxley's, Argyle, Mivart, Stebbing, Wallace, Mill, Spencer, Figuier,
and Tyndall. Lubbock, Lesley, and Biuchner will not pay for the
reading. These authors comprise the ablest, on both sides, and will
richly repay the study. They exhaust the subject, and, to a candid
reader, will not fail to suggest profitable lines of reflection; and, I am
persuaded, will not fail to produce the conviction that human research
furnishes neither the refutal of, nor substitutes for, the simple statement of revelation.




LECTURE IV.
THEISM AND ANTI-THEISM
IN
THEIR    RELATIONS TO        SCIENCE.
BY THE
REV. ASA MAHAN, D. D.,
President of Adrian College,
ADRIAN, MICHIGAN.








YECTURE IV.
THEISM    AND ANTI-THEISM        IN  THEIR
RELATIONS TO SCIENCE.
THE      Claim set up.-All are aware that antitheists, in all ages, the present and the past,
have claimed for themselves an exclusive abode in
the high realm of pure science, and have represented
religionists of all schools as having their dwellingplace in the lower sphere of superstition and credulity. "Religion," says Mr. Emerson, "is a system
which the people passively receive from the priest."
"The Churches," he accordingly assures us, "are in
the service of the devil;" while "vice and crime are
normald states of human nature." In the great antitheistic work of the age it is affirmed, that when the
mind ascends to the realm of pure science, religious
ideas and sentiments will forever drop out from the
sphere of human thought and regard. The teachings
of leading thinkers in the service of skeptical thought
are set forth, by themselves and their disciples, as
immutable truths of science. Science, they claim, is
"all their own."  As introductory to the argument
which we design to present, we will stop right here,
and inquire into the validity of these high claims.
109




110           INGHAM1 LECTURES.
Facts as they are.-We here announce, as an undeniable and undenied historic verity, that, without
exception, all thinkers of past ages, who have, in the
united judgment of mankind, vindicated for themselves permanent places as fixed stars in the firmament of science, have been openly avowed and
uncompromising theists; while the most eminent of
all anti-theistic thinkers are known and designated,
not as sages or philosophers, but exclusively as
sophists. Just as soon, also, as the most eminent
unbelievers and skeptics of modern times drop into
a past age, they, too, in the judgment of mankind,
fall from the firmament of science, lose forever the
designation of philosopher and sage, and descend to
the low sphere occupied by ancient sophists. Where,
for example, in human regard, are now the great
thinkers of France, who laid the foundation of
modern material atheism? Not one of them is, by
any class of men, believers or unbelievers, thought or
spoken of as a philosopher, and hardly as a sophist.
They are simply known, as a class of bewildered
thinkers, who reared up proud and imposing systems
upon "airy nothing." A similar verdict has, in fact,
been passed by the German mind upon the founders
of the various systems of modern rationalism. A
few years ago, those systems were the great theme
of thought and study throughout that country. Now,
among the tens of thousands who crowd those great
universities, no lecturer, whose object is to expound
and verify the system  of Kant, Fichte, Schelling,
or Hegel, can command a class of twenty hearers.
These men, who were once regarded as central suns




THEISM AND ANTI- THEIS.           I I I
in the firmament of science, have already practically
taken rank among the sophists of old. Long before
the year 900o shall roll round, will the great unbelievers of the present era-unbelievers such as Parker,
Emerson, Mill, Spencer, and Huxley-be known only
as the bewildered sophists of the nineteenth century.
Science and Sophistry distinguished. A clear exposition of the real distinction between science and
sophistry, will evince the strict justice of the discrimination which mankind ever have made, and
ever must make, between the two classes of thinkers
under consideration. Science is knowledge systematized. Into a scientific process, nothing but what is
absolutely known can enter. Any opinions, beliefs,
instinctive or otherwise, any conjectures or assumptions introduced into a scientific process, would
utterly vitiate the whole procedure. Science has to
do with principles known to be necessarily true, with
facts known with equal absoluteness to be real, and
with such deductions only as are necessarily implied
by such principles and facts. Here, and here only,
do we have real science. Whatever else, outside of
this, is given forth as scientific truth, is sophistry,
having no other foundation than mere opinion, belief,
conjecture, or assumption. Sophistry, you will bear
in mind, is a plausible show of reasoning, in which
deductions having no other basis than such opinions,
beliefs, assumptions, or a pa tial induction of facts, are
imposed.upon the public mind as truths of science.
Knowledge and Opinions, Beliefs and Assumptions,
distinguished.-Here a question of fundamental importance arises, to wit: What is the real distinction




12           INGAIAM LECTURtES
between knowledge on the one hand, and opinions,
assumptions, and beliefs on the other? Opinions, beliefs, etc., we answer, may and do change, and vary
their character. An individual may hold one opinion
on a given subject at one time, and the opposite at
another.  Science may forever displace from  the
sphere of thought and belief an opinion which was
once universally held as valid. Real knowledge, on
the other hand, never changes. When you know an
object, your apprehension of it, just so far as you do
know it, becomes permanently fixed. Any change
would imply, enlargement excepted, that the object
was not known.
Matter and Spirit KNOWN Substances.-The question of questions arises here. When we reason from
the apprehended facts of matter and mind to the
ultimate cause of these facts, are we reasoning from
mere opinions, assumptions, or beliefs, which happen
to be universal in the mind, or are our deductions
based upon real knowledge? All admit that if our deductions are based upon real knowlege, then we have
demonstrative proof of the doctrine of God. Antitheism affirms that these deductions are not based
upon real knowledge, but upon mere opinions, assumptions, beliefs, which happen to be universal, and are,
therefore, void of validity. We are now prepared for
a final determination of this question. It will be universally admitted that, in all minds in common, there
exists one and the same apprehension of mind on
the one hand, and of matter on the other. Mind,
as apprehended by the universal consciousness, is a
power possessed of, and exercising the functions of,




THEISM AND ANTI- TIHEIS.         113
thought, feeling, and willing. Matter, on the other
hand, is given with the same distinctness and absoluteness as an exterior substance, possessed of the
fixed and essential qualities, among others, of extension and form. Now, our apprehension of these substances can no more be changed or modified than can
our ideas of a circle or a square. We may question
or deny the reality of either or both of these substances, or the validity of our knowledge of the
same; yet they are, to our apprehensions, the same
identical substances that they were before, and are
known with the same absoluteness that we know a
circle or a square.
Here, then, we find ourselves standing in the
presence of real knowledge; or knowledge in no
form has a dwelling-place in the mind. Do you ask
how we became possessed of this knowledge? The
answer is this: When the proper conditions are fulfilled, we have a direct and immediate perception or
knowledge of the fundamental qualities of each of
those substances.  To deny the validity of such
knowledge, is simply to affirm the universal intelligence to be a lie. In reasoning, then, from the great
leading facts of mind and matter to their ultimate
cause, we are not reasoning from mere opinions,
assumptions, or beliefs, but from absolute knowledge,
facts absolutely known, to what is implied by the
same.
Grounds of the Distinction ultimately made by all
Men between Theistic and Anti-Theistic Thinkers.Such is science on the one hand, and sophistry on
the other. The reason why the great theistic thinkers
I I




114           INGHAM LECTURES.
of past ages do and ever will occupy their places
as fixed stars in the firmament of science; and why
all unbelievers and skeptics do and must, in the just
judgment of the race, take rank as sophists, now
becomes perfectly obvious. Thinkers of the former
class base all their deductions upon principles and
facts, which are given in the universal intelligence as
absolutely known verities. Whatever is thus given,
they accept and reason upon as real, and as being in
itself just what the intelligence shows it as being.
They never perpetrate the absurdity of assuming that
the intelligence, by one procedure, can know an
object as a fixed reality, possessed of certain immutably essential qualities-extension and form, for example-and then, by another procedure, know that same
object as a mere shadowy appearance, and no reality
at all. All their deductions are strictly within the
sphere of the knowable and known. Hence, said
deductions legitimately take rank as truths of science, and the great thinkers who reason thus will
ever, in the judgment of mankind, retain their places
as fixed stars in the firmament of science. It was on
the authority of principles and facts thus known,
that La Place affirmed that the evidence stood as
infinity to unity, in favor of the being and creative
agency of a personal God, as opposed to any other
hypothesis of ultimate causation. It was on the
same authority that Cicero affirmed that the idea
was infinitely more reasonable that the throwing
down at random, on a piece of parchment, of a mass
of writing instruments, would be the production of
such a poem as Homer's Iliad, than that creation,




THEISM AND ANTI-THEISM.          I 15
as now constituted, was originated by any other cause
than that referred to.
Wherein, then, lies the sophistry of anti-theistic
thinkers, of all schools? It lies here: All their systems are based upon a denial of the validity of what
is given in the universal consciousness as absolute
knowledge. Anti-theism now takes on, and ever has
taken on, one of three forms-materialism, idealism,
or skepticism. Materialism affirms the validity of our
knowledge of matter, and denies that of mind; idealism affirms the validity of our knowledge of mind, or
its operations, and denies that of matter, and all this
while our knowledge of each is given in the universal
consciousness as equally absolute. Both systems rest
upon the common assumption, an assumption for the
validity of which no reasons whatever can be assigned,
that what is given in the universal consciousness as
absolute knowledge is no real knowledge at all.
Skepticism denies absolutely the validity of our
knowledge of both these substances in common, and
thus bases its claims wholly upon a universal impeachment of the intelligence as a faculty of knowledge.
Take another view of this subject. In every act
of external perception, two factors are always giventhe subject and the object, mind and matter; the subject as endowed with the powers of thought, feeling,
and willing, and the object as possessed of the fixed
and immutable qualities, among others, of extension
and form. No affirmations of the intelligence are, or
can be, more absolute than the distinction under consideration. Now, while the intelligence never does,
and never can, confound these two substances, the one




I 6           INGHAM LECTURES.
with the other, materialism, in resolving all substances
into matter, confounds the subject with the object;
while idealism, in resolving realities into mind, confounds the object with the subject. Thus, these two
systems rest upon one common assumption, to wit:
that, in the language of Sir William Hamilton, the
universal "consciousness is a liar from the beginning." Skepticism, basing its claims upon a denial
of the validity of what is given in the universal consciousness as absolute knowledge, must stand or fall
upon the assumption that the universal intelligence is
itself a lie. Here, undeniably, is all the science that
can be found in the sphere of anti-theistic thought;
and here, as undeniably, sophistry reaches its consummation.
Suppose, now, that an advocate of one of these
theories attempts to convince you that your knowledge of one or both of these substances is invalid.
On what conditions can he escape the just charge of
acting the sophist? On this only, that he makes it
more manifest to your mind that his reasoning has
absolute validity, than is the fact that you yourself
exist, as possessed of the powers of thought, feeling,
and willing, and that matter is before you, as possessed of the qualities of extension and form. This
no anti-theist professes to be able to accomplish.
Kant, for example, affirms, and all anti-theists agree
with him, that no form of reasoning, no deductions of
science, can displace from the human intelligence the
conviction of the absolute validity of our knowledge
of nature. This is an open acknowledgment that he,
and all other anti-theists, are doing nothing but acting




THEISMi AND ANTI- THEISM.,      I 17
the sophist in all their attempts to subvert that conviction.
The reasoning of the anti-theist to induce the
results he desires, may have the appearance of conclusiveness; yet if his deductions are not more manifestly absolute than is the knowledge referred to, his
argument must, upon scientific grounds, be regarded
as nothing but sophistry. I once, for example, saw a
mother very much perplex her little child with this
form of sophistry: Every creature which has two feet
is a biped. You are a biped. A goose is a biped;
therefore, you are a goose. The child was perplexed;
yet it absolutely knew that it was not a goose. Suppose it had replied thus: Your argument appears
valid, and I can't meet it; yet I KNOW that I am not
the animal referred to. I, therefore, conclude, not that
I am a goose, but that you are acting the sophist.
The reply would have entirely accorded with the
principles of perfect science. So, when individuals
attempt to convince you that your knowledge of the
great leading facts of matter or mind, or of both in
common, is invalid, your proper reply is this: Your
reasoning is quite plausible. It utterly fails, however,
to induce that absolute assurance that I have, that I,
myself, exist as endowed with the powers of thought,
feeling, and willing, and that matter is before me as
possessed of the qualities of extension and form. I
conclude, therefore, that you are acting the sophist
with me; and I know well that I should make a goose
of myself if I should judge otherwise. Science affirms absolutely the validity of such a reply. The
sophistry of the anti-theist, in all such cases, is per



I 8          INGHIAM LECTURES.
fectly obvious. On the authority of deductions which
have nothing but assumptions for their validity, he
professedly invalidates that of original, immediate, and
absolute knowledge.
Reason wJy A ni- Theists regard each other as Sophists.-The reason why every anti-theist is to every
other, as well as to the rest of mankind, a sophist, and
especially why each class of anti-theists is to every
other a mass of unqualified sophists, now becomes
perfectly obvious. Each anti-theist bases his theory
upon a denial of the validity of what every individual
of the race, whatever his views may be, does and
must distinctly recognize as absolute knowledge. For
this reason, while any two individuals may perfectly
harmonize in their skeptical views, each does and
must intuitively recognize the other as a sophist. In
Germany, for example, unbelievers all take rank in
different schools, and each school is charged by all
the others with teaching nothing but sophistry; each
school, with every other, laying down absolute ignorance of all realities as the basis of a scientific exposition of the unknown and unknowable secrets of universal existence and its laws. The light in which each
French skeptic regards every other, is thus very impressively set forth by Rousseau: "I have consulted
our philosophers, I have perused their books, I have
examined their several opinions. I have found them
all proud and dogmatizing, even in their pretended
skepticism; knowing every thing, proving nothing,
and ridiculing one another. If you consider their
number, each one is reduced to himself; they never
unite but to dispute." Upwards of two years since, a




THEISM AND AN7TI- THEISM.         119
national, or world's, convention of unbelievers was
held in Boston. Each member was permitted a free
utterance of his own views. Every speech was taken
down at the time, and afterwards published.  The
character of the utterances of that confused assemblage is perfectly represented in the picture given
above. Each speaker was literally "reduced to himself," uttered little, or nothing, but what was regarded
as the consummation of sophistry by the rest of the
assembly. The only form of unity that has been
claimed, even by skeptics, for the convention, is that
of perfect toleration.  The convention, as all such
assemblages must do, presents to the world the most
impressive and edifying spectacle of Chaos and Old
Night dwelling with great quietness and full fellowship with Anarchy. Nor is any other form of unity
possible among this class of scientists, starting, as
they do, with the assertion of absolute ignorance of
all realities, and then attempting a scientific elucidation of the secrets of the world, nature, and its laws.
To attain to concurrent thought in such circumstances,
is as impossible as it would be for a thousand blind
men to start from a given point, and then walk a
thousand miles on the same straight line.
The Basis Principle of Anti-Theism renders Scientific Thought Impossible.-If we recur to the principle that lies at the foundation of modern skepticism,
we shall perceive at once the utter sophistry of all
the professed scientific teaching of this class of
thinkers.  Mr. Herbert Spencer, for example, the
great leader of the sect, after affirming that all objects
of thought and perception in the universe are mere




120           INGIHAM LECTURES.
shadowy appearances, and no realities at all, adds
that "the reality existing behind all appearance is,
and ever must be, unknown." This principle lies at
the foundation of ancient anti-theism. The wisest
among their thinkers, as Milton says, "professed to
know this only, that they nothing knew." The same
holds true of modern anti-theism. No objects of
thought or perception in the universe, says Kant, "are
that in themselves for which we take them. Neither are
their relationships so constituted as they appear to us."
Again, he adds, "We know nothing of these objects
but our manner of perceiving them, which is peculiar
to us, and may not be the same in any other class of
beings." Here, as we perceive, absolute ignorance is
affirmed of all realities of every kind, realities material
and mental, finite and infinite; and here we should
suppose that the mission of science is ended. How
can we reason but from what we know? Anti-theists,
on the other hand, make this infinite and acknowledged ignorance the basis of a scientific exposition of
the secrets of universal existence and its laws. Mr.
Spencer, for example, on account of his science of the
unknowable and unknown, has been called by his disciples the Sir Isaac Newton of this age.
I here affirm, without fear of contradiction, that
not a proposition or deduction can be found in Kant's
" Critic of Pure Reason," or in the multitudinous philosophical works of Herbert Spencer, that does not
bear upon its face the clearest indications of gross
sophistry. When you have affirmed absolute ignorance of any object, you have undeniably placed that
object wholly out of the sphere of true science. This




THEISM AND ANTI-THEISM.           121
is just what these authors have done in respect to all
realities of every kind. Any propositions or deductions, consequently, which they may put forth in respect
to such objects, and put forth especially as truths of
science, can have no other foundation than mere baseless conjectures and assumptions, for the validity of
which no reasons whatever can be assigned. Kant,
for example, after affirming an absolute ignorance of
mind, professedly determines, from a stand-point
purely scientific, the number and character of the
mental faculties, and the precise laws which govern
their activities. If he knows nothing, as he affirms
he does, of the mind itself, what can he know of its
faculties? Mr. Spencer, after affirming an absolute
ignorance of all realities, mental and physical, finite
and infinite, professedly gives us the science of universal existence and its laws. I slander no one when I
affirm that such thinkers, with the entire school to
which they belong, deserve no higher regard from the
race than philosophical jugglers, with this difference,
that the common juggler informs his audience of the
deceptions he perpetrates upon them, while these
authors deceptively impose upon the public their
mere opinions, conjectures, and assumptions as deductions of science.
The Character of the two Systems directly considered.-A direct consideration of the intrinsic character of these two systems will still more clearly
evince their distinct and opposite relations to science.
Both systems, in all their forms, agree absolutely in
this, that there is some one ultimate reason why the
facts of the universe are as they are, and not other



122           INGHAM LECTURES.
wise. When we inquire after the nature of this ultimate reason, or first cause, all agree, also, that it must
be either an eternally inhering law of nature itself, or
a cause out of and above nature-a cause acting upon,
organizing, and controlling nature, in accordance with
the law of intelligent foresight and design. In other
words, all thinkers of all schools agree that there are
but two conceivable hypotheses of ultimate causationthat of natural law or that of theism; and that one, to
the exclusion of the other of these, must be true.
Let us, for a few moments, turn our thoughts to a
consideration of each of these distinct and opposite
hypotheses.
The Hypothesis of Natural Law.-Upon the hypothesis of natural law we have three very concise,
but fundamentally important, remarks to make:
I. This dogma has no claims whatever to our
regard as an intuitive truth. If true, its truth is, undeniably, not self-evident. Nor do its advocates set
up any such claims in its behalf.
2. Nor can any form or degree of valid proof,
positive evidence, or antecedent probability, be adduced in its favor. The reason is obvious and undeniable: no fact can, by any possibility, be adduced in
favor of this hypothesis, which is not equally explicable on the opposite hypothesis. Whatever is compatible with the action of an inhering law of nature
as its ultimate cause, is undeniably equally compatible with the action of a cause out of and above nature. Hence, the deduction becomes demonstrably
evident, that there can be adduced from the universe
of matter or spirit no fact from which the remotest




THEISM AND ANTI- THEISA.        123
degree of valid proof, positive evidence, or antecedent
probability, can be drawn in favor of the doctrine of
natural law, as opposed to the hypothesis of theism.
3. No individual can hold the dogma of natural
law as a positive truth without thereby violating the
immutable demands of science on the one hand, and
involving himself in the just charge of the grossest
credulity on the other. Science absolutely prohibits
the holding of positive opinions not based upon valid
evidence. The individual who holds the dogma under
consideration as true, holds an opinion in favor of which
no real evidence or antecedent probability of any kind
can be adduced. No greater violation of the immutable demands of science is, therefore, possible. To
hold such an opinion is, also, credulity in its grossest
form. To attempt to impose such an opinion upon
the public as a truth of science, is moral criminality
of the most flagrant character.
Theistic Hypothesis.-On the theistic hypothesis
we have, also, three concise and fundamentally important considerations to present-considerations to
which very special attention is invited:
i. This hypothesis can, by no possibility, be disproved; nor can the least degree of positive evidence
or antecedent probability be adduced against it. For
the same reason that the opposite hypothesis can not
be proved true, this can not be disproved. For the
same reason that no positive evidence or antecedent
probability can be adduced in favor of the former,
none can be adduced against the latter.
2. The validity of this hypothesis accords with the
intuitive convictions of the race. Not a single tribe




124           INGHAM LECTURES.
or branch of the human race exists, who are void of
the idea of creation and a creator, and who do not regard that creator as a self-conscious, personal God.
We have here a form of positive evidence which will
command the belief and life of every honest disciple
of true science. When two hypotheses are before us,
one of which must be true and the other false, and
when no form or degree of evidence does or can exist
in favor of one, any degree of real evidence in favor of
the other binds the conscience. The issue before us
is one of this kind. No evidence, in any form, renders the doctrine of natural law even probably true.
The facts of the universe, as apprehended by the universal intelligence, induces, in that intelligence, the
absolute intuitive conviction of the validity of the
doctrine of theism.  Here is real evidence which
can not be doubtful, and which every honest student
of science will heed.
3. On definitely assignable conditions, this hypothesis may be rendered a demonstrated truth of
science, and the opposite one a demonstrated error.
If there can be adduced, for example, from the wide
domain of universal nature, a single real fact which
can not be accounted for by a reference to natural law,
that fact renders demonstrably evident the absolute
validity of the theistic hypothesis. Whatever can not
be accounted for by reference to any inhering law of
nature, must be referred to a cause out of and above
nature. This is undeniably self-evident.
Theistic Facts and Deductions.-Now, there are a
multitude of facts in the universe of matter and
spirit-facts of this identical character.  We will




THEISAH AND ANTI-7HEZISMi        125
make a bare reference to two of them. If we will
heed the intuitive convictions of the race, or the maturest and most absolute deductions of science, we
shall admit and affirm the fact of creation as an event
of time. So absolute are the teachings of science,
geological and astronomical, for example, upon this
subject, that no respectable anti-theist questions the
fact that the order of events in nature had a beginning. The fixed law of progress, in nature, from -the
less perfect in the direction of the absolutely perfect,
evinces, undeniably, the same great fact. Progression
in this or any other direction, by natural law, must
have been from eternity, in which case the perfect
would have been reached untold ages since. The
perfect, however, has not yet been reached. We are,
on the other hand, much nearer the beginning than
the end.
Progression in nature, then, had a beginnng in
time, and is not by natural law. There is no escaping this conclusion.  When we admit, as we must
do, the fact of creation as an event of time, we are
absolutely necessitated to adopt the immutable deduction of a creator out of, and above, nature. A law of
order inhering in nature, and acting potentially as the
ultimate cause of the order therein existing, must,
from the nature of the case, have existed and acted
from eternity, or not at all.  Facts of order thence
resulting, must have been from eternity, and not
events of time. No deduction has, or can have, more
absolute validity than this. But the facts of order in
nature are not from eternity, but are, undeniably,
events of time.  The ultimate cause of that order,




126              INGHAM LECTURES.
therefore, is the agency of a free, self-conscious, personal God.*
If we adopt, as our next stand-point, the state of
the earth, as it must have been at the subsidence of
the glacial flood, we shall be conducted, by logical necessity, to the same absolute conclusion. During the
continuance of that flood, such a degree of universal
coldness was induced, as of necessity, in the language
of Professor Agassiz, "to put an end to all living beings upon the surface of the globe." The earth could
have been re-peopled, as it now is, but from one of two
causes-origination by natural law, in accordance with
the principles of the development theory, or by the
direct and immediate creative agency of a personal
God.   The former hypothesis can, by no possibility,
be true in this case, there having been, undeniably, no
time for such originations. This theory, as the same
learned professor has well observed, "is cut by the
root by this winter." But one hypothesis remains for
us, and that doctrine must be true-the doctrine of
the all-creative agency of a personal God.
Relations of these two Hypotheses to Science.-The
relations of these two hypotheses to science now
*In the annual meeting of the great Scientific Association, of
Germany, held about one year since, this statement was made by one
of the most distinguished scientists of Europe, no one contradicting him,
to wit: That all the valid deductions of science culminate in the one
great central truth qf the organization of the universe as an event of time.
"In other words," he remarked, "we have a real creation, and therefore a creator." He then added, that when science shall have reached
its full maturity, it will be introductory to the Christian religion. Even
Mr. Huxley affirms, as an undeniable deduction of science, that the
order of events in nature had a beginning in time. Yet, with strange
fatuity, he would have us believe, not in a creator, but in creation by
natural law, than which no absurdity can be greater.




THEISM AND ANTI-THEISM.          127
become perfectly obvious. At the basis of the doctrine
of natural law, and consequently of anti-theism in all
its forms, there lies, as we have seen, not a solitary
principle (intuitive or deductive truth) known to
science. In its favor not a solitary fact can be adduced, a fact rendering that dogma even probably
true. Anti-theism, therefore, in none of its forms or
professed deductions, can have the remotest claims to
a place within the sphere of true science; and all positive claims set up in its behalf are positively condemned by science. At the basis of theism, on the
other hand, we have necessary intuitive principles of
science, and adamantine facts which science does and
must recognize as real; while the deductions of this
hypothesis are recognized by the same authority as
the necessary logical consequences of those principles
and facts. Here, then, we have science; or true
science has no being within the domain of human
thought.
The Boastful Pretensions of Anti-theists.-We are
also prepared to form a just estimate of the claim, so
boastfully set up by anti-theists of all ages, that they
only occupy the high sphere of true science; while
the dwelling-place, as they affirm, of all who believe
in an infinite and perfect personal God, is the dark
region of superstition and credulity. Does it not appear-permit us to ask here-does it not appear quite
modest in such thinkers as Emerson, Mill, Youmans,
Lyell, Spencer, and Comte, to deify themselves as
great central suns in the firmament of science, and to
present such minds as Thales, Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, the Bacons, Newton, Locke, and La




128           INGHAM LECTURES.
Place-all uncompromising theists-as mere rushlights in that firmament, blind thinkers, who passively received their conceptions of God from their
priests? We read of a Spaniard who never pronounced his own name without reverentially taking
off his hat, as expressive of the deep veneration he
entertained for such an illustrious personage as himself. It would seem that these anti-theists must have
taken lessons in the school of self-adulation of some
such thinker as that. But what is the real ground of
this self-boasting? They deny the being and perfections of God, a truth of real science, a truth evinced
as such by proof the most absolute. They hold as a
truth of science the dogma of natural law; a dogma in
favor of which no form or degree of real proof, valid
evidence, or antecedent probability can be adduced.
This, undeniably, is all the science to which these
thinkers can lay any just claim. If absolute disbelief
in the presence of absolute proof is presumption, and
absolute belief in the total absence of all evidence is
credulity, the presumption and credulity of these
thinkers must be infinite.
Let us suppose that an individual, first of all, affirms an absolute and hopeless ignorance of the matter, the productions and inhabitants (if any exist), of
the planet Jupiter, and should then claim that, by a
process of pure scientific deduction, he has fully revealed the geology and zoology of that unknown and
unknowable world. Would not mankind affirm, with
truth and propriety, that here is science run mad?
Yet this is precisely what has been done by antitheists of all ages, and especially by one of its most




THEISM AND ANTI-THEIS.A         I129
illustrious and generally accepted modern expounders,
in respect to the whole universe of matter and spirit.
Mr. Herbert Spencer, as we have seen, announces this
as the common doctrine of all anti-theistic thinkers,
from Pythagoras to Kant, and as embodying the fundamental principle of all true science; that all our
knowledge of every kind is wholly "phenomenal,"
mere appearance, in which no reality, as it is, is manifested, and that "the reality existing behind all appearances is, and must ever be, unknown."  Here,
then, as we have said before, the validity of this principle being admitted, the mission of science undeniably
ends. How can we have a science of that of which
our ignorance is hopelessly absolute? Do anti-theistic
thinkers stop here? By no means. This infinite
ignorance they assume as the certain condition and
ground of a scientific insight into the unknown and
unknowable secrets of universal existence and its laws.
The individual above named, for example, after professedly demonstrating the fact that neither the earth,
the sun, nor the stars; that neither mind, matter,
time, space, nor God; that nothing finite or infiniteis, or can be, in itself, the reality which we apprehend
it as being; and that it is impossible for us to know
what any of them is,-this same individual, after assuring us, as a deduction of science, that a personal God
has, and can have, no agency in nature, goes on to tell
us, on the authority of deductions purely scientific, as
he affirms, just how all the events of nature, from the
eternity past to the eternity to come, have resulted,
do result, and will result, from three great central
causes -causes of which he affirms an absolute
12




130        -INGHAI LECTURES.
ignorance, to wit: matter, motion, and force-and his
expositions are accepted by anti-theists as the only
true science of nature and its laws. Unless this individual has an absolute knowledge of all the facts of
nature-past, present, and to come-and a knowledge
equally absolute of the entire character and relations
of these three causes-and he affirms an absolute
ignorance of them  all-he does not, and can not,
know, that, through these causes, he can account for
all these events; nor, indeed, for any one of them.
Unless he has an absolute omniscience of all realities
that have being in infinite space-and he avows utter
ignorance of every one of them-he does not, and can
not, know, that the words, " matter, motion, and force,"
represent at all every cause, or, indeed, the chief
cause, that operates in nature. In affirming, as he
does, an absolute and hopeless ignorance of all realities of every kind, what reason has he for affirming
or denying the agency of a personal God in nature?
In the name of science, then, we ask, have we not
here philosophy run mad? Mr. Spencer, however, in
his infinite and affirmed ignorance of all realities, not
only professedly discloses to us the secrets of universal
nature and its laws, but professedly reveals a still
higher secret-that of life itself. Life, he tells us, is
"the definite combination of definite heterogeneous
changes, both simultaneous and successive, in correspondence with external co-existence and sequences."
That definition, surely, is as luminous as mud, about
as clear and illuminating as his definition of progression. This, he assures us, consists in "advancing
from -the definite homogeneous to the definite hetero



THEISM AND ANTI-THEISM.          131
geneous."  The correctness of this definition is a
matter of dispute among some of his learned disciples. His philosophy, and that of anti-theists of all
schools, when truly and properly defined, is " only this,
and nothing more"-conscious and avowed ignorance
of all realities, giving professedly to the world the
science of the unknowable and unknown.
The Developmenzt Theory.-With singular fatuity,
anti-theists of all schools have adopted the development theory as a last stronghold of the doctrine of
natural law. Their supreme aim is to exclude wholly
the idea of the agency of Infinity and Perfection in
the organization and government of the universe.
This theory carries the origin of things back to an
incalculable distance in the past. To think of the
world as having existed thus long, is equivalent with
anti-theists to the idea that it was never created at
all; that is, to an utter exclusion of divine agency
from the universe. They forget that whatever took
form in time, as all things did, according to this theory, is a creation, and absolutely implies a creator,
distance of time making no difference. Then, as all
organizations, animal and vegetable, are, according to
this theory, developed according to natural law, it
seems, at first view, as if God had no agency in nature. But let us go back to the first principle, from
which all things, according to this theory, have been
developed. This principle could not have existed in
nature by natural law. In that case it would undeniably have acted from eternity; whereas, it as undeniably commenced action in time. Nor coild it have
been introduced into nature by natural law; for, if




132           INGHAM LECTURES.
natural law had failed to introduce such a principle
into nature from eternity up to any given period, it
could not have done it then. Nature does not and
can not thus change her own laws. The principle,
undeniably, must have been introduced by a power
from without and above nature; which can have been
nothing but the agency of infinity and perfection, the
agency which these scientists would wholly exclude
from nature. But what must have been the character
of this principle, from which all other vital organizations have been developed? It must have contained
in itself the germs of all that was afterward developed
from it; that is, of all organizations, animal and vegetable. Now, this would have been the most wondrous form of creation to which Infinity and Perfection
could have given birth, and would, if true, involve the
most absolute demonstration of the agency of God in
nature. Thus, to escape the idea of divine agency in
nature, anti-theists have leaped into a theory which
involves them in the most palpable contradiction and
absurdity.
Let us now turn our thoughts for a moment to this
theory itself.  Mr. Darwin, its great modern expounder, is constrained to admit that, throughout the
wide range of geological science, he has not found a
single abnormal form of living beings indicating, in
the remotest degree, the transmutation of one species
into another. Turning in despair from the revelations
of this science, he has made a very wide induction of
facts in respect to the influence of domestication and
other causes in inducing a diversity of classes in the
same species.  But here, as before, his'argument




THEISM AND AN -TI-THEISM.        133
utterly fails. While he has done much to show that
domestication and other causes may induce many wide
diversities in the same species, he has not adduced a
solitary fact indicating in the least degree that any
one species ever has been, or ever can be, developed
from another by any natural cause,-the only question
at issue. The argument, as really presented by the
advocates of this theory, may be thus stated: An
endless diversity of the grape, for example, has been
developed, by domestication and other causes, from
some one original form. Therefore, the grape may be
developed into the apple-tree. From this, the final
conclusion is deduced, as a truth of science, that all
vital organizations were, in fact, originated in accordance with the principles of this theory. This argument, fairly stated, presents one of the widest leaps
in logic ever made or attempted by any power but a
crazy philosophy.
Conflicts between Science and Religion.-We have
now, we remark, in the last place, attained to a standpoint from which we can most clearly determine the
character of all conflicts, real or apparent, which may
arise between religion and science. In the department of natural theology, it has now become perfectly
apparent that no such conflict is possible. Either
theism  or the doctrine of natural law, as we have
seen, must be true. In favor of the latter, as we have
also seen, science absolutely denies all possible proof,
positive evidence, and antecedent probability. Here,
then, a conflict between science and religion is manifestly impossible.  Religion, on the other hand, accepts of no form or degree of evidence in its favor




134           INGHAM LECTURES.
which science does not affirm to be absolutely valid.
Here, also, as before, all forms and degrees of conflict
between science and religion are absolute impossibilities. While science, also, adduces, and can adduce,
no form or degree of evidence against theism, it does
present, as we have seen, absolute proof of the being
and perfections of a personal God. When anti-theism
impeaches the validity of the intelligence, as the
ground of denying the claims of religion-and it can
deny these claims on no other condition-the conflict
is not then between religion and science, but between
the intelligence and "science falsely so called."
The only conflict which can, even in appearance,
arise, is not between science and theism, but between
the former and revealed religion. Here the only peril
to be apprehended is hasty deductions in the sphere
of natural science on the one hand, and Biblical interpretation on the other. When geology shall have attained to the full consummation of a fixed science,
and the stand-point from which the first revelator had
a vision of the progress of creation, shall have been as
fully and finally determined, then we shall know absolutely whether the Spirit of inspiration-the Spirit
which brought order out of chaos - has, indeed,
dropped an inadvertent thought
"In that dearest of books, that excels every other,
The old family Bible, that lies on the stand."
Most of the issues which have hitherto been raised
have already been settled, and, as real science progresses onward, what remain are rapidly becoming
"beautifully less." The light of a rectified philosophy
and of a pure religion are piercing through the fog



THEIASM AND ANTI-THEISM.        135
banks which the reekings of false science have sent up
from the death-swamps of unbelief. The era is not
distant when the last cloud of darkness will have
passed away, and religion and science will become
visible to all the world, as having a common source
and a common end and aim, the light of each proceeding from the same central sun of universal illumination, the face of Infinity unveiled.








LECTURE V.
MIRACLES.
BY THE
REV. BISHOP EDWARD THOMSON, D. D., LL. D.,
DELAWARE, OHIO.
I3








YLECTURE V.
MIRACLES.
A   S Christianity is established in the mind of
Christendom, the burden of proof is with its
opposers. Still, it may be well, in a skeptical age,
occasionally to revert to the foundations of our faith.
Infidelity has invaded the Church, often putting on
the badges of ecclesiastical authority, eating the bread
of the Lord's table, and teaching his children; and
though in the garb of an angel of light, and speaking
in the sacred names of God, Reason, and Freedom, it
has all the venom of an angel of darkness. Usually,
it accepts the Bible as a grand product of antiquity,
and system of morality, and fountain of devotion; the
Church, as a support of the State, a means of civilization, and a source of refinement; the Savior, as a
teacher, of charming rhetoric, pure character, and
wholesome doctrine, to which he sacrificed his lifebut it would eliminate from them all the miraculous
element.
This tendency of modern thought is not surprising, considering the almost exclusive cultivation of
the natural sciences, and employment of human genius in material enterurises. Against it we assert that
I39




140            INVGHAM LEC TURE'S.
Jesus Christ authenticated a divine mission by miraculous acts. We prove this proposition by a few
sucessive steps; namely: miracles are possible, probable, provable, proved.
I. Miracles are possible. This would not be asserted if it had not been denied. Strauss says that
the chain of finite causes being inviolable, a miracle is
not possible. But this is assuming what ought to be
proved, what can not be proved, and what can be
disproved.
a. If nature is bound in an eternal, inviolable chain
of finite causes and effects, religion and even Providence are impossibilities, human responsibility is a
delusion, and prayer a folly. But what say the universal reason and universal heart to such conclusions?
Indeed, to deny the possibility of miracles is stark
atheism.  God is a supernatural being.  A  supernatural being must have supernatural powers; he who
has supernatural powers must be capable of supernatural acts.
b. To deny that God ever modifies the order of
natural, sequences, is to make him inferior to man,
who is at all times operating on the line of causes
and effects, and modifying results at his will.
c. That God has modified the order of nature, the
globe itself shows; for it was not created at once, but
by successive acts, as geology proves. The destruction of one set of species and the creation of a different set, and the alteration of the conditions of the
globe to adapt it to the new creations, being not the
results of established laws, but of the overrulings of
them, are so many different miracles. The successive




MIRA CLES.               141
strata of the world's crust record more miracles than
the successive leaves of the Bible; nor are the miracles spoken from the mouths of prophets more wonderful than those recorded in the lasting rocks. But
regard the world as it now is. Say, if you please,
that all animal forms have been developed by force
of inherent laws from a single animated germ. How
came that germ? It could not have been derived
from the vegetable world. There is a gulf between
the two which must be bridged by a miracle. Suppose we overlook that miracle and ascend through
the various forms of vegetable life to a primal vegetable cell, from which all living nature has evolved
itself. How came that vital cell? Here is another
gulf which nothing but a miracle can bridge. Let
us ignore this, and suppose that, somehow, it sprung
from inorganic matter; that life leaped out of death.
How came the world, on which it is planted, organized, garnished, illuminated, warmed? What gave
character and weight to atoms, and order to the
families of material cohesion? Between the universe
and chaos is another chasm which must be bridged
by a miracle. The Divine, then, must somewhere
break through the chain of causes and effects. If so,
who shall blasphemously seek to exclude him from
the circle or say, "Hitherto shalt thou come, and no
further?" As God has modified the established order
of things in the past, there is reason to suppose he is
doing so in the present. Direct your eye outward,
beyond the solar system, and the nebulae which
belong to it, to those remoter nebulae that float like
separate universes in the outer depths; buried so




142           INGHAM LECTURES.
deep in space that light, traveling twelve millions of
miles a minute, would not reach our earth'from
thence in fifty thousand years; some of them manifesting no signs of resolvability under the most favorble circumstances and most rigorous tests of science.
Have we not reason to suppose that new planets are
there evolving from their centers? Suppose they
issue from their furnaces and enter on their paths,
by force of ordinary law; must not some creative
energy be put forth to clothe their valleys with green
and render them vocal with song? How are the
eighteen elements which enter into the plant or
animal to be selected, gathered, brought together in
the exact proportions necessary and then molded into
organs and systems, and animated with life? Surely
we need more than the laws of the inorganic world.
II. Miracles are probable.
a. There is a natural necessity for them. As
we have reason to believe that God has modified
established order in the past and present, so have
we reason to suppose that he will in the future.
According to laws as well settled as that by which a
stone thrown into the air will come down, the moon
is drawing nearer to the earth and must soon meet
it, breaking up the crust of the globe by the shock,
generating intense heat by the destruction of its motion and fusing both in to one molten mass. By
the same process, the earth and attendant planets are
winding inward to fall into the furnace of the sun,
and the suns themselves with their planetary systems are coming together into a common globe,
which, though intensely hot at first, will gradually




MIrRA CLES.                143
cool. When the temperature of nine hundred and
ninety-seven degrees in the downward progress is
reached, all physical energy will cease, light, heat
and electricity will be equally diffused, all change
become impossible, darkness and death will be universal, and chaos be restored. What then? Shall the
universe stagnate forever? Surely he can not think
so, who believes in God. No; the Creator will then
come forth; at his voice there will be a resurrection,
a reconstruction, a restoration of the order of things.
But why not break the order to arrest the progress to
destruction, rather than after it has taken place?
What do you gain for physical science by putting off
the omnific mandate to the close?  And if you allow
interference with material law, to save a material
universe, why not to save a moral one?  How much
superior one man to all stellar worlds! As Pascal
has justly said: " Man is but a reed, the weakest in
nature; but he is a thinking reed.  It is not necessary that the entire universe arm itself to crush him.
A breath of air, a drop of water, suffices to kill him.
But were the universe to crush'him, man would still
be more noble than that which kills him, because he
knows that he dies, and the universe knows nothing
of the advantage it has over him."
" Behold this midnight glory: worlds on worlds!
Amazing pomp! Redouble this amaze;
Ten thousand add; add twice ten thousand more;
Then weigh the whole,-one soul outweighs them all,
And calls th' astonishing magnificence
Of unintelligent creation poor."*
*" Young's Night Thoughts," vii, 994.




144           INGHAM LECTURES.
b. There is a moral necessity for them. Miracles,
in the theological sense, are more than Strauss assumes; and yet, in this superior sense, they are probable. A revelation from God implies them. Faith
requires evidence, and the kind of evidence is to be
determined by the matter to be proved; for a proposi-.
tion and its proof must be homogeneous. As moral
truth requires moral evidence, algebraic truth an
algebraic process, mathematical truth a mathematical
demonstration, so supernatural truth requires supernatural attestation. When Jesus said, "If I had not
done among them the works which no other man did,
they had not had sin;"  that is, they would have
been excused for rejecting him; and when Nicodemus said, " We know that thou art a teacher come
from God; for no man can do these miracles that
thou doest, except God be.with him,"t-they expressed the general conviction of mankind, that
miracles are the proper and indispensable proofs of
revelation.  Since, therefore, a revelation can be
proved in no other way than by miracles, there is a
probability in their favor measurable by the evidence
that man needs further moral and religious light than
nature affords.
c. There is a fitness in them. God has made the
human mind with a tendency to believe in things
supernatural. All ages and nations have so believed.
Hence the saying of Plutarch, "As well build a city
in the air, as without belief in the gods." This belief is not confined to the lower orders. Socrates,
greatest among the ancients; Bacon, greatest among
John xv, 24.                 t John iii, 2.




MIRACLES.                145
the moderns; Herbert, first among philosophical
skeptics; Wesley, first among emotional preachers,had it in equal degree. The theory that, as mankind
advances in knowledge, it diminishes until, finally, it
ceases, is untenable. The present age is by no
means emancipated from it, even in the most enlightened states. Though we have disenchanted portents and wonders, and earthquakes and meteors
and simoons; and banished witchcraft and magic,
and sorcery and necromancy and ghosts; we have
not even weakened the popular faith in the supernatural, or in its influence upon the natural. Even
they who shake off their religious faith usually adopt
another no less supernatural. Spiritualism follows in
the wake of skepticism. He who was once highpriest of materialism in America, is now high-priest
of spiritualism in America. Can you arrest this
tendency with the laboratory? As well attempt to
destroy the atmosphere with an air-pump. As we
might argue the existence of light from the structure
of the eye, so may we argue the probability of miracles from the universal belief in miraculous manifestations. The mind is as substantial a part of
human nature as the body, and as sound a basis of
reasoning.
d. There is an analogy for miracles. Every-where
we see subordination of one law to a higher. The
animal pumps up blood in defiance of gravitation; it
appropriates elements and molds them into combinations unknown in inorganic spheres; the mind subordinates the vital laws.  Thus we see successive
layers of laws, as wheels within wheels in the proph



146           INGHAAM LECTURES.
et's vision; the lower subjected to the higher; the
vital subordinating the physical; the mental, both.
Why not a higher force subjecting all, if need be, for
higher ends? Surely, this is not incredible to men
who see, in the ascending series of being, the uprising
of a Supreme Power, and feel coming down from all
the depths, and through all the openings, and over
all the walls, of the universe, the influence of a heart
that speaks to our own.
e. The objections to miracles are easily answered.
Say not that the world, being established under God's
laws, needs no interference. So far as God is concerned, this may be; but man, created in God's image,
rational and free, has, by sin, broken in upon the
moral order established by infinite wisdom, and thus
given occasion for miracle; even demanded it. The
whole creation groaneth in pain together until now,
for the miracle of redemption.  When a surgeon
brings together the fragments of a broken limb, does
he interfere with established law?
Nor are we to suppose that miracles are incredible
because incomprehensible. A clergyman asked one
who would not believe what he could not comprehend, why the horns of one cow turn in and those of
another turn out. The skeptic was confounded. The
clergyman might have taken his antagonist upward
from the horns of the cow to those of the moon,
thence to the most distant star in the milky way, or
downward, from the horns of the cow to those of the
snail, and from the horns of the snail to the smallest insect that hums in the morning air, without finding any
thing comprehensible to human mind. "It is incom



MIRA CLES.               147
prehensible that God is, and incomprehensible that
he is not; that the soul is in the body, that we have
no soul; that the world is created, that it is not
created." And shall man, "this mean between nothing and all," to whom the end of things and their
principle are inevitably and impenetrably concealed,
"equally incapable of seeing the nothingness whence
he is derived and the infinity in which he is swallowed
up,"-shall man dare to say, as he trembles between
eternities and infinities: "There is matter, attraction,
impulse; beyond that, nothing. There are plants, animals, man; beyond him, nothing. There is mind,
thought, law; beyond, nothing,-because I can not
comprehend it?" 0, folly! 0, presumption!
III. Miracles are provable. Hume has said, and
his argument is often repeated, that a miracle being
contrary to experience, is not provable by testimony,
since it is more reasonable to suppose that testimony
is false than that a miracle is true. The sophism is
full of ambiguities. It is sufficient to notice one. It
is in the word testimonzy, which may mean either testimony in the abstract, or a particular testimony. If
the word be used in the former sense, the premise is
true, but the argument is void; for it is not by testimony in the abstract, but by a particular kind of testimony that miracles are established.  To put the
fallacy in syllogistic form: Testimony-according to
experience-may be fallacious. The Gospel is testimony; therefore, the Gospel-according to experience-may be fallacious. The first premise is an
indefinite proposition; put all, the universal sign,
before it, and you have valid reasoning, but a false




I48           INGHAM LECTURES.
premise; for it is not true that all testimony is fallacious; though testimony in general is, there is a
species of it which at once excludes the idea of fraud
on the one hand and delusion on the other-the very
kind we have for the Christian miracles. Change the
universal sign to the particular, and the premises are
true, but the reasoning becomes invalid; for, in scientific language, you have an undistributed middle. To
illustrate: Suppose you go into court with proof of
your title to a particular estate, what would it avail
for opposing counsel to say: This is testimony; therefore, this is fallacious? You would reply: Grant that
testimony in general is fallacious; it is incumbent on
you, if you would defeat my claim to this estate, to
show that the particular evidence on which it rests is
fallacious.
IV. The miracles of Christ are proved. The evidence is found in the Gospels. We assume their authenticity not only because it is proved in works accessible
to all readers, but because it is admitted by both Renan
and Colenso, the representatives of the great skeptical
schools of the age. This is enough; but as some are
troubled because the canon was not settled until the
Council of Carthage,* be it observed that this body
did not create, it merely announced, the long-settled
judgment of the Church. Since some are perplexed
about the apocryphal books, mark that they were not
contradictory, but complementary, of the canonical;
and, as many are disquieted because the works quoting the Scriptures of the New Testament are none
earlier than the second century, it may be well to note
*A. D. 397.




MIRA4 CLES.              149
that, in the latter part of the second century, Irenaeus
quotes the four Gospels by name. He could not have
been imposed on by any publication which Polycarp,
Bishop of Smyrna, disowned. But Polycarp, born in
the year of our Lord 80, was the contemporary and
companion of both St. John and Irenaeus, and must
have known what works were received by John as the
writings of the apostles. The four Gospels, then,
must have been received by the Church of the first
century-the apostolic age.
The testimony of the Gospels is corroborated by
an independent author-St. Paul, in his uncontested
epistles. He asserts that Jesus appeared, after his
resurrection, on six different occasions-to Cephas, to
the twelve, to more than five hundred brethren at
once, to James, to all the apostles, and to himself.*
He gives the appearance of Christ to himself as a
proof of his apostolic mission, and of his parity with
the other apostles; and of course it must have been
by sight, and not by conception or imagination, or the
argument would have had no force. The whole life of
the apostle, the grandest in history next to Christ's,
rests upon this fact.
Is the testimony to the Savior's miracles credible?
The objections to it are two-its age and its inadequacy. First. It is said to be subject to abatement
from the lapse of time since it was given. But on
what does the credibility of testimony depend? On
the period of time when it was given, or on the ability,
diligence, and honesty of the witnesses? If on the
latter, then, as long as these characteristics can be
* Cor. xv, 5-7.




150           INGHAM LECTURES.
evinced, so long will the testimony be credible. I
believe that Senorita Aldama was shot in the theater
of Havana, but I believe more firmly that Caesar was
stabbed in the senate house at Rome, although the
former occurred only a few days since, and the latter
nearly two thousand years ago. I believe that Grant
took Richmond, and, with as firm a conviction, that
Bonaparte crossed the Alps, Hannibal retreated from
Italy, and Xerxes from Greece. Had Bonaparte not
crossed the Alps, the current of history for the last
ninety years would have been different. Had Hannibal invaded Italy with a different result than history
records, Italian civilization would have been Punic.
Had the Persians triumphed at Marathon and Salamis, the civilization of Greece might have been Asiatic. I read the Constitution of the United States
to-day with as much faith as did the citizen of Philadelphia, when the ink was scarcely dry upon the
parchment. I know that without this Constitution,
the history and condition of the country can not be
accounted for. The division, organization, and relations of the States; the General Government, Congress, the President, the Supreme Court, all grow out
of the Constitution. Suppose the Government to continue a thousand years, would the Constitution be
quoted with any less faith than it is to-day? The
New Testament is the Constitution of the Church.
Without this, how can you account for its origin,
institutions, history, or for the history of Europe and
the world? for it has shaped the course of science,
and turned the hinges of empires. Where Gibbon
has failed, we had better not try. Instead of truth's




nMIARA CLES.              5 I
being absorbed as it descends the ages, it wears its
channel deeper with the lapse of time.
But, second, the evidence is said to be insufficient.
It will not do to reject it because of our prepossessions. To refuse to believe evidence because it conflicts with our theory of natural laws, is inconsistent
with that (Baconian) philosophy which infidels laud;
which lies at the basis of modern science; and whose
primary principle is, that whatever is proved must be
believed, any pre-conceived opinion to the contrary
notwithstanding. Perceiving this inconsistency, the
ablest skeptics of the day are compelled to admit that
there is-a kind of proof which would convince them
of miracles.
Let a man give out that, at a certain time and
place, he will perform a miracle. Suppose that he will
cause a body to rise contrary to the law of gravitation.
Let a committee of distinguished philosophers be appointed to witness it.  Let them take all needful
precautions, and exercise all needful scrutiny in its
examination.  If they certify that the miracle has
been performed, it must be believed; though, to remove any lingering doubt, it should be repeated,
somewhat varied.* Infidels may believe in such a
miracle,. not we.  We believe in the uniformity of
nature's laws, though they are under the control of
infinite wisdom, and may sometimes be violated for
the sake of the natural or moral world. But, in the
case described, there is no great end accomplished;
no new light thrown either upon science or morals;
no new encouragement given to the human heart; no
" Renan's Life of Jesus:" Introduction, p. 44.




15 2          ING Alir LECTURES.
new strength imparted to human virtue; no opening
made into the spiritual world; no communication of
truth lying beyond the range of reason; no new era
introduced,-a nine days' wonder, and that is all.
Now, we think either of the following suppositions-namely, that a deception has been practiced
upon the senses of the committee, or that some new
law has been discovered, the secret of which is with the
performer-is more credible than that a law of nature
has, at the bidding of a mere man, been suspended.
Such a miracle is no more like our Savior's, than a
school-boy's top is like the planet Jupiter. Indeed,
it is not a miracle in the theological.sense. In this
sense, a miracle is a suspension, control, or reversal of
a known law, by the act, assistance, or permission of
God, performed by a lofty character, and preceded by
a notification that it is wrought to attest the authority
of a divine messenger, or to authenticate a divine
message, of great moral and permanent benefit to
mankind. In the case supposed, five things are wanting to constitute the miracle: I. An ample notice;
2. An adequate power; 3. A sufficient motive; 4. A
grand agent; 5. Important and permanent consequences. All these belong to the miracles of Christ.
Mark first the pre-notification.  It has sounded
through the world and through the ages. This notification is in a series of prophecies by Adam, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, David, Isaiah, etc., in which Christ
is presented as the Shiloh, the Great Prophet, the
Prince, the Deliverer, the Messiah; also, in a series
of types, as the scape-goat, passover, morning and
evening sacrifice, in which he is exhibited as the




MIRA CLES.               153
Lamb of God; and, finally, in a series of typical characters, as Joshua, Joseph, David, in which he is foreshown as he who is to save the world, and lead his
people into eternity. He is predicted so minutely,
that almost every incident of his life, from the manger to the tomb, is described; so clearly, that, by an
alteration of tenses, prophecy may, in many cases, be
turned into biography; and so peculiarly, that in
Christ only, of all the race, can the lines of Messianic promise meet.  He is to come during the
fourth pagan monarchy, before the scepter departed
from Judah, while the second temple was still standing, and in the seventieth year of Daniel. These
prophecies are held by the Jews, the enemies of Christianity. They were interpreted of the Messiah by
them until his coming, and were confirmed by their
rejection of him when he came. They are harmonious
in doctrine, precept, promise, and both complementary
and illustrative of each other. They were translated
into Greek, and read by the Gentiles, before the Christian era. Many of their predictions have been clearly
proved by Volney and other infidels, while none can
be shown to have been falsified. They have been
examined as no other book; yet after enduring eighteen hundred years of intensest criticism, they shine
out more than ever. They have been hindered as no
others, yet are they going forth in more lands than
before, soon to be read in all the languages of the
polyglossal world. They have been opposed as no
other; for they oppose, as no other, the passions of
man's nature, and describe, as no other, the depth of
his depravity; yet are they received by more men and
I4




154           INGHAM LECTURES.
nations now than ever before, and are prized by them
as a general rule, in proportion to their intelligence
and virtue.
You point your telescope into space, and see a
set of planets arranged in order, and wheeling in harmony, at different distances around the sun; God
alone, who pervades all space, can build such a system.
Point, now, your telescope through past time, and you
see a series of prophetic lights sphered around one
great central orb, the truth that "Jesus Christ came
into the world to save sinners;" they are at different
distances, from the year 4Io B. C. to the birth of man.
First, the sixteen prophets, of different ages, nations,
occupations, and locations; then the Mosaic dispensation, with its apparatus of types and ceremonies,
like Jupiter and his moons; then the patriarchal history, with significant characters, altars, and sacrifices,
like Saturn and its rings; then Genesis, with its first
promise in the garden, like the far-distant Neptune.
Who but God, that pervades all time, can construct
such a moral planetary system. To herald what being
save Jesus Christ, was such a system ever constructed?
Such, then, is the pre-notification of his coming.
Second. The cause of Christ's miracles is adequate.
It is not the power of man, or angel, but of the Almighty. They are ascribed to this agency, and are of
such a character as to evince it. They occur in a
series which baffle all attempts to confound them with
false miracles; or to account for them on Paulus's
theory of natural explanations; or on Strauss's theory
of myth; or on Bauer's, of fundamental ideas; or on
Renan's, of delusion and imposture. Though the




/MIRA CES.               155
science of the sea has deprived Neptune of his scepter,
and that of the earth has stripped Ceres of her authority, and chased nymphs and dryads from woods
and streams, and the philosophy of the universe has
disenchanted eclipses and comets; no science or
philosophy has discovered a method by which the
blind may be made to see with a touch, or the dead
be raised by the voice of the living. These miracles
must be taken in connection. A chain that might
moor a man-of-war could not, if its links were separated, hold a fishing-smack to her anchor. If you
could find a mode of explaining each miracle separately, ascribing one to legerdemain, another to collusion, etc., it would by no means follow that you could
account for the whole series, without the supposition
of supernatural power. Even if you could explain
Christ's natural miracles, his clear vision, which detected thoughts in the depths of the soul, and the
stater in the mouth of the fish in the depths of the
sea, and his prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem
and of the future triumphs of his spiritual and universal kingdom, would remain to attest his divinity.
These, you perceive, are entirely different from a
shrewd guess, or the prevision of human conscience,
anticipating events by the grooves of Divine law in
which they must needs run, or the foresight of political wisdom, which sometimes works wonderful solutions from given data; for here there are no premises
to go upon, no providential chord struck, whose vibrations could be caught by the distant ear.
Third. The miracles of Christ are called forth
by a sufficient motive. They are wrought to verify




156           ZNGHcAM LECTURES.
important truth lying beyond the range of the human
reason; namely, the existence and relations of the
spiritual and eternal world.
That such truth is important to mankind must be
evident at once. It is truth after which the wisest
of all ages have sought, as after hid treasures. Without it, our civilization, which rests upon our religion,
would fall through, and we should reach a depth of
barbarism worse than that of pagan states; without
it, our aspirations after goodness and truth and immortality would not be adequately sustained; without it, what would support us in the sorrows of life,
sustain us in the struggles of virtue, animate us with
brotherly love, gird us for sublime heroism, lead us
forth in the enterprises of universal philanthropy,
and cheer us as we pass through the valley of death?
We grant that more or less of this truth has been
enjoyed by heathen states; but it has been imperfect
and derived.
That such truth lies beyond the range of the
reason, is equally clear. The laws of physical nature
may be discovered. Matter is before us, visible, tangible; it can be experimented upon. We are under
strong motives to study its laws. Their investigation
is a salutary discipline of mind. But the spiritual
world lies beyond our ken. No reasoning, no experimenting, no mental introversion, can give us any
knowledge of it. Reason, by her wisest son, Socrates, has confessed the necessity of a Divine messenger to give it. Without asserting that it is not,
either in whole or in part, discoverable by reason, we
know that, as a matter of fact, the world by wisdom




MIRA CLES.               157
does not discover it. God's natural attributes may
indeed be traced in his works, and glimpses of his
moral attributes may be obtained from his providences; but what man, unaided by revelation, has
ever reasoned himself up to the unity, spirituality,
and holiness of God, or found out by nature the
scheme of redemption?
Modern philosophers-of whom Carlyle is an example-sometimes tell us that they have a revelation within themselves, that their God-created souls
are Mt. Sinai's, and that thunder all round the heavens could not make God's law more Godlike to them.
But why are not the God-created souls of the savages Mt. Sinai's also? The difference between the
philosopher's God-created soul and the cannibal's
equally God-created one is not by internal, but by
external, revelation. Moreover, if the inner light
were enough for human guidance, whence the confusion concerning moral truth, the general depravity
of man, and the universal craving for a revelation,
which the oracles and altars of all ages attest?
We honor natural reason within her legitimate
domain. With all due respect to natural ethics and
religion, we say that they are unsatisfactory without
the aid of faith to complement and confirm their
conclusions. Instinct is perfect; reason is progressive. But where reason has not drawn from faith,
what progress has it made in morals since the
creation of man? It is a mistake to suppose that
a sacred nation, in an obscure corner of the world,
guarded in seclusion the deposit of the truth. Both
before and after Messiah, the Divine light was




158           INGHAiM LECTURES.
diffused. Why is it that beyond the circle of the
Church's influence, infanticide, polygamy, slavery,
prevail, without private remorse or public condemnation? Although the codes which have presided over
the public and private life of modern civilized states
have not been formed in synods, yet the principles
on which they rest, though they do not'exceed
reason, are derived from revelation.
The history of Europe for three centuries has not
been the mere progress of'the secular spirit, but its advance under revelation as its pillar of cloud and fire.
Let not him, who can not obtain the knowledge
necessary to guide him through this world without a
teacher sent from man, be ashamed to find his way
to the next by a teacher sent from God.
Fourth. The miracles of Christ are performed by
a miraculous agent. He comes forth at a remarkable period of preparation and watching for a deliverer. The Greek language had been diffused, and
the Roman arms carried in triumph through the
world. The dying Jew said, "Bury me with my
shoes on and my staff in hand, that I may be ready
to meet Messiah when he cometh." The living
one tuned his harp to sing of his approach; the
sweetest lyre of the pagan world echoed Isaiah's
strains.*
His character is peculiar; a mingled lion and
lamb, and both transcendent. His words of wisdom
and works of charity; his spirit of blended meekness
and majesty; his life of perfect purity and matchless energy; of pillowless poverty and unsearchable
* Virgil: Eclogue iv.




MIRA CLES.               159
riches; of patient suffering and godlike action; of
weeping with man and standing with God; of moving in the lowest social state, and rising infinitely
above the highest; of swaying the scepter of mercy,
and wielding the sword of justice; of opening at
once the gates of heaven and the mouth of hell; of
subordinating even superhuman wisdom and power to
the ends of love, and eclipsing them both by its transcendent luster; of renouncing the world, yet founding for himself a spiritual kingdom, embracing all the
nations and the ages-is unlike all else ever known on
earth, conceived by philosophy, or celebrated in art or
song.
His revelation is unique. What is its primal, central, final, comprehensive truth, which flashes from all
prophecies, blazes from all altars, and beams from all
miracles? "God so loved the world that he gave his
only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him
should not perish, but have everlasting life." Look
downward over this green earth, the footstool of
God; look inward upon your own soul., the image of
God; look upward into this blue sky, the throne
of God; listen to its utterances, as they come down
through spaces unmeasured and ages unnumbered,
and say whether this message is not worthy of thine
almighty Father! But sound all history, and you
find nothing like it.
His method is divine. His words have the charm
of antiquity with the freshness of yesterday; the
simplicity of a child with the wisdom of God; the
softness of kisses from the lip of love, and the force
of the lightning rending the tower. His parables




i60           INGHAM LECTURES.
are like groups of matchless statuary; his prayers
like an organ-peal floating round the world and
down the ages, echoed by the mountain-peaks and
plains into rich and varied melody, in which all.
devout hearts find their noblest feelings at once
expressed, sustained, refined. His truths are selfevidencing. They fall into the soul as seed into the
ground, to rest and germinate. He speaks, and all
nature and life become vocal with theology. The
mustard-seed and the mountain, the prodigal and the
parent, the sparrow on the wing and the lily of the
field, are still his unconscious ministers.
His errand is divine. We are not what we ought
to be. Sin interposes between us and God. Evil
tendencies and painful apprehensions, against which
we struggle in vain, seize us; so that, to the awakened
soul, life is a burden and death a terror. Christ comes,
the only being in all history that even assumes to be
an adequate and universal deliverer. Opposed by the
carnal heart, he is yet the desire of all nations. Covered with contempt and scorn, he nevertheless finds
his way to kings' palaces. Though sneered at by philosophy, he yet leads the princes of science as little
children. All other great men are valued for their
lives; he, above all, for his death, around which mercy
and truth, righteousness and peace, God and man,
are reconciled; for the Cross is the magnet which
sends the electric current through the telegraph be.
tween earth and heaven, and makes both Testaments
thrill, through the ages of the past and future, with
living, harmonious, and saving truth.  Other men
may be buried, and stay buried. Mankind can give




MIRA CLES.                6 I
their noblest dead only a place in the cathedral's
crypt, a page in history, and silence and forgetfulness
more and more profound as time rolls on. Napoleon,
dying, said to Bertrand: "I shall soon be in my grave.
Such is the fate of the Alexanders and Caesars. I
shall be forgotten; and the Marengo conqueror and
emperor will be a college theme. I die before my
time; and my dead body must return to the earth,
and be food for worms. Behold the destiny, near at
hand, of him who has always been called the great
Napoleon! What an abyss between my great misery
and the eternal reign of Christ, who is proclaimed,
loved, adored, and whose kingdom is extending over
all the earth." Well might the great conqueror say
so. But the world can not bury Christ. The earth
is not deep enough for his tomb, the clouds are not
wide enough for his winding-sheet; he ascehds into
the heavens, but the heavens can not contain him.
He still lives-in the Church which burns unconsumed with his love; in the truth which reflects his
image; in the hearts which burn as he talks with
them by the way. There are suns so distant that, if
they were blotted out to-day, the world would be
thirty thousand years in ascertaining the fact. Practically, so far as the world is concerned, they would
still exist.  So with Christ, Sun of righteousness:
he still shines; so that if we were not certified of
his death, we might suppose, from the calls upon his
name, the anthems in his praise, and the fruits of his
Spirit with which the Church is blessed, that he is
still on earth. And so he is. He is here to-day.
Wherever the soldier bows in his tent, or the sailor on
Is




162            INGHAM LECTURES.
his deck; wherever the saint seeks grace, or the philanthropist help; wherever the orphan lifts up his
cry, or the widow raises her despairing eyes, or the
father weeps over his dying child, or the heart breaks
under the weight of its sins, and calls on Jesus, he is
there; there with the sympathies of man and the
attributes of God; there to forgive sin, to fold the
lamb, to purify the soul, and to lead the departing
spirit in his own image to the skies; and every revolving day widens the sphere of mind over which
his scepter sways and his blessing falls.
Vain to call this character a myth. It were easier
for a rude peasant, without genius or geometry, or
knowledge of artists or works of art, to produce the
grandest historical painting, than for the fishermen of
Galilee to draw the picture of our Lord. As Rousseau
has shown, the myth would be as great a miracle as
the reality. The line of cause and effect must be
broken to produce the picture; why not to produce
the reality, and to group around the reality miraculous acts?
Fifth. The miracles of Christ have produced wonderful and permanent results. The Church, in its
origin, spread, present prosperity, and prospective
triumphs, is miraculous. By preaching Jesus and the
resurrection, it changed the religion of the world. It
had no social or physical force; no divil or intellectual
authority; no other element but the moral and miraculous. It has not lost its power. It still opens
blind eyes, unstops deaf ears, cleanses lepers, makes
the Ethiopian white, changes the lion to a lamb, and
raises the dead; not, indeed, physically, but morally.




fMIRACLES.               I63
It constitutes the coast and cascade ranges of the
moral world, condensing upon their summits the
clouds of spiritual blessing, and inclosing the only
valley of earth through which crystal streams meander among green pastures to the city of God.
Beyond, on one side, are the arid sands of idolatry;
on the other, the stormy ocean of unbelief. We may
find objections to it, as we may to nature when we
look into the recesses of the rocks for the snake, or
the depths of the forest for the bear; but when we
stand upon Mt. Zion, as when we stand upon Mt.
Hood, to survey the whole landscape, we see on all
its outlines the hand of the Almighty.
Now, to sum up and show how these five facts
bear upon the argument, let me suppose a case. Were
you to tell me that a carpenter in Brooklyn had risen
from the grave the third day after his interment, I
should give no heed to your tale, but let it pass as the
idle wind. Bring before me twelve men, of unimpeachable character and good sense, who make oath
to the fact, I should think them deceived. Prove that
they could not be mistaken; that they knew the carpenter well; were with him when he died, heard his
last words, and saw his breath depart; that after his
death they stood by while the surgeons opened his
breast and examined his heart and lungs; that after
his resurrection, they had talked with him, eaten with
him, and put their hands into his open side. I might
suppose they had taken a strong conception for an
object of sight. Show that, instead of expecting such
a vision, they were disheartened after his death; that
he had subsequently appeared to different parties, at




164           INGHA,41 LECTURES.
different times, and, on one occasion, to five hundred
and more at once-I might think there was an anomalous mental epidemic prevailing.  Prove that, although the proclamation of this truth was upsetting
the civil government and the religion of the world,
and charging a damning crime upon the Supreme
Court, the body of the carpenter, which, if brought
from the tomb where his enemies had sealed it,
would have vindicated the Court, saved the nation,
and forever silenced the witnesses, was never produced,-I might then suppose that the witnesses had
themselves concealed the body, and were dishonest.
Prove that. fr their testimony they had suffered the
loss of goods, reputation, office, and that they were
engaged in proclaiming this miracle in-pain, privation,
and persecution. Lead them out before a platoon of
soldiers, and read them an order from government
that if they persisted in their testimony they should
every one be shot. If, while the bullets were speeding to their mark, they should joyfully renew the
statement, I should be in a quandary. Mind has its
laws as well as matter. It is contrary to physical
law that a dead man should come to life and burst.from the grave; it is equally inconsistent with mental
laws that human mind should burst from motive influence, and reverse its mode of action. Here, then,
I should have, on the one hand, a physical miracle,
on the other, a moral one. Which I should choose, I
wot not; perhaps the latter. Add another circumstance-namely, that the resurrection was announced
beforehand as a work of God, in attestation of an
indispensable revelation to mankind-and the balance




MIRA CLES.                 165
would incline in favor of the natural miracles At this
point, prove that the carpenter was more than a carpenter; a great, a popular, a blameless, an effective
reformer; a miraculous being; the antitype of a long
line of types, and the subject of prophetic song in all
past ages, my doubts would be dissipated, and I
should cry:
"All hail, the power of Jesus' name!
Let angels prostrate fall;
Bring forth the royal diadem,
And crown him Lord of all."
We believe more firmly than the skeptic in the
uniformity of natural law, and reject more promptly
those reports of isolated miracles performed at tombs,
or at the bidding of mendicants or mountebanks, and
which excite only the wonder of gaping multitudes,
or the curiosity of prying historians. But we believe
in a moral as well as a physical world, and in a supernatural series of events running athwart the natural
laws, to verify a revelation for the instruction and
salvation of the world-not so much contrary to natural laws, as according to higher laws in a loftier
plane and for a nobler purpose.  The miracles of
Christ are but parts of a conglomerate miracle, of
which the Jewish dispensation and the Christian, the
Bible and the Church, the character of the Messiah,
and the doctrines, precepts, power, and results of the
faith, are all elements,-elements which we see and
handle; which enter into practical life and human experience; which run through history, and modify nature, whose laws, physiological, mental, and moral, are
dovetailed to them.




166          IZVGHAMI LECTURES.
But it may be said, "You have only proved the
miracles of Christ, leaving those of the Old Testament untouched."  That phase of infidelity which
accepts Christ and rejects Moses is the most absurd;
for it accepts the major and rejects the minor included
in it. Christ quotes the books of the Old Testament
as of Divine authority. Grant that he is divine, and
you must let us regard them so too. It is Christ that
says, "If ye believe not Moses and the prophets,
neither would ye believe though one rose from the
dead."
The language with which a French philosopher,
Pascal, closes one of his expostulations, I trust I may
adopt in closing this.
Whether this argument pleases you, and appears
strong or not, "know that it proceeds from one who,
both before and after it, fell on his knees before that
Infinite and Invisible Being to whom he has subjected
his whole soul, to pray that he would also subject you,
for your good and his glory; and that thus Omnipotence might give efficacy to his feebleness."




LECTURE VI.
THE
BIBLE A REVELATION FROM          GOD,
BY THE
REV. BISHOP DAVIS W. CLARK, D. D.,
CINCINNATI, OHIO.








LECTURE VI.
THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.
" Iz the begilningz,, God." GEN. I, I.
I AM challenged to-day to perform two impossibilities. The first is, to bring forth a popular lecture upon one of the profoundest subjects that ever
occupied the intelligence of man. The other is, to
comprehend, in the discussion of one brief hour, a
compass and breadth of thought that labored volumes
could scarcely reach. I can do neither the one nor
the other. All that can be hoped for is, that I shall
skirt along the coast, taking soundings here and
there, that, in the end, we may discover where the
true harbor is.
As I am to speak of the Bible in its relation to
God, no text more appropriate than its very first utterance can be found: " In the beginning, God." The
alpha and the omega of the Bible is God. It commences with his being; it closes with his benediction.
And, like a golden thread interweaving the whole texture and binding the genesis to the benediction, is
God. It is, therefore, not a far-fetched proposition
which asserts that the Bible is a revelation from God.
There are three generic problems in philosophy,
I69




170           INGHAM LECTURES.
around which the deepest interest has gathered —the
origin and collocations of matter in the realm of nature; the origin of man in the realm of mind; and
the origin of the Bible in the realm of thought. The
last of these problems is, however, the key to both the
others. Solve this, and both the others become clear.
This is the problem that now claims our attention. Let us state the issue, and confine our inquiry
to the narrowest limits that issue will admit.  The
Bible exists.  It is printed in almost all languages,
and spread abroad into all lands. Its wonderful history, and its still more wonderful literature, and its
influence in forming the character of men and shaping the destinies of the world, are facts claimed by
Christians, conceded by infidels, and known to all.
They form, then, no part of the issue before us.
So much vantage-ground has the believer in this
conflict. It makes the issue plain, simple, and single.
The infidel, who would exclude God from the authorship of the Bible, can not deny its existence. He
must, therefore, account for its origin in some other
way. For him to assert that he does not know who
its author was, does not meet the case; because this
is a mere confession of ignorance, and accounts for
nothing. If he does not know how the Bible originated, or who its author was, how does he know but
that God was its author, and that it originated just as
it claims?  The whole history of skepticism shows
how earnestly, and yet how vainly, it has sought to account for the origin of the Bible so as to exclude God.
It is a question vital to religion. If the Bible is a
divinely attested message from God, then we find in




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.     171
it a solvent of the mysteries of human life and history,
a harmonizer of the contradictions of philosophy, and
an infallible teacher and guide. If it is not from God,
then it only adds another element of mystery to that
boundless and endless maze of darkness and doubt
from which humanity may not hope to emerge without help from some higher source. This is the problem of the hour.
I. We have presumptive proof that the Bible is a
revelation from God, in that a written revelation is a
necessary complement of natural religion.
Nature speaks of God. But who will claim that
she is a sufficient teacher of God? What significant
teaching is there in the expression, "The unsearchable God"-handed down through all ages, felt in all
human hearts!
While Job is enumerating the tokens by which
God is seen in nature, the current of his thought is
suddenly arrested, and he exclaims, "Lo, these are
parts of his ways "-the extremities, the outer edge of
his works-" but how little a portion is heard of him?"
or, to give the passage a more true as well as forceful
rendering, "What a whisper of a word is heard of
him; but the thunder of his power who can understand?"* There are intimations of God in nature.
She proclaims the great fact of his being; and, with
unerring finger, evermore points to him as her author.
But these disclosures are dimly seen. They are only
glimpses of the Eternal.  The mysterious dwelling
of God in the universe; the workings of his mind
* Job xxvi, 14.




172           INGHAM LECTURES.
upon created things; the mighty sweep of his government through the ages; the spirituality and eternity
of his character,-have wrung from the profoundest
explorers, after all their research and their grandest
discoveries, the confession, "Lo, these are parts of
his ways!"
We stand only upon " the borders of his works "on the outer edge of the creation of God. The grand
center is full of God. Myriads of intelligences dwell
there. Grander emblems of his power and glory
brighten in their heavens, and speak to them from all
his works. But, alas! there comes to us only "the
whisper of a word." Go to him who has most profoundly explored the works of creation-the sage,
philosopher, student of the handy-workmanship of
God. Hear him speak of his discoveries and achievements. He has analyzed the hidden elements of nature; fathomed the depths of all oceans; measured the
distances of all stars; solved the mysteries of all
science; the winds and the waves obey him; the lightnings bear his messages across all continents and
through all oceans; his thought spans all the broad
spaces of astronomy. But put to him that question
of profounder moment than all: " Canst thou, by
searching, find out God? canst thou find out the
Almighty to perfection?"* Mark the humility of his
answer: "Lo, these are parts of his ways; we have
trodden only upon the borders of his works; and only
the whisper of a word have we heard of him."
Newton, who surveyed the amplitude of creation,
and brought to light her all-pervading, all-controlling
* Job xi, 7.




THIE BIBLE A REVEiLA 70NV FROM GOD.  I73
laws, could say no more; Sir Humphrey Davy, who,
with before unknown processes of science, analyzed
the wondrous compositions of inorganic bodies, tracing the plans and purposes of the Creator in each,
could say no more; and Hugh Miller, the Christian
geologist, who, with science angelic, studied God in
the earth's formation, could only rejoice in the discovery of the "foot-prints of the Creator" upon the
everlasting rock.
Was man never designed to know more of God
than this? Was it never intended that he should
know how to approach his God and Creator? Never
know how he might become like God? Never have
more than a faint conception of his perfections?
Was it intended that he should labor forever under
the most painful uncertainty about his own destiny,
and never for once feel the inspiration of the knowledge of his own grand immortality? Nature teaches
us much. She has some grand lessons her children
may learn from her. But there are higher, sublimer
truths essential for man to know, which she can not
teach. Turning away from, or rather, looking beyond, all the teachings of nature, the human heart
instinctively yearns for higher and holier utterances.
In its perplexity, doubt and darkness, it cries out,
"0, that God would speak unto me!"
II. Can God speak? Is utterance from himn possibie?
Nature shows the workings of the mind of God.
He embodies his thought in material creations, and
through them speaks to man. Why, then, may he




174           INGHAM LECTURES.
not, embody his thought in the utterances of speech,
and thus make known his will and truth to man?
"He that planted the ear, shall he not hear?  He
that formed the eye, shall he not see?" and, pushing the inquiry of the Psalmist a step further, " He
that gave the power of speech to the human tongue,
can not-he speak?" To deny that the Infinite, whose
utterances are made to the human heart and understanding through all the avenues of material nature,
can embody his thought or convey intelligence of
himself in the utterances of language, is equally
inconsistent and absurd. It is, in fact, to rob the
Infinite of his infinitude.
III. A revelation, written, recorded in permanent
form, is the only one that can meet this demand concerning God.
"It is written," "written in the law," "written with
the finger of God," "written in earth," "written in
heaven," and all "written for our learning, that we
might have hope!" Glorious words are these! Had
the Almighty only spoken, and left his words unwritten, no matter how august the scene when his voice
was uttered, though with ten-fold more grandeur than
when he uttered it amid the smoke and black darkness and pealing thunder of Sinai, the impression
could not be transferred to others-could not be
handed down to succeeding generations; and the
unwritten tradition would, in the lapse of ages,
become mixed with fable, till the grandest truths
uttered by God would be perverted and lost. To
such a peril God has not suffered the race to be




THE BIBLE A REVELA TION FROM GOD.    175
exposed. To such an uncertain and perishable ark
he has not committed the destinies of his own eternal truth.
The written revelation is the test of the unwritten tradition. The one is ever changing, the other
ever abiding. "It is written," is the standard and
the test of all truth, and in its sacred investiture it
shall bear the truth onward through all ages and to
all people.
IV. If a revelation from God be a necessary complement of natural religion, in what written document
shall we look for such revelation?
Does it exist? Where shall it be found? In
what book or literature shall we seek it? Shall we
go to the Shasters of the Hindoos; to the Veda of
Brahma; to the works of Confucius; to the Zendavesta of the Parsees; to the Koran; to the Book of
Mormon? Shall we find it in the "Age of Reason;" in the rationalist's "System of Nature;" in
the boasted "intuitions of the human mind," or
the "internal consciousness," so strongly asserted
by modern skepticism? Or, shall we find it in the
Bible?  Who can doubt for one moment where,
among all these, is to be found the true revelation
from God? The Bible stands out in its character,
claims, and influence, infinitely above all the others.
It distances every competitor. It is the only one
that can stand the test. If God has given us a revelation, that this is it must be the conviction of every
intelligent mind and every uncorrupted heart.
The whole question, then, is narrowed down to




176            INVGHAM LE'CTURES.
this: If God has made a written revelation of himself to the race, this Bible must be that revelation.
And if it is, then may we expect to find not only
direct testimony of the fact, but, in the Bible itself,
and in its character, history, and relations, we shall be
sure to find circumstantial and corroborating evidence
that it is from God.
V. The early origin of the Bible, taken in connection with its wonderful character, affords strong evidence that it is a revelation from God.
To say that the Bible is the oldest book extant
of which we have any knowledge, is to make only a
trite assertion; but it is an assertion pregnant with
suggestive thought. The writings of Moses carry us
up to the very origin of our race, and form the only
connected line of human history from the creation.
The Psalms of David, which contain some of the
sweetest and sublimest poetry ever uttered by human
tongue or recorded by human pen, were composed
three thousand years ago. Many of the prophetic
records were made a thousand years before the coming of Christ. The earlier portions of the Bible were
undoubtedly written in the first language spoken by
man. It is not improbable that the very first use
made of letters was to record the revelations of God
to the human race. The very fact that a book so
wonderful in its character-the admiration of cultured
mind in all ages, the crowning gem of all literatureantedates all science, all literature, and almost all
intelligence, is demonstration that its origin is higher
than human.




THE BIBLE A REVEILA TION FROM GOD.    177
VI. The survivance of the Bible as one of the living forces of the world is demonstration that it is from
God.
The works of men crumble and perish away. The
mightiest productions of human intellect, however
profound the impression made, or controlling their
influence, at the beginning, will, after the lapse of
ages, if not of years, pass gradually out of the current
literature of the world. They will lose their hold
upon the public mind, will cease to be read, and
their influence be no longer discernible among the
living forces that mold the characters of men and
shape the destiny of the world. But the Bible, this
earliest embodiment of thought, this earliest record
of literature, has somehow escaped the operation of
this universal law. It has come down to us, not as
the dry, dead, blackened mummies of Egypt, but as a
living force. The Bible lives. Never before did it
enter so largely into the hopes of humanity or exert
so wide an influence over nations and men as in this
very age. Never before did it enter so largely, not
only into the daily reading of unnumbered millions
of the race, but also as a living force into the languages and literature of the world. A tree of life
for the healing of the nations, the lapse of ages
has brought no decay to its roots, left no rust upon
its branches, no blight upon its fruit. Whence does it
derive its living energy? Whence has it those vital
powers that forbid it to die? Whence has it those
irrepressible energies that have kept it, like the bush
in the mount of God, unconsumed amid the flames?
I6




178           INGHAM LECTURES.
Inspiration itself answers, "The Word of God liveth
and abideth forever."
VII. The Bible has also overcome the opposition of
its enemies, and survived their assaults in such a manner as to prove it incontestibly Divine.
No other book has ever been so foully and so persistently assailed as the Bible. In this respect, the
Bible has had a wonderful history. No form of attack has been spared. The arm of power has gathered the fagots, and applied the torch; but it has not
been consumed. It has been cast into the crucible
of criticism, and tortured in every conceivable form;
yet it would not die. Infidelity has exhausted the
arsenals of unsanctified wit, and croaking hypocrisy
and damnable heresy have spread around it the pestiferous mildew of their breath; but it has come forth
from its thousand conflicts triumphing alike over the
open assaults of implacable foes and the machinations
of pretended friends. Popery has not been able to
chain it; the devil has not been able to destroy it.
Infidelity and false science have traveled the world
over to explore the archives of history, to find some
traces back of the Mosaic chronology, which might
show the Bible history to be a fiction. Heathen traditions have been consulted; the chronological myths
of the East, purporting to extend thousands of years
anterior to the creation, have been brought forward;
ancient astronomical calculations, whose dates were
fixed long before sun or moon or stars began their
courses in the heavens, have been sought out;
* I Peter i, 23.




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROMi GOD.    179
obscure hieroglyphics, inscribed on enduring obelisks,
have been tortured to draw from them  something
inimical to the Bible records; the most abstruse
mathematical calculations have been made to falsify,
if possible, the Mosaic history; the bowels of the
earth have been penetrated, and nature forced to
yield up the secrets of her birth, in the vain hope of
discovering something which might give the lie to
her Author.
All these objections to the Bible have been
brought forward again and again. They have been
reiterated with an audacious boldness and insisted
upon with a pertinacity almost transcending human
belief. This has been no ordinary ordeal through
which the Bible has passed. Had it not been founded
in truth and had God for its protector, it could not
have survived the conflict. But the very weapons of
its enemies have been turned against themselves.
Even heathen traditions, when traced back along the
converging lines toward their origin, present a thousand coincident features arresting the attention of
archaeologists, and tending to confirm the Word of
God. The boasted chronological and astronomical
records of antiquity, when founded in fact, and when
truly interpreted, have been found coincident with the
Bible, instead of being in antagonism to it:'
Along the frontiers of every science,'infidelity has
planted its standard and raised its bulwarks against
the Bible. But as scientific knowledge has advanced,
it has been obliged to surrender one stronghold after
another, till no place is left on which it can rest, except in the regions of conjecture and speculation.




80 8INGHAM LECTURES.
The Bible, assailed by wicked men through all ages,
has fought its way down along the line of opposing
forces, and to-day it comes forth from its last conflict
as it did from its first-bearing no scar or wound,
with no singe of fire upon its garments, and no perturbations upon its brow. Like Milton's Angel, it is
immortal in every part.
Take the last bold venture of modern rationalism,
which claims that all higher forms of life are derived
from the lower forms by a series of developments
requiring unnumbered ages for their completion, and
thus on down to the very lowest form of life, scarcely
distinguishable from the inanimate lump of earth out
of which it springs. Marvelous philosophy! But
who made the clod that produced the polypus, that
begot the monkey, that made the man? Who pfit
the lump of earth there? Force, do you say? But
what is this mysterious, intangible force? When,
where; how, did it originate?  What the fulcrum on
which it plants its lever? How can it account for
the work of creation, when it is not accounted for
itself? How can it solve the mysteries of nature
when, if it has any thing real in it, it is the most
mysterious of all things in nature? What unmitigated effrontery is it that propounds such a scheme
as this, unsustained by a single fact in all history, or
by a single discovery in all science! A generation
has hardly passed since this new "instauration of
philosophy" undertook to solve the mysteries of creation, yet it is fast becoming a by-word; while, on the
other hand, the very inquiries into the Bible account of creation, provoked by these attacks, gather




TIHE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.    I8I
around that account, from history, from science, and
from philosophy, the sublimest attestations of its truth.
What intellect was that which enthroned the
Bible, in the very morning of time, in advance of and
above all science and all philosophy, so that the ages
bow down to it with reverence?   What inherent
power is it that has given the Bible its double triumph over the unholy passions and the depraved
intellects of men? The first utterance of revelation,
"In the beginning, God," has stood the test of ages.
It is the beginning of all history, the seed-thought
of all philosophy. You must uproot this before you
can invalidate the authority of the Bible.
VIII. The entire freedom of the Bible from false
science and fictitious history is no small evidence that
it is a revelation from God.
The Bible was not intended to be a summary of
human history, but of the plans and dealings of God
with humanity. It was not designed to teach science
or philosophy, but religion. Its mission was to the
race. Its communications, therefore, must be conveyed not in the precise, technical terms of science,
but in the language current among men.
Science, through thirty centuries, has been searching out her facts, and molding and remolding her
theories in every department of human knowledge.
But though human interpreters have had oft occasion
to modify their commentaries on the sacred text, yet
the old record stands to-day unimpeached.  The
knowledge of the earth's form and its topography has
been wholly reconstructed and boundlessly enlarged;




182           ING HAM LECTURES.
the facts of history have been more fully investigated;
but no rashness of utterance on the part of the Bible
in regard to things unknown, can be found to weaken
its authority or expose it to contradiction. Even
when the Ptolemaic system of astronomy gave way
to the Copernican, and Galileo stamped his foot upon
the earth, exclaiming, "Nevertheless, it moves!" he
was not warring against the Bible itself, but against
the glosses of mistaken commentators, who had failed.
to understand it. Now mark this fact: The Bible
was written long before science had given rise to any
theory, or formed a nomenclature, or been enriched
by any of the great facts of her later discovery. But
it contains no statement, no allusion even, that is contradicted by them. It does not.employ any form of
phrase that could be even improved by any of the
discoveries of modern science. The most that can be
said of it, or against it, is that it employs the "language of the common people."
The Veda and the Shasters of the Hindoos have
not escaped this danger. The authors of these sacred
books were ignorant of the form and geography of
the earth; ignorant of many facts in the history of
the race. They were without a knowledge of the
true solar system. Hence, they hazarded statements
about the form of the earth, the system of the universe, the ages of empire, and the lives of men, that
harmonized with the traditions and mythologies of
their age, but have been found, by later discoveries in
science and a more accurate knowledge of human history, to be utterly unfounded in fact. Put a common school geography, or the simplest treatise upon




THE BIBLE A REVELA TON FROM GOD.      I83
astronomy, or any well-composed work on ancient history, into the hands of an intelligent Hindoo, and in
just so far as he comes to the knowledge of their
facts, he is compelled to give up his faith in his Shasters. It is for this very reason that these sacred
books are losing all their authority among the intelli
gent and inquiring of the people.
Compare, also, the Koran with the Bible. What
the Bible once uttered was uttered for all races and
all time. The emergencies of the moment never
affect its principles. The crises of an empire never
turn it back upon itself; never even divert it from its
main design.
On the. other hand, the author of the Koran conformed his instructions to his followers; not to any
deep and broad underlying principle, but to the pressing necessities of the moment. Hence, he was compelled frequently to recall what he had once promulgated, and to suppress what he had once proclaimed.
Thus, the Koran is not only filled with false philosophy
and historical untruths, but it is in itself " one complicated mass of irreconcilable contradictions." Skeptics
have pronounced it the great religious rival of the
Bible. It is the cripple entering the lists against an
athlete, only to suffer defeat in every possible encounter.
Look at the Bible. It spreads over a wider range
of history, looking into the future as well as recording
the past. It is more definite in its account of creation, more specific in its wondrous scheme of salvation. How happens it that it has escaped the rock
on which the systems of false religions have split?
There is but one answer that can be given, and that is,




184           INVGC/AMi LECTURES.
its Author held in his hand the key of all knowledge.
Not only is there an absence of false science and
history in the Bible, but there are the most wonderful confirmations of even its most remarkable facts,
brought to light in the investigations of philosophy.
The mistakes of the Hindoo astronomy, which would
have given the lie to the Bible, have been exposed and
rendered harmless. Explorations in the crust of the
earth's surface confirm the Bible history of the origin
of man, by showing that it dates among the later geological periods. They also demonstrate that the order
in which the elements were organized in the earth's
formation, and in which vegetable and animal life
were developed, was precisely that recorded in the
Bible. The traditions of all nations confirm the fact
of the Mosaic deluge. The Egyptian hieroglyphics
confirm the exodus of Israel.  Pagan oracles have
been demonstrated to be only perversions, or rather
imitations, of the utterances of God to the patriarchs,
prophets, and kings of his chosen people. Nineveh
rises from the grave to confirm the prophecies of Nahum and Zephaniah; Babylon rises to confirm Isaiah
and Daniel.  The scientific generalization of the
races of the human family brings us back to the Bible
account of Shem, Ham, and Japhet.     There are
more than two hundred different languages, and dialects almost innumerable, yet scientific analysis traces
all forms of language back to one common type, thus
illustrating the confusion of tongues, and making the
tower of Babel a historical reality.
Science not only brings to light confirmations of
the Bible in the ages past, but points forward to




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.    185
possible confirmations in the ages yet to come. Her
theories of human progress are a prediction and a
proof of the coming millennium. The "lost pleiad"
from the heavens is also a foreshadowing of the destruction of our own world by fire.
Nor is this all. In this age of skepticism and
infidelity, when the strongholds of the Christian's
hope have been so ruthlessly assailed, God seems to
have especially come forth for the vindication of his
Word. A voice has been given to the very desolations of the earth.  The buried and long-lost cities
that perished beneath the curse of God, and whose
desolation was so entire, and their very sites so long
lost, that infidelity had come to question whether they
ever existed, have been exhumed from the grave of
ages. They have come up from their dusty beds, with
the cerements of the charnel-house wrapped around
them, and, before all men, utter their irresistible testimony to the truth of God. Infidelity and skepticism
stand aghast at the spectacle, while the believer joins
in the mighty acclaim, " Great and mighty art thou,
0 Lord God, and fearful are the judgments thou hast
executed upon the face of the earth!"
IX. The harmony of the various parts of the Bible,
blending together so as to make it not. merely homogeneous, but an absolute unit, is demonstration that one
ruling mind gave it conception, and one master genius
molded its form, however numerous the instruments
employed in its development.
The Bible is made up of sixty-six different books,
written in different ages, and by forty-five different
17




i86           INGHAM LECTURES.
authors. And what is peculiar in the whole, each
one of all those authors, separately, voluntarily, and
for himself, surrenders the right, the honor, and the
prerogative of authorship, and only professes to write
as he is "moved by the Holy Ghost." There is incontestable evidence that there was only one Great
Designer, who contrived the whole plot, from the beginning to the end, and who directed the execution
of all the parts.
From the time that the record —"In the beginning, God"-was made, nearly sixteen hundred years
elapsed before the "Amen" of the Apocalypse was
uttered. During that time, what changes marked the
world's history! Fifty generations lived and died;
dynasties and kingdoms rose and fell; cities, walled
and mighty, perished utterly, and were forgotten;
new languages and new literatures received the impress of new forms of thought, and, in turn, gave new
forms to the thought and culture of the age; the
very face of nature was changed, and regions once
populous became barren and desolate. But none of
all this change reached up to the source whence the
Bible sprung.
It starts out with, "In the beginning, God;" and
every note struck thenceforward down through the
ages, was in perfect harmony with the key-note struck
in the beginning. Its instruments were many; their
gifts and culture and external surroundings were endlessly varied. But, behold! What a wonder! The
spirit, scope, and teachings are the same in all ages!
Though this sublime temple of revelation was so
many ages in going up, and employed so many and




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.     187
various workmen, and its parts were wrought out in
divers places-one in Mesopotamia, another in Egyyt,
most of them by the mountains and lakes of Palestine,
and the last on the isle of Patmos-yet all these parts,
when brought together, harmonize into one, demonstrating that it had only one Architect from beginning
to end. Creation does not more clearly indicate one
Creator than the Bible one Author, whose thought and
purpose and plan run through it all. One spirit only
pervades the sacred Volume, and that spirit is divine.
The volume. of nature and the volume of revelation
point to a common authorship. You may as well
claim that man is the author of the one as of the
other.
This thought is all the more striking when we
come to compare the Old Testament and the New.
Unlike, and yet alike, they fulfill their peculiar functions in perfect harmony. The one is the counterpart
of the other. The one is the preliminary, the other
the completion. All through the New Testament
there are vast ranges of preliminaries assumed. In
the Old Testament all these preliminaries are found
recorded, each one pointing forward to something
yet to come. In this harmony of the Old and the
New Testaments, the whole structure of revelation
stands complete.
You have seen buildings, partially completed, so
arranged that, while present emergencies are met,
future enlargement and a more perfect structure are
indicated. This, you perceive, entered into the design of the architect at the beginning. The building
as it now stands lacks symmetry, lacks completeness;




I88           INGHAM LECTURES
something is to be added. There are projecting
stones and sunken mortises along the angles and
at one end. The thought flashes upon you that
the building is to be enlarged in this direction.
The new is to be matched upon the old. These
projecting stones are to be mortised into the new
structure, and similar projections in the new building are to reach back and fill these mortises in the
old. By this means the old and the new are to be
dovetailed together, and made to constitute one great
building.
Such were the Old and the New Testaments.
The Old Testament, with prophetic jetties reaching
forward into the future, finds its counterpart in the
New; and the two together complete the symmetry,
strength, and unity of the whole building. Whoever
was the author of the former, most evidently anticipated the latter, even in its most delicate minutia.
Not one of the projecting stones in the partial structure of the Old Testament but enters into its appropriate mortise in the New. The inspired writers of
the New Testament constantly recognize this fact.
Hence the oft-repeated expressions: "That it might
be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet;" "As
it was written in the prophets;" "As the Holy Ghost
spake by the mouth of the prophet;" " The Scripture
can not be broken;" and so forth. There is a striking
significance in that declaration of our Lord, that "one
jot," the least letter in the Hebrew alphabet, or "one
tittle," the minutest point in Hebrew writing, "shall
in no wise pass from the law," the old dispensation,
"till all be fulfilled." Every projecting stone enters




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.      189
into its appropriate mortise, and the building stands
complete.
Whence this sublime harmony that pervades the
Bible in all ages; its history, so accredited and true;
its prophecies, so far reaching and yet so complete
in their fulfillment; its religious truths, so lifted
up above the range of human intellect, and yet so
accordant with man's deepest and holiest intuitions;
its great doctrines of Providence and grace, so unlike
any thing that ever fell from the lip of sage or philosopher, and yet so in harmony with God's world
and man's necessities; its great decalogue, born of
God before literature was formed or history was
written, an embodiment of moral precepts that has
commanded the homage of the learned and the good
in all ages, and which no subsequent age, however
cultured and refined, has ever been able to equal,
much less to surpass? What is there in all this
that can be regarded as man's work? Could the unaided intellect conceive so wondrous a scheme? Or,
if its conception were possible, how could frail, dying
man inaugurate and carry forward a scheme so stupendous, requiring ages for its development, employing and controlling agencies so innumerable and so
diverse, and working out, among all people and in all
ages, results so grand and far-reaching?  Impossible! simply impossible! It would be scarcely less
absurd to say that the vast machinery of material
nature was guided by human brain and impelled by
human muscle.
Listen to the music of the spheres, as.they roll
along in their boundless orbits through the regions




190           INGHAM LECTURES.
of space. How harmonious their concerts; how sweet
the blending of all their notes!
"Forever singing as they shine,
The hand that made us is divine!"
We listen; we wonder; we adore. That wondrous
harmony proclaims that the God of nature is one.
Turn to revelation: from every book and chapter
and verse; from every revelation, stretching through
a period of four thousand years,-there comes up in
responsive harmony the proclamation, "All Scripture
is given by inspiration of God."  "In the beginning,
God," is no less the formula of revelation than of
creation.
X. There are certain analogies between nature and
revelation, which indicate a common author.
Whatever comes from God bears the impress of
his character. His thought pervades alike his word
and his work. There is comprehensiveness of plan,
perfectness of adaptation, unity of design, together
with a mysterious mastery of means, which are ever
more reaching forward and working to bring about
predetermined ends. This point can be made more
palpable by a direct comparison of some common
traits of nature and of the Bible, showing how both
bear the finger-marks of God.
i. In both there is the most surprising and wondetful adaptations.
Nature is so perfectly adapted to man, that no
one can fail to discover the fitness between the two.
For man the day and the night succeed each other,




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.    I91
bringing seasons of labor and of rest. For him the
earth brings forth its flowers and its fruits. Had
there been perpetual darkness, where would have
been the use for the eye? Had the earth's crust
been covered with one unbroken sheet of ice, like
an immense glacier, it would have been totally unadapted to man. But we see every-where innumerable adaptations, great and small-adaptations wonderful beyond our thought; and the further we advance
in the study of nature, and the more minute our examination, the more real and wonderful will these
adaptations appear. They are infinite in number and
infinite in variety.
Turn to revelation. You there find this same
wonderful adaptation. To our intellectual nature,
how complete the adaptation of the Bible; power
to quicken the thought, to hallow the emotions, to
kindle the imagination, to enlarge the conceptions,
and to develop and perfect his power of utterance.
To man as an individual, conscious that a few years
ago he was not, and in a few years more he will not
be, yearning to know for what purpose he is here,
and what is to become of him in the future, the
Bible comes with its lessons of immortality; for the
victim of sin, the child of sorrow, here is deliverance
from sin, and joy of heart. It comprehends all necessities, is adapted to all conditions, fi-om the cradle to
the grave!
We think it wonderful that the solid earth is
adapted to one class of animals, the air to another,
and the sea to a third; but how much more wonderful are the endlessly varied and perpetually continued




192           INGHAM LECTURES.
adaptations of the Bible! John Williams, the early
and eminent missionary of the South Sea Islands,
gives, in his biography, a striking incident in point.
The British ship-of-war Seringapatam was cruising
in those waters, and the officers desired to see what
effect religion had wrought upon the natives, and
especially to hear them express their views of the
doctrines of the Bible in their own way. Among the
questions asked was this: "Why do you believe the
Bible is the Word of God, and that Christianity came
from him?" Several answers were given. After a
while the question was repeated to an old and shrewd
pagan priest, who had been converted and become an
ardent student of the Bible. Instead of replying to
it at once, he held up his hands, and rapidly moved
the joints of his wrists and fingers; he then opened
and shut his mouth, and closed these singular actions
by raising his leg and moving it in various directions.
Having done this, he said: "See, I have hinges all
over me. If the thought grows in my heart that I
wish to handle any thing, the hinges in my hands
enable me to do so; if I want to utter any thing, the
hinges of my jaws enable me to say it; and if I
desire to go anywhere, here are hinges in my legs
to enable me to walk. My body is just adapted to
the wants of my mind. When I look into the Bible,
I see there are proofs of adaptation which correspond exactly with those which appear in my body;
I therefore conclude that the Maker of my body is
also the Author of that Book." What more conclusive argument could be drawn, to prove that the
Author of nature and of the Bible is one?




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROlI GOD.     193
2. In both nature and the Bible there are anticipations of and preparations for coming events, which
could spring only from the infinite knowledge of God.
The broad prairies that lie untilled and waste are
a prophecy of the hand that shall cultivate them in
the ages to come. The vast mineral resources hid
away in the bowels of the earth, and the riches of
the great sea, were so many prophecies of coming
generations of men, who should delve in the mine
and traverse the ocean. The immense beds of coal
stored away in the earth, what were they but a
prophecy of generations of men that should live far
off in the future, and a preparation for them when the
primeval forests have been cleared away? While the
rich soil was designed to produce bread for the
eater, the coal deposit was designed to provide fuel
for the dwelling; and each is an anticipation of the
future. Thus, in all the creation of God, "one thing
is set over against another."
The same thread of anticipation and preparation
runs through the whole Bible. As in nature there
are events beyond the reach of unaided intellect, never
dreamed of before in science or philosophy, so in the
Bible there are events which no human experience
could suggest, and no earlier facts of history lead us to
expect. The ark was built while yet no cloud, visible
to the human eye, shaded the heavens; but its grand
mission was to bear the elements of a better civilization to a new world this side of the flood. The
gauze-like threads floating in the mottled contents of
the egg-shell are prophetic of a strong wing, that shall
erelong come forth to cleave the clouds and scale the.




I94           INGIHAM~s LECTURES.
heavens. So all along, in Jewish altar and sacrifice
and most holy place, we behold the gauze-like threads,
the mystic prophecy of the strong wing, that was to
bear our humanity heavenward in the Gospel day.
Amid all the sublime symbols of the temple and
the altar, who, among all the earlier generations of
men, had any adequate conception of the wondrous
work of redemption upon the cross of Calvary? Yet
the whole plan runs like a thread along the whole
line of revelation, from the beginning to the end.
Its key-note was struck amid the anguish and darkness of the fall; its final harmony is blended with
the song of the angels of God. Such anticipations
of the great and mysterious events of the future,
whether in nature or in revelation, have foundation
evidently in God's great, underlying law: One God,
one universe, one humanity! Such far-reaching insight, such unerring anticipation of events hidden far
away in the bosom of the future, belongs not to the
philosophy of the earth; it is a revelation from the
skies.
3. The same great laze of gradual development or
growth that characterizes nature, is also manifest in
revelation.
"All created nature is in the process of development. From the solid and sterile rock up to the
ethereal seraph, you see movement, transition, elevation, progress." God might have created an oak
complete, instead of having it grow up from the
acorn; he might have created the man instead of
the infant; but he leaves the one to become the
outgrowth of the other. So it is with the kingdom




THE BIBLE A REVEELATION FROM GOD.    I95
of heaven.  It is the mustard-seed sown in the
earth. He sheds upon it the light and warmth of
his Spirit; the dews of heavenly grace fall upon it
and quicken it into life; the vigor of his truth gives
it strength. Thus it grows up.
The mineral, the vegetable, the animal, the intellectual, the spiritual, are only so many successive
grades of ascent in the wonderful creative energy of
God. The acorn grows into a mighty oak. The
full-blown rose is but the unfolded petals bursting
into a higher life. The eaglet's wing, whose microscopic fibers are scarcely discernible floating in the
shapeless fluids of the egg-shell, shall yet soar majestically through the air, bidding defiance to cloud
and storm. The feeble and helpless child infolds
manhood in all its strength and glory.
What is here suggested in the natural world is
revealed and confirmed in the Bible. The processes
of development in the natural world have their counterpart in the spiritual. The resemblance is so precise, the two schemes interlacing at so many points,
fitting as exactly as the bone is fitted into its socket,
that no one can doubt that both had a common origin,
and that the one was made for the other. One God,
one universe, one Bible!
4. Again, there is a oneness in the mode in which
nature and the Bible impart knowledge, which clearly
indicates that they are parts of one great plan, having
a common Author.
They both simply indicate practical facts, without
assigning a reason, or attempting to explain the inner
being, cause, or mode of any of them. Nature gives




196           INGHAM LECTURES.
us water to drink and be refreshed, but does not stop
to explain how or why. She gives us light, and
allows us to open our eyes and behold her glories;
but the philosophy of the solar ray she leaves us to
study. Ages pass by before we have advanced so
far in that philosophy as to know that seven distinct colors are blended into one to make the solar
ray. Nor, when we have made the discovery, have
we made any practical addition to the value of light.
So Christianity gives us facts. The Bible announces
God; but the mysteriousness of his being and eternity, it does not attempt to explain. It teaches the
facts of the fall-sin, redemption, regeneration, adoption, resurrection, heaven; but it takes no pains to
disclose the philosophic element that underlies and
pervades all these truths. It does not even take
pains to explain the harmony that exists among
them all. The Bible and nature stand side by side.
Each one says, Here are my facts, use them; then
study them. Wonderful is this harmony! What
shall we say of these two, but that they are twin
ministers, receiving their commissions from one common Source?
5. Inexhaustibleness is also characteristic alike of
nature and of revelation, as it is of nothing else.
We can soon reach the bottom of the works and
thoughts of man, and comprehend all they contain.
The author is finite, and a finite mind may comprehend his work. But when we come to the works of
the Infinite One, we are struck with their inexhaustibleness. All our discoveries in the natural world
are so suggestive of undiscovered wonders which lie




THE BIBLE A IRE VELATIONA FROM GOD.  197
beyond, so suggestive of new and more wonderful
problems yet to be solved, that we deem ourselves
only to have made an advance, but never to have
reached the bottom. The broader our survey of the
material universe, the more absolutely limitless and
beyond finite comprehension it seems. Even a single
drop of water embodies forms of life wonderful and
innumerable, suggesting how inexhaustible nature is.
And so it is, also, with the Bible. Its profound
depths have never yet been fathomed by finite mind,
while portions and passages open up to the reader
new beauties and sublimer truths, even at the thousandth perusal. The art of Christopher Wren and
the philosophy of Bacon we may exhaust and go
beyond; but go far as we may in the study of
nature or of revelation, we find that the lines of
thought in each stretch out in perfect harmony, like
parts of one great whole, limitlessly beyond our farthest advance. What other conclusion can we reach,
but that both are the productions of one Infinite
Mind?
XI. The Bible only has given us the true idea of
God, and this is a presumption of its being a revelation
from himself
The intuitions of the human mind suggest God;
reason demonstrates him. But who, unaided by revelation, can comprehend him? The King of Syracuse proposed this question to Simonides, "What is
God?" The sage desired a day to consider the
question. On the morrow he asked for two days
more. When they were ended, he asked for four




I98           INVGHAs[ LECTURES.
days, then eight days, and so on, doubling the number each time. The King became impatient, and
demanded the reason for this delay. The sage answered, " It is because the more I consider the
question, the more obscure and difficult it appears."
Greece had a wonderful history. She had Aristotle
and Plato; she had Thucydides and Pheidias; she had
Demosthenes and Homer; philosophy, profound and
far-reaching; history, that has furnished the world
with models; art, admired and copied in all ages;
eloquence, entrancing, vehement, omnipotent; poetry,
the vibrations of whose melodies will cease only as
the earth's pulses stand still; a language and literature, sparkling with classic beauty, and rich with
classic lore. She had her conquering Alexander.
But she had no God! Saturn, her oldest deity,
devoured his own children. Jupiter dethroned his
father, and became sovereign of gods; but his life
was a history of corruption and debauchery. Juno,
his wife, was a vixen and a shrew, and yet a goddess.
Venus, his daughter, was the patroness of all licentiousness; Bacchus, the patron of wine and drunkenness; Mercury, expert as a thief, and a god of all
thieves; Mars and Bellona, patrons of war and blood.
These be thy gods, 0, Reason! 0, Philosophy!
But behold, away back in the dim antiquity of
the race-ages before Grecian art or culture had being-here is an outcast child, drifting in a frail ark
down the Nile! He is saved from the waters and
the crocodiles only to become first a foundling, then
a slave. Then, when grown to manhood, kindling
at the wrong inflicted upon one of his race, he smites




THE BIBLE A RE VELATION FROMI GOD.  199
the oppressor, and goes forth a fugitive into the desert,
branded as a murderer. Tell me, how did this poor
wanderer among the wastes of Arabia gather that
knowledge of God, to which Grecian culture and
art and philosophy utterly failed even to make the
faintest approach? Nay, how was it that he should
have grasped conceptions of God upon which no subsequent age has been able to improve, and which all
subsequent revelations have only confirmed? Where,
in what literature, ancient or modern, can you find a
substitute for that grand conception of God, as the
one Lord and Father, spiritual, holy, almighty, eternal? Mark how he appears to Moses, as he is sheltered in the cleft of the rock from the overwhelming
glory of the Divine presence: "And the Lord descended in the cloud, and stood with him there, and
proclaimed the name of the Lord. And the Lord
passed by before him, and proclaimed, The Lord, the
Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering and
abundant in goodness and truth; keeping mercy for
thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and
sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children,
and upon the children's children, unto the third and
fourth generation."* Can any thing be more sublime,
more true? In what age of the world, and among
what people or race, did poet or philosopher ever
originate conceptions of God so grand or so true as
this poor fugitive was made the vehicle of communicating to the race? From this old Bible, then,
lifting up its voice in the gray dawn of the world, we
* Exodus xxxiv, 5-7.




200            NGHAAIM LECTURES.
have the grandest utterance of God that has ever
fallen upon human ear. How can this be, unless God
himself spoke?
XII. The Bible has done more to keep alive the
idea of God, and make that idea felt and active, than
all other causes combined.
It utterly ignores the theories of philosophy; pays
little respect to the arguments of the naturalist; but,
by a sort of magnetism peculiar to itself, it touches
the intuitions of the heart, and the soul recognizes
that it is God who speaks. The Bible does not
demonstrate God, but it is full of God. You need
no other proof that the sun is shining than to look
at it. You can not commune with the Bible without
the felt presence of God. Among Oriental fables,
we read of a mirror with such wonderful properties
that to one looking into it distance and time were
annihilated; things past, present, and future could
be seen with equal distinctness; and objects invisible to human sight, and too grand for human comprehension, were brought to view. What was fiction
with the pagan has become fact with the Christian.
Such a mirror he has in the Bible.'It sweeps the
whole range of creation, and reveals God every-where.
Under the reflections of this wonderful mirror, "the
heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament
showeth his handiwork." He is seen walking among
the constellations; giving brightness to every sunbeam; giving the landscape its verdure, the rose its
beauty; whispering in the gentle breezes of evening;
feeding the young ravens when they cry; providing




THE BIBLE A REVELA TION FROM GOD.   20 
pasture for the cattle upon a thousand hills; uttering his voice in the thunder; going forth upon the
dark bosom of the tempest, and making the winds
and the waves his messengers. Creation becomes
instinct with a new life; God appears not merely in
its majestic worlds, moving through the cycles of
uncounted ages; but in the flitting of a wing, as
well as in the fall of a world; for even the sparrow has the notice and care of God. It reveals
God, present, living, active-threading all the mazes
of human history and shaping the destinies of all
events, from the beginning of creation to the end of
time. The grandest creations of the human imagination are unequal to such a result as this. None of
them have ever been, none of them can ever be, so
impregnated with God. The great lessons and the
grand pictures of the Bible abide from age to age.
They speak to all generations and all ages. They
never become obsolete, never become old; they are
like God, living and eternal. Theism can not die
while the Bible lives. Atheism with the Bible becomes impossible. The theories of philosophy and
the arguments of the schools, however conclusive,
may fail in their power to convince; they have no
key with which to reach the heart; but human conscience must respond to the Bible revelation of God.
Pantheism may resolve God into an airy abstraction,
deny his personality, banish him from creation or
confound him with it; but the moment the Bible
appears, God stands forth, personal, active, mighty.
The Bible formula-" In the beginning, God "-places
him at once in immediate contact with human beings
Q8




202           INGHAM LECTURES.
as their great Creator and Lord. "It appeals to the
eye, the ear, the imagination, the intellect, the heart,
and enshrines God in the most vivid conceptions and
the deepest sentiments of the human soul." It enters
into all the interests of humanity, fires the heart with
the loftiest aspirations, lays before it the grandest
work, and appeals to it with the noblest motives.
This is not the sphere of philosophy. Human philosophy has never yet risen so high. It is not human
teaching, but Divine.
XIII. The truths revealed in the Bible are above
the range of the human intellect, and such as human
reason could never have discovered.
Many of these truths are of profound and abiding
moment. They permeate all philosophy and endure
through all time; and though they are essential to
man's nature, yet his unaided reason never discovered
them. Take a single grand truth, the priceless revelation of the Bible, that God is one, and that the
universe is not the offspring of chance, nor a resulting condition of an endless development of previous
states, but the work of His hands, and so the object
of His almighty, fatherly, ceaseless care. Take a
single commandment, the first commandment of all,
and the second, which grows out of it, "Thou shalt
love thy neighbor as thyself,"-in these two primary and capital truths is the foundation of all religious duty, sentiment and action. They confront
us every-where, surround us evermore, permeate all
doctrines and all duties, and at once bind the whole
race together in one common brotherhood, and point




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.     203
them all to the love and care of one common Father.
"In the revelation of them is an evidence of the
Divine, which may be seen and read of all men.
And until it can be explained how these grand
truths, which neither the East nor the West discovered, which escaped the earnest searchings of Zoroaster, with his profound Magian philosophy, which
dawned not upon the soaring intellect of Plato, and
which was, in fact, hidden to all philosophy; until it
is explained how these truths, so solemn and yet
so salutary, defying the utmost scrutiny of the mere
intellect of man, and yet, when sent down from
heaven, harmonizing with all his clearest conceptions, and loftiest aspirations; until it is explained
how these great truths, thus lying beyond the reach
of the noblest minds of the race, were, or could be
elaborated out of the thoughts of Moses himself,until then, I shall not think it unreasonable to recognize in these truths and these facts a light from
heaven, an instance of Divine interposition, a proof
of the Divine origin, and an illustration of the high
worth of the religion of the Bible."*
XIV. The doctrines of religion which originated
in the Bible, and are taught by the Bible, are evidently
above human inveztion.
The human mind never originated them-never
could have originated them.  Human philosophy
never taught them. They are above and beyond the
scope of both. For the most part, indeed, human
philosophy has stood apart from the Bible and its
*- "The Divine in Christianity," pp. 59, 60.




204           INGZHAM LECTURES.
teachings, and ofttimes been in antagonism to both.
It did not, therefore, originate either, even if it had
power to do so.
But these doctrines are interwoven with the facts
of history. The same is true of the miracles of the
Bible. The doctrines, the miracles and the history,
were all recorded by the same hand. They are all
blended into the same system, and have become conjointed parts of one great building. Now, if we accept the history, as we must, then almost inevitably
the miracles are conjoined with it; and these together
become the "two witnesses" who attest that the doctrines are of God.
Then, too, these doctrines of grace, holiness,
heaven, bear the impress of God. Nowhere in them
is there to be found such limitation as always characterizes the finite mind, or such defects as inevitably
inhere in imperfect natures. They admit no exception, but extend to all. They are applicable to all
races and peoples, and sweep down through the
ages, a boon and a blessing for every generation and
every individual. The wonder-" God manifest in
the flesh"-was as surely born in heaven as it was
heralded by angels to earth.
Thus we are made to feel, as the first converts
of Christianity said, "Satan never devised those doctrines, man never wrought those miracles." And thus
are we driven back to God. His is the word, his the
work! One is the document, the other the seal. If
the seal shows the finger of God, it demonstrates
that the document is from God. If the document
comports with the seal, as the doctrines of the Bible




THE BIBLE A REVELATION FROM GOD.     205
do comport and harmonize with its miracles and its
history, then the two mutually strengthen and confirm
each other, and the demonstration that both are from
God is complete.
XV. Finally, I know that the Bible must be from
God, because it is the great intellectual regenerator of
the race, as no other work is or can be.
Most works of human authorship have but a limited influence and an early death. A few" in their
own specific departments have attained to distinguished honor and brought forth grand results. But
even these were limited in their sphere, and not one
of them could survive the slow wasting of the ages.
What human genius has not attempted, and what it
must have failed to accomplish, if it had attempted,
the Bible has actually done. In its practical lessons,
it discovers to us how intimately our personal interests are associated with those great truths and agencies by which God is leading our humanity onward
to its final destiny.
The Bible, setting aside all questions of its Divine
authenticity, of its inspiration, and even of its theology, stands before us in the light of fact as the intellectual regenerator of the race. This pre-eminence is
assured by the purity and truth of its philosophy, and
by that inspiration of its genius through which the
minds of men are quickened with intellectual vigor.
And to these must be added the sublime earthly, as
well as heavenly, destiny it reveals to man.
It embodies history the most wonderful, spanning
the entire cycle of the race, from the birth of creation




206           INGHAM LECTURES.
to its apocalypse; ethnography, the most minute and
accurate, challenging the profoundest deference of the
archaeologist and antiquarian; biography, the most
thrilling and instructive, giving portraitures of characters, with a distinctness, fullness, and beauty, no
human skill can equal; civil polity, laws, and jurisprudence, which not only transcend the wisest legislation
of the time, but furnish the germ and the model of all
that is humane and just and noble in the enlightened
legislation of the most enlightened nations and periods
of the world; delineations of the domestic affections
and virtues, such as ennoble humanity, and enchant,
by their simplicity, truthfulness, and purity; patriotism, love of country and people, such as led the
world's first great statesman and legislator to choose
to suffer affliction with the people of God rather than
to dwell in the tents of wickedness, such as girded
with might the sword of David, and inspired his songs
with undying melody, such as hallowed the tears of
Jeremiah, and kindled the eloquence of Isaiah; proverbs for instruction, maxims for the regulation of
human conduct, and oracles to clear away the darkness of human reason, which, for pertinence, for adaptation, force, and universal applicability, are unequaled
in the uninspired literature of the world; eloquence,
the most impassioned and sublime; poetry, soaring
on seraphic wing into sublime altitudes unreached by
Milton or Young; moral virtues and aesthetic beauties,
such as human philosophy, confessing its own impotence, can only wonder at and admire, without attempting to rival; science, comprehending mysteries of the
earth and the heavens, before which, even after the




THE BIBLE A REVE'LA TION FROM GOD.  207
lapse of six thousand years, all mere human philosophies pale into insignificance; theologies, teachings of
God, bringing within the range of human cognizance,
Him that filleth all things with his fullness and glory!
It is thus that Divine revelation sweeps across
every field of human thought, and underlies every
interest of human life.  The Bible is not a mere
lesson-book of duty, nor yet a mere manual of theology. Had it been such, and no more, a hundredth
part of the present volume would have been all that
was required. Such a book would not have been
diversified by varied and thrilling history, nor by
sublime imagery and wonderful announcements of
prophetic inspiration, such as have proved in all ages
a bulwark against the rude assaults of infidelity, and
are a standing demonstration of the truth of revelation, growing stronger and more convincing as the
ages roll on, and at the same time making the Bible
a book of unceasing study and criticism, to sound its
depths and unravel its meaning. Nor would it have
contained those sacred songs that so move the hearts
of men, nor those fascinating stories, beautiful narrations, striking fables, proverbs, and parables so attractive to the fancy of the young, and so rich in practical
wisdom for the common people. Thanks be to God
that he has given us, not the lesson-book, but the Bible! The former would have fallen still-born and
powerless; it would have been forgotten ages ago.
But the Bible is the life-thought of the world. It is
replete with all that can excite the fancy or give wings
to the imagination; all that can refine the taste, ennoble the affections, and enlarge the intellect; all, in




208           INVGHAMI LECTURES.
fine, that can call forth the sublimest thoughts, present the grandest motives of action, and enkindle the
loftiest expectation in the illimitable future. It enters
into all thought and all feeling, and is allied to all interests, earthly and heavenly. It is just such a book
as must be read, will be read. It will travel through
all lands, dwell among all people, find a home in all
languages, permeate all thought. However skeptical
and unbelieving men may be, they can not ignore the.
Bible. It confronts them. They must read it, if it
be only to learn how to combat its doctrines and
claims; they must study it, if it be only to join in
the vain effort for its overthrow. The very study and
effort to destroy it will only cause it to penetrate still
more deeply into the world's thought, and imbed it
still more firmly in the literature of all ages. Thus
the very efforts of infidelity to destroy the Bible only
cause it to strike its roots still deeper into the earthly
soil, where it shall live and grow forever.
St. Paul rejoiced that Christ was preached, even
though it was done by some "of envy and strife."
So say I of the Bible. Let skeptics and the false
and deceiving philosophers of the day read and
study the Bible, though it be only for envy and
strife, though it be only to cavil at its truths and
claims; yet "I therein do rejoice, yea, and will
rejoice;" for I know that by it all, the Bible will
be only the more firmly intrenched in the thought
and life of the world.
There is no department of taste or thought, or
culture or art, that has not felt the invigorating power
of the Bible. It has furnished some of the grandest




THE BIBLE A REVELA TION FROM GOD.    209
themes for the sculptor, the painter and the musical
composer, in all ages; it has given to the great masters their inspiration, and they, in turn, have laid
their grandest trophies at the foot of the cross.
The Bible contains some of the sublimest poetry,
which the most gifted of our race have ever found unapproachable in beauty and grandeur. But this is not
all. It has actually furnished the material, the subjects, and even the thought, for the sublimest poems
in the literature of the world. The sacred songs that
enliven the worship of Christian temples in all lands,
find their source and fountain-head in the songs of
David, written three thousand years ago. Who does
not recognize this every-where in the sacred hymns
of Watts and Wesley, of Montgomery and Cowper,
of Heber and White? Even Byron's gifted but
wayward muse kindled with unwonted fervor and
grace, as he sung anew the "Hebrew    Melodies."
Strike out from the sacred song of the ages all that
had its origin in this old fountain, and there would
be little left to touch the heart or inspire the faith.
The voice of melody would become silent in the
temples of God and in the dwellings of the saints.
Then, too, see how largely all poets have drawn
upon the Bible for their subjects, their materials, and
their inspiration. "Paradise Lost," the great epic
of the world, had never enthroned its author as
the master of song, but for the inspiration drawn
from  the Bible. Pollok's "Course of Time;" the
"Messiah," of Klopstock; the " Night Thoughts," of
Young; Tasso's." Jerusalem Delivered;" Dante's "Inferno;" Burns's "Cotter's Saturday Night;" Scott's
r9




210           INVGhZ-4A! LECT'U'ES.
"Hebrew Maid;" and Moore's " Song of Miriam,"are only a few of the examples that might be cited.
Thus, in the poetry of all ages and all languages, we
find every-where, mingling in the song, notes borrowed from the sacred poets of Israel.
Shakspeare has been claimed to be the most original of the poets. And so he was. But in almost
every scene and act of Shakspeare there are gems
gathered from the Bible, to deck the bright conceptions of his own genius. Do you question this?
Let me cite a few of the many examples. The
blood of Abel crying from the ground for justice;
the three-score years and ten as the measure of
human life; the sleeping of the righteous dead in
Abraham's bosom; the fearful thing of being blotted
from the Book of Life; the camel threading the eye
of the needle; the serpent as the tempter; the ministering angel from heaven; the "All hail" of Judas;
the dropping of manna from the skies; the mote and
the beam in the eye; the wail of the Jewish mothers
over the slaughtering of the infants; Pilate washing his
hands to remove the foul stain of murder; the grand
remedy of redemption for souls forfeited; the peacemaker's blessing; the voice of wisdom crying in the
streets,-are so many of the samples of the imagery
and language borrowed by Shakspeare from the Bible.
Thus, the great dramatist of the world was scarcely
less indebted to the Bible than was the author of the
grand epic of the Fall of Man. And who will not
say that both these grand authors were immensely
enriched by that indebtedness?
The Bible, it is true, does not undertake to teach




TIHE BIBLE A RE VELA TION FR OM GOD.  2 I
science, just as it does not undertake to teach painting or poetry. One has said, "The Bible has no
mission to teach philosophy how to cast her measuring-lines into the sea, or sink her shafts into the
heart of the earth, or stretch her telescopes through
the untrodden fields of space." But, after all, it does
have to do with science as well as with art. It is the
moving spirit, the upheaving energy, that has stimulated the discoveries of science, and shed its benign
radiance upon the brilliant pathway of her explorations, even in the material universe. Why is it that
in no age has science, or the arts of industry, or the
economies of life, or the humanities of society or of
legislation, made any essential progress without the
Bible?  Why is it that, in all ages, this reviled,
scorned, hated book has stood at the head of the
science and the literature of the world?
Have we, indeed, come up here to the fountainhead, the great inspirer of all thought, and the
source of all human progress? Do we here find
the great orb of light in the intellectual heavens,
whose beams shine from pole to pole? Who but
God himself could set it in the heavens, and sustain
it there, undimmed in its glory, from age to age?
And now, young gentlemen, having presented
these few initial points, which, to every unprejudiced
mind, must be decisive of the great question before
us; having seen that God is at once in the Bible
and the Author of the Bible, just as he is in creation and the Author of it; and that the Bible, by
the comprehensiveness of its plans, the marvelous
variety of its adaptations, the wo.nderful resources of




212           INGHAM LECTURES.
its power, and the sweep of its influence down along
the line of human history, is worthy of its author
and equal to the grandeur of its mission, —.we can not
better close these remarks than in the exultant language of Kepler, when, with rapt soul, he contemplated one of the sublime laws of astronomy, just
then disclosed to human intelligence: "The wisdom
of the Lord is infinite, as are also his glory and his
power. Ye heavens, sing his praises; sun, moon, and
planets, glorify him in your ineffable language! Praise
him, celestial harmonies, and all ye who can comprehend them! And thou, my soul, praise thy Creator!
It is by him and in him that all exist. What we
know not, is contained in him, as well as our vain
science. To him be praise, honor, and glory, forever
and ever!"
This, young gentlemen, is language not copied
from any sentimental or doctrinal work of the Church.
It is not the exultant triumph of Christian joy; but
it is the outgushing homage of science itself, and
expressed by one whose laws circle the earth and
comprehend the heavens. If in your college curricculum it shall be your ennobling privilege to try to
follow the pathway of the immortal Kepler among
the globes of light, tread that sacred ground with the
same reverent recognition of God. Return from it
rejoicing in the great central truth of all science, as
well as of all revelation, "' that it is by him and in
him that all exists."




LECTURE VII.
SCRIPTURE INSPIRATION.
BY THE
REV. WILLIAM F. WARREN, D. D.,
President of the School of Theology of Boston University,
BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS.








LECTURE VII.
SCRIPTURE INSPIRATION.
T   HE theme assigned for to-day's lecture is the In-spiration of the Bible. It is a high theme. It
is one of vital interest to every Christian, yet difficult of treatment apart from the technicalities of the
schools. Our time is short. Omitting all introductory
formalities, allow me to limit and define the discussion
by first stating a few points, respecting which I shall
assume a perfect agreement at the outset.
And, first of all, I assume that a man is not a beast.
I shall take it for granted that you claim for yourselves
and for your kind a spiritual nature. You do not believe with Moleschott, that "thought is a movement of
matter," nor with Karl Vogt, that " the thoughts stand
in the same relation to the brain as gall to the liver
or urine to the bladder." If any man chooses to hold
such language as this, we have many other questions
to settle with him before coming to that of Scripture
inspiration. Perhaps I should rather say that, if any
creature in human shape shall be pleased to profess
himself nothing different from a brute, it will be eminently fitting to postpone all argument with him until
he shall become a man. Lunatics, we are told, should
never be contradicted.
215




216           INGHAM LECTURES.
I assume, secondly, that there is a personal God,
who has created man and given him his spiritual nature. And I assume that, in making-man, this Divine
Being did not forever exhaust himself, and sink into
an eternal swoon. I shall take it for granted, without argument, that he is still God enough to act upon
the creature of his hand, and to influence him as one
spirit may influence another. If any of my hearers is
disposed to say he knows nothing of any such Being,
I shall reply by recommending him to make his acquaintance.
Thirdly, I assume that this Divine Creator and
natural companion of man is not locked up in the skyparlor of the universe, unable or unwilling to do more
than indolently to watch, through the crystal floor of
his prison, the swing of his spheres and the tumultuations of human history. I shall take it for granted
that you all reject this deistic notion of a cock-loft
divinity, far removed from all human affairs, a cold
and idle spectator of the world of men.  I assume
that, as the air inspheres all trees, so God all souls.
In him is our living, our movement, our being. He
touches us on every side. The Divine and human
spirits not only can, but do, communicate to and with
each other. God can take knowledge of my thought;
I of his. God can breathe peaceful benedictions into
my spirit; I can cause grief to his. God can woo my
love by his goodness; I his, in prayers and grateful
service. If any man hesitates to concede me this, let
him take lessons of Theodore Parker; even of him
he may learn thus much.
Finally, I assume that the Christian Church is




SCRIPTURE IzVSPIRA TIONV.       217
not the fabric of a dream, nor a paper plan found only
in books, but a great historic institution. I shall not
try to prove that Jesus Christ was neither a knave
nor a fool; neither myth-made nor a myth-maker. I
shall assume it as tolerably well settled that Abraham
was the father of the Israelitish nation; that there
was a servitude -in Egypt; a law-giving at Sinai; a
theocracy in Palestine; a crucifixion in Jerusalem.
The kingdom   of God among men has stood long
enough to be recognized in every history. It spreads
widely enough to be seen on the smallest map. Its
foundation-stones are under the world; its pinnacles
are lost in the heavens.
These, then, are our preliminary assumptions: a
spiritual psychology, speculative theism, and a personal relationship between God and men, historically
mediated by Jesus Christ. I make them the more
unhesitatingly, from the fact that each of them has
been already vindicated by the lecturers who have
preceded me in the course. They give us, as you see,
first, an inspirable Soul; second, a Being capable of
inspiring it; and, third, the fit historic occasion.
These preliminaries being thus settled, we are prepared to state the exact question proposed to us for
discussion. Much confusion has characterized some
of our treatises on this subject, from the failure of
their authors clearly to apprehend, and persistently
adhere to, the precise point in debate.
Observe, then, first of all, that the question before
us is not the question whether or not the ancient
prophets and apostles received immediate communications from God. This is assumed. It is the




218            INGHAM LECTURES.
question, not of Scripture inspiration, but of Christian
revelation.
Again, our question is not whether or not these
organs or mediums of Divine revelation were in an
inspired condition at the time of their receiving the
immediate Divine communications vouchsafed to them.
This may be taken for granted, if they received Divine communications at all. It is, however, a question relating not to the recorders, but to the recipients
of God's revelations.
Finally, the point at issue is not whether or not
the holy prophets and apostles were under an especial
Divine influence, when engaged in orally declaring and
carrying out their Divine commissions.  That is a
point to be settled on its own evidence; but it is not
the question of Scripture inspiration.
The real question of Scripture inspiration is simply and solely this: Is there satisfactory evidence
that, in the labor of composing our Holy Scriptures,
the sacred writers were aided in an extraordinary and
peculiar manner by the Holy Ghost? and, if so, what
was the nature, and what the effect, of that aid? Remember, then, that we do not here inquire respecting
the fact of a Divine revelation, or the psychical state
of its recipients at the time of its reception, or the
normality of their state of mind in orally delivering it
to others; our one and only business is with the sacred
writers, as zwriters, and as writing. The general inquiry ramifies, as we have just seen, into three special
ones; the first relating to the fact, the second to the
nature, and the third to the effects, of Scripture inspiration. Let us take up each in order.




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TION         219
I: THE FACT. That the sacred writers were directly and extraordinarily aided by the Holy Spirit in
writing down what they did, is not so easily proved as
some, who have attempted the task, would seem to
imagine.  The sacred writers themselves nowhere
make the assertion. In one place they tell us that
"holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy
Ghost;"* but nowhere, that they thus wrote. Often,
along with the Divine message, vision, or prophecy,
they record the Divine command which bade them
write it; but that, at the tine of making the record,
they were under an extraordinary Divine influence,
they nowhere tell us. We can not claim, therefore,
that they were under such Divine influence, on the
ground of any direct assertion of the writers themselves.
To some before me, very possibly, this may seem
a very grave and unnecessary concession. To such I
can only say, that no concession to truth is to be
feared. Nothing is so perilous to the ascendancy of
Christian ideas and beliefs, in a community like ours,
as an over-anxious, disingenuous, special-pleading spirit
in the professed expounders and defenders of the faith.
Nothing ever came so near swamping my own faith in
the Divine origin of Christianity as the discovery of
this pitiful pettifoggery on the part of some of the accredited apologists of the system. There are defenses
of Christianity which are more dangerous than the
attacks which called them forth. There are vindicacations of the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, of
which we may emphatically affirm, it had been better
*2 Peter i, 21.




220           INGNHAI[ LEC'TULES.
for the cause had they never been born. Take any
fifty ordinary treatises or discussions of this subject,
and you will find at least forty of them commencing
their argument for the fact of Scripture inspiration
with the assertion, "The sacred writers claim it."
When I recall the emotions with which I first perused
and sifted the course of argument employed in proof
of this initial proposition, I can not reply indignantly
enough, "They claim no such thing."  Call not my
position a perilous concession. It is the old position
which is perilous. The logical jugglery required to
cover up its falsity has fatally disgusted many an ingenuous mind. Nothing is so safe as truth, nothing
so persuasive as honesty.
There is another argument, almost invariably employed by those who have elaborated the proof of
Scripture inspiration, of which I can say nothing better than of the last. I refer to the argument apriori,
from the necessity of such a Divine influence in order
to make the Bible authoritative. It runs as follows:
The Bible must have been written under a Divine inspiration, since, without such an inspiration, it would
have no power to command man's faith, would have no
authority. This, as you observe, is arguing a matter of
fact from an alleged apriori necessity-a logical procedure always suspicious, and most frequently fallacious.
I must leave such an argument to others. It does not
carry conviction to my mind. It seems to me that the
Gospel would have been worthy of all acceptation, even
if it had never been committed to writing at all. Methinks the Israelites were bound to believe Moses or
Isaiah, when they declared what Jehovah had said to




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA T710N          22 I
them, even if these prophets gave no proof that God
was, at the moment, dictating, or in any wise extraordinarily affecting, their narration of his message.
Methinks that, if the writings of the holy prophets
and apostles contained no hint that God assisted in a
peculiar manner in their composition, I should still be
under obligation to believe the great facts of sacred
history; to accept the cardinal doctrines and practice the pure precepts of Christianity. Even these
same theologians grant, and indeed strenuously maintain, that uninspired testimony may make a belief in
miracles morally obligatory. If it can do that, what
is there, in the whole compass of the Bible, which the
ordinary testimony of the holy prophets and apostles,
and the witnessing Church, could not cover? Let us
remember, too, that, if uninspired testimony has no
power to command men's faith, the Bible has no
power to command faith in its own genuineness; for
the only testimonies we have that our sacred books
were really written by the holy men to whom they are
ascribed, are confessedly uninspired.
Again, the argument either excludes all Scripture
proofs for the fact of inspiration, or involves the fallacy of reasoning in a circle. If, as we are told, we
can never be absolutely sure that a Scripture statement is true, until it has been shown that every word
and syllable was infallibly inspired of God, then, evidently, no Scripture statements, were they never so
numerous and never so explicit, could establish the
doctrine of inspiration itself, for the simple reason,
we have as yet no proof that those Scripture statements affirming it are themselves reliable.  If we




222            ING I1AM L ECTURES.
employ them, we necessarily reason in a circle. We
say, in effect: All Scripture must be Divinely inspired, for such and such Divinely inspired passages
say so.
Without wasting further words upon the traditional mode of arguing our question, I will here say,
that, while I most heartily and unwaveringly believe
in the inspiration of the sacred writers as writers, I
am of the opinion that my faith, and the universal
faith of the Church, on this point, ispurely inferential.
The Scriptures teach it only as they teach the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, or the hypostatic union of
the two natures in Christ. Nor is its evidence, on
this account, in my opinion, any the less. I should
rather call it all the greater. Mere professions are
cheap in all religions, and in our day even authority
goes for little. The very best evidences which a system can have are those which are imbedded in its
very structure, ingrained in its very fiber.  These
must be as enduring as the system itself. Just such,
as I view them, are the evidences of Scripture inspiration.
The reasons in view of which we accept the doctrine are chiefly, I think, the following:
I. The grand analogies of Christian experience.
The true Christian has a very vivid realization of
his own utter impotence and worthlessness apart from
Divine grace. He has learned from experience that
no man can even call Jesus Lord, but by the Holy
Ghost. He has learned that the new life is a living in
the Spirit, and a walking in the Spirit; that they only
who are led by the Spirit are the sons of God. The




SCRIPTURE INSPIRATION.          223
Comforter is nearer to him than his own flesh and
blood. He helps his infirmities, bears witness to his
sonship, indites his petitions, makes intercession for
him, prompts to good, restrains from evil, sanctifies
the heart, and hallows the life. Such a man views
himself as a temple of the Holy Ghost, a worker together with God. When called upon to witness to
the truth before the ungodly, he asks for Divine assistance, and is conscious of receiving it. In interceding for others, he asks to be taught how to pray,
and believes that he is thus taught. If a preacher
of the Word, he never prepares or preaches a sermon
without asking, and, as he firmly believes, receiving,
Divine aid. With such views and convictions and
experiences, he instinctively assumes that the sacred
writers, walking more closely with God, called to
higher responsibilities, and intrusted with higher
work, must have enjoyed in an exceptional degree
these aids and influences of the Spirit. It is an argument a fortiori. If put into logical form by the
understanding, it would run thus: If I daily receive
such Divine strength and aid and direction in the
discharge of my comparatively insignificant duties,
how much more must the holy prophets and apostles
have had the higher aid they needed in every thing
pertaining to the revelation of God's will, and the
government of his Church! The force of this presumption is immense.   Its practical influence, in
maintaining the faith of the Church in the extraordinary inspiration of the sacred writers, is, in my
opinion, immeasurably greater than that of all the
argumentative treatises ever written upon the point,




224           INGHAA4 LECTURE S.
from the beginning until now. It is true it is only a
presumptive argument; but the presumption is so
vitally grounded in the facts and experiences of the
Christian life itself, that nothing can neutralize its
influence over the genuine Christian mind. And the
higher sense such a mind has of the responsibility
and importance of the work of committing the Divine
Oracles to writing, and thus furnishing to the Church
of all ages an authoritative norm of doctrine and
practice, the more vivid and firm will be its faitl
that, in the execution of that work, unusual aids of
the Spirit were granted.
2. I think the faith of the Church in the fact of
Scripture inspiration reposes, further, upon the representations given us, in the Scriptures, of the authority
and inspiration of the prophets and apostles in their
oral teachings.
I need not detain you with any extended proof
that a peculiar and exceptional Divine aid was
afforded to God's ancient prophets and to the apostles of Christ, when acting in their proper capacity,
as divinely commissioned teachers and authorities in
the Church. Such extraordinary aid was absolutely
essential to the right discharge of the extraordinary
duties of their office. They were constituted the
authorized heralds and interpreters of the whole
counsel of God with respect to human salvation.
To the apostles were committed the keys of the
kingdom of heaven, with the solemn assurance that
whatsoever they should bind on earth should be
bound in heaven, and whatsoever they should loose
on earth should be loosed in heaven. Christ made




SCRIPTURE ZiVSPIRA TON.         225
them  so completely his representatives and mouthpieces as to assume the full responsibility of their
words and acts. To those who should refuse to receive them and to hear their words, he threatens
judgments more intolerable than those which overtook Sodom and Gomorrah. He declares to them,
"He that heareth you heareth me, and he that despiseth you despiseth me." And when, at the close
of his earthly career, he tarries yet a little to issue
his last solemn commands to his almost bewildered
disciples, he deliberately suspends upon the teachings of these men the eternal destinies of all the
nations and tinborn generations to whom their words
shall ever come. "Go ye and teach all nations;..  teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you...    He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that
believeth not shall be damned."* In the old dispensation, like power and authority was committed.
God demanded of the people and of their rulers, and
even of the priests and high-priests, that they should
hear and obey his special prophetic messengers. He
declared that if any man should refuse, he would
require it of him. If such was the office of these
organs of revelation in God's kingdom, surely an
extraordinary Divine aid was essential to its right
discharge.
This antecedent expectation we find fully met in
the representations given us in the Bible. We are
told that such a special official charisma was promised and conferred. Christ pledged it to his dis* Matthew xxviii, I9, 20; Mark xvi, i6.
20




226            INGHAM LECTURES.
ciples the first time he sent them  forth to preach.*
He renews it in his prophecy of the destruction of
Jerusalem and the persecutions which awaited them.
He tells them, "Settle it, therefore, in your hearts,
not to meditate before what ye shall answer; for I
will give you a mouth and wisdom, which all your
adversaries shall not be able to gainsay nor resist."'
In his farewell discourse, just previous to his death,
he repeated and enlarged the promise; and after his
resurrection, one of his last injunctions to his disciples was to tarry at Jerusalem until they should be
endued with power from on high.1l Similar promises
were often vouchsafed to the ancient prophets.~
All these promises were duly fulfilled. The apostles were endued with the promised power; and, as
if to intimate the Divine significance of the baptism,
as designed to qualify them for the publication of the
Gospel, the charisma was bestowed under the visible
type of cloven " tongues," like as of fire resting upon
each of them. Thenceforth their preaching was with
the Holy Ghost sent down from      heaven.~   They
represented their teachings and ordinances as of Divine authority.** They demanded for the spirit within
them the respect due to the Divine.tt They asserted
that their preaching was not with words of man's wisdom, but in the demonstration of the spirit and of
power; that it was revealed unto them by God's
Spirit, the same Divine Agent who searcheth all
* Matthew x, 19, 20; Luke xii, II, 12.  t Luke xxi, 14, 15.
tjohn xiv, I6-I8., II Luke xxiv, 49; Acts i, 8.
~ Jeremiah i, 8, I8, I9; xv, I9-2I; Ezra iii, 8, 9, etc.  ~ I Peter i, I2.
**Acts xv, 28; I Corinthians vii. 40; xiv, 37; Ephesians iii, 5.
ft Acts v, 3, 4; I Thessalonians iv, 8.




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TION.        227
things, even the depths of God; that by this Spirit
they knew the mind of the Lord; and, finally, that
what they thus knew, they spoke, " not in words,
which men's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy
Ghost teacheth."*  Of the prophets they affirm that
they spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
At the same time they claim for themselves perfect equality with, and even pre-eminence above, said
prophets.t No one, who believes the Bible true, can
doubt that the prophets and apostles were truly and
extraordinarily inspired in the work of oral teaching.
Inspiration in oral teaching, however, being granted,
inspiration in the work of written instruction, and
especially in the preparation of a perpetual norm of
faith for the Church, is a simple, natural, almost
inevitable, inference. Contrasting the character and
foreseen historic influences of their spoken, and of
their written, words, we should say that such Divine
aid was even more needful for the writer than for
the speaker. Hence, the pious mind of the Church
has, in all ages, consciously, or unconsciously, reasoned as follows: If the Holy Spirit secured an
absolute and continual authority to the chosen
media of revelation, then must they have been as
truly under Divine guidance when laboring with the
pen, as when laboring with the tongue. Indeed, as
what they wrote was designed of God to be preserved through all generations, and to serve the
Church as a permanent and authentic record of sacred history, doctrine, and ordinance, there was greater
* I Corinthians ii.
t 2 Peter iii, 2; Romans xvi, 25, 26; I Corinthians xii, 28; Ephesians ii, 20; iv, II.




228           INGHAM LECTURES.
reason for affording them extraordinary aid when writing, than when delivering oral discourses, which could
reach but a few hundred of their own generation.
To suppose that the promised and received Spirit of
truth was withdrawn from the apostles, when they
betook themselves to the task of writing the Scriptures of the New Dispensatidn, would be to suppose
that they were deserted just when Divine help was
more needed than at any other time; would be to
assume that especial assistance was afforded in the
easier portion of their work, but withheld in the more
difficult. The argument loses none of its force when
applied to the ancient prophets, since in almost every
case the critical and decisive test of the truth of
their prophecies was to be the historic fulfillment, or
non-fulfillment, not of remembered words which had
been spoken, but of exact declarations, written down
ofttimes centuries before, in black and white. Evidently, if the prophet needed to be supernaturally
preserved from error at all, it was not so much in
his spoken,as in his written, declarations.
Such, I imagine, to be the second ground of the
Christian faith in the inspiration of the prophets and
apostles as writers.
3. The third basis of the same belief is found in
the peculiar deference every-where and always paid
to the Old Testament Scriptures by Christ and his
apostles.
Here, as on other points, I think the defenders of
the Bible have often overstrained the argument, and
so broken its force. Many of them have represented
the language of Christ and of the apostles, as directly




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA ZTON.         229
and unequivocally asserting that the authors of the
Old Testament books wrote under an extraordinary
Divine afflatus. I can find no such assertion in
the New Testament. Even the classical passage2 Timothy iii, I6-whether rendered, "All Scripture
is theopneustic and profitable," or, "All theopneustic
Scripture is profitable," does not assert it. It contains no reference to the sacred writers. It does not
even indicate whether the affirmed or assumed theopneustia relates to the matter, or to the form, of
ancient Scripture. It does not even define the unfamiliar term which it applies to ancient Scripture, a
term found nowhere else in the Bible. It does not
compel us to predicate of the Old Testament any thing
more than that theopneumatic quality which is predicable, for example, of a good man's prayers. Brtt if
this passage does not sustain the affirmation in question, surely there is none which does.  Here, as in
the former cases, the argument is first made clear and
forcible, when we make our conclusion an inference
from the facts before us.
What are these facts? I can not state them in
detail; but, in general, they are these. Christ everywhere appealed to the Scriptures of the Old Testament, as to an authoritative arbiter in all controversy.
He declared that it can not be falsified;* that the
whole law, even to its iotas and tittles, must be fulfilled;t that every thing in his own life and death
must conform to what was written of him, "in Moses,
and in the prophets, and in the Psalms." j The same
is true of the apostles. Their constant appeal is to
*John vii, 23; x, 35.  t Matt, v, I8.  t Luke xxiv, 44



230            INGHAM L ECTURES.
the Scriptures. They call them  the Word of God,
God's Oracles. They quote them with such introductory expressions as.these: "The Holy Ghost
saith;" "God saith;" "The Lord by the mouth of his
servant David hath said," etc. They style them, in
distinction from all other compositions, " The Scrip
tures," " The Scriptures of Trith," " The Holy Scriptures."  They affirm that they are theopneustic,* that
they are able to make us wise unto salvation. And
while most, if not all, of these and similar declarations are employed with reference to the Old Testament Scriptures, it is not to be overlooked that they
claim for their own apostolic writings a.full equality
with the more ancient Scriptures of the Church.t
Now, in all these and equivalent expressions, there is
no direct assertion that either the prophets or apostles wrote under extraordinary influences of the Spirit;
but there is such a patent assumption of the fact, both
by Christ and his apostles, that no candid and rightminded believer in their authority can resist the clear
inference. Taken in connection with the considerations already presented, its force far surpasses that of
any mere declarations of authority, however numerous
or explicit. It is perceived to be a necessary implication of the faith.
Such I believe to be the chief grounds on which
the Church's belief in Scripture inspiration rests.
Others no doubt contribute to its confirmation, but
these are the chief. I believe them abundantly sufficient. Granting the facts from which our inference
is drawn, and for all of which we have highest direct
*2 Tim. iii, i6.  t2 Peter iii, I6.




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA 7TION.2 23 1
evidence, the legitimacy of the inference can never be
questioned. So long, therefore, as the Church shall
retain her Christian life, her faith in the official charismata of the prophets and apostles, and, finally, her
histories of the manner in which Christ and the apostles deferred to Old Testament Scripture, just so long
will she believe in the fact of Scripture inspiration.
II. THE NATURE OF SCRIPTURE INSPIRATION.
Enough with respect to the Fact; let us pass to
consider the Nature of this extraordinary Divine influence.
On this point, as you all know, a great variety
of views have been entertained. There is, for instance, on the one hand, the dictational theory, or
the theory of an exact and universal verbal inspiration. According to this conception of the matter,
God literally dictated to the sacred writers, as to so
many amanuenses, every word of the Bible, verbatim,
from Genesis to Revelation. One Calvinistic Confession insists that even the Hebrew vowel-points were
given by the inspiration of God; though they are
well known to have been added centuries after the
original composition of some of the books. On this
theory the sacred writer was only a penman, a transcriber; his part was simply and solely the reproduction upon parchment of the precise words revealed to
his inner sense by the dictating Spirit. Whether he
penned history, prophecy, psalm, or doctrine, Divine
* "Tum quoad consonas, turn quoad vocalia, szvepuncta ipsa, sive
punctorum salter potestatem, et tur quoad res, turn quoad verba
oeo67vevurTo." (Formula Consensus Helvetici, A. D. I675.)




232           ING HAM LECTURES.
thoughts or human feelings, things already known, or
now for the first time revealed, the operation of the
Spirit was the same.  The writer was merely the
passive organ of the Divine Spirit, as much so as the
hand with which you write is an organ of your mind.
Gerhard calls them, in so many words, "Manus
Christi"-the hands of Christ.  Here the Divine
agency is at its maximum, human agency reduced to
its minimum.
The natural reaction from this mechanical and
most unsatisfactory view carries many to the opposite
extreme of a mere Divine supervision or superintendence of the sacred writers, by which they were simply
restrained" from material error. Their language is
their own; their style is their own; their statements,
arguments, and reflections, with perhaps the exception of those introduced directly with a " Thus saith
the Lord," are all their own. The only Divine agency
attending the composition was the somewhat negative one of excluding from the mind of the writer
all statements and inculcations inconsistent with the
great object of Divine revelation. Here we have the
maximum of human, with the minimum of Divine,
agency.
But these two antipodal theories are by no means
all. Between these, as extremes, we find almost every
conceivable modification of the two related agencies.
To increase the confusion, old Rabbinical distinctions
between different kinds of inspiration are rehabilitated; and we are told of "the inspiration of superintendence," "the inspiration of elevation," and "the
inspiration of suggestion." Then come distinctions




SCRIPTURE INVSPIRA TION.        233
with respect to the writers; one class being historic,
another didactic, and a third prophetic. Finally, to
render the discrepancies as nearly infinite as possible,
all these classes of writers are combined with all these
kinds of inspiration, through almost the whole scale
of possible mathematic permutations. How, now, in
such a Babel of conflicting opinions, are we to ascertain the true one? How can we expect to arrive at a
view satisfactory even to ourselves?
It would detain us quite too long were I to attempt
even the hastiest review of the arguments by which
any one of these theories has been defended or assailed.
The controversy, particularly between the verbalists
and the non-verbalists, has been long and earnest.
The arguments, pro and contra, fill volumes. Nor do
I think that such a review, even were it practicable,
would bring us to any satisfactory conclusion. No
business is more utterly profitless than that of weighing the relative advantages or defects of theories all
equally false. This I understand to be the exact difficulty with all these theories of the nature of Scripture inspiration. And I suppose the great reason
why no one of them has ever been able to secure
general acquiescence, is to be found precisely in
their common, and perhaps equal, untruth.
I style them all false, and equally so, because they
all equally proceed upon the false and Deistical dogma
that Divine agency and human agency are mutually
exclusive. Some things man, unaided, or left to himself, can do; those he is left to do. Only when the
requirement surpasses man's ability are we to bring
in the supposition of Divine efficiency. Whatever,
21




234           INGHAMI L ECTURES.
therefore, is required in the Bible over and above what
its human authors were able to furnish, that is God's;
all else is theirs. This principle underlies all these
theories alike. They all conceive of God's agency
and man's agency as similar, in their relationship, to
two antagonistic mechanical forces. Increase the
one, and the effect of the other is correspondingly
reduced; diminish the one, and the other proportionately preponderates. The moment God's agency in a
prophet becomes extraordinarily great, his own becomes extraordinarily small. In like manner, the less
the Divine influence, through withdrawal of the Spirit,
the greater the human. It is a see-saw relationship,
in which the higher the Divine element rises, the
lower the human falls; and, vice versa, the higher the
human rises, the lower the Divine falls.
Now a more radically anti-Christian notion never
found entrance into the Christian Church. The
principle is borrowed from the Deistic world-view.
It is not only not true, but even the exact reverse
of truth. Christianity teaches us that such is the
relation of God and man, that, in all their mutual
bearings over against each other, the greater the
Divine agency the greater the human, and the less the
Divine the less the human. I need not prove this by
any formal argument; its mere statement carries conviction to every truly Christian mind. Christianity is
radically and eternally at war with that whole conception of the world and of man, according to which
each, under normal conditions, exists and acts independently of Divine agency. It tells us that all
things are constantly upheld by the word of his




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TION.        235
power. Man lives and moves and has his being in
God. His dower of freedom gives him, indeed, sufficient personal independence to enable him personally
to antagonize or personally to choose God; but even
in the exercise of this freedom he is not independent
of God. Indeed, he can not become fully and truly
human without that supernatural Divine light, which
lighteth every man that cometh into the world. He
can never become a proper moral agent without that
insphering atmosphere of God's Spirit, in whose light
he discerns moral distinctions, and in whose promptings and reproofs he finds impulses to action. Especially in the phenomena of specifically religious life
do we note the great law I have enunciated. The
greater the awakening and convicting agency of the
Spirit, the intenser the contrition and agony of the
sinner; the livelier the testimony of the Spirit to
adoption, the keener the joy of the pardoned; the
more perfect the indwelling of the Spirit, the highertoned and more active the Christian's life. Even the
heightened joys and activities of the ultimately glorified, are represented by Christianity as conditioned
upon the fuller and higher Divine manifestations,
which await them in the future state. I repeat it,
then, that the conception of the relationship subsisting between God and man, which underlies the
dictational theory, the supervisional theory, and all
compromises between the two, is Deistic, anti-Christian, not merely untrue, but the exact reverse ot
truth. Inspiration, like- every other fact, conditioned
upon the co-efficiency of God and man, is a product,
not of contra, but of con-spiring forces.




236           INGHAM LECTURES
Such being the Christian view of the relationship
between Divine agency and human agency, it necessarily follows that the most thoroughly inspired man
is the most thoroughly self-active. This is as we
should antecedently expect, when we remember that
man was originally created in God's image, and was
designed to share in his life. It corresponds, too,
with the uniform Scripture representation of the natural man as dead, and of the Spirit as life-giving.
If God is the fountain of our life and archetype of
our nature, how can we expect to acquire more and
more of self-life, except by appropriating more and
more of his vivific inflowings? Apart from God's
power, we could not exist at all; apart from his
Spirit, our life can only be earthy, psychic, animal.
True normal activities of spirit can wake to life
only when we become partakers of the Divine nature.
You see at a glance how instantaneously and
completely this thought revolutionizes the traditional
conceptions of Bible inspiration. According to all
those theories, from highest verbalistic to lowest
supervisional, the trance-mediumship of the prophet
was regarded as the highest form  of inspiration.
Here the human activity was least; ergo, so it was
assumed, the Divine must be at its highest pitch.
Instead of being the highest form  of inspiration, it
is in reality the lowest. Only distinguish correctly
between inspiration, as that Divine operation upon
the soul by which it is prepared to apprehend a
Divine communication, and revelation, which is the
Divine act of presenting such communication to a
soul so prepared, and you see at once that the mere




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TION.        237
production of a prophetic trance or ecstasy is the
lowest operation of the Holy Spirit, to which we
should in any wise feel authorized to apply the word
inspiration. Indeed, it can not be proved that it
necessarily involves any thing more than an influence
upon the nervous organism. We see essentially the
same thing in the phenomena of animal magnetism.
The hypnotized subject is in the same relation to the
operator, as the entranced seer to God. The magnetizer can even make revelations to him; can cause
him to see, hear, taste, think, desire what he will.
He can cause him to relate, under this influence,
what he sees, hears, tastes, thinks, desires. It is
mysterious, indeed;- but it shows us that the mere
entrancing of a man is the lowest, most natural, most
mechanical of all forms of theopneustic inspiration.
It was for this very reason, doubtless, that it was the
first employed by God, after visible theophanies gave
place to spiritual manifestations in the history of
redemption. Very analogous effects of Divine power
have often been witnessed under the preaching of
the Word, in the history of every living branch of the
Church.
But whatever may-be thought of the relative rank
and dignity of the trance, as distinguished from other
forms of the inspired state, one thing is certain, and
that is, that we have no proof whatever that one
syllable of our Holy Scriptures was ever written in
that psychical condition. However frequent an experience it may or may not have been, in connection
with the reception of Divine communications, there
is not a particle of evidence that ever a prophet or




238           INGHAM LECTURES.
apostle, while yet in his trance, wrote down such
Divine communications. Every natural probability
lies against the supposition. All questions, therefore, with respect to the nature and rank of so-called
prophetic inspiration are ruled out of this discussion;
they have no connection with our question of Scripture inspiration, as defined at the outset.
How, then-, are we to conceive of the extraordinary Divine influence under which the sacred
writers wrote? In my own opinion, it was identical
with that Divine influence under which the same
Divine messengers orally taught and personally governed the Church. It was the distinctive charisma
of their office, as authorized expounders and plenipotentiary executors of God's will. That it was one
thing when they taught with the pen, and another
thing when they taught by the voice, is nowhere
hinted, even in the remotest manner. Peter's pentecostal sermon must have been just as theopneustic,
when it fell upon the ears of the congregated multitudes, as after Luke had written it down on a piece
of parchment. If Paul's discourse on Mars' Hill'is
to-day inspired truth, it must have been inspired
truth when first it rang out above the classic landscape in which it was pronounced. The apostles
every-where place their written and spoken instructions on a perfect equality, claiming for the one
as truly as for the other, full Divine authority.*
The precise psychological characteristics of this
inspired state, in which the "holy men" spoke and
* 2 Thessalonians ii, 15; I Corinthians xi, 2; Galatians i, 8, 9;
2 Thessalonians ii, 2, etc.




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TIOZN         239
wrote, we can never expect, in the utter absence of
the like experience, to discover. It seems, however,
clearly inferable, from intimations in their writings,
that the apostles, in all their official teachings by
tongue or pen, retained and exercised their full rational consciousness and freedom. Thus Paul declares, "In the church I had rather speak five words
with my understanding, that by my voice I might
teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue."*  Again, he affirms that "the spirits
of the prophets are subject to the prophets."f  When
charged by Festus with being a crazy ranter, he
replied, "I am  not mad, most noble Festus, but
speak forth the words of truth and soberness.": In
the case of the prophets it might be thought that
Peter's declaration, that they spake, "borne || by the
Holy Ghost," would exclude a normal consciousness
and freedom on their part; but this evidently can
not be maintained. All sons of God are said to be
led by the Spirit; but does this exclude consciousness and freedom on the part of the led? Does it
necessitate the supposition that they are led like so
many somnambulators or drunken persons? This
would be falling back into the wretched mechanical
conception, which constitutes the substructure of the
false theories already rejected. We are rather to conceive of even the prophets, when they stood before
the people and delivered to them God's messages, or
when in their chambers they penned them for future
generations, as more truly, widely, conscious and free,
* I Corinthians xiv, I9.  t Corinthians xiv, 32.
t Acts xxvi, 25.         11 iep6p6evo, 2 Peter i, 21.




240           INGHAM LECTURES.
than those to whom  they spoke. They were conscious, not only of their own inner and personal experiences, but also of God's presence, and of the
impending judgments just ready to fall upon their
guilty countrymen. The range of their lifted powers
was broader, freer, than without Divine inspiration it
could have been. The necessary effect of the Divine
inworking upon intellect, sensibilities, and will, was
not to stupefy, but to quicken; not to repress, but to
energize; not to smother, but to ignite. All theopneustic inspiration is generically one; the peculiarities
of the official prophetic and apostolic inspiration grew
out of their special offices, as Divinely authorized
intermediaries between Jehovah and man. In its
nature it was such a Divine influence, as lifted the
soul to where it could work in perfect unison of
power and purpose with God. It had its varying
limits and conditions, both in the nature and spiritual
attainments of the subject, and in the extent and
character of the revelations enjoyed; but for its specific purpose-to wit, to secure authoritative forms
of Divine teaching and requirement in his Churchit was, in all cases, and under all dispensations, perfect. This brings us to consider, in the last place,
III. THE EFFECTS OF SCRIPTURE INSPIRATION.
The question is, What did this extraordinary Divine influence upon the sacred writers, while writing,
secure? I reply:
I. It did not secure to the Church, so far as we
know, any new truth.
The disclosure of new truths is one operation;




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TION.         24
inspiration another. The work of revealing is usually ascribed in Scripture to the second person in the
Adorable Trinity, the work of inspiring to the third.
Revelations were often given without inspiration; inspiration, often, without revelations. Doubtless, every
degree of inspiration was, by reason of its natural effect upon the soul, a degree of preparation for the
receiving of Divine communications; but it does not
appear that any great distinctive doctrine of revealed
religion was first revealed to one of the sacred writers
while engaged in writing. We say, therefore, that the
inspiration vouchsafed to the sacred writers, while
writing, did not secure to the Church, so far as we
know, any new truth.
2. It did not secure to us, if I rightly apprehend
the matter, an exclusively Divine expression of sacred
history and revealed doctrine and duty, as claimed by
the advocates of the dictational theory. It is absurd,
in speaking of the language of Scripture, to speak
of it as Divine, or as human. It is neither purely
the one, nor purely the other. It is rather Divine
and human in inseparable unity, theanthropic in the
strictest sense.
Look at yonder inexperienced exhorter; last week
a rude and reckless sinner, to-day pleading with
mighty and effectual eloquence before the touched
and awe-struck throng. How the swift periods of
burning statement, and entreaty, and argument,and expostulation, roll from his lips! Do you ask me whose
are those words?   Foolish question.  You surely
can not say they are literally and strictly the words
of the Holy Ghost.  Neither are they strictly and




242           INGHAMI LECTURES.
properly his own. A week ago he could not have
uttered them, to save his soul. Even now, lift from
his heart the mighty burden of gracious prophecy
which the Spirit is laying upon him, and in three sentences he will flounder to an inglorious end. Every
such attempt to draw the dividing line between the
Divine and the human, in religious phenomena, is
as hopeless and absurd as to ask the apple-blossom
whether it is a child of the soil or of the sun. Every
Christian's prayers and praises and right relations
of religious experience, while human, are yet, in a
most real and true sense, theopneustic.  They are
not, on the one hand, the words of God, independent
of man; nor are they, on the other, the words of a
man, independent of God. They are the utterances
of a soul lifted above the low level of sinful and natural experiences; enlightened, vitalized, created anew
in Christ Jesus. They are not necessarily unerring
utterances, since G.od has not constituted them
prophets and apostles; but neither are they human,
as excluding the Divine. The words of Holy Writ
differ from such words in authority, but not in this
peculiarity of authorship. They are neither Divine
nor human, in the disjunctive sense; but, conjunctively, both, at one and the same time. They constitute neither a Divine expression, nor a human
expression of the truth; but an expression at once
perfectly Divine and perfectly human.
3. Precisely what the inspiration of the sacred
writers did secure the Church was, a rule of faith and
practice exactly equal in authority to the oral teachings and commands of these God-sent messengers.




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TIOV.         243
This we must suppose to have been the grand
leading purpose of God in causing the Holy Scriptures to be written. Nothing more than such a rule
was needed; nothing less would well answer. He
could have preserved the purity of the Church's faith
by continuing the succession of individual prophets
down to the end of time; he could have done it by
constituting the Roman popes and their clergy a body
of infallible Rabbins; but having chosen to pour out
his Spirit upon allfesh, and slowly build up a kingdom of heaven under the imperfect forms and processes of historic evolution, it was needful that there
should exist somewhere in the Church a standard by
which all teachings and practices could be tested. So
long as the apostles lived, such a standard existed in
their oral instructions; since their departure, it exists
in the writings in which God caused them to sum up
those instructions. These are to us all that prophets
or apostles could be without additional revelations.
They are as authoritative for us as would be the vocal
accents of Christ. They are God's word to us; and
evermore throughout the Church resounds the requisition, "If any man speak, let him speak as these
oracles of God."
The lapse of time forbids my taking up any of the
doubter's threadbare arguments against the fact of
Scripture inspiration, or anticipating, in any wise, objections which may be raised against the view above
presented of its nature and effects. I think the view
I have imperfectly suggested would aid in giving
new and solid answers to some at least of the traditional arguments against the fact; but already I




244           INGHAM LECTURES:
have detained you much too long. Accept, in place
of further argument, one word of wisdom. An honest,
truth-loving mind, willing to seek the truth on this or
almost any other point, to seek it by the light of
Christian experience and revelation, and especially by
the aids of God's Spirit, will seldom fail of satisfaction. Even if darkness shroud here and there a
point, such a mind has learned enough to know
that, with increasing light, all darkness must disappear. He therefore seeks the light, the true light;
walks in it; and his path grows brighter and brighter
unto perfect day.
Young men, if you will take this one thought
to heart, I shall feel that I have not come a thousand miles to speak to you in vain. The way to
find the truth is to love the truth. The way to escape from our natural darkness is to enter into the
light of God.
While we have been reasoning together here, the
millions of Christian Europe have been celebrating
the martyr-death of Mark. Eighteen hundred and
one years ago yesterday, they tell us, on the feast-day
of Serapis, tutelar deity of Alexandria, the holy evangelist, then laboring in that city, fell into the hands
of the maddened heathen. They tied his feet to a
chariot, and dragged him through the streets and
down to the sea-shore, dragged him the livelong day
over hot sands and stony banks, every-where marking
their track with shreds of flesh and a lengthening
trail of blood. Exhausted at last, and marveling that
their victim died not, they cast him into a dungeon
for the night. Eighteen hundred and one years ago




SCRIPTURE INSPIRA TION.         245
this morning,* they found him where they had placed
him the night preceding, but wondrously refreshed
and quickened by two visions of glory, which had
been vouchsafed him during the darkness. Again
they bind him to the chariot, and drag his mangled
form till God, in mercy, grants him in death a happy
deliverance.
History tells us that, a little more than three
centuries from that day, the colossal image of Serapis
was dragged, mutilated and dishonored, through those
same streets of Alexandria, and Mark proclaimed the
patron saint of the city. The proud temple of the
idol-one of the grandest in the whole world-was
demolished, while fanes sacred to Mark began to
rise throughout the earth. May we not discover in
the fortunes of this perhaps latest of all the sacred
writers save John, a significant type of the fortunes
of that inspired Word on which we have been dwelling? Ofttimes has it been dragged over the sharp
rocks of hostile criticism, ofttimes across the hot
sands of scorching sarcasm, ofttimes through. the
mire of filthy jesting: but God has been with it. It
refuses to die. Even when its enemies have fancied
it finally and forever dispatched, it has erelong reasserted its indestructible vitality, overtoppling earthborn fanes of superstition, and replacing them with
temples not made with hands. Even the works of
nature are frail, caducous, and transitory, when compared with this inspired Book. The grass withereth,
the flower fadeth, but the Word of our God abideth
forever.
*April 25, I869: Feast of St. Mark.








LECTURE VIII.
THE ALLEGED
DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE.
BY THE
REV. FALES H. NEWHALL, D. D.,
Professor in Wesleyan University,
MIDDLETOWN, CONN.








LECTURE VIII.
THE ALLEGED        DISCREPANCIES OF
SCRIPTURE.
AEz irdv ro 26TO' a0 rb E  avrT 6ato oyo7oovtevov elvat 7rdvry. To [ev
yap aX??OeZ 7rdvraa avvddet.         ARISTOTLE.
IT is very obvious that the question of the essential truthfulness of Scripture is not to remain
open until all its manifold facts are seen to be
woven into a harmonious and symmetrical whole.
Every candid objector must concede that there may
be evidence sufficient to produce the conviction of
essential truthfulness, although many details and
minutiae may appear exceptional. Not until we know
all things, can we see all truth to be perfectly harmonious with itself. In our study of nature and of
history, after being perfectly convinced of certain
truths, we always find ourselves carrying along packages of exceptional facts, which we can not at the
time adjust to others, but which we are sure that we
can, as we grow wiser, drop into their proper places.
"Nature," says Tyndall, "is full of anomalies, which
no foresight can predict, and which experiment alone
can reveal. From the deportment of a vast number of bodies, we should be led to conclude that
22                249




250           INGHAM LECTURES.
heat always produces expansion, and that cold always
produces contraction. But water steps in, and bismuth steps in, to qualify this conclusion." Yet the
anomalies of which Tyndall speaks, when followed
out, lead to the discovery of higher harmonies in nature. By a bold sweep of inductive reasoning, Newton grasped the truth of universal gravitation. He
came into that close sympathy with nature that led
him to judge, by unmistakable intuition, that he felt
the throb of her heart. There were certain facts that
could not then be reconciled with this induction; yet
so overwhelming was the evidence in its favor, that
he felt sure that deeper study and broader observation would bring them into harmony. The history
of physical science has justified this faith.
Apparent irregularities in celestial phenomena
have led to some of the grandest.discoveries of
astronomy. Mysterious variations in the position of
certain fixed stars, carefully observed and studied for
more than twenty years, led Bradley to the discovery
of the great and fruitful facts of aberration and nutation; the first furnishing final proof of the progressive motion of light, and the second showing that
the pole of the earth, instead of describing a smooth
and uniform circle in its revolution, traces a wavelike curve among the stars. These two facts have
given to modern- astronomy its precision and accuracy. Planetary perturbations have been the harvestfield of recent astronomical discoverers. Certain
irregularities in the path of Uranus led. some who
feebly held the clew of nature, to speculate whether
the law of gravity at that immense distance operated




ALLEGED DISCRREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 25 1
in all its rigor; but the true astronomer saw mirrored in these perturbations another world, pacing
its solitary round as the outmost sentinel of the
solar. system. Nature's laws are thus often found
by the philosopher to be knotted in discrepancies,
which, when patiently disentangled, have furnished
him threads to guide him through new labyrinths
of fact and law. Scripture discrepancies are thus
the clews to higher harmonies. The true philosopher does'not demand a demonstrated theory of
these irregularities in nature.  The logical understanding is not troubled by them, if a plausible
hypothesis of reconciliation can be invented.  A
reasonable mind, which has satisfied itself on independent evidence, as to the essential truth, is content
if imagination can suggest any adjustment of exceptional facts. In this respect we should go to Scripture, as the true philosopher goes to nature.
It may be, in the first place, remarked, that modern criticism, with all its acuteness, has not discovered new discrepancies of any importance. Colenso
and Strauss repeat objections that were urged against
the first Christian apologists. The " Wolfenbiittel
Fragments" urge the same difficulties in the Gospel
genealogies, and the same differences between the
Jesus of John and the Jesus of the synoptics, that
were fully discussed by the early Christian fathers.
Mr. Parker thus stated the discrepancy between the
law and the Gospel: "Here are two forms of religion, which differ widely, set forth and enforced'by
miracles; the one ritual and formal, the other actual
and spiritual; the one the religion of fear, the other




252            INGHAM LECTURES.
of love; one finite, and resting entirely on the special revelation made to Moses, the other absolute, and
based on the universal revelation of God, who enlightens all that come into the world; one offers
only earthly recompense, the other makes immortality a motive to Divine life; one compels men, the
other: invites them. One-half the Bible repeals the
other half; the Gospel annihilates the law."*
But we find the apostles themselves profoundly
pondering this problem of the antithesis between the
law and the Gospel, and the first generation of Christians bewildered and confused about its solution.
Paul's acutest logic and profoundest spiritual apprehension were. taxed, to state clearly and fairly solve
this problem.  It rent the first Church at Jerusalem;
it brought upon Paul his heaviest labors and fiercest
persecutions; it gave rise to the Epistles to the Romans, the Galatians, and the Hebrews; the echoes
of this controversy ring through every Pauline speech
and letter; it was one of the causes, or occasions, of
the formidable and wide-consuming heresy of Gnosticism. Mr. Parker declared this discrepancy irreconcilable and fatal. So did the heretics and persecutors of the first two centuries; and' they stated
the discrepancy as sharply and urged it more vehemently than Mr. Parker. Yet, in spite of it,
Christianity has become what she is. In her very
cradle she throttled this dragon; and will she tremble
before the dragon's seed to-day? If she proved the
old and the new covenants to be identical in essence,
when it was only by faith that she saw the Christian
"Discourses," page 324.




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 253
flower and fruit in the Judaic husk, much more will
she triumph, when the fragrance of those flowers
comes wafted to us through historic centuries, when
those ripened fruits are dropping on all lands.
Another preliminary thought of special importance is this: the perfect simplicity, the guileless
confidence, with which the Scripture writers spread
apparently conflicting statements before us, is most
suggestive and instructive. While the earliest commentators, Jewish and Christian, often manifest the
greatest anxiety to reconcile and harmonize these
discrepancies, the Scripture writers calmly go on
their way without giving them the least attention.
No editorial explanation is offered to adjust the two
narratives of creation; they are simply set side by
side, with all their divergencies and contrasts. There
is no editorial weighing of conflicting statements in
the Gospels, no word of comment to harmonize the
different accounts of Christ's birth and resurrection.
Thus is spread over all the Scripture the artlessness
of conscious truth. To the candid mind this impression is irresistible.  Every-where assuming in the
most solemn manner its own Divine truthfulness, yet
nowhere anxious to vindicate its consistency with itself, it reveals a sublime consciousness of integrity,
most impressive and convincing to a healthy soul.
So, when Moses wove into his history the patriarchal
narratives of creation, he left each to tell its own
story. So he wrote down the Decalogue of Exodus
and the Decalogue of Deuteronomy, without minute
reference to the stony tablets; not careful to use
the identical words in both, as a forger would be




254           INGZZAAi LECTURES.
sure to do where a copy is professedly given. So
Ezra gives us the first and second records of the
kings of Judah and of Israel, without editorial
alterations and corrections to bring them into harmony.
The value of these discrepancies is thus very high
in enabling us to understand the real nature of the
documents in which they occur. They show that we
have in the Scripture narratives the original documents, the genealogical records, statutes, speeches,
songs, having all the flavor of contemporary authorship, such as would be called, in our day, the raw
material for history, rather than history itself. These
materials have never been digested and assimilated
into a uniform whole, in the mind of any philosphical
historian: no Thucydides has woven them into an
artistic treatise. So the Gospels are memoirs, memorabilia of Christ's life, sayings, and doings; set down
by different authors, at different times and places.
The original facts have not been filtered through the
imaginations or judgments of professional authors,
but are spread before us in what criticism  calls
rawness, incompleteness, and redundancy; not fitted
to each other, or adjusted to any system or theory
whatever. Thus the narratives are often abrupt, fragmentary, assuming and suggesting much that is not
said; or disappointing, by leaving much unsaid.
Thus Mark assumes that the reader is already well
acquainted with Jesus and with John the Baptist.
John adds a supplement to his Gospel, giving an account of Christ's appearance at the Lake of Tiberias.
The history of the Acts breaks off abruptly in the




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 255
midst of Paul's imprisonment, without hinting any
thing about the result of his appeal to Caesar. Discrepancies are inevitable in such a mass of materials;
but how valuable are they, as showing the real character of the materials, proving them to be the original data on which all systematic history must be
founded! We have here no secondary formations
of critical conclusions or mythic imaginings to dig
through, in order to reach the primitive facts. The
discrepancies of the Gospels thus furnish weapons
with which Strauss's whole theory may be overturned. This must be admitted by any candid mind
that does not start with the dogmatic assumption
that the supernatural, being unnatural, is never to
be believed on any evidence whatever.
I. The first class of discrepancies that we note are
those which present us with diversities in form, while
yet there is identity in matter. Truth is presented
us here in manifold draperies; in phenomena terrestrial and celestial; in shadows and symbols; in actions
and language; in history, biography, argument, speech,
and song; in exhortation, parable, and proverb. It is
declared, inferred, intimated, presupposed; yet it is
ever one and the same truth, speaking with all these
various voices to the various moods and conditions of
humanity.  Historic statement may be essential to
reach one phase of mind, and parable or allegory to
reach another; and this drapery of truth may, by its
wonderful variety, display the highest wisdom. As
matter is obviously more essential than form, if there
be essential identity in matter, diversity in manner




256          IZVG HAM LECTURES.
and'form is not only not to be deprecated, but is to
be desired.
For example: In the evangelical narratives, Matthew says that at Jesus' baptism a voice from heaven
was heard, which said, "This is my beloved Son, in
whom I am well pleased;"* while Luket tells us that
the words were, " Thou art my beloved Son; in thzee
I am well pleased." Now, it is perfectly clear that
bothz Matthew and Luke can not have given us the
precise form of words. One uses the second person,
and the other the third; in the one the voice addresses the Savior, in the other John, or the multitude; yet the matter is identical. The truth is the
same, whether spoken in the second person or the
third. Such discrepancies as this may make insuperable difficulties for an interpreter who regards the
Scripture writers as the mere amanuenses of the revealing Spirit; but can not perplex him who intelligently distinguishes between matter and form. That
the inspired writers themselves made this distinction
is obvious, both from the freedom that they exercise
in quoting each other, and from the varied phraseology in which the same writer describes the same
events, and reports the same spoken words. For example, in Luke's narrative of Saul's conversion,: we
read, "And he trembling and astonished said, Lord,
what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said
unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be
told thee what thou must do." Paul himself relates
this conversation, in his speech on the stairs of the
tower of Antonia,~ in this language: "And I said,
*Matt. iii, 17.  t Luke iii, 22.  t Acts ix, 6.  ~ Acts xxii, IO.




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 257
What shall I do, Lord? [instead of' What wilt thou
have me to do?'] *  And the Lord said unto me,
Arise, and go into Damascus [instead of'the city'];
and there it shall be told thee of all things which are
appointed for thee to do [instead of'what thou must
do']."t Again, in Paul's speech before Agrippa,: we
have the revelation made to him after his visit to
Ananias, blended with that made on the road. to
Damascus; for there we read that Christ says, "But
rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared
unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister
and a witness both of these things which thou hast
seen, and of those things in the which I shall appear
unto thee." In his defense before Agrippa, the time
and place of this revelation were not essential; it was
the fact that he preached to the Gentiles in obedience
to a heavenly vision that he would emphasize.
If there were any place where literal exactness
might have been expected, it would certainly be in
the copying of the Decalogue, the commands written
in tables of stone; where the verba ipsissima would
not only seem to be of the highest importance, but
where they must also have been familiar. Yet, in
comparing the two records of the Decalogue given in
the Pentateuch,~ it is perfectly clear that both can
not be literal copies from the tables. Thus, in the
opening of the Fourth Commandment, "Remember
the Sabbath-day," Exodus I[ gives us the verb l1f,
zachor, and DeuteronomyT the verb nif, shamor,
* Ti TroLjtoW, instead of Ti lxe OeXet; troijoa.
t Hepi iravTrwv iv, instead ofa oL; and reTraKai ro-t roLcrat, instead of oe
bet Irocelv.        t Acts xxvi, 16.
~ Ex. xx, and Deut. v.  II Ex. xx, 8.  AT Deut. v, 12.
23




2 58          INGVGAI,  LECTURES.
while the Deuteronomy copy inserts the connective
particle., ve, before all the Commandments, from
the Sixth to the Tenth, inclusive.  In fact, the
reason for the observance of the Fourth Commandment, as given in the Exodus copy, "For in six
clays the Lord made the heaven and the earth," etc.,
is wholly omitted in Deuteronomy; and in its stead
we find an exhortation parenthetically interjected:
"And remember that thou wast a servant in the land
of Egypt," etc. Colenso presses these discrepancies
as demonstrating that the Pentateuch is not historically reliable; but the objection can have no weight,
except with one who confounds matter and form. The
Scripture writers are all too much busied with the
essentials of truth to be critically punctilious about
its drapery. They produce broad impressions, aiming
at the average heart and conscience, instead of choosing phrases for critical ears. Spiritual freedom emancipated them from the restraints that cramped and
fettered Rabbis and Fathers, as with fetters of iron.
The early Christian Fathers, as Clement, Polycarp,
and Justin, show much of the same freedom in
quoting Scripture phraseology; but, as we approach
the mediaeval era, the letter stiffens into a stony
hardness and coldness, that chills and crushes out
the spirit.
If, then, the objector press the question, "Was
the word spoken on Sinai'iT, or fin'? was the
declaration at the baptism ab eT, or o3Vro aortev?" we
reply that we do not know; and it is not essential
that we should know, for literal exactness is not essential to the real purpose of revelation. Had it been




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 259
so, faithful phonographers could have given us better
Gospels than the inspired evangelists; a Galilean
Boswell would have been selected, rather than the
spiritual and contemplative John. But while the Divine Spirit, bringing all things to the remembrance
of the disciple, does not call up in his memory the
precise language of the heavenly message, he does
suggest its precise import,-in Luke, as related to
the world without; in John, as related to the world
within.  Not to the weakness or ignorance of the
human co-workerl in revelation, not to caprice or accident, are we to charge these irregularities, or variations from  literal exactness in the records.  Not
because the substance is from the Spirit, and the
form from the man, do we find these diversities; for
both form and substance are from the Spirit and
from the man. The Word is Divine and human;
the Divine coming through the human. By this
variety in form, the Divine Spirit would teach us
that truth, while ever the same, is yet ever manifold.
The stiff, precise formula can set forth only one of
its aspects; its whole meaning can not be cramped
into an inflexible sentence.  The Scripture is not
addressed to the logical understanding, but to the
man.  It is not a collection of dry and bristling
formulas, but of living truths; which, like the cherubim of the apocalyptic vision, look before and after,
above and beneath, without and within.  Science
may gather up these truths as well as she can,
and arrange them in her cabinets of philosophical
theology; but she has no right to demand that
the winds of the Spirit should blow, and the




260             NGHAM'LECT'URES.
Sun of Righteousness shine, by her tables and
formulas.
II. In the second place, there are apparent discrepancies, not only between different Scripture authors,
but between different works of the same author, arising from differences in the point of view. The same
truth is viewed on different sides, or in different connections, or is differently applied, for the enlightenment and instruction of the reader. Under this
head comes the subjective condition of Scripture
authors. They are greatly diverse in mental character, education, and circumstances. They are scattered through a series of ages, in different lands, in
different civilizations and barbarisms. This it is that
gives the Scripture its infinite variety; its wonderful
manifoldness in thought and expression; its inexhaustible adaptability to man, at all periods of life,
and in all the varied phases of thought and feeling,
and even to the whims and caprices of this manifold human nature. God speaks through kings and
through herdsmen; through lawgiver and statesman,
philosopher and poet; through shepherd, fisherman,,and tent-maker. He calls a lonely nomad from faroff Ur of the Chaldees, who wanders all his life,
pitching his tent among his flocks and herds. He
talks with the lawgiver among the grandeurs of
Egyptian civilization. He speaks to the prophetorator, who pours forth warning and invective and
consolation, in the gate-ways of Jerusalem. He
touches the harp-string of the shepherd-poet, so that
it thrills through all time.  He speaks from  the




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 261
miry prison of Jeremiah; and from the banks of the
Chebar, where Ezekiel sits amid the solemn and
sublime monuments of Assyria. He speaks through
Solomon, the royal sage, as on his ivory throne he
receives embassadors from the ends of the earth;
through Daniel, the captive; and Nehemiah, the cupbearer, mourning the desolations of Zion. The dry
Matthew, the graphic Mark, the circumstantial Luke,
the mystic John, the stern James, the fiery Peter, and
the logical Paul, are various channels through which
one and the same spirit pours the water of life upon
a thirsty world. This wonderful variety can not
exist without wonderful diversities. Seer and sage,
poet and logician, king and peasant, each sees his
own vision of the same truth, and tells us what he
sees. He who hath ears to hear can feel that the
Epistle to the Romans chords with the Psalms of
David, and the Lamentations of Jeremiah with the
great shout of the triumphant Church in the Apocalypse. Many-sided humanity could be reached only
by this many-voiced revelation. Man must be addressed by man, else he could not understand; but
manifold men are requisite to touch all the sides of
man. The Infinite Spirit must use a vast number
and variety of finite channels, to pour itself upon the
world.
Take, as a first illustration of this species of discrepancy, the two distinct narratives of the creation,
as given in the first two chapters of Genesis. The
second narrative is evidently distinct and independent, going back to the very beginning, and bearing
a regular title: "These are the generations of the




262           INGHAM LECTURES.
heavens and the earth"-as we afterward read as
titles before the histories of the successive patriarchs-"These are the generations of Adam, Seth,
Noah," etc. Whether the two narratives originally
proceeded from one author or from two different authors, we do not now consider; for, whether they were
originally composed, or only finally revised, by the
inspired author of the Pentateuch, is comparatively
unimportant. The contrast between the two records
is striking, and objectors have declared the discrepancies to be inexplicable. If the book of Genesis commenced with the fourth verse of the second chapter,
although we should have no distinct account of the
creation of the heavenly bodies, we should still have a
full narrative of the formation of the earth and all its
inhabitants, and especially a full detail of the primeval
history of man. The first narrative gives a record
of six creative days; the second speaks of the day
when God created the heavens and the earth. If
the second narrative stood alone, we should certainly
speak of the creative day, instead of the creative
week. The first narrative brings man upon the
scene at its close; the second at its opening. The
first narrative speaks of man as created in God's image, male and female; while the second speaks of a
single man formed from the dust of the earth, and
of the woman formed from the man. Thus, if we
had the first narrative without the second, we should
think of the human race as brought into being in
numbers, like the lower animals, at the close of the
sixth creative day. Of the individuals Adam and
Eve, we should know nothing. Had we the second




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 263
narrative without the first, we should certainly think
that a single man was created as the first solitary
inhabitant of the earth; that after he had begun to
feel his solitude, the lower orders of animals were
brought into being; and that the woman was created
last of all. But all these diversities vanish when we
consider that we have here the same events described
from two different points of view. The first gives
us creation as viewed from without, as it might be
described by a spectator from another planet, taking
his stand upon the earth, and from thence beholding
the grand panorama move for the six successive
days; the second, as viewed from within, as described by the being for whom earth with its furniture and all its lower inhabitants were made. It
is earth as seen by man, and as related to man.
In the first narrative the successive creative steps
are followed and described with serene, impassive
grandeur, and man is beheld taking his throne of
dominion at the close of the scene; it is creation
as it might have been outlined by a seraph, adoring
the creative Majesty, but having no throb of interest
in us. But man is the center of the second narrative. All nature is focalized in him. As it is interesting only from its relations to him, it is described
not as it was made, feature after feature, in historical
succession, but simply as related to him. The first
is the world as it is in itself, the second is the world
as related to man. Thus are the two narratives not
contradictory, but supplementary to each other; the
first furnishing a broad and grand background for the
fuller and warmer detail of the second. They are




264           INGHAM LECTURES.
related to each other as a landscape sketch to the
picture of a single inhabited spot, which may be but
a speck or a line on the sketch, but which so enlarges in the picture as to dwarf or hide whole landscapes of background. The man of the first narrative
is a far-off, solitary king, with earth as his palace, the
animate creation at his feet, the sun and stars burning as his lamps in the firmamental ceiling above.
We can not clearly see his face nor hear his voice.
The man of the second narrative stands so near us
as to hide the mountains, sun, and stars; but we can
hear him talk with God and with his own heart, as it
first throbs toward the being who was made bone of
his bones and flesh of his flesh.
The greater part of the supposed discrepancies
between the different Gospels disappear when we
consider that the same facts are seen from  four
different points of view.  Many, most, indeed, of
these difficulties have been created by the presupposition that either one of the evangelists composed
a strictly consecutive chronological history. Rules
of composition deduced from the classic models have
been vainly appealed to and applied in the interpretation of the Gospel narratives. Neither one of these
writers aimed to produce a history after the model
of Tacitus or of Thucydides. There is no attempt
at a philosophical history of the origin of Christianity,
no analysis of the character of the Savior, no skillful
historic perspective, no artistic grouping of events,
no chronological unfolding of the mustard-seed truth,
which is destined to root itself through the entire
earth and lift its head to heaven. While men who




4LLEGED DISCREPANVCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 265
insist on judging solely by the rules of classic rhetoric, may regret that the Divine Spirit chose such
forms in which to drape these momentous truths,
they can not fairly criticise the work, unless they
candidly compare it with what it professes to be. It
is not to be judged by the standard which our science decides it ought to have reached, but simply by
the standard it claims to reach. These histories are
trustworthy if they really are what they profess to be.
That this is what they really are, is the Christian
apologist's only claim. It would seem to be a very
obvious principle, too trite to need to be stated, that
an author's point of sight is not to be learned from
a priori assumptions of what it ought to have been,
but from the author himself.
The discrepancies which have been most insisted
on as real, and not apparent, are chronological diversities, the order of a few minute events in time, events
which all describe as transpiring within the limit of
three brief years. Now, while all these historians
paint the same general series of great events, from
our Lord's birth to his resurrection, yet none of them
profess to give such minute chronological data of his
public ministry, as would be necessary to cast the
events of those last three years into the form of a
diary. Although many eminent authors have written
as if this were possible, and many critics seem to regard it as a great desideratum, we neither expect that
it will ever be attained, nor do we think that it was
ever designed by the Spirit, who is the real author
of the Gospel. But while neither evangelist professes to write a journal, each not only has his own




266           INGHAMI LECTURES.
object, but makes it sufficiently plain. Matthew, who
wrote in Hebrew, or rather Aramaic, for the Christian
Jews of Palestine, tells us, at the opening of his work,
that he is to set forth Christ as the son of David, the
son of Abraham. Mark, the preacher to the Gentiles, calls his work the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the
Son of God. Luke, the companion of Paul, who had
stood by that mighty apostle, as, amidst the stormiest
persecution, he aimed his heaven-directed blows at
the partition-wall which separated Jew and Gentile,
writes for the instruction and edification of those
Gentile Churches which he had helped to plant in
the soil prepared by the Jewish synagogues scattered through all the Mediterranean islands and
peninsulas. Matthew looks backward, as indicated
by his Hebrew garb, and sees the Gospel linked to
prophetic Judaism; Mark's eye and heart are filled
with the present; while Luke, with something of a
Pauline intuition, looks far into the future and abroad
over the Gentile nations. These three writers regard
the Gospel in its aggressive aspect; their eye is on
its foes; they give us the words and the works of
Christ as directed to those without; it is Christ as
seen and heard by a world lying in wickedness. But
John gives us the Gospel as seen from within, the
Gospel as it was poured into his heart, while he
leaned on Jesus' bosom. These are the rich, deep
discourses in which, when shut in with the chosen
twelve, or when gathering still closer to his heart the
chosen three, Jesus removed the veil from the most
awful mysteries. Renan tells us that the Christ of
John is not the Christ of the first three evangelists.




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 267
This statement is true, and yet it is false. Socrates
in the cell, talking of immortality in that little circle
of chosen, devoted friends, is not Socrates before
the tribunal, defending himself against the charge
of blasphemy. The face that was turned toward the
tyrant and the sophist was not the face that was
turned toward Phaedo and Crito. Yet without the
quiet faith and calm philosophy of the cell, we could
not understand the bold plea and stern rebuke at the
tribunal. So, while the other evangelists trace the
streams, John leads us to the fountain; the synoptics
show us the beams of light that burst from little
Galilee upon a darkened world; John shows us the
Sun of Righteousness.
As a single illustration of minor discrepancies
arising from diverse points of view, may be mentioned the diverse accounts of the time of our Savior's passion. Mark states* that he was crucified
at the third hour, and that he remained on the cross
until the ninth hour; that is, from nine in the morning till three in the afternoon. Matthew and Luke
do not mention the precise hour of the crucifixion,
but state that he hung on the cross at noon, the
sixth hour, and suffered until the ninth hour, when
he cried with a loud voice and gave up the ghost.t
But John states that it was about the sixth hour
when Pilate sat down in his judgment-seat, on the
pavement before his palace, and called Jesus before
him.t If, now, the trial commenced at noon, it is
evident that the execution could not have taken
* Chap. xv, 35.  t Matthew xxvii, 45; Luke xxiii, 44.
tChap. xix, 14.




268           INGHAI LECTURES.
place at nine in the morning. A simple consideration, however, harmonizes these accounts at once.
There were at Jerusalem two different modes of
estimating time, the one used by the people and
the other by the Government.* The people adopted
the Hebrew mode of computation, and commenced
the day with daylight; while the Government, the
courts, and official persons generally, all followed the
old Roman mode of computation, commencing the
day with midnight. In all official transactions there
must, then, have been a mingling of the two modes
of computation, the one being employed by the
officers and the other by the people. Jews who had
received a Greek education, sometimes used one and
sometimes the other.t Now, granting that it would
be more natural for John to use the popular reckoning, it is not at all unlikely that, in describing the
arraignment of Jesus and his trial before Pilate, John
should have used the official designations of time; in
other words, have spoken of the hours in the language used by Pilate and his officers, by those who
tried and crucified Jesus. The sixth hour of the Roman was the first hour of the Jew, and all the circumstances of the trial, such as the cock-crowing,
the morning chill, which drove Peter into the highpriest's hall to warm himself among the servants,
show that Jesus was led to Caiaphas very early in
the day, and the trial before Pilate followed immediately. It can not be demonstrated that this view
is correct, but with so easy a solution of the difficulty
*Cf. Tholuck on John, I. 39 and I9, 14.
t Cf. Josephus de bell. Jud., Lib. VI, cap. 9, 3, and Vita, cap. 54.




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 269
at hand, it would be very rash to assume that there
is a real discrepancy.
III. Not only may apparent discrepancy arise
from difference in the points of sight taken by the
authors, but also from the same difference in the
hearers or readers of Scripture. Scripture is as diverse as man, whose infinitely diversified wants it
mirrors, whose myriad-chorded nature it touches; as
diverse as the nature on whose bosom man is cradled.
As man is one, under all shades of color, babbling all
varieties of language, dwelling in all climes, having
ever the same central wants, the same sadness and
gladness,-so is this book most Divinely human, in
its vital unity amid infinite diversity. Now, if we
take up our abode in the center of Sahara, it may be
easy to quarrel with nature; so if we pitch our tent
amid the rites of Leviticus, the cavils and doubts of
Ecclesiastes, or the strange and startling symbols of
Ezekiel, we may easily quarrel with Scripture; yet
there is an Arab to whom the desert is home, and
there is a tropic soul for whom the jungles of Ezekiel
are none too rank and warm. He who stands on
John's mount of vision, does not care to follow the
steps of a Pauline demonstration; and he who ever
plods along logical highways, can never swoop upon
truth with apocalyptic intuition.
Scripture addresses diverse faculties, as well as
diverse men. The song may perfectly harmonize
with the syllogism; yet it is hard for the man who
is influenced mainly by reason to agree with him who
is swayed mainly by feeling, and harder to see that it




270           ING IZ1AM LECTURES.
is the same truth, under different aspects, that they
both believe. It takes a comprehensive mind to distinguish the same voice, now speaking to reason, now
to understanding, and now to imagination, as the
chemist sees the same water, now exhaling in vapor,
now dropping in rain, now feathering in snow, and
now flashing in ice. The graceful drapery of a symbol reveals to one a truth that another refuses to
see unless skeletoned in a dogma. When Socrates
roused himself from his last stupor to adjure Crito
not to forget to sacrifice a cock to /Esculapius, he declared his faith in immortality far more clearly and
beautifully than when arguing away the doubts of
Simmias. He would have his friend carry a thankoffering for him to the god of health, because that,
through death, he has found life at last. Yet dull
men have quoted this passage of the Phoedo, to
prove that Socrates died in superstitious doubt.
They could understand the reasoning that plodded
toward truth by short, slow steps, but could not understand the Platonic symbolism that revealed truth
as by a flash of lightning.*
IV. There is also an apparent discrepancy between the whole and the part, between the concise
and the detailed narratives of the same events. This
is closely connected with what we have just discussed;
as discrepancy arising from diverse points of view, in
fact, as will appear from our illustrations, is the same,
under another phase. Sometimes one writer sketches
what another paints, as the second chapter of GenPhxedo, Ed. Stallb., 18 A.; cf. Stallbaums' Note.




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 271
esis fills out a sketch given in two verses of the first;
as Mark adds graphic touches and warm colorings to
the bare outline of Matthew; as Luke, in the book
of Acts, draws out into minute narrative, incidents
just alluded to in the Pauline epistles. Events are
grouped together, in single verses or lines of the
Psalms and the prophets, which, in the Old Testament narratives, are painted in full historical perspective. Under this head are to be explained most
of the diversities in the genealogical tables of Scripture. As these records of lineage furnished the
framework for the most cherished hopes of the Hebrew people, they are preserved with exceeding care.*
The prerogatives and privileges of the priesthood,
the fulfillment of the ancient prophecies and of historic promises, and especially the splendid Messianic
hopes of the nation, all were guarded and guaranteed
by these genealogical catalogues.  Yet, where the
ancestors of the same individual are several times
given, comparison shows that some links in the chain
are frequently dropped; it is not necessary in the
mind of the author always to unroll it at full length;
it is enough to mention several selected ancestors
scattered along the line, and thus a man may be
styled the son of an ancestor of the third or fourth
generation. Ezra, the scribe, who had complete access to all these records, gives his priestly lineage up
to Aaron, the founder of the priesthood, and yet omits
several generations that are given in the first book
of Chronicles.  So when Matthew, for mnemonic
purposes, as well as to set forth the three great
*Cf. Josephus, in his first Book against Apion.




272           INVGIA  LECTURES.
epochs of Hebrew history-its patriarchal childhood,
its royal maturity, and its provincial decline-groups
the ancestors of the Savior in three fourteens, or
double-sevens, headed respectively by Abraham, the
patriarch, by David, the royal minstrel, and Jechonias,
the exiled monarch, he drops out three generations.
Yet that these three omitted names were perfectly
familiar to him, is evident from the fact that they
were well-known historic names, the names of kings
of Judah, the events of whose reigns were fully recorded in the books of Kings and Chronicles. Every
Jew, with the Old Testament in his hand, knew the
names of Amaziah, Joash, and Ahaziah. Had these
been the names of obscure or unknown individuals,
the case would have been very different. But no objector at this day doubts that Matthew had before
him the Old Testament history, in Hebrew and
Greek, subtantially the same as we have it today.  It was not, then, through ignorance that
these historic names were omitted, but by design; because their insertion would not agree with
the author's plan in the presentation of his subject.
Objectors may criticise this plan, that it is not according to classic models; they may object to the
Hebrew conception of the object and character of
history, and may complain that these records are
imperfect and unsatisfactory, when judged by the
rules of composition that have been drawn from
heathen histories,-but all this does not prove that
these authors are inconsistent with themselves or
with each other, and does not in the least impeach
their reliability, when their real stand-point is found.




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 273
And in this respect no more is demanded for them
than for any heathen authors; for no author can be
understood, and seem to be consistent with himself
and with truth, until we fully understand his point of
view. In this respect every author is a law unto
himself; and so every school of authors, and every
literature, has its own laws, which are to be candidly
and thoroughly studied, as facts, before any theory of
the subject can properly be constructed. A man has
no right to dogmatize about the Hebrew histories
who is willfully blind to the principles on which those
writers looked at all historical events. Every thing
is viewed by them in its relation to the Divine government and purposes.   Events are selected and
grouped, and set in the foreground or the background,
according to this plan. Thus, in the passage before
us, generations are so selected, from Abraham, the
father of the Jewish nation, to Joseph, the last descendant of Judah's royal line, as to set forth, in
three corresponding and symmetrical pictures, the
successive phases of Hebrew history, till God's purposes concerning that wonderful people ripened into
fulfillment. When the long-promised seed of Abraham, the Branch from the stem of Jesse, the King
of all kings, appeared in this royal line, the nation,
having fulfilled its mission, sank from human history.
The same law of Hebrew composition is also seen
in the apocalyptic vision of the hundred and fortyfour thousand that were sealed of the twelve tribes
of Israel. Dan is omitted from the list, probably
because of its idolatrous apostasy, and Joseph is inserted instead of Ephraim, his son, who is regarded
24




274           INGHAMI LECTURES.
as joined to his idols. No one will pretend that the.
author of Revelation was ignorant on so familiar a
subject as the names of the tribes.
This habit of compressing a genealogical series,
dropping out intermediate links, thus giving a part
for the whole, when it is not the author's design to
spread out the whole family history of an individual,
but simply to show the relation to some remote anancestor; as when Ezra is shown to be the son of
Aaron by the mention of several intermediate generations, and as when, in like manner, Christ is set
forth as the son of David, the son of Abraham,-this
habit of representation should be considered, in calculating chronology from genealogical series. Much
more time may have elapsed than would be inferred
from supposing the series before us to be complete.
Another peculiarity of the Hebrew narratives may
here be mentioned, which, although chiefly to be assigned to the difference in the point of view, combines both sources of discrepancy already discussed.
The narrative follows a logical, rather than a chronological, order, tracing an event out to its consequences, paying no attention to contemporary or
immediately subsequent events at the time, but afterward returning to take them up and follow them out
in like order. Thus successive portions of narrative
are not chronologically successive, but lap over each
other in time, like a series of parallel lines in which
the beginning of the second is opposite the middle
of the first, the beginning of the third opposite the
middle of the second, and so on. Thus, the history
of a patriarch is traced through, and then that of his




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 275
son is taken up from the beginning. Sometimes the
narratives resemble a series of parallels of different
lengths, yet all beginning on the same perpendicular
line. Thus, the first and second narratives of the
creation, at thel beginning of Genesis, commenced at
the same point; but the second runs out into a full
detail of the sixth day's work, and is followed by the
history of Cain and his posterity. The fifth chapter
then commences back again at the creation of man,
as if it had not been mentioned before, and follows
the line of Seth as far as Noah. The sixth chapter
begins back again amid the corruption which ensued
when men first began to multiply on the face of the
earth, and comes down through the generations again
to Noah, entering on his family history as if it had
not been alluded to before; and then follows the detail' of the flood.  Thus, an event which is just
sketched in one narrative, may be fully painted in
the parallel narrative, and the contrast may easily
be magnified into a discrepancy.
V. There are two other kinds of apparent discrepancy that we will mention, arising from the
limitations of the human mind considered as the recipient of revelation. The first is the discrepancy, or
rather contrast, between the subjective and the objective, between things as they are and things as
they seem to man. We know things only through
their attributes, and have no right to assume that all
attributes come within reach of our cognitions. By
what we can cognize we learn enough about different
natures to answer all life's practical ends; but it




276           INGHAM LECTURES.
would be very short-sighted to suppose that thus we
can learn enough to satisfy all speculative cravings,
or can thus infer how things appear to more highly
endowed intelligences. Human perception is not the
gauge of the universe. For aught we know, the rose
may show to superior beings, or even to the insects that hover over its petals, a hundred other attributes as pleasing as color and odor, for which
human language has no names. Our faculties can
be relied on as far as they go, yet they go but a short
distance into the infinite.
God, the Infinite, can never be fully known to any
finite intelligence. Here there must ever be an antithesis between the subjective conception and the
objective reality. Yet the conception may be correct
as far as it goes; deficient, rather than erroneous.
Our conceptions may thus be used to reveal the inconceivable, while yet we are saved from error by
counter-statements addressed to the reason. "His
ways are not our ways, nor his thoughts our
thoughts."... "No man hath seen God at any
time;" yet, through these very thoughts and ways of
ours, he reveals himself in the written word, while
the Incarnate Word makes us see the Invisible God.
This is a paradox, but it is not the paradox of revelation only, but of all instruction. The lessons of
the instructor, to be of any value whatever, must be
accommodated to the capacity of the pupil. The
objective must be made subjectively apprehensible.
Thus must there ever be an antithesis between truth
absolute and truth as conceived by a finite intelligence.




ALLEGED DISCREPAVCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 277
If we insist on the objective reality, and proudly
scorn all subjective aids, our God becomes an inaccessible, icy Absolute, the thought of whom freezes
every moral impulse into death; but if we allow ourselves to be instructed by God through the same
symbolism. by which we instruct each other, then can
we accept the statements, "They saw the God of
Israel," and "No man hath seen God at any time,"
and feel that there is no contradiction. In manifold
modes is the truth enforced and reiterated, that God
is not limited by a material form. "God is a Spirit,"
said Christ to the Samaritan woman at Jacob's well.
"Ye saw no manner of similitude in the day that
Jehovah spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst
of the fire," says Moses to Israel. Yet this formless
God speaks with Moses, and that, "face to face!"
Yea, the Psalm that sets forth, in language of unparalleled grandeur, the omnipresent spirituality of Jehovah, yet assigns "him human hands! "If I ascend
up into heaven, thou art there: if I make my bed in
hell, behold, thou art there. If I take the wings of
the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the
sea; even there shall thy hand lead me, and thy
right-hand shall hold me."* With what Divine skill
is the ineffable, and wholly inconceivable, objective
truth made, in this wondrous Psalm, subjectively apprehensible to the soul!
VI. The last kind of discrepancy that we shall
mention, is that which necessarily arises from progress in revelation. It is the contrast between the
* Psalm cxxxix, 8-Io.




278           INGHAM LECTURES.
sketch and the picture, between the seed and the
tree, between the foundations and the temple. The
egg would be called dead, most confidently, by him
who had never seen the eagle that is folded in the
germ; the law is dead to him who has never felt,
through the embryonic envelope of precept and ceremony, the quickening of the Gospel germ that waits
the age-long broodings of the Spirit to bring it into
perfect life. Revelation comes in successive stages
adapted to advancing man. The wisdom of the
Divine Teacher commends itself to us, in that it
adapts its lessons to the capacity of the pupil.
The patriarchal, Mosaic, prophetic, and Christian
revelations are successive stages in the same great
process, each intermediate step starting from those
which precede and suggesting those that follow. The
lofty ethics and sublime visions of the prophets, both
in form and substance, presuppose the Mosaic law
and ritual. The Psalms of David could never have
been sung in a nation that had not been trained for
centuries in the statutes of the Pentateuch; the Epistle to the Romans requires as its preface not only
the Gospel according to the evangelists, but the
Gospel according to Abraham, Moses, and Isaiah.
Revelation is to be judged by its own claim to be
the Word. of God to man, not scattered utterances
to diverse peoples in different ages. It is spoken to
the race as one, in all nations, ages, and grades
of progress; and this is the claim by which it is
to be judged. It is not Jewish, Greek, or Roman,
but human; it is cosmic in its aims and plans.
Its utterances should, therefore, have a depth and




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 279
breadth an'd weight, such as to penetrate all lands and
ages. It hastes not, and yet it rests not, until its
message is complete.  Abraham, the God-fearing
patriarch, is called to go forth from his father's
house in Chaldea, and wander in a strange land,
pitching his tent'in the grove, the plain, and the
desert, that day by day and year by year he may be
trained to become the father of a missionary nation,
whose message to the world shall be faith in the
one only God. This nation is then educated in the
school of centuries, by the Nile and by the Jordan;
in the terrible Syrian Desert, and in the delightful
land where the vales ran milk and the rocks dropped
honey; at the feet of the bare black peaks of Sinai,
and on the slopes of Ebal and Gerizim; by centuries
of royal splendor, and by generations of heart-breaking captivity; by lawgiver,.warrior, orator, poet,
priest, and seer; by tabernacle and temple; by statute, ceremony, and sacrifice; by the loftiest commands,
most terrible threats, and most inspiring promises.
In a word, by a history, national literature, faith, and
character, wholly unique, was the Hebrew people
trained to be God's messenger to all nations. This
was the John the Baptist crying in the wilderness
of heathen idolatries, to prepare the way before the
Desire of all nations. When he appeared, that
nation's work was done; its temple fell; and the
glory which had waxed from Moses to Solomon, and
waned from Solomon to Herod, went out in darkness forever...  The great day of revelation
advanced from the gray twilight of the patriarchal
era to the deeper hues of the Mosaic covenant,




280           INGHAM LECTURES.
through the morning tints of prophecy, to the splendid Gospel noon; yet was the' light ever from the
Sun  of Righteousness. Christianity, that mighty
tree,* which is fast drawing up into its branches all
the juices of the earth, was wrapped up in the mustard-seed promise given to the woman on the day of
the fall. Abraham saw Christ's day, and was glad;
yet he knew not what he saw. Moses never saw the
rich kernel that God had hidden in the ceremonial
husk. The Hebrew nation toiled for weary centuries
on the Mosaic scaffolding around the Christian temple; yet most of these busy workmen saw nothing
but the scaffolding, and dreamed not of the Divine
beauty and harmony of pillar and architrave, frieze
and cornice, within. At last the top-stone was laid,
the Lord of hosts came suddenly to his temple, and
lo! the scaffolding fell, and the workmen, who knew
not what they builded, were scattered forever. It is
easy to show that the messenger does not understand the full import of the message; that the workman, whose life is spent on a single column, has no
conception of the temple; that there is a contrast
between the rough scaffolding and the polished
marble; but let revelation be judged by its own
claims, and there is no discrepancy. Prickly rites
and thorny ceremonies were absolutely necessary to
guard the precious flower, whose fragrance was to fill
all lands and ages. The law seemed slavish; but, as
Paul said,t it was the slave whose office it was to lead
humanity to the feet of the great Teacher. Christ
proclaimed a contrast, not a contradiction, between
*Neander's "Church History:" Introduction. t Galatians iii, 24.




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 281
law and Gospel. He brushed away Pharisaic glosses,
wiping off the mold that had gathered on the tablets
of Moses; as he said, "Ye have heard that it hath
been said,... but I say unto you." Yet he
pointed to the traces of the Divine finger, as he declared, "Verily, I say unto you, till heaven and earth
pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from
the law till all be fulfilled." Paul, in whom the
Christian Church burst complete from the Hebrew
chrysalis, asked, "Do we, then, make void the law
through faith?" and replied, "Nay, we establish the
law." Certainly, Paul, who presided over that revolution, amid whose earthquake-throes the Church was
born, better understood the nature of the struggle
than those who to-day preach Christianity without
Judaism. For Christianity without Judaism is an
oak without roots, a cathedral without foundations.
As the man sees truths that are hidden from the
child, so great doctrines concerning the nature of
God and of man, and their mutual relations, of
which the race in its childhood had but a shadowy
apprehension, are revealed to the mature man.
Thus is it with the doctrines of the Trinity, the incarnation, immortality, and. resurrection. Yet these
great truths are outlined in the-earliest revelations.
The finished picture of the Gospel but completes
the sketch of the patriarchal age. Those wandering
shepherds of Syria, those Egyptian slaves of the age
of the Pharaohs, who believed that their ancestor,
Enoch, "walked with God, and was not, because
God took him," had views of immortality far more
clear to the intellect and comforting to the heart than
25




282           INGHAM LECTURES.
Plato taught, a thousand years later, in the groves of
the academy. Yet the splendor that Christ has shed
upon immortal life makes that patriarchal faith appear as a twilight gleam. Creation, by the Divine
Word, as revealed on the first page of the Scripture, corresponds mysteriously with the profound
utterances on the first page of John's Gospel"The Word was God; all things were made by
him." The Jehovah-angel who hears and answers
the prayers of the patriarchs, identifying himself with
the one only God in whom they so firmly believed,
was the morning star before the Sun of Righteousness, or rather that Sun himself, shining through
the mists of the morning. In the blood-besprinkled
altars of patriarch and Levite, were given the preparatory instructions for the profoundly mysterious
lesson of Calvary, which concentrates, in one dazzling focus, all the manifold rays of revelation.
There is much error in our day concerning the
progress of religious ideas. The most advanced culture of our day may profitably sit at the feet of those
far-off Syrian shepherds.  The grand fundamental
truths that lie at the foundation of all theology, the
truths of the Divine unity, spirituality, and supremacy, did not come to the world from the New Testament revelation, nor from Greek or Oriental philosophy; they are as clearly written on the oldest pages
of the Hebrew Bible as anywhere in literature.
When will our advancing race, in its spiritual development, outgrow the Hebrew Psalms? The most
advanced Christian of to-day finds these ancient
songs and prayers, which burst from the hearts of




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 283
Hebrew minstrels, prophets, priests, and kings, twenty
to thirty centuries ago, voicing more perfectly than
any other language his profoundest meditations, his
sternest struggles, his sublimest joys and aspirations.
It is not mere traditional reverence that has bound
the Hebrew Psalter on the heart of the Christian
Church. The eternal glow of the wondrous book
draws humanity of all ages to its quenchless warmth.
Some of these strains drop like angels to the darkest
depths of human agony; and there are others that
blow the hurricanes from their trumpets, and clash
the thunders from their cymbals, to pour forth the
grandest joys a mortal heart can know. It is significant and instructive, that the fierce conflicts and
triumphant victories of New Testament saints, find
adequate utterance only in Old Testament songs.
Even the Savior, at the midnight moment of his
mysterious agony, gave vent to his soul in a line of
an ancient Psalm. Paul, as he finishes his survey of
the resurrection, the distinctive doctrine of the New
Testament, which lay at the core of every apostolic
sermon, could close only in the triumphant strain of
Isaiah, "Death shall be swallowed up in victory."
John, who had leaned on Jesus' breast, and whose
very soul was steeped in the essence of the New
Testament revelations; this John of Tabor, and
Gethsemane, and Calvary, when he would paint the
final visions of the prophetic Gospel, uses the brush
and canvas and colors of Daniel and Ezekiel; nay,
he leads us back to the very spot whence we started
with Moses on this wondrous circuit of revelation,
and leaves us at last under the branches of that




284           INGHAM LECTURES.
same tree of life where stood Adam and Eve, to
hear the first whispers of revelation. Is this a discrepancy between the New Testament and the Old?
Is it not rather a profound, world-wide, and age-long
harmony?
We have thus looked at the apparent discrepancies of Scripture under six different heads, as resulting, (I) from the difference in form; (II) from the
difference in the author's points of view; (III) from
the difference in readers or hearers; (IV) from the
difference between the whole and the part; (V) from
the difference between the subjective and objective;
and (VI) from the difference between the seed and
the tree. We are confident that, by some one or
more of these formulas, all the problems of discrepancy can be solved. The more deeply we study
Scripture, the more deeply do we feel its profound
analogy with nature. Nature does not arrange her
flowers in herbariums; her animals and minerals,
and elements, in museums, cabinets, and laboratory
phials. She intermingles all together in that beautiful and sublime confusion that clothes the world
with an infinite charm and makes it a gymnasium
for all the faculties of the soul. The chemist may
dwell among his powders and gases; the botanist
may love his dried leaves and seeds; but the manz
loves the multitudinous forest, the myriad-mooded
sea. An uninspired theologian would have cast the
Epistle to the Romans in a series of metallic syllogisms, and nailed down its theses in a sort of
Nicene creed; and it would have been read by men
who love logic and system, and by no others; a




ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF SCRIPTURE. 285
Strauss, who had seen the truths that John saw,
would have arranged them like shelves of fossils; a
Niebuhr or a Hallam, among the disciples, would
have written gospels which would have met the
wants of the world as the histories of Niebuhr and
Hallam do to-day; but the Scriptures are written,
not for scholars or philosophers, but for men. Our
scientific technicalities and classifications of natural
facts satisfy for a year or a generation, and then
vanish, after giving birth to new classifications and
technicalities; but the facts themselves abide forever.
Pythagoras vanishes before Copernicus, and Copernicus before Newton; but the stars shine on the
same. So the facts of revelation, with all their startling irregularities, their abruptness, their soul-quickening contrasts, give rise to systems which oppose,
supplement, and succeed each other, age after age,
while the facts themselves abide forever. Athanasius, Augustine, Anselm, vanish; but the great Gospel facts are constellated in eternal beauty.
Again, the Bible is like nature, omnivorous, yet
healthful. It has a Divine vitality, which enables it
to absorb and assimilate elements most diverse and
contradictory. Nature is ever clean, healthful, and
serene. Though teeming cities may shed their filth
upon her bosom, though the malaria may reek, and
the earthquake throb here and there, yet she has an
exhaustless, recuperative, and assimilative energy,
which distills perfume from carrion, sweetness from
rottenness, exudes and absorbs volcanoes like pimples
upon the cuticle. So the Bible, with all its contradictory moods, and conflicting statements, is ever




286           INGHAM LECTURES.
infinitely calm and healthful, because infinitely vital.
Nature, man, and Scripture, when read with an open
eye, prove themselves to be successive volumes on
the same theme, and from the same Hand.




LECTURE IX.
ADAPTATION OF THE SCRIPTURES
TO
Man's Moral and Spiritual Nature.
BY THE
REV. DANIEL CURRY, D. D.,'Editor of the Christian Advocate,
NEW YORK CITY.








YECTURE IX.
ADAPTATION OF THE SCRIPTURES TO MAN'S
MORAL AND SPIRITUAL NATURE.
T   HAT the universe of beings is not a mass of
dissociated individualities, but a system  of
closely related parts, is an almost universally prevalent notion. The savage or rustic that might for the
first time examine the half-shell of a bivalve, would
see that it lacked completeness, and would be led to
suspect that there must be another, corresponding to,
yet unlike, the one found. Thoughtful minds, from
such suggestions, verified in nature, deduce the laws
of philosophical relations found pervading all things.
Poetical minds contemplate it as a kind of soul of
the universe, that
"Lives through all life, extends through all extent;
Spreads undivided, operates unspent."
Philosophers call it "the reign of law," and the superstitious speak of it as destiny"A divinity that shapes our ends,
Rough-hew them how we will."
By virtue of this universal prevalence of lawitself the outflow of the power and authority of the
one great Lawgziver-there is unity over all the
289




290    INNGGA4M LECTURES.
diversities of creation; there is harmony of purpose
in the apparently discordant actions of individuals;
and consolidation, without the confusion of the parts,
of the one great whole. Nothing is independent or
segregated; and the harmony of the universe is secured by the adaptation of each to all other mutually
related  individualities.  And, as the comparative
anatomist constructs a complete skeleton from a
single part, by producing, in material forms, the ideals
suggested by the requirements of that one member,
so, by following up the all-pervading order of adaptations, the philosophical mind is brought to the truth,
whether proceeding upwards or downwards in the
scale of being.
Beyond all others of the denizens of our world,
man's relations are multiform, and his susceptibilities
delicate. He is therefore, above all others, remarkable for the multitude and the greatness of his wants.
He sympathizes with all about him, because of his
relations to them; and these, in turn, exercise effective influences over him. And, further, these relations,
and the influences that grow out of them, determine
his character, both as to its original capabilities and
its ultimate attainments. The eye that could trace
out all these varying relations and their intertwining
influences, might also foresee all the various stages
of growth and development, up to the highest completeness.
Physical natures require an order of things in
their surroundings adapted to their sustentation and
growth. There must be an atmosphere for the lungs,
and food for the stomach, and often a covering for the




ADAP7A4TION OF TIlE SCRIPTURES.     291
body as a protection against atmospherical changes.
There must be light for the eyes, and for the ears
the sonorousness of bodies and the conducting power
of the atmosphere; and, answering to the universal
sense of touch, is provided the resistance of matter,
which returns touch for touch, and thus suggests, to
the reflective reason, the idea of externality and individuality, and distinguishes the objective and the subjective. There are also certain social wants of man's
nature, which look beyond the individual for their
supplies. Not only is it not good for a man that he
should be alone, but solitude is wholly incompatible
with the elevation, or even the continuance, of either
the race or the individual. Accordingly, he is endowed
with certain controlling social appetences, fellow-feelings, paternal tenderness, and the loves that draw together and hold individuals in the closest and most
sacred relations of life. In all these things, wants and
their required provisions lie over against each other, as
foins and foils, answering to each other, and each implying its opposite. Every-where in nature may we
detect an ever-recurring adaptation of related objects.
Each is the answer to the other's necessities; so that
adaptation has come to be accepted as evidence of
purposed co-existence, or of the original provisions
of certain things to meet the requirements of others.
It must also be observed that men's wants are
not the creatures of their own purposes and voluntary
fancyings. Rather, they are instinctive and spontaneous. Having their germs in the elements of our
being, they are developed with our normal growth,
and force themselves upon the consciousness unasked




292           INGHAM LECTURES.
and undesired. They may, indeed, in some cases,
be repressed and dwarfed in their development, but
they can be extinguished only with the extinction of
all that is ennobling,or productive of good in human
nature; and by their proper culture and discipline
the character is formed for the highest excellence.
Man's spiritual pre-eminence is indicated by the
multitude and greatness of his spiritual zwaets. Irrational creatures have only physical desires and necessities. The strong lion reposes in his lair, if only his
hunger is satisfied; and the fierce tiger desires nothing more, when gorged with the blood of the prey;
and the herd complains not among the rich pastures.
The ox knows his owner, and the ass his master's
crib, and they are satisfied with their provisions. But
human aspirations reach beyond these things. They
go out after the unseen and the intangible, the things
unknown to sense and but faintly apprehended by
reason, because man's nature is spirittal, and transcends the material and the merely rational; and as
our physical and social wants all find their complements in the provisions made for them and adapted
to them, so it may be inferred that there are provisions made for the satisfying of our spiritual cravings
and necessities; and the discovery of such adapted
provisions anywhere would be accepted as sufficient
evidence that the one was designed for the other.
The agreement together of related things, especially
if the points of adaptation are many and complicated, indicate that such things were intended for
each other.
From these somewhat general and comprehensive




ADAPTA TION OF TIHE SCRIPTURES.     293
views, we come to consider more definitely the proposition assigned for our present discussion: "The
adaptation of the Holy Scriptures to man's moral
and spiritual nature." And if we succeed in showing
that the instinctive appetences of the soul indicate
its want of such things as the Scriptures bring to it;
or if the things set forth in the Scriptures are found
to answer to the felt wants of the soul,-then we shallhave accomplished our purpose, and not only proved
the adaptation of the Bible to human wants, but also
rendered evident the truth and the Divine origin of
the sacred records. Then shall we havedemonstrated
the oneness of the origin of the Word of God and of
man as a spiritual being.
It is.not our business at this time to present
proofs of either the multitude or greatness of man's
wants.  If it shall be objected that many have
lived and died without being aware of some of
them, we may partly concede the fact, but not its
force as an objection.  Only sound and healthy
subjects properly answer to the normal conditions
of their kinds; and only a slight examination of
man's spiritual condition detects indications of derangement and disorder. The instincts of the soul
are in many things sadly perverted, and its healthful
and life-diffusing appetences are dwarfed, or held in
abeyance. But even such cases prove the reality of
these wants. The soul so perverted in its spiritual
instincts, and depraved in its tastes and instinctive
desires, is itself balked in its growth and deformed in
its development. Growth is an essential condition
of life, in all immature natures; and if, in man, the




294           INGHAM LECTURES.
higher and more spiritual elements of his nature remain inactive and undeveloped, the lower and more
brutish will be relatively enlarged, and made predominant in his life. In such cases the reality of the
wants is evinced, not indeed by the conscious longings of the soul for spiritual good, but clearly and
very painfully by the ruin induced through the absence of the things requisite for the soul's well-being.
We legitimately argue the requirements of any given
case, not only by the good that results from the possession of the things presumed to be needful, but
equally certainly by the evil results of the lack of
such things; and no class of men more forcibly,
though sadly, demonstrate the reality and the greatness of their spiritual wants, than those who are
the least spiritually minded. The sensualist and the
worldling, the man of pleasure and the devotee of
wealth or of the honors that come from men,-these
of all men manifest continually the restlessness
caused by the unappeased hungerings and thirstings
of the soul.
Nor is it true that such persons have no recognized and defined spiritual cravings. The world is
full of pains and travail and sorrow; and an almost
universal unrest is characteristic of the race. The
most worldly passions and impulses give intimations
of others back of them, of quite another kind. The
ambition that aims at only worldly greatness, is but
the prostitution and misdirection of a Divine impulse
designed to bring the soul to "glory and honor and
immortality." The covetousness that clutches convulsively at worldly wealth, is but the unappeased




ADAPTA TION OF THE SCRIPTURES.      295
thirst of the spirit for its unattained, perhaps unrecognized, spiritual sustenance.  The discontents,
the perpetual strivings for something better, the
dissatisfaction and disgust with what is really possessed,-what are these but the expressions of the
wants of the soul, which can not be satisfied with the
things of time and sense? He was indeed justly styled
a fool, who, with only material wealth, congratulated
his soul on the abundance of his possessions. Infallible wisdom and truth has said, that "man shall not
live by bread alone;" "that a man's life consisteth
not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth;" and a groaning world utters its Amen to this
Scripture. The reality of man's spiritual wants is
matter of universal consciousness; though often both
the source whence they come, and the objects for
which they are calling, may be but faintly, if at all,
recognized.
But no man is at all times precisely equal to his
own average. To even the most sensual and worldly,
there come seasons when the spiritual being will
assert itself-times between the gusts of passion, or
intervals in the active domination of worldly or sensual desires, when a still small voice is heard in the
soul, calling to higher purposes and more spiritual
occupations. And to such calls the enthralled spirit
responds with the passionate, but often hopeless,
earnestness of the caged bird answering to its free
companions, when the voice of Spring invites to the
joys of love. Deep down in the hearts of even the
least spiritual of men, are yearnings and complainings
and askings for something better. Because man in his




296           ING HAM LEC7URES.
essential nature is a spiritual being, with spiritual
wants that can neither be crushed out nor yet satisfied
with earthly goods, he longs for and requires spiritual
supplies and consolations; and the adaptations of the
lessons and revealings of Holy Scripture to answer
to these wants, and, in doing that, to bestow the
highest good, indicate an anterior design in placing
the one over against the other.
Among the earliest felt requirements of the unfolding intelligence, is an appropriate object upon
which to rest the vagrant thoughts that go out into
the limitless ranges of existence. The problems of
being force themselves upon the mind of childhood,
and weigh like a nightmare upon the maturest intellect, till some suitable objective is gained, some potent
and sufficient Source and Foundation of all life and
being is recognized.  Human intuitions spurn all
limitations to the range of thought, and, while confessing its inability to measure the infinite, the mind
clearly apprehends its reality as a necessary fact. But
without a personal and almighty First Cause, such as
is known only through the revelations of Scripture,
Eternity and Immensity are but horrible.chaotic
wastes; and even the finite and conditioned then seem
unreal and chimerical. For every phenomenon we
intuitively require a cause, and all secondary causes
imply others beyond them; and so the recognition of
a Firsi Cause is a philosophical necessity. And this
great First Cause, in order to its purpose as the
prime factor in all the problems of being, must be
apprehended as infinite. In considering the ages of
the past eternity, the mind rejects as absurd the idea




ADAPTA770ON OF THE SCRIPTURES.      297
of a time when God was not; and in contemplating
the unfolding cycles of the coming eternity, it requires always the presence of the infinitely potent
Original. Reason, alike in its simplest and its loftiest
processes, requires an infinite original of all secondary
beings, uncaused, eternal, almighty. But nature presents only the finite; all its phenomenal beings are
limited and conditioned upon all sides. The postulating of a personal God, himself embodying and
dwelling in the infinite, is exclusively the work of the
Holy Scriptures. God, as revealed only in his works,
is unreal, shadowy, and hypothetical; but when once
seen and recognized in his Word, all nature becomes
vocal and eloquent in confessing him; and especially
does the human intellect find, in that primary truth,
that wonderful revelation surpassing its clearest intuitions, an answer to its most painful and perplexing
questionings. God, self-revealed, is the only sure
basis of a sound philosophy.
Man's spiritual requirements are chiefly of the
moral and religious kind. So largely does that kind
predominate, that in that relation the epithets moral
and spiritual are often used convertibly. There can
be no doubt that the religious wants and capabilities
preponderate, and that man's religious instincts demand their appropriate objects with a peculiar importunity. The normal development of the powers of
the soul present them in controlling activity, and
with proper culture they increase and expand till
they come at length to characterise the whole spiritual being. In proportion as the religious elements
of man's nature are developed into a full and healthy
26




298           INGHAM LECTURES.
maturity, is the character ennobled, and the man
becomes Godlike. But these religious aspirations
especially require an object beyond the soul itself,
towards which they may tend, and upon which they
may rest, and which shall embody, in all fullness, those properties of character that answer- to
their cravings-just those, indeed, which the Holy
Scriptures reveal as dwelling in infinite perfection in
the God of the Bible.
A primary requirement of the soul is that the
object of its religious devotion shall possess all the
attributes of a perfect personality. An impersonal
and intangible principle, a blind, unreasoning force, a
diffused and insubstantial spirit, without will, or selfconsciousness, or purposed action, can not command
the worship of an intelligent soul. Love always,
and necessarily, demands responsive love. Prayer
itself is an unmeaning exercise, till faith confesses
the object addressed as the Hearer of prayer; and
penitence is perfected, only where the Divine placa-.
bility is recognized. Back of the attributes which
we admire, and which seem to command our worship, we intuitively postulate a personality, of whom
those admired characteristics are predicates. Nature
reveals to us a mighty force and an all-pervading
order, and it intimates design and wisdom, but does
not fully prove them. But it is the peculiar province
of the Divine Word to respond with all clearness to
the felt wants of humanity, by presenting the person
of yehovah, the infinite I AM.
Again, it is required that the object of the soul's
worship shall be enthroned in the majesty of rec



ADAPTA'TION OF THE SCRIPTURES.      299
torial power. Love, admiration, and a qualified reverence may be given to the powerless and the unauthoritative; but worship is given only to the Almighty
and the All-provident. It is eminently in the revelation of the Divine greatness, the majesty and power
of the Ruler and Dispenser of man's destiny, that
the Scriptures effectively command our worship to
God. If apprehended as less than the Almighty, or
as neither the Keeper nor the Judge of all men, God
no longer commands the highest devotion of the soul.
The ethical element enters very largely into all
our intuitions and conceptions of religious worship.
The idea of moral rectitude-the essential good-is
intuitive and spontaneous; and to no other susceptibility of its own nature does the spirit render such
profound deference. The logical faculty may control
the judgment, and the oesthetical may minister to
the emotional nature; but the ethical, developed and
exercised in the form of conscience, dictates the conduct, and extends its authority even to the feelings,
tempers, and sentiments of the heart. And it is
especially in his ethical character that the Holy
Scriptures seem to delight to portray to us our
God. Righteousness, justice, truth, are among his
moral attributes, the perfections of his nature, in
which he is perpetually presented to our adoring
contemplation. We gaze upon such excellences, and
are drawn to adore and worship the Being in whom
they subsist, and we confess their authority over our
own lives and hearts. But chiefly when we contemplate these things, not as abstract qualities, or segregated individual properties, but as concentrated into




300            INGHAM LECTURES.
a glowing focus of intense moral worth, under the
name of holiness, do we fully or adequately appreciate the ethical side of the Divine character, or rise
to that lofty height of pure worship which is alike due
to God and profitable to man. Only when we contemplate the Divine Being as a devouring fire of holy
wrath towards sin, and of intensest, purest love towards all that bear the image of his holiness, do we
find in.Him the inspiration and the sacred joy that
are, as for ourselves, the great end of worship. And
need we more than intimate how fully, as well as
exclusively, the Holy Scriptures teach these things,
and present to us the Divine character, in the fullness of holiness, perpetually and effectively active
throughout the moral world?
The aesthetical element of man's nature, though
less prominently, yet in no inconsiderable degree,
enters into his religious life and its exercises. Worship itself is the highest form  of the oesthetical.
Angelic and seraphic praises of the Most High are
the devout outpourings of sacred admiration of that
uncreated glory upon which they gaze, or veil their
faces before its insufferable splendor. Even to human
apprehension there is a "beauty of holiness," which
commands the ravished hearts of all capable of its
appreciation, and which, when perceived, casts a
pall of dimness over all earthly glories. All kinds
of earth's lesser beauties are but the forms and
shadows of the heavenly, that essential beauty that
dwells in absolute fullness only in the'Divine holiness, whether contemplated in the effulgence of the
sacred person, or viewed in finite spiritual natures,




ADAPTATION OF THE SCRIPTURES.       301
made in the image of God. The development and
culture of this really spiritual element of human
nature requires models of essential holiness, both
absolute and proximate, such as are given in the
revelations of the sacred persons of the Godhead,
and illustrated in the lives and characters of holy
men in the Scriptures. There, and there only, may
be found the models that-can both form and satisfy
the highest and noblest tastes; and there,.too, are
given the processes for gaining and reproducing the
highest forms of virtue.
The human conscience, untaught by aught besides
its own deep intuitions, confesses the need of some
remedial agency to deliver the soul from its thralldom. It is not for us to discuss learned questions
in theology; but we may safely venture the statement
that, somehow, there is found widely prevalent among
the most thoughtful classes of mankind a deep interior consciousness of sin, with heartfelt yearnings
for a better life. At those seasons, which come perhaps to all, when men are better than their own
average, there is a painful consciousness of deepseated moral evils in the soul. Sin is then seen in
its real character; and, though perhaps but faintly
resisted, it is abhorred as a loathsome evil. The
lowly breathings of the soul in such an hour, impotent and perhaps purposeless, are for a better heart
and a new life. But, though these aspirations may
be feeble and quite insufficient to restrain the passions and control the will, they are manifestly real,
and sufficiently powerful to disturb the guilty quiet
of the soul, and to check, at least momentarily, the




302           INGH-AM LECTURES.
headlong currents of vicious pleasures. Learned and
thoughtful heathen, especially, have confessed these
whisperings of the soul, and some of them have
both forcibly and feelingly declared their utterances.
But to them these things were, necessarily, only as
some delightsome dream, the imagination of an ideal
quite too lovely to be realized, as if a light from
heaven had fallen upon the camera of the soul, and
formed an image of surpassing loveliness, which remained but for a moment, and then melted away into
darkness.
And even among these there have been efforts
towards the realization of that bright but evanescent
ideal. A few of them have told us of their efforts
to retain in their minds the lovely image of virtue,
and to realize in their own characters and lives its
sublime lessons; but in all such cases utter failure is
the only result. Each, in his own manner, confesses
that, while he perceives and admires and longs to
pursue the good, and abhors and struggles against
the evil, still the evil, and not the good, is pursued.
That phenomenon of experimental Christianity,
known as conviction of sin, or religious awakening,'differs in degree, rather than in kind, from these
heart-yearnings of the best class of heathen minds.
The more adequate teachings, enjoyed wherever Bible
truth is diffused abroad, illustrating the vileness of
sin and the contrasted excellence of holiness, the
one devolving guilt upon its subject, and the other
demanding purity of heart and earnest devotion of
life, give largely increased force to these spiritual impulses. But even then the resistance against the




ADAPTATION OF THE SCIIPTURES.       303
steady undercurrent of the inbred sin of the soul is
usually feeble and transient. A schism in the soul is,
however, not only detected, but made active. Two
antagonistic impulses now war against each other.
The individual self becomes dual, and the conflict is
waged within the soul itself. "That which I do, I
allow not; what I would, I do not; but what I hate,
that I do." But notice that, always in these conflicts, if conducted under the guidance of reason and
by human agencies alone, the victory is uniformly on
the side of evil. "The good that I would, I do not;
but the evil that I would not, that I do." Just at
this point the most earnest resistant against sin is
brought to despair; and just where self-despair ensues, the hopes of the Gospel, as revealed in Holy
Scripture, become both strong and very precious.
By these we are taught not only the transcendent
excellence of essential virtue, but also tne way to its
attainment.
The sacred Volume is replete with images of
transcendent goodness, not shown as merely beautiful ideals, to be gazed upon and admired, as quite
unattainable, but each is presented as a spiritual
study, to be considered and reproduced in the susceptible soul, and copied into active life. Over
against the depressing sense of guilt stands the
promise of free pardon; against the dominion of sin
is the assurance of emancipation by the power of
renovating grace; for its defilement a fountain is
opened that cleanses from all spiritual uncleanness;
and for all them that "hunger and thirst after righteousness" is the beatific assurance of eternal fullness.




304           INGHAM LECTURES.
But chief among man's felt wants is that of a
competent protector, guide, and defense. Viewing
himself among his surroundings, no thoughtful man
can fail to be painfully conscious of his utter helplessness. He knows that his life was not given, nor
is it sustained, by his own power. He has not
ordered his own surroundings, nor appointed the
time and place of his habitation. Instinctively he
looks outward and recognizes a potent energy, an
awful and resistless Power about him and pressing
upon him, and yet utterly unknown. Men call it
destiny, or fate; they make it a negation and a contradiction, under the name of chance; or they belittle
it by calling it lick. It is their ruling star, or good
angel, or demon. The recognition of such a Power,
so intimately near, and ever active in our affairs, so
resistless and unapproachable, can not fail to be fearfully oppressive to the spirit and dwarfing to the
whole soul. Against its resistless and oppressive
tyranny, reason and philosophy are powerless. The
stoic sullenly confronts it, and in desperation defies
it; the Epicurean, because of his conscious helplessness for both the present and the future, makes haste
to "eat and drink, for to-morrow  we die." The
faint glimmerings of a surer faith, giving rise to a
better hope, in a very few of the best minds of both
Greece and Rome, were little more than fitful shadows, too faint and evanescent to deliver the soul
from its painful uncertainties. There were, indeed,
among them religions enough, and divinities more
than enough; but the former brought no consolations,
and the latter were careless of human welfare, or




ADAPTATION OF THE SCRIPTURES.       305
impotent to help. Under this burden, and in this
absence of any assured hope or rational dependence,
"the whole creation travaileth and groaneth together."
The religions of heathendom are every-where a horrid
and hopeless slavery, in which the soul is, by turns,
tortured with superstition, or blasted by an arid and
desolating atheism; between which two the spirit
sighs in the desolation of orphanage, or drifts helplessly and hopelessly onward to the unsearchable
abyss of the future.
Nor are the lessons of simple Theism, however
comprehensive its recognition of the Great Author of
being, adequate to the requirements of the soul. God's
greatness may, to the apprehension of reason, seem
to place him at too great a remove from us either to
take knowledge of us or to care for our affairs. The
sons of our forests and prairies confessed the "Great
Spirit;" and they thought they heard his voice, or felt
his power, in the thunder and the tempest; but he
was quite above their trivial, every-day affairs, and in
the absence of his watch-care, their whole lives were
a prey to their miserable demons. Even the inspired
Psalmist seems to have fallen, for the moment, under
this oppressive sense of God's stupendous greatness,
removing him far above all human concerns: "When
I consider the heavens, the work of thy fingers, the
moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; what
is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of
man, that thou visitest him?"*  It were not enough,
then, if reason and nature were equal to the task
of revealing God; we need to be assured that God
* Psalm viii, 3, 4.
27




306           INGHAM LECTURES.
cares for us, keeps us, and will be our support and
defense always.
The wonderful adaptation of the lessons of Holy
Scripture to the requirements of our case, at this
point, can not fail of attention. Its great Author
and subject is there revealed, as not only the Almighty, the Eternal, and the All-wise God; he is
more than all of these, and in them all he comes near
to us and teaches us to call him Our Father. While
upholding all worlds, and directing the course of
universal nature, he is still "not far from every one
of us." Though his omnipotence and ubiquity may
imply that, in some sense, "in him we live and move
and have our being," and though his moral perfections may indicate his regard for the right, and render it certain that his judgments will be in equity, we
still require, as the basis of our confidence, the direct
lessons of his Word to assure us of his peculiar nearness to us and his fatherly care for us. Nearer and
and better than all that reason can teach us of the
Divine character, and stronger in affections than any
thing suggested by the mutual relations of creatures
and Creator, is the fact that the God of the Bible,
though infinite in Majesty and power, chooses to be
recognized and addressed by us as " Our Fathecr," and
specifically entitles us to claim from him all the benefits of that relation.
Assured of God's fatherhood, we cease to be dismayed by the awful powers of nature, which, indeed,
under his control are changed to ministers of mercy.
Our confessed helplessness is more than compensated
for by the assurance that the Almighty Ruler of all




ADAPTATION OF THE SCRIPTURES.      307
things in heaven and earth is our loving Father.
With what triumph and confidence does the Psalmist
exclaim: "God is our refuge and strength, a very
present help in trouble. Therefore will not we fear,
though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea."*
Man's inmost nature asks for security, for some
sure ground of confidence upon which he may rely
without doubtings and misgivings. This is essential
to his peace, and it is found only in an abiding conviction of the Divine providence, exercised always
with fatherly kindness. All this, indeed, is compatible with a life of labors and perplexities, needful
discipline in our present imperfect state; but with it
life can not be sad  or fearful. In this confidence,
the soul is staid upon God; and from its depths it
utters anew that inspired song in whose sacred exultations unnumbered multitudes have confessed the
sufficiency of the Divine providence: "The Lord is
my shepherd; I shall not want. He maketh me to
lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the
still waters. He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me
in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow
of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me;
thy rod and thy staff they comfort me. Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup
runneth over. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in
the house of the Lord forever."t
* Psalm  xlvi, I, 2.  t Psalm  xxiii.




308            INGHAMa LECTURES.
The revelation of God's fatherhood, assuring us
of his wonderful providence over us, thus meets our
wants; and, if accepted in the spirit of faith, it is
sufficient to stay the soul in devout confidence. But
a still more wonderful display of his care for us is
shown in the teachings and the work of Christ. Here
are exhibitions of mercy yearning to save the ruined
-and guilty. Here is love, rising above all obstacles,
stopping at no sacrifices, and hastening, through tears
and blood, to redeem the fallen and to rescue the
perishing. If. to be loved is among the cravings of
the human heart, how abundant the provisions made
to answer to it in that transcendent display of tenderest, strongest affection in the Divine heart for
helpless and guilty men. Here is the miracle of Divine compassion, the love that "passes all understanding," but that which only and alone reaches to the
yearning necessities of the soul. Our spiritual nature
demands a present Christ; the Bible is itself the
revelation of the Christ to the soul.
At the risk of transcending our allotted space, we
must present yet another instance of a chief want of
man's spiritual nature, to which only the Word of God,
the revelations of the Gospel, respond. We speak of
the soul's earnest cravings for immortality and future
blessedness.
Love of existence is a perpetually active sentiment
of the heart. No help of reasoning is needed, either
to awaken it to activity or to preserve its unflagging
intensity. It grows with the growth of our years,
and gathers force as the toils and pains of life multiply; and as burdened age stoops downward to the




ADAPTA TION OF THE SCRIPTURES.     309
tomb, the instinctive longings of the soul call for
a new life, for which there shall be neither old age
nor decrepitude nor death. But over against these
longings nature presents the mementos of mortality.
Among the earliest learned of earth's lessons is the
astounding fact that people die.  Larger experience
of human affairs detects the shadow of death everywhere. Thus, with perpetual and passionate longing
for immortality, men pass as a vapor through time,
with the dark wings of the Destroyer spread over
them. In nature there is thus found the ill-assorted
companionship of intense desire and despair.
The pencil of inspiration has painted most truthfully the dark background of the picture of human
destiny, by simply setting forth the confessed truths of
our mortality: " Man that is born of a woman is of
few days, and full of trouble. He cometh forth like
a flower, and is cut down: he fleeth also as a shadow,
and continueth not... Man dieth, and wasteth
away: yea, man giveth up the ghost, and where is he?. So man lieth down, and riseth not: till the
heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be
raised out of their sleep."* And at the close of this
sad tale, and as if to crush the feeblest strugglings
of hope, comes the despair-enforcing question, "If a
man die, shall he live again?" uttered with the assurance that earth's oracles could answer only with a
universal negative.
The question of immortality and the future life
has been an ever-present and deeply interesting one
among all the races of mankind.  Their religious
* Job xiv, I, 2, o1, 12.




310           INGHAIM LECTURES.
instincts suggest it, require it, and recognize it, as
the necessary complement to our present existence;
but the sense-encumbered intellect and the cold logic
of merely mundane facts give the lie to all these
fond suggestions. Thus, though the idea of immortality is every-where cherished, it is rather as a beautiful, but unreal, fancy than as an assurance ever to
be realized.  Socrates, at the approach of death,
spoke with apparent confidence of his passage at
once into the society of the "immortal gods," declaring his persuasion that men live after death; but every
careful student of the life and teachings of the great
Athenian sage knows but too well that his hopes
were much more largely made up of desires than of
confident assurance. Plato, too, reasoned of immortality, and seemed to show that it was reasonably
possible; and he could do no more; and Cato, in his
extremity, cast himself upon death, preferring that
dim  possibility to the wretchedness of his earthly
being; but even the faint hope that impelled him to
such rashness was the child of his despair. Men of
every form of religious faith have hoped for immortality, but their hopes have been as destitute of assurance as their creeds have been deficient in rational
evidence; so that in the presence of death, in nearly
all cases, life and hope perish together.
This, then, is the humiliating result reached by
human reason, under the guidance of nature, as announced by the greatest of merely human expositors
of the heart of man:
" —  Death is a fearful thing."
And, 0! how true to nature is his picture of the




ADAPTA TION OF THE SCRIPTURES.             311
soul, contemplating, as near at hand, the terrible
catastrophe of being!
"Ay, but to die, and go we know not where;
To lie in cold obstruction and to rot;
This sensible, warm nature to become
A kneaded clod.
Or to be worse than worst
Of those, that lawless and uncertain thoughts
Imagine howling!'t is too horrible!
The weariest and most loathed worldly life,
That age, ache, penury, imprisonment,
Can lay on nature, is a paradise
To what we fear of death."*
And if such is nature's picture of death, to escape
such terrors is man's greatest and ultimate want.
But death is inevitable. On every hand is the concurrent declaration   or confession, "It is appointed
to men once to die."      To escape death, therefore,
is not an object of rational hope, but to find out
some sure and sufficient way to rob death of its
terrors through the hope of imniortality after death.
This is attempted by almost all forms of religion;
and all alike of the religions of men's devising have
failed in the endeavor. To every heathen mind not
maddened by fanaticism, or to the mere philosopher,
Death is truly and fearfully the Kinog of Terrors. Only
the faith of the Gospel has ever sufficed to overcome
the fear of death.
Holy Scripture teaches the doctrine of immortality, not chiefly by positive and direct declarations,
but rather by showing man's proper spirituality, by
virtue of which he is incapable of dissolution. The
sacred narrative of the creation tells of man as the
* "Measure for Measure," act iii, sc. I.




312           INGHAM [ LECTURES.
one spiritual creature upon the earth, inspired with
"the breath of lives," and constituted for perpetual
existence. And these primary statements in man's
history are steadily recognized in the after-records of
the Divine Word. God's providences towards men
imply their transcendent worth among the creatures
of God's hand, a worth that is found chiefly in their
spirituality and consequent immortality.  The one
crowning truth of Holy Scripture, the manifestation
of the Son of God in the flesh, would appear purposeless and unwarranted, except that man's immortality justifies the Divine regard for him. Without
that recognition, the wonderful history of JESUS
would be something worse than an enigma, a strange
misuse of the richest resources of Heaven. Granting
man's immortality, that history is the grandest ever
enacted. He came to bring "life and immortality to
light." He reveals himself as "the ligit." He shows
that, by his personal' union with our nature, humanity
itself is quickened and redeemed. And to those who
receive him as their life, he declares that where he
is-in the glory of immortality-there shall his servants be also. Thus every assurance of the future
life that the truth can declare, or love make precious,
is infolded in the very substance of the Gospel. The
largest desires of the aspiring spirit are fulfilled by
what is there taught respecting the life after death;
and the fear of death gives place to devout joy and
the triumphant song of faith. Thus, through the
Gospel-and by no other means-there is found out
a way of escape from  the dread of death. While
suffering that fear, the soul is dwarfed and bowed




ADAPTA TION OF THE SCRIPTURES.      313
down to the earth; but in the clear vision of that
Heaven-given light, it rises into the ennobling and
purifying atmosphere of revealed "life and immortality."
Here we must cease; not that we have gone over
the whole field of either the evidences or the illustrations of our subject, but our utmost limits are
reached. Our examinations prove to us that, if there
is any harmony in the spiritual universe, if the Creator has not written contradictions in the human
character, and, contrary to his economy in nature,
given appetences and needs for which he has provided nothing to answer, or has set forth only mocking and delusive answers, then has he made provisions to respond to the instinctive desires and spontaneous cravings of man's spiritual nature. And since
the Holy Scriptures with such wonderful adaptations
answer to those wants of the spirit, the evidence
seems beyond rational cavil, that the Framer of
man's interior nature is the Author of the Sacred
Scriptures, and that he has, of purpose, set the one
over against the other, to be the life, the light, and
the culturing agency for the soul.








LECTURE X.
THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.
BY THE
REV. WILLIAM D. GODMAN, D. D.,
President of Baldwin University,
BEREA, OHIO.




Cui enim veritas comperta sine Deo?  Cui Deus cognitus
sine Christo?  Cui Christus exploratus sine Spiritu
Sancto?     Cui Spiritus Sanctus accommodatus sine
fidei sacramento?
TERTULLIANI DE ANIMA, I.




LECTURE X.
THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.
" He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon
Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou,
Simon Bar-Jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee,
but my Father which is in heaven."  MATTHEW XVI, I5-17.
A   BOUT eighteen hundred and thirty-seven years
ago this day,* if the received chronology and
calendar be correct, occurred the great event which
secured the triumph of Christianity. The rolling
away of the stone from the holy sepulcher, the reappearing of Jesus, was more to the new faith than
the patronage of the Caesars or the protection of a
thousand legions of trained soldiers. It is a pleasing
arrangement of Providence that permits us to-day to
come into this learned presence, before this Christian assembly, with so Divine a theme. May He
of whom we are called to speak be present, and
verify in our hearts His ascended glory! We beseech the guidance of "the Spirit of Truth." May
he that "searcheth the deep things of God" impart
to us such of his treasures of knowledge as our exceeding weakness may be able to receive! If we
*Easter Sunday, I870.
317




318            INGHAM LECTURES.
may, without presumption, borrow the words of a
prince in the world of letters, we may pray:
"And chiefly Thou, 0 Spirit, that dost prefer
Before all temples, the upright heart and pure,
Instruct me, for thou know'st:............ what in me is dark
Illumine! what is low, raise and support."
The most stirring question of the civilized world
is this: " What think ye of Christ?"  Not only the
monk in the cloister meditates upon it; not only the
surpliced cleric and the zealous evangelist strive to
give it a fond or a professional answer; but grave
philosophers, who make least account of popular enthusiasm, leave their speculations about development
and spontaneous generation to utter their thoughts
about Jesus.   The jurist, forgetting the eminent
claims of legal antiquities and the current exigencies of the administration of justice, lays aside the
ermine and takes the pen to record an opinion concerning that Nazarene of whom the least that can
be said is, that the world can not forget him. Men
of letters, the familiars of every muse, turn themselves from the ravishments of polite learning and
of high art, to enrich the imagination with the ideal
beauties of "the Man of Sorrows," and to expend the
resources of the most cultivated taste in the reproduction of what transcends all else in nature's growthall else in history's life. Men of action, trained to
politics, or married to gold, ask themselves, What of
this man Jesus?    Why should we have an opinion
concerning him?  What is it makes him     essential
to us?




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.        319
This question, agitated for eighteen centuries, addresses now more minds than ever before, and receives
more various answers. Responses, in other days,
were given in the cannon's roar and in the dying
groans of martyrs. Now they are given with the
voice and the pen. Once given in reply to threatening power, now they are made in conflict with defiant reason. Unbelief is better equipped and more
self-reliant to-day than in any former age. Metaphysics, history, art, never furnished her such effective weapons as she draws now from the armories of
natural science. The Christian religion in its infancy
was trodden beneath the iron heel of power, despised,
hated, crushed, as is every good thing when it is
weak. But every drop of the Church's blood was
prolific, and she throve amidst her agonies. Now
that the millions train in her steps; now  that
she has a record of glory in history; now that the
veneration of centuries is enthroned upon her brow;
now, in the days of her hallowed maturity, and in
the exuberance of her maternal goodness,-there are
found those who glory in their enmity, not to Christians, but to Christianity, who attack the fortress of
her strength, and, seizing her own guns, turn them
inward upon her vital defenses. Rationalism-which
is an affectation of rationalness, just as theism is of
godliness, and as Romanism is of Catholicism-rationalism is the name of the prevailing tendency of unbelief, the cover to all the attacks against Gospel
truth. Men are zealous to be disciples of Reason,
as if the ages before us had been only irrational.
This is the general name for the skeptical reac



320           INGHAM LECTURES
tions of two centuries against the Reformation of the
sixteenth century. This tendency began with a socalled rational interpretation of Scripture, so explaining supernatural events as to bring them within the
domain of the natural. There followed the attempt
to reduce the narratives of miraculous occurrences to
myths. This, failing to account satisfactorily for the
rise of Christianity and the Christian Church, was
succeeded by the endeavor to invalidate the apostolic
origin of the four Gospels, and to father upon St.
Paul the invention of the supernatural in the Christian records and faith. This having been defeated by
historical criticism, the enemies of the faith have
turned, as with one accord, directly to the person
of yesus Christ, as if to take the citadel of our
religion and thereby secure capitulation of the outposts. Many proclaim the victory already won, and
are but waiting, as they think, the rapidly approaching
hour when the Christian world shall strike the colors
of Immanuel. A highly cultivated French gentleman pronounces Jesus to have been a young man of
great talent, a much refined and very subtle sinner;
a German professor discovers that he was a sinless
man and an uncompromising low-chuichman; an
American conventioner calls him Mr. Jesus; and a
St. Louis Councilman, learned in "lager beer," decides that his religion is an "exploded humbug."
Abating our contempt for the pretensions of ignorance, and our disappointment with the ill-disguised
sophistries of learned men, there is one view of the
activity of skepticism which commands respect, and
bids us heed its honest utterances. So far as the




THE PERSON OF 7ESUS CHRIST.       321
Christian Church has sought to impose her beliefs
by authority; and so far as skepticism is a protest
against this procedure, a demand for light and a denial
of prerogative,-so far it merits a respectful consideration, and an effort to attain the middle ground
whereon faith and reason, prescription and inquiry
may find themselves at one. All do not discriminate
between Christianity and the Church. Imposture,
rampant around ecclesiastical altars, may cast the
shadow of its rottenness over the sacred origins of
religion and Church. Strauss's declaration, that "he
who would banish priests from the Church must
first banish miracles from religion," is but the outgrowth of hatred towards ignorance, bigotry, and imposture in the living representatives of the Founder
of the Christian Church.
Furthermore, the discoveries of modern science
and the achievements of criticism have annihilated
so many hypotheses of ancient thinkers; have swept
away so many traditions, venerable with age and consecrated in the prejudices of nations; have re-written
the histories of so many men and so many peoples;
have unlocked so many secrets, and explained so
many mysteries; have reduced so many fog-mountains to molehills; and have found but a calf in the
sanctum of so many temples; in short, have brought
us so much daylight, and left the ancients so benighted,-that a presumption has been created against
every ancient belief; and that which can not verify
itself anew in inward experience or by outward experiment and observation, must fall to the ground.
We are in the midst of such a crisis. We rejoice
28




322           INGHAM LECTURES.
that it is so. Truth has nothing to fear. The more
numerous the tests, and the hotter the fires, the
brighter will be the luster of her after-glory.
PRESUPPOSITIONS.
Since some things must be taken for granted in
any writing; and whereas many things, closely connected with our theme, have been amply discussed
and satisfactorily determined elsewhere, by other
writers, we must, therefore, request the hearer, at
the outset, to concede to us the following presuppositions:
(a) AN HISTORICAL PRESUPPOSITION; namely,
The several books of the New Testament were written
by the persons whose names they bear; that is, they
are genuine.
(b) AN ONTOLOGICAL PRESUPPOSITION; namely,
The szupernatural in history is not repzgnant to reason.
(c) A PSYCHOLOGICAL PRESUPPOSITION; namely,
There is something in man which may be called faith,
or intuition,  be it a faculty of intellect, or a power
of feeling, or a mere receptivity-something which
mediates to us the knowledge of God.
When the apostle John says, "And we beheld
his glory, the glory as of the only-begotten of the
Father,"* he appears to assume, not a miraculous
power of perception in the disciples, but a power
resident in us all, more developed in some than in
others; a power whereby, had we, who are here,
* John i, 14.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.       323
been there, with Jesus and his disciples, we should
have perceived the same thing, the Divinity incorporate in Jesus.
Jesus taught that this perceptive power, this
organon of spiritual knowledge, might be dimmed,
and even blinded. "If the light that is in thee be
darkness, how great is that darkness!'"  If this eye
be "single"-that is, incorrupt-we may with it discover the treasures of the unseen world, and our
hearts will be ravished with their beauty. If it be
"evil," we may think there is no unseen world, because we perceive it not; that is, have gone past
perceiving it.  Are there not those who "having
eyes see not, and having ears hear not?" Are there
not things which "eye hath not seen, nor ear heard,
neither have entered into the heart of man, but God
hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit?" This may
be, and doubtless is, in most of us, a feeble faculty, a
power but little developed. But let us not doubt its
reality for that reason. Perhaps if we should try, we
might rub these eyes open, and see worlds of beauty
hitherto concealed. This spiritual vision made Peter
eminent among the chosen, who were all, probably,
selected because of their superior endowment therewith; and upon it was pronounced the blessing:
"Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona, for flesh and
blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father
which is in heaven."  Tertullian would, doubtless,
grant us what we claim, for he says:t " Who ascertains truth without God? To whom is God known
without Christ? By whom is Christ explored with*Matt. vi, 22, 23.   t Vide our motto.




324            INGHAA LECTURES.
out the Holy Spirit? And to whom is the Holy
Spirit granted without the sacrament of faith?" The
mystic discoveries and triumphs of Christian experience rest upon such a spiritual power. We all, in
the heart, admit it. We preach it, pray it, sing it.
"My prayer hath power with God; the grace
Unspeakable I now receive;
Through faith I see Thee face to face;
I see thee face to face, and live!
In vain I have not wept and strove:
Thy nature and thy name is Love."
Here, then, we stand. The Gospel narratives have
adequate historic verity. The mysterious person of
Christ is not to be rejected at the outset because it
is supernatural; and there is in us a power of such
a nature as, if cultivated, will aid us in discerning
the wonderful verities of our Lord's person.
And now we approach more directly our theme,
beseeching our Lord to pardon the shortcomings of
thought, and by his own illumination to fill up, and
complete in your minds, the necessarily imperfect
picture we shall draw.
We humbly propose to show that Jesus Christ is
very God, and very man.
I. DIVINITY: That he is very God.
Let us bear in mind that we speak of an historical
character; of one who has actually lived among men,
sharing all the lowly conditions of our mortality,
having human infirmities, speaking in a human language, enjoying the friendships and incurring the
hatred of men and women, and closing a laborious,




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.       325
self-denying life with a most tragic and humiliating
death. Of such a person we speak, who, notwithstanding all, claimed to be much more than a man;'
and his claim was accepted and honored by all who
knew him well, and has wrought itself into the foundation and the essence of the religion bearing his
name. It has been well said, by Dr. Schenkel, that
"no religion has its fortunes and its results so closely
connected with the person of its founder, as the
Christian religion."  It is equally true that no religion is so well prepared to risk its existence upon the
person of its founder, because it has the requisite
historic basis. Much as infidels ridicule a historic
religion, there is nothing but history, that is, authenticated facts, that can substantiate a revelation and
verify a deity. An invented religion may serve the
purposes of a philosopher; but dying men and women
call for a revelation and a "living God." We are not,
therefore, appalled by the greatness of the problem
before us, seeing Divine Wisdom has graciously provided abundant material for its solution.
But we are met, at the outset, with the assertion
that the incarnation of Deity is impossible and absurd.
The Infinite, it is claimec, can not impose limitations
on itself. The writer last quoted says:
"Statements like these, namely, that he imposed
limitations on himself in regard to his Divine fullness; that, during his earthly life, he made no use,
or only a partial use, of his Divine powers,-are not
only empty and unmeaning subterfuges, they are derogatory to the perfections and majesty of God. A
* "Character of Jesus Portrayed," Am. ed., Vol. I, chap. i.




326           ZINGHAMi LECTURES.
god who limits himself, is a god who ceases to be
God; for to the being of God it belongs, above all
things, to be unlimited. By propositions of this sort,
Christian theology sinks to the level of heathen representations of God. It makes him a being changeable and divisible; that is, a mere personification of
forces and powers."*
If this be sound philosophy, there is an end of
controversy. We should. not care to defend an unphilosophic and self-contradictory theology. But we
must confess our surprise at the raising of this objection by one who must be so familiar with the history
of thought. Let the objector reconcile creation and
providence and revelation with the infinitude of God
if he can. Let him solve the problem of the individuation of the absolute a favorite with the schoolmen. When he has done this, he may consistently
apply his dialectics to the doctrine of the Incarnation. We shall not need to tarry here, because of
the prominence given, of late years, to the philosophy
of the Infinite, and because of the large circulation,
in our country, of the works of Cousin, Hamilton,
and Mansel.
Now, remembering the authenticity of the Gospels,
assuming metaphysical or ontological difficulties to
be satisfactorily adjusted, looking upon this historical
personage, and, for the time, thinking of him only as
a man, too good to deceive, and too wise to be himself deluded, let us inquire what is his testimony
concerning himself. A man who exacts no pay,
while perpetually rendering most inestimable services;
* "Character of Jesus Portrayed,"Am. ed., Vol. I,:p. 4.




THE PERSOAN OF 7ESUS CHRIST.      327
who courts not popularity, but shrinks from applause;
who aims at no advantage for himself, and cherishes
not a shadow of ambition for fame or power; who
finds his delight in relieving the poor, in healing the
sick, in restoring outcasts to the society of their
kind; who is happy when he can make a blind man
see, and when he can restore a widow's son from the
embrace of death to his mother's arms,-such a man,
if he lived in our midst, without property, without office, without party, without social distinction, without
clique, or clan, or cure, or cunning; such a man, we
repeat, would command our confidence. Nay, more;
we would accept his testimony on any subject with
which he ought to be familiar, in preference to that
of any other man in the community. Nay, yet further; we should not feel ourselves justified in differing from such a man. If he testified at all of himself;
if he spake of himself with such reserve and candor
as his great deeds would require,-we should receive
his testimony, as much more likely to be true than
the opinions of others; especially if those others
were unfriendly, and rendered so by the claims of
selfishness.
Though we have not space for a complete and
exhaustive view of this testimony, we notice, briefly:
I. Some indirect testimonies to the nature of His
own person.
a. "Wist ye not that I must be about my Father's
business?"* This seems to be something more than
a presentiment of a future prophetic vocation. Samuel received a Divine call when a child, a call from
*Luke ii, 49.




328            INGHAM LECTURES.
without, which took him by surprise, and, to fulfill
which, he was educated. Jesus, a lad of twelve
years, speaks of God as from an abiding consciousness, and calls him his "Father."  This betrays an
inner light, which could not have proceeded from maternal instruction, and which was not derived from
the study of the prophets. Whence can it have
come? Does it not suggest a possible grandeur and
mystery of person, not inclusible within the ordinary
limitations of humanity?
b. The wonderful child, whose strange birth, history, and sayings were treasured up in a mother's
pondering heart; the lone and inspired man whom
the unsoiled and beautiful souls* sought, and, when
they found, exclaimed, "We have found    him  of
whom   Moses, in the law   and the prophets, did
write;"t this man, just emerged from obscurity, but
brimful of "grace and truth"-the truth that overtopped all written laws, all recorded prophecies, and
the grace that warmed and won, like the morning's
glory on dew-laden flowers,-this man said, "Follow
me."  The love-smitten souls of fishermen and taxgatherers left pelf and toil, profit and pleasure, to
rot away in their boats and coffers, while they companied with him, who chained them to himself by a
spell, which was the sign of the mysterious and
unmeasured power within the man. What was it
that gave authority to the summons, "Follow me?"
Something in the man; but what was it? And what
- " What dost thou call a beautiful soul? Thou callest a beautiful soul one that is quick to perceive the good, that gives it due prominence, and holds it immovably fast."-7acobi.
t John i, 45.




THE PERSON OF yESUS CHRIST.      329
did he assume when he said "follozv?" We inter
pret as if he said: "I have that to give which is
better than your trades and gains, better than your
homes and friends; that which ye have longed for;
that which men every-where would have, if they.
could buy it or work for it. It is in me. It is my
birthright. No other man has it." They saw the
reflection of the inner light, did they not? They felt
the attraction of the hidden power, did they not?
c. The first sermon of Jesus proclaimed a kingdom. "Repent, for the kingdom  of heaven is at
hand."* He proclaimed the restoration of the theocracy, as says the author of " Ecce Homo."t But he
pointed to no successor whose credentials he would
publish. He spake not of a king yet to come,
beneath whose scepter the "quickening fire" of a
golden age of peace should make beauty and blessing start from every desert soil of life. But, calmly
taking to himself the royal prerogatives, he lays
down, upon his own authority, the laws of a sovereignty as broad as the human race and more enduring than time. As Jehovah, under the ancient
theocracy, pronounced the blessing and the curse,
so now, Jesus declares "blessing" on the man of
love, "hell-fire" on the man of hate. When he
would heal the palsied man, he declares his sins forgiven; when his disciples gather and eat their food
on the Sabbath, he stops the mouth of caviling by
announcing himself the Lord of the Sabbath; when
his dear friend has been four days dead, and the
sisters doubt and weep, he cries, "Lazarus, come
* Matthew iv, 17.         t Chapter iii.
29




330           ZiVGHAM LECTURES.
forth."  Among the living and the dead, in nature's
unconscious laboratories, and in the quick spiritualities of human hearts, he moves alike with sovereign
composure and undisputed command. Nature never
revolted. Where humnan perverseness resisted and
seemed to triumph, it was evident he chose not to
use his power. Human beings, fanatics, have fancied
themselves kings; but when have they, without purse
and without armies, persuaded others of their royalty? When and where havethey consistently, composedly, beneficently, maintained their claim, amid
the hearty responses of grateful friends and indebted
thousands?
d. But among the indirect testimonies of Jesus
to his superhuman excellence, the chief importance
must be attached to the interior, spiritual fuzctions
which he takes to himself in relation to the souls of
Men.
e. He is legislator for the spiritual kingdom in his
ozwn right. "Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying,"
etc.; but Jesus says, "I say unto you."  Whosoever
kept not the law given by Jehovah to Moses, was
to be "cut off from his people."  But Jesus says,
"Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and
doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man which
built his house upon a rock," etc.*
He speaks not in another's name. He retires to
no oracle for instructions in critical moments. He
shelters his opinions and advices under cover of no
ancient and revered names. He. commands our virtues, denounces our vices, and wields with serenity
* Matthew vii, 24, etc.




THE PERSON OF ESUS CHRIST.       331
the awful decrees of irrevocable fate. He set out
upon his ministry with the assertion of this prerogative, armed as yet with the sole might of his person,
and before he had wrought the wonderful works that
drew all eyes to him. Out of his own consciousness
of inherent majesty and right comes his legislating;
not from the consent of the popular voice.
f He is the szpreme object of our heart-devotion.
With a keen glance, and without any knowingness, he
fathomed the human heart. He saw it, a tender dove,
in its weather-beaten ark, floating over the comfortless waters of submerged joys and extinguished hopes.
He saw its panting, its worrying, its longing; its fretted wings, its disappointed efforts, its untried powers.
He spake to it: "0, suffering humanity! leave all
thy crushed treasures and come to me. Forget the
wild roar of the troubled waters beneath thee in the
peaceful haven of my bosom. Cease thy strivings,
and the beating of thy frail wings. Take the'olivebranch' of my promise, and be at rest. I will assuage
the waters." "Come unto me, all ye that labor and
are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest." How
great was his heart, that could take us all in! How
vast the resources of a nature that can drink up all
the depths of our sorrow! Did ever man speak so
before? Was he but a man? If he were, did he not
wofully deceive himself when he thought he could
comfort us?
But, again, he saw that man could be redeemed
only through his affectional nature; that he could not
be permanently withdrawn from his sins except by
* Matt. xi, 28.




332           INVGHAM LECTURES.
attaching him to some better being, as a ship is
moored to the dock. He knew, too, the supremacy
of conscience in man, the indisputable and indefeasible sovereignty of rectitude, even in the fallen nature;
so that there could be no mooring of the soul to an
imperfect, fallible being.  The attempt to tie our
hearts in supreme devotion to a less than infallible
being, would inevitably create internal dissension and
warfare. But Jesus proposed peace and righteousness. Hence, to demand our sovereign affections for
himself, were treason, not only to God, but to us, if
he were only a man like ourselves, however pure and
refined. Yet, although he says, "Thou shalt love
the Lord thy God with all thy heart," etc.,* he also
says: "If ye love me, keep my commandments;"t
"He that loveth father or mother more than me is
not worthy of me;" " He that loseth his life for nmy
sake shall find it."~ Many a time friendship has laid
human lives on the altar of sacrifice. Many a time
have loyal heroes, fired with passion for glory, followed chivalric leaders to bloody graves. But who
ever, before or since Jesus, challenged our dying love
for himself?  Many a one has said, "Fight and die
for your country;" but who else than this one has
said, "Fight and die for me?" Who, besides him,
has ever said, "When the issue is made between
father and mother and me, choose me?" Who but
him has said, "When thy wife and children stand
between thee and me, put them aside?"  How like
the mandates of conscience! This inward monitor
A Matt. xxii, 37; Mark xii, 30; Luke x, 27.  f John xiv, 15.
t Matt. x, 37.                 ~ Matt. x, 39.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.               333
says, "Die, rather than     lie, or cheat, or murder."
Jesus says, " Die, rather than betray me."     May it be
that our fealty to rectitude and to Jesus is all one
and the same? Does he not assume it.?
g. But, again, he presents himself as the world's
Savior.   " No man cometh unto the Father, but by
me."    "No    descent fiom    Abraham, no      covenant
privilege, no keeping of laws, can give one acceptance
with the Father. This comes only of my mediation."
"I am   the way, the truth, and the life."t   "I mediate
access to the Father. None other can. I illuminate
the human mind. I give the knowledge of the Father. I bestow the power of a new life. I raise
souls, that are dead in sin, to the life of righteousness."   Could Paul use such language?         Could he
give  life?   Or did he count "all things loss for
the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus?"t
Did Paul imagine a new creation, originating with
himself? Or did he say, "If any man be in Christ,
he is a new     creature?"~   Was it, then, as a man
among men that Jesus said, "I am           the way, the
truth, and the life?"|l  Let prophet or holy man say,
*John xiv, 6.  t Idem.    Phil. iii, 8.  ~ 2 Cor. v, I7.
II We quote here with pleasure the words of Dr. Gess: "The
position which Jesus takes toward us corresponds to that which he
wishes us to take towards him. A Moses may well desire the Israelites to believe in him and to trust him (cf. Exodus xiv, 31: "And
the people feared the Lord, and believed the Lord, and his servant
Moses "); but only by reason of the commission and the prophetic
endowment which God has given the prophet, not because of the
inner essence of his person. The purpose of that Divine endowment
being attained, the relation of subordination between the prophet and
the people ceases, and another prophet may step into the place of the
first. Every prophet, the truer a prophet he is, the more certainly,
must desire his own decrease, his own retreat (cf. John iii, 30), and




334              INGHAAM LECTURES.
"Ye believe in God, believe also in me;"       shall it
not sound as blasphemy in our ears? But the words
drop from the lips of Jesus, and create no shock. He
is about to leave his disciples-to die.     But he assures them    he dies not as others die.      "I go to
prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a
place for you, I will come again, and receive you
unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be
also."t Is it blasphemy? The disciples do not think
it. Is he beside himself? The words are very sober,
for a lunatic. If this were lunacy, then the disciples
also were lunatics, and so continued, until they became martyrs for their lunacy. This is a lunacy,
too, that has had a strange power of self-propagation,
a marvelous pertinacity of endurance, a fertile productiveness of every thing good, and the power to
organize society and erect social institutions, surpassing the highest achievements of reason. Is there not
in him, that so addresses us, a consciousness of excellence more than human; a feeling that he can do
for us what all the good and great might strive in
vain to do? But who can utter the bitterness of the
mockery, and the stupendous sottishness of the imposture, if these be the words of one who is but
wrought up by enthusiasm     to the counting on imagthe ascending of all to his prophetic elevation. On the contrary, Jesus,
at the approach of his departure, says to his disciples, "Ye believe in
God, believe also in mfe." (John xiv, I.) And, while a prophet exacts
more faith in his person of the less experienced, but is obligated to direct those of riper religious experience to their own immediate experience of communion with God, yesus, on the other hand, induced much
rather the most experienced-namely, his disciples-to build their entire inner life upon communion with his person." (Die Lehre von der
Person Christi, u. s. w., 1856, p. 5.)  *John xiv, I.  tid., 2, 3.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST        335
inary powers; or, still worse, if they proceed from
one who, being delegated by the Supreme Benefactor
of the world to do us a great service, practices upon
our credulity, by drawing our attention to himself instead of the Universal Father.
But turn to another scene, and behold this same
person in the crowded temple, confronting his persistent enemies and rejecters. He is weary of denouncing sin, and longs for some sign of relenting.
See the risings of his heart towards his recreant
household.  Behold the forgetting of conventions,
and the oblivion of the machinations of enemies and
of the selfish artifices of a cold world. It is one of
the most beautiful pictures in the records of this
wonderful life. Looking into the faces of sordid
money-changers, of loose debauchees, of flaunting
courtesans, of wily demagogues, of hypocritical Pharisees, of artless countrymen and countrywomen, and
thoughtless of all but their souls' worth, he exclaims:
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee,
how often would I have gathered thy-children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under
her wings, and ye would not!"* Are we mistaken?
or is there in the words "how often" a backward
glance of a more than human memory over ages
gone by, when this gracious presence, not yet become incarnate, watched over his chosen people and
endured their rebellions?
2. But, secondly, we introduce the more direct
testimonies of Jesus to the nature of his own person;
* Matt. xxiii, 37.




336           INGHAM LECTURES.
testimonies which unequivocally avow his divinity, or
at least assume for him the attributes of -Deity.
a. He claims a pre-munidane and eternal existence.
He "came down from     heaven;"  he was in
heaven before his earthly existence: "What and if
ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was
before?"t He was in glory with the Father, before
the world was: "And now, O Father, glorify thou me
with thine own self with the glory which I had with
thee before the world was.":: He was, nay he Is,
before Abraham: "Before Abraham was, I am."~
When we endeavor to understand the words "before the world was," shall we conceive a limitless
stretch of time antecedent to the creation of the
world? Shall we banish from'conception all rolling
worlds, all shining light, all marked periods, all revolutions, and all sounds; and conceive the solitary,
soundless rush of the thoughts of God, like a spiritual
Tequendama in an unfrequented Andes? Shall we
behold one separate thought' spring out from the
dread abyss, and by Divine volition become a conscious being, an armed Minerva, an angel of light, a
companion of a hitherto solitary God? Does he
spring into a splendid florescence of beauty? a gorgeous affluence of majesty and power? Does he
receive much and bestow much? Does he call into
existence many ranks of intelligent and social beings? Does he form abodes of paradisiac beauty
and elegance for their entertainment and delectation?
Does he lead a life of untarnished glory and triumph
*John iii, 13; vi, 38.     t John vi, 62.
t John xvii, 5.            ~ John viii, 58.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.       337
through the skies, in perpetual ovation? Does the
wealth of his love pour floods of blessing through
the worlds, and meet responsive songs of grateful
hallelujahs from thronging millions of happy creatures?  Is this the being who now, a traveling
Prince, turns his eye, from a distant and disordered world, back to his Father's throne, and prays,
"Glorify thou me with thine own self with the glory
which I had with thee before the world was?""
Such was the doctrine of Arius, an accomplished
man of the early part of the fourth century, a doctrine which gave rise to the Ecumenical Council
of Nice, wherein it was condemned. It must be
rejected by us, not because it was thus condemned
by the Council, but because, whatever Gordian knots
of metaphysical obscurity it severs, it does not meet
the demands of Biblical interpretation. Take due
note of the words, "The glory which I had with
thee." Is this the language of a created being?
What creature, however exalted, may share the Divine glory? How vast, how incomprehensible, the
gulf between the Infinite God and the highest of his
creatures! Indeed, the most exalted creature, no
more than the meanest, could partake of the ineffable
glory of God. It is the creatureship, not any relative
degree of littleness, that forbids the participation.
Then the added words, "Before the world was," were
it not puerile to explain thus: "Before the earth
was formed and its inhabitants created, but still after
creation had begun?" This is as if we should interpret "before Abraham  was, I am," thus: "Before
* John xvii, 5.




338                INGHAM LECTURES.
Abraham, to be sure, but not earlier than Adam; or,
if earlier than Adam, at least contemporaneous with
Gabriel; or, at farthest, just a little before Gabriel; a
few years, at most."    This is a ireductio ad absurdum
of our Savior's words.      He spake too seriously and
too grandly to be thus understood. In his thought,
"before the world was," and "before Abraham          was,"
signify before the creation, and antecedent to the
course of time.* The glory he had enjoyed, and had
laid aside, was a pre-mundane glory, without conditions and limits, outside of all the befores and afters
of our human life.      Otherwise, why did he employ
the peculiar phraseology, "Before Abraham           was, /
am," when, if a creature, "I was," was the language
he should have employed, both for truth's and grammar's sake?     Did he not know that "I AM" was the
peculiar and most dreadful name of the God of the
Jews? Did he not know that they so reverenced it
as to   substitute   for it another word, on ordinary
occasions, so that they might not profane the holy
name? And were they not exasperated by his self* "'I came down from heaven;''I came out from the Father;''Glorify thou me with the glory which I had with thee before the world
was;'' That they may behold the glory which thou hast given me: for
thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world;''Before Abraham
was, I AM;'-in these expressions Jesus, in a plain and incontrovertible manner, ascribes to himself a glory before the temporal world was,
and, therefore, before time itself. He was with the Father, in the same
glory which he has in his post-temporal life, wherein all power in
heaven and upon earth is given over to him; and he has power to
bestow the Holy Ghost. He also ascribes to himself a changeless
life; not one of becoming and of passing away, but one of being. Is
not this just what we should expect of him who says: I am the life;
baptize in my name; my voice shall wake the dead?" (Gess, "I)ie
Lehre v. d. Person Christi," p. 28.)




THE PERSON OF 7ESUS CHRIS:T       339
appropriation of this supreme name? Did they not
take up stones to put him to death, as a capital
offender?  Again, if he were the good and true man
we have believed him to be, what are we now forced
to concede? Either that he was God, as he claimed
to be, or that he was woofully deceived concerning
himself. Was he likely to be deceived?  Could the
author of the Sermon on the Mount be easily mistaken on any subject pertaining to morals and religion? Keep this point steadily in view. Is there any
intellectual production in the world, in all the literatures of all the ages, equal to that mountain discourse?  Did  Confucius ever rise to its placid
elevation? Did Plato ever attain its sublime vision?
Did any other discourse ever so vindicate its truthfulness in the consciences of men? Here are teachings at the very top of all the wisdom of time. Was
their author an enthusiast?  Was he a sciolist?
Was he fanciful?  Was he sentimental? Was he
weak-minded?
Again, his enemies were Pharisees and scribes,
men who taught that it was a great offense to eat
without washing, or to send for a physician on the
Sabbath; but it was venial to profane the common
name by which Jehovah was known, or to defraud
parents in the name of sanctity. These men said
Jesus was an impostor, and denied his Messiahship.
Who was more likely to be mistaken-the casuistic
Pharisee, or Jesus? We must renounce our common
sense, or accept the testimony of Jesus.
b. He claims self-existence in the words, "Before
Abraham was, I am."




340           INGHAM LECTURES.
c. He assumes essential equality with the Father.
"He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.""  "I
and my Father are one."t   "No man knoweth the
Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man the
Father, save the Son.":
d. He makes himself the source of spiritual life,
and the quickener of the physically dead. "I am the
way, the truth, and the life."~ " For as the Father
raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so
the Son quickeneth whom he.will."[ "For as the
Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the
Son to have life in himself."~  Can he have life in
himself whose existence is derived and has a beginning? Is there not a contradiction in the conception
of a created life-giver?
e. In concluding our meager notice of the direct
testimonies of Jesus to his divinity, we may not omit
what is perhaps the plainest and most emphatic of
all, and which is often called the baptismal formula:
"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost."** This is not only a substantial,
but also a formal, assumption of the prerogatives of
Deity. Baptism  formally devoted the man to the
exclusive worship and service of God. Creatures
have no place as the objects of baptismal worship
and service. But here is a careful and deliberate
array of the Son and the Holy Ghost along with the
Father, as the united object of baptism. Criticism
has sometimes attempted to expunge the words from
John xiv, 9. t John x, 30. $ Matt. xi, 27. ~ John xiv, 6.
I John v, 21.'T John v, 26.  -*  Matt. xxviii, I9.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.       341
the text, but authority fails. Anti-trinitarians usually
evade the passage in their arguments. Here, however, is the attempt of one who is bold enough to
hazard his cause against this stronghold of the truth:
"This teaches no trinity of persons) much less of
equal persons in the Godhead. On the contrary, the
use of the word Son implies inferrority. The words
mean that we should be baptized into faith in God as
our Father, in the Son of God as our Savior, and in
the Holy Spirit as the guiding influence which proceeds from God. This comprises the whole Christian
faith. It is sometimes said that to be baptized in
the Son is a proof of his deity; but it is not so, for
Paul speaks of the Jews as having been baptized into
Moses.*  Nor does it follow, because the three are
spoken of together, that they are equal to each other,
for we read:'The people came to Moses and said,
We have sinned; we have spoken against Jehovah
and against thee.'t And, again,'All the congregation blessed Jehovah, God of their fathers, and bowed
down their heads, and worshiped Jehovah and the
king.': And,'David said to Abigail, Blessed be
Jehovah, God of Israel, who sent thee this day to
meet me: and blessed be thy advice, and blessed be
thou, who hast kept me this day from coming to
shed blood.'~  You will observe the strength of this
language. It is an ascription of praise, first to Jehovah, God of Israel, then to her advice, and then to
herself. But the ascription is to be understood differently in each case. So, when we read that they
I Cor. x, 2.           t Numb. xxi, 7.
I Chron. xxix, 20.     ~ I Sam. xxv, 32.




342           INGHAM LECTURES.
worshiped Jehovah and the king, we understand the
first as supreme worship, and the second as the
homage of respect. In all such cases, which are
frequent in the Bible, common sense saves us from
error. Although two or three subjects are spoken of
in the same connection, it does not follow that they
are spoken of in the same sense, much less that they
are the same thing, or equal to each other. Nor does
it follow that the Holy Spirit is a person because we
are baptized into its name; for, according to a common mode of expression among the Jews, the name
of a thing often meant the thing itself. So the
Rabbins speak of being baptized into the name of
liberty, and the Samaritans circumcised their converts into the name of Mt. Gerizim."
Let it be observed, in reply, that we are forbidden
to infer the Divine nature of the Son of God from
his position as an object of baptismal honor, because
in one place it is declared that the Israelites were
baptized unto Moses. Now, we remember that baptism is made an antitype of the deliverance from the
flood.- It will doubtless be conceded, on all hands,
that, in the passage cited from Corinthians, St. Paul
makes it the antitype of the deliverance of Israel
from  the Red Sea.   Therefore the baptism  unto
Moses is not real, but figurative; and the putting
Moses in such a relation to that figurative baptism,
is only an acknowledgment of his historic position
as leader and deliverer of Israel.  Moses, as a
prophet, was, in some sense, an object of faith to
* "Doctrines of Christianity," by Wm. G. Elliot, pp. 22, 23.
t IPeter, iii, 21.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.       343
Israel; but, in the passage in question, there is no
allusion to Moses other than historical. The connection requires, simply, a forgetting of Moses, and
an absorbing of the mind in the deliverance. There
is, therefore, in this use, by the apostle, of the words
"baptized unto Moses," as compared with the other
places of the New Testament, wherein universally
God or Christ is made the object of baptism, a good
opportunity for the application of the above writer's
words, " Common sense saves us from error."
As regards the import of mentioning the names
of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost together, it is vain
to cite instances of the kind mentioned. It is universally held by scholars that a purely doctrinal
passage is to be interpreted more rigidly than an
incidental bit of narrative. Where there is a conscious regard to the doctrinal import of one's words,
and an intention of teaching something, we may find
a ground of valid inference, which may not be justified in an incidental remark of the historian. When
Jesus, the sublimest of all teachers, enjoins baptism
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the
Holy Ghost, he is unquestionably teaching his disciples to co-ordinate those blessed hypostases of the
Divine Nature. For this utterance does not stand
alone. It must be taken in connection with the other
sayings of our Lord: "I and my Father are one;"*
"He that hath seen me hath seen the Father."t
And, again, " But when the Comforter is come, whom
I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit
of truth, which proceedeth from the Father,..
*John x, 30.             t John xiv, 9.




344           INGHAM LECTURES.
he will guide you into all truth;... he will
shew you things to come;... he shall glorify
me."   It is evident, too, although the writer to
whom we reply, ignores it, that the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Ghost are, in baptism, a personal object
of faith, not a mere subject of propositions. The
recipient of baptism signified, in his recipiency, something more than a mere confession of the existence
of God, and of Jesus Christ, his Son, our Savior, and
of an influence from God delusively called the Holy
Spirit. John Baptist proclaimed, "He shall baptize
you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire."t  Jesus
said, "Except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit, he can not enter into the kingdom of God."t
Do these words import that the Holy Ghost is but a
name?   Do they signify that the baptized merely
acknowledges a creed? Or do they assume that the
subject of baptism receives a Divine power, and enters into a new spiritual relation? To whom does
he hold this relation, if not to the being in whose
name he is baptized? To the Unitarian these grand
distinctions and titles, pertaining to the Divinity, may
be only subjects of belief; but to us they are objects
offaith. We do not insist on the word "person," as
applied to them. It has never been regarded, from
Augustine to our own time, as adequate to the truth.
It misleads, of necessity, until we put ourselves on
guard against it. But it is our infirmity, that we
have not found a word fitted to take its place.
When we remember that Jesus has continually
demanded our unlimited faith in his person, our
*John xv, 26; xvi, 13, I4.  t Matt. iii, I.  f John iii, 5.




THE PERSON OF 7ESUS CHRIST.       345
resting of all spiritual hopes thereon, we can not
doubt that when he places himself alongside the
Father, in the formula of baptism, he still aims at
our immortal, saving trust in himself, as in God.
We have noticed but few of the utterances of
Jesus which more or less plainly avow his Divine
nature. Time and space forbid an attempt at exhausting this review. The sayings of Jesus, suffice
it to say, are all permeated with the idea of his
superhuman and Divine nature. When this is not
expressly avowed and brought into the foreground of
the picture, it lies in the background, and throws its
coloring over the whole. When he speaks as "one
having authority;" when he names himself "the
Bridegroom," as did Jehovah in the Old Covenant;
when he bids the world come to him and live; when
he raises the widow's son upon his bier; when he
rises, himself, from the grave,-in all these things
are conspicuous to the unbiased reader now, as to
the pious disciple of old, the manner and the power
of God!
3. We have reserved for this place a brief discussion of the import of the phrase, "Son of God,"
although the understanding of it is indispensable to
the right appreciation of the baptismal formula, ot
which we have already treated.
We assume that we are all sufficiently familiar
with the fact that the phrase, "Son of God," is
sometimes applied, in the Old Testament, to holy
men, and men of exalted position in the Theocracy.
We need, also, only to advert, in passing, to the fact
that the same title is employed, as in the second
30




346           INGHAM LECTURES.
Psalm, to designate the promised Messiah.  The
question now is, whether the title, as applied to
Jesus, was any thing more than the official Messianic title; whether it signified his Divine essence. It
may be granted that, in the announcement of his
Sonship at the baptism of Jesus, and afterwards at the
transfiguration, the primary object was to point him
out as the Messiah, rather than to declare any thing
concerning his nature. The same may be true of
John Baptist's confession, "And I saw and bare
record that this is the Son of God;"* and of that of
Nathaniel, " Thou art the Son of God; thou art the
King of Israel."t  But, it is evident, a different and
higher relation is indicated in the words of Jesus,
"All things are delivered unto me of my Father:
and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father;
neither knoweth any man the Father, save the
Son."t This is no official dignity, but a vital and
pre-mundane relation between the Everlasting Father and the Son, a mystic union which only Divine
Wisdom comprehends. He assumes the same relation, not-of identity, but of Sonship, when he says,
"He that hath seen me hath seen the Father."~  It
is only a theoretical prepossession and bias that can
resist the force of such declarations. Compare, moreover, the words, "For God so loved the world, that
he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting
life."l That the term "only begotten" does not refer
to the temporal phenomenon of the birth from Mary,
*John i, 34.   t John i, 49.  I Matt. xi, 27.
~ John xiv, 9.              11 John iii, I6.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST        347
is evident from such passages as I have already
quoted;* and from this, "And now, O Father, glorify
thou me with thine own self with the glory which I
had with thee before the world was;"t and from
many other utterances of the Savior himself, not to
speak, now, of those of his apostles. The opinion
that the appellation, " Son of God," was given in a
distinctive sense to Jesus, only because of his supernatural incarnation, has been maintained by some
scholars; but no profound scholar or capable critic
of the present day would risk his reputation on such
a hypothesis. The Jews themselves, unless John has
deceived us, understood the title in its highest sense
when Jesus said, " My Father worketh hitherto, and
I work;"t for "they sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the Sabbath, but said
also that God was his Father, making himself equal
with God.''~
If we turn, now, to inquire how the apostles understood this peculiar name, and how they employed
it, we find John, who knew him best as a human
being, most decidedly impressed with his Divinity,
and clearly conveying it in the use of the name Son,
and its equivalent, "only begotten."  "And the Word
was made flesh, and dwelt among us, full of grace
and truth; and we beheld his glory, the glory as of
the only begotten of the Father."!  And, again, " No
man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten
Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath
declared him."[  "In this was manifested the love
*Matt. xi, 27.  1 John xvii, 5.  John v, I7.
~ John v, I8.   II John i, I4.  ~T Id., I8.




348            ZNVGiAM LECTURES.
of God toward us, because that God sent his only
begotten Son into the world, that we might live
through him."*  "Who is a liar but he that denieth
that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosever denieth
the Son, the same hath not the Father."t To St.
Peter, God is " the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."
St. Paul sets him before us as "made of the seed of
David according to the flesh;" but "declared to be
the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit
of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead."t He
says, "The life which I now live in the flesh I live
by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and
gave himself for me."~  We may well believe St.
Paul did not live by faith in one whom he esteemed
a creature. In the Epistle to the Philippians he
speaks of this Son of God as having been in the
form of God, but at his incarnation taking on him
the form of a servant;ll which is an implicit contradiction of the opinion that his Sonship pertained to
his incarnate existence. The author of the Epistle
to the Hebrews, whoever he was, is most explicit in
his use of the name Son, in the divinest sense:
"God..  hath in these last days spoken unto
us by his Son."~  "And again, when he bringeth in
the first-begotten into the world, he saith, And let
all the angels of God worship him."*  "And of the
angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and
his ministers a flame of fire. But unto the Son he
saith, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever."tt
* I John iv, 9.  t i John ii, 22, 23.  $ Rom. i, 3, 4  ~ Gal. ii, 20.
I Phil. ii, 6, ff.  ~T Heb. i, I;. 2.  ** Id., 6.  It Id., 7, 8.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST        349
Now, taking the pervading thought of the New
Testament, that divinity is couched in the appellation,
"Son of God," or, in other words, an equality of essence with the Father, wherein is this idea of Sonship
superior to that of creatureship? Do not we that
worship the Son, after all, worship a creature, and so
violate the first command of the Decalogue? The
Son was begotten. Was he not begotten at a particular point of time? Is not begetting a process as
necessarily finite as creating? Let the distinction be
whatever it may between these two acts; let the one
be a transient exertion of power, the other a passing
over of the Divine essence into a new embodiment;
let it be further assumed that this passing over of
the essence is perpetual and eternal, after it begins,still, since the begotten existence began, did it not
begin as the result of a volition of the Father? Does
not the Son, therefore, hold his existence by substantially the same tenure as creatures hold theirsnamely, by the Divine will? However exalted, therefore, his being, yet, in its dependence, it stands on the
same plane with the rest of creation. Can he, therefore, be worshiped? Must we not attain to some
different conception of the Son, or else get rid of
such Scriptures as, "Let all the angels of God worship him?" The' Church has felt this from the beginning, and has found a solution, which, however, is
not exactly a solution, but an answer. Now, let it be
premised that the terms employed in Scripture are
not presumed to be adequate to the mystic and
transcendent truths they represent; nor is it assumed that human language has any terms adequate




350           INGIHAM LECTURES.
to their expression. Our words are adequate only to
those things which we comprehend. When we do
not comprehend, words are only symbols, with a
very loose and indefinite adaptation to their objects.
Sometimes they are like the algebraic x, y,; sometimes they are like the hieroglyphics on ancient monuments. Their contents are obscure, and have to be
sought out and rendered definite. It may be long
before, at the end of the process, we can precisely
state the value of the unknown quantity. Of this
vague and inadequate nature are the correlatives,
Father and Son, in the names of the Godhead; the
words begetting and proceeding. They are the best
words which we have to represent the truth intended,
but it is very little of that truth which they distinctly convey. They can, therefore, be better understood negatively than positively. We can much
more easily say what the "Only Begotten" is not,
than what he is.
The Church met the difficulty by teaching, in the
"Nicene Creed," "The only begotten Son of God;
begotten before all worlds; God of God, Ligzht of
Light; very God of very God,; being of one substance
with the Father."  The "Athanasian Creed" puts it
thus: "Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and
such is the Holy Ghost; the Father uncreate, the
Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate; the
Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible,
and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible; the Father
eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal."
Theologians, taking up the question, have forged the
apparently self-contradictory phrase, "eternal genera



THE PERSON OF 7ESUS CHRIST.       3 5 I
tion," to express the mysterious and incomprehensible
relation of Father and Son. Now,'let us only remember that these terms are employed, not as adequate,
but as constituting for us a sign of these two
thoughts; namely, that the essence of the Father
is participated in by him who is called the Son; and
that this participation takes place outside of time
and space, where spatial and temporal limitations of
thought do not have place. This phrase thus becomes to us simply a terminus beyond which we can
not think; and, instead of answering all the questions we can raise, only preserves, like a casket, the
germs of truth we have secured.
We are aware of the finiteness of the thought
embodied in the word "participation," which we have
employed above; and if any one prefer, he may substitute the word fellowship, if it seem less liable to
objection. We are here again reminded of the hopeless disability under which our thought labors; a disability which can only be mitigated, not remedied.
There may be some force in the following:
"For our conceiving, or for the sensuous investiture of our thought which is necessary to our spiritu-corporeal nature, in its present earthly stage of
development, the notion of bringing forth presents
itself as a calling into being of that which hitherto
has not been; from which arises the presumption that
the cause, under all circumstances, must be older than
the effect, and the effect younger than the cause. So
long as our thinking is mediated by the activity of
the brain, or of any material organism, so long can
not our thought free itself from conceptions; and we




352            INGZHAM LECTURES.
are, therefore, with our idea of causality, compelled to
think of the being-effected as an emerging out of nonexistence into, existence, and therefore the effect as a
something beginning before the eye of our imagination. How, then, is it related to the thought and the
self-consciousness of God? Are not effects wrought
by God? None will contradict it. Is there, then,
any time wherein God was without his thoughts, and
without self-consciousness? Certainly not. Herein
we perceive that God's working must be timeless,
and his operations without beginning. Therefore, the
beginningless begetting of the Son can involve no
difficulty."*
No; it contains no other difficulty than belongs
to all the doing and thinking of the Infinite God.
It is therefore consistent with all that we believe
concerning God. Our inability to comprehend it is
of a piece with our inability to comprehend God himself. We may therefore accept'this subtle doctrinal
statement as a very near approach, for our minds, to
the verity of revelation. And let us bear in mind,
too, that a begetting which is without beginning is
also without endinog-an eternal process, of which the
very creation itself, with all its history, may be but
the type and the outflowing. This may serve to impress upon us, yet more forcibly, how far this truth
is raised above our power to conceive; how inadequate our terms are to shadow it forth; and how
futile must be our controversies about our forms of
stating doctrines which are so far above all forms.
*Dr. Gess, "Die Lehre v. d. Person Christi," pp. I92, I93.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.      353
II. HUMANITY.-That he is very Man.
But omitting the apostolic testimonies to the
Divinity of Christ, which are themselves worthy of a
separate treatise, it is time we should give attention
to the humanity of our Divine Lord and Redeemer.
a. He is a real Man.
The received doctrine of the Church concerning
our Lord's humanity is found concisely expressed in
the Athanasian Creed (so-called), as follows: "Perfect
God, and perfect man; of a reasonable soul, and
human flesh subsisting; equal to the Father as touching his Godhead, and inferior to the Father as touching his manhood; who, although he be God and man,
yet is he not two, but one Christ; one not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of
the manhood into God. One altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person.  For, as
the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and
man is one Christ."
This is beautiful, precious doctrine; sublime in
mystery, but touching to the heart.
What a Savior is a perfect God and a whole man!
How warmly did the earliest Church grasp her risen
Savior, glorying in him as her " Lord and her God;" at
the same time apprehending him as "the Man, Christ
Jesus!" But when the fervor of religion became mixed
at length with the vagaries of speculation, other and
various views arose. Some thought the humanity of
the Savior was unreal, and a mere appearance or vision.
To them he was God, descended "in fashion as a
man," without either the body or the soul of a man.
Others, among them Arius, as chief, maintained that
3I




354           INGHAM LECTURES.
the Logos, who was not God, but the first and most
exalted of creatures, became incarnate in a human
body, without a human soul.
In later, and in present times, we are not aware
that any can be found who deny the reality of the
Lord's body.  But there are many who stand with
Arius, and deny both his deity and his human soul.
Of these views, Dr. Channing is the ablest and
worthiest expounder. He insists that Jesus is not
God. He does not say that he is not man. But he
uses such language as the following: "There is one
God, even the Father; and Jesus Christ is not this
one God, but his Son and Messenger, who derived all
his powers and glories from the Universal Parent, and
who came into the world not to claim supreme homage
for himself, but to carry up the soul to his Father, as
the only Divine Person, the only ultimate object of
religious worship." Again, he says, "We believe
that Jesus is one mind, one soul, one being, as truly
one as we are, and equally distinct from the one
God."t  Such views are variously repeated in his
religious discourses. They show that while he did
not in words, so far as these published discourses
show, deny the actual humanity of Jesus, yet he held
Jesus to be a lofty creature, "the express and unsullied image of the Divinity,": who was united to a
human body, making one simple person.
To this view there are several objections, which
should have been decisive against the hypothesis, in
so acute a mind as Dr. Channing's.
* Works, III, p. 165, published by the American Unitarian
Association.  t Works, III, p. 75.  $ Works, III, p. 232.




THE PERSON OF 7ESUS CHRIST.      355
I. It is necessary, in order to maintain it, to expunge a considerable part of the New Testament.
2. It does not relieve us of speculative difficulties.
Did Dr. Channing ever undertake to show that it was
more reasonable a creature-spirit should become incarnate, than God? Did he even presume to suggest
that it was easier to domicile a spirit in an empty body
than in one already en-souled?  Who would be so
presumptuous? What then is gained for rationality
of doctrine? Indeed, could it not be made to appear
somewhat probable that a superior spirit would find
an inferior soul, already inhabiting a body, a convenient point of contact for his own incarnation? Just as
man's bodily nature more easily digests material that
has already undergone one transformation in vegetable
life, and still more easily that which has undergone a
second transformation in animal life; so, analogously,
it might be, that a pure and lofty spirit, that never
had contact with matter, might find in a soul that had
been born and brought up in contact with matter a
congenial medium for its incarnation, such as would
be lacking in a soulless body.
But, be this as it may, we are still environed with
mystery.  If, therefore, one is seeking simplicity in
the person of Christ, why not at once call him a man?
For although man is not a very simple being, still we
know something of him; and we know nothing of
such a being as Dr. Channing believed in. And, if
we put ourselves upon the task of burdening a creature with the awful attributes and wonderful achievements assigned in the Scripture to the Son of God,
why not take man? For aught we know, he can as




356           INGHAM LECTURES.
well intercede for the world as an angel; for aught we
know, his death might signify as much as an angel's.
Hence it is, that a large proportion of the Unitarians
of our country have gone forward to carry out the
tendency generated by Dr. Channing, and have held
to the simple humanity of Jesus. In this they are
fully as consistent as he, and, we think, have the better doctrine of the two.
The inner relation, subsisting in the person of
Jesus Christ, between the Divine Logos and the
human Ego, is a profound mystery which is not,
probably, penetrable by our minds. Two natures, so
wide apart, compounded into a grand, complex, unique
personality, construct a problem of gigantic proportions, and, for the metaphysician, tougher than the
geometrician's problem of squaring the circle. But as
the one, so the other may be indefinitely approached.
Man may, for the gratification of a speculative tendency, invent plausible and rational hypotheses of this
hypostatic union.  Thank God, these speculations
have no practical value to the believer. They are not
necessary to faith; nay, they may be a hinderance to it.
That is, the tendency of mind they generate may be
unfavorable to the sweet repose of faith. But whether
they be a hinderance or not, our faith works on in
triumph, whatever form of hypothesis our understanding may adopt for simplifying or systematizing this
mystery.
The Athanasian Creed has the well-chosen words:
"One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh,
but by taking of ite nmanood into God." What this
"taking into God" is, we may not be able to conceive.




THE PERSON OF yESUS CHRIST.      357
It is not important that we should think or say much
about it. It is safer, for clear understanding as well
as for faith, to speak negatively rather than positively.
Remembering that we hold our Christ to be both God
and man, we must then deny such commingling of the
two natures in Christ, as to confound the attributes
of both, and present us a being who is neither God
nor man. We must also deny such separation of the
two natures as will be inconsistent with their unity in
the theanthropic person of the Redeemer.  Further
than this it will avail us little to go. But theologians
have gone further, and Churches have their distinctive
forms of apprehending the mystery. We have seen
how the early Church, the Catholic Church, expressed
her thought about it.
Among modern Churches, the Lutheran holds
that in Christ the Divine and human natures
blended, each imparting to the other its qualities
and conditions. According to her theologians, the
human lent to the Divine its sensations, its limited
consciousness, its feelings of privation, its pains and
griefs. The Divine gave to the human a participation in the splendors of almightiness, omniscience,
omnipresence, and holiness.  While the Divinity actively employed the acquired human faculties and susceptibilities, the humanity was for the most part quiet
in the possession of its acquired Divine powers, and
seldom brought them into requisition. The Reformed Church holds the distinctness of the two
natures and their co-ordinate, parallel, and co-operative development.
These are the two leading forms of conception




358             NCGIHAM LECTURES.
imposed by Christians of the present day on this Divine mystery. The Church of England stands upon
the Athanasian creed. Dr. Gess argues with great
ability and subtlety for a strictly human development
of the Divine Logos during his earthly existence.*
That is, in his estimation, the Son of God surrendered his eternal self-consciousness in his incarnation,
and actually became man, recovering his Divine selfconsciousness at his glorification.
In all these attempts to understand so subtle a
mystery, we get little light, while we discover great
revelations of darkness. And this, the discovery of
our intellectual impotency, is often most wholesome.
It will be to us a great blessing if it humble the
aspiring mind in lowly and adoring reception of
truth too sublime for our philosophy, too vast for our
logic.
But so long as it stands in the Word of God
that Jesus Christ " was made sin for us," so long as
our consciousness of sin recognizes the need of a
Mediator, so long will the real humanity, the actual
manhood of fleshly body and reasonable soul, in
our Savior, be to us a truth above all price.
b. He is a perfect man.
His manhood was without defect, corporeal or
spiritual. It was not common, but extraordinary.
It was not commonplace, but marvelously unique.
He was "the seed of the woman" standing alone in
all history. He was "the Star of Jacob," brighter
than all the patriarchs and prophets. He was f"the
Scepter of Israel," loftier, greater than all her historic
"Die Lehre v. d. Pers. Christi," p. 288, ff.




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.        359
kings. He was "the Son of Man," not the offspring
of this or that particular man, but a divinely constituted "branch" of the common stock of humanity.
He was "the second Adam." From the first Adam
have come all colors and kinds of the races of men;
from the second, come, and shall come, in all the
future of eternity, all the varieties of the spiritual
life, as it shall bloom and ripen in immortal men
and women. He is thus the head Man of the race.
He is the ripe fruit of humanity's tree. He is the
most complete and beautiful flower of the life that
began in Eden. He realizes all the good possibilities that were wrapped up in the first man. All
that intellect can be; all that can grow in the pure
heart; all beautiful thoughts; all best affections;
whatsoever we can conceive of perfect good in the
possible experiences of a- man; whatsoever is grand
in moral power; whatsoever is beautiful in sentiment,-all gather harmoniously into the oneness of
this glorious Person. Privation, pain, and sorrow
dim not the brightness of his perfection, but seem
to be the media for its happiest manifestation. He
has not where to lay his head; but yet he is at
home every-where. He has no lot to seek; there is
none whereof he complains. He hates nothing but
sin. He loves all forms of being. Human feelings
are all known to him, and every one of them is to him
a jewel. He loves men. He is at home with them
every-where-in hut and harbor and palace. His
presence is a charm. He brings with it attraction.
He uses that attraction to bring men nearer to his
ideal self, up towards the measure of his spiritual




360           INGHAM LECTURES.
stature. He has the most perfect equipoise ever
known in man. He strives not. He cries not. He
is never in a hurry. He is never agitated. He is
not storm-tossed with passion. The cloud-shadows
of our life seem not to fleck the sublime serenity
of his interior life. He is not up and down like
the ocean's billows, as most of us are. He is as
composed amid the crowd of crafty, vulgar, stormy
adversaries as is the sleeping infant in its mother's
arms. He sleeps when nature is enraged, and rises
in calmness to chide the winds. This sunny sweetness, this grand composure, made him  a grateful
refuge to the weary-hearted. Like a mountain, he
could furnish a quiet retreat for weary flocks. Like
a great rock, he casts his shadow over the fainting
traveler. He had nothing in him exclusively Jewish.
He cherished no fondness for the traditions of his
ancestor David. He had no family pride, no pride
of intellect, no vanity of achievements, no conceit.
There was in him no littleness, no narrowness, no
blind prejudice, no obstinacy. He loved that which
was human; rising above all his surroundings, transcending all antecedents. His thoughts are human
and humane. They are as fresh to-day as when
they were uttered. They bear no marks of Jewish
master. They bear no partial reference to times
and countries. They are of universal import and
of immortal excellence.
Such a human being is a perfect man, filling out
our ideal of the highest human excellence and leaving nothing yet to be attained. The race culminates
in him. All history before sought after him, and




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.         361
looked forward to him. All history since looks back
to him, and moves forward in his light.
Perfect as was this humanity in itsinception and
growth, the history makes it plain that its acme of
refined completeness was realized by the instrumentality of suffering. This is it that brings it
nearest to our sympathies.'Tis this that opens the
innermost depths of our hearts for its fellowship.
That such a being suffered as we do, and yet was
perfect, sheds a radiance on our sorrows, and relieves
them of their harsher aspects. His suffering makes
his love for us deeper and stronger, in proportion as
his perfection stands in contrast with our unworthiness. His trials add to his inherent excellence the
grandeur of heroism, and his humanity shines the
more perfectly human, inasmuch as it stands secure,
while all others of human kind have fallen in the
hour of trial. And herein we see how "it became
Him, for whom are all things and by whom are all
things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make
the Captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings."  We "love Him because he first loved us."
The sin-smitten heart in agony of self-despair, will
gladly cling to Jesus. Clinging to him, it will sing,
in the words of an old hymn:
"Tecum volo vulnerari,
Te libenter amplexari
In cruce desidero."
With the apostle, "counting all things but loss
for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus,"
*Hebrews ii, Io.




362             INGHAM LECTURES.
-and even suffering the loss of all things, we may say
with St. Bernard, of Clairvaux:
I,et me true communion know
With Thee in thy sacred woe;
Counting all besides but dross,
Dying with thee on thy Cross;'Neath it will I die!
Thanks to thee, with every breath,
Jesus, for thy bitter death;
Grant thy guilty one this prayer,
When my dying hour is near,
Gracious God, be nigh!"
c. Thirdly, he was a sinless man.
Although we have almost anticipated this thought,
yet it is sufficiently distinct from that of his complete
and fully developed human-ness, to form the subject
of a few concluding thoughts, and is worthy of more
attention than we can give it.
That he could not have remained a perfect man if
he had sinned, is clear.  He would in that case have
fallen down into the ranks of those who train in the
gloomy footsteps of Adam. What a loss this had
been to the world, we can appreciate, who look back
to him now as the man who never sinned. Who can
utter the value of this one thought in history, that
yesus committed no sin? - Does it not illuminate
every dark page of our human record? Does it not
surround the very savage of Africa's dark wastes with
the halo of possibilities otherwise not to be imagined?
Does it not kindle hope in the criminal's bosom, the
victim of society's justice, the doomed wretch, who
has no hope for this life? Ah! who can tell how
deep a pall would have rested on the spirit of the




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.       363
modern world if it had inherited the mistakes and
miseries of the ancient world without the glory of
Jesus? Who can tell us how much of the hopefulness, the cheer, and the triumph, of our modern civilization is owing to the sinlessness of this one man?
For it is this that makes him dear-makes him a
Savior.
He could not have been our exemplar if it had not
been said by an apostle, "He knew no sin;" if he
had not himself said, "Which of you convinceth me
of sin?" Neither could he be our Mediator and Intercessor with God if he had, in the slightest shadowing, come short of moral perfection. " If any man
sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus
Christ, the'righteous." This sinlessness is sunshine
over all lands, and in all hearts. It gives emphasis
to the commands of conscience in the bosoms of
the great and of the humble. It overhangs the oracles of justice, and makes the utterances of human
law more sacred. It enters the noisy marts of trade,
and reveals to the worshiper of Mammon a more entrancing luster than that of gold. It glows in the
sacred desk, and sanctions every claim of the Divine
law, while it glorifies the benignity of the Gospel.
This sinlessness of the Savior is the very essence
of his glory, the very core of his saving excellence.
We can not suffer it to be tarnished. And while men
now, as in other times, will contradict the testimony
of Scripture concerning him, it delights us to know,
that now, as in the days of his flesh, he can triumphantly say to his enemies, "Which of you convinceth
me of sin?" Men can not prove that he sinned, they




364           INGHAMI LECTURES.
can not make out even a plausible case against him;
they can only avow that, since he was human, in
their judgment he must have sinned. His sinlessness
would be too much of a miracle for Renan, and though
it is assumed by Schenkel, it is nevertheless frittered
away. But in the simple, honest story of the evangelists, without parade of learning, and without a
touch of vanity, there shines forth the glory of such
spotless purity as can not be gainsaid. That exalted
goodness, too great for our common humanity, too
great to have been invented, speaks to the world's
heart. The human need of Jesus is too great ever
to suffer his place to be vacated.
Now, if any one choose to say that this sinless
Savior could have sinned, we may not care to controvert it, if he means that in him was only the physical
possibility or capability of sinning. But if he mean
that there was a moral possibility of his sinning, then
we must demur. Had the moral possibility existed, he
could not be the Savior of whom we have spoken, nay,
of whom the word of God speaks. Could he who was
"tempted in all points like as we are, yet without sin,"
have possessed even the most germinal desire to sin,
and have been free from taint?  Could he, in that
case, be our High-priest, "holy, harmless, and undefiled?" There is only one view of this to be taken
by those who trust in Christ for salvation. If he had
the moral possibilities of sin in him, we must seek
some other object of our faith. Absolute holiness is
required by the Christian faith, in the object of trust.
Jesus himself taught, and insisted upon, this spirit
of faith in his followers, and he directed their faith




THE PERSON OF JESUS CHRIST.       365
continually toward himself-toward his own person.
He.had proved himself a deceiver, therefore, if, after
soliciting the absolute trust of the human spirit for its
eternal purity and felicity, he had shown himself to
have the merest initials of sinful desire.
Now, the faith of his disciples recognized in him
a perfectly stainless purity. And for love of this
they bade farewell to earthly friendships; they sacrificed all worldly prospects; they brooked poverty,
and dared persecution; they took up their lives as a
little thing, and flung them into the very jaws of
death, feeling assured that in him whom they loved
they were rich, though "suffering the loss of all
things," and in him they were superior to death, that
masters all besides. Their faith and love have been
transmitted, not as fanaticism propagates itself, but
as life and love travel, through the convictions and
the affections of men. Ages have come and gone,
and the testimony of Jesus still lives. Great men
have lived, triumphed, perished, and been forgotten;
but the name of Jesus is mighty in all lands, and
more honored as time rolls on. This is the might
of holiness, this the success of charity. Well might
the exiled Napoleon say: "What a wide abyss between my deep misery and the eternal kingdom
of Christ, which is proclaimed, loved, adored, and
which is extending over all the earth!  Is this
death?  Is it not life, rather? The death of Christ
is the death of a God!"