diff options
Diffstat (limited to '46630-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 46630-h/46630-h.html | 18965 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 46630-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 130060 bytes |
2 files changed, 18965 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/46630-h/46630-h.html b/46630-h/46630-h.html new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5adff29 --- /dev/null +++ b/46630-h/46630-h.html @@ -0,0 +1,18965 @@ +<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en"> +<head> + <meta name="generator" content= + "HTML Tidy for Linux (vers 25 March 2009), see www.w3.org" /> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> + <link rel="schema.DC" href="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" /> + <meta name="DC.Creator" content="Charles A. Row" /> + <meta name="DC.Title" content="The Supernatural in the New Testament" /> + <meta name="DC.Date" content="August 19, 2014" /> + <meta name="DC.Language" content="English" /> + <meta name="DC.Publisher" content="Project Gutenberg" /> + <meta name="DC.Identifier" content= + "http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/46630" /> + <meta name="DC.Rights" content="This text is in the public domain." /> + + <title>The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Supernatural in the New Testament + by Charles A. Row</title> + <style type="text/css"> +/*<![CDATA[*/ + /* + The Gnutenberg Press - default CSS2 stylesheet + + Any generated element will have a class "tei" and a class "tei-elem" + where elem is the element name in TEI. + The order of statements is important !!! + */ + + .tei { margin: 0; padding: 0; + font-size: 100%; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal } + + .block { display: block; } + .inline { display: inline; } + .floatleft { float: left; margin: 1em 2em 1em 0; } + .floatright { float: right; margin: 1em 0 1em 2em; } + .shaded { margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; + padding: 1em; background-color: #eee; } + .boxed { margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; + padding: 1em; border: 1px solid black; } + + body.tei { margin: 4ex 10%; text-align: justify } + div.tei { margin: 2em 0em } + p.tei { margin: 0em 0em 1em 0em; text-indent: 0em; } + blockquote.tei { margin: 2em 4em } + + div.tei-lg { margin: 1em 0em; } + div.tei-l { margin: 0em; text-align: left; } + div.tei-tb { text-align: center; } + div.tei-epigraph { margin: 0em 0em 1em 10em; } + div.tei-dateline { margin: 1ex 0em; text-align: right } + div.tei-salute { margin: 1ex 0em; } + div.tei-signed { margin: 1ex 0em; text-align: right } + div.tei-byline { margin: 1ex 0em; } + + /* calculate from size of body = 80% */ + div.tei-marginnote { margin: 0em 0em 0em -12%; width: 11%; float: left; } + + div.tei-sp { margin: 1em 0em 1em 2em } + div.tei-speaker { margin: 0em 0em 1em -2em; + font-weight: bold; text-indent: 0em } + div.tei-stage { margin: 1em 0em; font-weight: normal; font-style: italic } + span.tei-stage { font-weight: normal; font-style: italic } + + div.tei-eg { padding: 1em; + color: black; background-color: #eee } + + hr.doublepage { margin: 4em 0em; height: 5px; } + hr.page { margin: 4em 0em; height: 2px; } + + ul.tei-index { list-style-type: none } + + dl.tei { margin: 1em 0em } + + dt.tei-notelabel { font-weight: normal; text-align: right; + float: left; width: 3em } + dd.tei-notetext { margin: 0em 0em 1ex 4em } + + span.tei-pb { position: absolute; left: 1%; width: 8%; + font-style: normal; } + + span.code { font-family: monospace; font-size: 110%; } + + ul.tei-castlist { margin: 0em; list-style-type: none } + li.tei-castitem { margin: 0em; } + table.tei-castgroup { margin: 0em; } + ul.tei-castgroup { margin: 0em; list-style-type: none; + padding-right: 2em; border-right: solid black 2px; } + caption.tei-castgroup-head { caption-side: right; width: 50%; text-align: left; + vertical-align: middle; padding-left: 2em; } + *.tei-roledesc { font-style: italic } + *.tei-set { font-style: italic } + + table.rules { border-collapse: collapse; } + table.rules caption, + table.rules th, + table.rules td { border: 1px solid black; } + + table.tei { border-collapse: collapse; } + table.tei-list { width: 100% } + + th.tei-head-table { padding: 0.5ex 1em } + + th.tei-cell { padding: 0em 1em } + td.tei-cell { padding: 0em 1em } + + td.tei-item { padding: 0; font-weight: normal; + vertical-align: top; text-align: left; } + th.tei-label, + td.tei-label { width: 3em; padding: 0; font-weight: normal; + vertical-align: top; text-align: right; } + + th.tei-label-gloss, + td.tei-label-gloss { text-align: left } + + td.tei-item-gloss, + th.tei-headItem-gloss { padding-left: 4em; } + + :link { border: none } + :visited { border: none } + img.tei-formula { vertical-align: middle; } + + /*]]>*/ + </style> +</head> + +<body class="tei"> + <div lang="en" class="tei tei-text" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em" xml:lang="en"> + <div class="tei tei-front" style= + "margin-bottom: 6.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <div id="pgheader" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em"> + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 2.00em">The Project + Gutenberg EBook of The Supernatural in the New Testament by + Charles A. Row</p> + </div> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This ebook is + for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most + other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no + restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use + it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License <a href= + "#pglicense" class="tei tei-ref">included with this eBook</a> or + online at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license" class= + "tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/license</a>. If you are + not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws + of the country where you are located before using this ebook.</p> + </div> + <pre class="pre tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"> +Title: The Supernatural in the New Testament + +Author: Charles A. Row + +Release Date: August 19, 2014 [Ebook #46630] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: UTF-8 + + +***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE SUPERNATURAL IN THE NEW TESTAMENT*** +</pre> + </div> + </div> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"></div> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.73em"><span style= + "font-size: 173%">The Supernatural in the New Testament</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.44em"><span style= + "font-size: 144%">Possible, Credible, and Historical</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.20em"><span style= + "font-size: 120%">Or: An Examination of the Validity of Some Recent + Objections Against Christianity as a Divine Revelation</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.20em"><span style= + "font-size: 120%">By the</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.44em"><span style= + "font-size: 144%">Rev. Charles A. Row, M.A.</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.20em"><span style= + "font-size: 120%">Prebendary of St. Paul's</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.20em"><span style= + "font-size: 120%">Author of</span> <span class="tei tei-q" style= + "text-align: center"><span style= + "font-size: 120%">“</span><span style="font-size: 120%">The Jesus of + the Evangelists,</span><span style="font-size: 120%">”</span></span> + <span class="tei tei-q" style="text-align: center"><span style= + "font-size: 120%">“</span><span style="font-size: 120%">The Nature + and Extent of Divine Inspiration,</span><span style= + "font-size: 120%">”</span></span> <span class="tei tei-q" style= + "text-align: center"><span style= + "font-size: 120%">“</span><span style="font-size: 120%">The Moral + Teaching of the New Testament,</span><span style= + "font-size: 120%">”</span></span> <span style= + "font-size: 120%">Etc.</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">London</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">Frederic Norgate</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em">1875</p> + </div> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Contents</span></h1> + + <ul class="tei tei-index tei-index-toc"> + <li><a href="#toc1">Dedication.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc3">Chapter I. Introduction. The Position of the + Controversy Between the Opponents and the Defenders of + Christianity.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc5">Chapter II. Definitions of Terms.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc7">Chapter III. The Supernatural Elements + Contained in the New Testament: In What Do They Consist? And What + View Do Its Writers Take Respecting Them?</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc9">Chapter IV. Miracles, What Do They + Prove?</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc11">Chapter V. The Antecedent Improbability of + Miracles.—The Unknown and Unknowable God.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc13">Chapter VI. The Objection That Miracles Are + Contrary To Reason Considered.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc15">Chapter VII. The Allegation That No Testimony + Can Prove The Truth Of A Supernatural Event.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc17">Chapter VIII. The Objection That The Defenders + Of Christianity Assume Certain Facts The Truth Of Which Can Only Be + Known By Revelation, And Then Reason From Those Facts To The Truth + Of The Bible, Considered.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc19">Chapter IX. Demoniacal Miracles—General + Considerations.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc21">Chapter X. The Existence And Miracles Of + Satan.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc23">Chapter XI. Possession: Is The Theory That It + Was Madness Subversive Of The Historical Value Of The Gospels Or + Inconsistent With The Veracity Of Christ?</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc25">Chapter XII. Possession, If An Objective + Reality, Neither Incredible Nor Contrary To The Ascertained Truths + Of Mental Science.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc27">Chapter XIII. The Alleged Credulity Of The + Followers Of Jesus.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc29">Chapter XIV. The Love Of The Marvellous—Its + Bearing On The Value Of Testimony To Miracles.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc31">Chapter XV. Our Summary Rejection Of Current + Supernaturalism Considered In Its Bearing On The Evidence For + Miracles.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc33">Chapter XVI. General Objections To Miracles As + Credentials Of A Revelation.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc35">Chapter XVII. The Historical Evidence On Which + The Great Facts Of Christianity Rest—General + Considerations.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc37">Chapter XVIII. The Testimony Of The Church, + And Of St. Paul's Epistles, To The Facts Of Primitive Christianity. + Their Historical Value Considered.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc39">Chapter XIX. The Evidence Furnished By The + Epistles To The Facts Of Our Lord's Life, And To The Truth Of The + Resurrection.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc41">Chapter XX. The Resurrection Of Jesus Christ + An Historical Fact.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc43">Chapter XXI. The Historical Value Of The + Gospels As Deduced From Previous Considerations.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc45">Chapter XXII. The Historical Character Of The + Gospels As Deduced From Their Internal Structure.</a></li> + + <li><a href="#toc47">Footnotes</a></li> + </ul> + </div> + </div> + + <div class="tei tei-body" style= + "margin-bottom: 6.00em; margin-top: 6.00em"> + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 1.00em"></p> + + <div class="tei tei-figure" style="width: 30%; text-align: center"> + <a href="images/cover.jpg"><img src="images/cover.jpg" alt= + "Cover Art" /></a> + </div> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">[Transcriber's + Note: The above cover image was produced by the submitter at + Distributed Proofreaders, and is being placed into the public + domain.]</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="pageiii">[pg iii]</span><a name= + "Pgiii" id="Pgiii" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc1" id="toc1"></a> <a name="pdf2" id="pdf2"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Dedication.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To The Committee + Of The Christian Evidence Society.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">My Lords and + Gentlemen,</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Having undertaken + to compose this work at your request, I beg permission to dedicate it + to you. In doing so I feel that it is a duty which I owe both to you + and to myself that I should state the position which we respectively + occupy with regard to it. Your responsibility is confined to having + requested me to compose a work in refutation of certain principles + now widely disseminated, which impugn the supernatural elements + contained in the New Testament. For the contents of the work and for + the mode of treatment I alone am responsible. When I considered the + position of the present controversy, I felt that it was impossible to + treat the subject satisfactorily except on the principle that the + responsibility for the mode of conducting the argument and of + answering the objections should rest with the writer alone. In + dealing with a subject so complicated, involving as it does questions + of philosophy and science as well as the principles of historical + criticism, I can scarcely venture to hope that every position which I + have taken will prove acceptable to <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "pageiv">[pg iv]</span><a name="Pgiv" id="Pgiv" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> all the various shades of theological thought. + I have endeavoured to take such as seemed to me to be logically + defensible without any reference to particular schools of theological + opinion. As the entire question is essentially historical, I have + done my utmost to exclude from it all discussions that are strictly + theological. Modern unbelief however puts in two objections which if + valid render all historical evidence in proof of the occurrence of + miracles nugatory, namely that they are both impossible and + incredible. In meeting these I have been compelled to appeal to what + appear to me to be the principles of a sound philosophy. In all other + respects I have viewed the question before me as exclusively one of + historical evidence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If the + Resurrection of our Lord is an actual occurrence, it follows that + Christianity must be a divine revelation. If it is not, no amount of + other evidence will avail to prove it to be so. As it has been + strongly affirmed that for this great fact, which constitutes the + central position of Christianity, the historical evidence is + worthless, I have devoted the latter portion of this volume to the + consideration of this question, with a view of putting before the + reader the value of the New Testament when contemplated as simple + history. Using the Epistles as the foundation of my argument, I have + endeavoured to prove that the greatest of all the miracles recorded + in the Gospels rests on an attestation that is unsurpassed by any + event recorded in history. For this purpose I have used the Epistles + as simple historical documents, and I have claimed for them precisely + the same value which is conceded to other writings of a similar + description. The feeling <span class="tei tei-pb" id="pagev">[pg + v]</span><a name="Pgv" id="Pgv" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> among + Christians that these writings contain the great principles of the + Christian faith has occasioned it to be overlooked that they are also + contemporary historical documents of the highest order. As such I + have used them in proof of the great facts of Christianity, above all + in proof of the greatest of them, the Resurrection of our Lord.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With these + observations I now present you the following work, with the hope that + it may prove the means of removing many of the difficulties with + which recent controversial writers have endeavoured to obscure the + subject. Trusting that it maybe accepted by the great Head of the + Church, the reality of whose life and teaching as they are recorded + in the Gospels it is designed to establish,</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I remain, my Lords + and Gentlemen,<br /> + Your's faithfully,<br /> + C. A. Row.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">London, January, + 1875.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page001">[pg 001]</span><a name= + "Pg001" id="Pg001" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc3" id="toc3"></a> <a name="pdf4" id="pdf4"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter I. Introduction. The Position + of the Controversy Between the Opponents and the Defenders of + Christianity.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Although every + portion of the Bible is vehemently assailed by the various forms of + modern Scepticism, it is clear that the real turning point of the + controversy between those who affirm that God has made a supernatural + revelation of himself to mankind, and those who deny it, centres in + those portions of the New Testament which affirm the presence of the + supernatural. The question may be still further narrowed into the + inquiry whether the person and actions of Jesus Christ, as they are + depicted in the Gospels, are historical facts, or fictitious + inventions. If the opponents of Revelation can prove that they are + the latter, the entire controversy will end in their favour. It would + in that case be utterly useless to attempt to defend any other + portion of the Bible; and the controversy respecting the Old + Testament becomes a mere waste of labour. If, on the other hand, + Christians can prove that the narratives of the four Gospels, or even + of any one of them, are a true representation of historical facts, + then it is certain that God has made a revelation of himself, + notwithstanding the objections which may be urged against certain + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page002">[pg 002]</span><a name="Pg002" + id="Pg002" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> positions which have been + taken by Ecclesiastical Christianity, and the difficulties by which + certain questions connected with the Old Testament are + surrounded.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that the historical truth of the facts narrated in the + Gospels constitutes the central position of the entire controversy. + It is not my purpose on the present occasion to discuss the general + question, whether the delineation of Jesus Christ which the Gospels + contain is one of an ideal or an historical person. That question I + have already considered in <span class="tei tei-q">“The Jesus of the + Evangelists.”</span> But as the various forms of modern unbelief are + making the most strenuous efforts to prove that the supernatural + elements of the New Testament are hopelessly incredible, and that the + attestation on which the supernatural occurrences mentioned in it + rests, is simply worthless, it is my intention to devote the present + volume to the consideration of this special subject, and to examine + the question of miracles, and their historical credibility.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Modern scepticism + makes with respect to supernatural occurrences (under which more + general term I include the miracles of the New Testament), the three + following assertions, and endeavours to substantiate them by every + available argument:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1st. That all + supernatural occurrences are impossible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2nd. That, if not + impossible, they are incredible; that is, that they are contrary to + reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3rd. That those + which are narrated in the New Testament are devoid of any adequate + historical attestation, and owe their origin to the inventive powers + of the mythic and legendary spirit.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is my purpose, + in the course of the present work, to traverse each of these three + positions, and to show:</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page003">[pg + 003]</span><a name="Pg003" id="Pg003" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1st. That miracles + and supernatural occurrences are not impossible; and that the + arguments by which this has been attempted to be established are + wholly inconclusive.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2nd. That they are + neither incredible, nor contrary to reason; but are entirely + consistent with its dictates.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3rd, That the + greatest of all the miracles which are recorded in the New Testament, + and which, if an actual historical occurrence, is sufficient to carry + with it all the others, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, rests on + the highest form of historical testimony.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such is my + position.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A recent writer, + who has ably advocated the principles of modern scepticism, the + author of <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion,”</span> has + in the opening passage of his work clearly placed before us the real + point at issue. He states the case as follows:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“On the very threshold of inquiry into the origin and + true character of Christianity we are brought face to face with the + supernatural. It is impossible, without totally setting aside its + peculiar and indispensable claim to be a direct external revelation + from God of truths which otherwise human reason could not have + discovered, to treat Ecclesiastical Christianity as a form of + religion developed by the wisdom of man. Not only in form does it + profess to be the result of divine communication, but in its very + essence, in its principal dogmas it is either superhuman or + untenable. There is no question here of mere accessories, which are + comparatively unimportant, and do not necessarily affect the + essential matter, but we have to do with a scheme of religion + claiming to be miraculous in all points, in form, in essence, and in + evidence. This religion cannot be accepted without an emphatic belief + in supernatural interposition, and it is absurd to imagine that its + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page004">[pg 004]</span><a name="Pg004" + id="Pg004" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> dogmas can be held, whilst the + miraculous is rejected. Those who profess to hold the religion, + whilst they discredit the supernatural element, and they are many at + the present day, have widely receded from Ecclesiastical + Christianity. It is most important that the inseparable connection of + the miraculous with the origin, doctrines, and the evidence of + Christianity should be clearly understood, in order that inquiry may + pursue a logical and consistent course.”</span>—<span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Supernatural Religion, + page 1.</span></span><a id="noteref_1" name="noteref_1" href= + "#note_1"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style= + "font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">1</span></span></a></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully accept all + the chief positions laid down in this passage as an adequate + statement of the points at issue between those who affirm and those + who deny that Christianity is a divine revelation. A few minor points + require a slight modification, as incurring the danger of confusing + ideas that ought to be carefully distinguished.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The writer before + me also raises no minor issue. Although the work is entitled + <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion, or an inquiry into + the reality of divine revelation,”</span> its object, which is + consistently carried out throughout it, is to impugn the historical + character of the Gospels, and to prove that the supernatural + occurrences which are recorded in them are fictitious. The title of + the work might have justified the writer in assailing other portions + of the Bible; but he clearly sees that to adopt this course is only + to attack the outworks of Christianity, and to leave the key of the + entire position unassailed. In doing so he has pursued a far nobler + course than that which has been adopted by many of the opponents of + the Christian faith. He has directed his attack against the very + centre of the Christian position, the historical <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page005">[pg 005]</span><a name="Pg005" id="Pg005" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> credibility of the supernatural actions + attributed to Jesus Christ in the Gospels, being well aware that a + successful assault on this position will involve the capture of all + the outworks by which it is supposed to be protected; while it by no + means follows that a successful assault on any of the latter involves + the capture of the citadel itself. This writer does not take up a bye + question, but he goes direct to the foundation on which Christianity + rests. In doing so, it must be acknowledged that he has taken a + straightforward course, and one which must bring the question of the + truth or falsehood of Christianity to a direct issue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully agree with + the chief position taken in the quotation before us, that + Christianity involves the presence of the supernatural and the + superhuman, what in fact is generally designated as the miraculous, + or it is nothing. To remove these elements out of the pages of the + New Testament, is not to retain the same religion, but to manufacture + another quite different and distinct from it. In the first place, we + have the great central figure in the Gospels, the divine person of + Jesus Christ our Lord, and the entire body of his actions and his + teaching. He, although depicted as human, is at the same time + depicted as superhuman and supernatural, not merely in his miraculous + works, but in his entire character. To remove the divine lineaments + of Jesus Christ out of the Gospels is simply to destroy them. Besides + this, we have a large number of miraculous actions attributed to him. + These are inextricably interwoven with the entire narrative, which, + when they are taken away, loses all cohesion. Lives of Jesus which + have been set forth, deprived of their supernatural and superhuman + elements, are in fact nothing better than a new Gospel composed out + of the subjective consciousness of the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page006">[pg 006]</span><a name="Pg006" id="Pg006" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> writers. Various attempts have been made to + pare down the supernatural and superhuman elements in the Gospels to + the smallest possible dimensions. Still they obstinately persist in + remaining. If everything else is struck out of the Gospels, except + their moral teaching, we are left in the presence of teaching which + is raised at an immense elevation above the thoughts and conceptions + of the age that produced it; and of a teacher, who while + distinguished by the marks of pre-eminent holiness and greatness of + mind, is also distinguished by a degree of self-assertion in his + utterances of moral truth, which is without parallel, even among the + most presumptuous of men. Deal with the Gospels as we will, while we + allow any portions of them to remain as historical, we are still in + the presence of the superhuman.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As the narrative + now stands it is at least harmonious. The lofty pretensions of the + teacher bear the most intimate correlation to the supernatural and + superhuman facts that are reported of him. The one are the complement + of the other. If the facts are true, the lofty self-assertion of the + teacher is justified; if they are not true, his pretensions conflict + with the entire conception of his holiness and elevation of mind. The + use which a wide spread school of modern criticism so freely makes of + the critical dissecting knife, for the purpose of amputating the + supernatural from the Gospels, can only be attended by the fatal + termination of destroying the entire Gospels as of the smallest + historical value. It is marvellous that persons who retain any + respect for Christianity as a system of religious and moral teaching, + should have attempted to throw discredit on this element in the + Gospels with a view of saving the remainder.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nor is the case + different with the other portions of <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page007">[pg 007]</span><a name="Pg007" id="Pg007" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> the New Testament. Christianity, as enunciated + by its writers, does not profess merely to teach a new and improved + system of morality. If this was its only pretension, it would + certainly have but little claim to be viewed as a divine revelation. + In morals its teaching is both unsystematic and fragmentary; though + it is an unquestionable fact, that a great system of moral teaching + may be deduced from the principles it unfolds. But if one thing is + plainer than another on the face of the New Testament, it is that the + great purpose sought to be effected by Christianity is to impart a + new moral and spiritual power to mankind. It professes to be, not a + body of moral rules, but a mighty moral force, which is concentrated + in the person of its Founder. The acceptance of it had generated a + new power or energy, a moral and spiritual life, which raised those + who had embraced it above their former selves; and which it professes + to be able to impart to all time. This supernatural element, + concentrated as I have said that it is in the person of its founder, + runs through the entire epistles, and constitutes their most + distinguishing feature. If the supernatural elements in the person of + Jesus Christ be removed from their teaching nothing remains but a + number of moral precepts robbed of all their vitality. In one word, + the whole system of teaching simply collapses.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In a similar + manner, if we eliminate every thing supernatural out of the New + Testament, with a view of arriving at a residuum of truth, we are + brought into immediate contact with the most unique fact in the + history of man, the creation of the Church of Jesus Christ, the + greatest institution which has ever affected the destinies of our + race, and which has for eighteen centuries exerted a most commanding + influence on human happiness and civilization. <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page008">[pg 008]</span><a name="Pg008" id="Pg008" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> This is professedly based on a miraculous + fact, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. If, therefore, we remove the + supernatural elements out of Christianity, this institution, mighty + for good in its influence on the progress of our race, has been based + on an unreality and a delusion. Here again we encounter something + which has very much the appearance of the supernatural.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">On these accounts, + therefore, I cordially accept the position which is laid down by the + author of <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion”</span> as a + correct statement of the case, that Christianity involves the + presence of the Supernatural, or it is nothing. We must either defend + the chief supernatural elements of the New Testament or abandon it as + worthless.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But there is an + expression which occurs in this quotation, and which is frequently + made use of in subsequent parts of the work, which requires + consideration, <span class="tei tei-q">“Ecclesiastical + Christianity.”</span> What is intended by it? The meaning is nowhere + defined, and unless we come to a clear understanding with respect to + it, we shall be in danger of complicating the entire question. The + expression is ambiguous. If by it is meant any other form of thought, + than that which is contained in the pages of the New Testament; if, + in fact, by it is intended a systematic arrangement of doctrinal + truth, which has been elaborated at a subsequent period, I + emphatically assert that those who are called upon to defend the + divine character of the Christian Revelation have nothing to do with + it. The only thing which those who maintain that the New Testament + contains a divine revelation can be called on to defend, is the + express statements of the book itself, and not a system of thought + which subsequent writers may have attempted to deduce from + it.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page009">[pg 009]</span><a name= + "Pg009" id="Pg009" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This point is so + important, that I must make the position which I intend taking with + respect to it clear. It involves the distinction between revelation + and theology. The religious and moral teaching which is contained in + the New Testament is in a very unsystematic form. Not one of its + writings is a formal treatise on theology, nor does one of them + contain a systematised statement of what constitutes Christianity. + Its teaching of religious truth is incidental, and is called forth by + the special circumstances of the writer. The plain fact is that four + of the writings which comprise the New Testament are religions + memoirs. One is an historical account of the foundation of the + Church. Twenty-one are letters, written to different Churches and + individuals, and all called forth by special emergencies. These all + partake of the historical character. The only one which does not + participate in this character is the Apocalypse, which, being a + vision, is utterly unlike a formal or systematic treatise on + Christianity. The result of the form in which the New Testament is + composed is that its definite teaching is always incidental, called + forth to meet special circumstances and occasions in the history of + Churches and individuals, and never formal. It is also universally + couched in popular, as distinct from scientific or technical + language. Not one of its writers makes an attempt to formulate a + system of Christian theology.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The person of + Jesus Christ constitutes Christianity in its truest and highest + sense. Three of the Gospels embody the traditionary teaching of the + Church on this subject. The fourth is the work of an independent + writer. The epistles may be received as a set of incidental + commentaries on the person and work of Jesus Christ, called forth by + the special occasions which gave them birth, and embodying the + author's general views as to his <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page010">[pg 010]</span><a name="Pg010" id="Pg010" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> work and teaching as adapted to a number of + special circumstances and occasions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Between the + contents of the New Testament and what is commonly understood by + Ecclesiastical Christianity the difference is extremely wide. The New + Testament contains a divine revelation. Ecclesiastical Christianity + is a body of religious teaching in which Christianity has been + attempted to be presented in a systematised form, or, in other words, + it is a theology more or less complete.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is necessary + that we should have a clear appreciation of the difference. Theology + is an attempt of the human intellect to present to us the truths + communicated in Revelation in a systematised form. It is in fact the + result of the human reason investigating the facts and statements of + Revelation. Theology therefore is a simple creation of human reason + erected on the facts of divine revelation. As such it is subject to + all the errors and imperfections to which our rational powers are + obnoxious. It can claim no infallibility more than any other rational + action of the human mind. Theology is a science, and is subject to + the imperfections to which all other sciences are liable. It stands + to the facts of Christianity in the same relation as philosophy and + physical science stand to the works of nature. In the one the human + intellect investigates the divine revelation contained in the works + of nature, and endeavours to systematise its truths: in the other it + does the same with respect to the divine revelation which in + accordance with the assertions of the New Testament has been made in + the person of Jesus Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What I am desirous + of drawing attention to is that theology is not revelation. Systems + of theology may be accurate deductions of reason from Revelation; or + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page011">[pg 011]</span><a name="Pg011" + id="Pg011" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> they may be inaccurate and + imperfect ones. It is very possible that a system of theology which + has been evolved by human reason, although it may have attained a + wide acceptance, may be as inadequate an explanation of the facts of + revelation, as the Ptolemaic system of astronomy was of the facts of + the material universe. Objections which were raised against the + latter were no real objections against the structure of the universe + itself. In the same way objections which may be raised against a + particular system of theology, may leave the great facts of + revelation entirely untouched.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If we look into + the history of Christianity, we shall find that as soon as the Church + began to consolidate itself into a distinct community, the reason of + man began to exert itself on the facts of revelation, and to attempt + to reduce its teaching to a systematic form. From this source have + sprung all the various systems of theology which have from time to + time predominated in the Church. It has been a plant of gradual + growth, and as such may bear a fair comparison with the slow growth + of philosophy or physical science. Such an action of reason on the + facts of revelation was inevitable and entirely legitimate. What I am + desirous of guarding against is the idea that when reason is exerted + on the facts of revelation, it is more infallible than when exerted + on any other subjects which come under its cognisance.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I am not ignorant + that there is another theory respecting the nature of theology. A + large branch of the Christian Church holds that a body of dogmatic + statements has been handed down traditionally from the Apostles and + other inspired teachers, which has been embodied in the system of + theology which is accepted by this Church, and that this was intended + to <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page012">[pg 012]</span><a name= + "Pg012" id="Pg012" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> be an authoritative + statement of the facts of the Christian revelation. It is also part + of the same theory that the Church as a collective body has in all + ages possessed an inspiration, which enables it to affirm + authoritatively and dogmatically, what is and what is not Christian + doctrine, and that which it thus authoritatively affirms to be so, + must be accepted as a portion of the Christian revelation as much as + the contents of the New Testament itself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully admit that + those who assume a position of this kind are bound to act + consistently, and to defend every statement in their dogmatic creeds + as an integral portion of Christianity. Nor is it less certain, if + this principle is true, that if any portion of such dogmatic creeds + can be successfully assailed as contrary to reason, as for instance + the formulated doctrine of transubstantiation, it would imperil the + position of Christianity itself. Those, however, who have taken such + positions, must be left to take the consequences of them. It is not + my intention in undertaking to defend the historical truth of the + supernatural elements in the New Testament, to burden myself with an + armour which seems only fitted to crash beneath its weight the person + who attempts to use it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + necessary to be explicit on this point, in order that the argument + may be kept free from all adventitious issues. The introduction into + it of the expression, <span class="tei tei-q">“Ecclesiastical + Christianity,”</span> brings with it no inconsiderable danger of + diverting our attention from what is the real point of controversy. I + must therefore repeat it. Ecclesiastical Christianity is a + development made by reason from the facts of the New Testament, and + is a thing which is entirely distinct from the contents of the New + Testament. With its affirmations therefore I have nothing to do in + the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page013">[pg 013]</span><a name= + "Pg013" id="Pg013" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> present discussion. It + will not be my duty to examine into its positions, with a view of + ascertaining whether they are developments of Christian teaching + which can be logically deduced from its pages; still less to accept + and to defend them as authoritative statements of its meaning. In + defending the New Testament as containing a divine revelation, I have + only to do with the contents and assertions of the book itself, and + with nothing outside its pages. What others may have propounded + respecting its meaning can form no legitimate portion of the present + controversy. The real point at issue is one which is simple and + distinct. It is, are the supernatural incidents recorded in it + historical events or fictitious inventions? As that is the question + before us, I must decline to allow any other issue to be substituted + in the place of it. Our inquiry is one which is strictly + historical.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Another statement + made by the author before me requires qualification. He says that + <span class="tei tei-q">“Christianity is a scheme of religion which + claims to be miraculous in all points, in form, in essence, and in + evidence.”</span> This statement I must controvert. Christianity does + not profess to be divine on all points. On the contrary, it contains + a divine and a human element so intimately united, that it is + impossible to separate the one from the other. It is also far from + clear to me how it can be miraculous in form when it is contained in + a body of historical writings. I shall have occasion to show + hereafter, that although miracles form an important portion of the + attestation on which it rests, they are not the only one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With these + qualifications I fully accept the position taken by this writer as a + correct statement of the points at issue between those who affirm, + and those who deny the claims of Christianity to be a divine + revelation, and <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page014">[pg + 014]</span><a name="Pg014" id="Pg014" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + accept his challenge to defend the supernatural elements in the New + Testament, or to abandon it as worthless. To maintain that any of its + dogmas can be accepted as true while its miraculous elements are + abandoned seems to me to involve a question which is hopelessly + illogical.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Modern unbelief + rejects every supernatural occurrence as utterly incredible. Before + proceeding to examine into the grounds of this, it will be necessary + to lay down definitely the bearing of the present argument on the + principles of atheism, pantheism, and theism.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As far as the + impossibility of supernatural occurrences is concerned, pantheism and + atheism occupy precisely the same grounds. If either of them + propounds a true theory of the universe, any supernatural occurrence, + which necessarily implies a supernatural agent to bring it about, is + impossible, and the entire controversy as to whether miracles have + ever been actually performed is a foregone conclusion. Modern + atheism, while it does not venture in categorical terms to affirm + that no God exists, definitely asserts that there is no evidence that + there is one. It follows that if there is no evidence that there is a + God, there can be no evidence that a miracle ever has been performed, + for the very idea of a miracle implies the idea of a God to work one. + If therefore atheism is true, all controversy about miracles is + useless. They are simply impossible, and to inquire whether an + impossible event has happened is absurd. To such a person the + historical enquiry, as far as a miracle is concerned, must be a + foregone conclusion. It might have a little interest as a matter of + curiosity; but even if the most unequivocal evidence could be adduced + that an occurrence such as we call supernatural had taken place, the + utmost that it could prove would be that some <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page015">[pg 015]</span><a name="Pg015" id="Pg015" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> most extraordinary and abnormal fact had + taken place in nature of which we did not know the cause. But to + prove a miracle to any person who consistently denies that he has any + evidence that any being exists which is not a portion of and included + in the material universe, or developed out of it, is impossible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nor does the case + differ in any material sense with pantheism. When we have got rid of + its hazy mysticism, and applied to it clear principles of logic, its + affirmation is that God and the Universe are one, and that all past + and present forms of existence have been the result of the Universe, + <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> God, everlastingly developing + himself in conformity with immutable law. All things which either + have existed or exist are as many manifestations of God, who is in + fact an infinite impersonal Proteus, ever changing in his outward + form. From him, or to speak more correctly, from it (for he is no + person), all things have issued as mere phenomenal babbles of the + passing moment, and by it will be again swallowed up in never-ending + succession. Such a God must be devoid of everything which we + understand by personality, intelligence, wisdom, volition or a moral + nature. It is evident therefore that to a person who logically and + consistently holds these views the occurrence of a miracle is no less + an impossibility than it is to an atheist, for the conception of a + miracle involves the presence of personality, intelligence, and power + at the disposal of volition. All that the strongest evidence could + prove to those who hold such principles, is that some abnormal event + had taken place of which the cause was unknown.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is evident, + therefore, that the only course which can be pursued with a professed + atheist or pantheist, is to grapple with him on the evidences of + theism, and to endeavour to prove the existence of a God possessed + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page016">[pg 016]</span><a name="Pg016" + id="Pg016" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of personality, intelligence, + volition, and adequate power, before we attempt to deal with the + evidences of miracles. Until we have convinced him of this all our + reasonings must be in vain.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There are four + modes of reasoning by which the being of a God may be established. I + will simply enumerate them. First, the argument which is founded on + the principle of causation; second, that which rests on the order of + the universe; third, that from its innumerable adaptations; fourth, + that which is derived from the moral nature and personality of man. + If the argument from causation fails to prove to those with whom we + are reasoning that the finite causes in the universe must have a + first cause from whence they have originated; if that from the + orderly arrangements in the universe fails to prove that there must + be an intelligent being who produced them; if its innumerable + adaptations fail to establish the presence of a presiding mind; and + if the moral nature of man fails to prove that must be a moral being + from whom that nature emanated, and of whom it is the image, it + follows that the minds must be so differently constituted as to offer + no common ground or basis of reasoning on this question. The whole + involves an essential difference of principle, which no argumentation + can really reach. To attempt to prove to a mind of this description + the occurrence of a miracle, is simply a waste of labour.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A work, therefore, + on the subject of miracles can only be addressed to theists, because + the very conception of a miracle involves the existence of a personal + God. To take this for granted in reasoning with a pantheist or + atheist is simply to assume the point at issue. It is perfectly true, + that a legitimate body of reasoning may be constructed, if the + pantheist or the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page017">[pg + 017]</span><a name="Pg017" id="Pg017" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + atheist agrees to assume that a God exists for the purpose of + supplying a basis for the argument. We may then reason with him + precisely in the same way as we would with a theist. But the contest + will be with one who has clad himself in armour which no weapon at + our disposal can penetrate. After the strongest amount of historical + evidence has been adduced, and after all alleged difficulties have + been answered, he simply falls back on his atheism or his pantheism, + which assumes that all supernatural occurrences must be impossible, + and therefore that alleged instances of them are delusions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This is not + unfrequently the case in the present controversy. A considerable + number of objections which are urged against the supernatural + elements of Christianity, derive whatever cogency they possess from + the assumption that there is a God who is the moral Governor of the + universe. These are not unfrequently urged by persons who deny the + possibility of miracles on atheistic or pantheistic grounds. It is + perfectly fair to reason against Christianity on these grounds; it is + equally so for a person who holds these opinions, to attempt to prove + that the historical evidence adduced in proof of the miracles + recorded in the New Testament is worthless as an additional reason + why men should cease to believe in them. But it is not conducive to + the interests of truth to urge objections which have no reality + except on the supposition that a God exists who is the moral Governor + of the universe, and then to fall back on reasonings whose whole + force is dependent on the data furnished by pantheism or atheism. I + shall have occasion to notice a remarkable instance of this involved + mode of reasoning hereafter.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page018">[pg 018]</span><a name="Pg018" id="Pg018" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall now + proceed briefly to state the mode in which I propose to treat the + present subject. The point which I have to defend is not any + conceivable body of miracles or their evidential value, but specially + the supernatural occurrences recorded in the New Testament. I must + therefore endeavour to ascertain what is the extent of the + supernaturalism asserted in the New Testament, and what is the degree + of evidential value which its writers claim for it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + asserted by many writers that the sole and only evidence of a + revelation must be a miraculous testimony. Whether this be so or not, + this is not the place to enquire. But in relation to the present + controversy the plain and obvious course is to ask the writers of the + New Testament what is the precise evidential value of the + supernatural occurrences which they have narrated. This is far + preferable to falling back on any assertions of modern writers, + however eminent, on this subject. They may have over-estimated, or + under-estimated their evidential value. The writers of the New + Testament must be held responsible, not for the assertions of others, + but only for their own. I must therefore carefully consider what it + is that they affirm to be proved by miracles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One primary + objection against the possibility of miracles is founded on that + peculiar form of theoretic belief, which affirms that both + philosophy, science, and religion alike point to the existence of a + Cause of the Universe, which is the source of all the forces which + exist, and of which the various phenomena of the universe are + manifestations, and designates this cause by the name of God. But + while it concedes his existence, it proclaims him to be Unknown and + Unknowable. If this position is correct, the inference seems + inevitable, that any thing like a real revelation of him is + impossible. <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page019">[pg + 019]</span><a name="Pg019" id="Pg019" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> It + will be necessary therefore for me to examine into the validity of + this position.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A vast variety of + arguments have been adduced both on philosophic grounds and from the + principles established by physical science, for the purpose of + proving that the occurrence of any supernatural event is contrary to + our reason. If this be true, it is a fatal objection against the + entire mass of supernatural occurrences that are recorded in the New + Testament. The most important points of these reasonings will require + a careful consideration.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A very important + objection has been urged against the Christian mode of conducting the + argument from miracles. It is alleged that it involves reasoning in a + vicious circle, and that Christian apologists endeavour to prove the + truth of doctrines which utterly transcend reason by miraculous + evidence, and then endeavour to prove the truth of the miracles by + the doctrines. If this allegation is true, it is no doubt a fatal + objection to the argument. I shall endeavour to show that it is + founded on a misapprehension of the entire subject.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">An attempt has + been made to re-affirm the validity of Hume's argument that no amount + of evidence can avail to prove the reality of a miracle unless the + falsehood of the evidence is more miraculous than the alleged + miracle. It will be necessary to consider the validity of the + positions which have been lately assumed respecting it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A very formidable + objection has been urged against the truth of the supernatural + occurrences recorded in the New Testament on the ground that the + followers of Jesus were a prey to a number of the most grotesque + beliefs respecting the action of demons, and that their superstition + and credulity on this point was of so extreme a character as to + deprive their historical testimony, <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page020">[pg 020]</span><a name="Pg020" id="Pg020" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> on the subject of the supernatural of all + value. As this objection is not only one which is widely extended, + but has been urged with great force by the author of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion,”</span> I shall devote four + chapters of this work to the examination of the question of + possession and demoniacal action as far as it affects the present + controversy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The entire school + of modern unbelief found a very considerable portion of their + arguments against the historical character of the Gospels, on the + alleged credulity and superstition of the followers of our Lord. This + is alleged to have been of a most profound character, and it forms + the weapon which is perhaps in most constant use with the assailants + of Christianity. All difficulties which beset their arguments are met + by attributing the most unbounded credulity, superstition and + enthusiasm to the followers of Jesus. It has also been urged that the + belief in supernatural occurrences has been so general, that it + renders the attestation of miracles to a revelation invalid. I + purpose examining into the validity of this objection. As this may be + said to be the key of the position occupied by modern unbelief, I + must examine into the reality of the affirmation, and also how far + the love of the marvellous in mankind affects the credit of the + testimony to miracles. This I propose discussing in two distinct + chapters.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is an + unquestionable fact that in these days we summarily reject whole + masses of alleged supernatural occurrences, as utterly incredible, + without inquiry into the testimony on which they rest. It will be + necessary to inquire into the grounds on which we do this, and how + far it affects the credibility of the miracles recorded in the New + Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The historical + value of the testimony which has <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page021">[pg 021]</span><a name="Pg021" id="Pg021" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> been adduced for the truth of the miracles + recorded in the New Testament, has been assailed by every weapon + which criticism can supply. It is affirmed in the strongest manner + that they are utterly devoid of all reliable historical evidence. The + Gospels are pronounced to consist of a bundle of myths and legends, + with only a few grains of historic truth hidden beneath them. They + are affirmed to be late compositions, and that we are utterly devoid + of all contemporaneous attestation for the facts recorded in them, + and that the true account of the origin of Christianity is buried + beneath a mass of fiction. If this be true, there cannot be a doubt + that it is a most serious allegation, which affects the entire + Christian position. It is further urged that while the defenders of + Christianity publish works in which they attempt to prove that + miracles are possible and credible, they carefully avoid grappling + with the real point of the whole question by showing that any + historical evidence can be produced for a single miracle recorded in + the Gospels, which will stand the test of such historical criticism, + and it is loudly proclaimed that no real evidence can be made + forthcoming. Such a charge as this, it is impossible to pass over in + silence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I propose, + therefore, to examine into the general truth of these allegations, + and to consider the nature of the historical evidence which unbelief, + after it has exhausted all its powers of criticism, still leaves us + unquestionably in possession of.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This consists of + the epistles of the New Testament viewed as historical documents. + Their value as such has been greatly overlooked by both sides to the + controversy, especially by the Christian side. Christians have been + in the habit of viewing them as inspired compositions, and have + studied them almost exclusively <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page022">[pg 022]</span><a name="Pg022" id="Pg022" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> on account of the doctrinal and moral teaching + which they contain, and each sect has viewed them as a kind of + armoury from which to draw weapons for the establishing its own + particular opinions. In doing this they have forgotten that they are + also historical documents of the highest order, the great majority of + which even the opponents of Christianity concede to have been + composed prior to the conclusion of the first century of the + Christian era, and many of them at a much earlier period.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Of these writings + four are universally admitted to be genuine, and to have been + composed prior to the year 60 of our era. Four more are genuine + beyond all reasonable doubt, and of two more the evidence in favour + of their authenticity is very strong. The Apocalypse, which is also + admitted to be genuine, although not strictly an historical document, + can be rendered valuable for the purposes of history. Of the + remaining writings the genuineness is disputed; but whether genuine + or not, it is impossible to deny their antiquity, and that they are + faithful representations of the ideas of those who wrote them. In + fact the names of their authors are of no great importance in the + present controversy, when the writings themselves bear so decisively + the marks of originality. Thus the epistle of James, by whomsoever + written, bears the most unquestionable marks of the most primitive + antiquity. It is in fact a document of the earliest form of + Christianity,—in one word, the Jewish form, before the Church was + finally separated from the synagogue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are our + historical materials. Little justice has been done to their value in + the writings of Christian apologists. As included in the Canon of the + New Testament, it has been for the most part the practice to view + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page023">[pg 023]</span><a name="Pg023" + id="Pg023" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> them as standing in need of + defence, rather than as being the mainstay of the argument for + historical Christianity, and constituting its central position.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be + admitted that it will be impossible for me to do full justice to such + a subject in a work like the present. To bring out all the treasures + of evidence respecting primitive Christianity, and the foundation of + the Christian Church which these writings contain, the whole subject + would require to be unfolded in a distinct and separate treatise + exclusively devoted to the subject. Still, however, this work would + be very incomplete if I did not accept the challenge so boldly thrown + down to us, and show that Christianity rests on an historical + attestation of the highest order. To this I propose devoting the six + concluding chapters of this work.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I intend, + therefore, in the first place to examine the value of the historical + documents of the New Testament, and show that several of the epistles + take rank as the highest form of historical documents, and present us + with what is to all intents and purposes a large mass of + contemporaneous evidence as to the primitive beliefs, and the + original foundation of the Christian Church. In doing so I propose to + treat them in the same manner as all other similar historical + documents are treated.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall then show + that these documents afford a substantial testimony to all the great + facts of Christianity, and especially to the existence of miraculous + powers in the Church, and that the various Churches were from the + very earliest period in possession of an oral account of the actions + and teachings of Jesus Christ substantially the same as that which is + now embodied in the Gospels; and that this oral Gospel was habitually + used for the purposes of instruction. Further, that this <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page024">[pg 024]</span><a name="Pg024" id="Pg024" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> oral Gospel was a substantial embodiment + of the beliefs of the primitive followers of Jesus, and that the + Church as a community was a body especially adapted for handing down + correctly the account of the primitive beliefs respecting its origin, + and that the peculiar position in which it was placed compelled it to + do so.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall further + show on the evidence furnished by those epistles, the genuineness of + which unbelievers do not dispute, that from the earliest commencement + of Christianity the whole body of believers, without distinction of + sect or party, believed in the resurrection of Jesus Christ as a + fact, and viewed it not only as the groundwork on which Christianity + rested, but as the one sole and only reason for the existence of the + Christian Church. I shall be able also to prove on the same evidence + that a considerable number of the followers of Jesus were persuaded + that they had seen him alive after his crucifixion, and that his + appearance was an actual resurrection from the dead. The same + writings prove to demonstration that this was the universal belief of + the whole Christian community, and that the Church was established on + its basis.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These things being + established as the basis for my reasonings, I shall proceed to prove + that it is impossible that these beliefs of the Church could have + owed their origin to any possible form of delusion; but that the + resurrection of Jesus Christ was an historical fact, and that no + other supposition can give an adequate account of the phenomenon.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Having proved that + the greatest of all the miracles which are recorded in the Gospels is + an historical fact, I have got rid of the <span lang="la" class= + "tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">à + priori</span></span> difficulty with which the acceptance of the + Gospels as genuine historical accounts is attended; but further, if + it is an historical fact that Jesus Christ really rose from the dead, + it is in the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page025">[pg + 025]</span><a name="Pg025" id="Pg025" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + highest degree probable that other supernatural occurrences would be + connected with his person. I shall therefore proceed to restore the + Gospels to their place as history, and to show that even on the + principles of the opponents of Christianity, they have every claim to + be accepted as true accounts of the action and teaching of Jesus + Christ as it was transmitted by the different Churches, partly in an + oral, and partly in a written form. I shall also show that even if + they were composed at the late dates which are assigned to them by + opponents, they were yet written within the period which is strictly + historical, while tradition was fresh and reminiscences vivid, and + long before it was possible that a great mass of facts which must + have formed the basis of the existence of the Christian Church could + have been superseded by a number of mythic and legendary creations. + Having placed these facts on a firm foundation, I shall proceed to + consider their accounts of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, and to + estimate its historical nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The proof that the + greatest miracle recorded in the Gospels, the Resurrection of Jesus + Christ, is an event which has really occurred, places the remainder + of them in point of credibility in the same position as the facts of + ordinary history; and they must be accepted and regarded in + conformity with the usual methods of testing evidence.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page026">[pg 026]</span><a name= + "Pg026" id="Pg026" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc5" id="toc5"></a> <a name="pdf6" id="pdf6"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter II. Definitions of + Terms.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing has more + contributed to import an almost hopeless confusion of thought into + the entire controversy about miracles than the ambiguous senses in + which the most important terms connected with it have been employed, + both by theologians and men of science, by the defenders of + revelation as well as by its opponents. Of these terms the words + <span class="tei tei-q">“nature,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“natural”</span>, <span class="tei tei-q">“law,”</span> + <span class="tei tei-q">“force,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“supernatural,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“superhuman,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“miracle,”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“miraculous,”</span> are the most conspicuous. It is + quite clear that unless we use these terms in a definite and uniform + sense, we shall be fighting the air. The neglect to do so has thrown + the greatest obscurity over the entire subject. This vague and + uncertain use of them is not confined to writers on theological + subjects, but is diffused over a large number of scientific works. My + object in the present chapter will be, not to lay down strictly + accurate definitions of all the terms used in the controversy (for + this in the present state of thought on the subject is hardly + possible) but to endeavour to assign a definite meaning to those + which it will be necessary for me to employ, and to draw attention to + some of the fallacies which a vague use of language has + introduced.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: No terms + are more frequently used in this controversy than the words + <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“natural.”</span> <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page027">[pg 027]</span><a name="Pg027" id="Pg027" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> They are constantly used as if their meaning + was definite and invariable. Nothing is more common than to use the + expression <span class="tei tei-q">“laws of nature,”</span> and to + speak of miracles as involving contradictions, violations, and + suspensions of the laws and order of nature, as though there was no + danger of our falling into fallacies of reasoning by classing wholly + different orders of phenomena under a common name.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What do we mean by + the terms <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“natural”</span>? It is evident that no satisfactory + result can come from reasonings on this subject, unless the parties + to the discussion agree to attach to those words a steady and + consistent meaning. Are we in fact under the expression <span class= + "tei tei-q">“nature”</span> to include both matter and its phenomena, + and mind and its phenomena? Is nature to include all things which + exist, including their causes; laws, and forces; or is it to be + restricted to matter, its laws and forces? Or is it to include all + things that exist, except God? I need hardly observe that the laying + down some clear and definite principles on this subject is vital to + the present controversy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: What do we + mean by the laws of nature? How do we distinguish between the laws + and the forces of nature? Do the laws of nature, in the sense in + which that expression is used by science, possess any efficient power + whatever; or ought not efficiency to be predicated only of the forces + of nature, and never of its laws? Or when we speak of the forces of + nature, do we recognise any distinction between material and moral + forces, or do we confound phenomena so utterly differing in outward + character, and on whose difference some of the most important points + of the controversy about miracles rest, under a common name? What + again do we mean by the order of nature? Is it its material order; or + does it include the order of the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page028">[pg 028]</span><a name="Pg028" id="Pg028" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> moral universe? Until we can agree to attach a + definite meaning to these expressions, to argue that miracles are + contrary to nature, or involve a suspension of its laws, or a + violation of its order, or even to affirm the contrary position, is + fighting the air. Yet this I may almost say is the present aspect of + the controversy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: What do we + intend, when we use the different expressions, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“miracles,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“supernatural,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“superhuman,”</span> or events occurring out of the order + of nature? It is evident that whether they point to any real + distinctions or not, it is necessary to employ them with + consistency.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The mere + enumeration of these questions makes it clear that by a vague and + indefinite use of terms, or by attaching to them meanings which they + cannot accurately be made to bear, we may unconsciously assume the + entire question at issue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: With + respect to the terms <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> and + <span class="tei tei-q">“natural.”</span> What do we include under + them? Bishop Butler considers that the latter term is satisfied by + attaching to it the meaning <span class="tei tei-q">“usual.”</span> + Nature then would mean the ordinary course of things. But such a + meaning would by no means satisfy the requirements of modern science, + philosophy, or theology.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One obvious sense + to attach to the word <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> is to + use it to denote the entire mass of phenomena as contemplated by + physical science. In this point of view it would include matter, its + forces, and its laws, and embrace the entire range of those phenomena + and forces where action is necessary; and into the conception of + which neither volition nor freedom enters. If <span class= + "tei tei-q">“nature”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“natural”</span> had been used only in this sense, it + would have saved us from a great mass of inconclusive reasoning. But + this is far from being the case. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page029">[pg 029]</span><a name="Pg029" id="Pg029" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> Not only are they used to include matter, its + laws and forces, but also the whole phenomena of mind.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To this use of the + terms the Duke of Argyll has given no inconsiderable countenance in + his admirable work, <span class="tei tei-q">“The Reign of + Law,”</span> especially in the sixth chapter. He uses the term law as + alike applicable to the operations of mind and matter, and this of + course implies that the whole of our mental phenomena form a portion + of nature and its order. He is led to this, among other + considerations, by the use which we make of the word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“natural”</span> as applied to the results of all kinds + of mental operations. The question may fairly be asked, Are not the + works wrought by man in nature, or is not the building of its nest by + a bird, or of its comb by the bee, a natural operation? If so, man, + bird, and bee, must form a portion of nature, and their various + actions, of its order.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In a popular point + of view such expressions involve no difficulty, and as a mere verbal + distinction the whole question would not be worth the labour of + discussion. But in a question like the one now under consideration, + which requires the utmost accuracy both of thought and reasoning, the + case is far different. The classing together of phenomena which + differ so entirely as mind and matter, under a common term, leads to + the inference that there is no essential difference between them, + which involves at the outset a <span lang="la" class= + "tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">petitio principii</span></span> of the entire + question under definition. I shall have occasion repeatedly to point + out in the course of this work the number of fallacious reasonings + which have been introduced into the question about the possibility + and the credibility of miracles by thus including under a common term + phenomena utterly different in character. It would be far better to + get rid of words so vague as <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> + and <span class="tei tei-q">“natural”</span> in this discussion, and + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page030">[pg 030]</span><a name="Pg030" + id="Pg030" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> substitute for them terms of + which it is impossible to mistake the meaning, than to employ them in + senses which are simply ambiguous and misleading. But of this more + hereafter.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What then are we + to do with man? Is he a part of nature and its order? I reply that + man is within material nature as far as regards his bodily + organization; but that he is outside, or above it, and belongs to a + different order, as far as his rational action, his volition, and his + moral powers are concerned. All that I am contending for is that a + clear distinction must be preserved between the necessary action of + the forces of material nature, and the voluntary action of man; and + that terms must be used which accurately denote this distinction. + Matter, its forces and laws, involve the conception of necessary + action. They act in a particular manner because they cannot help so + acting. With action purely intellectual I am not concerned, but all + moral action is voluntary. Man as an agent can act or forbear acting; + matter cannot. This distinction is of the highest importance, and + must not be lost sight of behind a confused use of such terms as + natural, law, force, or order of nature, applied indeterminately to + the necessary action of material agents, and the voluntary action of + moral ones.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will doubtless + be objected by a certain order of philosophy that all mental and + moral force is only some special modification of material force, and + consequently that there is no distinction between material and moral + action, or between material and moral force, and that the words + <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“natural”</span> are correctly applied to both alike, as + being simple manifestations of the same original force. To this it + will be sufficient to reply, first: that this is an assertion only, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page031">[pg 031]</span><a name="Pg031" + id="Pg031" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and never has been nor can be + proved. Secondly: that it contradicts the highest of all our + certitudes, the direct testimony of consciousness, which affirms that + we live under a law of freedom, wholly different from the necessary + laws of material nature. Thirdly: that it contradicts the universal + experience of mankind, as embodied in the primary laws of human + language and human thought. To assume this at the commencement of the + argument is to take for granted the point which requires to be + proved.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It would be quite + out of place in a treatise like the present to attempt to discuss the + question of the origin of the free agency and the moral nature of + man. It is sufficient for the purpose to observe that, however + voluntary agency may have originated, it is a simple fact that it + exists in the universe, and that its phenomena belong to an order of + its own. It is no mere theory, but a fact, that man not only is + capable of modifying the action of the forces of the material + universe, but that he has modified them, and has produced results + utterly different from those which would have followed from their + simple action. To use terms in this controversy which overlook this + plain and obvious fact, can lead to no satisfactory result.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Are then the + actions of man, the bird, and the bee, properly designated as + natural? In a popular use of language the question may be one purely + verbal; but when we are dealing with subjects requiring accurate + thought, it is in the highest degree necessary to use language which + does not confound the distinct phenomena of mind and matter under a + common designation. Both together compose the universe; but each + belongs to a different order of phenomena. The whole difficulty + proceeds from the fact that both material forces which act in + conformity with necessary laws, and moral ones <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page032">[pg 032]</span><a name="Pg032" id="Pg032" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> which act in conformity with those of + freedom, are united in the person of man.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Another order of + thought uses the term <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> as + including everything that exists, even God; or in other words, it + affirms that every thing which has existed and exists is a + manifestation of Him. As this theory involves the denial of the + personality of the Divine Being, it stands excluded from the question + under consideration, namely, the credibility of miracles, which is + utterly irrelevant, except on the assumption of the existence of a + personal God. It ought to be observed, however, that while theism + affirms that God and the universe, whether material or moral, are + distinct, it fully recognises the fact that God is immanent in both + the worlds of mind and matter, while at the same time he transcends + them both. This is an important consideration, which is too often + overlooked by both parties to the discussion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: a still + greater confusion has been introduced by a vague and indefinite use + of the term <span class="tei tei-q">“law,”</span> and by confusing a + number of utterly diverse phenomena under the designation of the + <span class="tei tei-q">“laws of nature.”</span> It is absolutely + necessary to trace this fallacy to its source. The Duke of Argyll + tells us in his <span class="tei tei-q">“Reign of Law”</span> that + there are five different senses at least in which this word is + habitually used even in scientific writings. They are as + follows:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“First, we have law as applied simply to an observed + order of facts.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Secondly, to that order as involving the action of some + force or forces of which nothing more can be known.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Thirdly, as applied to individual forces, the measure of + whose operation has been more or less defined or + ascertained.”</span></p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page033">[pg + 033]</span><a name="Pg033" id="Pg033" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Fourthly, as applied to those combinations of forces + which have reference to the fulfilment of purposes or the discharge + of functions.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Fifthly, as applied to abstract conceptions of the + mind—not corresponding with any actual phenomena, but deduced + therefrom as axioms of thought, necessary to an understanding of + them. Law, in this sense, is a reduction of the phenomena, not merely + to an order of facts, but to an order of thought.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“These leading significations of the word Law,”</span> + says the Duke, <span class="tei tei-q">“all circle round the three + great questions which science asks of nature, the what, the how, and + the why.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“What are the facts in their established + order?”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“How, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> from what physical causes + does that order come to be? What relation do they bear to purpose, to + the fulfilment of intention, to the discharge of + function?”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are the + multiform acceptations attached by scientific men to the term + <span class="tei tei-q">“law,”</span> yet the Duke is not quite + certain whether they may not be even more numerous. It is evident + that if they are all imported into the question of the credibility of + miracles, our position must resemble that of persons who are + compelled to fight in the dark; and that the question whether an + occurrence is natural or supernatural, whether it is contrary to, or + a violation of the laws of nature, or above nature, and many others + which enter into this controversy must be without definite meaning. + It is clear that unless we can restrict the word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“law”</span> to one, or at most, two definite meanings, + we shall get into hopeless confusion, or to speak more correctly, we + shall open the gate wide for the introduction of any number of + fallacies.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The primary + conception implied by the term <span class="tei tei-q">“law”</span> + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page034">[pg 034]</span><a name="Pg034" + id="Pg034" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> is unquestionably one which is + strictly applicable to man and his actions, and can only be applied + metaphorically, and in some systems of thought after a considerable + change of meaning, to the facts and phenomena of the material + universe. A law is a rule of action for human conduct and nothing + more. Such rules of conduct for the most part pre-suppose that they + are imposed by some external authority, which has the right or the + power to enforce obedience to them; or else that the person obeying + them has an inward feeling that it is right to do so, and knows that + his conscience will reproach him for the omission. But law, strictly + speaking, is simply the rule of action itself, as for instance, an + Act of Parliament; but as in practice all such rules are enforced by + a sanction of some kind, our conception of a law is also united with + that of a lawgiver, who has both the right and the power to enforce + it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore that such a conception is essentially a moral one. It is + also intimately united with the knowledge that we possess the power + to act or forbear acting in conformity with its dictates, and, if we + prefer it, of taking the consequences of disobedience. But when such + a conception is transferred to material nature it loses a + considerable portion of its original significancy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In its application + therefore to physical science, it may with strict propriety be used + to denote an invariable order of events: and if the human analogy + could hold in physics it might be used to include the power which + originated and enforced them. But as the consideration of will or + purpose forms no portion of strictly physical science, and is + expressly excluded from it, the term law as used by it ought to + denote the invariable order of sequences, and not to include + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page035">[pg 035]</span><a name="Pg035" + id="Pg035" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the forces which generate + them. Unless this distinction is carefully observed, we shall be in + danger of introducing into our reasonings human analogies to which + there is nothing corresponding in nature viewed as a mere body of + unintelligent forces.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The use of the + term <span class="tei tei-q">“law”</span> in physical science ought + to be confined to denote the invariable sequences of the material + phenomena. Physicists profess to know nothing of efficient causation; + or of a lawgiver standing outside his laws and possessing power to + enforce them. The whole question of intelligent agency or purpose + lies in a region outside their province. Law, as far as physical + science is acquainted with it, can consist only of a set of + antecedents, followed by an invariable set of consequents. Of any + inherent efficacy in these antecedents to produce their consequents, + it can affirm nothing. A very popular philosophy even denies the + power of the human mind to penetrate beyond this, and affirms that + its entire knowledge is limited to phenomena.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But physical + science also deals with forces. These, and not its laws, are its true + principles of causation. Mere invariable sequences can effect + nothing; but forces, such as gravitation, heat, electricity, and the + entire body of chemical forces, or whatever force they may ultimately + be resolved into, can effect much. They are in fact the antecedents + of which the invariable order of events are the consequents. + Respecting the ultimate principle of force, or what is its real + nature, or how it is directed, or came to be, physical science is + silent. All that it can do is to observe the order of their + occurrence, measure their quantities, and tabulate their results. By + this means it rises to the conception of what are called the laws of + nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If in the present + controversy the word law had <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page036">[pg 036]</span><a name="Pg036" id="Pg036" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> been used in this sense only, it would have + been wholly unexceptionable. But it becomes far otherwise when the + idea of force or efficiency is introduced into it. Nothing is more + common in the reasonings of those who attempt to prove that miracles + are impossible, than to import into the term law the idea of force, + or efficient causation, even at the very time when the presence of + intelligent action is denied. It is this which imparts to this class + of reasonings their entire speciousness. The laws of material nature + are continually spoken of as though they were forces which are + energetic in the universe, and to the energy of which all things owe + their present form; or in other words, it is assumed that the laws of + nature are causes which have produced by their unintelligent action + the present order of the universe.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing however + can be clearer than that a law of nature, in the sense in which + purely physical science can take cognizance of one, can effectuate + nothing. What can an invariable order of sequences effect? Before the + idea of efficiency can be attached to law, the conception of force + must be introduced into it. Modern controversy, however, is + constantly in the habit of speaking of the laws of nature as though + they were efficient agents. We hear of creation by law, evolution by + law, of results brought about by the action of invariable laws, and a + countless number of assertions of a similar description. To such + expressions in a popular sense when no accuracy of expression is + required, there is no objection; but when they are introduced into + the controversy respecting the credibility of miracles, they create + nothing but confusion. What is really meant is, that such results are + brought about by the action of forces which act in conformity with + invariable laws, but the idea of intelligence <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page037">[pg 037]</span><a name="Pg037" id="Pg037" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and volition is carefully excluded from + the conception. It is clearly inaccurate to speak of laws reigning. + Laws do not reign even in political societies; but only the power + which is able to enact and enforce them. In material nature the only + things which possess efficiency are its forces.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There can be no + objection to the use of the expression, <span class="tei tei-q">“the + laws of mind,”</span> when care is taken to use language which + clearly distinguishes between them and unintelligent and necessary + sequences of material nature. But when the term <span class= + "tei tei-q">“law”</span> is without any qualification applied to both + sets of phenomena alike, it is certain either to lead to fallacious + reasoning, or to involve the assumption of the point at issue. + Whatever may be the origin of the moral and spiritual in man, it is + certain that as they at present exist in him, they stand out in the + strongest contrast with the forces which act upon material things, + and with the laws of their action. Nothing can be more entirely + different in character than the force of gravitation and the + principles of volition and self-consciousness, or than the + unconscious forces of material nature and those principles which + constitute our rationality. If we affirm that the forces of mind act + in conformity with law, it ought to be clearly understood that they + act in conformity with a law of their own, which affords free action + to the principle of volition. Otherwise there is the greatest danger + that the expression will involve the covert assumption of the truth + of the doctrine of philosophical necessity, or in other words, that + all mental and material forces are of the same character, that is to + say, that they are both equally necessary. This involves the + assumption of the very point on which the entire controversy turns, + for if moral and material forces and laws are all alike, it destroys + the conception of a God, and the significance of a + miracle.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page038">[pg + 038]</span><a name="Pg038" id="Pg038" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This brings us to + the conception of force, what is it? Various definitions of it have + been given sufficiently accurate for practical purposes. It should be + observed however that physical science can know nothing of it except + as a phenomenon. The determination of its nature, and its ultimate + cause lie entirely beyond its limits. Many facts respecting it, have + been ascertained and tabulated. Many of its manifestations, which + bear a different phenomenal aspect, it has ascertained to be capable + of transmutation into one another. But it must never be forgotten + that it is able to affirm nothing respecting the source in which the + forces of the universe originate. All that it can affirm is, that + they do exist. The original conception of force is one, however, + which we derive, not from the material universe, but from the action + of our own minds. We are conscious that we are efficient agents, and + that definite results follow the action of our wills. This gives us + the conception of force. We apply it in a metaphorical sense to + certain things which we observe in the material universe and call + them forces, having abstracted from our primary idea of force the + conception of volition. But all that we really know about force tends + to prove that its origin is mental and not material.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is of the + utmost importance to preserve a clear distinction between the + unconscious forces of matter and the intelligent ones of mind; + otherwise we shall inevitably be misled by such expressions as + <span class="tei tei-q">“the forces of nature.”</span> It is + impossible to argue the question unless the distinction is admitted + as a fact, whatever theory may be held about their origin. It is + absurd to confound principles so distinct as heat, or gravitation, or + electricity, with those which produce the most disinterested moral + actions, and designate them by the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page039">[pg 039]</span><a name="Pg039" id="Pg039" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> common term <span class="tei tei-q">“natural + forces.”</span> In common language we are in no danger of error when + we speak of the force of conscience, or the force of a motive; but in + discussions like the present, where such expressions really involve + the assumption of the whole controversy, it is absurd to classify + such phenomena, and the unintelligent forces of matter under a common + designation, unless it can be demonstrated that they are all + manifestations of the same power.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We come now to the + much vexed question as to the meaning to be attached to the words + <span class="tei tei-q">“miracle”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“miraculous;”</span> and the terms closely allied to + them, <span class="tei tei-q">“supernatural”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“superhuman.”</span> Is there any valid distinction + between miracles and supernatural occurrences? Are, in fact, all + miracles supernatural occurrences, and all supernatural occurrences + miracles? The determination of this question is closely connected + with an important point which will be considered hereafter, viz., + whether a miracle could have any evidential value if it were brought + about by a special adaptation of the known or unknown forces of + material nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let it be observed + that we are not discussing this question as a purely abstract one, + but in reference to the truth of Christianity. What miracles may be + in themselves, I shall not inquire; but in relation to the question + before us, what we mean when we call an occurrence a miracle ought to + be made sufficiently clear and distinct. In this controversy it would + greatly tend to precision if we used the term <span class= + "tei tei-q">“miracle”</span> as distinguished from an occurrence + which is supernatural or superhuman, to denote only those + supernatural occurrences which have an evidential value in connection + with the evidences of a divine revelation, since there may be + supernatural occurrences which would not be in any proper sense + evidential.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page040">[pg + 040]</span><a name="Pg040" id="Pg040" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the further + question arises, Is it necessary in order to constitute an event a + miracle that it should be one which transcends the known or the + unknown forces of material nature to have produced? It is clear that + to constitute an event a miracle it must involve supernatural or + superhuman agency of some kind; that is to say, it must be either + supernatural in the mode of its production as an objective fact, or + superhuman in its productive elements, by which I mean, that it must + be preceded by an announcement that it is going to occur, which must + be beyond the sphere of human knowledge. In order to render a + supernatural event evidential, or in other words to constitute it a + miracle, it must not only consist of an external objective fact, but + its occurrence must be unknown beforehand, and take place at the + bidding of the agent. Such previous announcement, or prediction, is + necessary to render even a supernatural occurrence in the strictest + sense of the word a miracle. The prediction of some occurrence in + physical nature previously unknown may therefore convert such an + event into an evidential miracle, although the occurrence itself as a + mere objective fact may have been brought about by some known or + unknown forces of material nature. To render it such it would be + necessary that the knowledge of the occurrence should be clearly + beyond the bounds of existing knowledge. Thus, if any person, when + the science of astronomy was utterly unknown, had announced + beforehand the day and the hour of the occurrence of the next two + transits of Venus, and the various places on the earth's surface in + which they would be visible, and if the events had taken place + accordingly, this would have unquestionably proved the presence of + superhuman knowledge. The only question which in such a case would + require to be determined would be <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page041">[pg 041]</span><a name="Pg041" id="Pg041" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> whether such a knowledge must have been + communicated by God, or by some being inferior to God. As however + none of the miracles recorded in the New Testament have the smallest + appearance of being of this character, I need not further discuss a + supposed case. My only reason for referring to it is, that if it is + supposable that any of the miracles recorded in the New Testament + could, at some future day, be shown to have been due to a combination + of physical forces, their occurring instantly at the direct command + of the agent would still give them an evidential value.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it is clear + that the miracles recorded in the New Testament, if caused by + material forces at all, could not have been due to their ordinary + action. They must have been due either to an unknown combination of + known forces, or to the calling of unknown forces into activity, or + to the immediate agency of the divine mind. It is clear therefore + that their occurrence as objective facts proves the presence of mind + acting in some way on the material forces of nature. To determine the + mode in which this action mast have taken place has nothing to do + with the question of miracles, or the reality of their + occurrence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A miracle + therefore may, for all practical purposes of this argument, be + defined as an occurrence which cannot be effectuated by the ordinary + action of the known material forces of the Universe, and could only + have been brought about by the agency of intelligent volition; and + which is preceded by an announcement on the part of the agent that it + is about to happen or takes place directly on his bidding. The latter + element, as I have observed, is essential to constitute the + occurrence an evidential miracle. Otherwise in our ignorance of what + unknown forces may exist in the universe, we could have no certainty + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page042">[pg 042]</span><a name="Pg042" + id="Pg042" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> that the event was not a mere + unusual occurrence effected by some already existing but unknown + forces. To the highest form of the miracles in the New Testament, + however, such an idea would be inapplicable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It may perhaps + here be objected that in laying down this definition of a miracle, I + have not sufficiently identified its performance with the governing + power of the universe, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> God; but that if supernatural + agents exist, inferior to God, it may be due to their operation; and + consequently that it may not be evidential of a divine commission. + This objection will be fully considered in a subsequent portion of + this work.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A supernatural + event is one which exceeds and which cannot be effected by any force + existing in material nature. But there must always be a difficulty in + determining whether an occurrence, viewed as a bare objective fact, + belongs to that class of events which is supernatural, or only to + that which is unusual. This will always be the case until our + knowledge of the forces of the universe is so complete that we can + ascertain for certain what are the limits of their possible action, + and whether it is possible to bring into action any forces that may + exist, but are unknown to us. In strict language therefore, it is + impossible to be certain whether an occurrence, as a bare objective + fact, is supernatural, until we are acquainted with the possible + action of every force that exists in the universe. This difficulty, + however, is one that is entirely theoretical, and has not the + smallest practical importance with respect to the miracles of the New + Testament. Men have had several thousand years' experience of what + can be effected by the ordinary forces of material nature. + Occurrences which lie beyond their power to effectuate prove the + presence of intelligence and volition. The introduction of an unknown + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page043">[pg 043]</span><a name="Pg043" + id="Pg043" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> force can only be accomplished + by a being who, although he may be immanent in nature, is yet capable + of controlling its material forces. Occurrences therefore which + transcend the power of the known forces existing in the universe to + accomplish, whether they are material or human, may for all practical + purposes be viewed as supernatural; that is to say, they denote the + presence and agency of a being who is possessed of power, + intelligence, and volition. Whether that being be human, superhuman, + or divine, must be determined by an intelligent exercise of our + reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is useless to + discuss this question further. We are dealing with a very definite + question, the miraculous events recorded in the Gospels. With respect + to the great majority of them, there can be no doubt as to their + being supernatural occurrences, if they took place precisely as they + are recorded. We know enough of the ordinary forces of material + nature to be certain that the instantaneous cure of a blind or + leprous man by a word does not lie within the sphere of their + operation. Such an event must denote the special interposition of an + extremely high degree of intelligence and power. Common sense will + affirm that it could only be brought about by the intervention of the + supreme power of the universe, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In this sense + every supernatural occurrence may be said to be likewise evidential, + when we have ascertained for certain that it is due to supernatural + causes, and that it cannot have been brought about by the action of + unintelligent forces, or by those which are capable of being modified + by the agency of man. But in that case it would only prove the + presence and intervention of a being who is capable of controlling + the unintelligent forces of nature. The real difficulty, as I have + observed, is to prove the supernatural nature of <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page044">[pg 044]</span><a name="Pg044" id="Pg044" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the occurrence. But although, if it was + certainly supernatural, it would prove the intervention of a + supernatural agent, it would say nothing as to the purpose for which + such an intervention took place. It follows therefore, that to + constitute a supernatural occurrence in the strict sense of the term + a miracle, it must take place after an announcement that it is going + to happen, and take place at the bidding of the agent who performs + it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is highly + important, in considering the miracles of the Gospels, that the + distinction between a merely supernatural event and an evidential + miracle should be kept steadily in view. All creative acts would be + supernatural events, but they would not necessarily be evidential + miracles. The incarnation, and other occurrences mentioned in the New + Testament, are supernatural ones; but to mix them up with evidential + miracles is simply to invite confusion of thought. Another class of + supernatural occurrences mentioned in the New Testament seem to have + been wrought, not for purposes directly evidential, but to awaken + attention; and another class of supernatural endowments were + vouchsafed, to render it possible to lay deep in human society the + foundations of the Church as a visible and permanent institution. + Such occurrences are not directly but indirectly evidential, and it + will be necessary carefully to distinguish between them and + occurrences brought about for directly evidential purposes. To keep + this distinction clear, I shall designate the last by the term + <span class="tei tei-q">“miracle.”</span> A miracle is supernatural + in two ways: namely, in the agency which produced the objective fact, + and in the announcement of its occurrence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The common + definition of a miracle, as a violation or a suspension of the laws + of nature, is open to very grave objections. The question, as I have + observed, at <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page045">[pg + 045]</span><a name="Pg045" id="Pg045" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + once arises, what is included under nature? It also assumes that we + are acquainted with the mode in which miraculous agency must be + exerted; which we are not. Other definitions which have been proposed + take for granted positions which those who undertake to prove the + credibility of miracles ought never to concede. The plain fact is, + that we are simply ignorant of the mode in which God acts on material + nature; and every definition must be faulty which assumes that we + have that knowledge. To say that miracles must involve even a + suspension of the laws of nature introduces a needless difficulty. No + law or force of nature need be suspended in its action to render the + occurrence of a supernatural event possible. All that is necessary is + that forces should be introduced which are capable of overbalancing + the action of opposing forces. It is extremely inaccurate to affirm + that the force of gravitation must be suspended in order to render + possible either walking on the water, or an ascent into the sky.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is equally + unwise and unphilosophical to affirm that God cannot work a miracle + by the use of intermediate agencies, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> by + the partial employment of the forces of the material universe. It is + true that in most of the miracles recorded in the New Testament we + cannot affirm the use of such media, although we observe an economy + in the use of divine power: <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> no power is exerted beyond + that which is necessary to produce the particular result in question. + But in the Old Testament the use of such media is unquestionably + affirmed. To lay down in our definition of a miracle a particular + theory as to the mode in which it must be accomplished, involves the + whole subject in needless difficulties.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This question has + been obscured by representing a miracle as performed by the + intervention of a higher <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page046">[pg + 046]</span><a name="Pg046" id="Pg046" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + law, superseding the action of a lower one. This introduces the + conception of force into the idea of law, and leads to confusion of + thought. Laws, or the invariable sequences between phenomena, are + neither forces nor powers. The counteraction of one force by another + is an event of daily occurrence. All that is needful for the working + of a miracle is the intervention of a force or mental energy which is + capable of acting on matter, and of overbalancing those ordinary + forces which would produce a contrary result.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has also been + urged that miracles may obey a law of miracles. The best illustration + of this idea is that which has been supplied from the supposed + operations of Mr. Babbage's calculating machine. He supposes that a + machine might be constructed which could go on grinding out a + particular set of results for a long, yet definite period of time; + then by the operation of the same machine, that a fresh order might + be introduced; and afterwards that it might revert to the original + one; and that this operation might be continued for ever. If + therefore the great Author of nature had so planned the machine of + the universe that whenever a miracle was requisite in His scheme of + Providence this abnormal event occurred, like the new series + introduced into the calculating mill, in that case miracles might be + said to follow a definite law, which might be designated the law and + order of miraculous intervention.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + to deny the ingenuity of this theory, but unfortunately it is not + only one which takes for granted that the perfection of mechanical + contrivance is the only thing that the Creator had in view in the + production of the universe, but even if this were an unquestionable + fact, it could afford us no help with respect to all the most + important miracles recorded in the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page047">[pg 047]</span><a name="Pg047" id="Pg047" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> New Testament. How is it possible, I ask, to + account for many of our Lord's miracles on such a supposition? It is + expressly affirmed that this supernatural energy was frequently made + to depend on the faith of the person who invoked His help. Could any + miracle-working mill be even conceived of, which could bring out, as + part of the normal law of its operations, the cure of blind, deaf, + and leprous men by a word, or effectuate His own resurrection from + the dead, or ascension into Heaven? Such occurrences could not be + produced by the action of any machine which has the smallest analogy + to a calculating mill. But further: such an operation would be + impotent to answer the purposes of a miracle, unless the particular + result was announced beforehand by one who was completely ignorant + that the machine was capable of producing such extraordinary results. + This ignorance would likewise have to be extended to those to whom + the announcement was made. It would also be necessary that the + announcer should proclaim that on a particular day and hour the + machine would grind out the particular result of the cure of a blind + man, or a resurrection from the dead. The ability to do this would be + utterly abnormal, and impossible ever to be ground out by the + self-acting agency of any conceivable machine, however cleverly + constructed. Mr. Babbage's miracle-working mill, however ingenious a + conception, must therefore be dismissed as incapable of affording us + the smallest help in the present argument.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The term + <span class="tei tei-q">“superhuman”</span> remains to be considered. + It need not detain us long. Superhuman implies a result brought about + by the intervention of a being superior to man. Whether such an agent + be divine or otherwise can only be determined by the exercise of our + reason. It has been objected that the agency which <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page048">[pg 048]</span><a name="Pg048" id="Pg048" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> produces an earthquake is a superhuman + agency, that is, it exceeds the powers of man to produce it. Granted: + but this has no bearing on the subject under discussion. When we use + the word <span class="tei tei-q">“superhuman”</span> we always mean + by it, not the action of the unintelligent forces of material nature, + but of a being possessed of intelligence and will.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is a large + number of other subjects having an intimate bearing on the correct + definition of the terms habitually used in this controversy, and + which greatly modify their meaning. These however will best be + considered when I enter on the direct discussion of the possibility + and the credibility of miracles.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page049">[pg 049]</span><a name= + "Pg049" id="Pg049" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc7" id="toc7"></a> <a name="pdf8" id="pdf8"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter III. The Supernatural Elements + Contained in the New Testament: In What Do They Consist? And What + View Do Its Writers Take Respecting Them?</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Before entering on + the general question of miracles, it is only reasonable to inquire of + the writers of the New Testament what they have to say on the + subject. Their opinion of the nature and character of the + supernatural occurrences which they have reported is certainly of + more value than that of all other writers put together. St. John and + St. Paul must have been in the habit of coming in contact with + unbelievers. It would be most important if we could ascertain the + mode adopted by them of commending Christianity to their acceptance, + and what use was made by them of the supernatural power with which + they professed to be endowed.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: It is + impossible to read the New Testament without arriving at the + conclusion that the superhuman character which is ascribed to Jesus + Christ is perfectly unique, and differs entirely from that which is + ascribed to any other person. Others wrought miracles; but they were + men like ourselves. But in the person of Jesus Christ the + supernatural is represented as inherent. To say that he possessed the + power of working miracles, is an inadequate statement of the fact. + Although he embodies the perfection of human nature with all its + finite limitations, the supernatural and the divine take up their + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page050">[pg 050]</span><a name="Pg050" + id="Pg050" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> abode in his personality. + Whenever our Lord is represented as working miracles, he is always + represented as performing them by a power which was inherent in + himself. This is never once attributed to his followers. The + supernatural action which is ascribed to Jesus Christ must be viewed, + as a case distinct and separate, by itself. The miracles performed by + him are not only evidential, but also portions of his supernatural + manifestation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">According to the + author of the fourth Gospel, our Lord himself rarely designated them + by either of the three terms by which miracles are usually designated + in the New Testament, viz., signs, wonders, and mighty works (σημεῖα, + τέρατα, δυνάμεις). He almost uniformly called them <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Works”</span> (ἔργα). An important distinction is here + intended. Our Lord did not view his miracles as a separate class of + actions by themselves, but as portions of his ordinary superhuman + working, and as having a distinct relation to his entire character. + Four passages will be sufficient to show this clearly. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“The works that I do in my Father's name, they bear + witness of me.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“My Father worketh + hitherto, and I work.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“If ye believe + not me, believe the works.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“Many good + works have I showed you from my Father; for which of those works do + ye stone me?”</span> When contemplated by others only, they assume + the form of signs and wonders: <span class="tei tei-q">“Except ye see + signs and wonders, ye will not believe.”</span> It is highly + important that we should keep steadily in view that the divine + character attributed to Jesus is by no means restricted to the + performance of miracles; but that it extends throughout his entire + working, and that the two together constitute an harmonious whole. It + pertains no less to its moral and spiritual aspects, than to the + displays which he made of a power capable of controlling <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page051">[pg 051]</span><a name="Pg051" id="Pg051" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> nature. Even in this portion of his + working, he draws special attention to its moral and spiritual + aspects. According to his view of his own mighty works, they not only + exhibited a power of controlling nature, but were uniformly invested + with a moral and spiritual environment. Throughout the Gospels he is + represented as exhibiting a greatness and dignity, a purity, + holiness, humility and benevolence, so far transcending that of other + men, as to constitute him what may be almost designated a moral and + spiritual miracle. Perfection in the moral and spiritual world is as + essentially superhuman, as power over nature is supernatural. In + considering the miracles which have been attributed to Jesus Christ, + it is important to bear in mind the manner in which they stand + related to his entire superhuman character. Otherwise we shall fail + to observe the double aspect which they bear. They were + manifestations of the divine, which dwelt within him, and also they + possessed an evidential value.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall + occasionally use the term <span class="tei tei-q">“superhuman”</span> + instead of <span class="tei tei-q">“divine,”</span> as applied to + Jesus Christ, because for the purposes of this argument it will be + unnecessary for me to define the precise degree of divine character + which the evangelists intended to attribute to him. To ascertain this + is the proper function of the theologian, by comparing together the + facts and statements of the New Testament. It is sufficient for my + present purpose to observe that the perusal of the Gospels leaves the + inevitable impression on the mind that it was the purpose of their + writers to depict a divine character in union with a human one—a + supernatural power acting within the regions of the natural. This + covers alike the aspects of character presented of him both in the + Synoptic and the Johannine Gospels.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Although our Lord + speaks of his actions by the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page052">[pg 052]</span><a name="Pg052" id="Pg052" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> common name of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“works”</span> (ἔργα), when the sacred authors speak + generally of miracles, they apply to them, as I have observed, three + distinct terms, signs, mighty works, and wonders (σημεῖα, δυνάμεις, + τέρατα). Each of these denotes different aspects in which they + contemplated miracles. The sign included the supernatural fact + wrought on external nature with the whole of its moral environment. + In this point of view, the <span class="tei tei-q">“sign”</span> was + the direct proof of a divine mission. It is worthy of observation + that the author of the fourth Gospel has uniformly described the + supernatural actions which he has ascribed to Jesus Christ by this + term. The expression <span class="tei tei-q">“mighty works”</span> is + intended to bring under our notice the power which was displayed in + the performance of a miracle, thereby directly connecting it with a + superhuman agency. The term <span class="tei tei-q">“wonder”</span> + contemplates a supernatural event in its simple aspect as an + occurrence pre-eminently fitted to command attention to the person + who was capable of performing it. We may therefore conclude that the + writers of the New Testament considered that these were the three + special functions of miracles. It is quite possible that the same + miracle might have fulfilled all three at the same time: but as three + such functions of supernatural occurrences are distinctly stated, it + is quite conceivable that there were occasions when they were limited + to some one of these in particular.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is evident that + our Lord attached the highest importance to a miracle contemplated as + a <span class="tei tei-q">“sign,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> to + the moral environment with which it was connected. This, although + more definitely brought out in St. John's Gospel, is also distinctly + borne witness to by the Synoptics. It forms the ground of the + reiterated refusal of our Lord to comply with the demand of the + Pharisees that he would show some sign from heaven, <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page053">[pg 053]</span><a name="Pg053" id="Pg053" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> as a proof of his divine mission. His + miracles combined in one the two conceptions of signs and mighty + works. None of them were mere prodigies devoid of a moral aspect.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is worthy of + consideration whether our Lord's primary purpose in performing + supernatural actions was always directly evidential. I have already + drawn attention to their twofold aspect, as divine manifestations, + and as evidential miracles. A considerable number of the miracles + recorded in the Gospels are represented as performed by him because + he was moved with compassion. These evidently belong to the former + class of his supernatural workings. But although this was their + primary object it did not deprive them of an evidential value. But + there is also another remarkable class of supernatural actions + attributed to him, viz., those in which he is recorded to have + expressly forbidden the persons whom he healed to publish the fact. + As it is evident that these miracles could only have become + extensively known by the persons cured disobeying his orders, it is + clear that they could not have been directly performed for evidential + purposes, but were the manifestations of the divine which resided in + his person.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are the + supernatural actions attributed to Jesus Christ in the New Testament, + respecting which as a whole, whether performed for purposes avowedly + evidential or not, he himself affirms, that they bore witness of him, + that the Father had sent him. Two other classes of miracles, affirmed + to have been performed by his followers, require notice.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The whole of these + are stated to have been performed by a delegated power and + commission. The great majority of them are described as having been + performed in the name of Jesus Christ. They are <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page054">[pg 054]</span><a name="Pg054" id="Pg054" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> affirmed to have been performed for two + purposes; to prove the divine commission of those who wrought them, + and to attest the reality of their Master's resurrection, by giving + exhibitions of his present power. These therefore are distinctly + affirmed to have been evidential miracles. A few others were + providential interferences in favour of the infant Church. There is + also another class of supernatural actions referred to in the Acts of + the Apostles, such as the passing of St. Peter's shadow, and the + supposed supernatural effects resulting from it, and the conveyance + from St. Paul's person of handkerchiefs and aprons to the sick, and + one or two other instances. These involve special manifestations of + supernatural power, and belong to supernatural occurrences in their + aspect of wonders, or very extraordinary events, and as such were + specially adapted for drawing attention to the message of the + Apostles. But the New Testament also affirms another and very + peculiar form of the manifestation of the supernatural, as then + actually existing in the Apostolic Church. I need hardly say that I + allude to the various gifts of the Spirit, with which large numbers + of its members believed themselves to be endowed. I shall not + consider them any further here, as it will be necessary for me to + enter largely on the subject in a subsequent portion of this work. + Their use and purpose was to lay deep the foundations of the + Christian Church. All that will be necessary in this place is to draw + attention to them as a distinct order of supernatural manifestations, + to the existence of which the writers of the New Testament are + pledged.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is also one + further form of supernatural manifestation affirmed by them, namely, + a great moral and spiritual transformation effected in those who + cordially embraced the Gospel. This is most positively stated + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page055">[pg 055]</span><a name="Pg055" + id="Pg055" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> by St. Paul to have been a + fact constantly taking place under his own observation. It is only + necessary for me to notice its existence, as it is a form of + supernatural manifestation, the truth or falsehood of which forms no + portion of the present controversy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such then are the + various forms of the supernatural, to the existence of which the + writers of the New Testament are pledged as objective facts. To these + only, and not to any conceivable or possible ones, is the defender of + Christianity committed. If their occurrence can be shown to have been + impossible, either on grounds of science or philosophy, or because + human testimony is of so fallible a character that it cannot + establish the truth of a supernatural occurrence, it follows that the + whole of Christianity must have been an invention of a purely human + origin, that it can have no claim to the designation of a divine + revelation, and that it is hardly possible to free its inventors from + the charge of fraud. No mere paring down of its supernatural elements + will enable us to escape from this conclusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must now proceed + to consider whether the writers of the New Testament rest the truth + of Christianity on the evidence of miracles alone, and what position + they occupy respecting it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If we assume for + the sake of argument that the fourth Gospel is the work of the + Apostle John, it is evident that neither Jesus Christ nor the Apostle + accepted the theory which has been propounded by some divines, and + readily accepted by unbelievers, that the evidence of his divine + mission was exclusively founded on the testimony of miracles. To + state the point distinctly:—This Gospel places the evidence afforded + by our Lord's own divine person, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the + moral <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page056">[pg 056]</span><a name= + "Pg056" id="Pg056" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> evidence of his + mission, in the first rank, and his miraculous works in the + second.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As this is a point + of considerable importance, and one to which its proper weight has + been seldom attached, I will enumerate the chief statements made in + this Gospel on this subject.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: The author + of the Gospel directly affirms that Jesus is <span class= + "tei tei-q">“the light of men;”</span> and he himself distinctly + affirms of himself, <span class="tei tei-q">“He that seeth me seeth + Him that sent me.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“I am come a light + into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in + darkness.”</span> (John xii. 45, 46.) Again, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“I am the light of the world; he that followeth me shall + not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.”</span> (John + viii. 12.) It is impossible to read these and kindred passages + without feeling that our Lord appealed to something else besides his + miraculous works, viewed as mere objective facts, as a proof of his + divine mission. He evidently places the highest proof of it in his + great moral and spiritual manifestation. He asserts the possession of + an inherent illumination in his own divine Person in union with the + great truths which he enunciated, and the entire course of his divine + working. To a mind capable of appreciating a manifestation of + holiness, his person and divine working would be self-evidential. + <span class="tei tei-q">“He that seeth me, seeth Him that sent + me.”</span> It is evident therefore that he considered the moral + aspect of even his supernatural works as an important portion of the + evidence that he came from God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The fourth chapter + of this Gospel contains an account of our Lord's visit to the + Samaritans. He performed no miracle on this occasion. The Evangelist + tells us that many of them accepted him as the Messiah; and expressly + states that they affirmed that this was not on <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page057">[pg 057]</span><a name="Pg057" id="Pg057" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> account of the report of the woman as to + his supernatural insight into her character; but because they + themselves had heard him, and on this account they had arrived at the + persuasion that was the Christ. There was something therefore in his + moral manifestation, even apart from his miracles, which produced + this persuasion. The Evangelist accepts this position as a correct + one. He has even gone further, and has attributed it in the same + chapter to our Lord himself. He makes him address the nobleman who + came to solicit his interference in behalf of his sick son with these + remarkable words: <span class="tei tei-q">“Except ye see signs and + wonders, ye will not believe.”</span> (John iv. 48.) These words can + only imply that, in the opinion of the speaker, there was a moral and + spiritual attestation of his divine mission, which stood higher than + objective miracles; and that those who witnessed it ought to have + received it as such.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In John vi. 30, + ff., a remarkable dialogue is described as taking place between our + Lord and the Jews on this very subject. The Jews demand of him to + work some distinct sign in proof of his divine mission. Let it be + observed that the demand of a sign, here stated to have been made, is + of precisely the same character as similar statements which are made + by the Synoptics on the same subject, and shows that a common + conception, underlies them all. <span class="tei tei-q">“What + sign,”</span> say they, <span class="tei tei-q">“showest thou then, + that we may see and believe thee? what dost thou work?”</span> They + then proceed to define the particular sign which they wish to see + exhibited, by making an invidious comparison between his miracles and + those of Moses, viewed as mere objective facts. In reply our Lord + does not appeal directly to even the miracle of which the Evangelist + had just described the performance; but throughout the remainder of + the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page058">[pg 058]</span><a name= + "Pg058" id="Pg058" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> chapter, he proceeds + to draw attention to the moral and spiritual aspects of his working. + <span class="tei tei-q">“Moses gave you not that bread from Heaven; + but my Father giveth you the true bread from Heaven; for the bread of + God is he which cometh down from Heaven, and giveth life unto the + world,”</span> &c.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In chapter vii. + (17, 18) our Lord affirms: <span class="tei tei-q">“If any man will + do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or + whether I speak of myself. He that speaketh of himself seeketh his + own glory; but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is + true, and no unrighteousness is in him.”</span> Here the affirmation + is clear and distinct that there is a moral and spiritual element in + our Lord's person and teaching, which jointly with his miraculous + works bear witness to his divine character. The testimony given by + the one is convergent with that of the other. This the following + affirmation of our Lord most strongly asserts. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“I am one who bear witness of myself, and the Father who + sent me hath borne witness of me,”</span> that is to say, His moral + and spiritual manifestation is in a certain sense evidential; and the + Father who sent him bore a concurrent testimony of his supernatural + work.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">On similar + principles our Lord reasons with the Jews in the eighth chapter of + this Gospel. In reply to the charge that he performed miracles by the + aid of the evil one he affirms, that his own absolute sinlessness, + constitutes a complete answer to it. <span class="tei tei-q">“Which + of you convinceth me of sin? and if I say the truth why do ye not + believe me?”</span> (v. 46.) We have here a direct appeal to men's + moral and spiritual perception, as an independent witness to the + truth of his teaching; and the affirmation that a being who is not + simply good and holy, but perfectly sinless, is worthy of absolute + credence. In other words, he does not rest the truth of <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page059">[pg 059]</span><a name="Pg059" id="Pg059" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> his teaching on miracles wrought to + confirm his different utterances, but on the inherent truthfulness of + a sinless character. The moral aspect of his works is the predominant + one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In the fourteenth + chapter of this Gospel we have the following remarkable declaration, + which puts the whole subject in the clearest light. Philip says to + him; <span class="tei tei-q">“Show us the Father, and it sufficeth + us.”</span> Jesus said unto him, <span class="tei tei-q">“Have I been + so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He + that hath seen me hath seen the Father: Believest thou not that I am + in the Father, and the Father in me? The words that I speak unto you, + I speak not of myself; but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth + the works. Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me, + or else believe me for the very works' sake.”</span> (vs. 8-11.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This passage + contains several most important considerations directly bearing on + this subject. I will mention them in order. First—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Philip asks for + his complete conviction, a visible miracle in the form of an + appearance of God, such as was recorded in the Old Testament as + having taken place at Sinai.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly. Our Lord + affirms that the manifestations of his character made in his person + and work during his previous acquaintance with him were the truest + manifestations of the person, character and being of the Father.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly. That the + words which he spake and his entire working, possessed an evidential + character as proving that he came from the Father: and that his moral + and spiritual perfections were such as to entitle his affirmation to + be received on his own word.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fourthly. That if + Philip was unable to receive them on this evidence, which occupied + the highest place, then <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page060">[pg + 060]</span><a name="Pg060" id="Pg060" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> he + was entitled to be believed on the evidence of his supernatural + works, <span class="tei tei-q">“If ye believe not me, <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">believe the + works</span></em>.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This entire + passage makes it clear that in the mind of our Lord the moral + evidence afforded by him constituted a most important portion of the + attestation of his divine mission. Nor was its value confined to + those who witnessed it during the time of his personal ministry, but + he viewed it as extending to all time. This is made clear by his + reply to Thomas in reference to his demand to be allowed to handle + his risen body. <span class="tei tei-q">“Thomas, because thou hast + seen me, thou hast believed, Blessed are they who have not seen, and + yet have believed.”</span> (xx. 29.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With these + statements before us, unless we reject the authority of this Gospel, + it is clear that those Christian writers who have asserted that the + evidence of the Christian revelation rests exclusively on miracles as + objective facts are in error.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the same + Gospel refers us no less distinctly to the miracles of our Lord as + very important evidences of his divine mission, although they are + subordinated to those we have been considering. One or two further + references will be sufficient.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We have several + declarations on this subject in the fifth chapter. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“My Father worketh hitherto, and I work. The Son can do + nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do; for whatsoever + things he doeth, these also doeth the Son likewise.”</span> (vs. 17, + 19.) <span class="tei tei-q">“The works which the Father hath given + me to finish, the same works that I do bear witness of me that the + Father hath sent me.”</span> (ver. 36.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Here a plain + parallel is drawn between the whole course of our Lord's working and + that of the Father. In this working he evidently intended to include + his <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page061">[pg 061]</span><a name= + "Pg061" id="Pg061" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> miracles. Taken in + combination with his entire character the speaker affirms that they + form a conclusive proof that the Father had sent him. He subsequently + draws attention to the evidence afforded by his miracles as such, + <span class="tei tei-q">“and the Father himself which hath sent me + hath borne witness of me.”</span> (ver. 37.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">So again in the + tenth chapter, <span class="tei tei-q">“The works that I do in my + Father's name, they bear witness of me,”</span> (ver. 25.) A little + further on the moral aspect of his miracles, and their close + connection with his entire working is distinctly brought forward. + <span class="tei tei-q">“Many good works have I showed you from my + Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?”</span> (vs 37, 38.) + <span class="tei tei-q">“If I do not the works of my Father, believe + me not, but if I do, <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">though ye believe not me, believe the + works</span></em>, that ye may know and believe, that the Father is + in me, and I in him.”</span> (vs. 37, 38.) No words can bring out + more strongly the weight which our Lord attached to the moral aspect + of his miracles as proofs of his divine mission.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In the fifteenth + chapter we have our Lord's own reflections on the evidences which he + had afforded of his Messianic character, during his entire ministry. + <span class="tei tei-q">“If I had not done among them the works which + none other man did, they had not had sin; but now they have both seen + and hated both me and my Father.”</span> (ver. 24.) Here the miracles + are classed with the other exhibitions of our Lord's divine + character; and attention is especially drawn to the moral aspect of + his entire working as in the highest degree evidential. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“They have seen and hated both me and my Father.”</span> + It is worthy of remark that while our Lord uniformly spoke of his + miracles as part of his general working, by which he manifested his + divine character, the Evangelist himself almost invariably calls them + <span class="tei tei-q">“signs.”</span> This is brought out when he + gives us his <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page062">[pg + 062]</span><a name="Pg062" id="Pg062" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> own + reflections on the results of his public ministry. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Though he had done so many signs<a id="noteref_2" name= + "noteref_2" href="#note_2"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style= + "font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">2</span></span></a> before + them yet they believed not on him.”</span> (xii. 37.) So again, + <span class="tei tei-q">“many other signs truly did Jesus in the + presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: but + these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the + Son of God.”</span> (xx. 30, 31.) In both these passages our Lord's + miracles are evidently referred to. They are pronounced to be both + evidential of his divine mission, and at the same time to be + manifestations of his character. The Evangelist while contemplating + them as miracles never loses sight of their moral aspect.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In the Synoptic + Gospels one allusion is made to the evidential purpose of a + particular miracle which is worthy of notice. Generally speaking they + are viewed by the authors of these Gospels as simple manifestations + of his divine character. On this occasion, when his power to forgive + sins was questioned, he directly performed a miracle to prove that he + possessed it. <span class="tei tei-q">“But that ye may know that the + Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive sins, he saith to the sick + of the palsy, I say unto thee, arise, and take up thy bed and go thy + way into thine house.”</span> In this case it is clear that the + purpose of performing the miracle was not to prove the truth of any + doctrinal statement which he had made; but to establish the reality + of his divine authority and commission.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">While it is quite + true that the authors of the Synoptic Gospels have not enunciated the + purpose of our Lord's miracles in the formal manner in which it is + done in St. John's Gospel, it is clear that they must have taken the + same view of their general character. In fact the <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page063">[pg 063]</span><a name="Pg063" id="Pg063" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> evidential purpose of their performance + is less clearly stated in them than in the fourth Gospel. All four + Gospels view his miracles only as a portion of his superhuman + manifestation, and are ignorant of that broad distinction which has + been laid down between them and the other portions of his divine + working. They are in fact included under it; and it is the + concurrence of both together, and the moral aspect thereby impressed + on the whole, which proves him to be the Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + important to ascertain what are the views of the writers of the New + Testament on this subject, because it has been strongly asserted by + authors on both sides of the controversy that the doctrines of + Christianity are proved by miracles, and that they can rest for their + attestation on no other evidence. The precise value of this position + I will consider in the following chapter. It must, however, be + observed that this is not the view taken by the writers of the New + Testament. There is not a single miracle recorded in it which is + alleged to have been performed with the direct purpose of proving the + truth of a single doctrine properly so called. Those wrought by our + Lord are uniformly represented as having been performed in proof of + his divine mission, or as an essential portion of the manifestation + of the divine which dwelt within him. As such they were signs, + precisely in the same manner as the performance of those actions + which can only be performed by man are signs; that is, they are + proofs of the presence of man. In the same manner the actions + performed by our Lord are signs and proofs of the presence of the + divine man Jesus Christ. If our Lord was in truth what he asserted + himself to be, supernatural manifestations would be the concomitants + of his presence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In exact + conformity with these facts as we find them <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page064">[pg 064]</span><a name="Pg064" id="Pg064" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> in the Gospels is the direct dogmatic statement + made by the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews on this subject. + After having asserted in the first chapter that divine revelation is + made in the person of Jesus Christ, and that God speaks to man under + the Christian dispensation <span class="tei tei-q">“in him, who is + the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and + upholding all things by the word of his power,”</span> the author + proceeds to compare it with the former dispensation, and to give us + his views of the evidence on which it rests. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“How,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“shall we + escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to + be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard + him. God also bearing them witness both by signs and wonders, and + with divers miracles and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his + own will.”</span> (ii. 3, 4.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These words + distinctly inform us what were the writer's opinions as to the nature + of the evidences on which Christianity rests. First, it reposes on + the testimony of Christ respecting himself. Secondly, it is confirmed + by a number of miracles wrought by God. This view is strictly in + accordance with our Lord's own affirmation respecting it as recorded + in the fourth Gospel, <span class="tei tei-q">“I am one that bear + witness of myself, and the Father that sent me hath borne witness of + me.”</span> (viii. 18.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With respect to + numerous miracles recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, they are + affirmed to have been performed for purposes directly evidential, not + however to prove the truth of any doctrine, but of our Lord's + Messianic character. The affirmations on this point are express. + <span class="tei tei-q">“In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, + rise up and walk.”</span> (iii. 6.) <span class="tei tei-q">“His + name, through faith in his name, hath made this man strong.”</span> + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page065">[pg 065]</span><a name="Pg065" + id="Pg065" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> (iii. 16.) <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, + that God hath made that same Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord + and Christ.”</span> (ii. 36.) Of the fact of the resurrection, they + affirm that they were witnesses; and that the miraculous powers + imparted to them were the consequence of that event, and a proof of + its truth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The nature of the + other supernatural occurrences affirmed in the New Testament must be + fully considered hereafter. There remain however two further + statements, made by the sacred writers respecting this subject, which + require to be briefly noticed here. First, although the Gospels + affirm that John the Baptist had a divine commission to announce the + immediate setting up of the kingdom of the Messiah, and even to point + him out, they expressly assert that he performed no objective miracle + in confirmation of it. His prophetical assertions rested for their + verification on their fulfilment only, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> on + the immediate appearance of a person who united in himself all the + attributes of the Messiah. The following was the line of argument + adopted by those who believed his testimony: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“John did no miracle, but all things that John spoke of + this man were true.”</span> Secondly, while in the Apostolic + Epistles, miracles are stated to have been performed by our Lord, and + supernatural powers no less clearly asserted to have been at that + very time actually present in the Church, there is only one miracle + which is directly referred to in proof of the divine mission of + Christ. I need not say that this is the greatest of all the miracles + recorded in the Gospels, viz. his resurrection from the dead. On this + their unanimous testimony affirms that Christianity rests. This is + the one final and decisive proof of our Lord's divine mission. On its + truth they affirm that their claims as <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page066">[pg 066]</span><a name="Pg066" id="Pg066" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> divine teachers stand or fall. His resurrection + from the dead puts all his other miracles in the back ground in point + of evidential value. According to their statements it constitutes the + one great assurance that God has given unto all men that Jesus of + Nazareth is Lord and Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that if this one miracle can be proved to have been an + historical fact, it carries with it the entire force of all the + remaining miracles of the New Testament. But it leaves entirely + untouched the moral aspects of our Lord's divine character. These, I + may say, constitute a standing miracle which will continue to speak + for itself in all time. This evidence is again and again referred to + by the writers of the Apostolic Epistles. The two constitute one + harmonious whole. To the latter of these it is impossible to do more + than refer in the present work; I have already devoted a distinct + volume to the examination of its evidential value, in which I have + examined Christ's witness to himself; here I must confine myself to + the consideration of the witness borne to him by the Father.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page067">[pg 067]</span><a name= + "Pg067" id="Pg067" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc9" id="toc9"></a> <a name="pdf10" id="pdf10"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter IV. Miracles, What Do They + Prove?</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Having considered + the direct assertions in the New Testament in reference to the + supernatural, it will be necessary to take a brief view of the + question in relation to modern difficulties and objections.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following + subjects present themselves for our consideration:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1st. To what + extent, and in what sense are miracles the proofs of a + revelation?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2nd. Are + supernatural occurrences devoid of all moral environment capable of + affording such proof?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3rd. Can doctrinal + statements or moral truths be proved by miracles?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4th. Are miracles + objects of faith merely, or if not, how are they related to our + reason; and if in any sense they are objects of faith, how can they + be the media of proof?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be evident + that these questions will immediately lay open a number of the most + important considerations. They can only be adequately dealt with in + the subsequent portions of this work. The natural place to discuss + them will be when I come to consider the objections that can be urged + against the possibility and credibility of miracles. A few + preliminary observations, however, will be necessary for the purpose + of putting the reader in possession of some of the most <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page068">[pg 068]</span><a name="Pg068" id="Pg068" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> important points of debate and of the + positions which I intend to assume respecting them. They will also + help to clear the way for the solution of the various difficulties by + which the subject has been attempted to be obscured.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The manner in + which Christianity claims to be a divine revelation, as we have seen + in the former chapter, in its most proper and distinctive sense is + that the person of Jesus Christ constitutes that revelation. It is + the manifestation of the divine character and perfections by means of + the various acts and deeds of his earthly life and ministry. It is a + revelation of the divine shining forth in the human. I have already + adduced some of the affirmations of the sacred writers on this + subject. It would be easy to multiply them indefinitely. Perhaps it + would be impossible to express the position which they take on this + subject in more distinct language than by citing two brief passages + in St. Paul's epistle to the Colossians: <span class="tei tei-q">“Who + is,”</span> says the Apostle, <span class="tei tei-q">“the image of + the invisible God;”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“in him dwelleth + all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.”</span> Both passages affirm, + as the writer's view, that all revelation is made in the person of + Jesus Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that the Christian revelation in its highest sense is not + a body of abstract dogmas, but that it consists of an objective fact, + the Incarnation. As God has manifested his eternal power and Godhead + in the material creation, so he has manifested himself as a moral and + spiritual being, 1st, imperfectly in the moral nature of man, and + afterwards perfectly, in the perfect man who unites in himself the + divine and human, Jesus Christ. God, when he effected the work of + creation, made a manifestation of himself which chiefly revealed his + power and wisdom. When he effected the Incarnation he made an + additional manifestation <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page069">[pg + 069]</span><a name="Pg069" id="Pg069" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + himself which chiefly revealed his moral character and perfections. + The four Gospels contain the historical account of this + manifestation, as made in the actions and teaching of Jesus Christ. + As this revelation consists of a number of historical facts, all that + was necessary was that his life and actions should be correctly + reported. The remaining books of the New Testament are historical in + character, with one exception, and as far as they treat of doctrines, + they may be viewed as commentaries on the Divine fact of the + Incarnation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that the essence of Christianity consists of a superhuman + or divine fact, the Incarnation. In this point of view the + supernatural is not only a concomitant of Christianity, but it + constitutes its essence. It is the manifestation of a supernatural + and superhuman being appearing within the sphere of the natural and + the human. It cannot be too carefully observed throughout this entire + controversy that the character which is ascribed to Jesus Christ, + while it embraces every perfection of man, is no less superhuman than + the powers which are attributed to him are supernatural. In this + sense the supernatural is not merely an evidence of revelation, but + its essence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Incarnation + has frequently been designated a miracle. To do so seems to me to + incur the danger of involving the whole controversy in confusion of + thought. In a loose way of speaking, the creative acts of God may be + called miracles: that is, they involve a deviation from the previous + order of existing things, and the introduction of a new one; all such + results are unquestionable manifestations of supernatural agency, but + they differ wholly in conception from what we usually designate by + the term miracle. The Incarnation, therefore, ought not to be placed + on the same <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page070">[pg + 070]</span><a name="Pg070" id="Pg070" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + footing as miracles, which are supernatural occurrences, having a + definite evidential value, but with God's creative acts, being the + highest manifestation of himself which he has made to man. It is + perfectly true, as I have already observed, that the miracles of + Jesus Christ stand in a double aspect, as part of his supernatural + manifestation, and as possessing an evidential value.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear, + therefore, that a supernatural event such as the Incarnation, if + evidential, can only be self-evidential. It was not wrought for the + purpose of proving anything. But, as we have seen, the sacred writers + and our Lord himself assert that in a certain sense it was + self-evidential. <span class="tei tei-q">“For the life was + manifested, and we have seen it and bear witness, and show unto you + that eternal life which was with the Father and was manifested unto + us.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A recent writer + affirms that Christianity professes to be a revelation of + supernatural truths utterly inconceivable to reason, and that such + truths can only be proved by miracles. I can understand what is meant + by a truth derived from a supernatural source of information, or one + respecting a supernatural being or occurrence: but what a + supernatural truth can be contradistinguished from other kinds of + truth is far from evident. Revelation may disclose truths which + reason alone would have been unable to discover; but this does not + make the truths themselves, when they are discovered, either + supernatural or incomprehensible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will now proceed + to consider whether there is any real ground for affirming that + occurrences which we designate as miracles are the only proofs of a + divine revelation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The same writer, + whose object is to prove that Christianity is utterly destitute of + all claims to our acceptance <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page071">[pg 071]</span><a name="Pg071" id="Pg071" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> as a divine revelation, endeavours to show that + miracles, viewed as bare objective facts, are the only evidence which + can substantiate such a mass of incredible assertions as those + contained in the New Testament, and that their moral environment + cannot be taken into account in estimating their evidential value. + For this purpose he quotes the following passage from Dr. Mozley's + Bampton Lectures: <span class="tei tei-q">“Dr. Mozley,”</span> says + he, <span class="tei tei-q">“supposes the case, that if a person of + evident integrity and loftiness of character had appeared eighteen + centuries ago announcing himself as pre-existing from all eternity, + the Son of God, the maker of the world, who had come down from + heaven, and had assumed the nature of man, in order to be the Lamb of + God that taketh away the sins of the world, and so on, enumerating + the other doctrines of Christianity; Dr. Mozley then adds, what would + be the inevitable conclusion of sober reason respecting that person? + The necessary conclusion of sober reason would be that he was + disordered in his understanding.... By no rational being would a just + and a benevolent life be accepted as a proof of such announcements. + Miracles are the necessary complements of the truth of such + announcements, which without them are powerless and abortive, the + fragments of a design which is nothing unless it is the whole. They + are necessary to the justification of such announcements, which + unless they are supernatural truth are the wildest + delusions.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Supernatural Religion</span></span>.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In justice to Dr. + Mozley, the passage which is omitted in this citation from his + lectures ought to be quoted. It is as follows: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“What other decision could be come to when a man, looking + like one of our own selves, and only exemplifying in his life and + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page072">[pg 072]</span><a name="Pg072" + id="Pg072" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> circumstances the ordinary + course of nature, said this about himself, but that when reason had + lost its balance a dream of supernatural and unearthly, grandeur + might be the result.”</span>—<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Bampton Lectures.</span></span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Some expressions + in this passage leave it open to the assumption which this writer + wishes to fasten on it that Dr. Mozley intended to affirm that the + only adequate proof of such affirmations as were made by Jesus Christ + respecting himself would have been visible miracles wrought in + confirmation of them. This, however, is not necessarily its meaning, + for the omitted passage above cited, distinctly affirms that the + person who is supposed to make such assertions is only an ordinary + good and holy but imperfect man.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the assertions + in question were not made by an ordinary man like ourselves, but by + one who is described as possessed of superhuman greatness and + holiness and of profound spiritual insight into truth. He is + uniformly depicted as speaking with the fulness of knowledge of the + subject on which he speaks. I cannot therefore admit, supposing the + character of Jesus to have been historical, that if he had made such + assertions respecting himself prior to the performance of his first + miracle at Cana, they would have been utterly unworthy of serious + attention. It must be readily admitted that if they had been affirmed + of himself by an ordinary man like ourselves, no affirmation of his + would have been a guarantee of their truth, for the simple reason + that they would have been self-contradictory. Nor would the + performance of a miracle have made them one atom more credible. But + the credibility of such an assertion, if it had been made by such a + person as Jesus Christ even prior to his performance of a single + miracle, is a wholly different question.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page073">[pg 073]</span><a name="Pg073" id="Pg073" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, on the supposition that the delineation given us in the + Gospels is that of an historical reality, that his assertions + respecting himself would stand in a wholly different position from + those of any other man. He could neither deceive nor be deceived. + When he made assertions respecting himself he must have known whether + they were true. The assertions of such a person therefore would be + worthy of all acceptation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Miracles are not + the means of substantiating assertions respecting the truth of unseen + realities, nor are they used for such purposes in the New Testament. + The whole question is one of adequate knowledge. If we have the means + of knowing that a person has a complete acquaintance with truths of + which we are ignorant, we can rationally accept them as true on his + assurance that they are so, exactly on the same principles as we + accept the truths of physical science although we ourselves are + ignorant of the processes by which they are arrived at. To state the + position generally, it is quite rational to accept the affirmations + of those who possess full knowledge of any subject of which we + ourselves are profoundly ignorant. The only thing necessary is to + attain an assurance that the knowledge of our informant is adequate + to justify his assertions. It is on the ground of the fulness of his + knowledge that we accept the assertions of Jesus Christ, and not + because he wrought a miracle for the purpose of proving that his + assertions were true.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us now + consider in what sense miracles are a proof of the truth of a divine + revelation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I lay down that + the proper function of miracles is to establish the truth of a divine + commission. From this we argue to the truth of the assertions of the + persons who are intrusted with it.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page074">[pg 074]</span><a name="Pg074" id="Pg074" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If an ordinary + man, such as a prophet or an apostle, were to affirm that he had a + communication from God which he was directed to make to others, or in + other words that he had a divine commission, it is evident that no + one would be bound to believe him on his mere affirmation. The simple + and obvious reply would be, Give us some proof of the reality of the + fact. Your claim is far too lofty to be admitted as valid on your + simple affirmation. The question then is, how is such a claim to be + tested? I reply by the person who makes it performing some action + which is adequate to prove that the Great Governor of the Universe + ratifies this claim. He must do something analogous to what all + persons who claim to be acting under commissions from others do, + <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> he must produce some direct + and formal credentials from the authority in whose name he claims to + be acting. In this case the authority is God. He must therefore + perform some action which directly identifies himself with God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">How is this to be + accomplished? I answer by the performance of an unequivocal miracle + which will directly connect him with the Great Governor of the + Universe. I say unequivocal miracle, because if there were any doubt + as to its supernatural character it would be useless. Nor would it be + of any avail if it were a bare objective fact in external nature, + devoid of its moral and spiritual environment. What is required is + some direct manifestation of the divine on the sphere of the human + and the natural. It must, in fact, exactly fulfil the character so + often assigned to miracles in the Gospels. It must be a σημεῖον, or + indication of the presence of God, resembling as it were the Great + Seal which is affixed to state documents as the final mark of + sovereign authority. Of such a character are all the chief miracles + recorded in the Gospels.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page075">[pg + 075]</span><a name="Pg075" id="Pg075" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The question about + miracles has been beclouded by debating it in an abstract instead of + in a concrete form; thus forgetting that it is not every conceivable + form of alleged supernatural occurrence with which we have to deal, + but the miracles recorded in the New Testament. By discussing it in + this form it has been possible to raise a number of difficulties + which may be abstractedly conceivable, but which have no bearing + whatever on the miracles in question. Thus it has been frequently + urged that to enable us to be certain that an alleged miracle is + really due to supernatural agency, a jury of savants ought to be + impanelled, before whom the worker of the miracle should exhibit his + miraculous operation. They are to subject it to a variety of + scientific tests. Even then if they have failed to discover error, + they are to demand a second and a third performance, in order that it + may be again and again submitted to the same process of scientific + scrutiny. Until miracles can be submitted to and verified by tests of + this description they have been affirmed to be unworthy of credit, + even on the strongest ordinary testimony.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall discuss + this and kindred questions more fully in the subsequent portions of + this volume, when I consider the nature of the evidence which is + adequate to prove the performance of a miracle. For the present I + shall only observe that the entire plausibility of this position + arises from its being stated in an abstract or general form. We + cannot help seeing in reference to the chief miracles recorded in the + New Testament, such as the care of blind, lame or leprous persons, + instantaneously by a word or a touch, that common sense is fully + adequate to determine that such occurrences must belong to the + regions of the supernatural and to no other.</p><span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page076">[pg 076]</span><a name="Pg076" id="Pg076" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Two things are + necessary to establish the reality of a supposed miracle. First, that + the alleged fact should not only have been brought about by + supernatural causes but previously announced by him who performs it: + secondly, that the fact actually happened as it appeared to + happen.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There can be no + doubt that the power of juggling and sleight of hand, to perform + actions which would be supernatural, if they were only what they + appear to be, is considerable, and the difficulty of detection is + great. Enthusiasm also when once excited, is capable of generating + various unreal appearances which if actual, would be supernatural. It + is also mighty in those regions where the union takes place between + mind and matter, but the chief miracles recorded in the Gospels + belong to a wholly different order of occurrence. If they took place + as they are reported, no one possessed of common sense can doubt as + to whether they were due to supernatural agency. It is no less clear + that such miracles were occurrences in which successful imposture was + impossible. What is required to prove them is the evidence of common + sense, and not of scientific analysis. Let it be observed that it is + not my intention to affirm that the whole of the supernaturalism + recorded in the New Testament is of the same unequivocal + character.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The evidential + value of a miracle viewed as a matter of common sense maybe briefly + stated thus. A person comes to me who affirms that he has a divine + message to communicate. I ask him to prove it. He lays his hand on + one whom I have known to be blind for the last twenty years, tells + him in the name of Jesus Christ to receive his sight, and he + forthwith receives it. There is probably no person gifted with + ordinary understanding <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page077">[pg + 077]</span><a name="Pg077" id="Pg077" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> who + would not consider such an act to be an adequate proof of divine + agency, all theoretical or metaphysical difficulties to the contrary + notwithstanding.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will doubtless + be objected that such an act would prove only the presence of a + superhuman instead of a divine power. This point will be fully + considered hereafter. For my present purpose it will be sufficient to + fall back on the decision of common sense, that he who can restore + sight to the sightless eye-ball, by no other apparent instrumentality + than a word or a touch, can be no other than the Maker of the + Universe.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must now + consider whether supernatural occurrences devoid of all moral + environment, are capable of proving a divine commission.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has frequently + been the habit, both of the opponents and the defenders of + Christianity, to discuss the subject of the evidential value of + miracles apart from all reference to their moral environment. As, + however, the overwhelming majority of the miracles recorded in the + New Testament profess such an environment, the question of the value + of supposed miracles which are destitute of it, forms no legitimate + portion of the subject before us. What might or might not be proved + by them, even if it could be determined satisfactorily, is quite + foreign to the present discussion, which is limited to the truth or + falsehood of those contained in the New Testament. The most important + of these are not mere displays of power, but have an unquestionable + moral environment impressed upon them, and they profess to have been + wrought for a definite end and purpose. This is less distinctly + marked in some of the miracles recorded in the Old Testament, but + with them I have no present concern. It will be sufficient to observe + that while many of them <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page078">[pg + 078]</span><a name="Pg078" id="Pg078" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + were unquestionably performed in attestation of a divine mission, as + a class they bear another distinctive purpose, viz. that of + correcting the polytheistic tendencies of the age. Hence their + leading impress is that of power. The necessity of counteracting the + tendency which I have referred to, rendered it necessary emphatically + to assert the Lordship of one God over universal nature, in + opposition to that conception of it so widely diffused throughout the + ancient world, which saw a distinct power exerted in every + combination of material forces.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The very + conception of a miracle as a supernatural occurrence, brought about + for the purpose of authenticating a revelation, distinguishes such an + action from one which involves only a simple exhibition of power. All + acts of moral agents must display a purpose of some kind. No + conception of God is of the smallest religious value which does not + contemplate him as being a moral agent and a being on whose actions a + moral character of some kind must be impressed. Consequently an act + entirely devoid of all moral aspect cannot prove that it has resulted + from direct divine intervention. The difficulty has originated from + dividing into three separate parts an action which is essentially + one, and contemplating separately the objective fact in the + supernatural action, the circumstances attending its performance, and + the purpose for which it was performed. It is the union of all these + which constitutes the occurrence in question an evidential + miracle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let me now offer a + few observations on a very important point for our consideration. Can + abstract doctrinal statements or moral truths be proved by + miracles?</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page079">[pg + 079]</span><a name="Pg079" id="Pg079" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have already + observed that as far as the miracles of the New Testament were + wrought for directly evidential purposes, they were performed, not to + prove particular doctrines, but as the credentials of a divine + mission, or that they formed a part of the superhuman manifestation + of our Lord. The apparent exceptions are those which were performed + to attract attention to the divine message, to assist in the + foundation of the Church, or to bear witness to the truth of the + Resurrection. These last were in fact attestations to the reality of + the Messianic character of Jesus Christ, which is the highest + conceivable form of a divine mission, on which miracle the truth of + Christianity is directly pledged by the sacred writers. A mere + statement of the facts of the New Testament is a practical solution + of the difficulty. It nowhere affirms that a miracle was ever + performed to bear witness to the truth of an abstract doctrine.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will now + endeavour to lay down some general principles as to the relation in + which doctrinal statements stand to supernatural manifestations. As + on such a subject it will be impossible to lay down a general rule + which will be applicable to every supernatural event, it will be + necessary to consider each case by itself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First, that of our + Lord.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We believe his + statements about unknown truths, on the ground that he was perfectly + veracious, and had the most perfect knowledge of the subject on which + he spoke. The actions which he performed (I mean by these, not his + miracles merely, but the entire course of his working) are evidences + of his divine character. He himself avers that he possessed the most + intimate knowledge of God, and of the great realities of the + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page080">[pg 080]</span><a name="Pg080" + id="Pg080" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> spiritual world. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“We speak,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“that + we do know, and testify that we have seen.”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“I speak that which I have seen with my Father.”</span> + Throughout the Synoptics likewise he is represented as having the + most entire knowledge of both spiritual and moral truth, and as + teaching direct from his own insight. We believe the assertions, not + because he confirmed their truth by the performance of a miracle, but + because he afforded evidence that he was a veracious witness, and + fully acquainted with the subject on which he spoke. His miraculous + actions proved that he was God's messenger, and as such were + additional attestations to his veracity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The acceptance of + such affirmations as worthy of the highest credit may be correctly + designated as acts of faith; but let us never forget that such acts + of faith are also high exercises of reason. Writers in opposition to + Christianity are never wearied in running a contrast between reason + and faith, and in representing the two as standing in opposition to + each other, and belonging to wholly different regions of thought. Nor + can it be denied that they have received much encouragement to do + this by the indistinct or misleading statements of some Christian + writers on the subject. Between them no little confusion has been + introduced into the controversy, and a general idea has become + prevalent that reason and faith are two distinct, if not opposing + faculties, each of which acts within a subject matter of its own. The + effect of this confusion has been disastrous.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">My contention is + that faith is only another name for reason when operating on a + particular class of phenomena. To enter on an elaborate proof of this + would be out of place here; a few illustrations must therefore + suffice. <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page081">[pg + 081]</span><a name="Pg081" id="Pg081" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> To + accept information from persons who have knowledge of subjects which + we have not studied, or who have mental powers of insight or + perception of which we are destitute, or who have seen phenomena + which we have not seen, is an act in conformity with our highest + reason. A constant effort has been made by unbelievers to confound + faith with credulity: Faith is not credulity, but the acceptance of + truth on adequate evidence, and the rejection of mere affirmation, + when the evidence is inadequate. On the other hand multitudes of + Christians have assiduously laboured to decry reason as the + instrument for the investigation of truth. I admit that it is not a + perfect instrument, but it is the only one which we have. The light + of a candle may not be all that we can wish, but if we have no other + we shall not improve our condition by extinguishing it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let me illustrate + this subject by a few examples. We believe the assertions of Dr. + Livingstone about the interior of Africa, although we have no means + of verifying them by ocular observation, because we know that he has + travelled there, and we are persuaded that he is a veracious witness. + We accept the higher truths of astronomy, not because we have studied + them, or are even able to appreciate the nature of the processes by + which they have been arrived at, but because they are affirmed by + persons who have afforded evidence that they possess a high order of + knowledge on that subject. The same is true throughout the whole of + the higher departments of science. We may call this an act of faith + if we like, but it is also an act of our reason. The same thing is + true throughout every department of human knowledge. It is + astonishing how small a part of it is the result of our own personal + observation. It follows therefore that the attempts <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page082">[pg 082]</span><a name="Pg082" id="Pg082" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> which are so constantly made to separate + faith and reason, and to erect an impassable wall between them, are + suicidal alike both to faith and reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As therefore we + accept the affirmations of others on subjects within the limits of + their own knowledge, although we ourselves are ignorant of the + processes by which it has been arrived at, so we accept the + affirmations of such a person as the Jesus of the Evangelists on + those subjects on which he affirms that he possesses the fullest + knowledge.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it will be + objected that some of these assertions are made respecting high + mysteries incomprehensible to the human intellect. Can we accept such + truths?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I answer that we + are only capable of accepting propositions the two terms of which we + are able to comprehend with more or less distinctness. Nothing has + been the subject of greater abuse than the word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“mystery”</span> in connection with revelation. It is + frequently represented as denoting something which from end to end is + utterly incomprehensible, like the unknowable God of a certain system + of philosophy. In the New Testament the meaning of the word + <span class="tei tei-q">“mystery”</span> is not an incomprehensible + proposition, but a truth which once was hidden in the divine + counsels, and has been revealed by the Gospel. That which is actually + unthinkable is incapable of affirmation or denial. None of the + affirmations of Jesus Christ partake of this character. They are + mysteries only in the sense that they ran up into spheres of thought + which transcend the limits of human knowledge. But this is done by + all ultimate philosophical and scientific truths. If it be urged that + some of them are difficult or incapable of definition, the same is + true of not a few of the conceptions of science. It is also true that + they respect truths with which we could not be acquainted apart from + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page083">[pg 083]</span><a name="Pg083" + id="Pg083" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> such a revelation as that made + in the person of Jesus Christ; but this is true of the phenomena of + Creation likewise. We do not acquire a knowledge of its phenomena by + reasoning, but by observation, or from the statements of others when + they lie beyond the limits of our own observation. The Incarnation, + including as it does the divine actions and the teaching of Jesus + Christ, is not the revelation of a dogma, but the manifestation of a + new fact. This fact, like all other phenomena, although + undiscoverable by our reasoning powers without the exercise of + observation, becomes after observation a fact on which reason may + justly exercise its powers. If he be really what he professed to be, + then his statements about himself give as an account of his previous + history, before he came under human observation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let me now + consider the relation in which miracles stand to the affirmations of + those who claimed a commission from Jesus Christ to publish his + religion in the world, and to lay the foundation of the Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must here also + adhere to my original position that miraculous powers are never + described in the New Testament as being used for the direct proof of + dogmas, but for the proof of the Messianic character of Jesus Christ, + or of the divine commission of those who wrought them. The truth of + the assertions of its writers rests on no other foundation than the + fulness of their knowledge of the subjects on which they spake, + whether acquired by ordinary or by supernatural means, and on their + veracity, when they affirm that particular truths were within the + limits of their knowledge. Thus St. Paul claims acceptance for the + things which he asserted because he had been taught them by + Revelation from Jesus Christ, not because he had proved their truth, + by working miracles in confirmation of them. <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page084">[pg 084]</span><a name="Pg084" id="Pg084" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> This course is uniformly adopted by him + throughout his epistles. The object of the mighty works that were + wrought by him was to prove his own apostleship or the fact of the + resurrection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must not allow + myself to enter on the question of inspiration, its nature and + limitations, or the degree of supernatural guidance afforded to the + apostles and their followers. Such an inquiry would be foreign to the + present subject, which is strictly historical. It is of course a + direct and necessary inference that when the miracles proved the + reality of the commission of those who performed them, they also + proved that they were fully instructed in its terms, and entitled to + credit within its limits. But the extent of their enlightenment can + only be inferred from the nature of the commission itself, and from + the facts and phenomena of the New Testament. It has been an idea + widely spread that inspiration must confer a general infallibility. + The inference that a man is rendered infallible in general matters + because he is invested with a limited and definite commission, and + with endowments adequate to render him competent to fulfil the + purposes of his mission, is one which the premises will not justify. + The utmost that the possession of such a commission can prove is that + its possessor is enlightened up to its subject matter, but no + further.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But in the present + discussion I need not go beyond the affirmations of the New + Testament. The actions performed by Jesus Christ proved him to be the + Messiah. The miracles wrought by the apostles, were performed either + to prove the fact of his resurrection, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that + he was the Messiah, or their own divine mission, which was dependent + on its truth, or to draw attention to their message. The supernatural + gifts so frequently referred to in the epistles, are affirmed to + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page085">[pg 085]</span><a name="Pg085" + id="Pg085" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> have been designed for the + building up of the Church into a distinct community, and when that + purpose was accomplished they were to cease. Being functional, the + enlightenment communicated by them was necessarily limited to the + special subject matter on which they were exercised. In this point of + view miracles may be viewed as attestations of the veracity of the + persons who performed them, and of the sufficiency of their knowledge + on the subjects they were specially commissioned to communicate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the question + still remains for consideration, Can miracles prove moral truths?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I answer + emphatically in the negative. If dogmas, which may be viewed as + intellectual truths, are incapable of a direct proof by miracles, + still more so are moral truths. Such truths can rest only on a moral + basis. With respect to the miracles recorded in the New Testament, + the question is nugatory, for it nowhere affirms that its miracles + were wrought for such a purpose. It is true that Jesus Christ, as the + great legislator of the kingdom of heaven, gave an authoritative + utterance to many moral precepts as the laws of his kingdom. This + royal right of legislation was inherent in his Messiahship. But to + give utterance to moral truths in a legislative capacity, has no + connection with attempting to prove them by authority. Ordinary human + legislation has its authoritative utterances. But when it does this, + it does not rest the truths themselves on authority, or base them on + adventitious testimony. Our Lord and his apostles uniformly appealed + to the internal perceptions of our moral and spiritual nature as the + only ground on which moral obligation rests.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let it be + observed, however, that this by no means pre-supposes the truth of + the absurd proposition, that every man, however imperfect or + degraded, is capable of <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page086">[pg + 086]</span><a name="Pg086" id="Pg086" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + reasoning out all moral truth for himself. On the contrary, definite + moral knowledge requires to be communicated, as all other kinds of + knowledge. Its great principles require to be enunciated, and to be + worked out to their special applications. But the principles + themselves, as far as their binding power is concerned, must + ultimately rest on the internal perceptions of our moral and + spiritual being. A miracle, therefore, can communicate to them no + higher degree of certainty or obligation. The only thing which it can + aid in establishing is, that one invested with a divine commission + may have a right to claim obedience to special precepts on the + authority of God, in whom all moral obligation centres.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But even in this + case, the ground on which the obligation rests is a moral one, which + no miracle can possibly prove or even confirm. A moral teacher can + only appeal to that in man which we variously designate as + conscience, moral sense, or the principles which are the foundation + of our moral perceptions. The fact that many men through a long + course of evil get morally blinded does not alter the case. It only + exemplifies a remarkable saying of our Lord, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“If the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is + that darkness.”</span> When the light within us has become darkness, + there is nothing left to which an appeal to the sense of duty or + obligation can be made.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The objection + urged against Christianity, that because a miracle cannot prove a + moral truth it is therefore useless, is quite beyond the question at + issue. The special function of the Christian revelation is one far + higher than the mere laying down of rules for the regulation of human + conduct. Its great purpose is to impart to man a moral and spiritual + power, which is able to make obedience to the moral law a + possibility; <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page087">[pg + 087]</span><a name="Pg087" id="Pg087" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> to + supply a motive of sufficient potency to make us capable of resisting + the vehemence of our passions; and one which is able to lift the + morally degraded from their degradation, and to strengthen the holy + in their holiness. According to the teaching of the New Testament, + this constitutes the great distinctive purpose of Christianity, and + the end of all divine revelation. This most important truth has been + greatly overlooked in the present controversy. It entirely disposes + of the objection that if moral truth cannot be proved by miracles, + they must be valueless. To such a revelation the presence of the + supernatural is essential.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it by no means + follows because miracles are unable to impart to us a sense of moral + obligation, that a duly commissioned moral teacher would be useless. + They might prove his superior knowledge, or as attesting a divine + commission, enable him to bring obligations already existing to bear + on the mind with superior power. Thus it by no means follows that + because men possess in their mental constitution the great principles + on which scientific truths are based, each man is able to reason them + out for himself. The most highly gifted man would make slow progress + without a teacher. As I have already observed, moral truth is capable + of being taught like all other truth; and although a miracle cannot + prove it, it may establish the fact that the worker of one is a man + eminently entitled to be heard on the great subjects of moral + obligation, or that he is able to communicate knowledge which is + capable of acting mightily on our moral being.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must now proceed + to offer a few observations on the question, Are miracles objects of + faith? and if they are so in any sense, how can they be the media of + proof of a revelation?</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page088">[pg + 088]</span><a name="Pg088" id="Pg088" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The author of + <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion”</span> starts the + following difficulty in connection with this subject: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Consciousness of the difficulties which beset miracles + in the present age has led many able men to deal thus illogically + with them, and to represent them alternately as evidence and as + objects of faith.”</span> He then proceeds to refer to Dr. Arnold, + Professor Baden Powell, and Archbishop Trench, as having been in + various degrees guilty of making this confusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I am not prepared + to deny that many Christian writers have expressed themselves with + great indistinctness on this subject, especially in works where + miracles have been only referred to incidentally, and which only + partially treat of the supernatural elements of Christianity. This + question will be discussed more fully when we consider his definite + objections; but it will tend to a clearer understanding of the + subject if in the present place, I lay down the following + propositions:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I. That it is + impossible to believe in any assertion which contradicts the first + principles of our reason, even if it were supposable that a miracle + could be wrought in confirmation of it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">II. That, although + the illumination which reason imparts is imperfect, yet as it is the + only instrument that we possess for the investigation of truth, + attempts to disparage it are absurd.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">III. So far is + faith from standing in opposition to reason, that it is a legitimate + branch of it when exercised on a special subject matter.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">IV. That beliefs + which reason refuses to authorise do not originate in faith but in + credulity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">V. That even those + who entertain irrational convictions are compelled to base them on + evidence of some kind which is satisfactory to themselves: + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page089">[pg 089]</span><a name="Pg089" + id="Pg089" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> that is to say, on the + dictates of their own imperfect reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">VI. That, while we + can believe in nothing that is contrary to our reason, yet it is + perfectly rational to believe in many things which our reason would + have been unable to discover.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">VII. That + extraordinary facts which lie beyond the limits of human experience + are not contrary to our reason: and it is perfectly rational to + believe them whenever they are adequately attested.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">VIII. That a large + portion of our beliefs on subjects scientific, philosophical, + historical, moral, and religious, rest on testimony; the belief in + them is highly rational, when the knowledge of those from whom we + derive our information is adequate: and consequently that faith is a + principle co-extensive with the activities of the human mind, and is + by no means confined to subjects simply religious, however intimately + it may be connected with them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A few brief + observations will suffice in this part of our subject.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be + observed that I have included under the term <span class= + "tei tei-q">“reason”</span> the whole of our mental processes which + are necessary for the cognition and the discovery of truth. These + include, not only our powers of inductive and deductive reasoning, + but our intuitions, our forms of thought, those powers of our mind, + which whether intuitional or instinctive, form the foundation of many + of our most important convictions and our moral conceptions. These + constitute our reason as distinct from our reasoning powers. No + little confusion has been introduced into this controversy from the + want of attending to this distinction.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + asserted that we can accept things as matters of faith which to our + reason would be utterly <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page090">[pg + 090]</span><a name="Pg090" id="Pg090" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + incredible. This assertion has arisen from the confusion of things + which differ widely, viz. things which our reason might have been + unable to discover, but which when discovered may be perfectly + rational, and things directly contradictory to reason. The existence + for example of a square circle is a thing absolutely incredible, and + while thus contradictory to reason, it is impossible to accept it by + faith. So would any doctrine which in a similar manner contradicted + the first principles of our rational convictions. No more pernicious + principle can be laid down than that things which are contradictory + to our reason can be accepted by the principle of faith. Such a + principle would divide the human mind into two hostile camps, and if + carried to its logical consequences, must land us in universal + scepticism.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It by no means + follows that things which transcend our rational powers to discover + must be contrary to our reason when they have been discovered. We can + only arrive at the knowledge of unknown facts by observation, or + accept them on the testimony of others. Until they have been brought + within our knowledge in this way, no amount of reasoning could lead + to their discovery. In a similar manner with respect to several of + the facts in the New Testament connected with the Incarnation, our + reason might never have discovered them, but when they have been + discovered, they may form suitable subjects on which to exert its + energies.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The whole of the + confusion in which this question has become involved has originated + in the assumption that faith is a faculty of the mind distinct and + separate from our reason, and in a certain sense opposed to it; and + that things which cannot be subjects of rational conviction may yet + be the objects of faith. Whatever <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page091">[pg 091]</span><a name="Pg091" id="Pg091" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> opinions may have been held by divines upon + this subject, I can discover nothing which countenances them in the + New Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To what class of + truths is the word <span class="tei tei-q">“faith”</span> properly + applied? I answer to those which we accept on testimony. It has been + asserted that some of the first principles of our rational + convictions, such as our belief in the existence of an external + world, or in the truth of experience, is an act of faith. This, + however, is to introduce a confusion of thought. Such convictions can + be only acts of faith as far as we believe in ourselves.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Viewing faith as + the acceptance of truth on adequate testimony, it follows that all + our knowledge of things, whether natural or supernatural, that is not + the result of the action of our own minds, but which we accept on the + testimony of others, is an act of faith. Our acceptance of them + depends on the validity of the testimony that can be adduced for + them. The important question for determination is, is the subject on + which it is given within the knowledge of the informant? If it + respects a fact, has he witnessed it, or received it from others who + have? Are his powers of observation good and his judgment sound? Is + he worthy of credit? The determination of these and similar points is + the proper office of our rational powers, yet the acceptance of the + fact is an act of faith. When our reason is satisfied on all these + points, faith becomes an act of reason. To assert that the acceptance + of supernatural facts belongs to a faculty of our minds which we + designate faith, and that our acceptance of others is the result of + the action of our reason, is to lay down a distinction entirely of + our own creation. In both cases the evidences must form the subject + of <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page092">[pg 092]</span><a name= + "Pg092" id="Pg092" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> rational + investigation, and they must be accepted or rejected as they approve + themselves to our reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will perhaps be + urged, that the acceptance of propositions, such as the doctrinal + statements of the New Testament, is an act of faith which stands out + in manifest contra-distinction to an act of reason. It would be so + unquestionably, if we accepted them on insufficient evidence; but + when we do so with the knowledge that others have a full acquaintance + with the subject on which they speak, it is in the highest degree + rational to accept and to act on their testimony. A large portion of + the business of life is conducted on this principle. A man is + ignorant on some subject, or he distrusts his own judgment respecting + it: he consults one who knows, or on whose judgment he relies. For + example: let us suppose that I have a bottle full of a certain + substance; I do not know whether it is a medicine that I am in need + of, or a deadly poison. I consult my chemist, and without hesitation + I act on his opinion. In all such cases (and they are spread over the + entire sphere of life) we act on faith; but it is a faith which is in + conformity with the dictates of reason. The function of the latter is + to ascertain the adequate knowledge and the veracity of the person + whose assurance we accept. If it is a rational act thus to receive + truths on the testimony of man, whose knowledge must be imperfect, it + must be still more so to accept them on the authority of him who + knows all things, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I am aware that + certain writers have given such a representation of faith as to + produce the impression that it is one of its special functions to + accept certain dogmas, the terms of which are extremely obscure, or + absolutely incomprehensible. But no rational evidence can be adduced + in support of this position. To exert <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page093">[pg 093]</span><a name="Pg093" id="Pg093" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> actual belief in a proposition the terms of + which are incomprehensible, is an impossibility, and we only deceive + ourselves when we imagine that we can. All that we can do in such + cases is to repeat words, but if they have no definite meaning we + cannot believe them: for the act of faith or conviction is founded on + the affirmation that the two terms of a particular proposition agree. + It is quite true that the facts and statements of the New Testament + run up into principles which transcend our limited power of reason; + but this is common to it, and every system of science or philosophy; + and forms no peculiarity of religion. I am far from wishing to affirm + that theologians have not fallen into this practice; but my concern + is not with them, but with the statements of the New Testament. One + of the most important acquisitions made to our mental science in the + present day is that we have ascertained that there are limits to our + mental powers beyond which we cannot penetrate. This was imperfectly + realized by many of the reasoners of earlier times, and the result + has been that they have fallen into a hazy mysticism, or + logomachy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Equally pernicious + is the view that there is something particularly meritorious in + accepting truth on little or no evidence, and that to do so is a high + act of faith. Not only is this founded on no rational principle, but + it is entirely unsupported by any account of faith as given in the + New Testament, which again and again assumes the contrary position. + Faith is the acceptance of truths which lie beyond the sphere of our + personal knowledge on an adequate attestation. If an astronomer + should happen to be ignorant of chemistry, and accept its truths on + the testimony of one who was an eminent master of it, this would + constitute <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page094">[pg + 094]</span><a name="Pg094" id="Pg094" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> an + act of faith. Surely such an act is one which is highly rational.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that although our belief in miracles being founded, as it + now must be, on testimony, is an act of faith, yet it is also an act + of our reason. It is, therefore, by no means absurd to speak of + miracles as objects of faith, and at the same time as possessing an + evidential value. We accept them as we do all other adequately + attested facts, and reason on them in the same manner as we do on + other facts. This is the precise course which will be pursued by the + overwhelming majority of astronomers who will be unable to witness + the coming transit of Venus. They will accept the facts on adequate + testimony, and afterwards use them as media of proof.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page095">[pg 095]</span><a name= + "Pg095" id="Pg095" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc11" id="toc11"></a> <a name="pdf12" id="pdf12"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter V. The Antecedent Improbability + of Miracles.—The Unknown and Unknowable God.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The proof on + <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> grounds that an event is + either possible or probable, cannot establish that it has actually + occurred. This must rest on its own particular evidence. To prove + that a revelation is both possible and probable, and that it ought to + be evidenced by miracles, may form an essential portion of our + general argument, because the degree of probability of the occurrence + of a particular fact affects the amount of positive evidence + necessary to establish its truth. But the proof that a revelation has + actually been given, or a miracle wrought, can only be effected + through the same media as those through which other facts are + established. To prove that a revelation is probable will not be of + the smallest avail to prove that one has been actually given, without + adequate proof of the fact itself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Still the + examination of the antecedent question is in this case particularly + important, because modern unbelief boldly affirms that a revelation + and its attestation of miracles are both impossible and incredible. + If this can be demonstrated, the discussion of the evidence that can + be adduced for them as facts is a useless expenditure of our + reasoning powers; for no evidence can prove the occurrence of that + which is impossible. It <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page096">[pg + 096]</span><a name="Pg096" id="Pg096" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> may + be assumed, however, that those who make this affirmation are not + quite satisfied as to the cogency of their reasonings; because, after + having demonstrated, as they allege, that miracles are impossible, + they proceed to attack the evidence of those narrated in the Gospels, + and pronounce it worthless. As, therefore, the opponents of + Christianity boldly affirm that both a supernatural revelation and + miracles are impossible, it is necessary that the defender of + Christianity should examine the validity of the assertion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Our opponents + constantly charge us with reasoning in a circle, or assuming the fact + which ought to be proved. To avoid even the appearance of this, I lay + down the following positions:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If direct atheism + is a just conclusion from the phenomena of the Universe, it follows + that a divine revelation is impossible. Nor are miracles in any + proper sense of the word less so, because they are not merely facts + occurring in external nature, but facts in the production of which we + recognize intelligence and will. With the principles of atheism the + occurrence of an extraordinary event is quite compatible, because as + it cannot rise to any higher knowledge than that of phenomena, the + knowledge of the invariability of past phenomena is incapable of + giving the fact that all future phenomena will resemble the past. + Still the occurrence of a fact, however extraordinary, would not + constitute a miracle, and would prove only the existence of an + unknown force in the universe, or the predominance of chance.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The same remark is + equally applicable to that form of modern atheism which does not + affirm that no God exists, but contents itself with the denial that + there is any evidence that there is one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nor is the case + altogether different with regard to <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page097">[pg 097]</span><a name="Pg097" id="Pg097" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> pantheism. According to this system, God is + only another name for nature, which works out every form of fleeting + existence for itself in an unceasing round of unconscious + self-evolution. The essence of its affirmation is, that God has no + conscious personal existence, but that He is only another name for + the blind unconscious forces of the universe. Such a being (if it is + possible to conceive of it as a being at all, or as a unity) is + everlastingly making a revelation of itself by a ceaseless evolution + of phenomena, the result of the blind action of its inherent forces. + But to whom? Obviously only to beings capable of reason and + consciousness, whom it (I dare not say, He) has evolved out of its + own bosom, and will again resolve into unconsciousness. Prior to + their evolution this mighty τὸ πᾶν must have been everlastingly + making manifestations of itself, without a single being in existence + capable of recognizing them. Whatever be the result of such theories + in a logical point of view, it is evident that if pantheism be a + rational account of the order of the universe, a revelation and + miracles, in any sense in which such terms can bear meaning, are + impossible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">No less applicable + is the same remark to that form of pantheism held by Mr. Herbert + Spencer, which, while it affirms the existence of a cause of all + things, as alike required by the demands of philosophy, science, and + religion, yet affirms that He is unknown and unknowable, and that + every thing which is knowable, although a manifestation of that great + unknown cause, yet conveys no idea of Him that the intellect can + apprehend. In one word, the unknown cause of all things is + inconceivable, and incapable of becoming the subject of rational + thought. The intellect cannot help assuming the existence of this + cause of all things; but all that it can affirm of him is, that He is + unknown and unknowable; <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page098">[pg + 098]</span><a name="Pg098" id="Pg098" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and + that everything within the bounds of our knowledge, though it may + represent some mode of his existence, cannot be he, or like him. With + respect to this theory, while it cleverly evades some of the harsher + difficulties of pantheism and atheism, it is not too much to say that + it is a civil way of bowing God out of the universe, of which He is + alleged to be the cause. He can neither be a person, nor have wisdom, + nor be benevolent, nor be capable of conscious self-manifestation; + because all these conceptions are limited and finite. All that we can + know of Him is, that such a cause exists beyond present phenomena; + and that we are condemned respecting Him, to a profound and perpetual + ignorance. It is possible to designate such a being by the name of + God, but it would be to use the term in a sense peculiar to those who + thus employ it. Such a God is a bare abstract conception of the + intellect, void of all moral value. It is sufficient for my present + purpose to observe that it is impossible for the unknown and the + unknowable to make a revelation of himself. Consequently St. Paul's + affirmation with respect to the unknown God at Athens, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, Him declare I unto + you”</span> (Acts xvii. 23), is untrue. To such a God a revelation of + Himself, and miracles to confirm it, are alike impossible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is evident, + therefore, that if either of these principles can be demonstrated to + be a true account of the nature of things, all further discussion as + to the truth of a revelation or of miracles is useless. Let us take + the most favourable hypothesis, that of Mr. Spencer. It concedes that + the necessities of reason compel us to assume the existence of an + unknown cause of all things, which may be called God. But He is + unknowable; He is inscrutable. No conception of <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page099">[pg 099]</span><a name="Pg099" id="Pg099" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Him can be realized in thought; it + follows, therefore, that no revelation of such a being can be made to + the finite intellect of man, for if a revelation of Him could be + made, He cannot be unknowable. This being so, the person who attempts + to reason out the truth of Christianity is placed under a difficulty. + Christianity assumes the existence of a personal God, possessed of + moral attributes. This is the very truth, the evidence of which these + systems assert to be wanting. The Christian advocate, therefore, has + only two courses before him: First, To assume, in conformity with the + all but universal belief of mankind, that a personal God exists; and + then to argue for the truth of Christianity, and to answer the + objections urged against it. When we do this, objectors affirm that + we beg the question. Or, Secondly, To prove the existence of a + personal God; and then to argue for the truth of revelation. If he + adopts the latter course, he is compelled to adduce the proof on + which the belief in theism rests, and to answer the objections to + it—or, in other words, to compose a bulky volume, before he can get + at the immediate subject of inquiry.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Now I affirm that + the defender of Christianity is no more open to the charge of begging + the question when he assumes the existence of a personal God as the + foundation of his reasonings, than the author of a treatise on + trigonometry is, who takes for granted the truth of Euclid's + propositions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The author of the + work to which I have already referred does his utmost to fasten on + the modern defenders of Christianity the charge that they begin and + end in assumptions. I will not deny that much ambiguous language has + been used on this subject, but I trust I shall show that the charge + is utterly unfounded. I must briefly notice a few of his + reasonings.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page100">[pg + 100]</span><a name="Pg100" id="Pg100" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">At page 68 he + writes as follows: <span class="tei tei-q">“Dr. Mozley is well aware + that the assumption of a <span class="tei tei-q">‘personal’</span> + God is not susceptible of proof; indeed, this is admitted in the + statement that the definition is an assumption.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">An assumption, I + ask, in what sense? Is it a simple assumption without evidence, taken + for granted for the bare purposes of argument; or is it one which, + though taken for granted in the present case, rests on a substantial + basis of evidence previously established, and which bears the same + relation to the question of miracles which the truths of Euclid do to + those of trigonometry? The latter is the fact though the mode in + which the writer puts it implies the former. Without referring to the + authority of any particular author, is he not fully aware that + theists maintain that their belief in a Personal God rests on a basis + of proof which commends itself to their reason? Have not numbers of + men, endowed with the highest powers of intellect, accepted it as + satisfactory? Yet he seeks to imply that, after all, it is an + assumption. It is true that in the argument for miracles we take it + for granted; but we do so, because the proof has commended itself to + our highest reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I admit that Dr. + Mozley has used, in speaking of this subject, language which I cannot + but think is wanting in precision. Still it does not bear the meaning + that this author seeks to fasten on it. <span class="tei tei-q">“It + is then to be admitted,”</span> says he, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“that historically, and looking to the general actual + reception of it, this conception of God was derived from revelation. + Not from the first dawn of history to the spread of Christianity in + the world do we see in mankind at large any belief in such a + Being.”</span> The learned author then states, at considerable + length, the philosophic and vulgar views entertained of God, and + shows their inadequacy and <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page101">[pg + 101]</span><a name="Pg101" id="Pg101" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + imperfection, and concludes as follows: <span class="tei tei-q">“But + although this conception of the Deity has been received through the + channel of the Bible, what communicates a truth is one thing, what + proves it is another.”</span> He then proceeds to summarize the + general proof.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I cannot think + this statement altogether free from ambiguity. Whatever may have been + the precise forms in which the ideas of the vulgar or the philosopher + were embodied, there is strong proof that a higher and better + conception of God, though indefinite and indistinct, underlay them + all. The most degraded polytheist has indistinct conceptions of a + Supreme God above all the degraded objects of his worship. It seems + to me impossible that such a conception of God can have been attained + from revelation. It may, in a certain sense, be said, looking at the + precise form in which it is embodied, that it has been derived by us + historically from the Jewish race. But it must have had a prior + origin. St. Paul considered that the material universe manifested His + eternal power and Godhead. The primitive form of all the great + oriental religions contained in them the idea of God. It is simply + absurd to affirm that they derived it from the Bible. It is true that + the existence of a primitive revelation anterior to the Bible has + often been assumed to account for this knowledge, but this is a bare + assumption of which we have no proof, and whose only basis is + conjecture. Judaism and Christianity have been instrumental in widely + spreading correct conceptions of the Deity and dissipating false + ones. Yet if the conception had not existed in the mind at least + implicitly, no formal revelation could have put it there, for every + such revelation must be conveyed in language, and all language is + meaningless, unless the mind can realize its conceptions. The + assertion, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page102">[pg + 102]</span><a name="Pg102" id="Pg102" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + therefore, that the conception of God has been first communicated + through the channel of the Bible, and is afterwards proved by reason, + seems to me to be one not devoid of danger. On the contrary, our + belief that God exists is the very pre-condition of our being able to + believe that He has revealed Himself. This conception revelation may + modify, invest with a higher moral character, and import into it + definiteness and precision, but it cannot create it. It is on such + grounds that the author in question seeks to involve his reasoning + and that of all other defenders of Christianity in a vicious circle. + I fully admit that the conception of God has been elevated and + purified by the influence of Christianity, and that the teaching of + Christianity on this subject is in conformity with our highest + reason. But it is absurd to affirm that this is reasoning in a + circle, and that the Christian argument involves reasoning from + Theism to Christianity and from Christianity back to Theism.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following + passage, cited by Professor Mozley from Baden Powell, is referred to + by this author as a proof that all our reasonings on this subject are + a simple argument from reason to revelation, and from revelation to + reason. The passage itself is a clear statement of the grounds of the + charge, and requires our careful consideration. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Everybody may collect from the order and harmony of the + physical universe the existence of a God; but in acknowledging a God, + we do not thereby acknowledge this peculiar or doctrinal conception + of a God. We see in the structure of nature a mind, a universal mind, + but still a mind which only operates and expresses itself by law. + Nature only does and can inform us of mind in nature; but in no other + sense does nature witness to the existence of an omnipotent Supreme + Being. Of a <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page103">[pg + 103]</span><a name="Pg103" id="Pg103" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + universal mind out of nature, nature says nothing; and of an + omnipotence which does not possess an inherent limit in nature, she + says nothing either. And therefore that conception of a supreme Being + which represents Him as a spirit independent of the physical + universe, and able from a standing-point external to nature, to + interrupt its order, is a conception of God for which we must go + elsewhere. That conception is attained from revelation, which is + asserted to be proved by miracles. But that being the case, this + doctrine of theism rests itself upon miracles, and therefore miracles + cannot rest on this doctrine of theism.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be + necessary carefully to point out the inaccurate reasoning of this + passage.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: The author + speaks of nature as another expression for the forces, laws, and + phenomena of the physical universe, and for these alone. To this I + have no objection, for it would greatly conduce to clearness if it + was always confined to this meaning. But while he uses it thus, he + nowhere tells us in what relation man, including his faculties, + intellectual and moral, and above all, his will, stands to nature. + Are they included in, or excluded from it? Do they, or do they not, + form a part of it? If they are included in nature, then there are + other facts in nature bearing on the being of a God, beyond those on + which the author reasons. If they are excluded, then the reasoning is + inadequate to sustain his conclusion. Our reasonings respecting God + are founded not only on the forces and laws of physical nature, but + on man, his reason, his conscience, and his will. What makes this + fallacy the more plausible is that the term nature is very frequently + used to include man, as well as the forces and laws of the material + universe.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page104">[pg + 104]</span><a name="Pg104" id="Pg104" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As far as the + physical universe is concerned, the mind infers the existence of a + God from its order and its harmonies; that is to say, having observed + that order and harmony have been produced by intelligence within the + sphere of our own observation, and being deeply convinced on other + grounds of reasoning that they are incapable of resulting from any + other source, we infer that the results we behold in nature are due + to a similar principle which we experience in ourselves. Such an + inference is not due to simple observation of the order of the + universe only, but unites with it an act of reasoning founded on our + own self-conscious being. But the intelligence which produces order, + as far as we are cognisant of it, is invariably united with will. We + therefore infer from the order and harmonies of nature, not simply + the conception of a God, such as the God of pantheism; but, if they + are valid to prove anything at all, of a God who is possessed of + intelligence adequate to arrange the order, and of purpose adequate + for its production. If the inference of the existence of a God from + the works of nature is valid, it must be of a God possessed of the + attributes in question, for all our inferences on such a subject + derive their validity from applying to them the analogies of our + reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is quite true + that in the structure of the material universe we see only the + indications of a mind operating and expressing itself by law; that is + to say, we observe in the physical universe no instances of its + violation. But WE, that is the reasoning, rational beings, whether + existing in nature or outside it, have inferred from the structure of + the universe the existence of mind, and we know of no mind which is + not possessed of conscious intelligence and will. If our reasoning + from the order of the material universe is <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page105">[pg 105]</span><a name="Pg105" id="Pg105" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> valid to prove the presence of mind, which is a + conception entirely derived from our consciousness of ourselves, it + must be equally so to prove the existence of purpose and volition, + for we know nothing of mind which is devoid of these attributes. The + material universe proves that its order and harmony is the result of + the action of mind; but it cannot prove that the mind which produced + this order and harmony is unable to introduce a different one. But if + our minds form part of nature, then they are a proof that the author + of nature has produced something else in nature besides the order and + harmonies of the physical universe. If they are outside nature, then + we have direct evidence of the existence of beings outside and above + nature, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> above the physical forces of + the universe. It follows that if finite beings possessed of + intelligence and will, exist within nature or without it, a God who + possesses similar powers may exist also.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In a narrow and + restricted sense it may be quite true that nature, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> + matter and its phenomena, only informs us of the presence of mind in + nature, the partner and correlative of organized matter. But let us + here guard against a latent fallacy in this mode of statement. We + learn the presence of mind, not from material nature, but by the + application of our own reason to the investigation of what its + phenomena denote. This is overlooked in the above argument. It is + perfectly true that as a mere matter of phenomenal appearance, we do + not actually behold in natural phenomena manifestations of mind + acting outside nature. In fact we do not see mind at all, but simply + infer its presence from the phenomena before us through the agency of + our own reason; and this inference carries along with it all the + other attributes of mind.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The writer before + me is one of those who affirm that <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page106">[pg 106]</span><a name="Pg106" id="Pg106" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> the utmost our minds can infer from the + contemplation of nature, in which he includes every species of vital + organism, is the presence of order and harmony; and that any + inference that its phenomena testify to the presence of adaptation, + contrivance and design is invalid. I reply that this affirmation is + only valid on the assumption of a principle which altogether denies + that from natural phenomena we can infer the existence of mind. But + we also observe in natural phenomena, and above all in animal and + vegetable structures, that the results effected are produced, not by + simple forces, but by the careful adjustment of many, or by one + counteracting and qualifying the action of another, and by forces + intersecting one another at precisely the right time and place. Had + any of these occurred otherwise, the result would have been + different. Throughout nature we observe innumerable instances in + which various forces have thus combined to produce a definite result. + This we usually designate by the word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“adaptation.”</span> Adaptation implies intelligence and + purpose. We are quite as much justified in ascribing this purpose to + the power manifested in nature, as any other quality whatever, even + the possession of mind.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully concede + that natural phenomena and even the phenomena of the mind of man, + only testify directly to the existence of a power adequate to their + production, and that we cannot directly infer from them the presence + of omnipotence. But this is to quarrel about words. For the power + manifested in nature and in man is so great that the human mind can + make no distinction between it and omnipotence; or in other words, it + justly infers from its manifestations that the power which could + originate this universe and all things in it must be capable of + effecting anything which is possible. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page107">[pg 107]</span><a name="Pg107" id="Pg107" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> To this mind, whether in or out of nature, our + reason ascribes the attributes of intelligence and will. Such a power + it is incapable of conceiving as inherent in material forces; it + therefore assumes that this power exists outside nature, and is + capable of controlling it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore that the reasoning is fallacious, which asserts that the + conception of a supreme Being which represents Him as a spirit + independent of the physical universe, and able from a standing-point + external to nature to interrupt its order, is a conception which we + must seek from revelation, and cannot be arrived at by any exertion + of our rational powers on the facts of nature and of man. Its + apparent plausibility has arisen solely from ignoring the presence of + man, either in nature or outside it, and neglecting to take the facts + of human nature, man's reason, conscience and will, into + consideration. To affirm that, independently of man's moral and + intellectual being, physical nature, its forces and laws, can prove + nothing, is a simple platitude. We have not to go to revelation for + the principles on which we reason, but to man, and the phenomena of + his rational, self-conscious, and voluntary agency. It follows, + therefore, that the affirmation that in conducting the Christian + argument we reason from God to miracles and from miracles to God, is + utterly disproved. Yet the writer before me has ventured to affirm + that, when we commence with the being of a personal God as the + groundwork of our reasonings, we begin and end with a bare + assumption.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The philosophical + writings of Dr. Mansel are also pressed into the service for the + purpose of discrediting the evidences of Christianity, and, I own, + with considerably greater reason. Mr. Herbert Spencer has also + invoked them in confirmation of his theory that God is unknown and + unknowable. He refers to them <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page108">[pg 108]</span><a name="Pg108" id="Pg108" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> in the following words: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Here I cannot do better than avail myself of the + demonstration which Mr. Mansel, carrying out in detail the doctrine + of Sir W. Hamilton, has given us in his <span class= + "tei tei-q">‘Limits of Religious Thought.’</span> And I gladly do + this, not only because his mode of presentation cannot be improved, + but because writing as he does in defence of current theology, his + reasonings will be more acceptable to the majority of + readers.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Before referring + to Dr. Mansel as an unquestionable authority on this subject, it + would only have been candid in both writers to have informed their + readers that not only have his principles been repudiated by a + considerable number of Christian writers as unsound, but they have + been carefully examined by that eminent atheistic philosopher, Mr. + Mill, who gives it as his deliberate opinion that they are founded on + fallacious principles. It is absurd to urge principles, though they + have been maintained by an eminent Christian writer, which an eminent + unbeliever has pronounced unsound, as a clear and conclusive argument + against Christianity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The work of Dr. + Mansel may be described as an attempt to prove the truth of + Christianity on the principles of the most sceptical philosophy. It + may be briefly stated thus: Reason is incapable of forming any idea + of God as He is, whether as the Infinite, the Absolute, or the first + Cause. All the conceptions which we can frame on the subject are + mutually self-destructive. On similar principles our conceptions of + His moral attributes are wholly inadequate to inform us of His real + perfections. It by no means follows that our human conception of + benevolence or justice is a measure of the divine benevolence, or of + divine justice; and so of His other attributes. It is affirmed that + because they <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page109">[pg + 109]</span><a name="Pg109" id="Pg109" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> are + the attributes of an infinite Being, they lie beyond the possibility + of being realized in human thought. Consequently, holiness in God may + admit of very different manifestations from holiness in man. Upon + these principles, which affirm the inadequacy of the human intellect, + even to conceive of anything as it exists in God, it follows that our + only possible conceptions of God are relative; or, to use the word + chosen by the author in relation to Christianity, regulative; + <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> fitted to regulate our + conduct, but not to illuminate our understanding.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Upon the + assumption that reason, when it attempts to analyse our ideas of the + Infinite, the Absolute, or the first Cause, lands us in hopeless + contradictions, Dr. Mansel arrives at the conclusion that it is + incapable of forming any conception of God as he actually exists. It + follows as a necessary consequence from this, that even by revelation + we are only capable of attaining relative ideas of Him, and that + these relative ideas do not represent His real nature, but are only + regulative of conduct, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> we are to act upon them as if + they were true. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">E.g.</span></span> God is revealed as holy. Our + only conception of holiness is our human conception of it. But we + cannot know that this is an adequate measure of the divine holiness. + God is declared to be benevolent. We have no conception of + benevolence but that which is derived from the human mind. So + likewise with respect to justice. But benevolence and justice as they + exist in God may differ from these qualities as they exist in man. + The same thing follows as a necessary conclusion from Dr. Mansel's + premises with respect to all the other attributes of God. Nothing + will better illustrate the position to which this argument reduces us + than to apply it to the truthfulness or veracity of God. All that we + know about truthfulness <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page110">[pg + 110]</span><a name="Pg110" id="Pg110" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> is + as it exists in finite beings, that is, in men. But God is an + infinite being. It follows therefore that truthfulness in man is no + adequate representation of truthfulness as it exists in God, that is + to say, that the divine veracity may differ from our human conception + of it. This is certainly a very startling position.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If, therefore, + these principles are correct, acquiescence on the part of man in the + divine character is impossible. It is impossible to love a being who + does not present to us the aspect of loveliness; or to reverence one + who does not present to us an aspect capable of exciting this + emotion; or to feel trust in a being of whose justice we have no + certainty that it resembles our conception of justice; or to rely on + the promises of one whose veracity may differ from our own. Such + feelings cannot be made to order. They can only be generated by the + contemplation of a being who is holy, benevolent, just, and true, in + the ordinary acceptation of these words. They cannot be excited by + any merely regulative ideas. We love, reverence, and trust, not ideas + or conceptions, but persons, possessing moral attributes. But on the + principle of merely regulative ideas of God, the assertion that + <span class="tei tei-q">“God is love,”</span> loses all its value, if + God is not what I mean by love, but, because he is infinite, he may + be something else, I know not what; and thus the great precept of the + moral law, <span class="tei tei-q">“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God + with all thy heart, mind, soul, and strength,”</span> becomes + meaningless. Such devotion of our entire nature cannot be created by + the mere command to render it. It can only be rendered to a being + whose claims over us we both feel and know to be an absolute reality, + and to whom on the conviction of their reality we can offer ourselves + up a voluntary sacrifice. But if we cannot know Him as He is, how is + the fire of devotion to Him <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page111">[pg + 111]</span><a name="Pg111" id="Pg111" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> to + be kindled in our hearts? How shall we trust in Him? How shall we + acquiesce in His character? How shall we worship Him, how shall we + adore Him, if it is true that the justice, benevolence, or holiness + of the divine character may not resemble our conception of them? Nay, + more: the theory in question lays the axe to the root of the + Christian revelation itself. There is no affirmation of the New + Testament more decisive than that Jesus Christ in His divine and + human personality is the image of the invisible God, as far as His + moral perfections are concerned. Are the perfections of the character + of Jesus Christ only regulative, or are they real representations of + these attributes as they exist in God? Are the divine attributes of + holiness, benevolence, or justice, adequately represented by the + manifestations of them, as made by Jesus Christ? If we accept the + testimony of St. John's Gospel, our Lord himself has expressly + affirmed, <span class="tei tei-q">“He that hath seen me hath seen the + Father”</span> (John xiv. 9). But this is impossible if our + conceptions of God's moral attributes are only regulative, and if the + human idea of holiness is no adequate representation of the + divine.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">However erroneous + a system may be, yet if it has been elaborated by a powerful mind, it + has generally some foundation in reason, and I am far from affirming + that, with considerable qualifications, some important elements of + truth may not be found in that of Dr. Mansel. It is well that we + should be made to feel that there are limits of thought beyond which + the human mind cannot penetrate, and that there are profundities of + metaphysics which an imperfect measuring-line cannot reach. But + placing the matter as he has, the Christian apologist may well feel + indebted to Mr. Mill for his crushing demolition of the dangerous + portions of Dr. Mansel's system. When unbelievers quote the + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page112">[pg 112]</span><a name="Pg112" + id="Pg112" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> authority of Dr. Mansel, why + do they not also tell their readers that there was at least one + unbeliever of very high logical power, who wrote against the validity + of his system.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is one thing to + affirm that we cannot penetrate to the depths of the Deity, and that + after we have raised our thoughts to the highest, there is something + higher still; and quite another to affirm that our highest thoughts + of him have no validity; or, to use the terms of a fashionable + philosophy, that God is unknown and unknowable, that no true + conception of Him can be formed in thought; in one word, that he is + absolutely unthinkable. The difficulties of this subject have arisen + mainly from discussing it in terms of pure abstractions, instead of + embodying them in a concrete form. It is impossible in this place to + enter on the profound depths involved in these questions; but a few + observations will be necessary for the purpose of clearing away the + difficulties in which our opponents seek to involve the subject of + miracles. I shall confine myself to our conceptions of the + Infinite.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is affirmed + that no conception of the infinite can be framed in thought; that it + is therefore unthinkable, and transcends the limits of human + knowledge; that it is a negation; and that therefore our reason is + unable to affirm anything respecting it; that the idea of personality + is incompatible with that of infinity; and that therefore when we + speak of God as a person who possesses infinite perfections, we enter + on a region where human thought is invalid, and respecting which all + affirmation involves a contradiction.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But when we are + told that the infinite transcends thought, we are entitled to demand + that we should not be kept playing with an abstraction, and to ask, + what is infinite? In what sense does it transcend thought? + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page113">[pg 113]</span><a name="Pg113" + id="Pg113" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Does this mean that it is + absolutely unthinkable; or only partially so; or that our conception + of it is imperfect? Is it simply unknowable, or does it consist of + something which we know, <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">plus</span></em> something that has not come + within the limits of our knowledge, but which something is of a + similar character to the known? It will be at once seen that the + determination of these questions is at the root of the whole + controversy. If then by the infinite we mean something known + <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">plus</span></em> something unknown, to speak of + God as unknowable and unthinkable is absurd. Our knowledge of Him may + not be full, but yet real so far as it goes. When it is affirmed that + God is a being who exists, but is unthinkable by man, the effect is + to place Him beyond the bounds of human knowledge, and thereby free + us from all necessity of troubling ourselves about Him. We know that + He exists in the profundities of the unknown; and that is all. For + the purposes of thought and of morality, He is thus made of less + value than an algebraic <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">x</span></span>.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">When it is + affirmed that the infinite is unknowable, I again ask, what infinite? + The infinite as an abstract idea has no real existence; but something + that is infinite. The conception itself is an essentially + quantitative conception, and is only strictly applicable to number + and extension. When I speak therefore of an infinite number, what do + I mean? The only answer possible is, <span class="tei tei-q">“The + greatest number I can conceive, <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">plus</span></em> all possible number without + limit.”</span> Does my adding on the latter factor invalidate the + reality of my conception of the former? Is that which is added on + anything else than number? Surely here I have a valid conception. The + same is true when we speak of the infinity of space. I mean by it the + greatest space I can conceive, <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">plus</span></em> space without limit. Is the + idea of space <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page114">[pg + 114]</span><a name="Pg114" id="Pg114" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + rendered unthinkable, because I add the conception of space without + limit? Does it cease to be space? But space is conceivable. It + follows therefore that neither infinite number nor infinite extension + is absolutely unthinkable. We speak of the infinite divisibility of + matter. Does matter, because it goes on to be divided for ever, cease + to be matter?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In the same manner + we speak of God, and call Him infinite. It would be far more correct + to speak of Him as a Being who has infinite attributes. Here, + however, if accuracy of thought is to be preserved, a distinction + must be made. Some attributes of God may be viewed as quantitative; + others cannot. It is to the former only that the term infinite + properly applies. A moral attribute cannot have a quantitative + measure applied to it. It is therefore not infinite, but perfect.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">When we speak of + God as a being possessed of infinite power, what do we mean? The + thing intended is, that He is a being who possesses such power as + enabled Him to create the universe, and that He is capable of + exerting every other degree of power which is possible. We may call + this, if we like, power without limit; though there is always one + limit to possible power, viz., that of working contradictions. Of + course we are ignorant of what are the limits of possible power.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But when we make + this addition to our finite conception, we mean by it power similar + to that exhibited in the universe—it and all other power beyond it. + Must such a conception be banished outside the limits of rational + thought? Is the idea of a being who possesses power sufficient to + build the universe, and all possible power besides, unthinkable? + Again, we speak of God as infinitely wise. What do we mean by it? We + affirm that He knows all things actual and possible. <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page115">[pg 115]</span><a name="Pg115" id="Pg115" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> The knowledge is none the less knowledge, + because to the knowledge of the actual we add on the knowledge of the + possible. Such a being is certainly not unthinkable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: God is + often spoken of, not only as a being possessing infinite attributes + and perfections, but as the Infinite Being. Here the attempt is made + to entangle us in a puzzle. It is argued: if He be the infinite + Being, there can be no being beyond Him. He must therefore include + all being, both actual and possible. If this be so, He must also + include the finite, otherwise there would be a being which is not + included in infinite being—or in other words, being without limit + would not include all being, which is self-contradictory. Several + other self-contradictions may be easily adduced by reasoning on the + same principles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply that the + term <span class="tei tei-q">“Being”</span> is used here in a sense + so intensely abstract, that we have removed it out of all those + conceptions of which quantity can legitimately be predicated. Of + material being we can affirm that it is quantitative, but of no + other. The adding on the word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“infinite,”</span> and calling God the infinite Being, is + to use words which have no validity as conceptions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it is also + common to speak of God's moral attributes as infinite, such as His + benevolence, holiness, justice and truth. This again is inaccurate, + and its result is to plunge us into hopeless confusion of thought. + Such attributes admit of no quantitative measures. They are perfect, + not infinite. To speak of God's truthfulness as infinite is simply + absurd. A thing is true, or not true. A moral being is truthful or + not truthful. Benevolence may be perfect or imperfect; but it cannot + be measured by number or by line. These conceptions can only mean + what we mean <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page116">[pg + 116]</span><a name="Pg116" id="Pg116" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> by + them, and nothing else, even when applied to God, or we are + attempting to pass off forged notes for genuine ones. The only + possible additional idea which we introduce when thus ascribing them + to God, is that in Him they are perfect, free from the imperfections + with which they exist in us. To affirm that when we say that God is + perfectly benevolent, or perfectly truthful, we introduce into the + conception, as applied to Him, a new factor, beyond the meaning of + benevolence and truthfulness as used in human language, and that this + new factor can make the divine benevolence different from our human + conception of it, or can lead God to actions which man can by no + possibility view as benevolent or true; and then to say that God is + benevolent or true, is an abuse of language, or, to use Mr. Mill's + words, an offensive flattery.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it has been + urged that the moral attributes of God, even if we view them not as + infinite but as perfect, must be beyond the limits of human thought, + and therefore may produce results different in character from the + corresponding principles in man, because they are the attributes of + an infinite being. I have already disposed of this objection. + Benevolence, holiness, and truth cannot be other than benevolence, + holiness, and truth, to whatever being we may attribute them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is therefore no + necessary consequence, because we ascribe to God some attributes + which are infinite, and others which are perfect, that God must + therefore be unknowable or unthinkable. We may know much about Him, + without knowing all things. Our not knowing all about things does not + render them either unknowable or unthinkable. Our knowledge may be + imperfect; but as far as it goes it maybe real. If we were to affirm + that we only know that which we <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page117">[pg 117]</span><a name="Pg117" id="Pg117" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> know perfectly, or were unable to reason on + imperfect knowledge, mental progress would be brought to a + standstill. Nor is it right to affirm that we are only reasoning in a + circle when we reason from His moral attributes as displayed in the + government of the world in favour of the probability of a revelation; + or if because a revelation which claims to be from God, bears the + impress of His character, we employ this fact as an evidence that it + comes from Him. To affirm that He is unknowable or unthinkable is to + proclaim that man has no concern with God, and that all revelation is + impossible; therefore, the objections urged against the evidence of + supernatural religion on these grounds are untenable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But there are the + difficulties about the Absolute and the First Cause. It has been + urged that the Absolute is that which is out of relation to every + thing else—perfectly independent in itself. It is argued, therefore, + if God be this Absolute, he cannot be the first Cause, because a + cause can only be a cause by its being in relation to that of which + it is the cause. For similar reasons, if he be the first Cause, He + cannot be the Absolute. But as He is both, He must therefore be + unknowable and unthinkable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + in a treatise like this to enter into such profound metaphysical + questions. For my present purpose, I can safely refer to Mr. Mill's + discussion on this subject. As far as the views in question bear + adversely on Christian evidence, he has sufficiently refuted them. It + is not fair for unbelievers to put forth these positions as + subversive of Christianity, without answering the reasonings of so + eminent an unbeliever as Mr. Mill in proof of their inconclusiveness, + or even alluding to the fact that he has pronounced them + untenable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is no point + which reasoners of this class have <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page118">[pg 118]</span><a name="Pg118" id="Pg118" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> laboured more diligently to prove than that it + is impossible for human reason to think of God as a person. The + assumption of the personality of God is the foundation of the + Christian argument, without which, even if the occurrence of miracles + could be proved as objective facts, they would have no evidential + value. It follows, therefore, that if our only mode of attaining the + knowledge of the personality of God be from revelation, we are + arguing in a vicious circle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Briefly stated, + the argument of unbelief is as follows: God is the infinite Being. + Personality is a conception which necessarily involves the finite. + Therefore it cannot be predicated of an infinite Being. It follows + therefore that to speak of God as infinite, and at the same time as a + person, involves a contradiction.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is an + unquestionable fact that the only beings whom we are directly + acquainted with as persons are finite beings, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> men. + No less certain is it that the only beings whom we know to be + possessed of wisdom and intelligence are finite beings, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> men, + and those various classes of animals by which the latter quality is + manifested. The argument is equally valid for proving that wisdom and + intelligence can only belong to finite beings; and consequently that + the existence of wisdom and intelligence in the first Cause of all + things is inconceivable, and the assumption that He is wise and + intelligent is a contradiction. The same argument is no less valid + against ascribing any moral perfection to Him, or in fact any other, + for all our knowledge of such things is both in itself finite, and + derived from finite beings.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it even goes + further than this. If, as the positive philosophy lays down, our real + knowledge of things is confined to direct subjects of cognition; as + the only beings which we know to be possessed of wisdom and + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page119">[pg 119]</span><a name="Pg119" + id="Pg119" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> intelligence are men and + animals, it is quite contrary to sound reasoning to infer that these + qualities can be possessed by any other class of finite beings. To do + so is to transfer human conceptions to beings who are not human. + Equally valid would be the reasoning of an animal, if he could reason + on the subject, as for instance a horse or a dog, that the existence + of wisdom and intelligence beyond his own limited sphere was an + unwarrantable assumption. Pantheists have also propounded theories on + the assumption of the existence in nature of an unconscious wisdom + and intelligence. This assumption is open to the most formidable + objections; but even on their own principles it is utterly invalid; + for if on the grounds which they allege it is impossible to ascribe + personality to God, the same reasonings are equally valid against + ascribing wisdom and intelligence to unconscious nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I conclude, + therefore, that it by no means follows because our direct knowledge + of personality is confined to human beings, and is derived from them, + that personality itself cannot be conceived of as a property + belonging to any other than human beings. It is absurd to maintain + that the qualities of things must be confined to those things from + which we learn their existence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it will be + objected that the very essential notion of personality is limitation; + consequently that although it may be conceived of as belonging to + limited beings, it transcends the power of thought to conceive of it + as the attribute of a being who is unlimited or infinite; that is to + say, that although it lies within the power of thought to conceive of + the Being who had adequate power to build the universe as a Person, + because the power may be a limited power, yet when I ascribe to Him + beyond this the possession of all possible power, <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page120">[pg 120]</span><a name="Pg120" id="Pg120" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the conception of personality becomes + unthinkable. This is the real meaning of the affirmation, unless our + reasonings are to be confined within the region of abstractions. But + we have no assurance that such reasonings are valid, unless we can + bring them to the test of some concrete form of thought.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Next: It by no + means follows because our conception of personality is derived from + finite beings, that it is necessarily limited to them; and that it + cannot be thought of in connection with a being, some of whose + attributes are infinite and others perfect; in other words, that the + idea of finiteness is necessarily involved in that of personality. + What are the conceptions that make up the idea of our own + personality? I reply, the power to affirm <span class= + "tei tei-q">“I”</span> of one's own being—the possession of will—the + power of self-consciousness, and these in union with rationality. + These conceptions we undoubtedly derive from the contemplation of our + own finite being, but there is nothing in them which is necessarily + limited to the finite. If the conception of an infinite being is + possible (and the fact that it is so constantly introduced into this + controversy proves that it is possible), then there is no reason why + these conceptions, which certainly contain in them nothing + quantitative, should not be applicable to such a being. The real fact + is, these conceptions are not inherently finite, because they have + nothing in them of a quantitative character,—they are only derived + from a being whose manifestation in space we conceive of under the + form of limitation, and whose attributes are neither infinite nor + perfect.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must call + attention to the remark already made that the correct representation + of God in thought is not that of a pure abstraction, the infinite + Being, but of a being who possesses attributes, some of which are + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page121">[pg 121]</span><a name="Pg121" + id="Pg121" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> infinite and others perfect. + To affirm that such a being is a person, is not to attempt to think + that which is unthinkable. When we affirm that God possesses the + power adequate to build the universe, and all possible power beside, + we do not ascribe to Him that of which it is impossible to predicate + the possession of will or self-consciousness. When we affirm that + such a being exists now, that he has existed in all past known times, + and that no limits in point of time are conceivable of him, there is + nothing contradictory in ascribing to such a Being personality. It is + quite thinkable that an ultimate particle may never have had a + beginning and never will have an end; no less so is it that such a + particle may be possessed of personality, for it is finite. Surely + therefore there is nothing in the ascription to God of existence + without beginning and without end, which destroys the idea of His + personality.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + necessary to enter thus far into this subject, because in reasoning + on the Christian revelation we must assume the existence of a + personal God, unless all such treatises, in addition to their own + proper subject-matter, must likewise contain an elaborate work on the + principles of theism, and a refutation of those of pantheism and + atheism. The defender of Christianity is charged with reasoning in a + circle, as though he first assumed the existence of a personal God, + and then derived the idea of his existence from revelation. This + charge would undoubtedly be true if the idea of God being a person is + unthinkable. I am at a loss to conceive how it becomes one atom more + thinkable if communicated by a revelation. Much obscurity has + undoubtedly been thrown on this subject by Christian writers who have + fancied that the more they can invalidate our reason the greater gain + accrues to Revelation. This is not only unwise but irrational. Our + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page122">[pg 122]</span><a name="Pg122" + id="Pg122" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> reason doubtless is but an + imperfect light, but its extinction is to leave us to grope in + darkness. I affirm therefore that the assumption of the divine + personality as the groundwork of our argument involves no <span lang= + "la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">petitio principii</span></span>, or reasoning in + a circle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One more remark + and I will bring this portion of the subject to a close. The + affirmation made by this philosophy that certain things are + unthinkable is fallacious. What do we mean by <span class= + "tei tei-q">“unthinkable”</span>? It may mean many things; first, + that the subject cannot be made in any sense an object of thought. + This, in fact, is the only legitimate use of the word. But in this + sense the affirmation cannot be true of even Mr. Herbert Spencer's + unknown and unknowable God, for it is evident that he does manage to + reason and think about him somehow. It may mean a being respecting + whom we may know much and attain a knowledge continually progressing, + but respecting whom there is much which is unknown. This unknown is + called unthinkable. But it is not unthinkable. It has only not yet + become the subject of our knowledge, and is no more unthinkable than + any other unknown truth. Or that may be pronounced to be unthinkable + respecting which our conceptions are wanting in definiteness and + precision. But to designate such things as unthinkable is an abuse of + language. Or that may be designated as unthinkable of which our + conceptions fail fully to represent the reality. As far as they go, + they may be true, but there may be something beyond of a similar + kind, which they do not embrace. This is the only sense in which it + can be affirmed that God is unthinkable, but the assertion is + altogether misleading. The only correct meaning of the expression is + when some particular thing is affirmed to exist and at the same time + contradictions co-exist in it. The actual co-existence <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page123">[pg 123]</span><a name="Pg123" id="Pg123" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of these two contradictions is + unthinkable, but nothing more. Thus the existence of a round square + is unthinkable, so would the affirmation that the divine power was at + the same time both limited and unlimited. But in no other sense is a + conception unthinkable. To affirm that the cause of all things is + unthinkable because our conceptions of Him do not measure the entire + depths of His being is simply misleading.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have gone into + this question because it is evident that if God is unthinkable a + revelation of Him is impossible, and if a revelation of Him is + impossible, all miracles affirmed to have been wrought in attestation + of one must be delusions.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page124">[pg 124]</span><a name= + "Pg124" id="Pg124" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc13" id="toc13"></a> <a name="pdf14" id="pdf14"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter VI. The Objection That Miracles + Are Contrary To Reason Considered.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Under this head + are included the whole of that class of objections which extend from + the direct assertion of the impossibility of miracles to the + affirmation that even if their possibility is conceded, they are so + extremely improbable that it is a violation of the first principles + of our reason to believe in their actual occurrence. They are alleged + to be violations and contradictions of the laws of nature, and as + such to be incredible, as the stability of its laws is founded on a + universal experience. This unquestionably forms the most formidable + difficulty in the way of the acceptance of miracles, as actual + occurrences, at the present day, and therefore demands a careful + consideration.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The question of + the abstract impossibility of miracles need not occupy us long. Such + an affirmation can only be made on the assumption that our reason is + inadequate to affirm the existence of such a being as a personal God. + If this can be established, the whole argument is ended for all + practical purposes. It may be conceded that the occurrence of some + anomalous event as a bare objective fact is quite possible, even on + the principles of pantheism or atheism. But such objective fact would + be no miracle in any sense in which the word can be used in this + discussion. If the evidence was sufficiently strong to attest it as a + fact, it <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page125">[pg + 125]</span><a name="Pg125" id="Pg125" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + would be explicable on the supposition of some unknown force in + nature, or even as a purely chance occurrence. A miracle, in any + sense in which it enters into the present argument, is not only an + abnormal objective fact, but one which takes place at the bidding of + a moral agent. It is the union of these two which imparts to a + miracle any power to attest a revelation. If, therefore, there is no + evidence of the existence of a God, miracles may be pronounced + impossible for all practical purposes in this controversy, and we + need not further discuss the question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The whole argument + as to whether the occurrence of a miracle is or is not contrary to + reason must proceed on the assumption of the existence of a personal + God. It is also a proposition so clear as to render all proof of it + superfluous, that if a personal God exists who has created the + universe and governs it by His Providence, miracles are possible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First, I observe + that a miracle cannot be pronounced incredible, on the ground that it + is an effect without an adequate cause. On this point I may refer to + the high authority of Mr. Mill, that the idea of a miracle + contradicts no law of causation. <span class="tei tei-q">“In + order,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“that any alleged + fact should be contradictory to a law of causation, the allegation + must be not simply that the cause existed without being followed by + the effect, for that would be no uncommon occurrence, but that this + happened in the absence of any adequate counteracting cause. Now in + the case of an alleged miracle the objection is the very opposite of + this. It is that the effect was defeated, not in the absence, but in + consequence, of a counteracting cause, viz., a direct interposition + of an act of will of some being who has power over nature; and in + particular of a being whose will being assumed to have induced all + the causes, with <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page126">[pg + 126]</span><a name="Pg126" id="Pg126" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the + powers by which they produce their effects, may well be supposed able + to counteract them.”</span> (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Logic</span></span>, vol. ii. p. 167.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A miracle + therefore may not be the result of the action of any force which + falls within the range of our knowledge. It may be necessary for its + performance to neutralize the action of all existing forces by the + calling into energy of more powerful ones. But their operation need + not even be suspended. An adequate force, or power, or cause (it + matters not by what name we call it) is present to effectuate the + result; viz. the power which rules the universe, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> God. + As Mr. Mill justly observes, the only question which can be raised if + the existence of God is assumed, is, not the want of the presence of + an adequate cause, for the supposition pre-supposes the presence of + one, but the want of will on the part of God to bring about the + result. Thus it may be fairly argued that God will not work a + miracle, from the fact that He has not done so in the course of + previous observation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + frequently affirmed that a miracle is an act which is contrary to the + laws of nature, or a violation of them, or a suspension of them, or a + violation of the order of nature; and that its occurrence is + therefore incredible, as being contrary to reason. A miracle need + involve neither of these. The laws of nature as conceived by physical + science are a set of antecedents followed by a set of invariable + consequents. A miracle does not interfere with this. Its very + conception involves a new antecedent followed by its consequent. The + utmost that can be urged is that we have never before witnessed the + presence of that particular antecedent and consequent, or that the + antecedents which we have witnessed have been followed by totally + different consequents. The only mode in which such a <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page127">[pg 127]</span><a name="Pg127" id="Pg127" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> law could be violated would be, if a + particular antecedent was present and no other capable of modifying + its action, and it failed to be attended with its proper consequent. + But this is not involved in the conception of a miracle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us now suppose + that the expression <span class="tei tei-q">“laws of nature”</span> + is extended so as to comprise the forces of nature as well as its + invariable sequences. Such a use of the term is very common. In this + point of view, it is impossible to affirm that the laws of nature are + violated by the performance of a miracle. This could only be the case + if they were made to produce the opposite results to those which they + actually produce. Thus, if a boiler were filled with water and a fire + kindled under it, and no other force was present capable of + neutralizing the action of the fire; if, instead of the temperature + of the water being raised, it gradually froze, there would be a clear + violation of the laws of nature, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> its + forces would cease to produce their usual results. But there is + nothing in the idea of a miracle that involves this. It postulates + the presence of a force or forces which are adequate to counteract + the action of those already in existence, and to produce the adequate + result.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be + objected that we have never recognized the existence of such forces + in our previous experience. Such an objection would be valid only on + the assumption that there is no force in the universe besides those + which have been already recognized by us. This, however, science will + in the present state of our knowledge hardly venture to affirm. + Besides, it is contrary to the supposition with which we started, + viz. the existence of a power able to control nature, that is, + God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nor is the + assertion correct that the performance of a miracle necessarily + involves even a suspension of the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page128">[pg 128]</span><a name="Pg128" id="Pg128" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> laws of nature. This may be the mode of the + divine acting; but it is most important to observe that it by no + means follows that it must be so. A miracle may be performed by the + introduction of a force which has sufficient power to counteract the + forces of nature even while they are in the fullest operation. To + take an illustration: It has been frequently said that the force of + gravity must have been suspended in favour of Peter's body when he + walked on the water, and in favour of that of our Lord when he + ascended into heaven. But this is by no means the case. The mere + suspension of the law of gravitation would not in either case have + effected the results in question. The presence of other forces was + necessary. The law of gravitation might have been in the fullest + operation, and the miracle might have been performed by the action of + other forces adequate to neutralize it. The narrative itself implies + that this force was so far from being suspended, that it was in full + operation at the time when the miracle was performed, for the moment + the power which supported Peter's body ceased to act he began to + sink.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: even + if we assume that any natural forces have been suspended in the + performance of a miracle, we are not called on to assume their + general suspension, but only in favour of the particular case in + question. This observation is rendered necessary because it has been + frequently urged against the possibility of miracles that their + performance must have thrown the whole mechanism of the universe into + confusion, and involved an extensive reconstruction of the processes + of nature. This would unquestionably be the case if the working of a + miracle involved the difficulty in question. But I have shown that it + need not involve even the suspension of any natural law whatever, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page129">[pg 129]</span><a name="Pg129" + id="Pg129" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and if such suspension took + place in any particular case, the force might have been acting with + full energy everywhere else.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The counteraction + or modification of one force by the agency of another is an event + which we witness every day. The force of gravity is in the fullest + operation whenever we lift a weight from the ground—it is not + suspended for a single moment. The ability to modify the results of + the action of one force by the agency of another, or to combine many + forces so as to produce a definite result, constitutes the essence of + all mechanical contrivance. The self-determining power of the human + will is that which calls all these particular modifications of + existing forces into activity. By means of it, the entire aspect of + external nature has been changed from the appearance which it would + have presented, if no other agency had existed besides the forces of + nature which belong to matter. Man has been a power manifested in the + midst of them. I am quite aware that he can create no new force, and + that he can only control or modify the action of those which exist, + but is never capable of suspending them. Yet this power has produced + marvellous results on the external world, so that it presents a + wholly different aspect from that which it would have done if the + forces of nature had simply continued acting uncontrolled by the + influence of mind. Even in material nature itself, we meet with + repeated instances of such modifications of the results of one force + by the action of another, as for example when the force of + gravitation is counteracted by that of magnetism, or of capillary + attraction. The action of no force is suspended, it is only + modified.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The assertion + therefore is inaccurate which affirms that the performance of a + miracle involves the suspension of a single force in nature. It is + consequently so <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page130">[pg + 130]</span><a name="Pg130" id="Pg130" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> far + no violation of any natural law. All that the idea of it involves is + the presence of a force which is capable in a particular instance of + counteracting the action of those forces which would produce a + contrary result if left to themselves. It is quite unnecessary for us + to determine, in reference to the subject under consideration, + whether the result may be brought about by a combination of forces + which energize within the visible sphere of things, or by bringing + into action some latent force, or one which only occasionally + manifests itself, or by the immediate action of the divine mind, + which, having in itself all the forces necessary to produce the + universe, must possess those which are necessary to effect the + miracle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is a fact + worthy of observation that in the case of the miracles recorded in + the Bible, the materials out of which the new results were produced + already existed in nature, as in the miracle of the multiplication of + the loaves and fishes. No act of creation was necessary. All that was + required was the presence of a force or forces, able to build up + these materials into the forms in question. God does this in ordinary + course by what we designate natural forces, by means of which corn is + grown and flesh produced. Can it be pretended that no other forces + are under the control of, or exist in God, which are able to produce + these results in a different manner, even while the ordinary forces + of nature continue in activity?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + further urged that a miracle involves a violation of the laws of + nature, because as it cannot be effected by any of the forces of + nature with which we are acquainted, the presence of an unknown force + adequate to produce one must be a violation of the laws of + nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply that any + apparent force which this objection <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page131">[pg 131]</span><a name="Pg131" id="Pg131" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> may possess is due to an ambiguous use of the + word <span class="tei tei-q">“law.”</span> It is here used to denote + the order of the various occurrences in nature, and not its + antecedents and invariable consequents. If there are forces in nature + beyond those with which we are acquainted, how can their action be a + violation of nature's order? If God is always present energizing in + nature's forces, how can any fresh putting forth of his energy be a + violation of nature's laws? In a certain sense of the words the order + of nature may be said to be violated whenever one of its forces is + modified by the action of another, that is to say, an order of events + results from the modified action different from that which would have + resulted from the unmodified one. In this sense man is daily + violating the order of nature. But this has no bearing whatever on + the question at issue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will perhaps be + urged that the resurrection of a dead man, or the cure of a man born + blind by a word is a violation of the laws of nature. Whether this be + so can only be determined when we are acquainted with the means by + which such an event may be brought about. The assertion itself is a + mere general statement that, as far as human observation has gone, + dead men have never returned to life; and that blindness has never + been cured at any person's command.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But with respect + to a resurrection it may be objected that it is an observed fact + amounting to a complete induction, that all men die and that after + death has taken place it is a fact no less universal that with the + exception of a few alleged instances to the contrary no resurrection + has ever taken place. It may therefore be said to be a law of nature + that all men die, and that death is followed by no resurrection. + This, however, if put into other language amounts to the following + proposition. That it is a law of nature that these results + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page132">[pg 132]</span><a name="Pg132" + id="Pg132" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> must follow, as long as the + present forces which we observe and no others are in energy. But it + would cease to be so as soon as any others capable of producing such + a result were brought into activity. The truth is that death is a + phenomenon which is caused by the joint action of a multitude of + natural forces. But if these were overborne by any force of nature, + or by the Author of nature calling any unknown force into activity, + or even by the energy of his own creative will, it would be absurd to + call such an event either a violation of the laws or of the order of + nature, and therefore to affirm that it was incredible. Death is the + result of the action of the natural forces which we observe around + us. No natural force with which we are acquainted can effect a + resurrection. If it be affirmed that in this sense a resurrection is + contrary to the laws and order of nature, the expression is ambiguous + and misleading, for it is intended to be inferred that such a + violation would be contrary to reason and therefore incredible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the + affirmation that a miracle is contrary to the order of nature + requires further consideration. What do we intend to affirm when we + speak of an order of nature or of an event being contrary to it?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In a scientific + sense the order of nature can only mean the results of forces + energizing in conformity with invariable law. Every event which + occurs is the result of a combination of such forces and the product + of their joint action. These results necessarily follow an orderly + arrangement; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the orderly result always + occurs when precisely the same antecedents and no other are present, + and is invariably altered whenever the antecedents are modified to + the precise extent of the modification. As far then as the results in + nature are the effect of known forces unmodified in their + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page133">[pg 133]</span><a name="Pg133" + id="Pg133" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> action by other forces, they + follow a definite order. Thus all the motions of the heavenly bodies + present themselves to the scientific mind as the perfection of order, + because they are the results of the action of known forces acting in + conformity with invariable law. Whenever a fact is observed which + deviates from the order which these known forces would produce, the + action of another force which has hitherto been unknown is inferred. + The order of nature therefore means that the same forces always + produce the same results. There is nothing inconsistent with this in + the correct conception of a miracle. Viewed as a physical event only, + it would be due to the action of a force which has hitherto been + outside the sphere of our observation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear + therefore that whenever a fresh combination of forces takes place, + their combined action will modify the result, and a very different + order of events will take place from that which would have resulted + from their unmodified action. Such modification therefore must + produce a different order of nature from that which would have + otherwise resulted. But such modifications frequently take place + through the agency of man. It therefore follows that man has the + power of effecting modifications in the order of nature, without + causing any violation of nature's laws.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But various other + influences, and among them those usually designated as chances, exert + a powerful influence in changing the order of nature. It is necessary + that its forces should not only be combined, but combined at the + right time and place, or the effect which is due to their combination + will not take place; <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> a different order of natural + events would have happened. An illustration will make this clear. Let + us take the case of a disintegrating rock; according as the different + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page134">[pg 134]</span><a name="Pg134" + id="Pg134" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> forces, which act on it, meet + at the suitable time and place, the progress of disintegration is + greatly lengthened or shortened. Such concurrences of events are what + we view as pure contingencies. <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">E.g.</span></span> water penetrates into one of + its fissures; this takes place in summer, and no appreciable result + follows. But if in winter a frost happens immediately afterwards, it + will produce an order of events widely different from that which + would have happened if either no rain had fallen or frost occurred. + By their joint agency the fissure is widened, or the rock split + asunder. It follows therefore that the concurrence of these two + forces is necessary at a particular time and place to produce the + particular result. Such concurrences, though due to natural causes, + are what we call fortuitous. Yet their occurrence or non-occurrence + occasions a different order of natural events.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Further, let us + suppose that a bird with a seed in its mouth, in the course of its + flight casually drops it into a fissure in the rock, which has been + opened by the frost; and also that another concurrence of forces has + supplied the conditions suitable for its taking root and growth. This + produces a new series of events, which occasions a more rapid + disintegration, and modifies the whole of the results which follow. + If the casual act of the bird had taken place at any other time or + place, the whole series would have been different, varying with the + causes which produced the seed, and the contingencies which brought + the bird to the spot, and induced it to drop it. Let us now suppose + that man with his rational agency intervenes. He deliberately watches + for the prospect of a frosty night, pours water into the fissures, + and plants seeds in fissures where he knows that suitable material + has been prepared for their growth. Here a new order of events has + been introduced, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page135">[pg + 135]</span><a name="Pg135" id="Pg135" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + which, originating in human agency, entirely modify the order of the + results.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is important to + observe that all theories which attempt to account for the production + of living organisms by the principle of development are compelled at + almost every step of the process to postulate the concurrence of + forces of this description at the suitable time and place to render + their production possible. These must have taken place in past time + in numbers passing all comprehension. In the case of many vegetable + structures the result has been entirely modified by the contingency + of some insect choosing to enter one flower and not to enter another; + and according as this takes place a wholly different order of events + follows. Whether we choose to designate such concurrences of events + at the suitable time and place fortuitous or not, the law which + regulates them is wholly unknown, even if they are regulated by law. + So far it is impossible to affirm that these results follow a known + and definite order in nature. The concurrence of two or more such + causes introduces a new series, and occasions a break in the + previously existing order of nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Still more + completely has this happened when man with his reason and powers of + volition is introduced on the scene. It will doubtless be objected by + our materialistic philosophers, that the forces which energize in + mind act with the same uniformity as those that energize in matter, + and that volition exerts no appreciable influence on the results of + our actions. These theories, however, contradict the experience of an + overwhelming majority of mankind. Such as do so require that the + strongest proof should be given before their truth can be considered + as established. Such proof certainly yet remains to be given. Its + advocates, however, tell us that it will be forthcoming at some + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page136">[pg 136]</span><a name="Pg136" + id="Pg136" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> future time. In the meanwhile + the fact is sufficient for our purpose that man is capable of acting + on nature and of producing most important changes in the results of + the action of its forces. This being so, it is certain that an order + of events takes place through the interference of man, quite + different from that which would have taken place apart from his + interference. But these interferences take place in conformity with + no known law, and their results occasion a break in the previously + existing series of events, by the introduction of a new one. Man, + therefore, is capable of interfering with and effecting changes in + the order of nature. It will be objected that all the agencies by + which such results are brought about are forces energizing in nature + in conformity with invariable law, and consequently that the order of + nature is preserved intact. It is unquestionably true that the actual + forces at work are forces in nature. But there is another principle + at work which interferes with the regular course of their action, and + brings out a series of results quite different to that which would + have been produced if they had not been interfered with. This is + man's reason and intelligent volition. It is impossible to reduce the + action of this to any known law of invariable sequence. It follows + therefore that man is a power either in or out of nature, which is + capable of interfering with the order of the results of its material + forces, or, in the language of those with whom I am reasoning, of + violating the order of nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it will be + further objected that man in his action on nature can only use or + combine such natural forces as come within his knowledge; and this + proves nothing about the possibility of the action of a power outside + nature which is able to employ its known and unknown forces for the + purpose of producing such results as <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page137">[pg 137]</span><a name="Pg137" id="Pg137" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> miracles. I answer that this objection can have + no validity unless it is first assumed that man is a portion of + nature in the sense in which we are now speaking of it. But the proof + of this has certainly yet to be given. By the word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“nature,”</span> as it is used by this philosophy, is + meant the sum total of known material forces, acting on matter in + conformity with invariable laws; that is to say, of forces which are + devoid of intelligence and volition. It is impossible in this sense + of the word to include man in it, until his entire intellectual and + moral being can be shown to be the result of material forces. Nor + even if this could be done, would it avail for the present argument; + for however it may have originated, man's power to modify the action + of material forces is an existing fact, and produces results quite + different in kind from the action of the unintelligent forces of + nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The fact that the + mind acts through a material organism, and is incapable of calling + into existence any new force, does not alter the position above + taken. I am quite ready to take either of the following alternatives. + Man is either in nature, or he is outside of it. If he is in it, then + a power exists within it which is capable of compelling its + unintelligent forces to effectuate the determinations of rational + volition. If he is outside nature, then a power exists outside it + which is capable of effectuating these results. It follows, + therefore, that in either case a power exists which is capable of + modifying the order of nature. Now it would be absurd to deny that + whatever man can effect, God is able also to effect; and that He is + so much the more able, in proportion as His knowledge is more + perfect. Whether, therefore, God works in nature, or outside it, a + power exists which is capable of varying the order of nature without + interrupting the action of <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page138">[pg + 138]</span><a name="Pg138" id="Pg138" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> any + of its forces, or violating its laws. He also must have other forces + at His command beyond those which are known to man, and can combine + them and thereby modify their action in conformity with His pleasure. + He must also be the primary force everywhere underlying nature, which + imparts to every other force its energy and power. It follows that He + can work a miracle without even suspending any of the existing forces + of nature, and that the allegation that miracles are contrary to + reason, because they are contrary to nature, and a violation of its + laws and order, is disproved.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will now proceed + to adduce examples of these contradictions to our reason which are + said to be involved in the occurrence of a miracle, for the purpose + of illustrating the confusion arising from the various senses in + which the words <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> and + <span class="tei tei-q">“natural law,”</span> and other similar + expressions have been employed. Although the instances will be taken + from the opponents of Revelation, I by no means wish to imply that + they alone have been guilty of this ambiguous use of language. Its + defenders are equally obnoxious to the charge.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">After quoting a + brief passage from Dr. Newman, the author of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion”</span> urges the following + objections: <span class="tei tei-q">“Miracles are here described as + <span class="tei tei-q">‘beside, beyond, and above’</span> nature, + but a moment's consideration will show that in so far as these terms + have any meaning at all, they are simply evasions, and not solutions + of a difficulty. If the course of nature be interrupted in any way, + whether the interruption be said to proceed from some cause which is + said to be beyond, or beside, or above nature, it is certain that the + interruption is not caused by nature itself; and every disturbance of + the order of nature, call it by whatsoever <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page139">[pg 139]</span><a name="Pg139" id="Pg139" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> name we may, is contrary to nature, whose chief + characteristic is invariability of law. It is clearly unnatural for + the ordinary course of nature to be disturbed, and indeed were this + not the case, the disturbance would be no miracle at all.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is by no means + my purpose to defend Dr. Newman's use of the expressions, + <span class="tei tei-q">“natural,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“beside nature,”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“beyond + nature,”</span> or <span class="tei tei-q">“above nature.”</span> But + while the author criticises Dr. Newman, it is clear that in this + passage he has fallen into a number of very singular confusions of + thought.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: The words + <span class="tei tei-q">“nature”</span> and <span class= + "tei tei-q">“natural,”</span> are used as though they had one clear, + simple, and invariable meaning, whereas in this passage they are used + so as to include phenomena which widely differ from one another. We + are not told what is included under the term <span class= + "tei tei-q">“nature,”</span> whether it is restricted to matter, its + forces, and its laws, or whether it also includes mind and all its + phenomena. When we speak of interruptions in the order of nature, we + usually intend it to be assumed that volition is the cause of these + interruptions. This being so, the author has included in nature + phenomena which differ so widely from one another as those of mind + and matter. He then speaks of the chief characteristic of nature + being invariability of law. The laws and forces which regulate matter + are distinguished by this invariability. But the action of mind is + very different. All men habitually speak of some portions of it as + capricious. Whether they are so or not, nothing is more certain than + that many of our mental phenomena have not been reduced to the action + of known laws.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">When, therefore, + such expressions as <span class="tei tei-q">“beside, beyond, and + above nature,”</span> and <span class="tei tei-q">“natural,”</span> + are used, I ask what nature is intended? Is it matter, its + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page140">[pg 140]</span><a name="Pg140" + id="Pg140" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> forces and laws; or mind, + including the principle of volition; or both? If man is included in + nature, then there is a power in nature which is capable of + controlling other portions of nature, and even of acting on itself. + If man is excluded from nature, then there must exist a power outside + nature, which is <span class="tei tei-q">“beyond and above + nature,”</span> and is capable of acting on it. But if by nature is + meant the sum total of all the forces which exist, whether material + or immaterial, then it is clear that a power must exist in nature + which is capable of controlling the forces of material nature, and of + compelling them to effectuate its purposes. Whichever point of view + we take of it, the objection falls to the ground.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But, says the + author, <span class="tei tei-q">“If the course of nature be + interrupted in any way, whether the interruption proceed from a cause + beyond, beside, or above nature, such interruption cannot be caused + by nature; and every disturbance in the order of nature is contrary + to nature.”</span> This passage seems to imply that an interruption + in the order of nature cannot proceed from nature itself. But this is + certainly incorrect. Natural forces, that is to say, material ones, + modify one another; and by their combined action, they produce a + series of events quite different from what would be the result of + their separate action. Such a new series of events is to all intents + and purposes an interruption of the previous order of nature and the + introduction of a new one. Such results are produced by fortuitous + combinations taking place, in the manner which I have already + illustrated, at the right time and place. The fortuitous combination + of forces in nature is capable of producing a new order <span class= + "tei tei-q">“contrary to”</span> the previous order of + nature.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page141">[pg + 141]</span><a name="Pg141" id="Pg141" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This, as I have + shown, is still more evidently the case if we include the phenomena + of mind in nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it is + affirmed, <span class="tei tei-q">“if the interruption be due to a + cause either beyond, beside, or above nature, the interruption cannot + be caused by nature.”</span> This is of course a self-evident truth. + But then it is inferred that such interruption is a disturbance of + the order of nature; and that every disturbance of its order is + contrary to nature. The inference which the reader is left to draw, + and which is directly stated in other parts of the work, is, that + what is contrary to nature is contrary to reason; that a miracle is + thus contrary to nature, and therefore contrary to reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I observe that, + although the interruption here referred to cannot be caused by nature + (for it is contrary to the conditions of the case that it should be), + yet it by no means follows that it is a breach of the order of nature + in any other sense than that which I have already discussed. Such + disturbances occur every day. It is, therefore, misleading to + designate them as contrary to nature, as they neither necessarily + suspend any natural force nor violate any natural law. I have already + proved that there is nothing in such disturbances, or, if we persist + in so designating them violations of the order of nature, that is + contrary to reason. Such a use of the terms <span class= + "tei tei-q">“course and order of nature”</span> is full of + ambiguities and certain to betray us into fallacious reasonings.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But, adds the + writer, <span class="tei tei-q">“it is clearly unnatural that the + ordinary course of nature should be disturbed.”</span> Here the + ambiguity of the expressions used, and the consequent fallacy of the + reasonings, are brought to a culmination.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What, I ask, is + intended by the ordinary course of nature? Is it the invariable + action of its forces, or the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page142">[pg 142]</span><a name="Pg142" id="Pg142" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> invariable sequences of their results, or the + orderly arrangement of its parts; or does it include mind and all its + phenomena, of the precise nature of the forces, laws and order of + which we are ignorant, and its action on the physical universe? What, + again, is the precise meaning which can be attached to the word + <span class="tei tei-q">“unnatural”</span> in such a context, where + it is evident that its meaning must vary according as we include in + nature one, several, or all of these phenomena? If by the word + <span class="tei tei-q">“unnatural”</span> the meaning intended to be + conveyed is unusual or impossible, it is then clearly not unnatural + that the course of nature should be interrupted in the manner I have + previously pointed out. Nor if man is included in nature, is it + unnatural that the results produced by its physical forces should be + greatly modified by his action?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The remark of the + author in connection with this subject is perfectly true, that a + grain could never of itself, nor according to the law of natural + development, issue in a loaf of bread; but it is wholly aside from + the issue which he raises. It is unquestionable that forces purely + physical could not effect this result; but does it follow from this + that the production of a loaf of bread is an event contrary to + nature? The result can only be produced by the combination and + controlling of a number of material forces by human reason. The grain + of wheat must be planted by man at the proper season. It must be + cared for by him. Various physical forces must contribute to the + growth and development of the plant. The ears produced must be reaped + in harvest-time. This process must be repeated until the grains are + sufficient in number to produce our intended loaf. Then they must be + threshed, ground, prepared for the oven, baked. In one word, the + miller and the baker must be invoked to control, combine, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page143">[pg 143]</span><a name="Pg143" + id="Pg143" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> modify and give a new + direction to the forces of nature under the direction of + intelligence. All this involves something more than the action of + material forces. The forces of nature carry on the work to a certain + point. Then man takes it up and interrupts their order, although he + does so by compelling other forces to effectuate the purposes of his + will. The ordinary course of material nature is disturbed in the + production of a loaf of bread. A new order of events is introduced. + Man is either within or without nature. In either case a power exists + which is capable of producing innovations in its order.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But how stands the + case of the feeding of five thousand persons on seven loaves and two + fishes? The seven loaves and two fishes had been previously produced, + by the action of material forces out of materials already existing in + the ground, in water, and in the air. Of such materials there was + abundance at hand to produce the requisite amount of food for the + feeding of the multitude. The only question was how to build them up + into the forms of bread and fish. There was no occasion to create one + single particle of matter. As to the nature of the forces employed to + work the miracle the narrative says nothing. Nor does it imply that + one of the ordinary forces of nature was suspended on the occasion. + All that it asserts is the presence of a force adequate to build up + the materials already existing into the forms of bread and fish, that + force being God. In the manufacture of the loaves and in the catching + of the fish, man had interfered with nature's order by the blending + of her powers. God interfered with nature's order at a higher stage + by building up the particular forms of bread and fish out of + materials already in existence, by means of forces differing from + those which come under our cognisance. The act of man is <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page144">[pg 144]</span><a name="Pg144" id="Pg144" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> evidence of the presence of a being who + is able to control the forces of external nature for his own + purposes. The miracle would be evidence of the presence of a Being + who is able to exert a mightier influence over them in order to + effect his own.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Equal ambiguity + prevails in the use of the term <span class="tei tei-q">“law.”</span> + What do we mean by law when we apply the term to nature? In physical + philosophy, the Duke of Argyll tells us it is used in a great variety + of senses. Its proper meaning is to denote an invariable sequence of + phenomena. It is frequently made to include the conception of the + forces at work which produce the phenomena. This ambiguous use of the + word has been a source of endless confusion. The following quotation + will furnish us with an example:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“If in animated beings we have the solitary instance of + an efficient cause acting among the forces of nature and possessing + the power of initiation, this efficient cause produces no disturbance + of physical law. Its existence is as much a recognised part of the + infinite variety of form within the order of nature, as the existence + of a crystal or a plant; and although the character of the force + exercised by it may not be clearly understood, its effects are + regulated by the same laws as govern all the other forces of nature. + If the laws of matter are suspended by the laws of life, each time an + animated being moves any part of its body, one physical law is + suspended in precisely the same manner and to an equivalent degree, + each time another physical law is called into action. The law of + gravitation, for instance, is suspended by the law of magnetism each + time a magnet suspends a weight in the air. In each case a law is + successfully resisted precisely to the extent of the force + employed.... No exercise of will can overcome the law of gravitation + or any <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page145">[pg 145]</span><a name= + "Pg145" id="Pg145" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> other law to a greater + extent than the actual force exerted, any more than a magnetic + current can do so beyond the action of the battery. Will has no power + against exhaustion. Even Moses in the sublimest moments of faith + could not hold up his arms to heaven after his physical force was + consumed.”</span> P. 44, vol. i.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: it is + alleged <span class="tei tei-q">“that an efficient cause”</span> (man + for example) <span class="tei tei-q">“acting among the forces of + nature, and possessing the power of initiation, produces no + disturbance of physical law.”</span> What is here meant by + disturbance of physical law? It is plain that physical forces would + work out a wholly different result apart from the action of man upon + them. Though he suspends no physical force, the action of man has + produced an order of events in nature different from that which would + have taken place without it, but by balancing one against the other + he modifies their action. What is more, he possesses a power of + self-determination. Other forces are unintelligent. Man is an + intelligent force capable of introducing an order of nature quite + different from that which the material forces of nature would have + produced without his intervention.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Next: we are told + that the existence of man <span class="tei tei-q">“is as much a + recognised part of the infinite variety of form within the order of + nature as the existence of a plant or a crystal.”</span> I again ask, + what nature? Is the order spoken of that of blind unintelligent + forces, or does it include intelligence and free agency? Unless man + is a blind unintelligent force, although he be supposed to exist + within nature, he belongs to an order wholly different from that of a + plant or a crystal. To assert the contrary is to assume the whole + question. The results <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page146">[pg + 146]</span><a name="Pg146" id="Pg146" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + produced by intelligent volition differ completely in character from + those effected by the unintelligent forces of nature. The one follows + an order of necessity: the other of freedom. The affirmation that the + results of the latter belong to the same order as those of the former + is directly contrary to facts.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: + <span class="tei tei-q">“the laws of matter are suspended by the laws + of life.”</span> If laws are the invariable sequences of phenomena + how is it possible that one law can suspend another law? It is not + even true that one force can suspend another force. All that it can + do is to neutralize its action. Physical philosophy is constantly + attributing to laws what can only be true of forces, and even + frequently ascribes to them what is only true of intelligent forces. + It must never be overlooked in this controversy that the laws of + nature can effectuate nothing. Forces, not laws, produce results. The + following sentence will be a correct expression of a truth, if we + substitute <span class="tei tei-q">“force”</span> for <span class= + "tei tei-q">“law:”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“The law of + gravitation is overcome by the law of magnetism each time a magnet + suspends a weight in the air.”</span> Immediately after, we are told + that the arm falls in obedience to law. It falls by the force of + gravitation. When theologians use metaphors of this description they + are charged with anthropomorphism. Such a charge is equally valid + against the language in which physical philosophy expresses + itself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: The author + affirms <span class="tei tei-q">“that the solitary instance of an + efficient cause, if it be distinguished from the other forces of + nature by the possession of an initiatory impulse, is from the moment + when that power is exerted subject to physical laws like all other + forces; and there is no instance producible, or even logically + conceivable, of any power whose effects are opposed to the ultimate + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page147">[pg 147]</span><a name="Pg147" + id="Pg147" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> ruling of the laws of nature. + The occurrence of anything opposed to these laws is + incredible.”</span> p. 48.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What is meant, I + ask, by <span class="tei tei-q">“the intimate ruling of the laws of + nature”</span>? Even if we substitute forces for laws, the meaning is + sufficiently obscure. Probably the expression is intended to mean the + combined result effected by the energy of all the forces in nature. + If these include all mental as well as all material forces, then the + assertion is a simple truism, that nothing can be contrary to itself. + But if they exclude mental force, then the results which they produce + are clearly opposed to the ultimate ruling of the forces of + unintelligent nature. Numerous instances are not only logically + conceivable, but actually producible. The occurrence, therefore, of + anything opposed to the ultimate rulings of these unintelligent + physical forces is not incredible. It is perfectly true that man can + only produce results through the agency of these physical forces; but + he can modify their results, and so use them as to make them the + means of effectuating his purposes. It is quite true that nothing can + occur opposed to the forces of nature; that is to say, that, while + the force of gravitation is in energy, and no other force is present + capable of overcoming its power, the ascension of a human body into + heaven is impossible. But who has ever affirmed that it was possible? + Those who affirm that an ascension has taken place, also assert that + another force was in active energy, which was capable of + counteracting the force of gravitation. This assertion, therefore, is + totally irrelevant to the point at issue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The consideration + of the next question before us may very properly be introduced, by + quoting the following passage of the same author:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Our highest attainable conception of infinite power + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page148">[pg 148]</span><a name="Pg148" + id="Pg148" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and wisdom is based on the + universality and invariability of law, and inexorably excludes as + unworthy and anthropomorphistic any idea of its fitful + suspension.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This at once + raises the very important question, whether there is anything in the + performance of a miracle inconsistent with the divine character and + perfections. It has been often alleged by those who deny the + possibility of miracles, that God energizes in the universe in + conformity with invariable laws, which express the uniform mode of + the divine working. From these, as the result of his wisdom, He will + never deviate. To alter or vary from this mode of acting implies that + the machinery of the universe, through which He acts, is imperfect. + The supposition that He has worked a miracle therefore involves the + assumption that He has ceased from one mode of action and adopted + another; or, in other words, that the forces of the universe fail to + effectuate his purposes; or that the whole machine has got out of + order and requires rectification. Any action of this kind in the case + of a Being possessed of all power, is a reflection both on his wisdom + and his immutability. Still further: it is affirmed by some that the + love of order is an attribute so inherent in Deity, that it is + inconceivable that any alteration in the existing order of the + universe should take place under his government.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One objection + raised in the above quotation I may dismiss summarily, viz. the idea + that God interposes with any fitful interventions in the universe. + The idea of fitful intervention is quite foreign to the conception of + a miracle, which is described in the New Testament as one of the + means by which he realizes his deliberate purposes. I shall elsewhere + disprove the allegation that Revelation is an intervention of the + Creator to rectify a miscarriage in his creative + work.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page149">[pg + 149]</span><a name="Pg149" id="Pg149" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will also be + desirable in this place to answer the charge of anthropomorphism so + frequently urged against the defenders of Christianity. When they + speak of God as a person, they are charged with manufacturing a + gigantic man. When they ascribe to Him a moral character, or describe + Him as acting in nature, they are then accused of making a God out of + a number of conceptions which are purely human. This fault, if it be + one, must be shared alike by philosophers, men of science, and + theologians. The plain fact is, that man has no conceptions but human + ones. To abandon these is to cease to think altogether. When + philosophers and men of science speak of nature, they are obliged to + apply to it conceptions which are strictly true only of man. We are + obliged to do precisely the same with respect to God. So far all + thought, the most elevated and the most ordinary, is anthropomorphic. + The term can be fairly used as a reproach only when certain material + conceptions or degraded passions are directly affirmed to exist in + the divine mind.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The author, in the + following passage, places the objection before us in a still more + striking light: <span class="tei tei-q">“Being therefore limited to + reason for our feeble conceptions of the divine Being of which we are + capable, and reason being totally opposed to an order of nature so + imperfect as to require or permit repeated interference, and + rejecting the supposition of arbitrary suspension of law, such a + conception of the Deity as is proposed by theologians must be + pronounced irrational, and derogatory to the wisdom and perfection + which we recognize in the invariable order of nature. It is + impossible for us to conceive the supreme Being acting otherwise than + we actually see in nature; and if we recognize in the universe the + operation of his infinite wisdom and power, it is in the immutable + order and regularity of all phenomena, <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page150">[pg 150]</span><a name="Pg150" id="Pg150" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> and the eternal prevalence of law that we see + their highest manifestation.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is asserted by + this writer and a great number of others, that the most perfect + conception of the universe is that of a machine, which when once set + into action shall go on eternally grinding out its results without + the smallest occasion for the intervention of its Maker. According to + this view, all the He has to do for the future after the machine is + once set into operation, is to retire from the scene of His creative + work, and to contemplate the results of its wonderful operations. Any + intervention on His part would imply a defect in the construction of + the machine. It follows therefore that the most perfect conception of + God (if there be one) is that of a perfect mechanist and chemist, who + has originally formed matter with its properties and forces acting in + conformity with invariable law, and that this has been done by Him + with such perfection, that they have gone on ever since evolving + whatever has existed, without the need of His intervention or + supervision; or to put it in other words, after the original act of + creation, His presence in the universe may be dispensed with as + unnecessary. The universe is therefore a self-acting machine which + goes on in an eternal series of self-evolutions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such a conception + may be the most worthy one that we can form of a perfect mechanist or + chemist, though it may be doubtful how far the idea of having his + services dispensed with for the future would be wholly satisfactory + to him. It is far from clear, however, that it is the most perfect + conception we can form of God. The creations of the mechanist and of + the chemist are destitute alike of feeling, reason and volition, a + moral nature, conscience, and spiritual affections. They may + therefore when completed be left to themselves; and <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page151">[pg 151]</span><a name="Pg151" id="Pg151" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the more perfect the irrational machine + may be, the more perfectly it will grind out its results. But many of + the constructions of God possess attributes, which exhibit other + qualities in their maker than those of a perfect mechanist or + chemist. It follows, therefore, that this is not the most perfect nor + the most worthy conception which we can form of God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it will be + objected that even if we concede that the Creator is ever present + energizing in the works of nature, and even if the forces of nature + are viewed as the expressions of His energy, His action in conformity + with unchanging order is the worthiest conception of Him, and to + assert that He ever has varied from this mode of action is to degrade + Him. Such being the case, to affirm that miracles have been wrought + by Him, is to introduce a degraded view of the character of God, one + alike inconsistent with His wisdom, immutability and power.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply: that the + objection overlooks the existence of purpose in the divine mind, and + that it may not be confined to the realization of a mechanical + result. The purpose or idea of creation in God includes the + production of both the material and the moral worlds. If this be so, + one harmonious purpose, including the divine manifestations, both in + the material and moral universe, may be carried out by a succession + of progressive manifestations, each forming a portion of one great + divine plan. A miracle, therefore, as a part of such a moral + intervention, would be no interruption of the orderly action of the + divine mind, but a portion of it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: if + God exists, He must have other attributes besides those of a + mechanist or a chemist. He has created not only the material + universe, but a moral one. God, therefore, must be a moral being, and + a <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page152">[pg 152]</span><a name= + "Pg152" id="Pg152" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> person, for moral + attributes can only be conceived of as belonging to a being who is + possessed of personality. It follows, therefore, that manifestations + of Himself, under aspects suitable to moral beings, are as much to be + expected as manifestations of His power or of His wisdom addressed to + an intellectual nature. The supposition, therefore, that all His + manifestations can only be made through the laws of material nature, + and in an unchanging series, and that it is not a portion of His + purpose to manifest Himself as a moral being, is only valid on the + denial that He is one. It involves the absurdity of denying to God + that freedom from the trammels of necessary law which as matter of + fact He has bestowed on man.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If therefore God + be a moral being and not an impersonal force, it is perfectly + consistent with the highest conceptions of Him, that He should + manifest Himself in the moral as well as in the material universe. + This is the more necessary, because philosophy is never wearied with + telling us, that we can know little or nothing of His moral + attributes from material nature. As a part of such manifestation a + miracle is addressed to our highest reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is absurd to + argue on the assumption that there is a God, and then to found our + reasonings on principles which are inconsistent with it. If there is + a God, He must be the creator of the universe. It must, therefore, + have been consistent with His perfection and immutability to create. + It follows, therefore, even on the assumption of the truth of the + Darwinian theory of creation, that a new order must have been + introduced, when God first breathed life into the lowest forms of + matter. But if He introduced a new order then, that is to say, when + He first deviated from the previous order of His existence, and + performed His <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page153">[pg + 153]</span><a name="Pg153" id="Pg153" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + first creative act, how can it possibly be contrary to reason to + affirm that He has repeated it. A miracle would be such a repetition, + or, in other words, the introduction of a new series of events.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully admit that + reason is opposed to the supposition of such an order of nature as to + require repeated interferences with it, assuming that what is + intended is a frequent meddling with it to set it right, not constant + presence and superintendence. Still more is it opposed to the idea of + arbitrary interruption of law. The entire validity of these + reasonings which we have been considering proceeds on the assumption + that the argument requires this. I care not what some Christian + apologists may have said on this subject. The New Testament affirms + in the most unequivocal language that revelation is the steady + carrying out of a pre-determined purpose in God to make a + manifestation of Himself not only to man, but to other rational + beings besides man. The objection therefore falls to the ground.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The assertion that + it is impossible to conceive of the supreme Being acting otherwise + than we see him act in nature, may be met by a direct denial. On the + contrary the presence of evil, moral and physical, forms the greatest + difficulty connected with the belief in theism. The elder Mill was so + capable of conceiving that if a supreme Being existed, the order of + the universe would have been so wholly different from its present + order, that it led him to affirm that the proof of His existence was + altogether wanting.<a id="noteref_3" name="noteref_3" href= + "#note_3"><span class="tei tei-noteref"><span style= + "font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">3</span></span></a> But + intelligent Christians fully recognize in the immutable order and + regularity of the universe and the eternal prevalence of law, the + operation of His infinite wisdom and power. <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page154">[pg 154]</span><a name="Pg154" id="Pg154" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> Unless there was such a general regularity and + order in the universe, the evidential force of miracles would be + deprived of all value.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore, whichever views we may take of the mode in which a miracle + may be performed, that there is nothing in the idea of it which is + contrary to our reason. Whenever it is affirmed to be so, the + assertion originates in an ambiguity in the use of terms, or in + partial views of nature, or of the mode of the divine working, or + from confounding under a common name phenomena so different in + character as those of mind and matter, or by making assumptions + respecting the divine operations which contradict the laws of the + universe, or respecting the divine character, which reason refuses to + endorse. How far the known or unknown forces of nature may be + employed in the performance of a miracle is an abstract question that + we have no means of determining. The agency of some of the known + forces of nature is unequivocally asserted in the Old Testament to + have been the media employed in the performance of some of its + miracles. No such affirmation is made in the New Testament. Still + there is not one word to imply that any of the forces of material + nature were for a single moment suspended in their action. The only + assertion made is the presence and active energy of a force capable + of producing them. That force is the Creator of the universe bearing + witness to the divine mission of Jesus Christ. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“The Father himself, which hath sent me, hath borne + witness of me.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“The works which the + Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear + witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.”</span> (John v. 36, + 37.)</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page155">[pg 155]</span><a name= + "Pg155" id="Pg155" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc15" id="toc15"></a> <a name="pdf16" id="pdf16"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter VII. The Allegation That No + Testimony Can Prove The Truth Of A Supernatural Event.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Hume's position, + which affirmed that it is impossible to prove the truth of a + supernatural event by any amount of testimony however strong, is + certainly one of the most plausible that have ever been assumed by + unbelief. Stated briefly and in his own words, it is as follows: + <span class="tei tei-q">“A miracle is a violation of the laws of + nature; and as a firm and unalterable experience has established + these laws, the proof against a miracle from the nature of the fact + is as entire as any argument from experience can possibly be + imagined.”</span> Again: <span class="tei tei-q">“No testimony is + sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony is of such a + kind that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact which + it endeavours to establish.”</span> The fallacy of these positions, + notwithstanding the plausible arguments by which they are supported, + has already been pointed out by a multitude of writers. Mr. Mill + himself has practically abandoned Hume's argument as either a + harmless truism, or, in another point of view, one that requires to + be modified to such an extent as to deprive it of any real cogency. + Under ordinary circumstances, therefore, it might be passed over in + silence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the author of + <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion”</span> has + endeavoured to rehabilitate it even against Mr. Mill. He affirms that + Christian <span class="tei tei-q">“Apologists find it much more + convenient to evade the simple but effective arguments <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page156">[pg 156]</span><a name="Pg156" id="Pg156" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of Hume, than to answer them; and where + it is possible, they dismiss them with a sneer, and hasten on to less + dangerous ground.”</span> He then endeavours to show that Mr. Mill + has been partly misapprehended, and is partly inaccurate; and he + proceeds to address himself to Paley's argument against Hume, as + though it was relied on by modern apologists as entirely conclusive. + No other writer is even noticed by him. In the recent work of the + late Mr. Warington, <span class="tei tei-q">“Can I believe in + miracles?”</span> one chapter is devoted to the calm and + dispassionate examination of Hume's argument. It is perhaps the + ablest dissection of it in existence. Yet this writer, who charges + Christian apologists with evasion, and even with getting rid of its + force by a sneer, has left Mr. Warington's crushing reply to Hume + completely unnoticed. The position taken by him renders a few general + observations necessary. As it will be useless to repeat arguments + that have been fully elaborated elsewhere, I shall content myself + with briefly stating the positions which have been firmly established + on this subject.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: Experience + consists of two kinds; 1st, That which has fallen under our own + direct cognizance, which from the nature of the case must have been + very limited. 2dly, The general experience of all other men, as far + as we have the means of knowing it. This latter experience we become + acquainted with exclusively by testimony, and it rests entirely on + its validity. The two together constitute what we mean when we say + that a thing is, or is not, contrary to experience.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: There is + a sense in which miracles are contrary to our experience. They would + be destitute of all evidential value, if they were not so. But while + this is freely admitted, we must lay down clearly in what sense we + use the words. They are not so, in the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page157">[pg 157]</span><a name="Pg157" id="Pg157" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> sense that we have had direct evidence of their + non-occurrence. They are contrary to our experience only in the sense + that we have never witnessed them, and that the order of events which + we have witnessed is always different; for instance, we have + witnessed as a matter of experience that men die, and that none + return again to life; or that blind men, when cured, are never cured + by a word or a touch. In this sense alone it is that the resurrection + of a dead man, and the cure of a blind man by a touch, is contrary to + our experience.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly: It is not + true that an occurrence which in this sense is contrary to our + experience cannot be believed on adequate testimony. If it were so, + all additions to our knowledge that lie beyond the limits of our past + experience, ought to be rejected. Every extraordinary occurrence must + be at once pronounced incredible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fourthly: The + experience of one age differs from that of another. That which lies + outside the experience of one century becomes within the experience + of the next. The truth is that the sum of human experience is + receiving continual additions, in proportion as the sphere of + observation enlarges. If it is true that we ought to reject + everything contrary to experience, it follows that if many of the + inventions of the present age had been reported in a previous one, + they ought to have been rejected as incredible. For example: if a + century ago it had been affirmed that a message had actually been + conveyed one thousand miles in five minutes, the assertion ought on + this principle to have been rejected as contrary to the universal + experience of mankind. In an earlier age, no miracle could have been + more difficult to believe. Yet although contrary to prior experience, + it has been established as a fact. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page158">[pg 158]</span><a name="Pg158" id="Pg158" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> The principle, therefore, as laid down by Hume, + leads to an absurd conclusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fifthly: The + experience of each individual is limited by his own observation and + what he has learned respecting that of others. This constitutes as + far as he is concerned the experience of mankind. Now, under the + Equator the experience of man is that each day and night is twelve + hours long. Neither he, nor his ancestors, nor any person whom he + trusts, have ever had any other experience than this. To him, + therefore, the affirmation that there is a place on the earth where + each day and night is six months long, is contrary to experience, and + ought to be rejected as a fable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Sixthly: If we + confine experience to scientific experience, extraordinary + discoveries are made and facts established in one age which are + contrary to that of a former one. On this principle, the ground on + which Herodotus rejected the story of the Phœnician navigators that + they had sailed round Africa was satisfactory. It was contrary to his + experience that they should have seen the sun in the position in + which they affirmed that they had seen it, though it is not contrary + to ours.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Seventhly: + Miracles viewed as mere <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">phenomena</span></em> stand on exactly the same + ground as very unusual occurrences, or very wonderful discoveries. As + far as they are contrary to past experience, they are alike credible + or incredible. They are events of which the cause is unknown, but may + or may not hereafter be discovered. It is quite true that any + extraordinary phenomenon requires a stronger testimony to render it + credible than an ordinary occurrence. But this involves no question + of abstract possibility or impossibility, but is one purely of + evidence, each case having to be decided on its own merits. It must + be carefully <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page159">[pg + 159]</span><a name="Pg159" id="Pg159" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + observed that when we affirm that this or that matter lies within + human knowledge, or is contrary to it, experience has to do with + phenomena alone. All questions of causation lie entirely beyond its + cognizance.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Eighthly: The + moment we view an event otherwise than as a mere phenomenon, and take + into consideration the causes producing it, however unusual it may + be, it is impossible to affirm that it is contrary to experience. + When we take these into consideration the entire character of the + event is at once changed, and the probability of the occurrence must + be estimated on wholly different grounds. Under such circumstances, + an extremely improbable event, which we might otherwise justly reject + as contrary to experience, becomes simply one of which we have had no + experience. Thus it is contrary to experience that men can live for + one hour under water, but when we take into consideration and + thoroughly understand the contrivance of the diving-bell, the event + becomes one of a different order from that of which we supposed that + we had experience. Before this apparatus was invented, the assertion + that men could live an hour under water would have been rejected as + fabulous. The invention has introduced a fresh condition into the + case. The event has now become a portion of our experience; but prior + to the discovery of the apparatus it was merely an event lying + outside our experience, and not to be rejected as being contrary to + it. In a similar way, a miracle, as a mere phenomenon, may be said to + be contrary to our experience; but the moment that we take into + account its true character, viz. that its very conception implies the + presence of a force of some kind with which we were previously + unacquainted, then such an event is no longer one which we can + pronounce contrary to our experience, but merely one which lies + beyond or outside <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page160">[pg + 160]</span><a name="Pg160" id="Pg160" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> it. + In the case of miracles, therefore, the position of Hume is + inapplicable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Ninthly: It is not + true that in estimating the truth of testimony, we simply balance + probability, against probability, as stated in Hume's argument. The + form in which it has been put by him is too abstract to admit of + application to individual cases; nor does any man, in estimating the + truth of testimony for practical purposes, set down and deliberately + balance probabilities against probabilities. The whole process is of + a far more instantaneous character, and a number of minute + considerations are involved, which do not admit of statement in the + form of general propositions. Thus, if an event lying outside my + present experience is reported to me by a friend on whose veracity + and powers of judgment I have implicit reliance, I accept the truth + of his statement, notwithstanding a great degree of abstract + improbability; it being assumed that the event was one in which it + was impossible that he should be deceived. In estimating this latter + point, we never balance the probabilities as to the truth or + falsehood of human testimony, but we consider the individual + circumstances of the case, whether they are of such a nature that our + friend could be deceived about them. If on consideration we are + convinced that deception was impossible, we yield assent to his known + veracity, although, as far as we know, the event reported by him has + never before come within the range of human experience.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let me remove the + question from an abstract into a concrete form. There are numberless + events in which it happens that men of unquestionable judgment and + veracity are deceived. There are others in which no deception can be + possible. An instance of one class is the alleged case of persons + living a considerable time <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page161">[pg + 161]</span><a name="Pg161" id="Pg161" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + without food. Here astuteness may impose on the vigilance of the most + wary. Take, on the other hand, the case of a man born blind. One + informant, on whose veracity we have the fullest reliance, tells us + that he has known the man from his birth; that, up to a certain day, + his blindness was established beyond all reasonable doubt to every + one who knew him, that on that day, he saw a person touch the eyes of + the blind man, who not only instantly received his sight, but could + use his eyes as perfectly as those who had enjoyed the use of them + from birth. I admit that this case is a supposed one, and does not + exactly represent any case recorded in the Gospels. But though an + assumed one, it is perfectly valid for the purposes of argument. In + it deception would be impossible. If all this was affirmed to have + come under the direct knowledge of one, of whose veracity and + judgment we were assured, we should accept his statement as true, + without balancing the abstract probability of the truth of evidence + against the probability of its falsity, although the event narrated + lay outside the range of our experience. Our knowledge of the + judgment and veracity of the informant is the essential element in + judging of the truth of evidence. It is only when our means of + forming this judgment are deficient that we attempt to balance + abstract probabilities.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Tenthly: The + question of the truth of testimony as against past experience and the + alleged greater probability that testimony should be false, than that + past experience should be unreliable, is greatly modified by the + consideration that an overwhelming amount of the sum total of past + experience rests for its acceptance on the validity of testimony + itself. That portion which is not the result of our own individual + experience rests for its truth exclusively on the validity of human + testimony, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page162">[pg + 162]</span><a name="Pg162" id="Pg162" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and + must be unreliable in proportion as testimony is invalid. It must be + observed, however, that I by no means deny that testimony is much + more frequently invalid in its narrations of extraordinary events + than of ordinary ones.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Eleventhly: While + it is freely conceded that the evidence to prove the truth of a very + extraordinary occurrence must be far stronger than that which is + required to prove an ordinary one, it must never be forgotten that + the amount of evidence necessary to prove any particular fact always + varies with the amount of the antecedent probability of its + occurrence. The very same action may be credible or otherwise, just + in proportion as we can discern an adequate purpose for its + performance, or infer the presence of a particular motive. If, for + example, it were reported that a man of the highest character had + been seen during the hours of early morning issuing from one of the + lowest haunts of vice in London, those who knew him well would + require an overwhelming amount of evidence to establish the truth of + the assertion. They would undoubtedly fall back on the question of + abstract probability, and argue that it was more likely that it was + either a case of mistaken identity (a very common error), or a + deliberate falsehood, than that the statement should be true. But, + if, on the contrary, it could be shown that he had been sent for to + visit a dying person, and had gone at his particular request, the + whole of the antecedent improbability would vanish, and the otherwise + incredible testimony would become perfectly credible. It follows, + therefore, that the credibility of testimony varies with our + knowledge of the motive for the performance of the action.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This consideration + ought to have due weight in considering the evidence of miracles. + Viewed as mere <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page163">[pg + 163]</span><a name="Pg163" id="Pg163" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + phenomena, their abstract improbability is great. When they are + viewed as deviations from the ordinary course of nature, their + improbability becomes still greater. But those who believe in the + existence of a personal God energizing in the universe at every + moment, and in every place, postulate the presence of a force fully + adequate to work them, for this is involved in the idea of God. But + the question arises, Will He? Until a well-attested miracle has + actually been performed, the antecedent probability derived from our + experience of the order of nature is against the supposition that He + will, and throws on the reporter the necessity of giving a stronger + proof than we require for an ordinary fact. But in proportion as we + can show that it is probable that God will make a revelation, the + antecedent improbability of a miracle is diminished; and if it can be + shown that it is very probable that He will do so, it wholly + disappears.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be readily + admitted that such an argument can only have weight with a believer + in the existence of a God, who is the moral Governor of the Universe. + To him, however, it is of the utmost value, for on the supposition in + question, the probability of some higher manifestation of the divine + character than that displayed in the material universe does not rest + on theory, but on the facts of man and his condition. Looking at the + past history of the world, it is matter of fact that God has made + higher and higher manifestations of himself. So far it is + antecedently probable that He will continue to do so. His last + manifestation has been in the production of a being possessed of a + moral nature, with powers capable of immense elevation. It is also no + theory, but a fact, that this moral being now is, and ever has been + within the historical periods in a state of great imperfection. It is + therefore highly <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page164">[pg + 164]</span><a name="Pg164" id="Pg164" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + probable that the Creator will adopt means for elevating the moral + being whom He has created, and that He will effect this by acting, + not on matter, but on mind. Contemplating the actual state of man, + the known law of the Creator's previous action, and the moral + character of God, the antecedent probability that God will make a + further manifestation of himself is established quite independently + of the facts or assertions in the Bible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Twelfthly: + Whatever be the supposed antecedent improbability of an occurrence, + it is capable of being overcome by an amount of evidence which can + leave no reasonable doubt in a mind endowed with common sense. + Theoretical objections may be adduced against any evidence which can + be brought in proof of particular facts, but the ultimate appeal must + be, not to a multitude of abstract theories, but to the common sense + of mankind. Of this character is all historical evidence. It rests on + the same principles as those which guide us in the affairs of daily + life. There is a certain amount of evidence which leaves no doubt on + the common sense of mankind, although it may be open to many + theoretical objections. Such evidence is capable of proving a fact + against a very high degree of antecedent improbability. Mr. Mill may + be considered as a witness whose predilections were all in favour of + unbelief. Yet his clear logical mind has led him to state the case + fairly as far as the <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" + xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> + probability or improbability of miracles is concerned. His + conclusions are adverse to the position assumed by the author of + <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion.”</span> I will + briefly state the most important of Mr. Mill's positions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First. He points + out that a miracle involves nothing contradictory to any law of + causation. He well remarks that to prove such a contradiction, it is + not only <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page165">[pg + 165]</span><a name="Pg165" id="Pg165" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + necessary that the cause should exist without producing the effect, + but that no contravening cause should be present. But the very idea + of a miracle presupposes an adequate contravening cause, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> God. + The possibility of a miracle therefore cannot be denied on the ground + that it does not presuppose the presence of a force adequate to + produce it. Mr. Mill states, <span class="tei tei-q">“Of the adequacy + of that cause, if present, there can be no doubt, and the only + antecedent improbability that can be objected to a miracle, is the + improbability that any such cause existed,”</span> that is to say, + the whole controversy resolves itself into the question between + Pantheism and Atheism on the one hand, and Theism on the other.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly. He + observes: <span class="tei tei-q">“All therefore that Hume has made + out, and this he must be considered to have made out, is, that (at + least in the imperfect state of our knowledge of natural agencies, + which leaves it always possible that some of the physical antecedents + may have been hidden from us) no evidence can prove a miracle to any + one who did not previously believe in the existence of a being or + beings with supernatural power, or who believes himself to have full + proof that the character of the being whom he recognises is + inconsistent with his having seen fit to interfere on the occasion in + question. If we do not already believe in supernatural agencies, no + miracle can prove to us their existence. The miracle itself, + considered as an extraordinary fact, may be satisfactorily certified + by our senses, or by testimony; but nothing can ever prove that it is + a miracle: there is still another possible hypothesis, that of its + being the result of some unknown cause; and this possibility cannot + be so completely shut out, as to leave no alternative but that of + admitting the existence of a being superior to nature. <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page166">[pg 166]</span><a name="Pg166" id="Pg166" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Those, however, who already believe in + such a being have two hypotheses to choose from, a supernatural and + an unknown natural agency; and they have to judge which of the two is + the most probable in this particular case.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + to deny that this is a correct statement of the question. Hume's + position is a generalized statement, that no evidence can establish + the reality of a miracle, on the ground that our experience of the + uniformity of nature's laws is so firm and unalterable, that no + amount of testimony can establish a fact in opposition to it; or as + he elsewhere puts it, <span class="tei tei-q">“unless the testimony + be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous than + the fact which it endeavours to establish.”</span> He affirms this to + be equally true on the principles of Atheism, Pantheism, or Theism, + for the only thing that he takes into account is the inadequacy of + the testimony, and not the inadequacy of the cause. Mr. Mill + therefore says correctly that all that this argument avails to prove + is, that it is impossible to prove a miracle, except to persons who + are already convinced that a being or beings exist who are possessed + of supernatural powers, and that it is in conformity with their + character to work one. If this is the only intelligible meaning of + Hume's position (and it is evident that it is), it reduces his + argument against miracles to a very harmless one. The conception of a + miracle as distinct from an unusual phenomenon implies purpose. + Purpose is only conceivable of a being possessed of personality and + will. To those therefore who either deny the existence of any such + being higher than man, or who affirm that we have no evidence of his + existence, it is impossible to prove a miracle <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">as a + miracle</span></em>. The utmost that could be done would be to prove + that an event had taken place in nature which <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page167">[pg 167]</span><a name="Pg167" id="Pg167" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> in the present state of our knowledge + could be assigned to no known cause. In such a case the Pantheist and + the Atheist have always the alternative of believing that the event + in question must be due to the operation of some unknown force in + nature, but which in the gradual development of knowledge we may + hereafter be able to detect. This is a position that no defender of + revelation worthy of the name can be anxious to dispute. Let it + further be observed that Mr. Mill does not deny, but affirms, that + the occurrence of an extraordinary event analogous to a miracle + viewed simply as a phenomenon, may be satisfactorily certified by our + senses or by testimony. To affirm the contrary would be simply + absurd, as involving the stereotyping of human thought, and making + the wisdom of our ancestors the only standard of truth. There was a + time when the earth was believed to be an extended plain. If at that + time any one had asserted that by continually sailing westward he had + at last arrived at the place from which he started, or, in other + words, had circumnavigated the globe, this affirmation ought to have + been rejected, not only as founded on testimony contrary to all + previous experience, but as intrinsically impossible. Yet if Hume's + dictum has any value as an argument against the possibility of a + miracle, it must affirm the impossibility of establishing such an + occurrence by any amount of evidence whatever. Mr. Mill's mind was + far too logical not to perceive that such a position is altogether + untenable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Mr. Mill, however, + affirms that there is one ground on which the argument might be + tenable against a theist, not because the evidence is insufficient to + prove the occurrence of an extraordinary fact, as a mere phenomenon, + but because it could not prove it to be a miracle. It is not only + necessary, says he, in order to <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page168">[pg 168]</span><a name="Pg168" id="Pg168" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> render this proof valid, that one should + believe in the existence of a supernatural being who is able to bring + about the occurrence, but also that <span class="tei tei-q">“the + character of this Being is not inconsistent with his having seen fit + to interfere on the occasion in question.”</span> Thus a man may be a + believer in the existence of God, and yet be persuaded that it was + not consistent with his character to interfere with the course of + natural phenomena at all, or in such a manner as the conception of a + miracle pre-supposes. To such a theist the utmost that evidence could + prove would be, that the extraordinary event had been brought about + by the action of an unknown force. Again, the same principle acts, + and acts reasonably, on the minds of multitudes of intelligent + Christians, who summarily reject a certain class of reported miracles + without inquiring into their evidence, on the ground that the working + of such miracles is inconsistent with their conceptions of the divine + character; that is to say, they think it more probable that the + stories should be untrue, than that God should work in the way in + question. But to give this argument any validity against the miracles + wrought in attestation of Christianity, it must be proved that it is + inconsistent with the divine character to make a revelation, or to + introduce a deviation from what is to us the ordinary mode of His + working; or that the miracles recorded in the Gospels are repugnant + to the character of God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Mr. Mill's general + position is therefore incontrovertible, that those who believe in the + existence of God <span class="tei tei-q">“have two hypotheses to + choose from, viz. a supernatural, or an unknown natural + agency;”</span> and that they must judge which of these two is the + more probable; and that, in forming their judgment, a most important + consideration must be the character of God, <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page169">[pg 169]</span><a name="Pg169" id="Pg169" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> and the conformity of the supposed event to + that character. This position every intelligent Christian will + readily accept.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Mr. Mill adds: + <span class="tei tei-q">“But with the knowledge which we now possess + of the general uniformity of the course of nature, religion, + following in the wake of science, has been compelled to acknowledge + the government of the universe, as being on the whole carried on by + general laws, and not by special interpositions. To whosoever holds + this belief, there is a general presumption against any supposition + of divine agency, not operating through general laws; or, in other + words, there is an antecedent improbability in every miracle, which + in order to outweigh it, requires an extraordinary strength of + antecedent probability derived from the special circumstances of the + case.”</span> These observations require consideration.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is no doubt + that the polytheistic religions postulated the existence of a vast + number of superhuman beings by whose agency and caprice many natural + occurrences were brought about. Such a belief indicates a very + imperfect conception of <span class="tei tei-q">“order”</span> in + nature. But these supposed interferences with it would by no means + realize the notion of what we now designate a miracle, the very idea + of which implies an order in nature to which the miracle forms an + exception. If there is no order in nature, there can be no + miracle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Hebrew + monotheism involved conceptions directly opposite to this. It viewed + the action of God as the foundation of all the forces in nature. + Whilst above and outside nature, He was everywhere present in nature. + Its forces were the expressions of the energy of His will. Its order + (for the Hebrew recognised a high order in nature) was the result of + His good <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page170">[pg + 170]</span><a name="Pg170" id="Pg170" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + pleasure, and due to His constant working. In the Old Testament the + commonest events in nature are no less ascribed to God than those + which we designate miraculous. A Hebrew never conceived of a miracle + as a deviation from the divine order, but as a consistent carrying + out of a divine purpose in the government of the world. A modern + conception of theism differs from this in supposing that there are + certain forces in material nature which, when once called into + action, go on energizing without any direct intervention of God. But + when this conception comes to be minutely analysed, if we believe in + a God, it is impossible to conceive of force, at least in its + ultimate form, except as a direct expression of the divine + energy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Science has so far + modified religious thought on this subject, that while it still + continues to hold that the various forces in nature are modes of the + divine acting, it nevertheless believes that God does not deviate + from his predetermined course for the purpose of meeting what we are + pleased to call special contingencies. The divine action is, in fact, + not altered to meet man's convenience, and His government is carried + on as far as it lies within our cognisance by the general forces of + nature. God acts in nature in conformity with a definite law, and + from that He will not deviate, whatever consequences man's ignorance + or disregard of his mode of action may bring upon him. Mr. Mill + observes that to any person holding this belief, there is a general + presumption against any supposition of divine agency, not operating + through general laws. That is to say, we have had a constant + experience of his acting through general laws; and no experience of + his acting otherwise. But the idea of a revelation introduces a + factor into the case, entirely different from anything of which we + have had previous experience. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page171">[pg 171]</span><a name="Pg171" id="Pg171" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> It forms part of a great purpose existing in + the divine mind, and is in its nature analogous to the first + introduction of life, or the first creation of a free moral agent. + Respecting the laws by which God regulates his creative acts, we are + ignorant. Yet the theist firmly believes in creative acts of some + kind, and that they are regulated by law. In this ignorance of God's + law of creation, it is impossible to affirm that it is antecedently + improbable that in making a fresh manifestation of himself, he will + operate only through those general laws, which are the ordinary + manifestations of his will.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is some want + of clearness in Mr. Mill's expression, that in order to outweigh the + antecedent improbability of miracles, arising from those modes of the + divine action which fall within the limits of our experience, an + extraordinary strength of antecedent probability, derived from the + special circumstances of the case, is required. If by this antecedent + probability he means something such as has been above referred to, + there can be no objection to his statement. He ought to have + observed, however, that the antecedent improbability which may be + supposed to belong to miracles, only attaches to them while + contemplated as phenomena, and that such an improbability readily + yields to positive evidence. This is virtually admitted in a + subsequent sentence. <span class="tei tei-q">“According as this + circumstance, viz. the unknown cause, not having previously + manifested itself in action, or the falsity of the testimony, appears + more improbable; that is, conflicts with an approximate + generalization of a higher order, we believe the testimony or + disbelieve it with a stronger or weaker degree of conviction, + according to the preponderance, at least until we have sifted the + matter further.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“This,”</span> says + the author of <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion,”</span> + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page172">[pg 172]</span><a name="Pg172" + id="Pg172" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> <span class="tei tei-q">“is + precisely Hume's argument, weakened by the introduction of + reservations which have no cogency.”</span> We say, this is precisely + what Hume's argument is <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">not</span></em>, for, if it be valid, the whole + question of miracles may be summarily dismissed without any inquiry + into the evidence on which they rest.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Still, however, as + the author affirms and endeavours to prove that Mr. Mill's position + leave Hume's argument untouched, a few further observations will be + necessary. Hume's statement is, <span class="tei tei-q">“A miracle is + a violation of the laws of nature, and as a firm and unalterable + experience has established these laws, the proof against a miracle + from the nature of the fact, is as entire as any argument from + experience which can possibly be imagined.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply, that the + conception of a miracle does not involve any necessary violation of + the laws of nature. All that it implies is the presence of another + force different from those which have come under our cognisance: and + this may act so as to produce the miracle without violating one of + nature's laws. But, it is added, <span class="tei tei-q">“uniform and + unalterable experience has established these laws.”</span> What has + this experience really established? It is this, and this only, Given + the presence of certain forces, <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">and no others</span></em>, certain results + invariably follow. But experience cannot tell us anything, as to what + would be the law of nature, if some other force were in action; nor + is it able to say one word as to the non-existence of any force which + has not come under its observation. Abstractedly, it is true that the + argument against a miracle is as entire as any argument from + experience can be imagined, because experience really supplies us + with no basis for argumentation in the case. Prior to the invention + of railways and the discovery of the uses to which steam <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page173">[pg 173]</span><a name="Pg173" id="Pg173" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> can be applied, the argument from + experience was equally valid against the possibility of travelling in + a carriage not propelled by animal force. In each case a new force + enters into the conditions, of which experience is unable to take + cognisance.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Why is it more probable that all men must die?”</span> + asks this writer, <span class="tei tei-q">“or that lead cannot of + itself remain suspended in the air; or that fire consumes wood, and + is extinguished by water, unless it be that these events are found + agreeable to nature, and there is required a violation of its laws, + or in other words, a miracle, to prevent them?”</span> I answer that + it is probable that all men must die, because we observe under the + action of the known forces of nature that all men do die. But this + says nothing as to what must take place if another force was present; + or a combination of existing forces was discovered sufficiently + potent to counteract the action of those which in the present state + of things bring about the dissolution of man's frame. There is no + necessity, for the purpose of effecting this, that one of the + existing forces should be suspended. The time was, when certain forms + of disease invariably resulted in death. The advance of medical + science has averted this result. Ought the discovery to have been + rejected because it pretended to produce a fact contrary to prior + experience? Are any of the laws of nature violated, or are its forces + suspended in such a case? What has taken place? Man has discovered + agencies which have neutralized the effect of other agencies. Our + belief that all men must die rests on the assumption that no force + can or will at any future time be brought into action which will + counteract the forces now in operation by which that event is + produced.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The same remark + applies to the other three cases. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page174">[pg 174]</span><a name="Pg174" id="Pg174" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> To the second of them the author has himself + supplied the answer: <span class="tei tei-q">“Lead cannot of itself + remain suspended in the air.”</span> Doubtless, it cannot <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">of + itself</span></em>. Who ever supposed that it could? But it can be + suspended when a force adequate to counteract that of gravitation is + present. So fire will always consume wood, or be extinguished by + water, as long as no other forces but the usual ones are in + operation. But man has already invented the means of producing + combustion under water. No violation of nature's laws is required in + any of these cases. Nor is there any required in a miracle. The fact + is, that there is an assumption in all arguments of this kind, which + for obvious reasons is not openly avowed, but which alone imparts to + them an apparent validity. <span class="tei tei-q">“No such force can + exist,”</span> which translated into other language is identical with + the proposition, <span class="tei tei-q">“There is no God.”</span> To + keep this assumption in the background, when the very basis of the + argument for miracles is the assumption that there is one, is a + course which can lead to no good result.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the author + remarks further: <span class="tei tei-q">“There must, therefore, be a + uniform experience against every miraculous event, otherwise the + event could not merit that appellation. And as a uniform experience + amounts to a proof, there is hence a direct and full proof from the + nature of the fact, against the existence of any miracle; nor can + such a proof be destroyed, or the miracle rendered credible, by any + opposite proof which is superior.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Here again we + encounter the same faults of reasoning, which amount to a virtual + assumption of the point at issue. <span class="tei tei-q">“There must + be a uniform experience against any miraculous event, otherwise it + would not merit the appellation—doubtless.”</span> But what is the + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page175">[pg 175]</span><a name="Pg175" + id="Pg175" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> nature of this uniform + experience? Exactly this, that the ordinary forces acting around us + being present, and none other, the event has not, and therefore + cannot take place. But this is not involved in the idea of a miracle. + It assumes the presence of another force, viz. God. But what then? + The objector will urge that we have had no experience of the + existence of any such force. Is it to be urged, that no force can + exist, except those of which we have had experience, or any + combination of forces now in action, different from the present? The + men of a former century were equally entitled to make the same + assumption. If they had done so, it would follow, that if the + discoverers of America had found our present railway system in full + operation, and reported it to be so, the contemporaries of Columbus + would have been justified in treating him as an impostor.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the author + further observes: <span class="tei tei-q">“Mr. Mill qualifies his + admission respecting the effect of the alleged counteracting cause, + by the all important words <span class="tei tei-q">‘<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">if + present</span></em>;’</span> for in order to be valid, the reality of + the alleged counteracting cause must be established, which is + impossible; therefore the objection falls to the ground. No one knows + better than Mr. Mill, that the assertion of a personal deity working + miracles, upon which a miracle is allowed for a moment to come into + court, cannot be proved; and therefore, that it cannot stand in + opposition to a complete induction which Hume takes as his + standard.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This passage + strikes us as an extraordinary one to have been written by any one + who possesses the logical powers of the author. We are dealing with a + formal argument with a view of testing its validity, we have the + fullest right to test it by a supposed case. That <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page176">[pg 176]</span><a name="Pg176" id="Pg176" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> supposed case is the presence of an + unknown cause, or an unknown combination of known causes, or the + presence of a personal deity. If the argument breaks down under the + application of these tests, it is worthless. Does the author mean to + say, that it is necessary to prove every assumption to be a fact, + before it can be used in argument? How about the assumptions in + Euclid? I submit that the reasoning is by no means vitiated by the + assumption, and consequently that by the application of the same + principles of reasoning, Hume's argument falls to pieces. In one + sense the words <span class="tei tei-q">“if present”</span> are all + important, yet it is not necessary to prove the fact in order to + establish the validity of the reasoning, which is entirely + independent of the truth of the assumption. Has the author never + heard of contingent reasoning in which both antecedent and consequent + may be false, but the proposition valid?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“No one knows,”</span> again says the author, + <span class="tei tei-q">“better than Mr. Mill, that the allegation of + a personal God working miracles, upon which a miracle is for a moment + allowed to come into court, cannot be proved.”</span> It seems then + after all that we are reasoning with a person who rejects theism; + although he has been dealing with the question on principles which + assume its truth. In arguing a question of this kind it is necessary + to be consistent, and take our stand either on the principles of + theism, or on those of pantheism or atheism, and not to fall back on + either as the exigencies of the case demand. Least of all should this + be done by a writer who charges the defenders of Christianity with + shifting their ground to suit the necessities of their argument.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But is the case + correctly stated? No doubt that the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page177">[pg 177]</span><a name="Pg177" id="Pg177" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> conception of a personal God is essential to + it. But that of a personal God actually working miracles forms no + portion of it. If this were assumed, the entire reasoning would be a + <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">petitio principii</span></span>. We are + considering whether miracles are possible; or if, supposing one to be + wrought, it can be established by evidence. All that we assume is, + that God <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">can</span></em> work miracles, not that He has + wrought them. Whether we can prove by good evidence that He has + wrought miracles, is quite independent of the present question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“No one knows better than Mr. Mill, that the assertion of + a personal deity working miracles cannot be proved.”</span> It is + perfectly true that Mr. Mill believed that the evidence adduced to + prove the being of a personal God was insufficient, and that + respecting the origin of all things, nothing can be known. But yet it + is impossible to treat the existence of a personal God as a bare + assumption. <span class="tei tei-q">“It is impossible to be + proved,”</span> says the author. But to whom? To minds constituted + like Mr. Mill's. The evidence that a personal God exists has appeared + irresistible to an overwhelming majority of mankind, including a + great majority of minds gifted with equal, and even with greater + powers than that of Mr. Mill. One might imagine from the mode in + which this point is here represented, that the belief in the + existence of a personal God was exploded among all men of intellect, + and that the proofs adduced for it were unworthy of attention. Surely + the question of miracles has a legitimate place in the court which + tries the issue of their truth or falsehood.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One more point + requires notice. Hume says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Though the + being, to whom the miracle is attributed be in this case Almighty, it + does not on that account become a whit more probable, since it is + impossible for <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page178">[pg + 178]</span><a name="Pg178" id="Pg178" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> us + to know the attributes or actions of such a being, otherwise than + from the experience which we have of his productions in the usual + course of nature.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This position + involves an evident fallacy. It is also one which underlies one or + two of the statements of Mr. Mill, whose philosophical theory of + necessity was one almost certain to involve him in it. The statement + is, that it is impossible to know either the attributes or the + actions of such a being, except from our experience of his + productions in the course of nature. What is the course of nature + here intended? does it include mind as well as matter? If the former + is included, and we attain our knowledge of God from that source—and + every theist maintains that our chief knowledge of God is derived + from it—then the experience we have of man leads us to infer the + presence of certain moral attributes in God; and there is nothing in + that experience which renders the performance of a miracle + inconceivable or impossible—but as far as that experience is + concerned, it is rendered antecedently probable. What is included, I + again ask, in nature? Are <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">we</span></em>, the percipient beings ourselves? + Whether we are regarded as included or excluded from nature, it is + evident that a considerable portion of our knowledge of the divine + character is derived from the contemplation of our own being. God is + more manifested in our rationality, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“personality,”</span> freedom, and conscience, than in + the material forces and laws of nature. To perform a miracle + therefore is consistent with what we know of His character.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These observations + will render it unnecessary for me to examine in detail the writer's + observations on Paley's arguments against Hume. Even if his arguments + are not perfectly conclusive, their failure does not establish + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page179">[pg 179]</span><a name="Pg179" + id="Pg179" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the truth of Hume's positions, + or invalidate the refutation of them by others. As the object of this + author is to re-establish the validity of Hume's argument, he ought + not to have confined himself to Paley, whose mind was little adapted + to the investigation of purely logical or metaphysical questions, but + to have noticed the argument of the numerous subsequent writers who + have more fully handled the subject.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page180">[pg 180]</span><a name= + "Pg180" id="Pg180" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc17" id="toc17"></a> <a name="pdf18" id="pdf18"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter VIII. The Objection That The + Defenders Of Christianity Assume Certain Facts The Truth Of Which Can + Only Be Known By Revelation, And Then Reason From Those Facts To The + Truth Of The Bible, Considered.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + objected that the very idea of such a revelation as that of + Christianity implies a defect on the part of the Creator in the + original construction of the Universe, and that He has been under the + necessity of interposing for the purpose of correcting this defect. + It is affirmed that divines endeavour to prove that a revelation was + probable by first assuming a number of the most irrational + propositions, which, if true, can only be proved to be so by the + authority of the Bible, and then arguing back again that it is highly + probable that God would interfere to remedy the defects of his + creative work by a supernatural revelation; in other words, that they + assume a state of things which reason would pronounce to be + incredible, unless their truth was asserted in the Bible, and then + argue on the principles of that reason whose validity they deny, that + it is probable that the Creator would interfere to remedy a state of + things the existence of which reason pronounces to be incredible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The author of + <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion”</span> has strongly + urged this argument, and placed the difficulty clearly before us. + Although the entire passage is too long for <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page181">[pg 181]</span><a name="Pg181" id="Pg181" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> quotation, yet as it is important that we + should have the question which he raises before us in his own words, + I will cite a portion of it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Here again the argument is based on an assumption. The + supposition of a divine design in a revelation is the result of a + foregone conclusion in its favour, and not suggested by antecedent + probability. Divines assume that a communication of this nature is in + accordance with reason, and was necessary for the salvation of the + human race simply because they believe that it took place, and no + evidence worthy of the name is ever offered in support of the + assumption. A revelation having, it is supposed, been made, that + revelation is consequently supposed to have been contemplated, and to + have justified any suspension of the order of nature. The proposition + for which evidence is demanded is necessarily employed as evidence + for itself. The considerations involved in the assumption of the + necessity and reasonableness of such a revelation, however, are + antecedently incredible and contrary to reason. We are asked to + believe that God made man in His own image, pure and sinless, and + intended him to continue so; but scarcely had His noblest work left + the hand of his Creator, than man was tempted into sin by Satan, the + all-powerful and persistent enemy of God, whose existence and + antagonism to a being in whose eyes sin is an abomination, are not + accounted for and are incredible. Adam's fall brought a curse upon + the earth, and incurred the penalty of death for himself and for the + whole of his posterity. The human race thus created perfect and + without sin, thus disappointed the expectations of the Creator, and + became daily more wicked, the evil spirit having succeeded in + frustrating the designs of the Almighty, so that God repented that he + had made man, and at length he <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page182">[pg 182]</span><a name="Pg182" id="Pg182" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> destroyed by a deluge all the inhabitants of + the earth, with the exception of eight persons who feared him. This + sweeping purification, however, was as futile as the original design, + and the race of man soon became more wicked than ever.”</span> Here + follows a statement of what may be regarded as a plan of salvation as + held by some modern Churches, and the apparent contradiction of the + whole to the divine character and perfections is elaborately pointed + out. He then concludes as follows: <span class="tei tei-q">“We are + asked to believe in the frustration of the divine design of creation, + and in the fall of man into a state of wickedness hateful to God, + requiring and justifying the divine design of a revelation, and such + a revelation as this, as a preliminary to the further proposition + that on the supposition of such a design miracles would not be + contrary to reason.”</span> To this follows an elaborate piece of + reasoning, by which the author attempts to prove that every + proposition in this so-called plan of salvation is thoroughly + contrary to reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The general + positions laid down in this passage (omitting points of detail) are + as follows: Certain incredible occurrences in the past history of man + are assumed by divines to be facts on the authority of the Bible. + These include the complete breaking down of the divine plan in the + creation of man through the agency of a being who has frustrated the + purposes of the Almighty. Next it is asserted on the same authority + that another series of events has taken place which are in the + highest degree contrary to reason, for the purpose of remedying this + failure of the original plan. Then it is alleged that the probability + of a divine interference, in order to remedy a state of things which + reason pronounces to be incredible, is argued on the authority of + reason for the purpose of proving the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page183">[pg 183]</span><a name="Pg183" id="Pg183" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> occurrence of another state of things equally + repugnant to reason. Such a line of argument is affirmed to begin in + irrational assumptions, and to terminate in a vicious circle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have before + observed that the work from which the above passage is taken, + although entitled <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion, or + an inquiry into the reality of Divine Revelation,”</span> is really + an attack on the central position of the New Testament, the + historical value of the Gospels. In taking this course the author + raises an intelligible issue instead of spreading the argument over + an endless mass of controversial matter. If the historical character + of the Gospels cannot be maintained, the whole controversy as to + whether Christianity is a divine revelation is ended. This forms the + key of the Christian position, to which the other parts of the + controversy stand in the relation of mere outworks. If the events + recorded in the Gospels are historical, Christianity must be a divine + revelation, notwithstanding the difficulties connected with certain + statements of the Old Testament. The real point at issue between + those who believe and those who deny that God has made a supernatural + revelation of Himself, is confined to the following question: Are the + contents of the Gospels historically credible? Is the character of + Jesus Christ as depicted in them the delineation of an ideal + conception or of an historical reality? The author discerns clearly + that this is the turning point of the controversy, and has + accordingly addressed himself to prove that the Gospels are valueless + as historical documents. This line of argument is candid, and one + which, if adhered to, will save an immense expenditure of reasoning + power.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Now the question + of the historical character of the Gospels is quite distinct from + that of the truth or falsehood <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page184">[pg 184]</span><a name="Pg184" id="Pg184" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> of any system of Ecclesiastical Christianity, + which asserts that its theology is a deduction from the Gospels and + the other portions of the New Testament. It is not revelation itself + but a system erected by the application of reason to the facts of + revelation. It is most important that this distinction should be kept + in view. The truth is, that the facts of revelation stand in the same + relation to theology as the facts of nature do to physical science. + Incorrect reasonings respecting both the one and the other are alike + possible. The Ptolemaic theory was propounded as an adequate solution + of the facts and phenomena of the universe, and although utterly + incorrect in all its parts, it for ages held unlimited sway over the + human mind. In a similar manner various theories have been propounded + as solutions of the facts of revelation, but it by no means follows + because they have attained a wide acceptance that they afford the + true solution. In examining the claims of the Gospels to be viewed as + historical, it is quite as much out of place to make them responsible + for all the theories which Ecclesiastical Christianity has propounded + respecting the plan of salvation, as it would be to make the facts + and phenomena of the universe answerable for all the theories which + have been propounded for their solution. In examining the claims of + the Gospels to be accepted as historical documents, it is most + unreasonable to make them responsible for theories which were not + formulated in the Church until centuries after their publication.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Most of the + positions affirmed in the above quotation were not formulated until a + late period of the Church's history. Certainly they are nowhere + directly laid down in the New Testament. The utmost which can be + asserted of them is, that they are alleged to be derived + inferentially from its teaching. They <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page185">[pg 185]</span><a name="Pg185" id="Pg185" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> form no portion of the Apostles' or of the + Nicene Creeds, which are the only formularies outside of the New + Testament which can be represented as embodying the creed of the + universal Church. Nor can they be found even in the Athanasian creed. + In discussing the claims of the Gospels to be esteemed as historical, + they can only be made fairly responsible for what they actually + contain. To bring into such a controversy positions only affirmed in + recent attempts to formulate a body of Christian doctrine, as though + they had any bearing on the claims of the New Testament to be viewed + as containing a divine revelation, can lead to no satisfactory + result.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I now return to + the consideration of the difficulties above referred to. It is + important to take a careful survey of the entire question, because + they are not only put with great force in the passage which I have + quoted, but I believe that in different forms they weigh heavily on + the minds of many thoughtful men. I will first offer a few + observations on the general principle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing is easier + than to affirm that the introduction of moral evil into the universe + is a marring of the Creator's plan in its formation. The argument is + founded on the supposition that an Almighty God exists, who is wise, + holy, and benevolent, and who intended to manifest these attributes + through the rational beings which he has created. It is affirmed that + the existence of moral evil in man is a failure of this purpose on + the part of God. But it is the most certain of facts that moral evil + does exist in the world, and that it exists quite independently of + Christianity. The objection therefore is not one directed solely + against the Christianity of the New Testament, but bears with equal + weight against every form of theism, which admits that the universe + has been created, and <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page186">[pg + 186]</span><a name="Pg186" id="Pg186" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> is + governed by a God who is almighty, wise, holy, and benevolent.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If there be a God + who is the Creator of the Universe, it is clear that He must have + been the Creator of man, and that man could only have come into being + in conformity with His pleasure. Now, if we decline to admit that man + was created morally perfect, yet as he must have been created a moral + agent, it is clear that the first man must have sprung into being + either with the moral faculties of a savage, or in some intermediate + condition between these and a state of moral perfection. It follows, + therefore, that man must have been made capable of moral progress. + This is affirmed by all those who assert that he was first produced + in a savage state. But the possibility of moral progress involves + also the possibility of retrogression. The truth of this is borne + witness to by the most palpable facts of daily experience. Men of the + highest mental powers are capable of abusing them to the worst + purposes, and thus of sinking fearfully low in the moral scale. The + case of a man like Fouché will illustrate my argument, a man gifted + with high intellectual powers, but who sunk into the lowest condition + of moral turpitude. Such a man is incomparably worse than the first + original savage. I submit, therefore, that whatever view we may take + of the condition in which man was originally created, even if he were + created a savage, yet he was made a moral being capable of elevation + or degradation; and that, to use a human metaphor, the purpose of a + holy God must have been his elevation. Yet this involves the + possibility of his moral degradation. This degradation has also + become a fact. It is clear, therefore, that the difficulty is one + which is inseparable from every possible form of theistic belief, and + is no peculiarity of Christianity.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page187">[pg 187]</span><a name="Pg187" id="Pg187" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall not + attempt to enter on so profound a question as the origin of evil, and + how its existence is consistent with the perfection of a holy God. It + is a subject quite beyond the issue before us, and lies not at the + foundations of Christianity, but of theism, the truth of which is + taken for granted in the objections which the author adduces against + the popular view of the scriptural account; for if there is no God + the objections are valueless. Still he ought to have informed his + readers that it is urged as a partial explanation of those + difficulties by the defenders of Christianity, that it is highly + probable that the creation of a moral being possessed of free agency, + but who at the same time is not capable of sinking into a state of + moral degradation, involves as great a contradiction as the + conception of a circle which should possess the property of concavity + and not of convexity. No rational man believes that it is within the + compass, even of omnipotence, to work contradictions. If this be so, + it follows that the possibility of the existence of moral evil is a + necessary condition of the existence of free agency. The production + of a free moral agent capable of yielding a willing obedience to the + moral law is a more glorious work than anything in the material + universe, even than that universe itself. It might, therefore, have + been the good pleasure of the wise, holy, and benevolent Creator to + create free moral agents, even if it involved the existence of moral + evil. I am far from propounding this as a complete solution of the + difficulty, but when it is thus used unsparingly against + Christianity, it would have been only candid to have told the reader + that it bore with equal weight against every form of theism, and to + have given the partial explanation which has been propounded by + theologians.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In reply to the + definite statements before us, I <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page188">[pg 188]</span><a name="Pg188" id="Pg188" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> affirm that nowhere in the Gospels, or in any + other portion of the New Testament is it asserted or even implied + that revelation was rendered necessary by the frustration of the + divine purpose in creation, or that redemption was a kind of + afterthought in the divine mind rendered necessary by such a failure. + On the contrary, the synoptic Gospels make no affirmation whatever on + the subject. The fourth Gospel contains several statements about the + end and purposes of the Incarnation, but of a description totally + different from those which are alleged in the above quotation to + constitute the groundwork of Christianity. As I have already shown, + the Gospel of St. John speaks of its great purpose as being a + revelation of the moral character of God in the person of Jesus + Christ. According to its theology God has already manifested himself + in creation; in the Gospel He makes a still higher and nobler + manifestation of His moral character in the person of our Lord. The + author of the first Epistle ascribed to St. John, whom I must assume + to have been the author of the Gospel, makes the following direct + affirmation on the subject. <span class="tei tei-q">“That which was + from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our + eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the + word of life; for the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and + bear witness, and show unto you that eternal life which was with the + Father and was manifested unto us; that which we have seen and heard + declare we unto you, that ye also may have fellowship with us: and + truly our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus + Christ.”</span> In these words it is evidently the intention of the + writer to set forth the divine purpose of the Incarnation. It is true + that in other passages he assumes the existence of evil in the + universe, and <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page189">[pg + 189]</span><a name="Pg189" id="Pg189" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + declares it to be the work of the devil, and that one of the purposes + of this divine manifestation was its destruction. Still he drops no + hint of any failure in the Creation, or that it was the purpose of + the Incarnation to mend a marred scheme. On the contrary, the great + truth set forth in the Epistle and in the Gospel is that Creation and + Redemption form portions of one great whole; and that the latter is a + manifestation of the divine glories beyond God's previous + manifestations of himself, whether in creation or in history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Similar are the + views of the Apostle Paul. According to him, while many other + purposes were effected by the Incarnation, there is one great purpose + running through all divine revelation. In several passages he affirms + that its influence extends far beyond that which it exerts on the + race of man. He again and again asserts that it was the gradual + unfolding of an idea or purpose which existed from eternity in the + divine mind. Thus he writes: <span class="tei tei-q">“And to make all + men see what is the fellowship of the mystery which from the + beginning of the world hath been hid in God who created all things by + Jesus Christ, to the intent that now unto the principalities and + powers in heavenly places might be known by the Church the manifold + wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose which he purposed in + Christ Jesus our Lord.”</span> (Eph. iii. and ix.) <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Having made known to us the mystery of His will, + according to His good pleasure, which He purposed in Himself, that in + the dispensation of the fulness of times He might gather in one all + things in Christ, both which are in heaven and in earth, even in + Him.”</span> (Eph. i. 9, 10.) <span class="tei tei-q">“And having + made peace by the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things + unto Himself: by Him, I say, whether they be things <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page190">[pg 190]</span><a name="Pg190" id="Pg190" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> in earth or things in heaven.”</span> + (Col. i. 20.) I fully admit that the Apostle affirms that the design + of bringing man into union with God was a portion of this purpose. + Nothing however is more foreign to the ideas of St. Paul than that + revelation is an afterthought adopted as a remedy for a marred + plan.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nor are the views + of the other writers of the New Testament different. St. Peter tells + us that the angels desire to look into the redemption wrought by + Christ. St. James assures us that, <span class="tei tei-q">“known + unto God are all His works from the foundation of the world.”</span> + The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews speaks to the same effect: + <span class="tei tei-q">“God, who at sundry times and in divers + manners spake in times past unto the fathers in (by) the prophets, + hath in these last days spoken unto us in His Son.”</span> So far + from its being the idea of the sacred writers that redemption is an + afterthought designed to remedy the failure of the original purpose + of creation, that both of them are viewed as parts of the same whole; + both are purposes which have existed in the divine mind during the + eternal ages, and have been gradually evolved in time. Nothing is + further from their mind than that the divine mode of working is by + fits or starts, or sudden interventions. Man was the last form of + life which God has introduced into the world, and in that sense He is + said to have rested from His creative work. But God is no less + distinctly affirmed to be always working in nature and in providence, + so that Sabbath days form no exception: <span class="tei tei-q">“My + Father worketh hitherto and I work.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such being the + views of the writers of the New Testament on this subject, the whole + of those objections, as far as they are founded on the assertion that + revelation is intended to remedy the failure of God's creative + purpose, fall to the ground. My present supposition <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page191">[pg 191]</span><a name="Pg191" id="Pg191" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> is that I am reasoning with believers in + theism. If God has gradually evolved creation, each successive stage + of the evolution forms a part of one great and comprehensive whole. + At each stage the work is incomplete, but its incompleteness is no + proof of failure. A period has existed when the only beings in the + world were devoid of rationality. If an objector could have + contemplated it in this stage, he might have urged that the plan of + creation was a failure, while in reality it was only incomplete. Man + came in at the next stage of the great design. The next stage, + according to the New Testament, is the Incarnation of the Son of God, + intended as a higher manifestation of the moral glories of the + Creator for the purpose of raising man to a higher moral and + spiritual elevation. To the attainment of this purpose all the + previous events in man's history have been made subservient. Surely + those persons with whom I am reasoning ought to be the last to object + that there is anything inconsistent with the divine character in such + a gradual unfolding of the divine purposes. We might as well object + that every advancing stage of the great design of Creation was + introduced to remedy a preceding defect as assert that Christianity + originated in this cause. The world was in a most unfinished state + when it was only tenanted by the lower forms of life, and great fault + might have been found with its construction. But a higher came, and a + higher, then man, then Christ our Lord, the second Adam, as St. Paul + designates him, <span class="tei tei-q">“from heaven + heavenly.”</span> Whatever may have been the assertions of certain + classes of theologians who have attempted to fathom the divine mind + by their own short sounding line, the sacred writers take no narrow + view of the purposes of the Incarnation. It is declared that they + will be realized in the yet distant future, <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page192">[pg 192]</span><a name="Pg192" id="Pg192" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> towards which consummation they are gradually + being carried out in time.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that the New Testament affirms that a purpose is + consistently carried out in the history of redemption far different + from that which has been here placed before us as the assumptions of + Ecclesiastical Christianity. The author has placed these in their + most objectionable form; and if Christian apologists have affirmed on + such premises as those above stated that a divine interposition was + rendered probable, I shall not attempt to defend them. To establish + the probability of a revelation additional to that afforded by + creation we have no occasion to appeal to theories, but to facts.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The existing moral + and spiritual condition of mankind is universally admitted to be + imperfect. Both believers and unbelievers in revelation alike + acknowledge that the attempt to improve it is desirable. No less + certain is it that man possesses faculties which can only receive + their perfect development in a higher condition of things than the + present. These as much point to a higher development of man as the + organization of the lower forms of animal life points to the higher + and more perfect ones. If, therefore, God be the Creator and moral + Governor of the world, a further manifestation of Him is rendered + highly probable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This probability + may be reasoned out by analogies in the history of the past. Higher + developments from lower forms have been the rule. Are they then to + cease with man in his present state of imperfection? How man came to + be thus imperfect, how his moral degradation has originated, is a + question which does not fall within the present argument. It is a + fact, by whatever theory it may be attempted to be accounted for. If + a rational being had existed in <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page193">[pg 193]</span><a name="Pg193" id="Pg193" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> those ages during which there was manifested + nothing but the lower forms of life, and had come to the conclusion + that the world as it then existed was the work of an intelligent + Creator, he would have pronounced it highly probable that the + resources of creative power would yet receive a more glorious + manifestation. When vertebrate life was first introduced into the + world, a careful examination of the state of things would have led to + a similar conclusion. But the lower forms of vertebrate life are + typical of the higher, and the higher point to man. Before man + entered the world a being capable of comprehending the condition of + things as then existing would have pronounced it highly probable that + there would be yet a further manifestation of creative energy, and + that the work required for its consummation the production of + rationality.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such and far more + numerous have been the actual stages of creative action. Are we + entitled to call them a failure because they were relatively + imperfect, or any fresh intervention of divine power an interference + to remedy a previous failure? On the contrary, these so-called + interventions are the persistent carrying out of a determined + purpose. The acts of Deity are inaccurately designated interventions. + He is always working with the most perfect knowledge of the means + which He employs, and the most perfect controul over them. Failure + with Him is impossible. The word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“intervention”</span> as applied to the operations of God + conveys the idea of a machine which He originally constructed, and + then left to its own operations. Such a machine will in course of + time get out of order, or perform its work imperfectly, and require + to be supplemented by additional contrivances. Thus when the clock + ceases to go there arises a necessity for the intervention of the + clockmaker. He constructs <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page194">[pg + 194]</span><a name="Pg194" id="Pg194" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> his + clock and leaves it to itself. But creation is no mere machine; the + Divine worker is always present in His works. The last idea which + would have occurred to the authors of the Bible was that God was + obliged to be making a number of special interventions to cure + defects in the results of His operations. As the Bible cannot help + using the language of man, expressions derived from the defects of + human language are at times used in it, but the one prevalent idea is + that God is always present working in the kingdoms of nature and of + grace, that all His actions are the constant carrying out of a + predetermined purpose, and that with Him is no variableness neither + shadow of turning.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If the possibility + of the introduction of moral evil into the universe is a necessary + condition of the creation of a free moral agent, or in other words, + if the contrary supposition involves a contradiction, the Creator + must have viewed the production of such a free agent as so desirable, + that it formed a part of His purpose to create him notwithstanding + this possibility. If then moral evil became a fact, it involved no + failure in the purposes of God. He must have viewed the existence of + such beings as desirable, even if this contingency became a fact. + Why, I ask, may not a further manifestation of Himself, by means of + which moral evil might be reduced to the smallest dimensions, or even + ultimately removed, while freedom is still preserved, form a portion + of the same great purpose of the divine mind? If this be possible, + the assertion that Redemption is a special intervention of God for + the purpose of remedying the breaking down of his creative plan, is + disproved, and with it all the other inferences of the numerous + writers whose views I am considering.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page195">[pg 195]</span><a name="Pg195" id="Pg195" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In affirming the + probability of a revelation, the Christian apologist need not go + beyond the region of actual facts. He has no occasion to rest his + proof on any statement made by a supposed revelation the truth of + which is the point at issue. To do so would be to assume the thing + which requires to be proved. But facts as they exist, independently + of any statements in the Bible, are quite sufficient. Man exists. He + is possessed of powers and aspirations which this state of things + does not gratify. He is capable of moral action, and there is + something within him which affirms that he ought to obey the moral + law. Yet its realization by him is of the most imperfect character. + Does the actual condition of man afford satisfaction even to the + unbeliever, account for it as he may? Is there not a great amount of + moral evil in the world? Do not considerable numbers of men, instead + of progressing to higher degrees of moral perfection degenerate + through various stages of moral corruption? Does not moral evil cause + a great amount of physical suffering? Are not vast numbers of men the + prey of ignorance and superstition—great evils doubtless, and of + which unbelievers heavily complain? In one word, when we contemplate + the present condition of mankind, does not the sternest reason affirm + that it is inconceivable that this can be the final condition of + God's creative work? Yet these things are no theories but obvious + facts, and on the supposition on which we are reasoning, facts in the + universe of God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore, that facts such as these, when contemplated by reason, + establish the probability, nay almost the certainty of a further + divine action. Of course this is based on the assumption that there + is a wise and holy God who is the author of the universe, but both + the opponents and believers in revelation can <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page196">[pg 196]</span><a name="Pg196" id="Pg196" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> only argue this subject at all on the + supposition that God exists. Any fresh mode of divine action will + probably differ from the preceding ones, because man exists as a + moral and spiritual being. It is therefore probable that such divine + action will be moral rather than physical; or, in other words, the + divine purpose of creation includes within it a yet further + manifestation of the divine character and perfections. This is what + the New Testament affirms to have taken place in the Incarnation. + This is my position.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall only add + one or two more brief remarks. Those who charge theologians with + making unfounded assumptions should be guiltless of making them + themselves. The warning against falling into this error may be + profitably taken to heart by both parties to this controversy. It is + affirmed that the constitution of nature bears everywhere the + indications of systematic upward progression. I ask, is this + systematic upward progression everywhere true of man? Are there no + where indications of retrogression? Europeans generally during the + last two thousand years have progressed, although even this is not + universally true, for some of the fine arts attained to greater + perfection in the ancient than in the modern world. But has the + Hindoo race progressed during the last three thousand years? Have the + Chinese? Is it not true that the progress of these two races has been + one of considerable retrogression? Where is the progress made by the + Negro races from the first dawnings of their history? Yet these three + races form more than half of the human family. Again, have the Arab + races progressed since the days of Abraham? Are the Mahommedan races + in a state of gradual improvement? These are questions to which a + definite answer must be returned before the proposition above + referred to can <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page197">[pg + 197]</span><a name="Pg197" id="Pg197" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> be + esteemed a solution of all the problems of human history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will perhaps be + replied that nature is gradually extinguishing these unprogressive + races, under the pressure of her inexorable laws. Yet they constitute + an overwhelming majority of the human race, and it is strange to talk + of this progressive improvement of the human race as a great law of + nature, if the mode of improvement be the extinction of the great + majority of mankind. But are the Hindoo, Chinese, Negro, and other + unprogressive races less numerous than they were three thousand years + ago? The evidence is all the other way. We want present facts and not + theories of the future. It has been affirmed, that <span class= + "tei tei-q">“The survival of the fittest is the stern law of nature. + The invariable action of law of itself eliminates the unfit. Progress + is necessary to existence. Extinction is the doom of + Retrogression.”</span> These assertions may receive their fulfilment + in some period of the distant future, but they certainly do not agree + with the past history of man. Whatever progress the European races + may be capable of, certain conditions of climate form an inexorable + barrier to their supplanting the Negro, the Hindoo, or the Chinese, + and we know that European blood in certain climates has actually + degenerated.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again, it is + stated <span class="tei tei-q">“that the highest effect contemplated + by the supposed revelation is to bring man into harmony with law; and + this is insured by law acting on intelligence, and even on + instinct.”</span> Where, I ask, is the proof of this derived from the + history of man? Is the moral condition of the races above referred to + higher than it was three thousand years ago? Did the moral condition + of the Greek race progress or retrograde during the four centuries + which preceded the Advent? Which was the more elevated condition + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page198">[pg 198]</span><a name="Pg198" + id="Pg198" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of Roman morality, that of the + century which preceded and followed the conquest of Italy, or that of + the empire and its crumbling institutions?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again, we are told + that <span class="tei tei-q">“there is not in reality a gradation of + breach of law that is not followed by an equivalent gradation of + punishment.”</span> This may be the case in some Utopia in which the + author lives, but it certainly neither is nor ever has been the + condition of this world. Does villany, I ask, always receive adequate + punishment in this world? It has been the all but universal opinion + of mankind that it does not. Did not Fouché die quietly in his bed, + possessed of wealth and honours, and a darkened conscience? Did not + Philip II. of Spain, after all his crimes, die under the delusions of + self-approbation? In a controversy like this the most confident + assertions will not supply the want of facts on which to ground our + reasonings.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that the assertion that the Christian argument involves + reasoning in a circle, or else that it assumes the point at issue, is + disproved.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page199">[pg 199]</span><a name= + "Pg199" id="Pg199" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc19" id="toc19"></a> <a name="pdf20" id="pdf20"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter IX. Demoniacal Miracles—General + Considerations.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + objected that the admission which the New Testament is alleged to + make as to the reality of demoniacal miracles weakens, if it does not + destroy, the value of miracles as an attestation of a revelation. In + order to do full justice to the force of this objection I will state + it in the words of the author of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion:”</span>—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“The necessity of asserting the dependence of miracles on + doctrines is thrust upon divines by the circumstance, that the Bible + narrates so many cases of false miracles, and contains so many + warnings against them.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“The first thought which must occur to any unprejudiced + mind is amazement that an Almighty God should select as a guarantee + of his supposed communications signs and wonders which can be so + easily imitated by others, that there must always be a doubt whether + the message be from the kingdom of heaven, or from the kingdom of + lies. It seems <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang= + "la"><span style="font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> + absolutely incredible that a divine revelation which is so important, + and which it is intended that man should believe, should be made in + such obscure language, and with such doubtful attestation. That + heaven should condescend to use the same arguments as hell, and with + so little difference in the degree of the power <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page200">[pg 200]</span><a name="Pg200" id="Pg200" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> exhibited, that man can scarcely, if at + all, discriminate between them, is a theory of the most startling + description.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Does not the necessity of this theory of false miracles, + of the power of God thus placed on a level with the power of Satan, + in a matter where the distinct purpose is to authenticate by + miraculous testimony a miraculous revelation, rather betray the + unreality of miracles altogether, and indicate that the idea of such + supernatural intervention originates solely from the superstitious + ignorance of men in ages when every phase of nature was attributed to + direct supernatural interference, and ascribed with arbitrary + promptness to God or to the devil? It is certain that as miracles are + represented as being common both to God and Satan, they cannot be + considered as a distinctive attestation of a divine + revelation.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">After quoting Dr. + Mozley to the effect that <span class="tei tei-q">“Miraculous + evidence cannot oblige us to accept any doctrine contrary to our + moral nature”</span>—an abstractly true statement, but quite + inapplicable to the New Testament, which no where affirms that + miracles have been wrought in attestation of doctrines—the author + continues: <span class="tei tei-q">“The assertion that evidence + emanating from God is in some cases to be rejected is a monstrous + proposition; and the evidential force of miracles is totally + destroyed by the logical inference from it, and from the double + character of miracles as Divine and Satanic; that God is not only + capable of exerting supernatural power to attest what is true, but + that Satan equally possesses and exercises the same power in + opposition to God for purposes of deception. If miraculous evidence + is indifferently employed to certify truth and error, it is at once + degraded by such common service into + contempt.”</span></p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page201">[pg + 201]</span><a name="Pg201" id="Pg201" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These passages put + us in possession of the author's views, and perhaps it would be + impossible to state the objections more strongly. I have quoted them + thus fully, not only as embodying the views of this particular + writer, but as placing before us in a clear and distinct light the + chief objections which can be urged against the attestation that + miracles give to the truth of the Christian revelation, on the + assumption that demoniacal miracles have been performed, or even on + the admission that they are possible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Before I enter on + the general question, I must briefly draw attention to the statements + and assumptions contained in this remarkable passage.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. The assertion + that miracles are alleged in proof of doctrines, and that divines, + when the necessities of their position compel them, affirm the direct + converse of this, viz. that miracles are dependent for their truth on + doctrines, is an entire misapprehension of the Christian argument. + Its true position will be discussed in a subsequent chapter.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. The assertion + that the miracles of Almighty God can be imitated by Satan is a + gratuitous assumption. Nowhere is this affirmed in the New Testament. + On the contrary, our Lord uniformly declares that His works were + clearly distinguishable from the working of Satan, and could only + maliciously be confounded with them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. While the Bible + speaks of false miracles, its language is quite consistent with the + fact that they were impositions practised on the senses, like the + acts of jugglers.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4. The word + <span class="tei tei-q">“miracle”</span> is here used to denote a + supernatural fact in external nature devoid of all moral environment. + I have already pointed out the inaccuracy of this position; and shall + have much to say on <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page202">[pg + 202]</span><a name="Pg202" id="Pg202" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + this subject hereafter. To strip a superhuman occurrence of its moral + aspect is simply to assume the question at issue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">5. It is not + correct that the essence of a miracle consists in the degree of power + manifested in the performance of the outward act. The performance of + a miracle does not necessarily involve a greater exertion of power + than is manifested in the ordinary occurrences of nature. A miracle + is not only an act of power, but it involves the elements of + prediction and of purpose.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">6. The affirmation + that the Christian argument involves the position that heaven must + condescend to use the same arguments as hell, if demoniacal + possession is supposed to be possible, is altogether inaccurate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">7. The Christian + argument nowhere involves the assumption that evidence emanating from + God is under certain circumstances to be rejected. It is quite + conceivable that a real miracle may have been wrought, which was + adequately attested when it was performed, but that the evidence has + become imperfect by lapse of time.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">8. Even if it be + supposed that demoniacal miracles are possible, there is nothing in + that assumption which renders it necessary to take for granted that + Satan is allowed to ramble over the universe and work miracles at his + pleasure, and to imitate the miracles of God. The New Testament + uniformly asserts that whatever agency he can exert is a permitted + one, which is confined within definite limits.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In considering the + question of demoniacal miracles it must be kept in mind that the + language employed by the writers of the Bible is invariably + phenomenal. They describe events as they appeared to the eye of the + beholder. Hence it by no means follows, when they refer to the arts + of magic and other similar practices <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page203">[pg 203]</span><a name="Pg203" id="Pg203" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> which were so prevalent in the ancient world, + and say that the magicians did such and such things, that they meant + to affirm the reality of their performance. Their language is always + taken from the observer's point of view. As far as he saw, they did + so. We frequently speak in the same way of modern feats of conjurors. + Thus, when it is said that the magicians brought forth frogs, the + language is quite consistent with the act being a delusion + successfully practised on the senses.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is affirmed by + the author that the Bible asserts the reality of such miracles. I + reply that it makes no such assertion, but merely describes them as + they appeared to the eye of the beholder. Its strong denunciations of + such practices is no evidence that they were anything else than + deceptions which the performers endeavoured to palm off for wicked + purposes. The precept of Moses, <span class="tei tei-q">“Thou shalt + not suffer a witch to live,”</span> has been urged as affording proof + that the Bible in unqualified terms asserts the reality of + witchcraft. Whether the art was real or simulated, the sentence of + the lawgiver would have been equally just, for impostors who practise + such arts for the purpose of delusion, are far more injurious to + society than many kinds of criminals who have undergone the severest + punishment. In the New Testament <span class="tei tei-q">“lying + wonders”</span> are occasionally referred to. The expression may + legitimately mean one of two things, either a supernatural act + performed for the attestation or propagation of a lie, or an apparent + miracle, which is in itself a lie. It cannot be denied that the + language of the New Testament will honestly bear this interpretation. + I will quote the strongest passage to be found in it. St. Paul, + writing to the Thessalonians, in speaking of the manifestation of a + great anti-christian power, says, <span class="tei tei-q">“Whose + coming <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page204">[pg 204]</span><a name= + "Pg204" id="Pg204" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> is after the working + of Satan, with all power, and signs, and lying wonders, and with all + the deceivableness of unrighteousness, in them that perish, because + they receive not the love of the truth that they might be + saved.”</span> This language is quite consistent with the idea that + the works here spoken of were not supernatural, but deceptions + wrought for the propagation of a system of falsehood.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There can be no + question that impositions of this kind have been systematically + practised in later times in support of a great system of + ecclesiastical power, and to attest doctrines in connection with it. + But it is worthy of observation that the demoniacal supernaturalism + which we read of in the New Testament, is not represented as having + been employed for the attestation of any system of doctrine whatever. + Elymas, the sorcerer, practised his art for the purpose of + establishing an influence over Sergius Paulus, but for aught that + appears he was a simple impostor. All the other cases of Satanic + supernaturalism referred to in the Gospels resolve themselves into + cases of possession, or the occasional production of a disease.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is further to + be observed that nowhere throughout the New Testament is a miracle, + properly so called, ascribed to Satanic action. Possession is a + phenomenon entirely different from a miracle. I admit that there is + one apparent exception, namely in the history of our Lord's + temptation. This if it is intended to be a description of an + objective fact, is undoubtedly an instance of direct interference + with the action of the forces of nature; Satan is here represented as + possessing and exercising the power of counteracting the force of + gravitation by transporting the body of our Lord from place to place. + As this is the one solitary instance in the New Testament in which + such power is ascribed to <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page205">[pg + 205]</span><a name="Pg205" id="Pg205" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + him, it demands especial consideration. We are told that during one + period of his temptation our Lord was carried by Satan to an + exceeding high mountain; and again, that he was placed on a pinnacle + of the temple. These acts involve such an exercise of supernatural + power as may justly be put in comparison with his walking on the + water. It becomes therefore a very important question whether this + account is intended to be taken as a literal narrative. The fact of + its being the only recorded instance of its kind affords a contrary + presumption, for if the writers had believed that there was nothing + in such interference with the physical forces inconsistent with the + ordinary course of Satanic action it is hardly possible that they + could have viewed this as a solitary instance of the exercise of such + power, especially when the case of the demoniacs afforded so many + opportunities for its manifestation. It is clear from the narrative + itself that the only source of information regarding the temptation + must have been an account given by our Lord himself to his disciples, + as it was an occurrence of which there could have been no witnesses. + Otherwise it must be assumed to be a mere fiction. It is also clear + that the three temptations into which the narrative is divided are + intended to describe three great crises through which our Lord's mind + passed. According to Mark's account he is represented as undergoing + temptations during the whole period of forty days. Matthew and Luke + present us with the general results of the entire temptation. If our + Lord gave an account of it to his disciples, there can be no reason + why he should not have embodied its results in a narrative form, as + is the course which he adopted in his parables. If the parables were + not usually introduced with the formula <span class="tei tei-q">“he + spake a parable,”</span> we might easily mistake them also for + narratives of actual occurrences. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page206">[pg 206]</span><a name="Pg206" id="Pg206" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> But although this is the usual form, it is not + the only one, as appears in the parable of Dives and Lazarus. It is + therefore quite conceivable that on giving his disciples an account + of the crises through which his mind passed during the period of the + temptation he may have put it into a parabolic form, of which himself + was the centre, as one which would be most adapted to the level of + their apprehensions; otherwise it would have assumed the character of + a number of abstract disquisitions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But we are not + left to infer from mere probabilities that the narrative was not + intended to be understood literally. One portion of it places it + beyond doubt that it was intended to contain a visionary or parabolic + element of some kind. In the account of the temptation to fall down + and worship Satan, it is expressly stated that the Devil transported + our Lord to an exceeding high mountain, and showed him all the + kingdoms of the world and the glory of them. The narrative of Luke + adds that all this was done in a moment of time, which shows clearly + that it was not intended to be from one end to the other a literal + statement of facts. It is therefore absolutely necessary to assume + the presence of a visionary element somewhere; the only question is, + where, and to what extent? If we attach the meaning usually assigned + by the writers in the New Testament to the word <span class= + "tei tei-q">“world,”</span> it is impossible to imagine that any + amount of credulity can have believed that there was any mountain + from whose top such a view could have been attained by the unaided + power of the human eye. But further, it is asserted not only that the + kingdoms of the world were rendered visible, but <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">their + glory</span></em>; that is to say, the spectator was able to see + their great cities, their buildings, and all their signs of outward + magnificence, for the sight of their glory was <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page207">[pg 207]</span><a name="Pg207" id="Pg207" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> obviously intended to add force to the + temptation. Yet even the most credulous people possess some + moderately correct idea as to the extent of view which the eye can + reach and would feel quite certain that without the interposition of + a miracle such a survey in a moment of time would be impossible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It may probably be + urged by some that the first part of the account only is intended to + be a description of an objective fact, and that the last temptation + was visionary. To this I reply that the entire narrative is couched + in language of fact, and the latter portion quite as much so as the + former. Besides, if the sight of the kingdoms of the world and their + glory was a visionary representation, then the reason for conveying + Jesus to a lofty mountain ceases, for such a vision might equally + well have been presented to him in a plain; whereas if we take it as + an account of a literal fact, it is clear that the reason for + conveying him to the mountain was to afford him an extensive view. It + is therefore impossible to draw a distinction between the two + portions of the narrative.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Every + consideration therefore proves that the entire narrative is either + parabolic or an account of a visionary transaction, precisely similar + to many of those described in the Old Testament, and not of an actual + occurrence. This being so, we arrive at the inference that nowhere in + the New Testament is Satanic influence described as interfering with + the ordinary action of the forces of nature, by a direct exertion of + power.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It may however be + objected that there were probably reasons why he was permitted to do + so on this particular occasion; but on such a question I shall not + enter. I shall only repeat that it is impossible to view the latter + portion of the narrative as an account of an objective <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page208">[pg 208]</span><a name="Pg208" id="Pg208" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> fact; and this being the case it is far + more probable that the whole partakes of the same character. At any + rate it is the single instance in the New Testament in which the + possession of such power is ascribed to Satan.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This has a very + important bearing on the argument. The author affirms that the + writers of the New Testament attributed to Satan a general power of + interfering with the forces of nature, and of working miracles which + may fairly be contrasted with the miracles of God. But whatever may + have been the opinions of others on this subject, it is clear that + such opinions were not held by them. If they had believed that + Satanic agency was constantly exerted in the affairs of the visible + universe, there is every reason why they should have invented + numerous stories of this description, and ascribed them to Satanic + intervention. The writer to whom I am referring, urges in the + strongest manner, that the belief in magic, and in frequent exertions + of demoniacal power over the external universe, was universal among + the Jews at the time of the Advent. To prove this, he has adduced a + number of opinions entertained by the writers of the Talmud and + others, involving the most grovelling superstitions, and asserts that + indications of the same are to be found in the Gospels. As an + instance, he favours us with the following story told by Josephus, + who declares that he was an eye-witness of the fact.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Josephus had seen a countryman of his own, named + Eliezer, release people possessed of devils in the presence of the + Emperor Vespasian and his sons, and of his army. He put a ring + containing one of the roots prescribed by Solomon, into the nose of a + demoniac, and drew the demon out of his nostrils, and in the name + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page209">[pg 209]</span><a name="Pg209" + id="Pg209" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of Solomon, and reciting one + of his incantations, he adjured him to return no more. In order to + demonstrate to the spectators that he had power to cast out demons, + Eliezer was accustomed to set a pitcher of water a little way off, + and he commanded the demon, as he left the body of the man, to + overturn it, by which means the skill and wisdom of Solomon was made + very manifest.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The object for + which this and kindred stories are referred to, is to prove that the + Jewish mind was so intensely credulous and superstitious on the + subject of demoniacal action at the time of our Lord, that there was + nothing so monstrous, which it was not in the habit of accepting as + fact. We are also repeatedly informed that the followers of Jesus + shared in this unbounded credulity. It may be even inferred from the + assertion before us, that they were far more credulous. The argument + which this writer adduces is plausible, and it may be stated thus. If + a writer like Josephus, who was extensively acquainted with Greek + literature, and the Talmudists who belonged to the <span class= + "tei tei-foreign"><span style= + "font-style: italic">élite</span></span> of the nation, could narrate + such follies as facts, what must have been the beliefs of the vulgar + herd? We must not forget that the followers of Jesus were chiefly + from the lower orders. <span class="tei tei-q">“The common people + heard him gladly.”</span> The inference which the reader is allowed + to draw is that they must have been addicted to yet more gross + credulity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What were the + reasons which induced Josephus, a man who had seen the wide world, to + relate this monstrous story I shall not inquire. One can hardly + believe that he was a dupe; his reporting it, however, no more proves + that such beliefs were universal when he wrote, than the existence of + a wide-spread spiritualistic literature proves that a belief in + spirit-rapping <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page210">[pg + 210]</span><a name="Pg210" id="Pg210" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + prevails generally among all classes of society at the present day, + although many of the believers in spiritualism belong to the educated + classes, and readily accept absurdities which the sound sense of + multitudes of artisans would immediately repudiate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The argument + before me tells in a direction precisely opposite to that which is + intended by those who have invoked it, and it is marvellous that they + do not perceive that it is destructive of their own case. I put it as + follows: If the authors of the Gospels entertained the views of + demoniacal agency which this author represents them to have held, + their narratives, which directly lead them to refer to that subject, + would have contained numerous references to stories of the type of + that quoted from Josephus. Let me illustrate this argument by an + example. The Arabs and other Orientals believe in the power of demons + and magicians over external nature. They consider this action to be + of frequent occurrence. Their literature therefore abounds with + accounts of such monstrous interventions. But the Gospels, with the + exception of the history of the Temptation, do not contain an account + of a single marvel wrought by the agency of demons on external + nature. Demoniacal agency is repeatedly mentioned by them; but it + belongs to an order of phenomena of an entirely different character. + What, I ask, is the only legitimate inference? That the authors of + the Gospels were free from the superstitions in question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Before going + further it will be necessary to ascertain what is the precise nature + and character of that demoniacal supernaturalism which is apparently + asserted in the pages of the New Testament. Without doing so, it will + be impossible to form a correct opinion on the subject under + consideration.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The New Testament + apparently ascribes to Satanic <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page211">[pg 211]</span><a name="Pg211" id="Pg211" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> agency not only a power of suggesting + temptations to the minds of men, but also in certain cases of + depriving them of the supremacy of their wills, of enslaving their + intellectual and moral powers, of interfering with the use of their + bodily organs, and, in one instance, of imparting an unusual + strength. These phenomena constitute what is designated as + <span class="tei tei-q">“possession,”</span> and bear no + inconsiderable resemblance to different forms of insanity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the New + Testament also makes mention of lunacy as well as possession. How far + they were distinguishable from each other we have no sufficient data + to enable us to determine. At one time they are spoken of as the same + disease; at others they are clearly distinguished from each + other.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The language of + the Gospels seems to imply that some maladies were believed to be + produced by the influence of possession. In one or two instances + language is used which may imply that a bodily disease was brought on + by Satanic agency without actual possession. Whatever may have been + the belief of the Jews on this subject, it is certain that the cases + referred to in the Gospels are very few; and although the mention of + diseases is very common, nothing is said about their being due to + demoniacal influence. Not a single case occurs in which ordinary + accidents are referred to this influence, although such is affirmed + to have been the common belief of the Jews. In the Acts of the + Apostles only two cases of possession are mentioned, one that of the + damsel at Philippi, and the other the occasion when certain Jewish + exorcists undertook to exorcise demoniacs at Ephesus in the name of + Jesus.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The former case is + of some importance. The girl is described as possessed by a spirit of + Pytho, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> she pretended to practise the + art of divination by the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page212">[pg + 212]</span><a name="Pg212" id="Pg212" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + inspiration of the god Apollo, and in many respects she practised the + arts of the modern fortune-teller. Such persons were not uncommon at + the time. The Pythia at Delphi professed to prophesy under the + influence of a similar inspiration. Whatever may have been the real + causes by which this mental condition was brought about, the + paroxysms were so real that one is recorded to have died under their + influence. Her state when under prophetic influence, is described as + one of phrensied excitement. St. Paul is represented by the historian + as addressing himself to the spirit, and commanding him to come out + in the name of Jesus Christ. The powers of such persons were confined + to diving into the secrets of the future; but to other kinds of + supernatural power they made no claims.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If the language + here employed be other than phenomenal, it seems to imply that in St. + Paul's opinion certain practices of the ancient world which were far + from uncommon, were connected with demoniacal agency. These were + usually combined with certain forms of religious phrensy, such as + even in the present day manifest themselves in connection with the + more degraded forms of religion. At no period was this class of + phenomena more prevalent than during the century which preceded, and + that which followed the Advent, when human nature was stirred to its + profoundest depths.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There are also a + few passages in St. Paul's writings which seem to affirm a connection + between demoniacal agency and pagan worship. Whatever may have been + his own opinions on this subject, it is evident that the action which + he supposed to have been exerted was entirely mental. Not one word is + uttered by him which implies that he regarded this mode of demoniacal + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page213">[pg 213]</span><a name="Pg213" + id="Pg213" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> action as involving a power of + interfering with the forces of the material universe.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such is a general + statement of the facts as they appear in the New Testament in + connection with possession, and demoniacal action. It has been + necessary thus distinctly to state them, in order that we may keep + the subject clear of all adventitious issues with which it has been + attempted to obscure it. That form of demoniacal action involved in + the supposed power possessed by demons of tempting men to evil does + not fall within the limits of the present controversy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the opponents + of Christianity are not content to reason on the facts respecting + demoniacal action as they are presented to us in the pages of the New + Testament. They charge its writers with a number of the most + grotesque beliefs on this subject, for which the book itself + furnishes us with no evidence. This course has been taken for the + purpose of fastening on them a boundless credulity, and thereby + destroying their claim to be accepted as credible reporters of + historical facts. I will cite one or two examples of this mode of + reasoning, in order that we may be able to form a correct estimate of + its value.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">After having given + a detailed account of a number of monstrous beliefs gleaned from the + Talmud and other sources respecting angels, the author of + <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion”</span> then proceeds: + <span class="tei tei-q">“The belief in demons at the time of Jesus + was equally emphatic and comprehensive, and we need not mention also + that the New Testament is full of it. They are in the air, on earth, + in the bodies of men and animals, and even at the bottom of the sea. + They are the offspring of the fallen angels who loved the daughters + of men. They have wings like angels, and can fly from one place in + the earth to another. They attain a knowledge <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page214">[pg 214]</span><a name="Pg214" id="Pg214" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of the future by listening behind the + veil of the temple of God. Their numbers are infinite. The earth is + so full of them, that if man had the power to see, he could not exist + on account of them; there are more demons than men, and they are + about as close as the earth thrown up out of a new made grave. It is + stated that each man had 10,000 demons on his right hand, and 1000 on + his left.... The crush on the Sabbath in the synagogue arises from + them; also the dresses of the Rabbins become so soon worn through + their rubbing; in like manner also they cause the tottering of the + feet. He who wishes to discover these spirits must take sifted ashes, + and strew them about his bed, and he will perceive their footprints + upon them like a cock's tread.”</span> Here follow a number of the + most ineffable absurdities, unsurpassed by anything contained in the + Arabian Nights, which I need not cite. The author then proceeds: + <span class="tei tei-q">“Demons, however, take more especial delight + in foul and offensive places, and an evil spirit inhabits every + private closet in the world. Demons haunt deserted places, ruins, + graves, and certain kinds of trees. We find indications of these + superstitions throughout the Gospels. The possessed are represented + as dwelling among the tombs, and being driven by unclean spirits into + the wilderness, and the demons can find no rest in clean places. + Demons also frequented springs and fountains. The episode of the + angel who was said to descend at certain times and trouble the water + of the pool of Bethesda, so that he that first stepped in was healed + of whatsoever disease he had, may be mentioned here in passing, + although the passage is not found in the older manuscripts of the + fourth Gospel, and was certainly a late addition.”</span> Here follow + further citations of Rabbinical absurdities. The author then + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page215">[pg 215]</span><a name="Pg215" + id="Pg215" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> proceeds: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“The Talmud and other Rabbinical writings are full of + references to demoniacal possession, but we need not enter into + details on this point, as the New Testament itself presents + sufficient evidence respecting it. Not only could one spirit enter + into a body, but many took possession of the same individual. There + are many instances mentioned in the Gospels, such as Mary Magdalene, + out of whom went seven demons (ἑπτὰ δαιμόνια), and the man whose name + was legion, because many demons (πολλὰ δαιμόνια) had entered into + him. Demons likewise entered into the bodies of animals, and in the + narrative to which we have just referred, the demons, on being + expelled from the man, requested to be allowed to enter into the herd + of swine, which being permitted, <span class="tei tei-q">‘the demons + went out of the man into the swine, and the herd ran violently down + the cliff into the lake and were drowned,’</span> the evil spirits, + as usual, taking pleasure only in the destruction and injury of man + and beast. Besides possession, all the diseases of men and animals + are ascribed to the action of the devil and demons. In the Gospel, + for instance, the woman with a spirit of infirmity is described as + bound by Satan, although the case was not one of demoniacal + possession.”</span> The author then proceeds to enumerate a large + number of grotesque beliefs as held by the Jews at the time of the + Advent.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I regret the + necessity which has compelled me to cite so lengthy a passage, but it + is absolutely necessary that the reader should be enabled to see, + beyond the possibility of misapprehension, the nature of the + objections which are urged against the historical credibility of the + Gospels, and the reasonings by which they are attempted to be + supported. The general principle that underlies them may be stated in + a few words, that <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page216">[pg + 216]</span><a name="Pg216" id="Pg216" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the + followers of Jesus and the authors of the Gospels were a prey to such + a multitude of degrading superstitions on the subject of demonology + as wholly to destroy the value of their historical testimony.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The effect of this + passage with its context is to produce the impression on the mind of + the reader, not only that these absurd beliefs were generally + entertained by the Jews at the time of the Advent, but that they + constituted the form of thought of the followers of Jesus. It may be + urged that the object of the author is to prove the general + superstition of the times; and that he does not intend to affirm that + it was shared in by every one of the followers of Jesus. This may be + correct; but if it is not intended to be asserted that the followers + of Jesus were the prey of equal superstitions, the reference to this + mass of credulity can have no bearing on the present argument, and is + simply misleading. To what purpose, I ask, is it made, unless it is + intended to implicate our Lord's followers in these beliefs? Unless + it were so, the fact that others entertained them would not in the + smallest degree affect the value of their historical testimony. But + on this point we are not left to inferences; not only are passages in + the Gospels referred to, but we are repeatedly informed that the + followers of Jesus did share in these popular delusions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The position, + therefore, which is taken by the author is clear. His readers are + invited to believe that the followers of our Lord were a prey to the + belief in a number of ineffable absurdities respecting demons such as + he has enumerated. If this can be established, the conclusion is + inevitable, that their historical testimony is valueless.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us now + consider the mode in which the proof of this is attempted to be + established. The authorities <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page217">[pg 217]</span><a name="Pg217" id="Pg217" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> quoted are chiefly the Talmudical writers; that + is to say, persons who wrote as late as from <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 200 to <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 500, are cited as the + proof that such opinions were universally entertained by the Jews in + the time of Jesus Christ. Equally valid would it be to quote the + writers of modern spiritualism to prove that such opinions were held + by our ancestors in the time of the Stuarts or the Plantagenets. On + the strength of this and kindred evidence, such opinions are ascribed + to the original propagators of Christianity, and to the authors of + the Gospels.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But this is not + all. The only correct method of ascertaining the superstition and + credulity of any particular writer is carefully to examine the + contents of his book, and to note the various instances which we find + in it of what we consider to be superstitions; and then proceed to + estimate their value, and, if needful, to compare them with other + contemporary authorities. This course, however, is not that pursued + by this writer. On the contrary, he quotes the absurdities which we + have seen from the Talmudical writers, and refers in the midst of + them to nearly every passage in the Gospels which can be made to bear + even a remote reference to the views in question. I submit that such + a mode of reasoning is not conducive to the interests of truth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A few examples of + this mode of conducting the argument require notice.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">After referring to + a number of monstrous superstitions, he tells us that the Jews + believed that <span class="tei tei-q">“demons took especial delight + in foul and offensive places, and that an evil spirit inhabits every + private closet in the world. Demons haunted deserted places, ruins, + graves, and certain kinds of trees. We find indications of these + superstitions throughout the Gospels. The possessed <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page218">[pg 218]</span><a name="Pg218" id="Pg218" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> are represented as dwelling among the + tombs, and as being driven by unclean spirits into the wilderness, + and demons can find no rest in clean places.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“We find indications of these superstitions throughout + the Gospels.”</span> To this observation I invite the reader's + attention. Is it meant to be affirmed that any indication can be + found in the Gospels that the writers believed that a demon inhabited + every private closet in the world? Two instances only are referred to + in the text, in one of which the demoniac of Gadara is represented as + dwelling among the tombs, and as having been driven into the + wilderness; and the other the parable of the unclean spirit going out + of the man, and finding no rest when walking through dry places. Do + these two cases prove the truth of the sweeping assertions above + referred to? Does the parabolic representation that the expelled + demon found no rest in dry or clean places prove that the disciples + of Jesus believed that they took especial delight in foul or + offensive ones? Does the fact that the demoniac of Gadara had been + driven by the evil spirit into the wilderness prove that it was a + universal belief that deserts and graves were haunted by demons?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In proof also of + these assertions we are referred in a note to five passages in the + Gospels, viz. Matt. viii. 28; xii. 43; Mark v. 3-5; Luke viii. 27-29; + xi. 24. Five passages are very few to justify the assertion that we + find indications of these superstitions throughout the Gospels. On + examining them, however, the five references are reduced to two, + three belong to the account of the demoniac at Gadara, reported by + each of the Synoptics; and two to the twofold report of the same + parable as given by Matthew and Luke! This is a very slender + foundation on which to ground the assertion that the followers of + Jesus believed that <span class="tei tei-q">“demons <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page219">[pg 219]</span><a name="Pg219" id="Pg219" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> took especial delight in foul and + offensive places, that they inhabited every private closet in the + world, and that they haunted deserted places, graves, ruins, and + certain kinds of trees, and that we find indications of these + superstitions <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">throughout the Gospels</span></em>.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Still more + extraordinary is the next reference. <span class="tei tei-q">“Demons + haunted springs and fountains,”</span> says the author. To this he + adds, <span class="tei tei-q">“the episode of the angel who was said + to descend at certain seasons and trouble the water of the pool of + Bethesda, so that he who first stepped in was cured of whatsoever + disease he had, may be mentioned in passing.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Why, I ask, + mention it at all? Is the visit of an angel to this particular pool + for the purpose of working a miracle, a proof that the followers of + our Lord believed that demons inhabited springs and fountains?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But our + astonishment at the author's reference to it is increased when we + read the following words: <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Although the passage + is not found in the oldest manuscripts of the Fourth Gospel, and it + is certainly a late interpolation</span></em>.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must put the + question again in real earnestness. This being so, why mention it + here? The author admits that it formed no portion of the original + Gospel of St. John, and that it is certainly a late interpolation. + Now the Gospel of St. John, according to the opinion of the most + eminent unbelievers, was not published before <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 170. If this was the + case (the author himself evidently assigns to its composition a very + late date) a late interpolation could not have found its way into its + pages until about the year 250, at the earliest 200. What then is the + nature of the reasoning before us? We are referred for proof that the + followers of Jesus held these opinions to an authority which the + author himself admits to have been a late interpolation, <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page220">[pg 220]</span><a name="Pg220" id="Pg220" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> which could not have been introduced into + this Gospel earlier than 180 years after the ministry of our Lord, as + a proof that his original followers believed that demons inhabited + springs and fountains. Such reasonings furnish their own + refutation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The exposure of + one more fallacy of this description will be sufficient. We are told + that, <span class="tei tei-q">“Not only one evil spirit entered into + a body, but many took possession of the same individual. There are + <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">many + instances mentioned in the Gospels</span></em>, such as Mary + Magdalene, out of whom went seven demons, and the man whose name was + legion, because many demons had entered into him.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I ask, where are + these <span class="tei tei-q">“many instances”</span>? The plain fact + must be stated, that the two here referred to, constitute the only + ones which are mentioned as facts by the Evangelists. Besides these + there is the parable of the unclean spirit going out of the man above + alluded to, who, when he could find no rest returned to his former + habitation in company with seven other spirits more wicked than + himself. It should be observed that in two of the cases the number + given is the mystical number <span class="tei tei-q">“Seven”</span>; + and that one of them occurs in a parable, the moral of which is, to + warn the Jews, that although they had got rid of the evil spirit of + idolatry, they were in danger of falling into the greater evil of + Phariseeism and hypocrisy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But to return to + the argument. The great mass of the author's citations for the + purpose of proving that the Jews at the time of the Advent, and among + them the followers of Jesus, were a prey to these grotesque beliefs + respecting the action of demons, are made from authors who are + separated by an interval of centuries from the ministry of our Lord. + I submit, therefore, that such authorities are utterly valueless to + prove that <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page221">[pg + 221]</span><a name="Pg221" id="Pg221" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> His + disciples and early followers were a prey to these gross delusions. + Nor has he adduced an atom of valid proof from the New Testament + itself. The references above referred to have either been made in a + most careless manner, or have been used to assist in proving a + foregone conclusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But let us suppose + for the sake of argument that the Jews at the time of our Lord did + generally entertain these monstrous demoniacal beliefs: to what + conclusion, I ask, would such a fact, if true, indubitably point? + Credulous and superstitions people, invariably invent stories that + are the counterparts of their own credulity. This is proved by the + whole mass of existing mythology. Mythological inventions give us the + precise measure of the beliefs of those who have originated them. If + then the demonology of those who have elaborated these portions of + the Gospels was of the character that this writer and others assert + it to have been, the Gospels would have contained an embodiment of + such demoniacal beliefs as those which the author has so + industriously collected, and has endeavoured to fasten upon their + writers.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Now the idea of + demonology having been present in the minds of the writers, it is + obvious that they did not omit all reference to these absurd beliefs, + merely because they were outside the subject on which they were + writing. But while demoniacal action is repeatedly alluded to, it is + an undeniable fact that no stories of the description given by this + writer are to be found in them. The author therefore has furnished + the most conclusive proof, without intending to do so, that these + forms of thought, to whomsoever else they may have appertained, were + neither those of the original followers of Jesus, nor of the authors + of the Gospels.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page222">[pg + 222]</span><a name="Pg222" id="Pg222" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore that this attempt to prove that the followers of our Lord + and the authors of the Gospels were a prey to such a mass of + grotesque beliefs respecting demons, as to invalidate their + historical testimony, falls to the ground, and that the data on which + this has been attempted to be established, afford proof on the + contrary that they did not entertain the beliefs in question.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page223">[pg 223]</span><a name= + "Pg223" id="Pg223" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc21" id="toc21"></a> <a name="pdf22" id="pdf22"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter X. The Existence And Miracles + Of Satan.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully admit that + a difficulty is involved in the idea that a being like Satan is + permitted to perform actions which bear even a remote analogy to + divine miracles. I have already shown that the New Testament only + apparently ascribes to him a supernatural action of a very limited + and special kind, differing widely from our usual conception of a + miracle. I now proceed to inquire how far this limited action, thus + attributed to him, if we suppose that possession was an objective + fact, and not a form of madness, interferes with the validity of the + attestation of miracles to the Christian revelation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The existence of a + being like Satan is alleged as constituting an enormous difficulty + against the statements of the New Testament. A numerous class of + writers dismiss the idea of his existence as unworthy of serious + argument, and endeavour to dispose of it with a sneer. This world + however contains numerous analogous cases of very evil men endowed + with the highest mental powers, who have exerted the most injurious + influences on others. Their existence is a fact; and the difficulties + attending it cannot be got rid of by any kind of evasion. The + objections that have been urged in connection with this subject are + not founded on the facts of the moral universe as they exist; but on + <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> principles alone. It has + been affirmed to be incredible that Almighty God should <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page224">[pg 224]</span><a name="Pg224" id="Pg224" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> have permitted the existence of such a + being as Satan; or if his existence is permitted, that he can be + allowed to interfere in the affairs of men.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In dealing with + this question it is evident that I must proceed on the supposition + that I am reasoning with theists only. The whole question is + irrelevant on the principles of Pantheism or Atheism, or, to put the + case more distinctly, on such principles there is no greater + difficulty in supposing that nature has evolved evil beings superior + to men in their faculties and powers in some other part of the + universe, than that it has evolved evil men, who are gifted with high + forms of intelligence in this; or even that such beings should be + capable of interfering in human affairs. If Pantheism or Atheism is a + correct account of the facts of the universe, it is impossible to say + what kind of beings nature may have evolved in the past, or may + evolve in the future from her prolific womb.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But if it is once + conceded that a personal God exists, who is the moral Governor of the + Universe, the affirmation that the existence of such beings is + inconsistent with his attributes, is only another form of asserting + that the existence of moral evil is incompatible with them. The + ground of its existence has been a problem, into which the human mind + has striven to penetrate from the earliest dawn of thought, without + ever approaching to its solution; but into this question it is + useless to enter. In the present argument we are dealing with facts, + and the existence of aggravated forms of moral evil in the universe + is a fact. If there be a God, it must be consistent with his + attributes. The real difficulty lies in its existence at all in the + universe of a God who is all-powerful and good.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But since it does + exist, the existence of a being like Satan is a mere question of + degree. It is an unquestionable <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page225">[pg 225]</span><a name="Pg225" id="Pg225" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> fact, whether we can explain it or not, that + many men of the worst moral principles have been gifted with the + highest intellectual powers, and have been placed in positions in + society which have enabled them to inflict the greatest evil on + others. History is full of such cases. The most extreme forms of + human corruption have been not inaptly designated as <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Satanic.”</span> If therefore under the moral government + of God it is a fact that such forms of human wickedness exist; and if + it is supposable, that there are other rational beings in the + universe endowed with higher powers than man, how can it be + inconceivable that they may differ in moral character, precisely in + the same way as men do; and that some may be eminently virtuous, and + others fearfully corrupt? It is clear that the difficulty centres in + the existence of moral evil in the universe of a God who is possessed + of almighty power, and perfect holiness and goodness. Why has He + permitted it? Is its existence a necessary condition of the creation + of a free moral agent? If so, might not the amount of it have been + greatly diminished? The utmost light that reason can throw on these + questions consists of a few very imperfect glimmerings. The fact is + undeniable, that a large mass of moral evil exists, and in very + fearful forms. If there be a Creator of the universe, it is plain + that the present state of things must be consistent with his + attributes. The only mode of escaping from this difficulty is by + taking refuge in the vastly greater ones of pantheism or atheism.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Many theists, + pressed by these difficulties, have attempted to evade them by + endeavouring to reduce the amount of moral evil in the universe, the + existence of which they cannot deny, to indefinitely small + proportions, and then affirming that it will be ultimately + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page226">[pg 226]</span><a name="Pg226" + id="Pg226" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> swallowed up in the ocean of + universal good. But the mere diminishing of its amount by no means + solves the difficulty. The real question is, how has it come even + into temporary existence? But there is also a still more grave + objection to this course of reasoning. It renders it necessary that + we should close our eyes to the most obvious facts. So far is it from + being the case that the amount of moral evil in the world is small, + that it is very large. This fact is indisputable. The whole course of + history tells us that it has existed in all past ages and in very + aggravated forms. To try to get rid of the difficulty in this manner + is simply to close our eyes, and refuse to see it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But not only does + moral, but physical evil exist. This is another unquestionable fact, + and its existence bears directly on my argument. Many and vain have + been the attempts to explain it away. It has been affirmed that pain + after all is no such great matter. I strongly suspect that those who + have asserted this, have experienced but little of it. It is true + that it may ultimately result in good under God's government, but + taken by itself, it is undeniably an evil. Do not frightful + sufferings abound? Do not most painful diseases afflict our frames? + Is it not possible to suffer terribly from causes quite independent + of our own conduct? Is not a great earthquake a terrible calamity to + those who suffer from its effects, although it may be attended with + beneficial results to those who do not? Pains may be said to be + useful warnings; but surely the warning might have been given without + the extremity of the suffering. They are also affirmed to be the + penalties of ignorance, and this may be partially true: but the + ignorance is in a vast majority of cases unavoidable. It is a simple + fact, that a great amount of physical suffering exists, the reason of + which we are wholly unable to explain.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page227">[pg 227]</span><a name="Pg227" id="Pg227" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: moral + evil propagates itself, and inflicts calamities on those who are not + implicated in its guilt. Is it not true that men have existed both in + the ancient and modern world, whose actions have inflicted the + greatest evils on mankind for generation after generation? Can any + one doubt that descendants suffer for the sins of remote ancestors, + and children for those of their parents? Facts are facts, and they + will not become less so by our refusing to look at them. The evil + wrought by such a man as Philip II. of Spain, is a fact, and it has + extended its baneful influence to our own times. Is not a large + portion of the evils under which France has groaned, traceable to the + misdeeds of two of her sovereigns? These were quietly sleeping in + their graves, when the evils they had occasioned burst on the head of + their guiltless successor. But it is needless to quote examples. + History is one long succession of them. Whether we like it or not, + the old saying is an accurate account of the moral order of the + universe as it exists, <span class="tei tei-q">“Visiting the sins of + the fathers on the children unto the third and fourth generation of + them that hate me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love + me, and keep my commandments.”</span> These are facts which the + theist equally with the Christian must face, for they exist in the + universe of that God, in whose moral perfections both believe. I + repeat, therefore, that the only way of escaping from them is by + rushing into the far greater difficulties of pantheism or + atheism.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These reasonings + might be indefinitely extended. The result which follows from them is + clear, that if we attempt to reason from abstract principles to the + constitution of a universe, we shall produce one utterly unlike that + which actually exists. It follows, that as they cannot account for + the facts of the universe, as <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page228">[pg 228]</span><a name="Pg228" id="Pg228" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> they come under our observation, they are + unsafe guides on all similar questions. Consequently they are unable + to show that the existence of evil beings possessed of superhuman + powers, is inconsistent with the perfections of God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nor is there any + greater force in the objection, that if such beings exist at all, it + is inconsistent with our conceptions of the divine government, that + they should be allowed to interfere in the affairs of men. I reply, + that it is equally inconceivable, that God should have allowed a man, + to whom he has imparted the greatest mental endowments, and whom he + has placed in an elevated position in society, who lived centuries + ago, to exert an evil influence on the present generation. The + difficulty that a powerful influence for evil can be exerted by men + on those who have never seen them, and of whose existence they have + never heard, is just as great as the one under consideration. Yet it + is one of the most undeniable of facts, that men do exert the most + powerful influence on one another, and that such influence can be + exerted by generations long since passed away on those who live ages + afterwards; and that it can be exerted unconsciously.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I am far from + wishing to deny, that the difficulty is a real one. On the contrary, + I fully admit it; and that it is one which our present faculties are + unable to explain. But it is one which is not peculiar to + Christianity, nor has it originated in it. The interference of + superhuman beings in human affairs for the purposes of evil, would be + only another form of the same difficulty.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Precisely similar + reasonings to those which have been employed to prove that the + existence of a being like Satan is impossible, when they are applied + to other subjects, bring us into direct collision with realities. + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page229">[pg 229]</span><a name="Pg229" + id="Pg229" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> There can be no doubt, that if + the constitution of the universe had been placed in our hands, its + phenomena would have been very different. But our function is a far + humbler one. It is not to erect a universe according to our + conceptions of what is best, but to learn the order of that in which + we live, and to accept facts on sufficient evidence, however strongly + they may conflict with abstract theories.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I now proceed to + consider the real difficulty connected with this subject, and which + has been very strongly urged by the author of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion.”</span> It is this. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“If it is conceivable that beings exist who possess + superhuman knowledge and power; and that they are capable of + interfering as the New Testament affirms, in the affairs of men, how + can the performance of a miracle be the guarantee of a divine + commission? May not inferior agents, who possess superhuman knowledge + and power, be able to produce results which would to all outward + appearance be miraculous? Might not an evil being, who was possessed + of the highest intelligence like Satan, perform such actions as would + be equivalent to miracles, for the purpose of authenticating + falsehoods? All that such actions prove is the presence of superhuman + knowledge and power; but they would leave it quite uncertain whether + the power was divine or Satanic.”</span> Such is the objection, and + it demands an adequate solution.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply, that if + we view the question merely as an abstract one, it is quite possible, + if a superhuman being of high intelligence is permitted to interfere + in the affairs of men, that he should be able to perform actions + which might have all the appearance of being supernatural. Such + results might be even brought about by a superior acquaintance with + the existing forces of nature, and by a successful combination of + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page230">[pg 230]</span><a name="Pg230" + id="Pg230" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> them, without the introduction + of any new force whatever. For such results we need not invoke the + aid of a supernatural being. They have been frequently effected by a + superior human intelligence acting on an inferior one. We all know + how Columbus used his superior knowledge of astronomy, to predict an + eclipse, and the ignorant natives of America mistook this as denoting + the presence of a superhuman being. Such results may be always + produced, when superior knowledge acts on ignorance; and such is the + origin of no inconsiderable number of impositions which have been + practised on mankind. It is therefore quite conceivable, as an + abstract question, that as men who possess a very superior + intelligence, are capable of producing results which to an inferior + intelligence would have the appearance of being supernatural, without + really being so, in the same manner, if Satan is supposed to possess + an intelligence greater than that of the wisest of mankind, and if + his interference in human affairs is permitted, he may be able to + perform actions which would have the appearance of being + supernatural, by a skilful use of the existing forces of nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But to such power + there must be a limit. There are certain results which plainly lie + beyond the power of any mere combination of the forces of nature to + produce. Of these, many of the miracles recorded in the Gospels are + instances, such as the cure of blind or leprous men by no other + visible instrumentality than a word or a touch. Actions of this kind + differ wholly in character from those which we are now considering. + If a miracle was a more objective fact taking place in external + nature, and nothing more, it might be open to question whether its + performance was owing to supernatural agency, or to some combination + of known or unknown forces. But the miracles with which we are + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page231">[pg 231]</span><a name="Pg231" + id="Pg231" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> concerned in this controversy, + involve a great deal more than more objective facts in material + nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But assuming, as I + cannot help doing in an argument like the present, the existence of a + God, who is the Creator and Governor of the universe, the question is + not a mere abstract one, what a Being like Satan, if he is supposed + to exist, might be capable of doing; but it becomes entirely one of + permitted agency. It is plain, that if there is a God, every being in + the universe, however powerful or intelligent, can only act within a + certain definite sphere of operation, which the Governor of the + universe has assigned to him. Within what limits then is he allowed + act? Are subordinate agents permitted to interfere with the material + forces of external nature? and if so, within what bounds? Can they + wander over the universe at their mere will and pleasure, and + interfere with its operations? How far is their interference + permitted in the moral and spiritual worlds? The question before as + is even reduced to one of far narrower limits. Our only direct + knowledge of the existence of such an agency is derived from + Revelation. The real point therefore which concerns us is, to what + extent is such permitted agency affirmed in the New Testament. Do the + Satanic interventions there described interfere with divine miracles + as attestations of a divine commission? We have nothing whatever to + do with abstract propositions or with what Rabbinical writers may + have affirmed on this subject, but with the assertions of the New + Testament alone.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If there is a God, + it is certain that the present order of nature must be a + manifestation of His will. So must be the energy of its forces in + conformity with invariable law. Whatever power He has delegated to + subordinate agents, must form a portion of this universal order, and + be exercised in conformity with the divine purposes. <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page232">[pg 232]</span><a name="Pg232" id="Pg232" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> It is inconceivable that subordinate + agents can be allowed to break in upon it at their will and pleasure, + for the general permanence of its order forms an essential condition + for the exercise of moral agency. If they are allowed to do so, it + must be only within clear and definite limits, which ultimately + effectuate the purposes of the Creator. Such is the nature of the + power which man can exert over material nature. It can only modify + results, by giving a new direction to its forces. In the case of man + this power is limited to the world in which he lives. In a similar + manner, if beings superior to him in power and intelligence exist, + their interference must be subject to definite limitations. Such is + the uniform affirmation of the writers of the New Testament. Even if + we take their language in the most literal sense, the supernatural + interventions which they attribute to Satan, are confined to a very + definite order of phenomena. In one word, the sacred writers have + described Satanic intervention as limited to the world of mind; and + as capable, through its action on the mind, of producing certain + results on the bodily organization. To this there is one exception, + the apparent ascription of a few diseases to Satanic agency. This I + shall consider hereafter.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is a remarkable + fact, and one worthy of particular attention, that the supernatural + action attributed to Satan in the New Testament, with the exception + above referred to, is a mental one. It is through the action on men's + minds alone, that demoniacal agency produces any results on their + bodily frame. No direct action on the material forces of nature is + ever attributed to it. We find nothing in the smallest degree + resembling the act of a demon overturning a pitcher of water. The + kind of influence attributed to Satan is of a similar character, + though much higher in degree, to <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page233">[pg 233]</span><a name="Pg233" id="Pg233" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> that which one man can exert over another. One + man of superior mental power is capable of exerting an influence over + a weaker mind to such a degree, as almost to enthral it. We call this + a species of fascination. In the New Testament the similar but + mightier Satanic influence is Possession. One mind, by getting a + powerful hold on another, can exert an influence on the body, as in + mesmerism. The Satanic influence exerted in possession is only a more + powerful one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is certain that + the extent to which one human mind can act on another is bounded by + no narrow limits; what is more, it is one which is frequently exerted + for evil. It is evidently within the purposes of the Creator to + permit this. Why it is allowed to the extent to which it is, is + beyond our powers to discover. But the wide extent to which it not + only can be, but actually is exerted, is a fact that cannot be + denied. It is also an influence that can be exerted secretly. The + difference between this power and that which is supposed to be + attributed to Satan in the New Testament is far more one of degree + than of kind; and the latter is one which is bounded by clear and + definite limits. Between a Satanic possession and a miracle performed + by Jesus the distinction is unmistakable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows from + the foregoing considerations, that the Satanic supernaturalism, which + we have to consider, as far as if stands in opposition to the + miracles of God, is reduced to very narrow limits. It consists almost + exclusively of possession and its phenomena. No other kind of action + bearing even a remote analogy to a miracle, with the single exception + of the history of the temptation, is anywhere attributed to Satan in + the New Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In estimating the + evidential character of miracles, <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page234">[pg 234]</span><a name="Pg234" id="Pg234" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> it has been a far too common practice with + those who deny the historical character of the Gospels, to keep out + of view their moral aspect as an important portion of their + evidential value. It has been affirmed that a miracle must be + estimated as an act of power quite apart from its moral impress. The + author before me even goes the length of supposing, that, if Satan is + as cunning as he is represented in the New Testament, he may even + turn himself into an angel of light and perform works bearing the + impress of holiness for the purpose of furthering the interests of + the kingdom of lies.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such an idea + receives no countenance from anything which is affirmed by St. Paul. + The passage in which allusion is made to Satan transforming himself + into an angel of light is as follows: <span class="tei tei-q">“For + such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves + into the apostles of Christ. And no marvel, for Satan himself is + transformed into an angel of light. Therefore it is no great thing if + his ministers should be transformed as the ministers of + righteousness.”</span> It is quite clear that nothing was further + from the Apostle's mind than the idea of Satanic miracles bearing the + impress of holiness as wrought in support of the kingdom of + falsehood. He is simply speaking of Judaizing teachers, who claimed + the support of apostolical authority, for the purpose of + disseminating their unchristian views.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The idea is absurd + and ridiculous, but we know that it occurred to the opponents of our + Lord, who charged him with working miracles by Satanic agency. The + special instance in which they made this charge was that of his + supposed expulsion of demons. Our Lord met it by the decisive + argument, <span class="tei tei-q">“How can Satan cast out Satan? If + Satan be divided against himself, how <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page235">[pg 235]</span><a name="Pg235" id="Pg235" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> shall his kingdom stand?”</span> In a word, he + appealed to the moral aspect of his miracles as a convincing proof + that their accusation could only have been instigated by deliberate + malice.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The same objection + was doubtless urged against his other miracles, although it is + nowhere stated in express terms in the Gospels. But whatever absurd + beliefs may have been entertained by the learned Rabbis, they were + easily met by the common sense of the people. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“We know,”</span> said the Rabbis, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“that this man is a sinner.”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“How can a man that is a sinner perform such + miracles?”</span> is the reply. <span class="tei tei-q">“Whether he + be a sinner, I know not, but one thing I know, that whereas I was + blind, now I see.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“Can a devil open + the eyes of the blind?”</span> It is evident that the difficulties + suggested by the author of <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural + Religion”</span> as to the evidential value of miracles being + nullified by the views which prevailed respecting demoniacal action + were not appreciated when the fourth Gospel was composed, although + according to this theory they ought to have been at that time in full + force. But apart from the peculiar character ascribed to Satanic + supernaturalism in the New Testament, the entire idea that there + could have been any danger of confounding Satanic miracles with the + miracles of God, rests on the fallacy of confounding a mere objective + fact with an action of a moral agent. A miracle does not consist + merely in the outward event, which is caused by him, but in the + occurrence united with the character and purpose of the agent. The + actions of holy beings must bear the impress of their holiness; those + of evil ones, of the contrary. If, therefore, evil moral agents are + capable of performing actions which are analogous to miracles, they + cannot fail to be stamped with the evil of their characters. Such + would <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page236">[pg 236]</span><a name= + "Pg236" id="Pg236" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> always form a + discriminating mark between Divine and Satanic miracles, even on the + supposition that the latter are possible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This precisely + represents the case as it stands in the New Testament. All the + miracles alleged to have been wrought by God, bear a definite impress + of character and purpose. The supernaturalism ascribed to Satan is no + less definitely marked. The one clearly comes from above. The + indications that the other, if real, must have come from below, are + equally distinct. The moral impress which the two series of events + bear, is fully sufficient to discriminate the one from the other.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The attempt to + distinguish between the miraculous act and its moral environment, is + absurd. It has been affirmed that one miraculous act is as good as + another, quite apart from the circumstances with which they are + attended. Such a principle would destroy the distinction between a + highly meritorious act and the foulest crime. A, for example, has + killed B. The outward act may be the same; but the accompanying + circumstances make all the distinction between a justifiable + homicide, and a most atrocious murder. It is ridiculous to affirm + that principles which are legitimate in common life become invalid + only when they are applied to the evidences of Christianity. Why, in + the name of common sense, may not one miracle be as clearly + distinguishable from another by its moral environment, as an event in + ordinary life is similarly distinguished? The affirmation, therefore, + that the supposition of the possibility of Satanic miracles must + invalidate the miracles of God is absurd.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Our Lord, + therefore, was right in appealing to the character of his works as + affording a conclusive proof of the source whence they originated, + and in contrasting them with the species of supernaturalism which + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page237">[pg 237]</span><a name="Pg237" + id="Pg237" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> was popularly attributed to + Satan. <span class="tei tei-q">“How can Satan cast out Satan? If I do + not the works of my Father, believe me not; but if I do, though ye + believe not me, believe the works, that ye may see and believe that + the Father is in me and I in Him.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This is conclusive + reasoning. It is only possible to darken the question by treating it + as one of bare possibilities, as to what kind of actions a being like + Satan might be capable of performing, if he is allowed to interfere + with the arrangements of the universe at his pleasure. Such a + supposition is foreign to the question at issue, which is whether the + supernaturalism which the New Testament is supposed to attribute to + him can interfere with the evidential value of the miracles wrought + by Jesus. My reply is, Examine and compare the two. When this has + been done, no doubt can remain on any reasonable mind that the + latter, if real, are from above; and the former from below. The + affirmation therefore that if Satanic miracles, such as possession, + are possible, it invalidates the evidence of those wrought by God in + attestation of the truth of a divine commission is disproved.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Equally invalid is + the objection against a miraculous attestation to a divine + commission, on the ground that such testimony can be easily imitated. + I reply, that the great mass of the miracles recorded in the New + Testament do not easily admit of a fraudulent imitation. I by no + means deny that the art of legerdemain is capable of producing + results which to an ignorant observer have the appearance of being + supernatural. But this class of actions bears not the smallest + analogy to the miracles recorded in the New Testament. No art of + legerdemain can persuade a man who has been for many years blind to + believe that he has recovered his sight, and enable him to act + accordingly.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page238">[pg + 238]</span><a name="Pg238" id="Pg238" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it has been + argued; if God is the moral Governor of the universe, is He not bound + to prevent a being like Satan from acting for the purposes of evil in + the affairs of men? This question may be best answered by asking + another. Is He not equally bound to hinder evil men from exerting + such terrible influences on others, even long after they are dead? Is + He not bound to hinder the possibility of the bringing up of children + by their parents in various forms of vice, so as to render them in + after life, more wicked than themselves? Yet it is an indubitable + fact that such an influence is exerted under the moral government of + God. Human life abounds with such cases, which bear a close analogy + to Satanic action exerted in the affairs of men. When we can fully + fathom the reason for the permission of the one, we shall have made + considerable progress in understanding those of the other. The case + may be simply stated. There are difficulties in the moral government + of the universe, into the grounds of which we cannot penetrate. These + press equally on every form of theism. The Satanic supernaturalism + described in the New Testament presents a precisely analogous + difficulty. This therefore can form no reason why one who believes + that God is the moral Governor of the universe, as it now exists, + should reject Christianity because the difficulties are of a similar + order, and press equally on both. The only escape from them, as I + have already said, is the inevitable position assumed by atheism, or + pantheism, and the dreary prospect which they afford to the + aspirations of the human mind.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page239">[pg 239]</span><a name= + "Pg239" id="Pg239" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc23" id="toc23"></a> <a name="pdf24" id="pdf24"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XI. Possession: Is The Theory + That It Was Madness Subversive Of The Historical Value Of The Gospels + Or Inconsistent With The Veracity Of Christ?</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There can be no + doubt that the subject of possession is attended with real + difficulties, whichever view we may take of its actual character.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The symptoms which + are alleged to have accompanied it present many of the usual + phenomena of madness. No possession is believed to take place now, + but such phenomena are attributed to causes purely natural. The + supposed possessions therefore which are mentioned in the New + Testament or in other ancient writings are said to be due only to + ignorance of natural causes. Many very eminent defenders of + Christianity have been so deeply impressed by these and other reasons + that they have admitted that possession is only a form of madness, + and that the language respecting it in the New Testament is based on + the current ideas of the day.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is desirable + that the difficulty should be put in the strongest light. I will + therefore state it in the words of the author of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion.”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“It would be an insult to the understanding of those who + are considering this question, to pause here to prove that the + historical books of the New Testament, speak in the clearest and most + unmistakable terms of actual demoniacal possession.”</span> Now what + has become of this theory of disease? The Archbishop of Dublin is + probably <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page240">[pg + 240]</span><a name="Pg240" id="Pg240" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the + only one who asserts the reality of demoniacal possession formerly, + and in the present day; and in this way we must say that he is + consistent. Dean Milman, on the other hand, who spoke with the + enlightenment of the 19th century, <span class="tei tei-q">“has no + scruple in averring his opinion on the subject of demoniacal + possession to be that of Joseph Mede, Lardner, Dr. Mead, Paley, and + all the learned modern writers. It was a kind of insanity, and + nothing is more probable than that lunacy would take the turn, and + speak the language of the prevailing superstition of the + times.”</span> The Dean, as well as <span class="tei tei-q">“all the + learned modern writers”</span> to whom he refers, felt the + difficulty, but in seeking to evade it, they sacrifice the Gospels. + They overlook the fact, that the writers of these narratives, not + only themselves adopt <span class="tei tei-q">“the prevailing + superstition of the times,”</span> but represent Jesus as doing so + with equal completeness. There is no possibility, for instance, of + evading such statements as those in the miracle of the country of the + Gadarenes, where the objectivity of the demons is so fully + recognised, that on being cast out of the man, they are represented + as requesting to be allowed to go into the herd of swine, and being + permitted by Jesus to do so, the entry of the demons into the swine + is at once signalised by the herd running violently down the cliff + into the lake and being drowned. (p. 131.) The author might have + strengthened his case, as far as modern authorities are concerned, by + drawing attention to the fact, that even Dr. Farrar, who seems to + maintain the objective reality of demoniacal possessions in his + recently published <span class="tei tei-q">“Life of Christ,”</span> + admits that in the statement that the demons locally passed from the + man into the swine, some inaccuracy has crept into the narrative of + the Evangelists.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be at once + seen that the all-important point <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page241">[pg 241]</span><a name="Pg241" id="Pg241" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> in this objection is the apparent acceptance by + our Lord of demoniacal possession, as being a correct account of an + objective fact. I fully agree with this writer, that those who affirm + that it was madness and nothing else are bound, when they propose + this solution of the difficulty, to point out distinctly how it + affects the question of our Lord's veracity, and the historical + character of the Gospels.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In approaching + this question, let me at once observe that while I entertain a + definite opinion as to the nature of the inspiration of the New + Testament derived not from <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" + xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> + assumptions, but from a careful study of its facts and phenomena, yet + the question at issue is not what is the nature or the extent of the + inspiration, but the reality of the supernatural events recorded in + the Gospels. This issue is one which is purely historical, and + therefore I have simply to examine it on historical grounds, and not + to defend any particular theory of inspiration. Our business is first + to ascertain what are the facts of the New Testament which are + supported by historical evidence; when we have ascertained these, we + shall be in a position to propound a theory of inspiration in + accordance with the facts and assertions; still, however, it will be + necessary to find out how a certain state of the facts will affect + the character which the Gospels attribute to our Lord.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following + facts are plain on the surface of the Gospels. First, that the + followers of our Lord believed that the demoniacal possessions there + recorded were objective facts, and not mere forms of disease.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly, that our + Lord himself, if the words attributed to Him are correctly reported, + used language which seems to imply that He shared in this belief.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly, that in a + particular instance, not only do <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page242">[pg 242]</span><a name="Pg242" id="Pg242" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> the Evangelists affirm that our Lord addressed + a demoniac, but also the demons who possessed him, and that He + permitted their departure into a herd of swine, thereby apparently + confirming the objective reality of the possession.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The question is a + far more serious one, as it affects our Lord, than those on whose + reports the statements of the Gospels are founded. He is represented + as being a divine person, and as possessed in His human nature, not + of infinite but of superhuman knowledge. His apparent sanction of an + erroneous view is therefore a very different thing from the apparent + sanction of it by an author of a Gospel, or from the mistaken views + which his followers might have entertained as to the causes of a + bodily disease.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I should find no + difficulty in adopting the theory of the eminent writers above named, + that the demoniacal possessions mentioned in the New Testament, were + nothing but forms of insanity, if it were not that our Lord has + apparently recognised their reality. It has been urged that if + possession was nothing but insanity, there is an end of the miracle. + But this is not the case, for the cure of a madman is quite as much a + supernatural act as the expulsion of a demon.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let me now assume + for argument's sake, that possession was simple madness. How does + such a supposition affect the veracity of the authors of the Gospels, + and their judgment as credible historians of the events of our Lord's + life?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If we assume that + possession was madness, it is evident from the language which the + Evangelists have employed that they must have shared in the ignorance + of the times in which they lived as to the true causes of the + complaint. When however we speak of the ignorance of any particular + period, it should be observed <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page243">[pg 243]</span><a name="Pg243" id="Pg243" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> that the expression is an indefinite one. We + have no right to impute to any body of authors opinions on particular + subjects of which their writings contain no traces. It has been + affirmed, as we have seen, that the Jews of the apostolic age held a + number of opinions on the subject of possession of the most grotesque + and monstrous description. I have already shown that to impute these + opinions to them, when no trace of them can be found in their + writings is a most unfair mode of reasoning.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">When, therefore, I + use the expression that they must have shared in the ignorance of the + age respecting the causes of this disease, I must guard against the + danger of ascribing to them a greater degree of ignorance than that + which they have actually shown. The expression, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“ignorance of the age,”</span> denotes no uniform + quantity of ignorance shared in by every individual alike. In an + ignorant or superstitious age, one person may be far more so than + another. It is quite conceivable that two thousand years hence human + improvement may have become so great, that those who live in the + present century may be designated as ignorant. It may be hereafter + asserted that such writers as Huxley, Tyndall, Herbert Spencer, and + Mill shared in the ignorance of the age in which they lived on some + important physical facts. But from this it would be absurd to draw + the conclusion that they were believers in the alleged facts of + spiritualism because large numbers of their contemporaries were known + to have believed in them, and spiritualistic publications enjoy a + large circulation both in Europe and America in this nineteenth + century.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As far as the + Evangelists are concerned, the supposition that I am now considering + involves nothing more than that they held a false theory as to the + cause <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page244">[pg 244]</span><a name= + "Pg244" id="Pg244" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of a particular form + of disease, and that they have used language respecting it that + embodies this theory. In this point of view they would not differ + from writers of every age who have entertained false theories as to + the causes of physical phenomena. In such cases it is easy to + separate the fact from the incorrect view as to what were the causes + of that fact. Ancient philosophical writers held many false theories + as to the place of the local habitation in our bodies of certain + affections of our moral nature. These can be traced very distinctly + in the language of the present day. Thus we say that a man is devoid + of heart, and talk of making appeals to the heart. These, and + multitudes of similar expressions which occur both in ancient and + modern writings, involve false philosophical theories; but it is easy + to separate the facts intended from the theories. Thus, if the + authors of the Gospels inform us that our Lord cured a demoniac, and + give an account of the demoniac's outcries, as though they were the + utterances of a demon, we have only to substitute madman for + demoniac, and the correct state of the case is easily discovered.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The real + difficulty which is felt on this subject, arises not from the + narratives as ordinary histories, but on the supposition that the + writers possessed an inspiration which ought to have guarded them + from such errors. Popular theories of inspiration unquestionably + render such an assumption necessary, but I can see no ground for it, + either in the statements of the Gospels, or any other portion of the + New Testament. Nowhere is it affirmed that its writers were to be + guided into all truth, scientific, philosophical, or even historical. + All that is affirmed is that they possessed a degree of supernatural + enlightenment adequate to communicate the Christian revelation to + mankind. Neither is there <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page245">[pg + 245]</span><a name="Pg245" id="Pg245" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> a + hint given, nor can a fact be adduced, to show that their + supernatural illumination extended beyond this. The spiritual gifts + bestowed no enlightenment beyond the special function of those gifts. + This the affirmation of St. Paul in the Epistles to the Corinthians + makes clear. A person having the gift of tongues, if he had not also + that of interpretation was unable to interpret his own utterances, + and the possession of the high gift of prophecy by no means exempted + the possessor from the danger of using it in a manner to create + confusion in the Church. Even the highest apostolic gifts conferred + no infallibility, but were strictly limited to their proper functions + of communicating the great truths of the Christian revelation. The + idea that they conferred a general infallibility is no statement of + the New Testament, but a pure figment of the imagination.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It therefore by no + means follows because the writers of the New Testament had an + illumination sufficient for their functions that they had any other + than their ordinary enlightenment beyond that limit. They might have + been good teachers of religious truth, and yet utterly ignorant of + physical science. The assertion may be correct that St. Luke + possessed a supernatural guidance sufficient to enable him to compose + the third Gospel, and yet it may be no less true, that as a physician + he had no medical knowledge beyond that of his time, and that he + shared in all its errors as to the causes and cure of physical + disease. A man may be a good physician of the soul, and at the same + time a very ignorant physician of the body. It is quite conceivable, + therefore, even if the Evangelists or those followers of Christ from + whom they derived their accounts possessed various degrees of + supernatural enlightenment on matters directly affecting + Christianity, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page246">[pg + 246]</span><a name="Pg246" id="Pg246" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + that they possessed none whatever as to the causes of disease, and + that they may have viewed madness as a result of demoniacal action, + and described it accordingly. The facts would remain the same; the + symptoms might have been exhibited, and the cure actually + effected.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the New + Testament likewise affirms that our Lord imparted to His followers + the power of expelling demons, as well as that of healing diseases. + Now, on the supposition that these demoniacs were simple maniacs, how + does this affect the credibility of the narrative?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply that + during the mission of the Apostles and the Seventy (for these are the + cases alluded to) there is no promise made them of supernatural + enlightenment. They were simply sent out to announce a specific fact, + the near approach and setting up of the kingdom of heaven, and to + work miracles in confirmation of it. It is true that in His address + to them, our Lord told them that a time was coming when they would + have to testify to Him before princes and kings, and that He promises + them, that they should receive supernatural assistance, suitable to + the emergency. But this never arose during the mission in question. + They were commanded to cure the reputed demoniac in confirmation of + their mission. This would be an equally miraculous sign whether he + was one possessed or a simple maniac. In this case, therefore, there + was no reason why they should be supernaturally enlightened as to the + causes of this disease, more than of any other. No doubt the theories + then prevalent as to the causes of disease generally were very + faulty. It could not be otherwise in the state of medical science at + that period. So they must always have been while such a truth as the + circulation of the blood was unknown. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page247">[pg 247]</span><a name="Pg247" id="Pg247" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> But the object of Christianity was not to + communicate scientific knowledge, or to teach the true causes of + disease, but to discover truths mightily operative in the moral and + spiritual worlds. It follows, therefore, that the ignorance of the + disciples as to the actual causes of mania no more affects the + credibility of the narrative than their ignorance of the causes of + paralysis or leprosy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is also evident + from the statements of the Gospels, that there were a considerable + number of persons who practised exorcisms of various kinds, and who + fully believed that the persons on whom they operated were possessed + by demons. It seems also probable from the allusions made to them, + that these exorcisms were occasionally successful in effecting a + cure; and it may be, more frequently, in mitigating the symptoms. + This, however, was not always the case; for the Evangelists describe + the disciples as entirely unsuccessful in the case of the child, out + of whom they invoked the demon to depart in the name of Jesus. It is + worthy of observation, that in this instance, the father of the + demoniac describes his son's case as a combination of lunacy and + possession, <span class="tei tei-q">“He is lunatic and sore + vexed.”</span> Their failure is directly attributed to want of faith, + <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that there was something + wanting in their mental state which prevented them from exerting the + requisite influence over the lunatic youth. The want of success with + which exorcists were not unfrequently attended is strikingly set + before us in the account given in the Acts of the Apostles, of the + attempt made by certain Jewish exorcists to cure the demoniac at + Ephesus. In this case it not only ended in a complete failure, but in + an aggravation of the malady.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Now when we + consider the various forms which <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page248">[pg 248]</span><a name="Pg248" id="Pg248" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> mania assumes, it is quite credible that + exorcisms may have exerted a favourable influence on it, altogether + apart from any supernatural power possessed by the operator. It is + clear that the supposed maniacs imagined themselves under the + influence of demoniacal possession. When we consider the powerful + influence that one mind is capable of exerting over another under + these circumstances we can see that the presence of superior mental + power was an influence exactly suited to produce a favourable result. + In our modern treatment of mania (whatever may be the opinions as to + its physical origin) it is now universally admitted that moral means + are the most efficacious. Some obvious physical causes can be dealt + with and removed, while others cannot. But the most successful + operator on these forms of lunacy is he who applies to them the most + effective moral treatment, under which in many cases its symptoms + have gradually disappeared. One of these modes of treatment is never + to cross the patient on the subject of his delusions. Nothing is more + remarkable than the influence which the efficient practitioner can + exert over persons suffering from these forms of madness, by the mere + energy of his will; a display of mental power analogous to that of + strong faith. This will often produce a calm among maniacs which + persons of inferior endowments utterly fail to excite. It is an + unquestionable fact that high mental and moral power is capable of + producing striking results on different forms of maniacal + disease.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This being so, it + follows that exorcists might be capable of exerting upon maniacs a + powerful influence favourable to cure. In the ancient world the usual + treatment was that of extreme harshness. The demoniac of Gadara had + been bound with chains and fetters. This is now known to have a + direct tendency <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page249">[pg + 249]</span><a name="Pg249" id="Pg249" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> to + aggravate the disease, rather than to cure it. It is no wonder, + therefore, if the exorcist, by adopting an opposite mode of + treatment, and even by sympathizing with the sufferer's delusions, + was capable of alleviating the symptoms of the complaint, if not of + effecting a cure. The whole result may have been due to moral + influence and spiritual power, which may have been taken for the + expulsion of a demon. In whatever way it was effected, the cure or + the alleviation was no less real.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that the exorcists of the ancient world were far from + necessarily being a set of impostors, even on the supposition that + possession was simple mania. They may have been able to effect real + alleviations or even cures of the complaint, although they were + ignorant as to its cause, or how their exertions produced a + successful result. There is nothing inconsistent with their general + honesty, if they themselves were under the belief that they were + expelling demons, while they were really curing ordinary mania. It + should also be observed, that a real power of exerting an influence + on madmen was one which in those times of ignorance, both of mental + and physical science, admitted of fearful abuse, and if exercised for + evil purposes, was capable of producing many of the worst results + with which the practice of witchcraft and sorcery have been attended. + A large portion of these latter operations no doubt resulted from the + successful practice of ocular deception, but another portion of them + unquestionably resulted from the mighty influences that a powerful + mind can exert over a weak, imaginative, and superstitious one. There + are many depths of human nature into which science has as yet failed + to penetrate; and among these are the entire phenomena of mania and + religious frenzy.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page250">[pg + 250]</span><a name="Pg250" id="Pg250" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These facts and + considerations are sufficient to vindicate the credibility of the + writers of the New Testament in their statement, that a power of + exorcism was known and exercised in their time, and that its exercise + was at times attended with favourable results. The statement on this + subject attributed to our Lord, <span class="tei tei-q">“If I by + Satan cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? therefore + shall they be your judges,”</span> is plainly an <span lang="la" + class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">ad hominem</span></span> argument. It amounts to + no more than this; You Pharisees accuse me of casting out demons + through Beelzebub. You assert that your disciples exercise a power of + exorcism; and that they do this in virtue of a divine power + communicated to them. On what principle of common sense can you + affirm that the power which I exercise is demoniacal, and that which + your disciples exercise is divine?—There is no assertion made one way + or the other as to the reality of the acts in question; nor is there + any difficulty in supposing that our Lord recognised that some of the + influences thus exerted were genuine.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have hitherto, + in treating this part of the subject, been dealing with the + supposition that our Lord's disciples mistook maniacs for demoniacs, + and the consequences of such a mistake on the authenticity of the + Gospel narratives. I must now address myself to the far more + important question as to the consequences which follow from our + Lord's apparent recognition of the existence of demoniacal possession + on the supposition that it was simple mania.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The facts as they + appear in the Gospels are unmistakable. It was the distinct opinion + of their authors that our Lord recognised the phenomena which they + have reported as the results of demoniacal possession and not of + simple mania. In proof of this it will be needless to refer to every + instance they have recorded. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page251">[pg 251]</span><a name="Pg251" id="Pg251" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> The account of the demoniac at Gadara and that + of the lunatic youth are among the most remarkable, and on them the + case may be allowed to rest. In the former case the words of St. + Mark, whose description of the scene abounds in those details which + are rarely seen except in narratives derived from direct ocular + testimony, are: <span class="tei tei-q">“And all the demons besought + him, saying, Send us into the swine that we may enter into them. And + forthwith Jesus gave them leave. And the unclean spirits went out and + entered into the swine, &c.”</span> In the case of the demoniac + child the Evangelist describes the Apostles as asking Jesus, + <span class="tei tei-q">“Why could not we cast him out?”</span> The + following words are ascribed to our Lord: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“This kind goeth not out but by prayer and + fasting.”</span> It is undeniable, therefore, that the Evangelists + have ascribed to Jesus a belief in the reality of demoniacal + possession.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I am not concerned + in the present argument with the words and actions which they have + attributed to the demoniacs; but with the words and actions + attributed to Jesus. We know that some madmen labour under the + delusion, not only that they are emperors and kings, but even in a + few instances that they are God himself. This being so, it is quite + possible that a maniac may confuse his personality with one or more + demons; and speak and act consistently with the delusion. The maniacs + may have given utterance to exclamations resulting from mere + delusions; but the Evangelists in recording these utterances gave + simple statements of facts. It is quite possible, that the demoniac + of Gadara may have imagined himself possessed by a legion of demons, + and have spoken and acted accordingly, whilst he was at the same time + labouring under simple mania.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Now, on the + assumption that possession was simple <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page252">[pg 252]</span><a name="Pg252" id="Pg252" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> mania and nothing more, the following + suppositions are the only possible ones.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First, that our + Lord really distinguished between mania and possession; but that the + Evangelists have inaccurately reported his words and actions, through + the media of their own subjective impressions, or, in short, have + attributed to Him language that He did not really utter.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Second, that our + Lord knew that possession was a form of mania, and adopted the + current notions of the time in speaking of it, and that the words + were really uttered by Him.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Third, that with + similar knowledge, He adopted the language in question as part of the + curative process.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fourth, that He + accepted the validity of the distinction, and that it was a real one + during those times.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These alternatives + demand our careful consideration, not for the purpose of determining + which is the correct one, but of estimating the results which flow + from either of them on the central character of the Gospels. The + position which I take must be clearly stated. It is this: If + possession be mania, there is nothing in the language which the + Evangelists have attributed to our Lord which compromises the + truthfulness of his character. If, on the other hand, we assume that + possession was an objective fact, there is nothing in our existing + scientific knowledge of the human mind which proves that the + possessions of the New Testament were impossible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us consider + the first alternative.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A careful + examination of the phenomena presented by the synoptic Gospels leads + to the irresistible conclusion that they largely consist of accounts + which had been handed down by oral tradition, for a considerable time + prior to their being committed to writing, and <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page253">[pg 253]</span><a name="Pg253" id="Pg253" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> that these have been in various degrees + supplemented by information derived from other sources. Assuming this + to have been the case it gives an adequate account of the differences + of form which they present, their variations in minor circumstances, + and that most remarkable of all their phenomena, the samenesses of + expression interwoven with considerable diversities, which is + presented alike by the parallel narratives and discourses. The + threefold and more frequently twofold form in which several of the + discourses have been handed down to us, prevent us from believing + that these discourses were intended to be rigid reproductions of the + verbal utterances of our Lord. All they can be is an accurate account + of the sense and very frequently of his words. The important question + for our present consideration is, Have the Evangelists, in reporting + the discourses of Jesus, imparted to them a colouring derived from + their own subjective impressions or do they accurately convey to us + his meaning and his meaning only? Or with respect to the point before + us, Have the Evangelists in reporting the utterances of Jesus to the + demoniacs and his observations on possession to his disciples given + us the substance of what He actually said, or their own impressions + of what He might have said?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply, the + internal grounds for assuming their accuracy are strong. This is + vouched for by the fact that while we have a three or twofold report + of the same discourse, varying very considerably in words and + arrangement, and while we have whole sentences in one Evangelist + which materially aid in determining the meaning, either omitted in + one or inserted in another, still with all these variations in + expression, the variations in sense are of the smallest possible + importance. This being the case the whole aspect of <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page254">[pg 254]</span><a name="Pg254" id="Pg254" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the discourses leads us to infer that + they are altogether unaffected by the subjective impressions of those + who reported them. They are indelibly stamped with the mind of Jesus + himself and with his alone. There are many points on which his + teaching ran strongly counter to the subjective impressions of those + who reported it. Here then if such impressions had intruded + themselves we should be certain to find indications of such + intrusion, and that in no doubtful form. But there are none. The + theory therefore of the introduction of the subjective impressions of + the followers of our Lord into the discourses has no foundation in + their contents, and therefore it is wholly illegitimate to assume it + for the solution of a difficulty.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The phenomena + which distinguish St. Mark's Gospel strongly display the marks of + autoptic testimony. This greatly increases the difficulty of the + supposition in question, for these expressions are found in that + Gospel, and in it we also find the remarkable saying, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“This kind goeth not out but by prayer and + fasting.”</span> It seems therefore impossible to doubt the + Evangelist's assertion that such words were uttered by our Lord.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But I must now + inquire whether Dr. Farrar's supposition is tenable, that some + misapprehension has crept into the narrative when it affirms that the + demons in objective reality left the body of the man and entered into + the swine.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I answer that + there is nothing in the Evangelists which requires us to consider + their words as an accurately scientific statement of the mode in + which the demon acted on the mind of the possessed.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is true that + they repeatedly say that they entered in and out of the man, but this + may well be in conformity with popular ideas on the subject, without + intending to assert as a scientific fact, that the demons + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page255">[pg 255]</span><a name="Pg255" + id="Pg255" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> made either the body or the + spirit of the man their local habitation. The New Testament attempts + to determine nothing respecting the <span lang="la" class= + "tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">modus operandi</span></span> of spirits. God is + said to dwell in a holy man, but it is ridiculous to affirm that the + omnipresent Spirit makes the man his local habitation. There is a + case in point as to the use of such language in the narrative of the + woman who was healed of the issue of blood. The effect produced on + her is described by our Lord and the Evangelists by the words + <span class="tei tei-q">“Power (δύναμις) has gone out of me.”</span> + Yet no one who considers the mode in which the Gospels are composed, + will affirm that our Lord by using these words intended to convey a + scientific truth as to his <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" + xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">modus + operandi</span></span> in performing the miracle, or that it was + actually performed by some subtle emanation called <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Power,”</span> which issued from his person. With those + who assume that neither our Lord nor his Apostles could use popular + expressions of this kind, but were bound to use terms of strict + scientific accuracy all reasoning is thrown away. If the strictest + verbal accuracy must be observed on every occasion it would be + incorrect to say that a physician has cured a lunatic, for the idea + on which the term lunacy is founded is scientifically inaccurate. It + follows therefore that the terms which are so constantly applied to + demons in the New Testament, that they entered into, departed out of, + or possessed a man may well be popular expressions, denoting that + they exerted a mighty, nay, an overwhelming influence upon him, which + in the shattered state of his physical or moral condition he was + unable to shake off, without determining anything as to the mode in + which that influence was exerted. Thus, in St. John's Gospel, the + devil is described as having put it (βεβληκότος) <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">into the + heart</span></em> of Judas Iscariot to betray our Lord. After the + giving <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page256">[pg 256]</span><a name= + "Pg256" id="Pg256" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of the sop, Satan is + said to have entered into him. Surely the only fact which these words + are intended to convey is that Judas allowed his whole moral and + spiritual being to be overpowered by the influence of the evil one. + It is quite possible that the Evangelists might have thought that the + influence was exerted by actually going in or coming out of a man. + But this is a mere physical theory as to the mode of action, and + certainly is not a point on which the writings of the New Testament + anywhere affirm that a supernatural knowledge was imparted to their + authors.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore that the expressions <span class="tei tei-q">“going out + from the man,”</span> and <span class="tei tei-q">“entering into the + swine,”</span> may only denote the cessation of the influence of the + demons over the man, and its exertion on the swine, without + determining the mode in which that influence was exerted. Surely when + our Lord promised that He would come to the man who loved him and + make his abode with him, that did not imply a local indwelling of his + person but an indwelling of influence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With such + expressions in abundance before us, in which it is obvious that they + were never intended to denote anything local, it is absurd to fix it + on the sacred writers in this particular case. They nowhere assert + that the demons were seen to pass from the man and enter the swine. + It was simply a matter of inference from the facts which they + witnessed that they had done so. The man ceased to rave and became a + rational creature. The swine rushed down into the lake and perished. + They also affirm that the result took place by the permission of + Jesus. Yet it is somewhat remarkable that it is only Matthew who + attributes to him the word <span class="tei tei-q">“Go.”</span> Mark + and Luke only mention the request of the demons, and the result which + followed. There is nothing therefore derogatory to the character + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page257">[pg 257]</span><a name="Pg257" + id="Pg257" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of the Evangelists as + historians in supposing that the facts received a colouring from + their own subjective impressions, though it would be so if under such + circumstances they had allowed those impressions to assign a + different meaning to our Lord's words from that which he actually + conveyed.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This conclusion at + which we have arrived, that our Lord's meaning is accurately reported + by the Evangelists, disposes of the first alternative. We will now + proceed to examine the second, viz., that our Lord knew that + possession was mania, and that He adopted the current notions of the + times in speaking of it. The all important question is, how far does + this affect his veracity?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">On this point + Archbishop Trench has laid down the following position broadly: + <span class="tei tei-q">“If Jesus knew that the Jewish belief in + demoniacal possession was baseless and that Satan did not exercise + such power over the bodies or spirits of men there would be in such + language that absence of agreement between thoughts and words in + which the essence of a lie consists.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If this position + is correct it involves a principle far more extensive than the case + immediately before us. It is nothing less than that our Lord neither + in his formal teaching nor in his conversation should have used + language which was other than scientifically correct. It might be + argued, that if He had done so He would have lent his sanction to the + error which it involved. Even if the principle thus laid down could + be confined to religious truth (which it cannot), it would then have + been necessary that whenever the current ideas, or the mode of + conception of the day contained an assumption involving an incorrect + theory or endangering a religious error, our Lord ought to have + corrected it in the course of his teaching. If we admit <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page258">[pg 258]</span><a name="Pg258" id="Pg258" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> that demoniacal possession was a real + agency there can be no doubt that the Jews would confound many cases + of ordinary mania with it. This being so, if the principle is + correct, our Lord ought to have pointed out the distinction. Again, + even if it is assumed that demoniacal agency was sometimes manifested + in the phenomena of witchcraft, there can be no doubt that much of it + was due to human imposture. On the principle laid down by the + Archbishop our Lord ought to have corrected every error that was + prevalent on that subject. On the same principle it would have been + impossible for him to have used an <span lang="la" class= + "tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">ad + hominem</span></span> argument or in fact any form of expression + founded on an erroneous conception. It is therefore evident that the + principle, if accepted at all, can only be accepted under very + considerable qualifications, or we shall convert our Lord from the + revealer of truth and teacher of Christianity into one whose duty it + was to combat every erroneous opinion of the day. On such a theory it + is difficult to see how our Lord was not bound to correct every + erroneous opinion then current respecting the first and second + chapters of Genesis, and to point out their true relation to the + modern discoveries of geology, for He expressly referred to the + second chapter in his teaching. He also referred to the flood, + respecting which many erroneous opinions were undoubtedly current. If + the principle is good it might be urged that He sanctioned those + errors by his silence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The same principle + must also have been applicable to many other erroneous opinions which + the Jews entertained respecting the interpretation of the Old + Testament. In fact it would be difficult to assign any limits to our + Lord's duty of correcting popular errors which had any kind of + bearing on religious truth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But to return to + the demoniacs. Is there any thing <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page259">[pg 259]</span><a name="Pg259" id="Pg259" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> inconsistent with our Lord's truthfulness, if + we suppose that they were lunatics and nothing more, in his using the + current language of the day respecting them? Let it be observed that + two considerations are really involved; first, our Lord is + represented as conversing directly with the demoniac. Secondly, He + also occasionally speaks of demoniacal possession in his ordinary + teaching in the current language of the day. Now if it be admitted to + be consistent with his truthfulness to address such language to the + maniac, is it equally so to employ such language in his discourses to + others?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I observe first, + that if possession was mania, the real ground of the popular error + was an erroneous opinion as to the cause of a natural disorder. The + popular belief in fact ascribed it to supernatural instead of natural + causes. So far, but no farther, it touched religious questions. To + correct the error involved not merely the teaching of religious + truth, but in this particular case the enunciation of sounder + principles of mental philosophy. I think that I may fearlessly affirm + that the teaching of scientific truth, either mental or material, did + not come within the scope of our Lord's divine mission. Political + truth is a part of moral truth, and moral truth is closely allied to + religious truth. Now although Christianity is a power which will + ultimately reform the political world, our Lord expressly affirmed + that it was no part of his mission to enunciate political truth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In the same manner + it may have formed no direct portion of his mission to teach correct + views respecting the origin of mania, or to counteract the opinions + which ascribed it to supernatural causes.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If this principle + is correct, there is nothing inconsistent with his truthfulness if + when our Lord conversed with a supposed demoniac, He addressed him in + language <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page260">[pg + 260]</span><a name="Pg260" id="Pg260" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + which took for granted the truth of his delusions. Even if it is + supposed that truthfulness required that He should have exposed a + popular delusion, surely it was no occasion for doing so, when He was + addressing a madman. Who would affirm that a physician is wanting in + truthfulness if he addresses his patient in terms of his own + delusions, or imagines that it is his duty to enter into a discussion + with a madman as to the causes of his malady?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">On these + principles it is quite consistent with our Lord's truthfulness to + suppose that the dialogue with the demoniac of Gadara actually + occurred, while He himself knew that possession was nothing but + mania. Let us suppose that the man was a raving madman. He had been + treated cruelly. He rushed towards Jesus and was awed by the + greatness of his character. The dialogue takes place, as it is + described by the Evangelist. I see no want of truthfulness on our + Lord's part, nor can I conceive any necessity for explaining to the + man that he was not possessed by a multitude of demons; or if the + madman requested that the demons by whom he imagined himself + possessed might be allowed to go into the swine, that our Lord should + explain to him that it was impossible that they should do so because + the idea of the demoniac was a delusion. The case would be one of + confused or double personality, and accordingly the narrator has + described the demons and the man as alternately speaking, and our + Lord as addressing them. In such a case the form of the narrative + would be modified by the subjective impressions of the narrator.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the words + which our Lord is described as addressing to the demoniac lad also + require consideration. St. Mark describes them as follows. Jesus + rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Thou deaf <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page261">[pg + 261]</span><a name="Pg261" id="Pg261" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and + dumb spirit, I charge thee come out of him, and enter no more into + him; and the spirit cried, and rent him sore and came out of + him.”</span> Let us suppose that the disease was mania, and that our + Lord knew it to be so, but that the father, as well as the maniac and + the others who were present believed that it was caused by the action + of an evil spirit. What was there inconsistent with veracity in + addressing the maniac in terms of his own delusions? If it is urged + that the belief in possession was a superstition, and that to use + such language tended to confirm the belief, I reply that if we assume + that our Lord was bound not to use the language which was common + among his hearers in speaking of such diseases, or that He ought to + have given explanations of their true causes, then we assume that his + character as a revealer of Christianity rendered it necessary that in + the course of his public ministry He should correct all the errors + which He encountered, and never use language which had originated in + them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The words which + are ascribed to our Lord by the Evangelist when He stilled the + tempest will throw light on this subject. St. Mark gives them as + follows: <span class="tei tei-q">“He rebuked the winds and said to + the sea, Peace, be still.”</span> The word here rendered <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Be still”</span> is in the Greek far more emphatic, + <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Be + gagged</span></span> (πεφίμωσο). In the case of the demoniac our Lord + is represented as rebuking the evil spirit. Here He rebukes the + waves. Now it is only possible to rebuke rational agents. Such an + expression would therefore be only accurate if addressed to a being + who was capable of hearing it, and who was uttering load cries. It + may be objected that the expression favours the notion that the + speaker supposed the roaring of the waves to be the voice of an evil + spirit, who was exciting the tempest, or, in other words, that He + gave countenance to the heathen <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page262">[pg 262]</span><a name="Pg262" id="Pg262" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> belief, that it was the voice of Æolus, the + spirit of the storm. Whatever amount of superstition may be + attributed to the Jews at the time of the Advent, it will scarcely be + urged that the followers of Jesus attributed the roaring of the gale + to the voice of a demon. Still it may be urged on the principles + above referred to that the words uttered by our Lord tended to + confirm superstitions notions as to the nature and origin of storms. + I argue, on the other hand, that these expressions prove indisputably + that the language used by Him was not always intended to be a literal + description of fact, any more than the numerous similar addresses to + the inanimate creation which we find in the Psalms.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But in the case of + the demoniac, the real difficulty consists in the results which are + alleged to have happened to the swine. I have already obviated some + portion of this as far as the form of the narrative is concerned. But + there remains the fact that the swine are stated to have rushed into + the lake and perished. As to the reality of such an occurrence there + can have been no mistake. The mere mode of expression offers no + explanation, nor can a mistake respecting such an occurrence have + originated in any possible deception of the imagination. <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">If it was not a fact + it must have been a fictitious invention.</span></em> Can any + explanation of it be given? It has been suggested that the swine were + driven down the cliff by the madman. Against this supposition, it has + been urged that no animals are less easily driven than swine. How + then could it have been possible to drive two thousand of them into + the water? But there is no necessity to assume that they were driven + at all. The scene as it is described by the Evangelists was well + calculated to inspire animals with fright. It would however have been + impossible to frighten two thousand of them. Granted: but large + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page263">[pg 263]</span><a name="Pg263" + id="Pg263" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> herds of animals follow their + leaders implicitly. When under excitement one makes a leap, the + others will follow. All that would have been necessary, if we suppose + that the herd was near the edge of the cliff, was that the leaders + should have received the requisite impulse from the madman, and under + its influence rushed wildly down the cliff, and been followed by + their companions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the case is + different when our Lord speaks to others, and not to the demoniacs + themselves. His observations to the Pharisees on this subject I have + already considered. There remains the striking one addressed to the + disciples: <span class="tei tei-q">“This kind goeth not out but by + prayer and fasting.”</span> The circumstances of the case are these. + The disciples had failed to cure the youth, whether a demoniac or a + simple lunatic. They ask our Lord why it was that they had failed. He + tells them that it was because of their unbelief. Now it is + impossible for us to say what was the nature of the influence of + faith in affecting miraculous cures, and why the want of it prevented + success. It is sufficient to draw attention to the fact that it is + uniformly laid down in the New Testament, that in the case of + subordinate agents working miracles faith was necessary for their + accomplishment. Our Lord also usually required faith in the + recipients of his cures, but not always. But to his disciples when + they attempted to perform a miracle faith was indispensable to their + success. The question was not what was the nature of the disease, but + why in this particular case they had failed to cure it. Our Lord + replied that in this instance not only was faith necessary to effect + the cure, but a very unusual degree of it. If the question had been + what was the cause of the child's disease, and if our Lord know that + it was not possession, but <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page264">[pg + 264]</span><a name="Pg264" id="Pg264" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + mania, it is quite possible that He would have refused to answer it, + as He did on other occasions when curious questions were put to him, + and would have deduced some moral lesson from the fact. This it will + be remembered was the course which He pursued when He was asked + whether only a few would be saved. But the inquiry was not what + caused the disease, but why the attempt to cure it had proved a + failure. Such being the question, there is nothing inconsistent with + truthfulness in our Lord's answer. He avoided entering into an + explanation as to what was a physical cause of the disease, which was + quite foreign to his divine mission. He therefore simply told them + that their failure was owing to their unbelief, and then added, in + language couched in their own forms of thought, and which would not + therefore open a discussion on subjects foreign to the purposes of + his mission, <span class="tei tei-q">“This kind goeth not out but by + prayer and fasting.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Those who lay + stress on difficulties of this kind are in the habit of overlooking + the plain fact, that our Lord's teaching was specifically addressed + to the living characters of the day, and to their existing lines of + thought, and cannot without reference to them be directly translated + into our own. This remark is no less true of the moral teaching + contained in the Gospels, than of their historical statements. It is + even more so, for a great number of the moral precepts of Christ + cannot be applied as practical guides until they have been adapted to + the altered conditions of thought and of society.<a id="noteref_4" + name="noteref_4" href="#note_4"><span class= + "tei tei-noteref"><span style= + "font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">4</span></span></a> They are + in fact principles given in the form of precepts. If our Lord's words + had been reported so as to make them square with the lines of thought + of every age, they would have given us, not <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page265">[pg 265]</span><a name="Pg265" id="Pg265" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> his actual teaching but a modification of it. + It is our duty by a careful study of the great principles on which it + is based to apply it to our present wants. It may appear to some far + more desirable that it should have been capable of a direct instead + of an indirect application, yet the fact is as I have stated it. Want + of attention to this has occasioned no inconsiderable number of the + difficulties of the New Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One or two remarks + will be all that is necessary for illustrating the position which + some have adopted that our Lord's mode of dealing with demoniacs was + intended by Him as part of the process of cure. I should not have + alluded to this subject at all unless the view in question had been + propounded by a very eminent writer. I have already considered its + main principles under the previous head.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It ought to be + observed that the care of demoniacs, whatever view we may take of + possession, belongs to a class of our Lord's miracles which are + distinct from all others. All the others are described as wrought on + the human body, or on external nature. The Evangelists do not record + a single miracle beside these that was wrought on the human mind. + This is a remarkable fact. In the course of his ministry He + encountered every form of moral and spiritual disease, from the + weaknesses of his disciples and attached friends to the opposition of + his most avowed enemies. Now, although He emphatically asserted that + He was the physician of the soul, and although for the spiritual + diseases of men He felt the most profound sympathy, never once is + Jesus represented as exerting his supernatural power for their care. + On the contrary, He is uniformly represented as having recourse to + moral and spiritual means and not to miracles to effect it. Physical + diseases He cures instantaneously, moral ones <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page266">[pg 266]</span><a name="Pg266" id="Pg266" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> slowly and with effort. This fact is + worthy of deep attention as showing that our Lord uniformly acted in + conformity with the laws of the moral universe. If the Gospels are + fictions, why is the Great Physician of Souls never represented as + performing a sudden or miraculous cure in the moral and spiritual + worlds, in the same manner as He does in the material? The need of + miraculous intervention to secure Simon Peter from the moral and + spiritual danger which surrounded him was as great as to prevent him + from sinking in the water. Yet no other than moral and spiritual + influences were called into action.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following is + the bearing of this fact on the question before us. If the cure of a + demoniac was the expulsion of a demon, it involved the liberation of + a moral nature from its thraldom, and at the same time the cure of + the bodily organisation as far as its disordered condition enabled + the demon to exert his power. If, on the other hand, it was the cure + of simple mania, still the act had a direct bearing on the moral + nature of the sufferer. In either case the use of moral means as well + as supernatural agency would be especially appropriate. If demoniacs + were madmen, our Lord was fully justified in displaying towards them + the highest degree of sympathy, and in bringing to bear on them the + mighty moral and spiritual forces which abode in his lofty + personality. The same remark would be equally true if the sufferer + was held in thrall by demoniacal power. Each class of miracles in the + mode of their performance is exactly suited to the condition of those + on whom our Lord was operating. On either supposition He was dealing + not merely with physical forces, but with moral agency, and He dealt + with it accordingly.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I conclude, + therefore, that if it may be taken as <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page267">[pg 267]</span><a name="Pg267" id="Pg267" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> established that possession involved nothing + but simple mania, there is nothing in the facts as they are recorded + in the New Testament inconsistent with that supposition, or which + affects the credit of the Gospels as historical narratives. Nor are + they inconsistent with the idea that their writers were favoured with + such supernatural assistance in composing them as was adequate for + the purpose of giving us such an account of the actions and teachings + of Jesus as was necessary for communicating all the great truths of + the Christian revelation. Nor is the supposition inconsistent, as it + has been alleged to be, with His divine character and + truthfulness.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will examine in + the next chapter the supposition that possession was not mania, but + an actual objective fact.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page268">[pg 268]</span><a name= + "Pg268" id="Pg268" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc25" id="toc25"></a> <a name="pdf26" id="pdf26"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XII. Possession, If An + Objective Reality, Neither Incredible Nor Contrary To The Ascertained + Truths Of Mental Science.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I now proceed to + the consideration of the remaining alternative, the truth of which + the form of the narrative seems most to favour, viz., that our Lord + accepted the distinction between possession and mania; and that + during those times possessions were actual occurrences.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In considering + this subject, it will be necessary to pay attention to the + distinction to which I have referred in the previous chapter, that + even if many of the phenomena that accompanied possession were due to + superhuman agency, the Gospels are by no means pledged to any + particular theory of the <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" + xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">modus + operandi</span></span> by which the phenomena were brought about. + What I mean is that these phenomena might have been due to a + superhuman agency, without involving the fact that the demon had a + local habitation either in the body or the spirit of the man. All + that the Gospels can be taken to affirm is, that the evil spirit in + some way or other, of which we are ignorant, held the man in a state + of thraldom, made his mental powers the subject of a divided + consciousness, overpowered the functions of his reason and his will, + and through his action on the mind used for his own purposes the + organs of his <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page269">[pg + 269]</span><a name="Pg269" id="Pg269" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + body. The writers of the New Testament are pledged to no theory as to + how such results were effected. They have simply reported the + phenomena as they presented themselves to their observation. In doing + this, the language which they have employed denotes local habitation; + but the words used in stilling the storm make it quite clear that the + literal meaning cannot be pressed. Considering the general character + of these narratives, it is impossible to pledge them to the + particular mode in which these results were brought about.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One circumstance + seems to militate against the supposition that possession involved + nothing but simple mania, namely, the numbers of those who are spoken + of as possessed. If the Gospel narratives are historical, it would + appear that such cases were numerous. Not only are several miracles + of this description definitely recorded, but the Evangelists several + times affirm that our Lord cured demoniacs in considerable numbers, + without furnishing us with the details. Now it is difficult to + believe that maniacs existed in such large numbers in a country of + the size and population of Judæa. Yet all the phenomena of possession + point to maniacal, and not to harmless lunacy. The number of the + cases of mania that occur bears but a small proportion to those of + the latter form of derangement. It is true that at times of popular + excitement various forms and numerous cases of frenzy manifest + themselves; but these differ from mania, though they not unfrequently + terminate in it. I have made these observations, because, in + discussing such a subject, it is only right to state fully the + difficulties with which particular theories are attended. It is very + probable, however, that as the symptoms so closely resembled each + other, many cases of actual mania would be confounded in popular + estimation with possession, and, therefore, that cases of actual + possession <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page270">[pg + 270]</span><a name="Pg270" id="Pg270" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> may + not have been so numerous as at first sight would appear.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">On the supposition + that possession was a reality, we have no means of determining what + moral or physical preconditions were necessary for its manifestation. + It is clear that the authors of the Gospels must have considered that + it was owing to some predisposing causes, physical or moral, though + they have not described them. Unless this was the case, the evil, + instead of being partial, would have been universal. Various moral + causes would naturally form a suitable precondition for its + manifestation. There can be no doubt that a number of vices, when + indulged in beyond a certain point, reduce man's moral being to a + wreck and render him obnoxious to the action of external agency. The + power of self-control may be indefinitely weakened. If vice is + carried to its extreme forms, it produces phenomena hardly, if at + all, distinguishable from madness. Such a state of man's moral nature + would form a suitable precondition to enable a superhuman being to + overpower the reason and the will, the supremacy of which was already + impaired by an influence from within. In such cases possession would + have been rendered possible by a man's self-induced moral + corruption.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The testimony of + history proves that during the century which preceded and that which + followed the Advent, the state of moral corruption was extreme. Men + were sated with the old, and craving for new and unheard of forms of + sensual gratification. The old class of ideas, moral and religious, + were gradually dying out, and men were eagerly seeking for something + to fill the void. There consequently never was a time when a greater + number of abnormal forms of thought burst on the human mind, which + was shaken to its utmost depths. The outbreak of fanaticism + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page271">[pg 271]</span><a name="Pg271" + id="Pg271" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> combined with moral + wickedness, which displayed itself forty years after in the Jewish + war of independence, is probably without a parallel in the history of + man. For this there must have been years of preparation. A somewhat + similar state of things existed in the Pagan world, which led to the + production of numerous religious charlatans and impostors. The times + were characterised by an extravagance of thought on almost every + subject, philosophy itself forming no exception. Such an abnormal + mental condition was peculiarly suited to the reception of external + mental influences, if we suppose them possible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But I am bound to + admit that the facts recorded in the Gospels prove that possession + was not always the result of moral degradation. This is proved by the + case of the youth, whose possession the father directly connects with + lunacy, and says that it had seized him from a child. In this case + the cause which rendered the possession possible must have been + physical, probably a derangement of the nervous system.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If I understand + rightly the position which is taken by those who affirm that + possession was mania, and nothing else, it is as follows. It is + alleged that at certain periods of history, the belief in possession + has been widely spread. Possessions are unknown in modern times; and + all the instances which have been alleged are either cases of mania + or delusion. The belief in it has gradually died away as knowledge + has advanced. In former times it generated a number of grotesque + stories, which were pure inventions of the imagination heated by + enthusiasm. Such facts as were real may be referred to madness as + their cause. The others are simply disbelieved. Under the influence + of increasing knowledge, there has arisen a widespread belief in + modern times, that there is nothing superhuman <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page272">[pg 272]</span><a name="Pg272" id="Pg272" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> in the causes of such phenomena, but that + they are due to influences existing within the mind itself. This, as + it is affirmed, being true of all the alleged instances of possession + in the modern world, it is inferred that similar ones in the ancient + world are equally unreal; and if we had the requisite data before us, + we should be able to refer them all to ordinary human causes.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With respect to + the general fact, there can be no doubt that advancing knowledge has + caused a general disbelief in the reality of any modern form of + possession, or of witchcraft. The supreme grotesqueness of the + phenomena of the latter has caused the belief in it to perish under + the influence of common sense, aided by an increased acquaintance + with sound principles of causation, and the stability of the + operations of nature. Still it is incorrect to affirm that the + prevalence of such beliefs has been due to no other cause than + universal ignorance. The belief in witchcraft produced its most + unhappy results during the reigns of Elizabeth and the Stuarts, in + the very age of Bacon, Shakespeare, and Raleigh. Such beliefs + originate in certain principles of our minds whose gratification + consists in the contemplation of the marvellous, the action of which + I shall consider hereafter. They have existed in every condition of + society, and only changed the form of their manifestation. Those who + boast of our freedom from such delusions, owing to the superior light + of the nineteenth century, seem to have forgotten the existence at + the present day of a belief in spiritualism, which is little, if at + all, less absurd than witchcraft, though the former has encountered a + less severe treatment than the latter. This has been more due to the + improvement of our humanity than to our knowledge of physical + science. It is a fact that spiritualism is believed <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page273">[pg 273]</span><a name="Pg273" id="Pg273" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> in by multitudes; and its votaries belong + far more to the cultivated class of society than to the ignorant and + the vulgar. What the witch mania was to the sixteenth and seventeenth + centuries, spiritualism is to the nineteenth. It is the peculiar form + rather than the possibility of such delusions that has passed + away.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It should be + observed also that the demoniacal supernaturalism of the monastic + writers, and of the middle ages, differs from that of the New + Testament to such a degree that they cannot fairly be compared. In + the former the apparition of demons and departed spirits was a thing + of constant occurrence; in the latter, never. To the monks the devil + was continually appearing in the most phantastic forms, and + performing the most grotesque miracles. To this form of demonology + modern spiritualism can put in very strong claims to be esteemed the + genuine successor. The heated imagination of even such a man as + Luther suggested to him that he saw Satan in visible reality. It is + worthy of remark that St. Paul knew nothing of visible Satanic + manifestations. With him they were invariably spiritual.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is important to + keep steadily in view the fact, that the New Testament invariably + represents possession as consisting in the action of a stronger mind + on a weaker one. The influence which the demon exerted on the bodily + organs might have been effected through the agency of the man + himself. It is never described as involving a visible manifestation + of the demon, but his action is one which is purely mental and + spiritual. His presence and his departure were simply judged of by + their effects.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that the denial of the possibility of an influence of this + kind must rest on a very wide principle. It cannot be confined to + such action alone, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page274">[pg + 274]</span><a name="Pg274" id="Pg274" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> but + must go to the extent of denying the possibility of the action of all + spiritual beings on the mind of man. The only principle on which the + denial can rest is, that our mental science has so far succeeded in + analyzing all the past and present operations of the human mind, that + it is justified in affirming that they all originate entirely within + the mind itself; and are never brought about by an action on it from + without by any invisible agent. If this is the principle on which the + denial rests, it will be equally valid to exclude the action of God + on our minds, as well as that of all other invisible beings. It will + doubtless be urged that it is only intended to deny the action of + invisible evil beings. But if it is true that our mental philosophy + has ascertained that all our thoughts originate either in the mind + itself, or in the mind acted on by external nature, or by other men, + the principle must be valid for proving that all other spiritual + agency exerted on the mind is impossible, and that all supposed + instances of it are delusions. It is impossible on this principle to + exclude the evil agency, and not to exclude the good also.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is evident that + this principle is far too broad to be used for the purpose of + affirming the impossibility of the action of external evil agents + only. It is based on the supposition that our mental philosophy is so + complete as to be able to assign even the most abnormal portions of + our mental action to definite and known forces, all of which + originate within the mind itself, and are never due to external + influences. If mental philosophy could establish this as a fact, it + would doubtless prove that possession was impossible; but it could + prove a great deal more, even that God never acted on or influenced + the spirit of man. But if there is any one phenomenon of the mind, of + the origin of which we are ignorant, the whole principle is vitiated, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page275">[pg 275]</span><a name="Pg275" + id="Pg275" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> for that very phenomenon may + be caused by the action of an external power. The real point of the + controversy therefore is, Is our mental science thus complete? Has it + been able to reduce all our mental phenomena, including the most + abnormal of them, to the action of known forces? Has it analyzed our + mental powers to their inmost depths? Until it has done this, it is + impossible to affirm that the abnormal actions of the mind may not be + occasioned by an external agency.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will probably + be urged, that although our philosophy has not yet succeeded in + assigning all our mental phenomena to the action of known forces, it + hopes to accomplish this hereafter; and that its past conquests ought + to be accepted as a pledge of its future performances; and that the + time will certainly come, when it will be able to refer every mental + phenomenon to a cause originating in the mind itself, and acting in + conformity with invariable law. Promises, however, are not + performances; what is requisite to impart validity to wide + affirmations is present actual knowledge, not the hope that future + scientific conquests will be extended over the entire regions of the + unknown. Science professes to walk by sight and not by faith. In a + subject of this kind it is most unphilosophical to assume that the + possibilities of the future are the realities of the present; and to + enunciate propositions whose validity rests solely on the fact that + they are so.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will now + definitely state the principle which can alone give any scientific + value to the assertion, that such demoniacal action as that which is + described in the New Testament, is unbelievable. It is as follows: + that we have so completely ascertained the nature of the forces which + act on our minds, and the laws which regulate them, that we know as a + scientifically <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page276">[pg + 276]</span><a name="Pg276" id="Pg276" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + established truth, that they all originate either in our own mental + organization, or in the action of other men on our minds. The + statement of the principle in this distinct form at once shows that + it is invalid.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + for one moment to affirm that our knowledge is so complete, that we + have a scientific acquaintance with the causes of all our varied + mental phenomena, and the laws which regulate them. We have + ascertained the nature of several of our mental processes; but how + small a portion of man's mental activity do they embrace. I need only + particularize a few of which we are in complete ignorance, as to the + forces which generate them, and the laws which regulate their + action.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First, with + respect to Genius. Genius is a mental power which manifests itself + only on rare occasions. Who can affirm that we have ascertained the + law which regulates its birth? We may judge from analogy that this, + as other things, follows a law of some kind; but respecting the + causes which give it birth our philosophy is profoundly ignorant. Nor + have we any knowledge of its mode of action. It manifests itself in + various forms. There is the genius which makes the poet, the + philosopher, the scientific discoverer, the orator, the politician, + and many others. How those who are possessed of this power effectuate + their mental operations, or how their great ideas originate in their + minds is a subject which exceeds the limits of our scientific + knowledge. Take for example the genius of the poet. Whence came, and + what was the nature of that intuitive power with which Shakespeare + was endowed, or how was it called into exercise? We call such powers + intuitions. We say that a great poet is endowed with a species of + inspiration. What is this but to confess our entire ignorance both of + the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page277">[pg 277]</span><a name= + "Pg277" id="Pg277" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> origin and the mode of + his mental operations. Probably the poet himself would be unable to + give us any analysis of the origin of his own thoughts, or of the + laws that regulate them. How then can we venture to affirm that they + must all originate in the mind itself, and not be due to the action + of some external power? The habit of speaking of his inspirations, + from which scientific men are not exempt, proves our complete + ignorance both of its nature and origin.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But to descend to + a humbler sphere—our own minds. We are all conscious that thoughts + rush into them in a most unbidden manner, and that we pass through + mental states which our analysis is unable to explain. Can any man + affirm, however deep may be his philosophy, that the known laws of + association of ideas are adequate to account for all the mental + phenomena of which he has been conscious? Who has not had experience + of severe efforts to realize something in thought, which have ended + in failure, and that the right thing has suddenly come into his mind + uncalled and unbidden? Not unfrequently has a sudden thought entered + the mind (we know not whence it came) which has entirely changed the + whole current of a previous life. Still more frequently has a happy + idea occurred to us, the origin of which it is impossible to trace. + Who again has not had experience of the sudden rushing of a + temptation into his mind with an all but overwhelming force, even + while his thoughts were occupied with subjects in no way allied to + the suggestion? Many of our mental phenomena may be explained by the + principle of association of ideas and other known mental powers; but + who can venture to affirm that they are adequate to account for all + the various states of which he has been conscious, or that some of + them have not originated in suggestions from without? <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page278">[pg 278]</span><a name="Pg278" id="Pg278" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Scientific knowledge is certainly able to + make no such affirmation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Next: there are + numerous abnormal conditions to which the mind is unquestionably + subject. Who will venture to affirm that he has penetrated to their + depths, or ascertained the laws which regulate their action? These + have a most important bearing on the present subject. They are best + designated by the term phrenzy. Their aspect is very varied. They + differ in many respects from mania, though they are closely allied to + it. They are confined to no one race of men, but are co-extensive + with human nature. They were prevalent in the ancient world, and + connected with various forms of religious belief. They display + themselves with peculiar violence in the religious rites of savages. + In Oriental countries at the present day, they frequently manifest + themselves and assume a great variety of aspects. Examples might be + easily adduced. The phrenzied fanatic often presents indications of + his mind being acted on by an overwhelming external influence; and + when under the influence of the rites of a degraded religion, the + symptoms present no little resemblance to those which accompanied + demoniacal possession.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have no wish to + affirm that such phenomena must be due to an action of this kind, but + to draw attention to the fact that we are ignorant of the power in + which they originate, and that such being the case, it is quite + possible that their most violent and terrible forms may be aroused by + the influence of a power external to the mind itself. Equally + ignorant are we of the causes of even their milder manifestations. + Whatever may be the hopes which are entertained of the future + triumphs of science, it is not too much to assert, that it has not + yet reduced these abnormal conditions of the mind to any thing like a + scientific law, and that it has not succeeded <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page279">[pg 279]</span><a name="Pg279" id="Pg279" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> in tracing the phenomena to the exclusive + operation of a force acting within the mind itself. In truth our + mental science is ignorant of their causes: and for aught that it can + affirm to the contrary, many of them may be due to causes human, + superhuman, or a combination of the two. In cases where we are + profoundly ignorant, dogmatical assertions should be carefully + avoided. While such phenomena are incapable of explanation by the + action of known mental forces, the students of mental science are not + justified in affirming that possession contradicts its known + truths.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully admit, + however, that there is a system of professed mental science, which, + if its truth could be proved, would establish the fact that + possession was impossible. I need hardly say that I allude to that + which affirms that thought is the result of a function of the brain, + and nothing else. According to the views of these philosophers, the + brain secretes thought as a gland secretes its own peculiar + secretion. Until this philosophy has succeeded in proving the truth + of its first principles, it is useless to consider its bearing on + this particular question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is another + abnormal mental condition, the existence of which is unquestionable, + and which has a close connection with the present question, namely, + the ecstatic state. The forms in which this has manifested itself + have been extremely various, and it is impossible for any one to + assert that our mental philosophy has fully fathomed them, and has + succeeded in assigning them to forces originating within the mind + itself. On the contrary it is not too much to affirm that it has as + yet wholly failed to analyze its nature, or to account for the + abnormal powers displayed by the mind when in this condition. In the + ancient world this state of mind was closely connected with the + manifestations of <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page280">[pg + 280]</span><a name="Pg280" id="Pg280" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the + prophetic power, the reality of which was recognized by many of its + philosophers. It will of course be observed that I am not speaking of + this power as it existed in the Jewish church, but of its supposed + manifestations in the heathen world. Similar ecstatic states have + frequently displayed themselves in modern times. When in this + condition the mind is especially liable to be acted on by external + influences. Is it possible, I ask, in the present state of our mental + philosophy, to assert that we know their nature, or the forces which + produce them? The ecstatic in union with a phrenzied state of the + mind was apparently the condition of the Delphian priestess when she + delivered oracles to those who consulted her. According to all the + accounts that we possess, she presented the appearance of being + subject to an overpowering external influence. Every other + description which we possess of the manifestation of this prophetic + power, (and we have several) describes it as presenting phenomena + closely allied to raving madness, an influence of some kind + apparently overpowering the prophet's personality. Until the forces + which produced these phenomena in the ancient world, and the somewhat + similar ones which have been manifested in modern times, can be shown + to owe their origin to forces originating in the mind itself, and to + nothing else, it is absurd to affirm that such a phenomenon as + possession is in contradiction to our scientific knowledge of the + human mind.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is another + point which demands our attention, namely, the close connection + between the extreme forms of moral wickedness, and madness. It is an + unquestionable fact that nothing is more difficult than to draw the + precise line where moral wickedness ends, and madness begins. In + their great outlines they are easily distinguishable, but in the more + advanced stages <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page281">[pg + 281]</span><a name="Pg281" id="Pg281" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + moral evil, the one passes into the other by insensible degrees. So + difficult is it to lay down the precise line which separates them, + that scientific men are not wanting, who affirm that every extreme + case of moral wickedness is a species of mania. Consistently with + this theory frequent efforts are made to save the most abandoned + criminals from the consequences of their crimes. If the principle is + correct, it is impossible not to assign lesser degrees of moral evil + to the same cause. Such a principle logically leads to the denial of + any distinction between moral and physical action. Happily however, + although this conclusion is one which has been arrived at by a + considerable number of physicists, it is one which the common sense + of mankind steadily refuses to accept. It is sufficient for the + present purpose, that extreme forms of moral evil shade off into + mania by insensible degrees; and that ultimately they are capable of + producing insanity. If insanity can be produced by moral causes, it + follows that a superhuman influence powerful for evil, acting on a + degraded moral nature, may be attended with a similar result, and + produce such a phenomenon as possession.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: while + madness is produced by physical causes, it is a certain fact that it + is frequently occasioned by causes purely mental. Of this the + instances are innumerable. These mental causes react on the brain and + the nervous system; and thus they superinduce disease on those parts + of our bodily organization by means of which the mind exercises its + powers. Still the disease itself originates in causes that are not + seated in the body, but in the mind. The mind is therefore capable of + acting powerfully on our bodily frame. If therefore possession be + viewed as the action of one mind on another, there is no reason why + it should not be able to superinduce those forms of <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page282">[pg 282]</span><a name="Pg282" id="Pg282" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> bodily derangement which exhibited + themselves in the demoniacs by the simple action of the mind upon the + body. The mental causes capable of producing mania are, as we know, + of a varied description; and among them is the action and influence + which one mind is capable of exerting on another. As, therefore, in + certain states of our minds, or of our nervous system, mania with all + its results can be produced by the simple action of mind on mind, and + through the action of the mind disorder may be produced in our bodily + organization, there can be no reason why possession with all its + attendant phenomena should not originate in similar causes. There is + nothing to imply that the superhuman agency manifested in possession + was directly exerted on the body of the possessed. An agency which + was entirely mental was fully adequate to produce all the phenomena + with which it was accompanied.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In cases of mania + produced by mental action the removal of the exciting cause is the + precondition of its cure, and in many cases effects it. Similarly, in + cases of possession the removal of the exciting cause would produce + similar results.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, from the foregoing considerations, that the allegation + that the possessions described in the New Testament are incredible, + because they contradict the known truths of mental science, is + disproved.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The question + really resolves itself into the following one: Do evil beings, other + than men, exist in the universe? Or, if they exist, is it credible + that they are allowed to interfere in the affairs of men? This + question we have already considered in a former chapter, and we have + arrived at the conclusion that if we free ourselves from the trammels + of <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> theories, <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page283">[pg 283]</span><a name="Pg283" id="Pg283" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and judge only by the facts of the + universe as it exists, neither their existence nor their intervention + in human affairs is contrary to our reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Two things, + however, must be steadily kept in mind. First: that if such + interventions in human affairs are facts, the agency which can be + exerted is only a permitted agency, and only capable of being exerted + in subordination to the divine purposes in the government of the + universe. A large number of the difficulties with which the subject + is attended have originated in the wholly inaccurate idea that a + power is attributed in the New Testament to Satan, of interfering + both in the material and the moral universe at his own will and + pleasure. This, however, is altogether contrary to the fact. Whatever + power is attributed to him is an entirely permitted one, and + exercised in subordination to the general purposes of God. Secondly, + that although the disorder in the moral world might lead us to + suspect the presence of an evil agency, different from that of man; + yet as it is not a visible one, but confined to the regions of the + mind, it is one which cannot come under our distinct observation, and + could therefore only become known to us by revelation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One more + difficulty has to be considered. It is alleged that possession never + takes place now. It is therefore inferred that it never took place at + all.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply first, if + we grant that demoniacal action, in the form of possession has now + ceased, it by no means follows that it was not once real. The + objection overlooks the fact that its action was a permitted one; and + could only be exercised within the limits assigned to it. There may + have been reasons at the time of the Advent why the exercise of a + Satanic agency should be permitted at that particular period to a + greater extent than it ever has been before or since.</p><span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page284">[pg 284]</span><a name="Pg284" id="Pg284" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: certain + moral and physical conditions were necessary for its exercise. These + may be no longer in existence, but they may have passed away with + many other abnormal conditions of human nature which existed in the + ancient world.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly: it is not + possible to affirm with certainty that, even at the present day, no + supernatural agencies bearing an analogy to possession, are exerted + on the mind. This will be only possible, when all those abnormal + phenomena which manifest themselves in connection with various + debased forms of religion and other cases of phrenzied excitement can + be traced to known forces, originating solely in the mind itself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is one + further objection which requires a brief consideration. It is urged + that the writers of the New Testament entertained the belief, that + diseases were generally occasioned by demoniacal action, quite + independently of possession; and that this belief has received the + sanction of our Lord. One case only is alleged in proof of this, that + of the woman with the spirit of infirmity. She was no demoniac, but + an ordinary diseased person, and the disease is asserted to have been + occasioned by demoniacal action.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply, that + considering the large number of diseases of various kinds mentioned + in the New Testament, in none of which is there any allusion to + demoniacal agency as their cause, a single example is a narrow + foundation on which to build the affirmation that the followers of + our Lord held such a theory as to the origin of disease in general. I + admit that disorganization of the bodily functions is mentioned among + the phenomena of possession. But this differs widely from a bodily + evil superinduced without the agency of possession. Let us inquire + whether the special instance affords any justification for this wide + assertion.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page285">[pg + 285]</span><a name="Pg285" id="Pg285" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Evangelist + states that the woman was bowed down by a spirit of infirmity, and + could in no wise lift herself up. Here it is just as absurd to fasten + on him the intention to describe a scientific fact, as when on + another occasion it is said that <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">power</span></em>”</span> went out of our Lord + <span class="tei tei-q">“and healed them all.”</span> The one stands + on the same ground as the other.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In effecting the + cure, our Lord uses the words, <span class="tei tei-q">“Woman, thou + art loosed from thine infirmity.”</span> Here there is no reference + to Satanic agency whatever. The only mention of it occurs in his + argument with the ruler of the synagogue on the lawfulness of + effecting such cures on the Sabbath day. The words are, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Thou hypocrite, ought not this woman, who is a daughter + of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years, to be + loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These words are + addressed to the ruler in answer to the objection that our Lord was + no prophet, because he effected his cures on the Sabbath. If so, as + the reality of the miracle was not denied, it was intended to be + implied that it had been wrought by the power of Satan, of which the + violation of the Sabbath was the proof. The real point of controversy + therefore was the lawfulness of effecting cures on this day, not the + Satanic origin of the complaint. Was there any conceivable reason why + our Lord should not discuss the point with the ruler on his own + principles? Why was it necessary to raise a wholly different issue, + viz. the Satanic or non-Satanic origin of the disease, instead of + confining it strictly to the point, which was the all-important one, + that His curing this woman on the Sabbath day was so far from being a + proof that He did not come from God, that it was a strong reason for + believing that He did so? To have entered on a discussion as to what + was the cause <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page286">[pg + 286]</span><a name="Pg286" id="Pg286" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + the complaint, would not only have diverted attention from the real + question, but would have introduced one wholly foreign to the + purposes of His divine mission.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Two suppositions + only are possible respecting possession. It must have been either a + form of madness produced by natural causes, or a manifestation of + superhuman power. As the facts on which a judgment can be formed are + meagre, I have not ventured to determine which of these two theories + is alone consistent with the facts and phenomena of the New + Testament. I have therefore taken either alternative, and shown, that + neither does the theory that it was mania interfere with the claims + of the Gospels to be accepted as historical documents, nor is the + language attributed to our Lord contrary to the truthfulness of His + character; nor does the supposition that it was due to superhuman + causes contradict the established truths of mental science.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page287">[pg 287]</span><a name= + "Pg287" id="Pg287" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc27" id="toc27"></a> <a name="pdf28" id="pdf28"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XIII. The Alleged Credulity Of + The Followers Of Jesus.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The allegation + that the followers of Jesus, and the early Christians generally, were + a body of intensely credulous and superstitious people, may be + considered as not only the stronghold of those who impugn the + historical character of the Gospels, but also as the arsenal from + which they draw no small number of their weapons of attack. A + credulity which knew no limits is liberally ascribed to them as + showing how every miraculous narrative might have been invented. They + have even been credited with a facility of inventing fictions, and + then deluding themselves into the belief that they were facts which + they had actually witnessed. Thus it has been asserted that it was + their firm belief that the Messiah ought to have wrought miracles; + that Jesus himself may not even have professed to perform them; but + that the fervid imaginations of His followers invented a set of + miracles, attributed them to Him, and ended with the belief that they + had seen Him perform them. On the other hand, whenever these + objectors are pressed by a difficulty in accounting for the origin of + particular phenomena in the Gospels, they retire on the credulity of + the followers of Jesus as into a kind of citadel, in which they + consider themselves so strongly entrenched that they may defy every + attack. There is also another important purpose which it is made to + serve. It is asserted that it renders worthless the <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page288">[pg 288]</span><a name="Pg288" id="Pg288" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> testimony of the followers of Jesus as to + the actual occurrence of miracles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The allegation + takes two forms:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1st. That the + followers of Jesus were the prey of a credulity and superstition + which greatly exceeded the limits of the ordinary credulity of + mankind; and that therefore the value of their historical testimony + is destroyed.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2nd. That the + ordinary credulity of mankind with respect to the occurrence of + supernatural events is so great and widespread, as to render the + invention of miraculous narratives easy, and to destroy the credit of + all narratives containing them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I propose to + consider these subjects in this and the following chapter.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing is easier + than to charge a body of men with intense credulity and superstition. + Before, however, such charges deserve to have any notice taken of + them, they should be substantiated by direct proof. It is impossible + to meet them if urged in a mere general form. Fortunately, the author + of <span class="tei tei-q">“Supernatural Religion”</span> makes a + number of specific and definite charges, in which he endeavours to + fasten an unspeakable degree of credulity and superstition on the + immediate followers of Jesus and the authors of the Gospels, and + refers to authorities in support of his assertions. I will state his + general position in his own words.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“We have given a most imperfect sketch of some of the + opinions and superstitions prevalent at the time of Jesus, and when + the books of the New Testament were written. These, as we have seen, + are continued with little or no modification throughout the first + centuries of our era. It must however be remembered that the few + details that we have given, omitting much of the grosser particulars, + are the views absolutely expressed <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page289">[pg 289]</span><a name="Pg289" id="Pg289" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> by the most educated and intelligent part of + the community; and that it would have required infinitely darker + colours adequately to have portrayed the dense ignorance and + superstition of the mass of the Jews. It is impossible to receive the + report of supposed marvellous occurrences from an age and people like + this, without the gravest suspicion. Miracles which spring from such + a hot-bed of superstition are too natural in such a soil to be the + object of surprise; and in losing their exceptional character, their + claims on attention are proportionally weakened, if not altogether + destroyed. Preternatural interference with the affairs of life and + with the phenomena of nature was the rule in those days, not the + exception, and miracles in fact had apparently lost all novelty, and + through familiarity had become degraded into mere + commonplace.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“There can be no doubt that the writers of the New + Testament shared in the popular superstitions of the + Jews.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Before proceeding + further, I must draw the reader's attention to three affirmations in + this important passage.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1st. That the + educated Jews of the time of Jesus were a prey to the superstitions + in question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2nd. That the + common class of Jews were a prey to yet grosser superstitious.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3rd. That the + followers of Jesus, who were chiefly Jews of the lower classes, and + the authors of the Gospels, shared in these superstitions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The author devotes + not less than fifty pages to a minute description of the + superstitions of the educated classes. These are alleged to have been + of so gross a nature, that the reader will get but a very imperfect + conception of the point at issue, unless I give a brief sketch of + some of them.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page290">[pg + 290]</span><a name="Pg290" id="Pg290" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I. The Jews are + affirmed to have believed in an innumerable multitude of angels, + whose agency was continually displayed in the ordinary phenomena of + nature. They presided over and energized in its ordinary operations, + as for instance, in thunder, lightning, the winds, the seas, frost, + hail, rain, mists, heat, light, &c.; heaven and earth in fact are + filled with them, and they are also continually busying themselves in + human affairs, of which minute details are given.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">II. They are + alleged to have believed in a demonology of the most phantastic + description. To this I have elsewhere sufficiently alluded.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">III. They are + likewise affirmed to have believed that the sun, moon and stars are + rational beings, and traces of this belief are distinctly affirmed to + exist in the New Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">IV. The belief in + sorcery, witchcraft and magic is affirmed to have been universal + among them. To give the reader an idea of the grossness of these + beliefs, to which even the educated classes are affirmed to have been + a prey, I must quote the following passage:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Amulets consisting of seals, or pieces of paper, with + charms written upon them, were hung round the necks of the sick, and + considered efficacious for their cure. Charms, spells and mutterings + were constantly said over wounds, against unlucky meetings, to make + people sleep, to heal diseases, and to avert enchantments; against + mad dogs for instance, against the demon of blindness and the like, + as well as formulæ for averting the evil eye, and mutterings over + diseases.”</span> Here follow several pages of unutterable + absurdities. It is not too much to say, that there was hardly an + occurrence in nature, and hardly an event of daily life, which was + not influenced by these supernatural powers, and very frequently in a + manner unspeakably grotesque. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page291">[pg 291]</span><a name="Pg291" id="Pg291" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> If such were the beliefs of educated people, + urges the author (and he tells us that he has omitted the grosser + forms of them), what must have been those of the lower orders, and + the extent of their degraded superstition? It must be kept constantly + in mind that the followers of Jesus chiefly consisted of persons + taken from the lower strata of society. But the author in express + words charges them with sharing in such beliefs. If they did not, the + reference to them would have no bearing on the argument.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We have therefore + in this portion of the work a definite issue raised for our + consideration. It is no vague charge of general boundless credulity + and superstition, such as is generally urged against the followers of + Jesus and the authors of the Gospels. It is presented to us in a + clear and definite form. I fully allow that if this charge could be + substantiated, it would deprive the Evangelists of all historical + credit.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The issue which is + thus raised is consequently one of the highest importance. It will be + necessary therefore for us carefully to examine the mode in which it + is attempted to establish the truth of these charges. The process is + an extremely singular one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">When we have a set + of writings before us and endeavour to estimate the amount of + credulity and superstition to which their authors were a prey, the + only legitimate mode of proceeding is to subject these writings to a + thorough and minute examination as to the indications of credulity + and superstition contained in them. Having done this, it then becomes + our duty to ascertain the amount of general good sense or the want of + it which is displayed by them in these or in other subjects, and then + to form a general conclusion by fairly balancing the indications of + credulity and good sense against each other. The author, however, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page292">[pg 292]</span><a name="Pg292" + id="Pg292" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> seems not to have had the + smallest idea that it is the duty of the critic to ascertain what are + the facts of the case as presented by the writings, and to form a + general conclusion by a careful review of the entire evidence. On the + contrary, his mode of reasoning is to quote a number of opinions held + by various writers, widely separated from each other in time, to + charge them on the contemporaries of our Lord, and refer to nearly + every passage in the New Testament which has even the remotest + bearing on the subject, for the purpose of fastening these + superstitions on the followers of Jesus. Such a mode of reasoning can + only avail to establish a foregone conclusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: In forming + a judgment on such a subject, it also behoves us most carefully to + consider whether the subject-matter of the writings is or is not of + such a character, that if their authors had been addicted to such + gross superstitions, there would not of necessity have been frequent + examples of them in their pages? Also whether the absence of such + references, when the subject on which they were writing was certain + to have suggested them to their minds, does not constitute a strong + proof that these superstitions were not held by them? In one word, it + is absurd to attempt to charge writers with boundless credulity and + superstition, on the ground that a multitude of grotesque beliefs + were prevalent in their day. No author can be held responsible for + beliefs other than those which appear in his pages, especially when + subject-matter of his writings would have been certain to call them + into activity if he had entertained them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The course pursued + by the author is directly opposite to this. He has been compelled to + adopt it, because it is the only method by which extreme credulity + and superstition can be fastened on the writers of the <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page293">[pg 293]</span><a name="Pg293" id="Pg293" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Gospels. The available contemporary + literature, besides that contained in the New Testament, which can + throw light on the opinions of the followers of Jesus, is very small. + The point which requires proof is that the entire Jewish nation, + <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">without any + exception</span></em>, was a prey to the basest superstition and + credulity. Unless this can be established, the charge against the + authors of the Gospels falls to the ground, except so far as it can + be proved by the Gospels themselves. The contemporary proof of it, + however, failing, he endeavours to substantiate his position by + quoting the opinions of writers separated from the times of Jesus by + several centuries, and affirming that they were held by the entire + body of His contemporaries. Such a mode of reasoning is useless to + support anything but a foregone conclusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A brief reference + to the authorities relied upon will at once expose the fallacy of the + argument. First, certain differences existing between the Septuagint + and the Hebrew Scriptures are pressed into the service, which are no + instances of either credulity or superstition. Then the frequent + idolatries which prevailed among the Jews prior to the captivity are + adduced as a proof of the superstitious tendencies of the Jewish + mind, as if superstitions prevalent at the time of Becket were any + evidence of the condition of English thought at the present day. Next + the absurdities in the Apocryphal Book of Tobit are put in as + evidence, although the contrary evidence afforded by the other books + of the Apocrypha, which contain no traces of such superstitions, is + left without mention. The writings of an Assyrian Jew who lived about + three hundred and fifty years before the Christian era are about as + valid to prove the opinions held by Christ and his followers as the + opinions of Cicero would be in <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page294">[pg 294]</span><a name="Pg294" id="Pg294" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> evidence of the beliefs of Constantine. Then + reference is made to the angelology and demonology contained in the + writings of Philo, who was unquestionably a contemporary of our Lord; + but not the smallest hint is given to the reader that he was deeply + tinged with the principles of the Neo-Platonic philosophy, a mode of + thought wholly alien from that of the Palestinian Jews, or that Philo + was himself an Alexandrian Jew. Next the book of Enoch is quoted, + which (whenever it was written, for its date is uncertain) is + unquestionably not the work of a Palestinian Jew. This book, which is + an Apocalypse, contains a monstrous angelology and demonology, and + abounds with extravagances. Although part of it was written prior to + the Advent, other portions are clearly subsequent to it. Its author + is unknown; but it is highly probable from certain resemblances of + expression between it and the New Testament, that he was acquainted + with portions of the latter; or, to state the theory of unbelievers, + that the authors of the New Testament borrowed from it. If this view + is true, then it is evident that they must have rejected its + angelology and demonology, for that contained in the New Testament is + utterly dissimilar in character to that which we read in the book of + Enoch. As far, therefore, as the evidence of this book is concerned, + it affords a distinct proof that they were not a prey to its + monstrous superstitions. This remark is equally applicable to the + book of Tobit, and the writings of Philo.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But there is a + reference made to Philo which deserves particular notice as an + exemplification of the mode adopted by those who endeavour to fix the + charge of unbounded credulity on the authors of the Gospels. I cite + the author.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“The belief that the sun, moon and stars were + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page295">[pg 295]</span><a name="Pg295" + id="Pg295" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> living entities possessed of + souls was generally held by the Jews at the beginning of our era, + along with Greek philosophers, and we shall presently see it + expressed by the fathers. Philo Judæus considers the stars spiritual + beings full of virtue and perfection, and that to them is granted + lordship over other heavenly bodies, not absolute, but as viceroys + under the Supreme Being. We find a similar view expressed regarding + the nature of the stars in the Apocalypse, and it constantly occurs + in the Talmud and Targums.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“We find,”</span> says the author, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“a similar view expressed regarding the nature of the + stars in the Apocalypse,”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that + the stars are spiritual beings full of virtue and perfection, and + that they hold lordship over other heavenly bodies. No quotation is + made from this book, but four passages are referred to in a note as + proving this. They are as follows: <span class="tei tei-q">“The + mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and + the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the + seven churches, and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the + seven churches.”</span> (Rev. i. 20.) With as good reason may it be + said that the book of Revelation teaches the rationality of + candlesticks.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“These things saith He that hath the seven Spirits of + God, and the seven stars.”</span> (Rev. iii. 1.) It is difficult to + see how this proves that the author of the Revelation was of opinion + that the stars were rational entities. The next passage referred to + (Rev. iv. 5) makes no mention of stars at all, but of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are + the seven Spirits of God.”</span> The last reference is: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“I saw a star fall from heaven unto the earth; and to him + was given the key of the bottomless pit.”</span> (Rev. ix. 1.) Here a + star is spoken of as a living agent; but to refer in <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page296">[pg 296]</span><a name="Pg296" id="Pg296" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> proof of this to a book which is full of + symbols and is an avowed vision is ridiculous and misleading. On the + contrary, the New Testament supplies the most unquestionable evidence + that its writers were free from this superstition, into which even + philosophers had fallen.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The next writer + referred to, to prove that the followers of Jesus were a prey to + credulity and superstition, is Josephus, in his narrative of the + signs which preceded the destruction of Jerusalem.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To what extent + Josephus embellished these signs may be a question. Most of them have + a very heathen aspect, and it is unquestionable that he was much + disposed to conciliate his heathen readers. It is sufficient to + observe that the pages of the New Testament contain nothing + resembling them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the chief + source whence these ineffable puerilities are derived, and charged on + the contemporaries of our Lord, and through them on the writers of + the New Testament, is the Talmud. Probably there are no writings in + existence from which a more monstrous set of absurdities can be + collected than from those of the Talmudists. But how does this prove + that this mass of nonsense was believed in by the Jewish nation in + our Lord's day? One portion of the Talmud, the Mishna, was composed + between <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 180 and <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 200, or some years + after the date assigned by unbelievers to the Fourth Gospel. The + lateness of this date is urged by them as conclusive proof that that + Gospel does not embody the real traditions of the early followers of + Jesus. How then can it be urged with any thing like consistency that + the Mishna adequately represents their views respecting the order of + nature? But the other portion of the Talmud, the Gemara, was not put + forth in a written form prior to <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> + 500. To quote <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page297">[pg + 297]</span><a name="Pg297" id="Pg297" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + works thus remote in time as proofs of the superstitions of the + followers of Jesus, is to adopt a course which if applied generally + to history, would reduce it to a tissue of falsehoods. Bishop Jewell + was a believer in witchcraft; but it would be absurd if some future + writer were to quote the writings of modern spiritualists as a proof + that he believed in their doctrines.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nor is it true + that the opinions of the masses of a nation are at all adequately + represented by those of its learned men, especially when learning, as + in the case in question, assumed the most unbounded licence of + speculation. In most cases the common sense of the masses who are + brought into contact with the hard facts of daily life will preserve + them from puerilities, into which learning, which draws exclusively + on the imagination, is certain to fall. There is sufficient evidence + of the superstition of the masses during the middle ages; but nothing + would be more absurd than to quote some monstrous opinions held by + the great scholastic writers to prove that they were the current + opinions of the vulgar. Yet the principle here adopted is to adduce + opinions propounded by learned writers, who lived centuries + afterwards, as a proof that they were current among the entire Jewish + race at the time of Jesus Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The remaining + references in proof of this position are still more noteworthy. To + establish the superstition of the Jews at the time of the Advent, a + set of opinions are adduced which were held by Christian Fathers, + whose writings cover a period of not less than four centuries. A list + of them will be sufficient. The apocryphal Barnabas and Hermas, + Justin Martyr, Theophilus, Clement of Alexandria, Tatian, Tertullian, + Cyprian, Origen, Augustine, Jerome, Chrysostom, Lactantius, Eusebius, + and Cyril of Jerusalem. A number <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page298">[pg 298]</span><a name="Pg298" id="Pg298" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> of grotesque opinions are collected from these + writers, as though they could have any possible bearing on the + question whether the followers of Jesus were able correctly to report + what they saw and heard.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I submit therefore + that the facts adduced utterly fail to establish the charge of + intense superstition and credulity against the followers of Jesus. + But I go further, and affirm that they furnish the means of giving a + most conclusive proof of the contrary.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These quotations + furnish us with a clear and conclusive proof, which is also furnished + by the entire range of literature, that when writers are the prey of + a definite class of superstitions, their pages will afford abundant + evidence not only of their existence, but of their nature and + character. This, of course, must be qualified by the supposition that + the subject-matter on which they wrote is one suitable to call their + latent superstitions into activity. This always happens when the + works are of a religious character. In such cases they will + faithfully reflect the superstitions entertained by their authors. + This is pre-eminently the case with all the writings in question. + They are all on religious subjects, on which they allowed their + imaginations to run riot. They entertained a number of grotesque + opinions, and accordingly we find in their writings a grotesque + super-naturalism, exactly corresponding to the peculiar ideas of each + individual writer. On the principle that <span class="tei tei-q">“out + of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh,”</span> we may be + quite certain that when an author is extremely credulous and + superstitious, it will find expression in his pages whenever he is + writing on a subject on which his imagination gives scope to exhibit + them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I put the argument + as follows: all writers exhibit in their pages the superstitions to + which they are a prey. <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page299">[pg + 299]</span><a name="Pg299" id="Pg299" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> The + writers of the New Testament do not exhibit the superstitions in + question. It follows therefore that from these particular + superstitions they are free. Consequently the charge against them of + intense superstition and credulity falls to the ground, as far as it + rests on the evidence in question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The amount of + subject-matter in the New Testament which, independently of a general + belief in miracles, the opponents of Christianity can designate as + superstitious, is of a very limited and definite nature. It may be + said to be almost exclusively confined to a belief in the reality of + possession;—a few cases of disease occasioned by Satanic agency;—an + occasional intervention of angels, and their power to act on + nature;—and perhaps that demonology and heathenism were in some way + connected with each other. This is the sum total of such beliefs + which appear on the face of the New Testament. They appear in unequal + degrees in the works of different writers; and viewing them as mere + human compositions, we have no right to charge on one writer the + beliefs of another. The book of Revelation, and its imagery as + professedly merely seen in a vision, cannot fairly be introduced into + this controversy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If then we + concede, for the sake of argument, that the Jews in the time of + Christ were a prey to the extravagant superstitions referred to; if + they believed that the whole course of nature and human life was + incessantly interfered with by an army of spirits in numbers passing + all comprehension, and that these interferences were of the most + grotesque and phantastic character; if they universally believed in + magic, charms and incantations, the non-appearance of such phenomena + in the pages of the New Testament is a proof that its authors were + not a prey to the current superstitions of <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page300">[pg 300]</span><a name="Pg300" id="Pg300" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> the day. No inconsiderable number of + supernatural events are recorded in their pages, but unbelief itself + is compelled to admit that they are all of a dignified character, + with perhaps the exception of the entrance of the demons into the + swine, and the discovery of the piece of money in the mouth of the + fish. From what is monstrous, grotesque and phantastic, they are + absolutely free.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If it be conceded, + for the sake of argument, that miracles are possible, then it cannot + be denied that those of the New Testament, taken as a whole, stand + out in marked contrast to the current supernaturalism of + superstition. Their whole conception is lofty; there is in them + nothing mean or contemptible; they subserve a great purpose; they are + worthy of that great character to whom they are ascribed, Jesus + Christ. I put the question boldly: how is it, if the followers of + Jesus were a prey to the degrading superstitions above referred to, + that we find no indications of them in their pages? Also: how is it + possible that men of such a character should have invented such a + number of noble creations? Let unbelievers account for this on any + principle which a sound philosophy can recognise.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: the + Gospels mention a certain number of possessions, and their cures + effected by our Lord. Here then we are in the very presence of a + demonology such as was actually believed in by the followers of + Jesus. Here, therefore, is the very condition of mind and outward + circumstances where, if they had been a prey to the phantastic and + disgusting beliefs about demons above referred to, such beliefs would + certainly have made their appearance in their pages. But, as I have + shown, the demonology of the Gospels stands in marked contrast to + that of the Talmud, of Josephus, and of the <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page301">[pg 301]</span><a name="Pg301" id="Pg301" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> Christian Fathers. We have no fumigations of + demoniacs with the liver of a fish, we hear nothing of a demon drawn + out of a man's nose, and overturning a basin of water, nothing of a + demon inhabiting every private closet. On the contrary, their action + is described as mental, and, through the mind, affecting the body, + with the exception of a few doubtful cases. I am not here arguing + whether a belief in the reality of demoniacal possession is a + superstition or not. But I affirm that if the writers of the New + Testament had been a prey to the superstitions with which they are + charged, these are the narratives in which they could not have failed + to make their appearance. Again: It has been affirmed that they held + a monstrous angelology. I reply that although angels are + unquestionably stated to have appeared, and their existence is + affirmed by the writers of the New Testament, still their recorded + appearances are rare. They are confined to a few very remarkable + occasions, viz.: the Annunciation and birth of our Lord, the + temptation, the agony in the garden, and the resurrection. Surely + this does not look as if the authors of the Gospels thought that they + were always interfering with the course of nature or the events of + life. In the Acts of the Apostles, they appear at the Ascension; once + to liberate St. Peter, and at another time the Apostles, from prison; + to direct Philip to preach to the eunuch; twice in a vision to St. + Paul; and Herod Agrippa is also said to have been smitten by the + ministry of an angel. There were certainly many occasions when, if + the writers had believed in the habitual intervention of angels, we + should have found them introduced. Thus an angel is not sent to + deliver Paul from prison, or to still the tempest, but simply to + assure him of his safety. St. Paul enumerates in a passage of some + length the various dangers which beset <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page302">[pg 302]</span><a name="Pg302" id="Pg302" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> him in his missions, especially mentioning the + perils he encountered in travel. But neither he nor St. Luke once + refers to an angelic intervention in his favour. In numerous passages + he refers to dangers and persecutions which he encountered. But it is + our Lord, and not angels, who delivered him. Is this consistent with + a belief in their habitual intervention in nature? If he was the + visionary which he has been asserted to have been, would he not have + been continually seeing visions of angels for his protection?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In St. Paul's + writings we are in the presence of documents which are in the highest + degree historical. Even those who endeavour to prove that the Gospels + and the Acts were not written until the second century, are obliged + to allow that at least four of the most important of his letters were + written within 30 years after the Crucifixion, and that the evidence + that four of the remainder are his, vastly preponderates. Here then + we are in the presence of historical documents of the highest order, + compared with which such a writing as the book of Enoch is worthless, + and the Talmud and the Fathers are modern compositions. What light + then do these letters throw on the opinions of St. Paul and the + Pauline Churches? Much every way: they let us into the secret of + their inner life. They tell us that these Christians thought they + possessed certain supernatural gifts; that St. Paul asserted that he + wrought miracles; that demons by an invisible agency tempted men to + sin, and opposed the progress of the Gospel; but beyond this there is + scarcely a trace of angelology or demonology in them. With these + epistles in our hands, is it credible that their writer, or those to + whom he wrote, held a multitude of monstrous and phantastic beliefs + on this subject? Are not these writings characterized by supreme good + sense? Do <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page303">[pg + 303]</span><a name="Pg303" id="Pg303" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + they not in this point of view marvellously contrast even with those + of the earliest Fathers? The writer undoubtedly believed that unseen + spiritual agencies were capable of acting on the mind of man, and + that they were active agents in the production of moral evil; but + where is the evidence that he considered that external nature was + under their control, or that they made themselves visible to the + mortal eye? Although he affirms that he possessed a supernatural + illumination on religious subjects, only on two occasions does he + refer to visions as actually seen by him; and he directly affirms + that he had the power of distinguishing the ecstatic from the + ordinary condition of his mind. Even with the aid of the Acts of the + Apostles, we can only add a few more to the number. Surely this is + not the mental condition of a man who was a prey to unbounded + superstition. Contrast the amount of good sense in the epistles of + St. Paul with an equal number of consecutive pages from the Fathers + and the Talmud, and the difference is enormous. Where are the + ineffable puerilities found in these writings even hinted at in those + of St. Paul?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: if we + include in our examination the other writings of the New Testament, + they wholly fail to supply us with any evidence of the superstition + or credulity of their authors. On the contrary they are characterized + by the marks of uniform good sense. It will be doubtless objected + that they, as well as St. Paul, were bad logicians, and that their + applications of the Old Testament Scriptures are inapt: but this does + not affect their trustworthiness as historians. They were undoubtedly + men of great religious fervour, yet they are both sparing in the use + of miracles, and when they report them, the miraculous action is + never represented as extending beyond the necessities of the + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page304">[pg 304]</span><a name="Pg304" + id="Pg304" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> case. Their miracles consist + of simple acts, as for instance the cure of diseases, but all + marvellous superadditions are wanting. It has been urged that in + comparing the miracles of the Gospels with other miraculous + narratives, we have no right to do more than compare the external + miracle of the one with the external miracle of the other; as for + instance a resurrection with a resurrection, or a cure of blindness + recorded in one with a similar case recorded in another; and not to + take into account either the external circumstances or the moral + aspect of the miracle. I have elsewhere proved that this position is + untenable. But for the purpose of the argument let us here assume + that all the circumstances may be the invention of the narrator. If + it be so, it proves at any rate the soundness of his judgment and the + elevation of his ideas, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that it is impossible that he + could have been either intensely superstitious or credulous. How is + it possible, I ask, for minds which were a prey to such monstrous + beliefs as those which we have been considering, to have dramatized + miraculous narratives of the elevated type of those contained in the + Gospels? Would not all the circumstances with which they invested + them be the counter-part of their own degraded conceptions?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But there is one + most distinctive phenomenon presented by the Gospels which affords a + conclusive proof that neither their authors nor the followers of + Jesus could have been a prey to either degrading superstition or + credulous fanaticism. I allude to the fact that, whatever theory may + be propounded to account for their origin, the Gospels, as a matter + of fact, unquestionably contain a delineation of the greatest of all + characters, whether actual or ideal, that of Jesus Christ. I shall + hereafter draw attention to the portraiture of this character for the + purpose of proving that they are <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page305">[pg 305]</span><a name="Pg305" id="Pg305" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> veritable historical documents. In this place I + refer to it simply for the purpose of proving that their authors and + those who invented the alleged fictions of which their contents + consist, were possessed of a soundness of judgment which is wholly + inconsistent with the truth of the assertion that they were a prey to + boundless superstition or credulity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">For the purpose of + the argument I must assume that this character is a fictitious one, + because to assume that it is a delineation of an actual historical + character, would be to take for granted the entire question at issue. + If the Jesus of the Evangelists is an historical personage, there can + be no doubt respecting the claims of the Gospel to be a divine + revelation. But even if we make the assumption above mentioned, it is + quite clear that those persons who invented the character, or who put + it together out of the number of legendary stories floating about in + the Church, must have been possessed of a sound judgment, and the + highest appreciation of what was great and noble. The character we + have before us, and it is confessedly the noblest which can be found + either in history or fiction. The inventors, whoever they were, have + succeeded in portraying a great harmonious whole. Such a character + could only have been delineated by men possessed of sound + discriminating judgment. The more the Gospels are depreciated as + histories the more does this depreciation establish the credit of + their authors as the successful delineators of an ideal character, to + which they have succeeded in imparting a naturalness which men of the + most exalted genius have mistaken for an historical reality. They + must have been, therefore, consummate masters of the art of ideal + delineation. The mental powers adequate to effect such results are + those of high genius, to which in this case must have been added a + very elevated conception <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page306">[pg + 306]</span><a name="Pg306" id="Pg306" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + morality. Such mental qualities are never exhibited by men who are + the prey of gross credulity and superstition. The great ideal + delineations of poets have been only capable of being produced by the + <span class="tei tei-foreign"><span style= + "font-style: italic">élite</span></span> of the human race. On the + other hand, if we assume that the character is a fictitious one, and + its inventors men of the mental calibre which they are affirmed to + have been by those against whom I am reasoning, it would have been + inevitable that its proportions should be marred by the introduction + into it of traits marked by meanness, puerility, and monstrosity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In support of this + assertion we have no occasion to appeal to theories but to facts. + Happily antiquity has preserved to us several delineations of a + mythical Jesus on which the inventors have stamped the most + unmistakable impress of their own credulity and superstition. I need + not say that I allude to the Apocryphal Gospels, the delineations of + Jesus which they contain, and above all to their miraculous + narratives. Those who reiterate these charges against the authors of + the Canonical Gospels, are very slow to draw attention to their + bearing on this portion of the argument. In the Apocryphal Gospels we + are brought face to face with the legendary spirit exerting itself in + the invention of miraculous stories. There can be no doubt that their + authors were both extremely credulous and superstitious; and their + miraculous narratives give us the precise measure of their credulity. + There is every reason to believe that two of these compositions were + written as early as the second century. What, I ask, is the general + character of the miracles which they have attributed to Jesus? There + can be only one answer. They are mean, ridiculous, degraded, + burlesque, destitute of all trait of moral grandeur. If the authors + of the four Gospels, or the inventors of their <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page307">[pg 307]</span><a name="Pg307" id="Pg307" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> miraculous narratives, whoever they may + have been, had been a prey to similar credulity and superstition, the + marks of them would have been indelibly stamped on their pages.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These documents + also contain accounts of miracles wrought by Jesus, some of which, as + bare facts, are precisely the same as some recorded in the Canonical + Gospels, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> they contain accounts of + resurrections from the dead, and the cure of diseases. I ask, do + their accompanying circumstances and moral aspect stand as nothing in + our estimate of the credibility of their authors? Compare the account + of the resurrection of Lazarus, or that of our Lord himself, with the + resurrections in the Apocryphal Gospels, and mark the difference. + Compare likewise the other miracles, which, as bare facts, resemble + one another. The one have the stamp of historical probability, and + precisely fit in with the lofty character of Jesus; the other of an + unbelievable legend, in which the character is degraded to a level + with the conceptions of the inventors.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let not + unbelievers, therefore, decline to grapple with the question. Let + them cease to pass it over in silence. I propose to them the + following questions for solution. If both sets of Gospels originated + with minds intensely credulous and superstitious, whence has come the + difference between them? Why is the one set of miracles dignified, + and the other mean? Whence the entire difference of their moral + aspect? Why is the Jesus of the Canonical Gospels the most elevated + personage in history, and the Jesus of the Apocryphal ones, one of + the most mean and silly? If two of the Apocryphal and the four + Canonical Gospels are the production of the superstition and + credulity of the same century, whence the marvellous contrast between + them? Which of the Fathers of the second <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page308">[pg 308]</span><a name="Pg308" id="Pg308" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> or third century was equal to the task of + reducing a mass of floating legends, the creations of numbers of + superstitious men, into their present form, as they stand in our + Canonical Gospels? Would they not certainly have coloured the events + with their own absurdities? If, on the other hand, it be allowed that + the Canonical Gospels are the production of the first century, and + the Apocryphal Gospels of subsequent ones, how came the credulous + followers of Jesus to produce fictions dramatized with such admirable + taste in the first century, and the same spirit in subsequent + centuries to present so striking a contrast? The only possible answer + which can be returned to these questions is that the phenomena of the + Canonical Gospels are inconsistent with the supposition that their + miraculous narratives are the invention of men who were the prey + either of credulity or dense superstition; they must have been men + well able to distinguish between a genuine miracle and a mythic + parody of one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it has been + urged that the dignified character of Jesus induced the compilers of + our present Gospels to select all the miraculous stories of a high + type which were current in the hotbed of Christian fanaticism, and to + attribute them to Jesus, and to suppress all of a contrary + description. If this be the true solution of the facts, then it + certainly follows that the compilers of the Gospels must have been + free from the superstitions of the times in which they lived. + Otherwise, how came they to select all the elevated stories and + attribute them to Jesus, and to consign those of a lower type to a + well-merited oblivion? Is it not a fact that credulous and + superstitious people have often attributed what is contemptible and + mean to elevated characters? Let the Apocryphal Gospels bear witness. + It follows, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page309">[pg + 309]</span><a name="Pg309" id="Pg309" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + therefore, that even on this supposition the question must be decided + in favour of the authors of our present Canonical Gospels, that they + must have been free from the degraded superstitious to which their + fellow-believers were a prey.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But there is yet + another problem, even if we assume the above supposition to be true, + which urgently demands solution. If, among the mass of legends with + which the history of Jesus was incrusted, a certain portion of the + miraculous stories were of an elevated type, who among His credulous + and superstitious followers were the inventors of them? Were they men + of like credulity with the remainder? There are only two + alternatives. They were, or they were not. If they were, I ask, how + came they to invent elevated stories? If they were not, then it + follows that there were persons among His followers who were neither + intensely credulous nor superstitious. If the latter be the + alternative adopted, then the theory which I have been considering, + which attributes to the followers of Jesus such a degree of those + qualities as to render their historical testimony valueless, falls to + the ground.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, on a careful consideration of the position, that the data + on which the charge which we have been considering is made against + the followers of Jesus and the authors of the Gospels utterly fail to + establish it; and that the phenomena of the New Testament prove the + contrary to have been the fact.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page310">[pg 310]</span><a name= + "Pg310" id="Pg310" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc29" id="toc29"></a> <a name="pdf30" id="pdf30"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XIV. The Love Of The + Marvellous—Its Bearing On The Value Of Testimony To + Miracles.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + objected that the love of the marvellous has in every age constituted + so remarkable a phase of human nature as greatly to weaken, if not + entirely to invalidate the testimony to the performance of miracles. + It is alleged that the great historians of ancient times have + recorded a number of supernatural occurrences which are now summarily + rejected as incredible: and it is therefore argued that all + narratives of miraculous occurrences must share the same fate. This + objection differs from that which I have considered in the former + chapter, in that it avoids the necessity of imputing to the followers + of Jesus and the authors of the Gospels a degree of superstition and + credulity greatly in excess of that which characterizes the majority + of mankind. It will be therefore necessary to give this subject a + careful consideration.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is an + unquestionable fact that the human mind has been in all ages disposed + to accept a number of narratives of supernatural occurrences upon + very insufficient testimony, and which the principles of sound reason + lead us to reject as untrue. Such beliefs have been peculiar to no + one period of the world's history, but have been co-extensive with + the human race; and they form one of the most remarkable facts in our + nature. Many of the ancient historians have reported such occurrences + without apparent suspicion; or if <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page311">[pg 311]</span><a name="Pg311" id="Pg311" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> they entertained any doubts respecting their + truth, they did not venture even to whisper them into the popular + ear. What is still more; eminent men of the ancient world did not + scruple to act in matters of this kind a part which they knew to be + deceptive, because they held the opinion that such beliefs, though + they might be laughed at by philosophers, were necessary to act as + restraints on the vulgar. Thus we know, on the most indubitable + authority, that a Roman Augur could gravely act his part before the + public at the very time that he was secretly laughing in his sleeve + at the ridiculousness of his art. It does not therefore follow + because the ancient historians have reported numbers of occurrences + of this nature with considerable gravity, that they accepted them as + facts. They were frequently influenced by the spirit of + accommodation, thinking it necessary for the welfare of society to + keep up the vulgar ideas on the subject. It would be inaccurate + therefore to attribute all the accounts of such things which we meet + with in ancient writers to simple credulity, or to infer from them + that they did not believe in an inviolable order of nature of some + kind. With respect to the arts of magic, however, one feels that even + the greatest of the ancient writers contemplated them with a kind of + bated breath. This would appear to have been the state of mind even + of Tacitus, with one exception the greatest historian of the ancient + world, and one who was intimately acquainted with the various systems + of its philosophy. Conscious as he was that vast numbers of the + professors of magic were impostors, he seems hardly able to realize + the fact that the whole art was a delusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + affirmed that the progress of physical science has destroyed in this + nineteenth century all belief in the actual occurrence of the + supernatural, and <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page312">[pg + 312]</span><a name="Pg312" id="Pg312" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + that it now prevails only in some of the dark corners of Christendom. + The widespread belief in the phenomena of spiritualism, which is + certainly very far from being confined to religious men, and from + which some students of physical science have not been exempt, is a + striking proof of the contrary. All that can be affirmed with truth + is that, in these modern times, these forms of belief have taken a + new direction. Modern science has done much to establish and spread + the belief that the operations of all natural, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> + material forces are uniform. Many of its students have even brought + themselves to the belief that the occurrence of any event whose + existence is due to the action of any other than the known forces of + nature, is impossible: though this is far from being the invariable, + and is certainly not the necessary result of its study. Still, + probably, the most ardent votary of these opinions would find it + difficult to keep himself wholly free from terrors arising from + unseen causes, if they were aroused by a suitable apparatus. The + study of physical science is far from being a universal safeguard + against the invasions of superstition. Its causes lie far more deeply + rooted in our nature than the principles of physical science can + reach. Nor is it able to guard against an extravagant use of the + imagination.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Whether, in the + present state of our philosophy, we have fully penetrated to the + depths of this principle thus working in the mind of man, may admit + of doubt; but its presence there, as an essential portion of our + nature, is an unquestionable fact. We are not without the means of + getting a general idea of its character. It is doubtless intimately + connected with those principles of our nature which constitute man a + religious being, and which form a fundamental part of his mental + constitution. As such it must, like all our other faculties, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page313">[pg 313]</span><a name="Pg313" + id="Pg313" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> have a legitimate and an + illegitimate action. It points, as we shall see, to the existence of + the supernatural. A rational religion forms the object for its + appropriate exercise. Whenever man has been destitute of this, and + his reason has been weak, this principle, devoid of its proper + object, has always manifested itself in various forms of + extravagance. So powerful is it in the human mind that even avowed + atheism has not been proof against its power. Julius Cæsar was an + atheist, and possessed one of the most powerful minds that ever + inhabited the human frame. Yet, on the great day of his triumph, he + ascended the steps of the Capitol for the purpose of averting an + avenging Nemesis. Napoleon the First was no atheist, though few + persons who have ever lived have been more free from the restraints + of religion or superstition. Although he possessed a mighty intellect + and was no stranger to the truths of modern science, yet even he + believed in his star. Many other instances of men of powerful + intellect who disbelieved in religion, yet who entertained singular + superstitions, might be easily adduced. I refer to them for the + purpose of proving that the principle out of which such things + originate must be one which is deep-seated in the nature of man, and + therefore an essential portion of it. If it is founded on a + fundamental principle of our mental constitution, it follows that it + must have a legitimate subject-matter on which to exercise its + powers, and that the abnormal forms of it which are so frequently + manifested are the results of some disorder in its action. What then + is its nature?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There are certain + principles deeply-seated within us, which form as definite a portion + of ourselves as even our rational faculties, and which directly + prompt to the belief in the supernatural, and therefore point to its + existence. Among these, the faculties of imagination, <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page314">[pg 314]</span><a name="Pg314" id="Pg314" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> wonder, reverence and awe, hold a + conspicuous place. It is impossible to deny that they form portions + of the actual constitution of our minds, however we may account for + their origin. Is it then our duty to eradicate them because they + prompt us to the belief in something which transcends the visible + order of nature? This will hardly be affirmed by the most + thorough-going sceptic; for if it be our duty to do so, the human + mind must be a mass of disorder in the midst of a universe of order. + If we were to make the attempt (for indeed it has been attempted) the + result would be to upset the balance of our mental constitution, and + it would terminate in failure. Human nature, taken as it is, + constitutes a whole. These faculties hold in it a place subordinate + to reason and to conscience. When our rational, our imaginative, and + our moral powers act harmoniously together, they constitute man a + religious being.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But, for the + purposes of the present argument, I have simply to draw attention to + the fact that imagination, wonder, reverence and awe form an + essential portion of our being. It would be in the highest degree + undesirable to get rid of them, even if we were able. How mighty is + the influence of the first of these principles! It lies at the + foundation of everything that is great and noble in man. To it are + due the magnificent creations of poetry; in fact everything which + adorns life, and much of that which raises us above the mechanical + forces of nature. Destitute of it, our reason could not act; nay, it + could not even exist; and we should be reduced to the mere mechanical + action of the understanding, the wheels of which would be in danger + of rusting. Nor has the faculty of wonder a less definite place in + our being. It is closely connected with our imagination, which + supplies <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page315">[pg + 315]</span><a name="Pg315" id="Pg315" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> it + with objects fitted to excite it, and ought to be exercised under the + guidance of reason. Its object is the great and the vast, shall I not + say, the infinite? Regulated by reason and united with awe, it + produces reverence. Reverence points to the existence of some object + which is really worthy of veneration. Veneration can only be + legitimately exercised on that which is truly venerable. As such it + directly points to a personal God, and refuses to rest in anything + short of Him as able fully to gratify its aspirations. Viewing them + as a whole, the legitimate object of these faculties, and the subject + from which they can receive their fullest gratification, is that + Great Being who everywhere manifests Himself in this glorious + universe. But when man has ceased to contemplate in nature a rational + power guiding and controlling it, the principle of wonder has + frequently prompted him to gratify its aspirations by peopling it + with a multitude of phantastic creations. When under the influence of + awe, he has contemplated it in its terrible aspects, unguided by a + being who possesses a moral character, these feelings have prompted + the imagination to fill it with beings who excite the feeling of + superstitious dread.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Although the + vastness of the material universe and the energy of its forces can + excite the feeling of wonder, yet that of reverence refuses to find + in the mere extension of space, or the might of material forces, any + object adequate to its demands. The vastness of the material universe + may fill the mind with wonder and admiration; but even wonder refuses + to rest satisfied with a vastness of which the limits are known. It + demands something which is conceivable, which yet runs up into the + regions of the inconceivable. But even here the feeling of reverence + can find nothing on which to energize. It directly points to a moral + being <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page316">[pg 316]</span><a name= + "Pg316" id="Pg316" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> in whom it can find a + centre, and it will find its gratification in nothing short of one. + To talk, as many Pantheists do, of feeling reverence for an + impersonal Universe, is a misuse of language. What! to reverence a + Being, if the impersonal Universe can be called a Being, which is + everlastingly casting up the bubbles of existence in the form of + moral agents, and is everlastingly devouring them, devoid alike of + consciousness, volition, and a moral nature!</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, if these principles form a constituent portion of our + nature, that like all our other faculties, they must admit of a right + and a perverted use. It is therefore absurd to lay down as a general + principle, because they admit of an illegitimate use, that the whole + class of phenomena connected with them are worthy of nothing but + summary rejection, without exercising our reason on the evidence on + which they stand. All that their existence can prove in reference to + this subject is something which is very like a truism; that mankind, + being liable to all kinds of mistakes and errors, and having + frequently fallen into them, no class of phenomena ought to be + accepted as facts, until evidence of their occurrence has been + adduced which is capable of satisfying our reason. But this is a very + harmless proposition.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There can be no + doubt that to a perverted use of these faculties is due the belief in + a kind of current supernaturalism, which in various forms runs + through the entire history of man. This has owed its origin to the + efforts of the imagination to supply objects for its gratification + when the reason is feeble and the moral faculties have become + perverted. Hence the readiness of large masses of mankind to accept + narratives of marvels without regard to the evidence on which they + rest. They are accepted simply as gratifying the principle + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page317">[pg 317]</span><a name="Pg317" + id="Pg317" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of wonder. This is the cause + of what I have designated by the term <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Current Supernaturalism.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But because all + our faculties admit of abuse, and the higher they are, the greater, + this forms no reason for rejecting their legitimate use, or the + entire subject-matter on which they operate. As I have observed, the + principle is found energizing wherever man exists. Although in one + age it may be more active than in another, it is alike the + inheritance of the civilized man and the savage. It has displayed + itself in the creations of the poet and the writer of fiction; in the + various forms of religious thought; in the production of + ghost-stories and pictures of the under-world; in the creation of the + various forms of demonology, witchcraft and magic; in the milder form + of fairy-tales; in charms and incantations, and in efforts to pry + into the future. Even in philosophy and science we may trace its + influence, not only in aiding and suggesting their great discoveries, + but in propounding multitudes of startling theories, erected on the + smallest basis of fact. These not only gratify this feeling, but + promise an apparently royal road to knowledge, which avoids the long + and tedious one of only propounding theories after a careful + investigation of facts. But in the regions of intellectual pursuit, + its abnormal manifestations are pre-eminently in the science of + historical criticism, in those numerous departments of historical + inquiry where the facts are few and vague. Here nothing is easier + than to supply the absence of facts by theory, and to erect a + magnificent edifice on a foundation of sand. The ancient soothsayer + gratified vulgar curiosity by guessing at the events of the future. + There is a species of modern soothsaying which expends its energies + in guessing at the events of the past. Such guessing presents an + unspeakable fascination to a large number <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page318">[pg 318]</span><a name="Pg318" id="Pg318" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> of minds, by its happy mixture of fiction and + fact, and is the true analogue to many of the forms of ancient + thought. It has been necessary to draw attention to these things for + the purpose of proving the widespread influence of this principle on + human nature. Its action has manifested itself in different forms in + different ages; but the cause is the same in all, the existence in + man of a principle which points to the existence of God, and which + can only receive its adequate gratification in Him.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The action of + similar principles produces in man the love of the extraordinary, the + unusual and the novel. This is so powerful that unless it is kept in + subordination to reason, it produces a number of fictitious beliefs. + So strong is it, that it may be truly said of large numbers of + mankind that they spend all the time which they are not compelled to + devote to the serious realities of life, in little else than hearing + and speaking of some new thing. It is undoubtedly the cause of a + large number of fictitious beliefs, and produces, in minds where the + rational powers are weak, a ready acceptance of the unusual, the + strange, and the wonderful. The same principle, acting in conjunction + with others, when uncontrolled by reason, has occasioned many of the + exaggerations which are to be found in history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Still, as one of + the fundamental principles of our minds, it cannot but have a + legitimate sphere of action. United with curiosity, it is the chief + source of all mental activity. It is that which produces the earnest + desire to penetrate into the regions of the unknown. As such, it is + essential to the activity of our rational faculties, and has been the + exciting cause which has rendered all our great discoveries + possible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that if these principles form <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page319">[pg 319]</span><a name="Pg319" id="Pg319" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> part of our mental constitution, the objection + that they destroy the value of miracles as a testimony to a + revelation is absurd. We might as well argue that because the love of + the marvellous has generated a belief in a number of fictions as + facts in ordinary history, it invalidates its testimony to events + which have really happened, or renders all unusual occurrences + incredible. I will illustrate this by an example. Herodotus tells us + in his history that there were certain tribes who dwelt in wooden + habitations erected over lakes, and he gives us several particulars + as to their manner of life. This fact, until a comparatively recent + period, might have been pronounced incredible, and have been supposed + to have originated in the simple love of the marvellous, either in + the author or in his informants. I own that when I first read the + historian, this was the opinion which I formed respecting it. But we + now know that he reported an actual fact. On the other hand it is + certain that a great portion of the details of the Scythian + expedition of Darius must have originated in the undue activity of + the mental faculties to which I have referred, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that + they are inventions. But if the principle of summarily rejecting + narratives of events which lie beyond our experience is valid, + because the abnormal activity of certain faculties has urged men to + invent, and believe in a multitude of fictions, the account of the + lake-dwellings given by the historian ought to have been rejected as + equally unworthy of credit, with some of the occurrences of the + Scythian expedition. It is impossible to deal with the events of + history on any general <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" + xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> + principles; they must stand or fall on their own intrinsic + evidence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that if these principles admit of an abnormal action, we + are still by no means justified in a summary rejection of all unusual + occurrences. It only <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page320">[pg + 320]</span><a name="Pg320" id="Pg320" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + forms an adequate reason for closely scrutinizing the evidence on + which the credibility of history rests. The faculty of imagination, + instigated by that of wonder, has produced widespread beliefs in a + mass of supernatural events which are utterly incredible. But as that + faculty must have a legitimate action somewhere, it is clear that its + abuse can be no valid reason for the rejection of all supernatural + occurrences, unless for other reasons they are proved to be + incredible. The whole must be a question of evidence and of reason. + If it formed a valid ground for the rejection of miracles, it is + clear that the principle on which it is founded cannot be confined to + any such narrow limits, but must have a wide and general application, + and extend to all that is wonderful and unusual.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is an + unquestionable fact that a large proportion of mankind in every age + have eagerly sought the means of affording gratification to the + feeling of wonder, and that this has been the means of introducing + into history a considerable number of fictions of various kinds. But + does this invalidate its testimony? Does it justify us in rejecting + whole classes of phenomena as unworthy of consideration? We have + already seen that whatever principle is applied to miracles must be + equally applied to all extraordinary events, because as phenomena + there is no difference between them. We admit that many fictions have + got into history. These it is the duty of the critical historian to + detect and displace. Will anyone affirm that their introduction + invalidates the events in the history of the past, which rest on an + adequate attestation? What that is, I shall consider hereafter. + Whatever effect this may have exerted on the minor details of + history, will anyone affirm that its great outlines do not rest on a + substantial basis of truth? It is impossible to lay <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page321">[pg 321]</span><a name="Pg321" id="Pg321" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> down on these subjects a wide and + comprehensive canon which will save us the trouble of careful and + accurate investigation. All reports of extraordinary events, marvels, + and miracles, must stand or fall with the adequacy of the evidence + which can be adduced for their occurrence, and cannot be decided by + any artificial rule. If the evidence is good, they must be accepted, + notwithstanding the fact that extensive classes of marvels have been + accepted by mankind on testimony wholly insufficient to establish + their truth. If the evidence fails, they must be regarded as the + result of the abnormal exercise of faculties which yet have a + legitimate place in our mental constitution.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing is more + common than the assertion that at certain periods of history, mankind + have been ignorant that there is an order in nature; and that this + ignorance has given these faculties such unbounded play as to render + all reports of supernatural occurrences unworthy of credit, + notwithstanding any amount of evidence which may be alleged in their + favour. It is urged that, if men are ignorant that there is an order + in nature, to such a state of mind nothing would be really + supernatural; but every event, whether supernatural or otherwise, + would be viewed as a matter of ordinary occurrence. To this state of + mind a miracle would convey no meaning, and therefore it would be + valueless as evidence of a divine revelation. In other words, it has + been affirmed that there have been certain conditions of mankind in + which the love of the marvellous has been so powerful, and the action + of reason so weak, as to destroy all sense of the distinction between + a natural and a supernatural occurrence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply that the + Christian revelation was not addressed to such a condition of the + human mind. On the contrary, it was made after a long course of + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page322">[pg 322]</span><a name="Pg322" + id="Pg322" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> preparation for its + introduction. After the whole course of previous history, under the + controlling providence of God, had prepared the way for His Advent, + Jesus Christ appeared. The Gospel was not preached to men in the + lowest state of barbarism, but to civilized man. What may have been + the ideas of degraded savages, at some early period of the history of + our race, it will be needless to inquire. With mankind in such a + condition we have nothing to do in the present controversy, but with + the state of thought in the Roman Empire during the first century of + our era. This was no period of mental darkness or of boundless + credulity. In the early ages, when every phenomenon of nature was + viewed as due to the action of some capricious god, the belief in an + order of nature must have been in a high degree vague and uncertain. + But such a state of things, whatever it might once have been, had + long since passed away. The period of history now under consideration + was one of widespread intelligence, varying greatly in different + parts of the empire, but still one of intelligence and + civilization.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + for men to attain a degree of progress necessary for the existence of + civilization, and still to remain ignorant that a large class of + natural occurrences follow an order which does not admit of + deviation. Civilization would be impossible unless this were + generally recognized. It is in fact founded on its recognition. At + the same time, there is a class of phenomena which are not recognized + by the ordinary mind as following a definite order. It is within this + alone that the beliefs of current supernaturalism exert their + activity. But the supernatural occurrences narrated in the New + Testament do not belong to this ambiguous order of events, and are + therefore unaffected by them.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page323">[pg 323]</span><a name="Pg323" id="Pg323" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is a large + class of events which civilized man cannot help recognizing as + belonging to a definite order and sequence, and where the belief in + the marvellous exerts little or no influence. The violation of this + order he views as impossible. Thus he cannot fail to recognize the + fact that men cannot walk on the water without support; that + thousands of persons cannot be fed by a few loaves and fishes; that + diseases never leave us instantaneously by no other agency than that + of a touch or a word; and that men who have been actually dead have + never returned to life. No amount of the love of the marvellous has + ever induced men to consider such occurrences possible. Whatever may + have been the current supernaturalism of the ancient world, it did + not embody beliefs of this description. This is proved by the entire + course of ancient history. Its supernaturalism is of a wholly + different order. The love of the marvellous, therefore, has never so + confounded the distinction between the natural and the supernatural + among civilized men, as to have deprived a miracle of its + significance.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such an assertion + respecting any part of the Roman Empire, during the century which + preceded and that which followed the Advent, would be contrary to + fact. On the contrary, certain classes of events which were reported + to have happened, were invariably believed to have been really + supernatural. They were so far from being considered as devoid of + meaning, that persons supposed to be skilled in the art of + interpreting them were habitually consulted as to what they were + intended to denote. The only exceptions to this were those + occurrences which were supposed to have been brought about by the art + of magic. These seem to have been viewed as in some measure due to + the existence of occult powers in nature, the results of which + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page324">[pg 324]</span><a name="Pg324" + id="Pg324" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the professors of the art had + succeeded in mastering. It may be safely affirmed that at no portion + of this period was the love of the marvellous so prevalent in any + portion of the Roman Empire as to have deprived a real miracle of its + signification.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore that it is impossible to lay down any abstract rule which + will save us the trouble of investigating the evidence of miracles, + because mankind has in all ages been greatly influenced by the love + of the marvellous, and under its influence has invented a number of + occurrences which reason pronounces incredible. The action of this + principle is far from being confined to subjects connected with + religion, but extends over the whole range of literature. While it is + quite true that, under the influence of various principles of this + description, numbers of fictions have been reported by ancient + historians, this forms a valid reason only for rejecting those which + rest on no adequate attestation. The adoption of the other principle + would render all knowledge of the past impossible. All the faculties + of our minds admit of a legitimate and an illegitimate use. To reject + the results of the right use of our faculties, because they are + capable of a wrong one, is absurd.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But an opposite + view may be taken of the entire question, and one which is dictated + by the principles of reason.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Several principles + in man directly point to the existence of the supernatural. Among + these veneration and conscience occupy a conspicuous place. These + acting in conjunction with reason constitute man a religious being. + Man alone of all living beings is capable of religion. The principle + of reverence finds its only adequate gratification in the + contemplation of moral perfection. Moral perfection is inconceivable + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page325">[pg 325]</span><a name="Pg325" + id="Pg325" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> where personality and volition + are not. This principle therefore forms the counterpart in man which + is directly correlated to the being and the perfections of a personal + God. It follows that instead of these principles invalidating the + existence of the supernatural, they establish it. The conception of + immensity is the adequate subject-matter on which our faculty of + wonder works. The highest conception of greatness is realized in God. + In Him therefore this faculty receives its most perfect realization. + Reverence points to greatness united with supreme moral goodness. The + imperfection of man will not satisfy it. It therefore impels man to + bow down before the throne of One who transcends the imperfections of + the created universe. If there be a personal God, supremely good, who + is the Creator and moral Governor of the universe, nothing is more in + conformity with our highest reason than that He should make a further + manifestation of Himself to man, in addition to that which He has + made in the material universe.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page326">[pg 326]</span><a name= + "Pg326" id="Pg326" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc31" id="toc31"></a> <a name="pdf32" id="pdf32"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XV. Our Summary Rejection Of + Current Supernaturalism Considered In Its Bearing On The Evidence For + Miracles.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There can be no + doubt that there is an enormous mass of supernatural beliefs which we + feel at once justified in rejecting without troubling ourselves to + inquire into the evidence on which they rest. Others also we reject + because on investigation we find them altogether destitute of + evidence. Others again which rest on evidence which would be + sufficient to establish an ordinary fact, we reject notwithstanding + this attestation, on the ground of their inherent improbability. It + has been objected that our summary rejection of the great mass of + current supernaturalism puts the case of miracles out of court, and + renders them so improbable, that it is unnecessary minutely to + examine the evidence which can be adduced in support of them. I + propose therefore in this chapter to consider the reasons for our + summary rejection of the great mass of current supernaturalism, and + its bearing on the credibility of the miracles in the New + Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: I observe + that the stories of current supernaturalism are not the only ones + which we reject in a summary manner. We treat in the same way a great + number of other stories which offend against the principles of common + sense. It is clear that in these latter <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page327">[pg 327]</span><a name="Pg327" id="Pg327" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> cases, we do not reject them merely because + they are supernatural, but because they are generally incredible. The + fact therefore that we thus reject a number of absurd narratives + without inquiry into the evidence on which they rest, cannot be urged + as a reason for rejecting other occurrences which are not involved in + any such absurdity. If the principle is valid against miracles, it + must be equally so against other extensive classes of facts. To + assert that miracles are thus absurd or ridiculous is to assume the + point which ought to be proved.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: We + reject the great mass of current supernaturalism because it is unable + to assign any adequate reason for its existence. When it is alleged + that a miracle has been performed as an attestation of a revelation, + if it forms a necessary portion of such attestation, this is an + adequate reason for the miracle. But the great mass of current + supernaturalism is utterly unable to assign any reason for its + existence; or if reasons have been given, they are quite inadequate. + Of this the case of magic is an example. If it were a reality, it + would not only interfere with the order of nature, but no reason + could be given for this interference. If, on the other hand, its + phenomena were alleged to be due to secret forces in nature, then + they would belong to an order of grotesque and monstrous phenomena, + which we are justified at once in refusing to believe to be due to + the action of intelligence or goodness; and on the supposition that + there is a moral Governor of the universe, it is utterly incredible + that they would occur either by his agency or with his + permission.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Perhaps the best + attested occurrences of current supernaturalism are the phenomena of + spiritualism. It will tend to the illustration of this subject, if we + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page328">[pg 328]</span><a name="Pg328" + id="Pg328" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> consider the grounds on which + we reject a large portion of its reported phenomena quite + irrespectively of the evidence produced in favour of their reality, + and ascribe the belief in them to the effect of an excited + imagination, and in some cases to imposture. In considering this + subject, it is not necessary to examine whether the phenomena alleged + by spiritualists, if true, would be really supernatural, or belong to + an order of nature hitherto unknown.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Many of the + manifestations of spiritualism possess a grotesqueness which we see + in no other class of natural phenomena. If they are alleged to be the + results of the action of natural forces previously unknown, then they + must belong to a class of forces which contrast in a most remarkable + degree with all known ones; that is to say, the known and the unknown + forces of nature must be utterly out of harmony with one another. I + am now speaking on the supposition that such forces are merely + natural ones, not under the guidance of intelligence. In that case + they must have been always in existence, only latent; yet they now + for the first time manifest themselves under very special + circumstances and conditions, such as are highly favourable to the + existence of delusion. The abnormal character of these phenomena, so + entirely at variance with the known order of nature, forms the + strongest ground for the conviction that they cannot be the results + of the action of unknown natural forces. It would require an + overwhelming amount of evidence to convince us that these two sets of + natural forces, distinguishable by the strongest possible contrasts, + (viz. those which produce the visible phenomena of nature, and those + which produce another class, intermittent in their action, of which + grotesqueness and monstrosity are the most striking characteristics, + and which <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page329">[pg + 329]</span><a name="Pg329" id="Pg329" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + only manifest their existence under circumstances calculated to throw + a suspicion on their reality), can be the results of the action of + forces which have been present in nature during all past time.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: these + phenomena, if natural, must belong to an order of nature which is not + only unlike the visible order, but would throw its action into + confusion. I am here reasoning on the supposition that the moral + order of the universe is due to the action of nothing but physical + forces. If this be so, it must form a portion of the existing order + of nature. But the forces which, on the supposition of the truth of + spiritualism, must be capable of being brought into activity, would + interrupt that moral order of which we are actually conscious. Their + action, if real, would interrupt the entire course of the moral + world. No man would be safe from their intrusion. Even in our deepest + retirement we should never be free from the invasion of their prying + curiosity. Such a power would be incompatible with the moral order of + society. It follows, therefore, that an unknown order of nature, + presenting the most violent contrast to the visible one, whose + phenomena do not follow an invariable but an intermittent law, and + are only alleged to manifest themselves under conditions favourable + to imposture, possesses such a degree of inherent improbability as to + justify its rejection, even by those who recognise the action of none + but material forces in the universe.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But to those who + recognise the present order of nature as due to the action of a wise + and intelligent Creator, it becomes absolutely incredible that forces + such as the phenomena of spiritualism require for their production, + can form a portion of that order which He <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page330">[pg 330]</span><a name="Pg330" id="Pg330" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> has created, as they contradict every + conception which we can rationally form of his character.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But if these + phenomena are viewed as due to the action of supernatural agency, the + reality of their occurrence becomes still more inconceivable. If such + agency is capable of being exerted, we can only conceive that its + exertion is permitted for the realization of some known end. Yet the + phenomena of spiritualism serve no purpose whatever. Spiritualists + have been holding their <span class="tei tei-foreign"><span style= + "font-style: italic">séances</span></span> for many years; but no one + practical result has yet been realized by them. The spirits of the + departed have been invoked, but they have never yet given a single + useful response. Surely if there be a spirit world, its occupations + cannot be the production of the abnormal, the mean and the grotesque. + Its employments must possess some pretensions to be esteemed + dignified. It has been alleged that such manifestations help to + convince the incredulous of the reality of the immortality of man. On + the contrary, the idea that spirits can be guilty of such phantastic + tricks can only help to throw discredit on the doctrine. It follows, + therefore, that if the phenomena of spiritualism are viewed as due to + supernatural causes, it is utterly incredible either that the + Governor of the Universe would permit such a course of action, or + that the spirits themselves, unless deprived of reason, would exhibit + themselves in such a variety of phantastic forms, and for no other + apparent purpose than to effect a number of capricious interferences + with the visible order of nature. This incredibility is so great as + to entitle us summarily to reject the idea that the reputed phenomena + can be actual occurrences. In addition to this, the alleged + manifestations are made under circumstances pre-eminently suited to + excite suspicion.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page331">[pg + 331]</span><a name="Pg331" id="Pg331" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The phenomena of + modern spiritualism are a fair illustration of the general character + of the current supernaturalism of the ancient world. It was for the + most part equally senseless and absurd. The attestation to its actual + occurrence was of a very inferior character to that which can be + urged in favour of the alleged facts of spiritualism. I have merely + taken notice of these latter as an illustration of the general aspect + of the phenomena of current supernaturalism, and as placing before us + the reasons which fully justify us in rejecting a large portion of it + without minutely inquiring into its evidence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will now proceed + to contrast the entire mass of current supernaturalism with the + miracles of the New Testament for the purpose of still further + illustrating the grounds on which we reject it, while we claim for + the latter that their reality must be tested by the evidence which + can be adduced in favour of their actual occurrence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let me again draw + attention to the fact that the only correct conception of a miracle + in connection with this controversy, is that of an event wrought in + external nature with a definite moral aim and purpose. Extraordinary + events, to which no such moral aim and purpose can be assigned, may + be unusual occurrences, but are in no proper sense of the words + evidential miracles. An isolated occurrence of an extraordinary + nature, and an event marked with a definite moral purpose, are two + wholly different things. The one may be credible, and the other + wholly incredible. We habitually recognise the distinction in + ordinary life, and it entirely affects our judgment of the + probability of an event. We esteem the action of a particular person + quite credible under one set of circumstances, which we should reject + as incredible under another. Thus <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page332">[pg 332]</span><a name="Pg332" id="Pg332" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> if we were informed that a friend with whom we + were intimately acquainted, had precipitated himself from a height + into the water, supposing him to be sane, we should not believe it. + But if we received the information that he had done it to save a + person from drowning, and we knew that he was a man of courage, we + should accept the fact without the smallest hesitation. On this + account, therefore, the moral aspect of the alleged miracle is of the + utmost importance; and it is necessary for its correct conception + that it should not only be an extraordinary occurrence in external + nature, but that it should take place at the bidding of another, and + in order to render it credible, that it should be calculated to + effectuate some definite moral purpose.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Alleged + supernatural events, which are destitute of these accompaniments, are + always liable to a very high degree of <span lang="la" class= + "tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">à + priori</span></span> suspicion. In fact it would be difficult to + prove them to be supernatural. All that could be affirmed respecting + them would be that they were very unusual occurrences, which it was + impossible to account for by the action of any known force. If the + universe is under the government of God, all supernatural action must + either be the result of His agency or permission. If He interferes + with the order of occurrences, it is evident that such interference + cannot be capricious, but must have a definite purpose. We are + justified, therefore, in refusing to accept occurrences as + supernatural, which are destitute of all appearance of purpose in + their performance.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: the + alleged miracle must be consistent with the character of God, before + it is possible to attribute it to Him as wrought by His direct + agency. This rests on the same principle on which we refuse to + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page333">[pg 333]</span><a name="Pg333" + id="Pg333" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> credit the reports of actions + performed by men which are contradictory to their well known + characters. But this is far more certain with respect to God than it + can be of man. Human characters can at best be but imperfectly known, + and there are unseen depths in the human heart which sometimes render + actions possible, which stand in striking contrast to the general + character of the agents. To state the truth generally, as it is + impossible that man can act in opposition to the inmost principles of + his moral being, so in a far higher degree is it impossible that God + can contradict the perfections of His moral nature. This being so, it + follows that we are entitled to reject all miracles alleged to have + been wrought by God, which are contrary to His moral attributes; all + which are low, mean, or grotesque, and unfitted to realize an + elevated moral purpose.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will here be + objected that if these positions are true, demoniacal miracles are + rendered impossible. I have already pointed out that if demoniacal + supernaturalism is affirmed in the New Testament to be an actuality, + its action is described as being limited to the human mind, and that + whatever permitted activity is conceded to it, always bears the most + distinctive marks of being from beneath. There is no possibility of + mistaking between such supernatural occurrences and the miracles of + God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such then are our + general principles, the truth of which can hardly be contested. If + they are true, the great mass of current supernaturalism is worthy of + rejection for the following reasons.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. While it claims + to be the result of supernatural agency, it is destitute of all + definite moral purpose, and such moral impress as it bears is mean + and degraded. What end, I ask, was it designed to serve? It involved + an almost continual interference with the order of <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page334">[pg 334]</span><a name="Pg334" id="Pg334" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> nature; or if at times it claimed to be + due to occult forces, they were only suited to confound the visible + order of the universe. I am reasoning on the supposition that there + is a God who rules the world. This being so, it is impossible to + conceive that such a mode of acting can be His. Under this head of + supernaturalism fall all the monstrous and the grotesque, and the + entire range of magical phenomena.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. The whole range + of ancient supernaturalism is in contradiction to everything which we + can conceive of the moral character of God. Let us take as an + illustration the phenomena of Soothsaying. Who can believe that God + employed the entrails of slaughtered beasts as the means of revealing + the future? or that it was consistent with his character to manifest + his will through a multitude of monstrous portents? There is perhaps + not a single occurrence of ancient supernaturalism which does not + offend against our primary conception of the Divine character; and, + therefore, the whole is worthy of summary rejection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. Ancient + supernaturalism assigned its occurrences to no cause adequate to + produce them. Those who asserted its reality, referred it to the + action of deities who possessed very limited power, or to occult + powers in nature. Such occult powers we now know to have no + existence, and the power attributed to the supposed deities was far + too limited to be capable of producing the results in question. All + reputed events, the alleged cause of which is unable to produce them, + we are entitled to reject without further investigation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4. A large amount + of ancient supernaturalism rested on no evidence whatever. Of those + portions for which any reasons were alleged, the evidence itself was + of a character exactly suited to discredit it. Of this kind was the + whole of the supernaturalism connected <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page335">[pg 335]</span><a name="Pg335" id="Pg335" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> with the state religions. These were in the + hands of men who used them for the purpose of acting on the vulgar, + and who therefore readily accepted the report of anything, however + incredible, which could subserve their end. Other portions were + palpable impostures worked for the basest and most selfish purposes. + A very brief acquaintance with the nature of the evidence on which it + rests is sufficient to justify us in rejecting it without entering on + any inquiry as to its details.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such being the + general character of ancient supernaturalism, it is absurd to argue + that its existence is a reason for rejecting along with it another + order of supernaturalism, which stands contrasted with it in every + particular. We might as well urge the existence of a vast number of + counterfeits as a reason for rejecting everything which is genuine. + We do not reject it because it is supernatural, but because it is + utterly incredible. A statement of a few particulars will exhibit the + contrast between it and the supernaturalism of the New Testament in a + striking point of view.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. Christian + supernaturalism alleges that its occurrences are the result of the + action of a force which, if present, is certainly adequate to produce + them. Ancient supernaturalism alleges no cause whatever, or one + wholly inadequate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. Christian + supernaturalism alleges a perfectly adequate purpose for its + production; that purpose being the attestation of the divine mission + of Jesus. Ancient supernaturalism alleges either no purpose at all, + or a degraded one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. Christian + supernaturalism is made to centre around the greatest and most + exalted character that has ever appeared in history. Ancient + supernaturalism, instead of being connected with the most eminent + characters <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page336">[pg + 336]</span><a name="Pg336" id="Pg336" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + the times, directly connects itself with the most questionable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4. Christian + supernaturalism is stamped throughout with a high moral character and + aspect. This is wholly wanting in the supernaturalism of the ancient + world.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">5. Christian + supernaturalism belongs to an elevated order and type; the objects + realized by it were for the most part benevolent. The mode of its + action was dignified and the effects produced by it were + instantaneous, following directly on the word of the agent. The mode + in which its miracles were performed is characterized by the utmost + simplicity, destitute alike of anything scenic or fantastic, entirely + in harmony with the great character who performed them. The + supernaturalism of the ancient world is marked by the opposite + characteristics.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">6. Christian + supernaturalism, or to speak more correctly, the greatest + supernatural occurrence which Christianity records, namely the + Resurrection of Christ, has not only left a mighty impression on + history, but has created a civilization of its own which embraces all + the progressive nations of the world, and exerts a powerful influence + even on those who deny its truth. The only result wrought by the + supernaturalism of the ancient world was the moral degradation of + those among whom it prevailed.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">7. The + supernaturalism of Christianity rests on an attestation which even + unbelievers would allow to be quite sufficient to establish the truth + of any ordinary facts. The other rests either on no testimony at all, + or on one which is open to the gravest suspicion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are some of + the striking contrasts which distinguish the supernaturalism of the + New Testament from that of the ancient world. When two series of + events present such opposite features, it is the duty of <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page337">[pg 337]</span><a name="Pg337" id="Pg337" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> a sound philosophy to trace these + distinctions to their causes, and to show what is the nature of the + forces which have impressed on each series its own peculiar + characteristics. Instead of this, however, we are invited to + pronounce both alike incredible; that is to say, because one series + of events is deeply impressed with characteristics which render them + incredible, we are invited to pronounce a similar condemnation on + another series, which is distinguished by the most opposite features, + and which has only this point in common with the former, that both + belong to an order of events which we designate as supernatural. + Nothing can be more unphilosophical than such a mode of reasoning. We + reject the one series in a mass, not because the events which it + contains are supernatural, but because they are absolutely + incredible. A similar rule we apply to ordinary, no less than + supernatural occurrences.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it will + doubtless be objected that there is another series of supernatural + occurrences which rational men, with a few exceptions, greet with an + equally summary rejection, viz. the long series of ecclesiastical + miracles which extends in an almost unbroken succession from the + second century of our era nearly to the present day. These, it has + been urged, are alleged to have been wrought in attestation of + Christianity, and bear some remarkable analogy, as facts wrought in + external nature, to the miracles recorded in the Gospels. It is + argued that if we reject the one, we are for the same reason bound to + reject the others.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following + points may be considered as admitted.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First; That every + century from the second downwards has been characterized by a + considerable amount of pretension to the possession of supernatural + power; <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page338">[pg 338]</span><a name= + "Pg338" id="Pg338" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and during this period + one section of the Christian Church claims to have actually wrought + miracles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly; Several + of these miracles, viewed merely as phenomena in outward nature, are + precisely similar to those recorded in the New Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly; When a + miracle is alleged to have been performed at the present day, as has + recently been the case in a neighbouring country, not only all + unbelievers in the possibility of supernatural occurrences, but also + all rational Christians concur in its summary rejection, not merely + on the ground that the evidence is insufficient, but that the event + is in itself incredible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fourthly; That + rational men reject in a similar manner and for similar reasons the + great mass of ecclesiastical miracles as unworthy of serious inquiry + into their attestation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With respect to + the second point, I have already observed that if we view miracles + merely as phenomena in external nature, and if a similar belief in a + current supernaturalism, which we have seen to be one of the + phenomena of human nature, prevailed in the Church, it was to be + expected that the current forms of ecclesiastical supernaturalism + would adopt those of the New Testament for their basis, and + consequently that it would abound in narratives of resurrections from + the dead and the cures of various diseases. This is actually the + case. It may also not only excite our wonder that the model was not + far more exactly copied, but that ecclesiastical, and especially + monkish miracles, which constitute an overwhelming majority of the + miracles of Church history, abound so largely in features which stand + in such marked contrast to the miracles of the New Testament, their + peculiar characteristics being the same as those of ancient + supernaturalism, viz. the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page339">[pg + 339]</span><a name="Pg339" id="Pg339" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + monstrous and the grotesque. This point is one which demands the + serious consideration of unbelievers; for if, as they aver, they are + both due to the action of the same causes, this diversity requires to + be accounted for. The truth is, that with the exception that both + series contain reports of miracles which are similar or mere + objective occurrences, in other respects their characteristics differ + widely.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With respect to + the fact that rational men concur in the rejection of modern + miracles, it should be observed that this is not because all + supernatural events are believed to be incredible; but because the + reputed events themselves possess characteristics which excite in us + the gravest suspicions of their truth; and especially because by far + the greatest number of them are well known not to have originated in + mere credulity, but in actual imposture. Men or communities who have + once lent themselves to the deliberate coining of miracles, are of + blasted reputations, and whenever marvellous occurrences are reported + by such persons, we are justified in rejecting them without further + inquiry. It is evident that these are the grounds on which such + stories are rejected, and not simply because they are supernatural, + since those who believe in the supernaturalism of the New Testament + concur with those who disbelieve in it, in thus rejecting them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must now briefly + consider the general grounds on which we reject the great mass of + ecclesiastical miracles, while we accept those in the Gospels as + actual occurrences.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The general ground + of our rejection of them is precisely the same as that on which we + reject the supernaturalism of the ancient world. The only thing which + distinguishes them from the latter, is that they <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page340">[pg 340]</span><a name="Pg340" id="Pg340" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> contain a number of events which viewed + as bare facts are similar to those recorded in the Gospels. In every + other respect the contrast is complete. I shall only draw attention + to a few considerations which might otherwise escape the notice of + the reader.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The ecclesiastical + miracles were not wrought in attestation that the person working them + had a divine commission, but that a divine power permanently abode in + the Church. The qualification which was thought necessary for the + exhibition of this power was the possession of a great degree of + reputed sanctity. The exercise of miraculous power was supposed to + prove, not that its possessor had a divine commission, but that he + was a saint. The saint was supposed to have in himself some inherent + power of working miracles, bearing a considerable analogy to that + which the woman with the issue of blood believed to be possessed by + our Lord. A miraculous power in the shape of a virtue issued from the + saint. Hence the supernatural power which was ascribed to dead men's + bones and to relics. Such a supernatural power is devoid of + everything which presupposes a divine purpose, and of all evidential + value. Its frequency would destroy the nature of a miracle as an + attestation of a divine commission, and involve an interference with + the order of nature, which would destroy the sense of its regularity, + the knowledge of which is so essential to our well being, as well as + to the conception of a miracle. Moreover, the supernatural agency is + not supposed to be due to the direct intervention of God, but to some + imaginary virtue residing in man.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The ecclesiastical + miracles of which we have anything like a detailed account, when they + are not simply regarded as due to the direct sanctity of the person + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page341">[pg 341]</span><a name="Pg341" + id="Pg341" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> performing them, are never + alleged to be performed in proof of a divine commission; but when + they are asserted to have been evidential, they are affirmed to have + been wrought in proof of some doctrine, or in favour of some + particular party in the Church; or, what invests them with a still + greater degree of suspicion, in favour of the power of a particular + order. The last class of alleged miracles may at once be dismissed as + due to simple imposture. The first are strongly contrasted with those + of the New Testament, where we cannot find the account of a single + miracle wrought in attestation of a doctrine, the one or two apparent + exceptions being really performed to attest a divine commission. But + when a miracle is wrought to prove an irrational doctrine, the + credibility of the miracle perishes with the truth of the doctrine. + We are, therefore, justified in rejecting the miracles whenever we + have sufficient evidence that the doctrines which they were alleged + to attest are untrue. Again: whenever a particular party alleges a + divine attestation in its favour, its character may be known by its + works. The parties in the Church who have claimed such miraculous + attestation, have proved by their actions that the idea of a divine + interference in their favour is incredible, as being inconsistent + with the divine character.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is perfectly + true that at the present day all rational men, with few exceptions, + concur in rejecting almost the entire mass of ecclesiastical + miracles. They do this, however, not because they believe miracles to + be impossible, but because they are persuaded that God will not work + one on a light or trivial occasion, and because the great mass of + such pretended miracles are characterised by marks which are + inconsistent with the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page342">[pg + 342]</span><a name="Pg342" id="Pg342" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + idea that they have been wrought by God. With our larger acquaintance + with the order of nature, we no longer believe that it is possible + for miracles to be wrought by any inherent virtue in things + themselves, but that if performed at all, it can only be by the + direct agency or permission of the Author of Nature. In a word, the + general incredibility of the ecclesiastical miracles, and their + repugnance to our conception of the mode of the divine acting is the + reason why we reject them altogether.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is also + unquestionably true that at the present day a great majority even of + religious persons would receive with no little incredulity the report + of a miracle, while such incredulity would not have existed at a + former period. This is due to two causes: first, our increased + knowledge of the permanence of the forces of material Nature; and + secondly, our belief that supernatural occurrences can only take + place by the direct agency and permission of God, and not by means of + my supernatural power inherent in particular persons. From this we + draw the inference that almost all the alleged ecclesiastical + miracles must be rejected as inconsistent with the divine character. + We are of opinion, therefore, that a miracle wrought for any other + purpose than the attestation of a revelation is not credible; and as + from the nature of the case revelations must be rare, we summarily + reject all reports of supernatural occurrences as impostures, or the + offspring of a heated and undisciplined imagination.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Now although this + is generally the case, yet it is unquestionable that if a miracle was + reported to us with a pre-eminently strong attestation, no rational + person would refuse to give a serious consideration to the evidence + merely because the event was <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page343">[pg 343]</span><a name="Pg343" id="Pg343" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> supernatural. A reported miracle would + doubtless be attended with no inconsiderable degree of antecedent + improbability; but if a man with whom we were intimately acquainted, + of sound intellect, and high moral character were to allege that he + had performed an act which, if real, must have been indisputably + miraculous, it would be altogether irrational to reject his assertion + summarily as unworthy of consideration merely because in all ages + miraculous stories have been extensively believed. The application of + such a principle would lead us into the grossest error.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This question has + a very important bearing on the subject before us. It has been + alleged that while nothing has been more common than the ascription + of miracles to eminent men, it is impossible to find a man of sound + judgment and high moral character who has deliberately affirmed that + he has performed one himself. That such affirmations have been very + rare is certain, and for the simple reason, that miracles have been + very rare occurrences. But the assertion that no such cases are to be + found is inaccurate. One, at all events, exists, although probably + the only one, but it is that of a man of the most undoubted veracity, + the Apostle Paul. As I have already observed, four of the most + important writings which have been attributed to him are admitted by + a vast majority of those unbelievers who are competent to form an + opinion on the subject, to be his genuine productions. These are + before us, and we can form from them a full judgment as to the + character of the man. In them he distinctly tells us that he + performed miracles. He writes: <span class="tei tei-q">“I have + therefore whereof I may glory in those things which pertain to God. + For I will not dare to speak of any of those things which Christ hath + not wrought by me to <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page344">[pg + 344]</span><a name="Pg344" id="Pg344" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + make the Gentiles obedient by word and deed, through mighty signs and + wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, + and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of + Christ.”</span> (Rom. xv. 18, 19.) Here at least we have a direct + affirmation on the subject. It is not the only one made by him. But + there is also one which is equivalent to another affirmation made by + One whom unbelievers must admit to have been the greatest man who + ever lived, Jesus Christ Himself. Those with whom I am reasoning + allow that the discourses in the Synoptic Gospels are accounts of His + real utterances. In them He directly affirms that He performed + miracles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Even those against + whose opinions I am arguing, will concede that the characters of + Christ and St. Paul stand at the greatest height of moral elevation. + If there are any other persons whose utterances have been handed down + to us, who have deliberately made this affirmation, their numbers are + unquestionably few. Certainly no other thoroughly great and elevated + character has done so. This is a remarkable fact and well worthy of + consideration. While many of the Fathers have affirmed that miracles + were performed by others, not one of them has affirmed that he has + wrought any himself. The supernaturalism of the New Testament + differs, as we have seen, from all other alleged kinds of + supernatural occurrences. It differs moreover in this respect, that + one of the persons through whose agency these miracles are declared + to have been performed, has made a deliberate affirmation that he + wrought them; and that the founder of Christianity, in recorded + utterances which are admitted to be genuine, has likewise asserted + that miracles were wrought by Him.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page345">[pg 345]</span><a name="Pg345" id="Pg345" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that our summary rejection of all the current + supernaturalism which has been alleged to have taken place at various + periods of history, is quite consistent with our accepting as true + the series of supernatural events recorded in the New Testament, + which are distinguished by characteristics of an entirely different + order.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page346">[pg 346]</span><a name= + "Pg346" id="Pg346" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc33" id="toc33"></a> <a name="pdf34" id="pdf34"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XVI. General Objections To + Miracles As Credentials Of A Revelation.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">While considering + this subject, it will be necessary to keep steadily in view that + miracles are not alleged in the New Testament to have been performed + to prove the truth of doctrines, but that a particular person + possesses a divine commission; or in attestation of particular facts, + such as the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The truth of a + divine commission being established, it follows that the + divinely-appointed messenger must have some message to communicate. + We further infer that God will not intrust a message to any person + whom He has not previously fully enlightened as to the subject which + he has to communicate, and who would not truthfully communicate the + message with which he is intrusted. A miracle is therefore not only + an attestation to the divine commission of the person performing one, + but also to the adequate information and veracity of the messenger. + Although a miracle is not wrought to prove the truth of a particular + doctrine, but that a particular person is intrusted with a divine + commission, we accept a doctrinal statement as true, when made by a + messenger thus attested, within the limits of the message with which + he affirms himself to be intrusted, on the ground that such a + messenger must both be truthful, and possess adequate knowledge. + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page347">[pg 347]</span><a name="Pg347" + id="Pg347" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> In other words, our belief in + the doctrinal statement does not rest on the miracle, but on the + veracity of God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This is the + affirmation made in the New Testament respecting the most important + class of the miracles which it records. As I have elsewhere observed, + not a single instance occurs in it of a miracle wrought for the + purpose of proving that a doctrine is true. Our Lord's distinct + affirmation is, <span class="tei tei-q">“The same works that I do, + bear witness of me that the Father hath sent me.”</span> (John v. + 36.) <span class="tei tei-q">“If I say the truth, why do ye not + believe me?”</span> (John viii. 46.) The miracles which are alleged + to have been performed by the Apostles for directly evidential + purposes, were wrought in proof of the Resurrection of Christ, and of + their own divine commission, which directly depended on it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let it also be + observed that it by no means follows that every miracle recorded in + the New Testament was performed exclusively for evidential purposes. + This point I shall consider hereafter.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If these + principles are correct, they will at once dispose of two objections + which are alleged against miracles: first, that they cannot prove a + doctrine; and secondly, that they cannot prove a moral truth. I fully + accept the statement that moral truths cannot be proved by the + evidence of miracles, but must rest on their own inherent evidence; + and that all positive duties rest on the command of God, to whom we + feel, on other grounds, that all love, reverence, and adoration are + due. The truth of doctrines also cannot be established by the + performance of a miracle; but when we accept them on external + authority, they rest on the testimony of God, and our full persuasion + that He must be in possession of all truth. Although, therefore, I + accept as correct these principles, on which the objection is + founded, they have no bearing <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page348">[pg 348]</span><a name="Pg348" id="Pg348" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> on the point at issue; for the New Testament + nowhere affirms that its miracles were wrought to prove either + doctrinal statements or moral truths, but facts.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. It is objected + that the prevalence of supernatural beliefs renders the existence of + miracles <span class="tei tei-q">“so hackneyed as scarcely to attract + the notice of the nation to whom the Christian revelation was in the + first instance addressed.”</span> (<span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Supernatural + Religion.</span></span>)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply that this + objection contains two inaccuracies. First, it is not true that the + miracles of Jesus scarcely attracted the notice of those among whom + they were performed. The only authority on this point is the New + Testament itself, and this assertion contradicts its express + statements. Numerous passages in the Gospels directly affirm that the + miracles of our Lord attracted very general attention, and produced a + profound astonishment; and that those who had witnessed them + considered that there was a wide distinction between them and the + miraculous pretensions then current. His fame is represented as + having been spread by them in regions beyond Palestine; and great + multitudes are stated to have collected, both for the purpose of + hearing Him and of being healed of their diseases. The fourth Gospel + represents our Lord as rebuking the multitudes, for attending on Him + for sordid purposes. It is quite true, that notwithstanding the + miracles, the body of the Jewish nation ultimately rejected + Christianity, though the epistles bear witness that the Jewish + element which was attracted into the Christian Church was large. The + assertion, therefore, is simply contrary to fact, that miracles were + in those days so common and hackneyed as to attract little or no + attention to him who professed to work them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Equally inaccurate + is the assertion that the evidence of miracles as the attestation to + a revelation was a <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page349">[pg + 349]</span><a name="Pg349" id="Pg349" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <span class="tei tei-q">“hackneyed”</span> one. The Old Testament + professed to rest on miraculous evidence. This being the case, the + Jews were fully entitled to expect that if God made a further + revelation of His will, it would be accompanied by a miraculous + attestation. But Judaism was the only religion of the ancient world + which professed to be founded on the evidence of miracles. A belief + in a current supernaturalism was no doubt mixed up with the ancient + religions, but its wonders were not alleged to have been wrought in + attestation of the fact that they were revelations, nor even as + attestations to their truth. The religion of the Greeks possessed + both priests and prophets; but they performed no miracles in + attestation of a divine commission. The only attestation of this kind + which they claimed was the utterance of obscure or mendacious + oracles. I am not aware that anyone who pretended to be a revealer of + the divine will in ancient times ever professed to perform visible + and palpable miracles in proof of his assertions. Similar is the + position of the old religions which still exist in the modern world. + Many of them abound in stories of the most fantastic manifestations + of their gods in ancient times. Their votaries believe in the + efficacy of magic, charms, and incantations. But none of these things + have been affirmed to have been wrought in attestation of a divine + commission. Mahometanism claims, in the strictest sense, to be a + divine revelation; yet the Koran even offers apologies for the fact + that its founder wrought no miracles in attestation of his claim to + be a divine messenger. So far therefore is it from being the fact + that miracles are so generally alleged by religions in vindication of + their claim to be revelations, that Judaism and Christianity are + absolutely unique in this respect. The idea of working a miracle in + attestation of a divine commission is so far from <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page350">[pg 350]</span><a name="Pg350" id="Pg350" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> being a <span class= + "tei tei-q">“hackneyed”</span> one, that it has the strongest claims + to originality.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. It is urged by + the same writer that <span class="tei tei-q">“every marvel and every + narrative of supernatural interference seemed a matter of course to + the superstitious credulity of the age. However much miracles are the + exception to the order of nature, they have always been the rule in + the history of ignorance. In fact the excess of belief in them + throughout many centuries of darkness, is almost fatal to their + claims to credence now. They have been limited to periods of + ignorance and superstition, and are unknown to ages of enlightenment. + The Christian miracles are rendered almost as suspicious from their + place in a long series of similar occurrences, as they are by their + being exceptions to the sequence of natural phenomena. It would be + extraordinary if cycles of miracles occurring before and since those + of the Gospels, and in connection with every religion, could be + repudiated as fables, and these alone maintained as + genuine.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The principles + which I have laid down in a former chapter fully meet the chief + points raised in these objections. A few additional observations on + them, therefore, are all that will be necessary.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: the + assertion that every marvel or narrative of supernatural interference + seemed a matter of course to the superstitious credulity of the age, + is inaccurate. If they had been of habitual or constant occurrence, + they would have ceased to be marvels at all. In such a case the trade + of the impostor would have gone, for it would not have paid him. The + entire plausibility of such reasonings arises from confounding under + a common name phenomena wholly different in character. I ask + emphatically, did the current supernaturalism of any age or nation + accept as matters of course such <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page351">[pg 351]</span><a name="Pg351" id="Pg351" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> events as the resurrection of Christ, or the + cure of a blind man, or a man full of leprosy, by a word or a touch? + Have not heathen writers pronounced actual resurrections from the + dead to be impossibilities? Were such occurrences ever believed to be + within the power of magic to effect? Belief in the possibility of + such occurrences became current only under the influence of + Christianity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. It is not + correct to assert that the belief in miracles has been confined to + ages of ignorance. Will it be affirmed that the most flourishing + period of Grecian literature was an age of ignorance? Yet a belief in + a current supernaturalism prevailed in it. Was the Augustan age an + age of ignorance? Both ages were ignorant of physical science: but + during few periods has the human intellect been equally active. Each + age contained men endowed with common sense sufficient to make them + adequate judges whether the supernatural occurrences above referred + to were possible or not.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. It is + inaccurate to affirm that the Christian miracles are interposed + between two similar series of supernatural occurrences. There is only + one point in common between them; the claim to be supernatural. As I + have proved, in every other respect they are strongly contrasted. It + is, therefore, by no means extraordinary that a series of + supernatural occurrences, which have the highest moral impress, and + possess other distinguishing characteristics, should be true; and + that the others, one of which took place before and the other after + that in question, and which are stamped with the very opposite + characteristics, should be false.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The same author + adduces the following objections, as lying at the root of miraculous + testimony to a revelation: <span class="tei tei-q">“Surely + supernatural evidence of so common and prodigal a nature betrays + great want of force <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page352">[pg + 352]</span><a name="Pg352" id="Pg352" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and + divine originality. How could that be considered as special evidence + for a new revelation, which was already so well known to all the + world, and which was scattered broadcast over so many centuries, as + well as successfully simulated by Satan.”</span> Again: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Instead of a few evidential miracles taking place at one + epoch of history, and filling the world with surprise at such novel + and exceptional phenomena, we find miracles represented as taking + place in all ages and in all countries. The Gospel miracles are set + in the midst of a series of similar wonders which commenced many + centuries before the dawn of Christianity, and continued without + interruption fifteen centuries after it. No divine originality + characterized the evidence selected to accredit the divine + revelation.”</span> (P. 192.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply, First: It + behoves those who except against the plan of attesting a divine + revelation by miracles, to inform us in what other way it is possible + that the truth of a divine commission can be attested. It is + doubtless possible for God to make a special revelation of His will + to each individual man; yet even this would involve supernatural + agency of some kind; and it is very questionable whether to do so + would be consistent with the plan of God's moral government which + comes under our actual observation. But the Christian revelation is + founded on the idea of making a divine manifestation additional to, + and of a different order from, that which is made by the created + universe; and not simply of imparting so much additional information + to each individual. This manifestation professes to be made by the + Incarnation. How, I ask, was such a manifestation to be made except + by a supernatural action of some kind? It is clear, therefore, that + every manifestation of God differing from that made by the ordinary + forces of nature, or by the moral nature of <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page353">[pg 353]</span><a name="Pg353" id="Pg353" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> man, must be supernatural. There can be no + doubt as to the means which must be employed. The only question which + can be raised is one which I have considered elsewhere, namely: + whether it is the purpose of God to make such a manifestation of + Himself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be + objected that such a manifestation might have been made self-evident + to the moral nature of man, and consequently it would have required + no additional attestation. To this I reply that, on the supposition + that it is God's purpose to make such an additional manifestation of + Himself, He must be allowed to be the only adequate judge of the + right mode of accomplishing it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But even if a + revelation involved no such manifestation of God, but only a + communication of truth to man, it is incumbent on those who object to + its attestation by miracles, to find some other method by which the + reality of a divine commission could be attested, and to show that + this mode would be preferable to an attestation by miracles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: if we + regard a miracle as a supernatural occurrence wrought in attestation + of a divine commission, which is the unquestionable aspect of a + considerable number of those recorded in the New Testament, the fact + that there was a wide-spread belief in the existence of supernatural + events is far from interfering with its efficacy. What did the + current beliefs imply? That there existed beings, other than the + blind forces of nature, who interfered in human affairs; and that + they were in some way or other capable of communicating with man. + What is the very conception implied by a revelation? That a God + exists, who is the moral Governor of the universe, who cares for man, + and is capable of holding communications with him. Both conceptions + rest on a common ground—the existence of <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page354">[pg 354]</span><a name="Pg354" id="Pg354" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> supernatural beings capable of manifesting + themselves by outward indications. Why then should not the moral + Governor of the universe, if it was His purpose to make a revelation, + employ media, which were all but universally recognized? No + inconsiderable number of the objections of unbelievers rest on the + assumption, that if there be a God, it is derogatory to His character + to suppose that He is capable of condescending to the weaknesses and + imperfections of man. A God who neither will nor can do so may be a + very grand conception; but one who is very ill adapted to the wants + of human nature, and who is incapable of exciting human sympathies. + The only thing that would be necessary, on the supposition that it + was His purpose to make such a revelation, would be that His mode of + manifesting His presence should be one clearly distinguishable from + the events of current supernaturalism. What was requisite would have + been to afford evidence that the manifestation in question was due to + no other being than Himself; that is to say, that the miracles should + bear the unquestionable impress of His own perfections. The subject + of alleged demoniacal miracles I have considered elsewhere. The + simple question before us is—Are the supernatural events recorded in + the Gospels clearly distinguishable in their general character from + the supernaturalism which was current previous to the Advent? I have + already shown that it contains no doubtful indications as to who the + agent must have been, if we suppose the facts to have been actual + occurrences.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: if + the objection has any validity, it presupposes that God ought not to + make a revelation in ages of superstition and ignorance; but must + wait until knowledge has cleared away the mists of ignorance and + error, and supplied us with the means of <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page355">[pg 355]</span><a name="Pg355" id="Pg355" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> infallibly discriminating between true miracles + and false ones; or, in other words, we must wait for the + much-talked-of jury of scientific men, who can submit His alleged + miracles to the whole range of scientific tests. Happily, however, + God has gifted a considerable number of men with common sense, which + is quite adequate to determine whether a certain class of events + wrought under certain circumstances are miraculous operations, or + mere natural occurrences, or due to imposture. If this be so, what is + there, I ask, unworthy of God, in making a revelation at such times + as man stands in special need of one?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is further + objected that a miraculous attestation to a divine commission shows a + want of force and divine originality. I ask, how? The fact is that + with the exception of Judaism, no ancient religion professed to be so + attested; and the Jew would naturally expect that any fresh + revelation would be attested in a manner similar to that which he + believed in as divine.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The objection that + because the belief in supernaturalism was so general, therefore + miracles must be worthless as evidence, I have already shown to be + fallacious.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it is also + objected: <span class="tei tei-q">“Instead of a few evidential + miracles taking place at one particular period of history and filling + the world with surprise at such novel and exceptional phenomena, we + find them represented as taking place in all ages and in all + countries.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This is the old + objection of the Jews who demanded of our Lord a sign from Heaven. + Both demand a particular class and order of miracle, viz.: something + stupendous, or terrific. The value of each objection lies in + conceiving of a miracle as a mere objective fact in external nature, + stript of all its moral accompaniments. In one word, it contemplates + the miracle in its most vulgar aspect, as a bare act of power, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page356">[pg 356]</span><a name="Pg356" + id="Pg356" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> a portent, a prodigy. A great + light everywhere appearing in the heavens might have appeared to + vulgar minds a greater miracle, and have attracted more attention + than the cure of a man full of leprosy by the utterance of a word. + But it would not have presented stronger evidences of having been + wrought by the power of God.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But with respect + to the general question, I ask, Is not the resurrection of Jesus + Christ in every respect an exceptional event? Where are resurrections + to be found in the history of current supernaturalism? Who ever + pretended, before or since, to have a divine commission which was + attested by his own resurrection from the dead? This miracle is at + any rate absolutely unique; and it must never be forgotten that it is + the only one recorded in the New Testament on the truth of which its + writers stake the claim of Christianity to be regarded as a divine + revelation. Although they refer to other miracles, wonders and signs + which God wrought by Him, yet whenever they adduce the full and + conclusive evidence of His divine mission, they always appeal to the + fact that God had raised Him from the dead.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But a further + objection is urged as invalidating this kind of testimony: + <span class="tei tei-q">“At the very time when the knowledge of the + laws of nature began to render men capable of judging of the reality + of miracles, these wonders entirely ceased. This extraordinary + cessation of miracles at a time when their evidence ought to have + acquired value from an appeal to persons capable of appreciating + them, is perfectly unintelligible, if they are viewed as the + supernatural credentials of a divine revelation.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This passage + contains several fallacies. One, to which I have repeatedly drawn + attention, runs through it, viz., the classing together every kind of + alleged <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page357">[pg 357]</span><a name= + "Pg357" id="Pg357" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> supernatural + occurrence, from the miracles of Jesus to the fantastic performances + of the magician, as though they all stood on the same level. I need + not further allude to the fallacy of such reasoning.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. It is affirmed + that miracles entirely ceased when the knowledge of the laws of + nature began to render men capable of judging of their reality. I + conclude that by the word <span class="tei tei-q">“miracles”</span> + in this passage, the author means ecclesiastical miracles, viz., + those which have been alleged to be wrought in attestation of the + established system of belief. If it is meant to be asserted that all + belief in a current supernaturalism has now ceased, the affirmation + is inaccurate, as the wide-spread belief in spiritualism abundantly + testifies.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But if the + assertion is intended to be confined to ecclesiastical miracles, it + involves an inaccuracy as to a matter of history. They had become + thoroughly discredited long before the birth of modern physical + science. The cure of blind and leprous persons by a touch, or the + feeding of five thousand persons on seven loaves and a few fishes, + require nothing else than sound common sense for the appreciation of + their supernatural character, or the testing of their reality. The + assertion, therefore, that miracles ceased precisely at the time when + their evidence would have been most valuable, by their being able to + be tested by those persons best capable of appreciating them, is + entirely inaccurate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I fully admit that + a belief in a current supernaturalism, as for instance in the + absurdities of witchcraft, survived the Reformation. What the + Reformation destroyed was a belief in a divine order of miracles + wrought in support of an ecclesiastical system. The belief in this + current supernaturalism has been gradually diminishing ever since, + under the combined influence <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page358">[pg 358]</span><a name="Pg358" id="Pg358" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> of the increase of the knowledge of physical + science, and common sense. The objection raised is simply irrelevant + to the point at issue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But there is + another subject which demands consideration. Hitherto we have been + dealing with the evidential character of miracles. But although all + miracles have an evidential value, if they can be adequately + attested, it by no means follows that every miracle recorded in the + New Testament was intended to subserve this purpose alone. It was + necessary not only that a revelation should be communicated, and + receive an adequate attestation, but that it should be propagated + among mankind. To render this possible, it was necessary that its + messengers should be armed with some means of insuring that their + message should be heard with attention. There was also another object + to be effected; namely, the establishment in the world of that great + institution, the Christian Church, which was intended so largely to + influence its destinies.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be quite + clear to any person who carefully considers the various supernatural + occurrences recorded in the New Testament that they are not all of + equal evidential value. The highest class of them are directly + affirmed to have been performed for the purpose of attesting the + divine mission of Jesus Christ, and as a portion of His supernatural + manifestation. To this class belong the miracles wrought by Himself, + and several of those performed by the Apostles. But there is another + class referred to in the Acts of the Apostles, of which the primary + object seems to have been to awaken attention to the Apostolic + message, though even these were not destitute of evidential value. + There is also another order of manifestations frequently referred to + in the Epistles, viz., the supernatural gifts of the Spirit, one of + the declared purposes <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page359">[pg + 359]</span><a name="Pg359" id="Pg359" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + which was to lay deep the foundations of the Christian Church. As + divine interpositions, they were all to a certain extent evidential; + but it will be important to observe that there is an order of + supernatural manifestations mentioned in the New Testament, whose + apparent primary intention was to subserve a different purpose.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let it be observed + therefore, that at the introduction of Christianity, two distinct + purposes had to be effected: first, to attest the truth of the + revelation; secondly, to establish the Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will briefly + draw attention to this latter portion of the subject, as far as it + affects certain portions of the supernatural action affirmed in the + New Testament. I allude to a certain class of miracles, such as the + cure of the cripple at Lystra, those wrought by the passing of + Peter's shadow, and by garments brought from Paul's person, and some + others; also to the entire class of the supernatural gifts mentioned + in the Acts of the Apostles, and so frequently referred to in the + Epistles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One of the + greatest difficulties which beset the missionary is to obtain a + hearing in the midst of the hostile elements by which he is + surrounded. Yet to obtain this is the necessary condition of carrying + on his work. In this respect, the modern missionary possesses great + advantages compared with the primitive missionary of Christianity. He + belongs to a superior civilization, and is therefore able to bring to + bear the whole force of a higher on a lower one. This was exactly + reversed in the case of the primitive missionaries. Instead of being + able to bring to bear the prestige of a high civilization on those + among whom they laboured, they belonged to a despised race; or if the + missionary himself was a member of the race whom he addressed, he + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page360">[pg 360]</span><a name="Pg360" + id="Pg360" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> belonged to the lower sections + of society. How was this enormous deficiency to be supplied? How was + a man thus despised to obtain a hearing for the message with which he + was charged? The New Testament affirms that the deficiency was + supplied by imparting to the early Church a certain number of + supernatural endowments, which, when once communicated, acted like + our ordinary faculties; also that a supernatural gift of curing + certain diseases was imparted to particular individuals, a gift which + was exactly suited to obtain an attentive hearing for their + message.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Among the + supernatural gifts which St. Paul affirms to have been communicated + to the Church, there were two of which he asserts that the operation + was distinct, but which are merged in the modern idea of miracles. + These he designated by the expressions ἐνεργήματα δυναμέων, or the + inworking of powers; and χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων, endowments of healing + powers. The distinction in function between these powers is affirmed + by him no less than three times; what it consisted in, we are only + able to judge from the terms themselves, and the nature of the case. + There is every probability that the distinction points to a higher + and a lower exercise of supernatural power; the one being the + evidential miracle properly so called, and the other a supernatural + knowledge of how to effect cures—a gift which would be exactly suited + to enable the missionary to obtain that attentive hearing of his + message which he so urgently required. The Epistle of St. James + furnishes us with a general idea of the nature of the gift, when he + directs, that in case a person was sick, the elders of the Church + were to be sent for, who were to pray over the sick man, and anoint + him with oil in the name of the Lord; <span class="tei tei-q">“And + the prayer of faith,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“shall + save the sick; and the Lord shall raise <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page361">[pg 361]</span><a name="Pg361" id="Pg361" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> him up.”</span> (James v. 15.) The whole + description points to a cure which, although in a measure + supernatural, was not instantaneous; the latter point being one which + would be required to make a miracle in the proper sense of the word + evidential. A power of effecting cures, however, whether by a + knowledge of natural means supernaturally acquired, or by + supernatural agency, would be one which would obtain for the despised + Jewish missionary a hearing in Gentile cities, which otherwise he + would be unable to obtain.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To such a class of + supernatural operations would belong such cures as those effected by + the conveyance of handkerchiefs and aprons from St. Paul's body to + the sick. These are only asserted to have taken place on one + occasion, at Ephesus, a city greatly addicted to the arts of magic. + They were adapted to the circumstances of the place, where the + Apostle had to encounter a particular form of supernaturalism; and + they would have been exactly suited to meet the difficulty in + question. The historian tells us that the success was great, for many + of those who had used magical arts came forward and confessed their + deeds, collected together their magical books, which were worth a + considerable sum of money, and publicly burned them. The same + observations apply to Peter's shadow. Although the historian does not + tell us that cures were wrought by it, yet the narrative presupposes + that a large outburst of supernatural power took place in connection + with Peter's person. Although the cure of the cripple at Lystra + belongs to a class of miracles which is strictly evidential, yet the + immediate occasion of its performance seems to have been with the + view of arousing the attention of an ignorant heathen population.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But not only had a + revelation to be communicated <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page362">[pg 362]</span><a name="Pg362" id="Pg362" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> and attested, not only had converts to be made + and instructed, but it was also necessary that the foundations of the + Church, the visible kingdom of Christ, should be firmly laid, and + that it should be established among the visible institutions of the + earth. Sufficient attention has not been paid to this portion of the + subject in considering the question of supernatural intervention. The + establishment of the Church as a visible institution, which was + intended gradually to leaven mankind with the great principles of His + revelation, is again and again affirmed by Jesus Christ to have been + one of the great purposes of His coming. A description of its + character and functions forms the subject of no inconsiderable number + of His parables, and it is the great end and purpose for which He + gave the great final Apostolic commission to go and gather it + together out of all the nations of the earth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Church of + Christ had therefore to be formed into a community out of the most + heterogeneous elements. It was destined not for a momentary + existence, but for a continuous growth, so as to leaven human nature + with its influences. The creation of such a society was a conception + so bold that it had never previously entered the head of either poet + or philosopher. Those with whom I am reasoning will not deny that the + attempt was a very arduous, and to all appearance a most chimerical + one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Yet it is the most + certain of facts that the Church of Christ is now in the nineteenth + century of its existence. The boldness of the undertaking will be + more fully estimated when we reflect that the Church was intended to + be a society which, while existing in the world, should differ in its + essential character from all the other societies on the earth. Its + action was to be entirely spiritual and moral. Its founder intended + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page363">[pg 363]</span><a name="Pg363" + id="Pg363" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> it to be invested with no + coercive powers. The appeal was to be, not to force, but to + conscience.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Those who offered + to enroll themselves as the subjects of Christ's spiritual kingdom + had to be formed into a social organization. Unless this could be + effected, one of the great objects for which the revelation was given + must have proved a failure. The elements of which it had to be + composed were of the most unpromising description. The first converts + consisted of no small number of Jews and proselytes, who were + extensively leavened with the narrowest prejudices of Judaism. When + the Gentiles began to join the new community, its members were + chiefly derived from the lower ranks of society, including a + considerable number of slaves. The infant Church embraced a great + diversity of opinions and characters. When converts were made, the + time for their instruction was short. Yet such an institution had to + contend with mighty civilization, the habits and prejudices of + existing society, the self-interest of a corrupt religion, and the + opposition of a powerful government.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such were some of + the difficulties which had to be surmounted before this new + institution could be firmly planted among the existing societies of + the world, and expand itself with the life which was peculiarly its + own. If the primitive followers of Jesus were animated by the + credulous superstition which unbelievers delight in attributing to + them, none should be better qualified than they to form a judgment of + the difficulties which must have beset their path. Yet these have + been surmounted. To this fact the vigorous life of the Church during + eighteen centuries testifies. It has not only held its ground, but it + has succeeded in leavening all existing civilizations with its + influences. How has this been accomplished? The Apostolic Epistles + return <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page364">[pg 364]</span><a name= + "Pg364" id="Pg364" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> an answer. They affirm + that the early converts were endowed with a number of supernatural + gifts, exactly fitted to qualify them for the various functions which + they were called upon to discharge. I subjoin a list of them, as they + are directly affirmed by St. Paul to be then existing in the + Corinthian Church. They were nine in number, each of which is + asserted by him to have had a distinct and separate function and + subject-matter: the gifts of wisdom, knowledge, faith, working of + miracles, endowments of healing powers, prophecy, discerning of + spirits, tongues, and interpretation. It does not appear whether this + last is meant to be exhaustive of the supernatural mental endowments + which the members of the early churches supposed themselves to + possess, or whether they were varied for the purpose of meeting + particular exigences. Nor do I ask those with whom I am reasoning to + accept this statement as a true account of an objective fact; but + only that they were supposed to be so by the Apostle and those to + whom he wrote. It is plain, however, that these supernatural + endowments, if real, were precisely such as the Church was in urgent + need of, as the instrumentality for welding together the discordant + elements of which it was composed, and enabling it firmly to plant + itself in the soil of human nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These supernatural + gifts of the Spirit, with two exceptions, produced no results on + external nature. They constituted enlargements of the powers of the + human mind. As such, they cannot with strict propriety be said to + belong to the class of evidential miracles, although like all other + supernatural operations of which God is the Author, they cannot fail + to be indirectly evidential. It is important to observe that they + belong to a separate class of supernatural phenomena, which were as + necessary in reference to the Christian revelation, <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page365">[pg 365]</span><a name="Pg365" id="Pg365" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> contemplating as it did the institution + of a divine society, as the order of supernatural manifestations + which directly attested the divine mission of Jesus Christ and His + Apostles. If this was their end and purpose we can understand why + they were withdrawn at a very early period, before they could be + submitted to the tests of our modern <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">savants</span></em>. + They were given for a special purpose, and they were withdrawn when + they had accomplished it. The Apostle who affirms their existence + asserts that they were not intended permanently to continue in the + Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is one more + allegation which is occasionally urged against the miracles of the + New Testament, and which I must briefly consider. It is alleged that + pious frauds have been very general in all ages of Christian history; + that many good men have not hesitated to participate in them; and + that literary forgeries were very abundant in the first ages of + Christianity, and were even common in the days of the Apostles. It is + insinuated that this state of mind throws great suspicion on the + alleged miracles of the apostolic age.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As the charge of + pious fraud is not made against Jesus himself or his immediate + followers, it is difficult to meet so indefinite an objection. It + seems to be put in to add force to others, rather than for its + intrinsic value. Modern unbelievers express a nearly unanimous + concurrence in endeavouring to account for the miracles of the New + Testament, by assuming that the followers of Jesus were the victims + of the most intense enthusiasm, superstition, and credulity. It is + difficult to comprehend, on the assumption that the existence of the + supernatural portions of the New Testament is due to these causes, + how direct fraud could have anything to do with the concoction of + these miraculous stories. Intense enthusiasm and fanaticism, and + deliberate fraud, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page366">[pg + 366]</span><a name="Pg366" id="Pg366" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> are + usually opposite poles of character; and if we call in one to account + for these miracles, we must exclude the other from exerting an + influence on their origination. To make the charge of any avail + against the narratives of the Gospel, it is necessary not to prove + that pious frauds were common in the second, third, or fourth + century, or even in the first, but to establish directly either that + Jesus professed to work miracles while He knew that they were not + such, or that His followers deliberately invented a number of + miraculous stories and attributed them to Him, well knowing that He + had performed none. The charge that the miracles of the New Testament + originated in enthusiasm and credulity is a definite one, and can be + definitely met. So is the one that they originated in deliberate + fraud. So would be the charge that the innocent followers of Jesus + were imposed upon by fraudulent impostors. But to combine the charge + of intense enthusiasm and credulity with that of conscious fraud, is + a mode of reasoning which contains the grounds of its own + refutation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is no doubt a + fact, that the practice of literary forgery was not unknown to the + early ages of Christianity. St. Paul seems to have thought that there + were in the world impostors daring enough to attempt to forge a + letter in his name, and to try to foist it on the churches which he + had planted, as a genuine production. But the existence of such + impostors has no bearing whatever on the question whether the + miracles recorded in the New Testament are facts or fiction. Did not + St. Paul himself assert that he had performed miracles? Was he an + impostor? Did he not believe that Jesus Christ in veritable reality + rose from the dead? What have such beliefs to do with the existence + of a set of daring literary impostors? Happily, however, the whole of + this class of ancient <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page367">[pg + 367]</span><a name="Pg367" id="Pg367" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + writers were utter bunglers in the art of fictitious composition. It + is a universal characteristic of them, that they were entirely unable + to throw themselves into the spirit of former times, or of the + persons whose names they assumed. In their references to history, + geography, manners, customs, and character, they lay themselves open + at almost every point to certain detection. There is good reason for + believing that no forger or writer of fiction in the ancient world + has succeeded in his art. In investing fiction with apparent + probability, the modern world has completely outstript the ancient. + Still, however, even in the most perfect works, when the fictions are + extended over a wide sphere of action, no amount of genius will + protect a writer from leaving some weak point unguarded. It is + probably not too much to say that neither in ancient nor modern + times, has a fictitious work or a forgery been able to maintain its + ground against the apparatus which can be brought to bear on it by a + sound and rational criticism.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Most of the other + objections which are adduced against the miracles of the New + Testament have been answered in principle under the foregoing heads. + I must now adduce some of the most important considerations which + prove them to have been historical facts.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page368">[pg 368]</span><a name= + "Pg368" id="Pg368" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc35" id="toc35"></a> <a name="pdf36" id="pdf36"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XVII. The Historical Evidence + On Which The Great Facts Of Christianity Rest—General + Considerations.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been urged + by opponents, that the defenders of historical Christianity rest + content with endeavouring to prove that miracles are possible or + probable; but that they neglect an all-important part of their duty, + viz.: that of adducing historical proof that miracles have been + actually performed. If the fact is as here stated, there can be no + doubt that works which profess to discuss the subject of miracles, + and omit to give a clear statement of the chief points of the + evidence which can be adduced to prove that they have actually + occurred, must be unsatisfactory. To answer the objections which are + urged to prove that miracles are impossible, or which affirm on + general principles that all evidence in their favour is unworthy of + credit, is an essential preliminary to the consideration of the + historical evidence which can be adduced to prove their actual + occurrence. But to afford proof, that as facts they rest upon an + adequate attestation, is the essential duty of every one who asserts + their reality. To this portion of the work I will now proceed to + address myself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What then is the + position occupied by the Christian advocate? Is it requisite in order + to establish the truth of Christianity, that he should give an + historical proof of everyone of the miracles recorded in the New + Testament? I answer this question emphatically in <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page369">[pg 369]</span><a name="Pg369" id="Pg369" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the negative, and for the following + reason. The New Testament itself, while it affirm that many miracles + have been performed, rests the truth of Christianity on one miracle + alone, the Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. This is the + great event which, according to the Acts of the Apostles, the early + missionaries urged as the distinctive proof of their Master's divine + mission. The views expressed in the Apostolic Epistles are precisely + similar. In them, the entire evidence of the truth of our Lord's + divine mission is made to centre in the fact of His resurrection. Not + only is the great fact referred to either directly or indirectly in + almost every page, but St. Paul has distinctly rested the truth of + Christianity on the reality of its occurrence. Such a statement is + made respecting no other miraculous event recorded in the New + Testament. It is the miracle of miracles, unique and alone, by which + the seal of God was affixed to the divine mission of Jesus Christ. It + formed the <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang= + "la"><span style="font-style: italic">locus standi</span></span> of + the Church, and the sole ground of its existence. If it was not an + objective fact, those who testified to its occurrence must have been + false witnesses, and the whole of Christianity either a delusion or + an imposture.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that this great miracle forms the very key of the + Christian position. Everything else is an outwork, an important one + it may be, but yet an outwork. If this position can be successfully + assailed, the entire fortress of Christianity must surrender at + discretion. If, on the other hand, the most determined unbeliever + could be convinced that there is good historical evidence that Jesus + Christ rose from the dead, he would find no difficulty in accepting + the Gospels as historical documents, and the whole <span lang="la" + class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> objection against them + would disappear.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: If the + Resurrection of Christ is a fact, Christianity <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page370">[pg 370]</span><a name="Pg370" id="Pg370" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> must be a divine revelation. The perfect + historical accuracy of the Gospels in minute details may be still + open to question; deep thought and careful investigation may be + necessary for ascertaining the precise amount of truth communicated + by that revelation; past ages may have erred in its interpretation, + or in their deductions from it; many questions as to the relation in + which revelation stands to science or history may be open ones—all + this is both conceivable and possible—but still, if Jesus Christ rose + from the dead, his entire manifestation, work, and teaching, must be + a communication from God to man.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This then is my + position. The real question stands within very narrow limits. The + miracle that requires strong historical proof is the Resurrection. + The other supernatural occurrences recorded in the Gospels are + important portions of the revelation made by Christ. They were + important evidences to those who witnessed them. But to us in these + latter times the one great question is: Is the Resurrection capable + of being established as an actual occurrence? If it is, it will carry + with it all the others. If it is not, the proof of the others will + fall along with it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us examine the + historical conditions of the case. Christianity differs from all + other religions in professing not to consist of a mass of abstract + dogmatic statements, but to be founded on, and largely to consist of, + a number of historical facts. There are unquestionably a considerable + number of dogmatic statements in the pages of the New Testament; but + they profess to grow out of the facts and to be explanations of them. + The facts form, so to say, the essence of the religion. The + Christianity of the New Testament is a growth which encircles itself + around the person of its founder in a manner in which no other system + of thought or religion, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page371">[pg + 371]</span><a name="Pg371" id="Pg371" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + which has existed among men, has ever done. If we take the person of + Jesus Christ out of the New Testament, the whole system of its + teaching crumbles into nothingness. If we remove the person of its + founder from every other system of human thought—its great religions + form no exception—the system remains intact. This is a very striking + peculiarity in Christianity. In this respect it stands absolutely + unique.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But as + Christianity is founded on an historical person, who lived in a + particular age, so He is the founder of a great historical + institution, the Christian Church. This institution differs from + every other society which has ever existed, in that both its + origination and its continued existence are inextricably bound up + with the person of its founder. Other societies could exist even if + it could be proved that their reputed founders were creations of the + imagination; but this would be fatal to the life of the Church of + Christ. If it could be proved that Jesus Christ was a myth, or + nothing but a learned Rabbi, the Christian Church, mighty society as + it is, would certainly collapse. The Christian Church without Christ + would be far more out of place than the play of Hamlet with the part + of Hamlet omitted. In this respect it is a institution unique among + all those which the world has ever seen, whether political or + religious.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This great + society, which now comprehends a vast majority of the intelligence of + mankind, and all the progressive nations of the world, had a definite + beginning in historical times. It differs wholly from a philosophic + sect, whose bond of union consists in the acceptance of a body of + dogmatic teaching. It is and ever has been an organized society with + specific purposes and aims, and one which has ever meditated schemes + of conquest. It differs widely from all political <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page372">[pg 372]</span><a name="Pg372" id="Pg372" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> institutions, and yet ever since its + birth it has taken a place beside them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The origin of this + society is not lost, like that of many others, in the mists of the + hoary past. History enables us to assign a definite time when this + society was certainly not in existence. It no less definitely marks + out a period when it not only was in existence, but had entered on a + condition of active growth. Its origin did not take place in the + cloud-land of the mythic or the semi-mythic period of history, but in + the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, and in a country occupied by Roman + garrisons, and presided over by Roman governors.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be + objected that our only accounts of the causes which led to the + organization of this society are writings composed by its own + members. In this there is nothing peculiar; for until societies have + grown sufficiently powerful to attract the attention of the world + outside them, there can be no other source of information. Still the + fact can be ascertained on the most unquestionable authority, that at + a certain date this society was not in existence, and that within a + certain number of years afterwards, it was not only in existence, but + rapidly increasing; and that it originated in Jesus Christ, who was + put to death by the Roman government.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This society, + therefore, came into existence at a definite period of time. Its + early writers give us an account of how it originated. They affirm + that its founder was Jesus Christ; and that, having been interrupted + by His death, it was called into a new existence by His resurrection. + To this great event they most positively affirm that the origin of + the Church, as an institution, was due. To the belief in it as a + fact, it has certainly owed its gradual enlargement, until it + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page373">[pg 373]</span><a name="Pg373" + id="Pg373" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> has attained its present + dimensions after more than eighteen centuries of existence. To this + belief is due the great moral power which it has exercised on + mankind; and if its members could be persuaded that the belief in the + Resurrection of its founder was a mere delusion, great as this + society is, it would certainly perish.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There are five + facts connected with the origin of this society, which no one who + believes in the possibility of historic truth will dispute.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: That at the + year A.D. 25, this society had no existence.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: That in + A.D. 40, it was in a state of vigorous growth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly: That it + was founded by Jesus Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fourthly: That His + crucifixion by the Roman government caused its temporary + collapse.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fifthly: That an + event of some kind, which took place shortly after His death, + imparted to it a new vitality, which it has never lost to the present + hour, and which has caused it to exert a mightier influence on + mankind than any other community, whether political or religious, + that has ever existed.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The problem, + therefore, which history has to solve, is to account for the renewed + life, the marvellous progress, the intense vitality of this society, + and the mighty influence which it has exerted on the destinies of + mankind; originating as it did in the smallest possible beginnings, + and in a manner differing from all other existing institutions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Christian + Church has propounded, from the first commencement of its renewed + life, its own solution of this problem. It is: that its founder, + after having been crucified, rose again from the dead. This account + has this clear and obvious advantage, that if it be true, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page374">[pg 374]</span><a name="Pg374" + id="Pg374" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> it sufficiently accounts for + all the phenomena whose existence we have to solve. His resurrection + was a power adequate to revive the society after its temporary + collapse, to impart to it its mighty moral and spiritual energy, and + to impress on the original work and teaching of Jesus, a new and + peculiar aspect. In short, assuming the Resurrection to have been a + fact, it assigns a cause adequate to account for all the phenomena + which have been presented by the Church. Here then we have firm + ground on which to take our stand; viz., the belief of this society + as to its origin, capable of being traced historically to the first + hour of its renewed life, and which also, if true, affords a rational + account of it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further; + besides this account which the Church has given of its own origin, + there is no rival account of it in existence. As far as historical + documents are concerned, there is no other. All others are founded on + conjecture.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Our opponents, + however, affirm that the alleged fact which the Church asserts to + have been the cause of its existence is incredible, because all + miracles are impossible. Then, leaving <span lang="la" class= + "tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style="font-style: italic">à + priori</span></span> grounds, they also affirm that the evidence to + prove the Resurrection to have been an historical fact is + insufficient for the purpose.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Church, + however, is clearly in possession of a vantage-ground, from which it + is not easy to dislodge her. The cause which she alleges is adequate + to account for all the phenomena.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The <span lang= + "la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">onus probandi</span></span> therefore clearly + rests on the opponents of Christianity. If they deny the truth of the + fact which the Church has ever handed down as the true account of her + origin, they are bound not only to show that it is devoid of + historical attestation, but to propound a theory which will + adequately account for <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page375">[pg + 375]</span><a name="Pg375" id="Pg375" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> all + the facts to which history testifies. It is clear that nothing short + of this is required of them as philosophical historians. Certain + facts are plain and undeniable. A society, of a very special + character, sprang into existence at a definite point of history, and + has exerted a mightier influence than any other on the destinies of + man. If therefore they reject the account which the Church herself + gives, they are bound to supply a rational account of how this great + society came into being; how the phenomena which constitute its + history have been brought about; and what it was that imparted to it + its vitality and power. We are in the presence of the greatest + institution with which history is acquainted, founded as it is on the + greatest ideal conception (if it is not historical) which the human + mind has ever succeeded in inventing. Both these came into existence, + not in pre-historic times, but in the midst of a period of + contemporaneous history. Respecting the times, the modes of thought, + and the general character of the period, we have extensive historical + data. The religious, moral, and philosophical opinions, and the + general line of thought, are well known. The various forces which + were then in activity we are able to appreciate. With all these data + before him, it is incumbent on the philosophical historian to give us + an account of the moral and religious forces in activity at this + period, which were capable of creating the Christian Church, and + generating its conception of the ideal Christ. If it is alleged that + after the utmost investigation it is impossible to account for their + origin by the action of any known moral or spiritual forces acting on + the human mind, this would be at once to confess that the origin of + Christianity and the Church is entirely abnormal, or in other words, + that it is a moral and spiritual miracle.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page376">[pg 376]</span><a name="Pg376" id="Pg376" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To do unbelievers + justice, they have not been slow to recognize the fact that if they + reject the account which the Church has given of its origin, they are + bound to give us a rational one of how Christianity came into + existence. Accordingly, theory after theory has been propounded on + this subject. No intellectual exertion has been spared to point out + how Christianity and the Church have succeeded in getting into + existence, and in effecting their religious and moral conquests, by + forces purely human, and without the aid of any supernatural + intervention.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One thing + respecting these theories is worthy of particular attention. No + unbeliever has as yet been able to suggest one which has succeeded in + commanding, I will not say the universal, but even the general assent + of the unbelieving world. Theory after theory has been propounded and + abandoned. It is therefore clear that the difficulty of accounting + for the origin of Christianity and the Church through the action of + the ordinary forces that operate on the human mind, is extreme. There + is no analogous case in the whole history of man. Let me briefly + enumerate the chief principles which have been invoked to aid in the + solution of this problem.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First, it has been + attempted to get rid of the supernatural elements contained in the + Gospels by representing them as distorted representations of real + facts. This has been justly abandoned as childish. Then came the + mythic and legendary theories. These, having been found inadequate, + have been supplemented by various theories of development of ideas; + and the supposition of a violent party spirit existing in the Church, + which under the influence of a spirit of accommodation produced + various compromises; a mass of varied and often contending opinions + seething in the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page377">[pg + 377]</span><a name="Pg377" id="Pg377" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + bosom of a society continually threatened with disruption, until they + somehow succeeded in welding themselves together; enthusiasm, + fanaticism, boundless credulity, aided by a prodigious power of + mythic and legendary invention, and whenever occasion so required, + the presence of a moral atmosphere, which on great emergencies did + not shrink from deliberate imposture. All these, in ever varying + degrees and proportions, have been pressed into the service of + creating the Church, the ideal Christ, and the Christianity of the + New Testament. It is impossible in a work like the present to examine + these various theories, and show their inadequacy as philosophical + explanations of the fact. This I have already done in a former + work,<a id="noteref_5" name="noteref_5" href="#note_5"><span class= + "tei tei-noteref"><span style= + "font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">5</span></span></a> to which + I must refer the reader for their refutation. A few observations only + will be necessary in this place.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: The + positions taken by unbelievers are theories, which rest on the + smallest basis of historical evidence. I readily admit that where + there is a known fact, but the recollection of the events which would + give an account of its origin has perished, if a theory can be + propounded which fully accounts for the fact, then it has a right to + take its place as an historical event which rests on evidence of the + highest probability. An example derived from the mode in which the + study of comparative philology discloses the history of the past will + explain my meaning. We have before us the facts of language. The + history of those who formerly used it has perished; the accounts of + their migrations have nowhere been preserved. But certain facts of + comparative philology justify the assumption that certain primitive + races of men must have migrated in particular directions. These + assumed migrations are really a theory, but one which is exactly + adequate <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page378">[pg + 378]</span><a name="Pg378" id="Pg378" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> to + account for the facts which language unquestionably presents. Thus + the facts of the Indo-Germanic languages justify the assumption that + in the pre-historic ages, migrations westward must have taken place, + of which history contains no record. Still the theory affords so + perfect an explanation of the facts, that the occurrence of the + migrations is as certain as if they had been recorded by + contemporaneous writers. On similar grounds it has been inferred with + a degree of probability so high as to be equal to certainty, that a + language earlier than the Sanskrit, and from which both it and the + Indo-Germanic family of languages have been derived, was spoken by a + previous race. Investigations of this kind are largely adding to our + historical knowledge.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us observe the + basis on which such arguments rest. In all these cases we have before + us not mere conjectures, but a distinct and positive fact, or set of + facts. The connecting links are missing. By the aid of conjecture we + propound a theory; or in other words, we suppose a set of events to + have occurred, which, if they really happened, would be adequate to + account for the facts in question. When they thus account for them, + and for them alone, and no other conjectural occurrence will do so, + the assumed fact is fully entitled to take its place in history as an + event which has actually happened. The reason of this is, that it can + stand the test of historical verification.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A problem similar + to that above referred to is the one which those who deny the + historical truth of the Gospels are called upon to solve. We are in + the presence of certain unquestionable historical facts, viz., the + five above referred to, and many others. The denial of the truth of + the Christian account leaves them without the connecting link which + once united them. What <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page379">[pg + 379]</span><a name="Pg379" id="Pg379" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> was + that link? It can only be supplied by conjecture. But to enable such + a conjectural fact or facts to take rank as historical events, they + must be adequate to account for the facts, and be true to human + nature, and to the circumstances of the case; in other words, they + must be capable of enduring a rigid historical verification. Theories + which cannot endure this are no better than ropes of sand. This is + the character of the theories which have been propounded to account + for the Christianity of the New Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let me illustrate + this by one of the favourite theories used by unbelievers for this + purpose. We are told that a number of extremely hostile factions + divided the primitive Church. Of these the followers of James, Peter, + and Paul may be taken as fairly representative. These were in a state + of great hostility to each other, and went on gradually elaborating a + Christianity that was in conformity with their own views and tastes. + After a while it occurred to these hostile parties that it would be + advantageous to compromise their differences. An influential person, + such as we may suppose the author of the Acts of the Apostles to have + been, composed a history, for the purpose of making matters smooth, + and to afford a common ground of union among the contending factions. + This process was repeated as often as was necessary; and in good + time, by the aid of myth and legend, and the whole of the needful + apparatus, appeared the Christianity of the New Testament, and the + Church was consolidated out of these varied elements.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such theories + grievously offend against the logic of history, and are in direct + variance with the facts of human life. We are here in the midst of a + whole mass of conjectural facts, each of which is imagined to account + for the existence of the other; and the whole <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page380">[pg 380]</span><a name="Pg380" id="Pg380" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of them taken together fail to give an + adequate solution of the phenomena before us. They are both untrue to + human nature and unable to account for either the facts of + Christianity or the existence of the Church. I must content myself + with selecting one of them for illustration. We are asked to believe + that the Church was divided into a number of parties, the opposition + between whom was violent; and that these effected a number of + compromises, out of which was ultimately evolved a common + Christianity. This result is in direct contradiction to the testimony + of the religious history of man. Religious parties do not effect + compromises, but go on contending and widening their differences, + until their enthusiasm wears out and they die of inanition. To this + the history of all sects bears ample testimony, and the greater the + enthusiasm and not unfrequently the lesser the grounds of difference, + the greater the animosity. Compromises between hostile sects, in the + rare cases in which they have taken place, have been brought about by + means of external coercion. The religious history of mankind presents + no example of furious religious parties, while animated by a living + enthusiasm, voluntarily coalescing on the general principle of + compromise. Witness the unsuccessful attempts at compromise between + the Eastern and Western Churches, even when it was urged by the + strongest external pressure. Witness the sects which grew out of the + Reformation. Compromises have frequently originated among + politicians, but these have in vain tried their healing influences + among contending sects. Occasionally they have been brought about by + the aid of pressure exerted by the temporal power, as in the Church + of England. Nothing more strongly illustrates the difficulty with + which compromise between religious parties can be <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page381">[pg 381]</span><a name="Pg381" id="Pg381" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> effected than the failure of the attempts + to reconcile the Church of England and the Methodists. The + compromiser who will effect this union exists only in the hopes of + the future. But we need not confine ourselves to the manifestations + of sectarian spirit in connection with Christianity. The Mahometan + Church is also divided by sectarian differences. Is there any + tendency to produce a common Mahometanism, erected on the basis of + compromise? Do Buddhism and Brahminism show any disposition to + compromise their differences by fusing them into a common Pantheism + which shall suit both parties? The idea of producing a Christianity + by a succession of happy compromises entered into by violently + hostile parties in the early Church, is a dream which, however + plausible it may have seemed in the closet, is rudely dissipated the + moment we come in contact with the stern realities of life.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: the + wide separation of the early Churches from each other; and, according + to the opinions of those against whom I am reasoning, their want of a + governing power acknowledged by all, must have rendered agreement on + the basis of mutual compromise impossible. Compromises are the + results of considerations of policy, and are unheard of among + fanatics, such as my opponents assert the early followers of Jesus to + have been. But what further renders this theory untenable is, that it + is compelled to imagine a number of developments accompanied by + corresponding compromises between hostile parties, before we can + succeed in evolving the Christianity of the New Testament. Not only + does it contradict the history of man; not only is it an assumption + made to form the connecting link between other established facts, but + it is itself founded on other assumptions. Among these <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page382">[pg 382]</span><a name="Pg382" id="Pg382" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> are the assertions made as to the + evidence of the party spirit existing in the Church, and the + opposition between its leaders. Party spirit we know to have existed, + but not with the violence which this theory is compelled to + postulate. The statement also that the doctrinal opposition between + these parties was of so declared a type is not founded on the + evidence that we possess, but on a highly exaggerated view of it, + distorted for the purpose of adding strength to the theory; or, in + other words, it is founded on a set of unwarranted assumptions. The + passages in the New Testament alleged to prove the declared + opposition between the leaders of the Church, which this theory is + compelled to pre-suppose, can only be made to do so by taking it for + granted that they do. For example, the assertion that the person + denounced in the Epistles to the Seven Churches in the book of + Revelation, is St. Paul, is a simply gratuitous one, the only + evidence for which is the will and pleasure of those who make it. The + theory, therefore, not only contradicts the history of man, but is + based upon a number of alleged facts which are either absolute + assumptions or exaggerations, and fail to give any account of the + origin of Christianity which will stand the test of the scrutiny of a + sound philosophy.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The mythic and + legendary theories are equally unable to account for the facts as + they stand in the New Testament. I cannot here attempt to follow them + in their innumerable windings. Taken by themselves they are not now + accepted as adequate accounts of them, but other theories are called + in to aid them. Still, whatever assistance these are supposed to + impart, myth and legend must always hold a prominent place in the + systems of those who endeavour to account for the origin of the + Gospels on purely human principles. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page383">[pg 383]</span><a name="Pg383" id="Pg383" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> As they contain a large supernatural element, + it is certain that if this is not historical, it must have originated + in some species of fiction, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> either in the mythic and + legendary spirit, or in pure invention. Hence the use of myths and + legends must always be freely invoked by those who, while they deny + the historical character of the Gospels, do not go to the length of + accusing the original followers of Jesus of deliberate invention.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I must here draw + attention to one particular portion of the evidence, the full + significance of which I have described elsewhere. Whatever opinions + may be formed as to the unhistorical character of the Gospels, there + is one fact respecting them as to which believers and unbelievers + must alike agree, namely that they contain a delineation of the most + perfect conception ever formed by the mind of man, the character of + Jesus Christ. There it is, beyond the power of contradiction; the + overwhelming majority of men possessed of the most powerful minds + have recognized it as the greatest of ideals, as well as the millions + of ordinary men to whom it has been the object of supreme admiration + and attraction. The following questions respecting it therefore + urgently demand an answer.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If the Gospels are + a mere collection of mythic and legendary stories, generated and put + together in the manner affirmed by those who deny their historical + character, how got this great character there? If the fables of which + they are composed are the inventions of many minds, whence its unity? + If their inventors were credulous enthusiasts and fanatics, whence + its perfection? If they were implicated in all the superstitions of + the age, whence its moral elevation? Of what order of thought then + existing is it the embodiment? How could the credulity which was + necessary <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page384">[pg + 384]</span><a name="Pg384" id="Pg384" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> for + the acceptance of such fictions, or how could the spirit which + invented them, have conceived these moral elements? There the + character is—let us be distinctly informed how it was put together; + how much of it is fact, and how much fiction; how the fictions were + welded together with the facts so as to compose the whole; and what + class or order of minds in the early Church was equal to its + elaboration. This delineation must have been made at an early period, + and could not have been a late invention; for it is substantially the + same as that contained in those Epistles of St. Paul, which are + acknowledged to have been written within thirty years of the date of + the Crucifixion. A distinct answer to these questions is demanded of + those who affirm that the Gospels have no value as histories. It is + impossible to deny that they have a most important bearing on the + present question. Why do not unbelievers set themselves to grapple + with this problem?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the value to + be assigned to the Gospels as histories must be a matter for + subsequent consideration. At present I need simply draw attention to + the fact that while the opponents of Christianity fully recognize the + necessity of propounding a rational theory of its origin, the more we + examine their various theories in detail, the more apparent becomes + their inadequacy to account for the phenomena. The fact, already + alluded to, that unbelievers cannot come to any agreement among + themselves on this subject, shows that they find the problem + extremely difficult of solution. The plausibility of their theories + is due to the abstract and general form in which they are presented. + Various causes are held up without any discrimination as to what each + of them is capable of effecting; and the wished-for result is + ascribed to their combined action. But when we analyse the various + forces at their command, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page385">[pg + 385]</span><a name="Pg385" id="Pg385" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + ascertain the mode of their action, the difficulties they would have + to encounter before they could effectuate their results, and examine + whether they are true to the facts of human nature as testified to by + the long course of history, it is not too much to affirm that all the + investigations of unbelievers have completely failed to give an + account of the origin of Christianity which can take the place of + that handed down to us by the Church. Until this can be given, + notwithstanding all the expenditure of intellect on the question, we + are justified in affirming that the problem is insoluble, although + Christianity originated in a period unquestionably historical, in the + midst of the Roman Empire over which it rapidly spread, despite the + opposition of the government and the entire organization of + society.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Before proceeding + to the direct considerations by which the great fact of Christianity + is attested, I must take a general glance at the nature of the + materials which we have at our command, and at their historical + value.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I shall take as my + starting-point the five facts already mentioned, the historical + certainty of which it is needless to prove. My starting-point, + therefore, is the continuous existence of the Church, which came into + being at a definite period of time, to which it can be traced up in + one unbroken succession. This society has always affirmed that its + corporate existence, as well as the life of its individual members, + is due to the Resurrection of its founder. I shall also carefully + examine and estimate the contemporaneous evidence afforded by the + Epistles of St. Paul, especially those which are acknowledged to be + genuine, as well as that of the other writings of the New Testament, + for the purpose of estimating the value of their testimony on this + subject. Even if some <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page386">[pg + 386]</span><a name="Pg386" id="Pg386" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + these writings are not allowed by unbelievers to be the productions + of the persons whose names they bear, still they are all of a very + early date, and unquestionably reflect the thoughts and ideas of + those who wrote them, and of the persons to whom they are addressed. + But before I enter on my immediate subject, it will be necessary to + lay down the leading principles of historical evidence, and to + estimate the value of tradition as a testimony to historical + facts.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I am fully + prepared to abide by the chief principles laid down by Sir G. C. + Lewis on this subject in his great work on the <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">Credibility of Early + Roman History</span></span>. They are generally considered to be + sufficiently severe and exacting. By many they are viewed as of far + too stringent a character. The evidence on which the great fact of + the Resurrection rests, will endure their most rigid application. + They have this great advantage, that they are laid down for the + investigation of a subject purely secular, with which religion has + nothing to do. They are therefore wholly free from religious bias, + and are simply the principles for testing the claims of ordinary + facts on our belief. If the chief facts of Christianity can stand + this scrutiny, it is impossible to affirm that they are not supported + by the strongest historical testimony.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. Every alleged + fact, in order to be entitled to our belief, must be shown to rest on + direct contemporaneous testimony, or that which is its historical + equivalent.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This rule is by no + means intended to affirm that every fact for which contemporaneous + testimony can be adduced is true; but only that it is to be accepted + as such when there is no reason for disbelieving it. We must have + some means to enable us to form a judgment of the knowledge and + veracity of the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page387">[pg + 387]</span><a name="Pg387" id="Pg387" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + informant. It remains for consideration, when the direct testimony of + a contemporary is not to be had, as must be frequently the case with + events long past, what may be considered as its historical + equivalent?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It must be kept in + mind that one of the most valuable forms of contemporaneous + testimony, if not the most valuable of all, is a set of letters which + contain various and definite allusions to the current events, habits, + and modes of thought of the time. For certain purposes these are far + more valuable than formal histories. The latter are frequently + written under the influence of party spirit, partiality, or bias. The + writer of a history is usually on his guard, has carefully considered + what he says, and affords us but little opportunity of interrogating + him. But the writer of a letter, unless he has special reasons for + being guarded, places before his correspondent his entire mind. We + are therefore capable of interrogating him. He often lets us into the + secret causes of events. He also makes a number of incidental + allusions to events which are passing. These form testimony of a most + valuable kind. We can in a manner almost converse with him. As a + confirmation of the facts which formal histories narrate, and as + letting us into the secret springs of events, a series of letters, + written by persons who were actively engaged in them, are historical + documents of the highest order. Their value is increased when they + bear all the appearance of coming from the writer's heart. Nothing is + more striking than the happy results which have accrued from the + extensive use made by modern historians of original correspondence. + It is not too much to say that it has largely modified our view of + events, as they have been reported in formal histories. Another very + high form of contemporaneous testimony is the <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page388">[pg 388]</span><a name="Pg388" id="Pg388" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> existence of institutions and monuments + which can be certainly traced up to a particular period, and which + owed their existence to events of that period. These form a species + of living witnesses to the truth of the facts out of which they have + originated, and as far as their testimony goes, it is incapable of + falsehood. The most valuable testimony of this kind is a great + institution of which we possess definite evidence that it originated + in a particular event, or in the belief of it. This kind of evidence + Christianity possesses in the highest form, in the continued + existence of that great institution, the Christian Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. Testimony has a + general credibility, subject of course to the knowledge and honesty + of the informant, when the reports are derived from those who lived + during the generation in which a particular event occurred, supposing + it to have been one of sufficient notoriety to attract attention, and + that the reporter possessed adequate means of information, and + investigated it with sufficient care. We are always justified in + assuming that he tells the truth unless there are reasons for + suspecting the contrary.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. Narratives of + events which a man has heard from his father or his contemporaries, + but which happened before his own recollection, are for the purpose + of history, (but subject to the requisite qualifications) fair + representations of contemporaneous testimony.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">History admits + hearsay testimony under proper restrictions. The knowledge of the + past would be impossible, if it were to allow itself to be fettered + by the technical rules which have been introduced into the + administration of justice. The all-important considerations with the + historian, are the notoriety of the fact and the truthfulness of the + informant. Facts that a man may have heard detailed by his + grandfather or <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page389">[pg + 389]</span><a name="Pg389" id="Pg389" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> his + contemporaries as having happened in their time stand as + representations of contemporaneous testimony in the same position as + those derived from the earlier generation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4. But when a + third stage is interposed in the transmission of events, as for + instance when we learn from our fathers or grandfathers what they + have learnt from theirs, an element of uncertainty is introduced. + Still an historian, writing after such an interval of time, if he + sifted evidence with care, would be able to report with accuracy all + the great events, whatever difficulty he might have in ascertaining + the minor details. Within this period abundance of sources of + accurate information exist on all points of importance, although the + details gradually fade out of people's recollections. After this + interval, the accounts of events are likely to receive a certain + amount of colouring, according to the prejudices of the narrators; + but the interval is too short, and the remembrance of them too + recent, to allow of their becoming incrusted with important mythical + additions. All the materials for investigation are in existence, and + within the reach of the honest historian. He might find difficulty in + arranging the details in historical sequence; but if he does not give + an accurate account of the great outlines, it is owing, not to the + want of historical materials, but to the absence of a desire to + investigate and report the truth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">5. The limits of + time during which tradition can be considered as a sufficiently + accurate medium for preserving the memory of events, may be put + generally at from one hundred to one hundred and twenty years. Within + this period careful investigation and inquiry will enable the + historian to report the main features of events with substantial + truth, from the testimony of those who were contemporaries, or who + derived their <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page390">[pg + 390]</span><a name="Pg390" id="Pg390" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + information from those who were. Beyond this period, when the + knowledge of occurrences has to pass through three or four media of + transmission, tradition becomes an uncertain and untrustworthy + informant, and after the lapse of a greater interval, it is utterly + unreliable, affording no means of checking the introduction of + legendary narratives. There may be a few exceptional cases which have + impressed themselves deeply on the public recollection. Occasionally + the protracted lives of a few individuals may lengthen the period of + trustworthy transmission, but this is an event of such rare + occurrence as but slightly to modify the general rule.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It must be + observed that there are two cases in which the traditional knowledge + of events is transmitted with far more accuracy, and over far longer + intervals of time than in ordinary ones, viz., those of families + which have an historical importance derived from the actions of their + ancestors, and those of bodies of men who have a kind of corporate + life, succeeding one another in unbroken succession, especially when + this corporate life is founded on the events themselves. This latter + case presents the means best adapted for the traditionary + transmission of facts, and one in which it is hardly possible that + they should fail of being accurately transmitted within a reasonable + interval of time. This was precisely the position occupied by the + Christian Church during the first century of its existence respecting + the chief events in the life of its founder.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">An example will + illustrate this: If there had been no written memorials of the life + of John Wesley, there can be no doubt that the society which he + founded would have handed down to the present day an account of the + chief events of his life, which would have been accurate in its main + outlines. Thousands of persons are now living who have conversed with + those who have heard <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page391">[pg + 391]</span><a name="Pg391" id="Pg391" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> him + preach; I myself have done so. It would therefore be impossible to + impose upon them a wholly mythic account in place of that which would + have been handed down by the Wesleyan body. Yet this society is + founded on a set of dogmas, not on the historical facts of its + founder's life. The Christian Church therefore was in a far superior + position for preserving a substantially accurate account of the chief + events in the life of Jesus Christ, yet the interval which separates + us from the death of Wesley is greater than that which elapsed + between the death of Christ, and the publication of the latest of the + Synoptic Gospels, even if we accept the dates which are assigned to + them by our opponents.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">6. When the + knowledge of past events has perished, it is impossible to + re-construct them by the aid of conjecture, except within the limits + to which I have previously alluded. These limits must be strictly + defined, otherwise that which is propounded as history becomes + nothing else than a statement of our subjective impressions. + Conjectures which cannot stand the test of historical verification + cannot be accepted as facts of history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing is easier + than, when facts are wanting, to invent them, and thus bridge over + the intervals which lie between others, the connecting links of which + have perished. But how are we to know that such conjectural events + were real facts, and not mere creations of the imagination? Clearly + this can be determined in no other way than by subjecting them to a + rigid verification. If they will not endure this, they must be + rejected. Historical conjectures have no higher claims for acceptance + than scientific ones. Both must be subject to the same tests, and + must share the same fate. I do not deny that many such conjectures + may have a <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page392">[pg + 392]</span><a name="Pg392" id="Pg392" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + considerable degree of plausibility; but, unless we rigidly reject + from the rank of historic facts those that break down under the test + of verification, histories will be converted into novels or poems. If + our knowledge of the connecting links between events in the history + of the past has perished, we shall not improve it by imagining facts, + and calling the result by the name of history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We cannot be too + guarded in this particular subject, because an almost boundless + license has been introduced into the present controversy. Pure + creations of the imagination, which it is impossible to verify, are + constantly propounded as facts in the history of the past. I by no + means wish to deny that both parties must plead guilty to the charge + of this species of historical forgery. The fact may be unpleasant, + but we shall do no good by refusing to recognize it. When the + knowledge of past events has perished, and our conjectures break down + under the test of verification, we have nothing to do but to remain + content with our ignorance.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If these + principles are correct, a considerable number of recently published + lives of Jesus, and other similar compositions, have no claim to the + designation of historical writings. They are mere novels evolved out + of the self-consciousness of their authors. They are nothing but + simple imaginations of what, under certain conjectural circumstances, + might have happened, but are destitute of all evidence that they + actually occurred. If history is thus degraded, it must become devoid + of all scientific value. I have pressed this point because nowhere is + this license of conjectural guessing at events more largely indulged + in, than in questions connected with the Bible and its criticism.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page393">[pg 393]</span><a name= + "Pg393" id="Pg393" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc37" id="toc37"></a> <a name="pdf38" id="pdf38"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XVIII. The Testimony Of The + Church, And Of St. Paul's Epistles, To The Facts Of Primitive + Christianity. Their Historical Value Considered.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have in the + preceding chapter drawn attention to the chief principles of + historical evidence, and to the importance of certain classes of + historical documents; also to the important bearing which the + continued existence of a great institution like the Christian Church + has on this subject, especially as its origin can be traced up to a + definite period of history. I have further shown that as the Church + gives a definite account of its origin, which, if true, is an + adequate one; it is incumbent on those who reject this account to + propound another which shall be able to stand the application of the + principles of a sound philosophy of human nature. I must now consider + the evidence which the existence of the Church as a visible + institution, and the Epistles of St. Paul, afford to the great facts + on which Christianity is based.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If it can be + proved beyond question that the Church immediately after it assumed a + distinctive form not only believed in the Resurrection of Jesus + Christ, as one among many miraculous facts, but affirmed that the + belief in its truth was the one sole ground of its corporate + existence, within a very short interval after the date of His + crucifixion, it must be admitted, even by <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page394">[pg 394]</span><a name="Pg394" id="Pg394" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> unbelievers, to involve a question of the most + serious importance. It proves for certain that the belief in one + miracle, and that the greatest of all recorded in the Gospels, was + neither a mythic nor a legendary creation. It further follows that if + the original followers of Jesus thought that He had risen from the + dead, it may be taken as a moral certainty that they must have + believed that other supernatural actions were performed by Him during + His life. The solution which unbelievers propound as the account of + the origin of the miraculous narratives in the Gospels is that they + are a gradual creation of a mythic and legendary spirit. Hence their + efforts to assign them to the latest possible date. If their + publication can be deferred to the early years of the second century, + they consider that this would afford the requisite time for + surrounding the history of Jesus with a halo of mythic and legendary + environment. But if it can be shown that the new-born Christian + Church, within a short interval after the Crucifixion, affirmed that + the sole ground of its renewed life was the belief in the + Resurrection of its founder, the possibility that such belief could + have been either mythic or legendary is taken away. Whatever may be + urged about the other parts of the story, there remains one miracle + (and that the greatest of all), which it is impossible to affirm to + have been either a mythical or a legendary creation. If the Church + accepted it as the sole ground of its existence, and if that belief + can be traced to the hour of its birth, it must have been due either + to some species of delusion, or to a fact. If Jesus was thus believed + to have risen from the dead, it is useless to assign the belief in + His other miracles to a later legendary spirit.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: The + Church, within a short number of years from the date of its birth, + must have had all the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page395">[pg + 395]</span><a name="Pg395" id="Pg395" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + consciousness that it was a young society. It was engaged in a + constant struggle for existence, and had before it the alternative of + enlarging its numbers, or perishing. A new society constantly + struggling for existence could not fail within this interval of time + to have the most lively consciousness of what it was to which it owed + its origin, and which formed the bond of union among its members. It + must have been to them a constantly recurring thought. Every one must + have known that it was an alleged miraculous fact, a supposed + Resurrection of one who had been crucified. Was it possible for the + members of such a society to avoid looking back with anxiety on the + alleged ground of its existence? It was no dogma capable of endless + discussion, but a fact. The bond of union was allegiance to a living + person. Is it conceivable that this person was not the object of + daily interest to its members, or that they did not make His history + the subject of earnest inquiry? Can we suppose for one moment that + any of them were ignorant of or had forgotten the grounds on which + they had joined the new community, or which formed the basis of its + life? The recollections of the members of a society which is only + between twenty and thirty years old must be fresh.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it may be + said, these people were very credulous. Be it so. Credulous people + placed in the circumstances of the Christian Church are never + deficient in curiosity. Even if the belief in the Resurrection of + Jesus had originated in credulity, the first principles of human + nature would have urged them to get all the information which they + could respecting it. They were in the exact position to enable them + to do this. Within ten, twenty, thirty, or forty years, there must + have been plenty of information at hand to enable them to ascertain + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page396">[pg 396]</span><a name="Pg396" + id="Pg396" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> whether the society to which + they belonged did or did not owe its existence to this belief, and to + get full information as to the general outline of the story on which + it was founded. It is impossible for members of a society whose + origin was so recent to have remained ignorant of the circumstances + which gave it birth. They must have been handed down by a lively + tradition. I conclude therefore, that it would have been simply + impossible for the members of the Church, within this short time, to + be mistaken as to whether its existence and continued life was due to + the belief that its founder had risen from the dead, or whether He + was supposed to have worked miracles during His life; and that its + belief could not have been due to mythic or legendary causes.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The question + before us then, becomes clear and definite, freed from the vagueness + with which it has been endeavoured to obscure it. If it can be proved + that the Christian Church owed its origin to its belief in the + Resurrection of Jesus Christ, and that its renewed life began within + the briefest interval after His crucifixion, the whole discussion + becomes narrowed into the following issue: Is it possible that such a + belief, within so short a time after His death, could have originated + in a fiction? Three alternatives are open for our acceptance, and + three only; either:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Jesus did not + really die, while his followers supposed that He had, and they + mistook some appearance of Him after His crucifixion for a + resurrection:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Or they imagined + that He appeared to some of them after His death, but the appearance + was a delusion of their imaginations:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Or He rose from + the dead as an objective fact.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Other alternatives + there are none; and with respect to this particular miracle, the + whole apparatus of myth, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page397">[pg + 397]</span><a name="Pg397" id="Pg397" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + legend, development and compromise, which is so liberally used to + account for the supernatural portions of the Gospels, is simply + worthless as a rational account of the origin of the story.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A very bold + affirmation has been made, that no contemporary testimony can be + adduced for the performance of any miracle recorded in the New + Testament. This assertion is founded on the supposition that none of + the Gospels can be proved to have been written earlier than the end + of the first, or the beginning of the second century. It is alleged + that they are of very uncertain authorship, that two of them do not + profess to communicate anything but second-hand information; and the + proof of the early composition of the other two utterly fails. The + three first Gospels being thus quietly assigned to the region of + myths and legends, and the fourth affirmed to be a forgery, it is + asserted that contemporary evidence for the truth of the supernatural + narratives of the Gospels wholly disappears.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What then is + contemporaneous testimony to a fact? Few persons who actually witness + events compose histories of them. There is scarcely an account of a + great battle which has been composed by the general who commanded in + it; and when such accounts have been published by persons who were + actually present, they could have witnessed but a small portion of + the events which they describe. Such is the case with the great mass + of facts which constitute the history of the past. The chief actors + in them are seldom the historians.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But although such + persons rarely compose narratives of events at which they were + actually present, yet it is quite possible to possess testimony which + for all practical purposes is of equal value. As I have already + pointed out, such testimony consists of historical documents + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page398">[pg 398]</span><a name="Pg398" + id="Pg398" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> composed by persons who lived + during the time in question, and who had ample means of procuring + information from those who must have known the truth of the + occurrences.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We possess + contemporaneous testimony of the highest order in the Epistles of St. + Paul. I have already observed that no documents are of higher + historical value than letters composed by persons actively engaged in + the events to which they refer. I must now point out specifically the + importance of these letters as historical documents.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: four of the + longest of them are admitted, by every school of unbelievers, who + have given any consideration to the subject, to be the genuine + productions of the Apostle. The evidence, both external and internal, + of his authorship, is of the highest character. If it is not valid to + prove that they were written by him, all historical certitude is + rendered impossible. They are the two to the Corinthians, and those + addressed to the Romans and the Galatians. Their importance is + greatly enhanced by their presenting to us a more distinct picture of + the innermost life of the Apostle than any others which have been + attributed to him. To these may be added four more, viz. the two to + the Thessalonians, and those to the Philippians and to Philemon, + which, although doubted by some, are yet fully admitted by other + unbelievers, among whom is Renan, to be genuine. The internal + evidence that the Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon were + written by the same person who composed those to the Corinthians and + Galatians, is as strong as such evidence can possibly be. The whole + form of thought is instinct with the presence of the same mind. Nor + can the two to the Thessalonians admit of any reasonable doubt. To + these follow the two to the Colossians and the <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page399">[pg 399]</span><a name="Pg399" id="Pg399" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Ephesians, for which the evidence is + certainly less strong; but Renan admits that it greatly preponderates + on the side of their being genuine productions of St. Paul. + Altogether, then, we have eight letters which are undoubtedly his, + and two more which are probably so; instinct with his mind, and + placing before us a vivid picture of the innermost life of the early + Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly, as to + their date. Six of them were unquestionably written within + twenty-eight years after the crucifixion, by the most active agent in + the propagation of Christianity, who had been employed in this work + for a period of at least eighteen years previously. Let us consider + what such a period of time really means. Twenty-eight years is about + the period which lies between the present year and the repeal of the + corn-laws. While some of those who effected it have passed away, many + of those who took a most active part in it are still living. All the + events connected with it lie within the period of the most lively + historical recollection. Many persons are still alive who can look + back with the most perfect reminiscence to the great events of the + anti-corn-law agitation. While these persons live, it will be + impossible to encircle the chief actors in it with a halo of myth or + legend. In precisely the same position must multitudes have stood to + the ministry of Jesus Christ, and the foundation of the Christian + Church, when these Epistles were written. The fact is worthy of our + deepest attention, that when we read these letters and the various + statements they contain, we are in the immediate presence of some of + the most important events in history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Although St. Paul + had never seen Jesus himself, yet his age was such when he wrote + these letters, that his recollection was good for many years before + the commencement of His ministry. Great numbers of persons + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page400">[pg 400]</span><a name="Pg400" + id="Pg400" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> also were alive whose + recollections of events that occurred at a much earlier date must + have been distinct and clear. With the early followers of Jesus he + had for not less than twenty years every facility for holding + communication. Is it to be believed that a man whose entire being was + swallowed up in one continuous sacrifice of himself to Jesus Christ, + and who was penetrated with the profoundest love towards Him, had not + accurately informed himself of the great facts of His earthly life, + when during the last twenty years he had enjoyed every means of + obtaining information from His followers, and previously had + investigated it with the keen scent of an angry persecutor? The idea + is incredible. In these letters of St. Paul therefore, as far as they + throw light on this subject, we are in the presence of + contemporaneous historical evidence of the highest order.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly: Although + these letters were written within so brief an interval after the + Crucifixion as from twenty-five to thirty years, yet they afford + evidence which carries us up to a much earlier period. St. Paul's + conversion dates at least eighteen years earlier than the earliest of + them. His testimony therefore is good as to the general nature of the + beliefs of the Christian Church during the whole period of his + ministry. It proves, among many other things, this all-important + point, that the Resurrection of Christ was believed by the whole + Christian community, and formed the groundwork of the existence of + the Church, within less than ten years after the crucifixion. But the + Apostle's hostile connection with the Christian sect dates still + earlier. As a persecutor he must have ascertained what were the + leading subjects of the Christian belief, and must have subjected the + whole matter to a rigid investigation. Above all, he could not have + failed to know whether <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page401">[pg + 401]</span><a name="Pg401" id="Pg401" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the + belief in the Resurrection of Christ was or was not from its + commencement the ground of the renewed life of the Christian + Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Every + consideration must have induced him when a persecutor to make this + entire question the subject of a most careful investigation. Nothing + was more important than that he should ascertain whether any + considerable interval had elapsed between the Crucifixion of Christ + and the propagation of the report of His Resurrection; and his means + of ascertaining the truth about it must have been complete. To + determine this for certain would have been most important in his work + of convicting the founders of the new sect of imposture; for if any + considerable time had elapsed between the death and reported + resurrection, it would have afforded that of which all the theories + of unbelief stand in need, a sufficient interval for the delusion to + grow and propagate itself; or, if the belief was the result of fraud, + for the imposition to be concocted and spread. St. Paul's testimony + therefore affords the most conclusive proof that the belief in the + Resurrection as a fact was contemporaneous with the foundation of the + Church; that it was the cause of its renewed vitality; that no + interval could have elapsed between the death of Jesus and His + reported resurrection, sufficient for the growth of myth or legend, + the fabrication of an imposture, or the gradual spreading of the + hallucinations of a single individual among a multitude of persons. + In one word, if the belief in the Resurrection originated in the + conversion of some subjective delusion into an objective fact, it + must have been one which spread with incomprehensible rapidity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">These letters also + form the most convincing proof, not only that the Resurrection was + universally believed as a fact by the communities to which they were + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page402">[pg 402]</span><a name="Pg402" + id="Pg402" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> addressed, but that it was + accepted by the individual members of these Churches from the first + commencement of their Christianity. Although two of these Churches + had been planted by St. Paul, that of the Romans was not planted by + him, and was of considerable standing when he wrote the letter. Its + fame had spread throughout the whole Christian world. Everything in + the Epistle denotes that its Christianity was of no recent growth. + Many of these Churches, especially the Jewish portions of them, could + carry their recollections up to a much earlier time. It should be + carefully observed that the interval of twenty-eight years from the + foundation of a sect is a period wholly insufficient for the growth + of an hereditary and otiose faith. The majority of the members of + these Churches were beyond all doubt actual converts, who had once + been either Jews or Pagans. However credulous we may suppose them to + have been, their conversion must have been due to an inquiry of some + kind. The short period which had elapsed since the foundation of the + Church and the supreme interest which the whole of the events and + circumstances must have excited in the converts, were precisely what + was requisite for preserving traditionary recollections with the + utmost soundness. There could have been no doubt in any of their + minds whether or not the belief in the Resurrection was the + groundwork of their Christianity. They must have known therefore + whether it was a story which had gradually spread, or had existed + from the beginning; or whether the peculiar form of it was an + invention of St. Paul; or whether it was the foundation of the + convictions of those by whom they had been converted. The manner in + which the fact of the Resurrection is referred to in these Epistles + proves that the belief was of no recent growth, but had <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page403">[pg 403]</span><a name="Pg403" id="Pg403" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> existed from the beginning. The Epistle + to the Romans opens with these words:—<span class= + "tei tei-q">“Concerning His Son Jesus Christ ... who was declared to + be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, + <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">by the + resurrection from the dead</span></em>.”</span> It is impossible that + a writer could have made such a reference as this at the opening of + his letter, unless he had been certain that the belief in the + Resurrection had been accepted as a fact by those whom he addressed, + and by the whole Christian community with whom they were + acquainted.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: it is + utterly incredible that if the converts accepted the fact of the + Resurrection of Jesus Christ as the foundation of their Christianity, + they should have contentedly remained ignorant of the facts of His + previous history, at a period when there must have been abundant + means of obtaining an acquaintance with it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fourthly: the + value of these letters as historical documents is greatly increased + by the fact that a strong spirit of party existed in the Churches. + None are more ready to accept the fact that the Church was divided + into a number of parties than the opponents of Christianity. Not only + have they admitted it, but for their own purposes they have greatly + exaggerated it. But it is a weapon which can be used in defence of + Christianity more efficaciously than in opposition to it. It is clear + on the face of these letters not only that the Churches were divided + into parties, but that party-spirit existed in them with considerable + violence. It is needless for the purpose of the present argument to + ascertain the number of the parties into which some of the Churches + were divided; but these letters, confirmed as they are by incidental + references in the Acts of the Apostles, leave no doubt that the + opposition between St. Paul and those who followed his teaching, and + a <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page404">[pg 404]</span><a name= + "Pg404" id="Pg404" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> powerful Judaizing + party in the Church, was of a very decided character; that this party + had a great dislike to the person of the Apostle; and that he himself + denounced them as corrupters of the fundamental principles of the + Gospel. They make it quite clear that even in the Churches of which + he was the founder, the Apostle was far from having it all his own + way. Judaizing teachers had made very considerable progress in + alienating the Galatian Churches from him. His letter to these + Churches discusses the entire question between him and his opponents, + who actually went the length of denying his apostolical authority. In + the Church of Corinth also there was a powerful Judaizing party, who + affirmed that he was no true Apostle. In this Church there were also + other parties who designated themselves by the names of particular + leaders in various degrees of opposition to St. Paul. It is evident + that these parties must have derived their views of Christianity from + a source quite independent of the Apostle. Portions of the first and + not less than half of the second Epistle are occupied by St. Paul in + setting forth his claims in opposition to these leaders. It is + altogether a mistake to suppose that these Churches were disposed to + accept his assertions without question, as equivalent to oracles from + Heaven. On the contrary, Judaizing teachers habitually followed his + steps, and to some extent succeeded in subverting the faith even of + his own converts.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing can more + enhance the value of these letters as historical documents than the + existence of this party-spirit in the Churches to which they were + addressed. If St. Paul had written them to none but devoted admirers, + as is frequently the case with the leaders of religious sects, his + assertions might have been open to grave suspicion. It might have + been urged that such <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page405">[pg + 405]</span><a name="Pg405" id="Pg405" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + persons were ready to accept anything and everything which he + affirmed. But nothing is more keen-eyed than religious party-spirit + in detecting and denouncing the false positions of an opponent, even + when it is sufficiently ready to accept everything which makes in its + own favour. So strong was the opposition to the Apostle, that in two + of these Churches, as we have seen, a powerful party existed who went + the extreme length of denying his right to the apostolic office. Yet + these letters were not only intended to be read to the whole Church, + but portions of them are directly addressed to the opponents in + question. What guarantee of the truthfulness of statements can + compare with this? The Apostle's letters are openly read in the + presence of the opposing party, before the assembled Church, + challenging them to impugn his statements. It will perhaps be + objected that we have no record of the discussion which followed the + reading of his letters, and of the results attending it. The second + Epistle to the Corinthians has preserved some of those results, + though it is plain that an opposing party still continued. This + Epistle is a very strenuous attack on them. The man who had the moral + courage to write such letters as the second to the Corinthians and + that to the Galatians, to be openly read in the presence of his + adversaries, must have been well assured of the goodness of his + cause. Common sense alone would have suggested to him not to make in + them statements which were sure to receive direct and instant + contradiction.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear, + therefore, that certain points on which these letters make very + definite statements must have been held in common by St. Paul and his + opponents. If it had not been so, it is impossible that the letters + could have been written in their present form. The <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page406">[pg 406]</span><a name="Pg406" id="Pg406" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Christianity on which the two parties + agreed beyond all doubt, concentrated itself around the Messianic + character of Jesus. The letters themselves make the points on which + they disagreed sufficiently obvious, centering as they did on the + necessity of observing the rites of the Mosaic law in the Christian + Church. But the Epistles contain a vast number of allusions to other + subjects, not a few of which are of a very incidental character. What + is the only legitimate inference which can be deduced from this + circumstance? Obviously that the Apostle wrote them with the fullest + conviction that his statements on these subjects would be accepted by + his opponents as part of their joint belief; and not only by them, + but by all the members of the Church. It is inconceivable that a man + of the mental calibre of St. Paul should have written letters such as + those to the Corinthians and Galatians, abounding as they do with + references to facts and doctrines, if he had not been fully persuaded + that they constituted the common faith of himself and those to whom + he wrote.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + to over-estimate the historical importance of letters like these, + when in this incidental manner they contain numerous references to + facts and opinions, and to the actual controversies then existing in + the Church. The form in which they are made constitute us almost as + adequate judges of their value as if we were able to interrogate + their author. We have him, in fact, in the witness-box before us, and + can narrowly scrutinize his mental character. They can leave no doubt + on our minds as to whether the allusions were incidental, or made for + a purpose. The value of letters, written by persons who have + impressed on them the image of their own inner life and character, + and referring at the same time to current events and opinions, is now + universally acknowledged as the best means <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page407">[pg 407]</span><a name="Pg407" id="Pg407" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> of correcting the mistakes and + misrepresentations of formal histories. But when we take into + consideration that these letters of St. Paul are outpourings of his + inmost mind, intended not only for admiring friends, but for + scrutinizing opponents, we have before us historical evidence of the + highest order.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fifthly: The + Apostle presents himself to us in these letters in the fullest + outbursts of his heart. We have the whole man before us, + intellectually, morally, and religiously. Probably no eight letters + exist in all literature, from which it is possible to construct in + equal fulness the mental portraiture of the writer. Nowhere can we + find stronger bursts of feeling. He was a man of deep sensibility, + united with the firmest resolve. His sacrifice of self, and complete + freedom from all selfish aims, is exceeded by only one character in + history. Who can read these letters through, and question the + sincerity of the writer? Can any one believe that he was not true to + his convictions, or that he was capable of deliberately stating what + he knew to be false? If the facts were not as he has stated them, the + only possible alternative is that he was the prey of an + hallucination. Yet in every detail of business, and in disposing of + all practical questions, his judgment was of the soundest + character.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There is one + remarkable fact which these letters bring out distinctly, which is + probably true of no other man that ever lived. The Apostle claimed to + decide certain questions authoritatively in virtue of a divine + guidance which he possessed. He gave that decision on two points, + having the closest bearing on the daily life of the Christians of + that day, and which excited deep conscientious scruples. These were: + whether the obligation of observing certain days was binding on the + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page408">[pg 408]</span><a name="Pg408" + id="Pg408" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Christian conscience, and + whether it was unlawful to eat meat which had been offered in + sacrifice to a heathen god. On each of these points he gives his own + apostolical decision; yet in the very act of doing so, he directly + enjoins that the conscientious scruples of those who could not + acquiesce in it should be respected. Can this be said of any other + man who thought that he possessed a supernatural guidance? + Enthusiastic he was; but his was an enthusiasm which did not blind + his judgment. He was a man, too, of a highly delicate mind, yet + capable of using a refined sarcasm in dealing with his opponents. We + have the whole man before us, and his entire character renders him a + witness of the highest order.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As modern + unbelievers refuse to allow us to appeal to the Gospels as historical + documents, it becomes a matter of the highest importance to ascertain + what facts in connection with the origin of Christianity and the + beliefs of the earliest followers of Jesus can be established with + the aid of these letters. Unbelievers cannot dispute that they are + the authentic writings of the most active agent in the propagation of + Christianity, who has contributed more to its permanent establishment + than any other of the disciples of Jesus. This being so, it is + impossible to deny that they are contemporary historical records of + the highest value. Our opponents demand contemporary testimony, and + we present them with the Epistles of St. Paul. In pursuing this + argument, it will be my duty to forget that we Christians consider + that the man who wrote them had a supernatural guidance, and to use + them as I would the letters of Cicero. I will proceed to examine + their testimony.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: It has been + asserted, with a view of weakening <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page409">[pg 409]</span><a name="Pg409" id="Pg409" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> the evidence of the supernatural portions of + the New Testament, that although its writers have reported miracles + as wrought by others, not one of them has affirmed that he himself + ever performed one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply that St. + Paul distinctly affirms that he believed he wrought miracles. + <span class="tei tei-q">“Truly,”</span> says he, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all + patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.”</span> (2 Cor. + xii. 12.) He here affirms that such a power was possessed not only by + himself, but by other Apostles also. The power to perform + <span class="tei tei-q">“signs, wonders, and mighty deeds”</span> was + directly connected with the apostolic office.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again, he says to + the Galatians (iii. 5), <span class="tei tei-q">“He that ministereth + to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you.”</span> In this + reference he evidently means himself, and affirms that he had + performed miracles in Galatia.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In the Epistle to + the Romans he makes the following affirmation: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“For I will not dare to speak of any of those things + which Christ hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, + by word and deed, through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of + the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto + Illyricum, I have fully preached the Gospel of Christ.”</span> (Rom. + xv. 18, 19.) Here then we have St. Paul's direct affirmation that in + his own opinion, throughout the mission in question, he had been in + the habit of performing <span class="tei tei-q">“mighty signs and + wonders.”</span> After these passages it is needless to quote + further. The Apostle deliberately affirms to the Corinthians and + Galatians that he performed miracles, and the whole passage makes it + clear that he supposed they would fully recognize the fact of his + having done so. Of course this affirmation does not prove that they + were real miracles; but it does prove that he <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page410">[pg 410]</span><a name="Pg410" id="Pg410" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and those to whom he wrote thought that + they were so. Not less distinct is his affirmation to the Romans. + These passages further distinctly prove that it was an accepted + belief in the Churches when the Apostle wrote, and even at a much + earlier period, that supernatural manifestations attended the early + preaching of Christianity. It follows therefore that the invention of + miraculous stories was not due to a later mythic and legendary + spirit. This the statement made by the Apostle in his Epistle to the + Romans distinctly proves; for he evidently considered that he had + been in the habit of performing miracles up to the very time when he + wrote the letter, and during the whole course of his preceding + ministry. Also the affirmation that miracles were the signs of an + Apostle, and admitted to be such, is a strong corroboration of the + statement made by the Synoptics that our Lord was supposed to have + conferred such powers on the Apostles; and as it is simply incredible + that any should have believed that He conferred on the Apostles + powers which He did not exercise himself, it carries up the belief of + the Church that Jesus was a professed worker of miracles to the very + first years of Christianity. I am quite aware that these beliefs of + the Church do not prove these miracles to have been real ones. But + they do prove that the belief in their actual performance was + contemporary with the birth of Christianity itself. They therefore + could not have originated, as the opponents of Christianity are never + weary of assuming, in a mythic or legendary spirit; for myths and + legends require a considerable time to grow; and it is impossible + that they can encircle an eminent character with an unreal halo till + after those who witnessed his actions and personally know him are + silent in the grave. But in the case before us we have affirmations + of St. Paul <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page411">[pg + 411]</span><a name="Pg411" id="Pg411" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + respecting himself, which put the whole apparatus of myths and + legends out of the question. If then this belief in the manifestation + of a supernatural power in connection with Christianity dates thus + early, there are only three modes in which it is possible to account + for it, viz. that it was due to deliberate and conscious imposture; + or that Jesus and His immediate followers laboured under a delusion + when they thought that they performed miracles; or that they were + really wrought. As no one now-a-days pretends to maintain the truth + of the first alternative, we may dismiss it from further + consideration.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But it will be + asserted that St. Paul does not mention any specific miracles which + he considered that he had performed, and that his statements are + merely general. I reply that such a mode of statement is precisely + what we should expect to find in a letter of this kind, and is just + the one which would be adopted by a person who was satisfied that + those to whom he was writing were as firmly convinced of the fact as + he was himself.... A formal and distinct description of the miracles + which he had performed would have been quite out of place in a + reference of this kind, and would have implied that doubts respecting + them existed on one side or the other. Besides, the words which he + uses embrace all the different expressions by which the various kinds + and aspects of miracles are designated in the New Testament.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: These + letters also afford unquestionable evidence that at the time when + they were written both the writer and those to whom he addressed + them, were firmly convinced that there was then actively operating in + the Church a number of supernatural manifestations of a very peculiar + character, and widely different from any species of supernatural + belief which has been current <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page412">[pg 412]</span><a name="Pg412" id="Pg412" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> before or since. I allude to the gifts of the + Spirit, to which the Apostle has so frequently alluded in these + Epistles, and of the nature of which he has in those to the + Corinthians given a distinct account, together with definite rules to + regulate their use. The reason why he has given us a far more + definite account of this class of manifestations than of the other is + obvious. In the Church in question they had become the subjects of + ambitious rivalry, and under its influence some of them had been + perverted to pernicious uses. The whole subject is definitely treated + of in the 12th, 13th, and 14th chapters of the first Epistle to the + Corinthians, besides a number of distinct references to it in other + portions of his writings. These assertions on the part of St. Paul + that both he and those to whom he wrote were fully of opinion that + supernatural powers were then manifested in the Church, are so clear + that they require a most careful consideration. The following points + respecting them are proved by this Epistle.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. That St. Paul, + and the various parties in the Corinthian Church, however much they + might disagree on other points, fully believed that these + supernatural powers were <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">then and there</span></em> manifesting + themselves in the Church. This belief might have been a delusion, but + the letter proves beyond doubt that it was entertained by the whole + Church, including all its various parties.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. That these + gifts were earnestly coveted by the various members of this Church; + that many of them made a very ostentatious use of them; and that + stringent rules were required to prevent their use from degenerating + into an abuse.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. Nine of these + supernatural endowments are enumerated by the Apostle. It is not + clear whether the list is intended to be exhaustive. Probably it is + not; <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page413">[pg 413]</span><a name= + "Pg413" id="Pg413" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> but it is evident that + the writer intended to enumerate the chief of them. They are as + follows: the gifts of wisdom, knowledge, faith; gifts of healing + (χαρίσματα ἰαμάτων); working of miracles (ἐνεργήματα δυναμέων); the + gift of prophecy, those of discerning spirits; tongues and + interpretation. This list of gifts in a slightly altered form is + repeated no less than three times in the same chapter. They are + affirmed to be supernatural endowments, qualifying the possessor for + distinct functions in the Church. It is worthy of particular remark, + as showing how free the Apostle was from contemplating the subject + with the eye of a credulous enthusiast, that he distinctly asserts + that they were designed for a definite purpose only, and that when + that was effected they were to cease. A fanatic would certainly have + considered that they were destined to continue for ever. This point + is worthy of our deepest attention.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4. The existence + of a marked distinction between these gifts is definitely affirmed by + the Apostle. They were not confined to a particular order of men, but + were spread over the entire community. They also differed not only in + kind but in degree. Some of them subserved higher, others humbler + purposes. The reason for which they were given was the building up of + the Church into a distinctive community. When that was effected they + were to cease.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">5. The Apostle + also most carefully points out that a distinction of function existed + between these various supernatural endowments. This is a very + important consideration. Whether we view them as realities, or as + delusions, it is plain that this distinction of function must have + pointed to some corresponding facts well known in the Church, at the + time when the Epistles were written. The possession of one of them by + no means implied that of another, although the subject-matter + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page414">[pg 414]</span><a name="Pg414" + id="Pg414" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> upon which they operated was + closely akin. Thus the possession of the gift of tongues (whatever it + may have been), did not imply the possession of the gift of + interpretation. On the contrary, the rules which the Apostle gives + for the regulation of those gifts, as well as his statements + respecting them, prove that they were a set of distinct + manifestations, and were possessed very often by different persons, + and that the presence of the one power by no means implied that of + the other. This must unquestionably point to the existence of a + remarkable phenomenon of some kind. Even if it is supposed that St. + Paul and those to whom he wrote were labouring under a delusion, it + proves that the Apostle possessed a power of discrimination which is + not exhibited by an ordinary enthusiast or fanatic.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A distinction + which St. Paul affirms to have existed between two of these gifts, + viz. between the gifts of healing and of miracles, deserves special + attention. That a real distinction existed between them is affirmed + three times over in the same chapter. Both of these gifts, according + to our present mode of viewing the subject, would be confounded under + the designation of a power of working miracles. But it is clear from + the Apostle's statement, that he, and those to whom he wrote, saw an + appreciable distinction between them. <span class="tei tei-q">“To + another,”</span> says he, <span class="tei tei-q">“are given the + gifts of healing by the same Spirit; to another the working of + miracles.”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“But all these worketh that + one and the self-same Spirit, <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">dividing to every man severally as he + will</span></em>.”</span> (1 Cor. xii. 9-11.) Again, in summing up + their relative importance, he says: <span class="tei tei-q">“thirdly + teachers, after that miracles, <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">then gifts of healing</span></em>,”</span> (ver. + 28); and again, as qualifying individuals for particular offices: + <span class="tei tei-q">“Are all apostles? are all prophets? + <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">are all + workers of miracles? Have all the gifts of + healing?</span></em>”</span> (ver. 29, 30.) Now although <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page415">[pg 415]</span><a name="Pg415" id="Pg415" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> we may deny that these phenomena were + supernatural in their character, it is plain that there must have + been something in existence in this Church corresponding to them, and + of which they were the supposed manifestation. The Apostle and those + to whom be wrote evidently understood one another.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">What this + distinction was it is now impossible accurately to determine. As I + have already observed, it probably had reference to a higher and + lower class of miracles; those which were in the proper sense + evidential; and those which might in various degrees have resembled + the act mentioned by St. James, the anointing a sick man with oil in + the name of the Lord, the offering fervent prayer for his recovery, + and the gradual cure of his complaint. Such would belong to a lower + class of miracles to which I have elsewhere alluded, as rather fitted + to procure a favourable attention to the missionary than for + evidential purposes. Be the distinction what it may, and even + supposing that St. Paul and the Corinthians were under a delusion as + to their supernatural character, it is plain that some real + difference, which was clearly distinguishable, must have existed in + the outward manifestations. This is a fact of very considerable + importance, as it proves that both the Apostle and the Corinthians + were in a state of mind in which they were capable of exercising a + clear discrimination between these gifts, which is the last thing of + which visionary and credulous enthusiasts ever think.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">6. These gifts + were likewise clearly separate in respect to the subject-matter on + which they operated. The Apostle and the Corinthians supposed that + they communicated a supernatural illumination of some kind; but the + illumination conferred by one might leave the possessor completely in + the dark with respect <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page416">[pg + 416]</span><a name="Pg416" id="Pg416" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> to + the special subject-matter of the other. This is definitely affirmed + with respect to the gift of tongues, and interpretation. A person + might possess the former and yet be altogether destitute of the + latter. There can be no doubt that the same analogy ran through them + all. This is affirmed when St. Paul asserts that all these gifts were + the work of one and the same Spirit <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">dividing to every man + severally as he will</span></em> (1 Cor. xii), and is implied by the + comparison which he institutes between them and the members of the + human body and their respective functions. Thus: the power of seeing + furnishes no information in matters of sound; nor the latter on the + perceptions we derive through the sense of smell. Equally functional + were these gifts, each being confined to its own proper + subject-matter. If the idea was that the possessor had an + inspiration, as far as respects the subject-matter of his gift, it + conferred on him no supernatural knowledge on matters outside its + special function. Thus a man who had the gift of tongues might remain + perfectly ignorant of the interpretation of them, if he had not the + latter gift. One who possessed the power of discerning of spirits + might have been destitute of the power of working miracles. One who + had the gift of prophecy might have had no illumination with respect + to that special knowledge which was conferred by the gift of wisdom. + The inspiration which was supposed to be conferred by them, conferred + no general infallibility—it was strictly functional and did not + extend beyond the limits of the gift.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">All these points + are of the highest importance in an historical point of view. Whether + we think that St. Paul and the Corinthians were, or were not, under + delusions about this matter, they clearly prove that there must have + been phenomena of some kind which <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page417">[pg 417]</span><a name="Pg417" id="Pg417" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> were supposed to be the results of the gifts in + question; and that the persons who believed that they possessed them + exercised a discriminating judgment respecting them. It is no less + clear that they did believe that they actually possessed them. Some + of them were of such a nature that it is difficult to comprehend how + the possessor could be under delusion on the subject. Take for + example the power of discerning spirits. Once the possessor had it + not. Afterwards he must have believed that he possessed a + supernatural insight into the character of others. It is difficult to + comprehend how a man's consciousness could be deceived on a point + like this. He must have surely known whether within a definite period + of time he had obtained an insight into character, which he did not + possess before. Everywhere in the account given us of these gifts we + seem to be dealing with facts. The distinctions laid down as existing + between them, and the separateness of their functions are truly + philosophical, supposing the gifts to have been real, and were the + last things which were likely to have occurred to credulous + enthusiasts.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">7. These gifts + admitted of being abused. The possession of them was not sufficient + to confer any infallibility in the use of them. This fact is worthy + of deep attention, not only as pointing to the reality of the + manifestations but to the soundness of the Apostle's judgment. If + these gifts had been mere inventions of a credulous imagination they + would have been represented as guarded from the possibility of abuse + by the supernatural power in which they originated. Even at the + present day it is a very common idea that the gift of inspiration + cannot possibly be a functional one which is limited to a definite + subject-matter, but that it must confer a general infallibility. Very + different were the views of St. Paul and of the Churches <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page418">[pg 418]</span><a name="Pg418" id="Pg418" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> to which he wrote. The Apostle was of + opinion that when they had been once conferred, they were subject to + the control of the will, and capable of a good or bad use in the same + manner as our ordinary faculties. His statement is clear that in this + Church they were used in a manner little conducive to edification. In + order to suppress this abuse he adopted some stringent rules. No + person was to be allowed in the congregation to use the gift of + tongues (a gift which he was so far from underrating that he thanked + God that he possessed it more largely than any other member of the + Church), unless there was some one present who had the gift of + interpretation. The gift of prophecy held the second rank in point of + importance. Yet from the eagerness of its possessors to use it, + confusion arose in the congregation; and the Apostle was compelled to + prescribe rules for limiting its exercise and enforcing order among + the prophets. The more the account is studied the stronger must be + the conviction that it points to actual phenomena, which were + exhibited in the Apostolic Churches; and that St. Paul, in his + description of them, exhibits the strongest indications of a sound + judgment.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such were the + phenomena which the Apostle, and those to whom he wrote, considered + to be supernatural manifestations. I observe respecting them:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: That it is + clear that when St. Paul wrote these Epistles, both he and those whom + he addressed were fully persuaded that certain supernatural + manifestations were then habitually present in the Church. It is + impossible to attribute this belief to the presence of the mythic or + legendary spirit.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: It is + clear from other statements in the Epistles, not only that St. Paul + firmly believed that he himself was endowed with several of these + supernatural <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page419">[pg + 419]</span><a name="Pg419" id="Pg419" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + gifts, but that he had been the means of imparting them to + others.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Thirdly: If we + consider the nature of some of these gifts, it is difficult to + conceive that a man like St. Paul could have been deceived respecting + their reality. Several of them involved accessions of mental power, + as for example the gift of wisdom, knowledge, and discerning of + spirits. He must have known that at one time he had nothing but his + natural endowments. At a later period he must have believed that his + wisdom, knowledge, and power of discerning character was increased. + These must have been definite facts of his mental consciousness. It + is difficult to conceive how delusion was possible, when in his + treatment of the entire subject he displays such clear indications of + sound judgment and common sense.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fourthly: It is + necessary to suppose not only that St. Paul was a prey to delusion on + this subject—if we deny that the gifts were real—but that a similar + delusion was spread over the entire Church. Its individual members + believed that they possessed them, no less than the Apostle. Those + who possessed only the lower gifts were emulously desirous of + possessing the higher ones. They also made an ostentatious use of + them. Such are not the phenomena presented by enthusiasm. Was it + possible that considerable numbers of persons should be deceived in + supposing that they had acquired particular mental endowments of + which they well knew that they had been previously destitute?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Fifthly: While the + phenomena under consideration were unquestionably believed both by + St. Paul and the Corinthian Church to be supernatural manifestations, + yet it is a supernaturalism which differs in its entire aspect and + character from any other which has been believed in by man. We may + wander over the entire <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page420">[pg + 420]</span><a name="Pg420" id="Pg420" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + regions of history and fable, and we shall fail to find any belief in + the supernatural, bearing the smallest resemblance to it. It is most + definitely contrasted with that which has been ascribed to the + contemporaries of our Lord; and which I have considered in the + earlier portions of this work. Whence has come this most striking + contrast? If St. Paul and the members of the Corinthian Church were a + prey to the superstitious beliefs above referred to, how was it + possible for them to have considered themselves to be living in the + midst of an atmosphere which presented so marvellous a contrast. The + gifts, if real, were precisely suited to the wants of the Church, for + building it up into the great institution which it became. It + required accessions to its numbers from the populations in the midst + of which it lived. The two miraculous gifts, even if they were not + evidential, were fitted to draw attention to its claims. Collected as + its members were from Judaism and Heathenism, without sufficient + means for their definite instruction, those who performed this office + were qualified for it by two gifts conferring various degrees of + enlightenment. Then there was the prophet, who as an inspired + preacher expounded and enforced the truths of Christianity. Its + members were ill-qualified for public offices, owing to the low + condition of the society from which they sprang. Here again were two + mental endowments to supply the need, the power of discerning spirits + and the supernatural gift of faith. All these gifts here enumerated, + were the very endowments suited for the building up of a body of + converts taken from such unpromising sources, into the great society + to which it speedily grew. A new society had to be formed of a wholly + different character from any previously existing. It was designed to + leaven by new influences the state of religious, moral, and + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page421">[pg 421]</span><a name="Pg421" + id="Pg421" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> political thought out of which + it originated. The old social organization met it with determined + opposition. The problem was how was it to be erected on such a basis + as would give it permanence? The Church of Jesus Christ was to be a + new moral creation in the midst of effete society. An extensive + communication of endowments, such as are referred to in the Pauline + Epistles, was the very thing which was requisite to accomplish this + purpose. It came into existence; it grew; it struggled; it conquered; + it subverted the old forms of civilization; it created new ones. + These are facts which require to be accounted for. The forces + referred to in these Epistles as in active energy before the eyes of + St. Paul and the members of these Churches, were adequate to have + effected this. Without some such moral creation attending the first + planting of Christianity, the formation of this unique society out of + the various elements of which it was composed, and their welding + together into an organization instinct with life, which has imbued + with its principles all existing institutions, must remain a problem + which baffles all the attempts of philosophy to solve.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Lastly: These + letters prove on the highest historical evidence that a supernatural + power was believed to be manifested in the Church at the date of + their composition, wholly different from any kind of ordinary current + supernatural belief. Through the Acts of the Apostles, its existence + can be traced up to a still earlier period. Two of these gifts, but + two only, involved a power which we should now designate as + essentially miraculous. This being so, the testimony of St. Paul, + involving as it does that of the entire Church, is express as to the + belief of contemporaries that miracles were actually performed. We + can trace this belief up to the first origin of Christianity. If + Jesus was believed to <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page422">[pg + 422]</span><a name="Pg422" id="Pg422" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + have endowed His followers with this power, it is impossible to + believe that He was not supposed to have possessed it himself. These + Epistles therefore are evidence that the earliest followers of Jesus + believed that He was a worker of miracles. So far the proof is + complete that the ascription of miracles to Jesus and His original + followers was not due to the imagination of subsequent + generations.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The careful + perusal of these Epistles can leave only one impression on the mind + of the reader, that he is in the presence of facts of an + unquestionably historical character.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page423">[pg 423]</span><a name= + "Pg423" id="Pg423" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc39" id="toc39"></a> <a name="pdf40" id="pdf40"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XIX. The Evidence Furnished By + The Epistles To The Facts Of Our Lord's Life, And To The Truth Of The + Resurrection.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have proved in + the last chapter that St. Paul and those to whom he wrote his + Epistles firmly believed that a number of supernatural manifestations + were displaying themselves in the Church under their immediate + observation, and that their presence can be traced up to a much + earlier date. I have also shown that St. Paul asserts in the most + positive language that he was persuaded that he wrought miracles + during the whole course of his mission. It is therefore in the + highest degree probable that the servant was convinced that he did by + the divine power of his Master that which he believed that his Master + had accomplished before him; in other words, that he was a worker of + miracles. But as it has been asserted that St. Paul knew only of a + divine, and scarcely anything of a human Jesus, that is to say, that + he was to a great extent ignorant of the events of our Lord's life, I + must inquire what light the Epistles throw on this subject; for if it + can be shown that St. Paul allowed himself to be ignorant of the + human life of Jesus, it lowers the value of his testimony to the fact + of the Resurrection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The ground of this + affirmation is that the direct references to the events of our Lord's + life are few, and that he chiefly dwells on the glorified aspect of + it after His Resurrection. The only passage, as far as I am aware, + which has been adduced as proving this strange position is the + following:—<span class="tei tei-q">“He died for all, that they + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page424">[pg 424]</span><a name="Pg424" + id="Pg424" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> which live should not + henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them and + rose again. Wherefore, henceforth know we no man after the flesh; + yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth + know we him no more. Therefore, if any man be in Christ, he is a new + creature: old things are passed away; behold all things are become + new.”</span> 2 Cor. v. 15-17. The utmost that this passage can be + made to prove is, that the belief in the Resurrection of Christ had + thrown an entirely new aspect over His human life. The persons who + had witnessed it had not seen its true significance. This is what the + Synoptic Gospels plainly affirm to have been the case even with the + Apostles during His public ministry. They had witnessed the events, + but they had failed to penetrate into their inner life. This is what + the Apostle means by <span class="tei tei-q">“knowing Christ after + the flesh,”</span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> according to the uniform + meaning of that expression in the New Testament, the knowing the + events of His life merely externally, as so many bare objective facts + devoid of spiritual significance. This he affirms would be the mode + in which neither he nor the Church would in future contemplate this + subject. The very words which he uses imply that he and others had + had this knowledge of Jesus. But such a knowledge would have been + impossible without an intimate acquaintance with the events of His + human life. What he affirms is, that he will contemplate them in + future in their moral and religions aspect.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The affirmation + that St. Paul was not thoroughly acquainted with the details of our + Lord's ministry, and that after his conversion he was simply absorbed + in the contemplation of a divine Christ is incredible. When we are + asked to accept a startling proposition, it is necessary that it + should not offend against the first <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page425">[pg 425]</span><a name="Pg425" id="Pg425" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> principles of human nature. That a man like St. + Paul did not make accurate inquiries into the facts of his Master's + life is inconceivable. In his eyes His human was the manifestation of + His divine life. Did not the persecutor Saul thoroughly inform + himself respecting the life and actions of Him whose divine mission + he denied, and whom he believed to be an impostor? Was not this the + obvious course to take, in order to enable him to expose imposition, + and to destroy the Church? On the other hand, the converted Paul was + animated by a more intense love for Jesus than one man ever felt for + another. Is it conceivable that such love did not impel him to + treasure up in his bosom every reminiscence which fell within his + reach, and to inquire with the most profound interest into the life + and actions of him who was become the object of his adoration? Is it + conceivable that the man who was incessantly inquiring into the + condition of his converts, made no inquiry about the life and actions + of his Master?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The position of + St. Paul, the ardour of his temperament, the fierceness of his + opposition, and the intense self-sacrifice with which he afterwards + consecrated himself to Jesus Christ, falling into communication as he + must with persons who had witnessed His earthly ministry, are + sufficient proof that the Apostle had used every available means of + becoming acquainted with the facts of His life. But in the Epistles + themselves, although owing to the circumstances which called them + forth, they contain few direct references to it, the indirect + allusions are quite sufficient to prove that St. Paul and those whom + he addressed, were in possession of a number of facts respecting + their Master's life which formed the subject of a common Christology. + I am quite ready to admit that when the Apostle wrote, none of our + present Gospels were in <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page426">[pg + 426]</span><a name="Pg426" id="Pg426" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + existence. The converts had to receive their instruction orally, or + from short written memoranda. But instruction of some kind they must + have had. Without it, converts from Paganism could have known nothing + about Him to whom in the act of joining the Church they professed + allegiance; Jewish converts living in Gentile cities, but little. As + Christianity was not a mere body of dogmas, like a philosophy, but + consisted in direct adhesion to a person, it is clear that it could + not be propagated at all without at the same time communicating + information respecting His history. The early missionaries announced + that Jesus was the Christ. Such an announcement would have been + meaningless unless they had given an account of who Jesus was, what + He had done to claim the homage of those addressed, and what was the + nature of His office. These considerations establish the fact that an + oral account of His life must have been handed down in the Church + prior to the publication of written Gospels, sufficiently definite to + constitute the Christianity of the converts. The intimations + contained in the Epistles prove that such was the fact.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First let us + consider St. Paul's own positive assertions. The most important is in + 1 Cor. xv. <span class="tei tei-q">“Moreover, brethren, I declare + unto you (γνωρίζω, I remind you of, or refresh your memories + respecting) the Gospel (τὸ εὐαγγέλιον) which I preached unto you, + which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye + are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye + have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all (ἐν + πρώτοις, as matter of prime importance) that which I also received, + how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and + that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to + the Scriptures.”</span></p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page427">[pg + 427]</span><a name="Pg427" id="Pg427" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let it be observed + that the subject which the Apostle was here discussing with certain + members of this Church—the possibility of a resurrection of the + dead—led him to refer to the first principles of Christianity as he + had taught them. They denied the truth of a material resurrection. + St. Paul draws their attention to the fact that Christianity as + taught by him consisted of a body of facts. The following points are + clearly deducible from the passage before us.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. The + εὐαγγέλλιον, or message of good news, which the Apostle had announced + at his first preaching at Corinth, consisted of a body of facts as + distinct from mere doctrinal teachings; and that whatever doctrines + he taught were built on them as a foundation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. Among the facts + of prime importance which he announced, was the death, burial, and + resurrection of Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. He states that + in his preaching there were matters of prime importance, of which + Christ's death and resurrection was one. It follows therefore that + there were other matters of prime importance, which his present + argument did not require him to notice. This is obvious from the + nature of the case: the announcement of Christ's death and + resurrection would have been scarcely intelligible without the + addition of a great many other facts to give it meaning. But further, + the assertion that there were facts of prime importance, implies that + there were also points of secondary importance, which he must have + announced likewise, or in other words, that the Gospel which he + proclaimed must have consisted of an account, more or less full, of + the human life of Jesus.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4. This account + the Apostle says that he delivered to the Corinthian Church. The + words imply that he committed it in a formal manner to their keeping, + as <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page428">[pg 428]</span><a name= + "Pg428" id="Pg428" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the ground of their + Christian instruction. This he likewise affirms that he had no less + formally received.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">5. As his + statement respecting the Resurrection is somewhat minute, the + inference is, that the other facts of prime importance were + communicated with equal detail. It is also fairly presumable that in + his oral communications the Apostle did not give a bare list of the + appearances of Jesus after his Resurrection, but a detailed account + of them; and so with respect to his other facts. This his converts + would naturally have required him to do, if we suppose that they were + only animated by common curiosity. The less important facts would be + necessary to connect together those of primary importance. In short, + the Apostle's narrative must have been what we may call a brief + Gospel.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">6. As St. Paul + states that one of the facts which he committed to the Church was + that Christ died for our sins, it follows that he must have given an + account of his death more or less resembling those in our present + Gospels.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">7. One of the + great facts which he delivered to the Church, was that of the + Resurrection of Christ. This is the great miracle of Christianity; + the one to which it is expressly affirmed that the Church owes its + being. The Apostle's Gospel therefore contained a detailed account of + one great miracle. It is also fairly presumable that among his other + facts of primary or secondary importance were accounts of + supernatural occurrences in the life of Jesus.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">8. The Apostle + does not leave us without the means of judging respecting the amount + of matter in these narratives of events in the life of Christ which + he committed to the Church. He has given us (in 1 Cor. xi. 23-25) a + formal account of the institution of our Lord's Supper, quite as full + as that contained in either <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page429">[pg + 429]</span><a name="Pg429" id="Pg429" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + our Gospels. This account he prefaces by the same words which we have + already considered, as denoting the form or mode in which he received + it, and delivered it to the Church: <span class="tei tei-q">“For I + have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that + the Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; + and when He had given thanks He brake it, and said, Take, eat; this + is My body which is broken for you. This do in remembrance of Me. + After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, + saying, This cup is the New Testament in My blood: this do ye as oft + as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.”</span> This account varies in + words, but it is equal in minuteness, and substantially agrees with + those in our present Gospels; although it more nearly approaches, + while it is not precisely identical with that of Luke, who is + asserted in the Acts to have been the companion of the Apostle. + Judging therefore by this example, the historical details which St. + Paul committed to the Church respecting the life of Jesus must have + been of considerable minuteness.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">8. Another fact in + the life of our Lord is directly referred to in these letters, His + descent from the family of David. <span class="tei tei-q">“Who was + made,”</span> says the Apostle, <span class="tei tei-q">“of the seed + of David, according to the flesh, and declared to be the Son of God + with power according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection + from the dead.”</span> These words prove that St. Paul was in + possession of an account of the birth of Jesus, which in this + particular point was in agreement with that in St. Matthew's and St. + Luke's Gospels, and that it was known to the members of the Church at + Rome, and received by them as true. He does not positively affirm + that the birth was supernatural; but his language clearly implies it. + It would be absurd in speaking of an ordinary <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page430">[pg 430]</span><a name="Pg430" id="Pg430" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> human birth to say that the person born + was descended from his ancestors, <span class="tei tei-q">“according + to the flesh.”</span> The natural meaning of such an expression is + that both the writer and those whom he was addressing were well + acquainted with an account of the supernatural birth of Jesus, and + accepted it as true. So far their accounts and that in the Gospels + agreed in the main issue.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">9. One more + reference must be added: <span class="tei tei-q">“Jesus + Christ,”</span> says the Apostle, <span class="tei tei-q">“was made a + minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the + promises made unto the fathers; and that the Gentiles might glorify + God for His mercy.”</span> This passage not only proves that the + Apostle and those to whom he wrote were in possession of an account + of the circumcision of Christ, but also that they well knew that His + ministry had been confined to the Jewish people, but with the + ultimate purpose of His being manifested to the Gentiles. In these + particulars it exactly corresponded with the account given in our + Gospels.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">10. There are also + several passages in which the Apostle directly refers to our Lord's + teaching, and clearly distinguishes it from his own. These references + uniformly agree with that which is attributed to Jesus in the + Synoptic Gospels, and prove that the Apostle and the Church were in + possession of details of it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are the + direct references to the life of Jesus in these Epistles. But there + are numerous indirect references which prove that the Apostle and + those to whom he wrote must have been acquainted with accounts of the + life of its Founder, which went into a considerable degree of detail. + I shall give a few instances:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. His preaching + of the Gospel to the Thessalonians is described as a proclamation + that Jesus was the Christ or Messiah. In one of the Epistles to this + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page431">[pg 431]</span><a name="Pg431" + id="Pg431" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> Church he speaks of them as + having been so powerfully influenced that in consequence of it + <span class="tei tei-q">“they had turned to God <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">from + idols</span></em> to serve the living and true God,”</span> and + <span class="tei tei-q">“as having become <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">followers of him and + of the Lord</span></em>.”</span> Among persons thus utterly ignorant + of Christianity, as they were when he first preached to them, it + would have been impossible to make an announcement of this kind, or + to set forth the Messianic claims of Jesus, without laying before + them a great many of the details of His human life. The expression + above quoted, implies clearly that he had put his converts in + possession of such an account of the life of Christ as to enable them + to become <span class="tei tei-q">“followers of the Lord.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. These Epistles + contain many definite assertions as to the duty of imitating Christ. + <span class="tei tei-q">“Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ;”</span> + <span class="tei tei-q">“As many as have been baptized into Christ + have put on Christ;”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“Let every one of + us please his brother for his good unto edification, for even so + Christ pleased not himself;”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“The God + of patience and consolation grant you to be like minded one toward + another, according to Christ Jesus;”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“I beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of + Christ;”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“Ye have not so learned + Christ;”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“Be ye followers of me, as I + am of Christ.”</span> Many other similar expressions might be cited, + but these are sufficient.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: I observe + that the exhortation to put on the character of another is + meaningless, unless the persons so exhorted were known to have been + thoroughly acquainted with the life and actions of him whom they are + urged to imitate. The same observation is true when we are + deliberately recommended to make another person our example. Again, + the exhortation to lay ourselves out in efforts to please others for + their good to edification, on the ground that Christ pleased not + himself, would be without meaning, unless the writer <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page432">[pg 432]</span><a name="Pg432" id="Pg432" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> felt assured that those whom he addressed + were in possession of facts in the life of Christ, which exhibited + Him in the character of a sacrificer of self. So again, the + exhortation to patience, after the example of Christ, is founded on + the assumption that those whom the Apostle was addressing were + acquainted with details which exhibited him as a model of patience. + The same remark is true with respect to the entreaty addressed to the + Corinthians by the meekness and gentleness of Christ. They must have + been acquainted with actions of His which exhibited Him as supremely + meek and gentle. These and other indirect references form an + indisputable proof that the churches to whom St. Paul wrote must have + been in possession of a very considerable number of details of the + human life of Jesus, in which a large portion of the instruction + given to those Churches consisted. This imparts to them a far higher + value than if they had been direct. It is the mode universally + adopted in genuine letters, where the writer, and those to whom he + writes, are freely communicating to each other their inmost thoughts. + When one party is firmly persuaded that the other is well acquainted + with a certain set of events, they never detail them formally, but + simply refer to them in passing allusions. Such allusions are the + strongest possible evidence that the events in question are the + common property of the writer and of those whom he is addressing.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The whole of these + Epistles contain a continuous body of references to the various + aspects of our Lord's divine and human character as it is depicted in + the four Gospels. The references to the former are very numerous. + They contain a Christianity of so advanced a character as to resemble + in all its great features that which we read of in St. John's Gospel, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page433">[pg 433]</span><a name="Pg433" + id="Pg433" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and which are only + distinguishable from it, if distinguishable at all, by the aid of + minute criticism. I have treated this subject at length in another + work in reference to its evidential value, and therefore need not + discuss it here. I shall only observe that the incidental references + in these Epistles to these subjects form the strongest historical + proofs that St. Paul and those to whom he wrote were in possession of + a sufficient number of facts respecting the life of Jesus to enable + them to found on them a definite Christology; and that there must + have been well known in the Churches a general outline of His human + life, which must have been to their members as recent converts a + subject of the profoundest interest. I fully admit that if Paul and + the early Christians, while centering their highest affections on the + glorified Christ, had been contented to remain in ignorance of the + facts of His human life, the value of their testimony to the truth of + the Resurrection would have been greatly weakened. But the + supposition is not only untrue to human nature, but is contradicted + by the facts of the Epistles, which it is impossible not to admit as + documents of the highest historical value.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will now proceed + to examine the evidence which these Epistles afford to the truth of + the Resurrection. The references which they contain to this great + miracle of Christianity are extremely numerous, occurring in some + form or other in almost every page. Shall I not say that their entire + contents are written on the supposition of its reality? They are of + the most direct as well as of the most incidental character. They + make it clear that the belief in it lay at the foundation of the + existence of the Church; that it was that which was supposed to + communicate its moral power to Christianity, and that it was the + source of the new spiritual life of every individual believer. In the + following passage <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page434">[pg + 434]</span><a name="Pg434" id="Pg434" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> St. + Paul distinctly pledges the truth of Christianity on the reality of + the fact: <span class="tei tei-q">“And if Christ be not risen, then + is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain; yea, and we are + found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that + he raised up Christ, whom he raised not up, if so be that the dead + rise not, ... and if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are + yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ + are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of + all men most miserable.”</span> (1 Cor. xv. 14, etc.) Whatever + opinion may be formed as to the genuineness of the other writings of + the New Testament, they give one consistent testimony that the belief + in the Resurrection was co-extensive with the Church, and constituted + the only ground of its existence. How could it be otherwise? The + Church, as a community, was founded on the belief of the personal + Messiahship of Christ; a dead Messiah would have been utterly + worthless to it. Without a living Messiah to form its centre the + whole superstructure must collapse.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following are + some of the most important points which these letters prove as + matters of fact respecting the Resurrection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: That the + belief in it was co-extensive with the entire Church. It was not the + belief of any single party in it, but of the whole community.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This they + establish on the most indisputable evidence. The existence of various + parties in the Church in direct opposition to St. Paul proves beyond + the possibility of contradiction that it was the one belief + respecting which there was not the smallest diversity of opinion. If + these parties had not existed, it might have been urged with some + degree of plausibility that the testimony of these letters was + inconclusive, because all the members of the Churches received + servilely whatever St. Paul chose <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page435">[pg 435]</span><a name="Pg435" id="Pg435" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> to dictate. But as we have already seen, a + powerful party existed in both the Corinthian and Galatian Churches, + who summarily rejected his claim to apostolic authority, maintaining + that the twelve were the only genuine Apostles. Nevertheless, the + Epistles make it clear that they must have believed in the + Resurrection quite as strongly as St. Paul did himself.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us suppose for + a moment that they doubted it. How is it conceivable that St. Paul + should have addressed to them such letters as those to the + Corinthians, abounding everywhere with both direct and incidental + allusions to it as an acknowledged truth and as the foundation of his + reasonings? Would anyone in his senses have thus exposed himself to + instant denunciation if he had supposed that there was the smallest + doubt respecting its reality in the minds of his opponents? Would + they not at once, if they had entertained it, have made short work + with the Apostle and his reasonings? But the point is almost too + clear to need any argument.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In one of the + passages where he is discussing with them the reality of his + apostleship he urges as the foundation of his claim to this office: + <span class="tei tei-q">“Have not I seen Jesus Christ our + Lord?”</span> This reasoning is evidently founded on the supposition + that all the other Apostles professed to have seen Him; and that none + could have a valid claim to the office who had not seen Him. But Paul + could only have seen Christ after the Resurrection; and it was in + virtue of an appointment from the risen Jesus that he claimed to hold + the office. If there had been the smallest doubt in the minds of his + opponents as to the reality of the Resurrection, or if they had not + been persuaded that the Apostles, whose claims they set up against + those of St. Paul, affirmed that they had seen Him also, this would + at once have settled the controversy <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page436">[pg 436]</span><a name="Pg436" id="Pg436" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> and covered the Apostle with confusion before + the assembled Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But if this + reasoning requires any additional confirmation, it is afforded by the + Epistle to the Galatians. The opposition leaders in this Church were + yet more hostile to St. Paul than those at Corinth. His denunciation + of them is very severe. They are described as <span class= + "tei tei-q">“false apostles, deceitful workers,”</span> and + subverters of the Gospel. Yet in the very opening words of his + address to this Church in which he thus sharply denounces his + opponents, the Apostle writes: <span class="tei tei-q">“Paul, an + Apostle, not of man nor by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the + Father <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">who + raised him from the dead</span></em>.”</span> Is it conceivable, I + ask, that St. Paul should have used such language, under such + circumstances, in addressing this Church, unless he was absolutely + certain that his opponents accepted the Resurrection of Christ as a + fact? We shall see hereafter that these assertions and allusions of + the Apostle not only prove that the Resurrection was believed in by + every section of the Christian community at the time when he wrote + these letters, but that they enable us to carry up the date of this + belief to the very commencement of Christianity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: The + Epistle to the Romans sets before us the state of this belief in a + Church which St. Paul had not visited. Of the exact date of the + foundation of this Church we have no record; but the entire contents + of the Epistle prove that it had been in existence for many years + before the Apostle addressed to them this letter. The general + impression produced by it is that this was one of the most important + Christian communities then in existence. We learn from it that among + its members were persons attached to the household of Nero. As the + intercourse between Rome and Judæa was very considerable, there can + be <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page437">[pg 437]</span><a name= + "Pg437" id="Pg437" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> no doubt that the + Church originated at an early period, either by Christian Jews + visiting the imperial city, or by Roman Jews visiting Judæa and + having thus become converted. At any rate its Christianity must have + been derived from a source entirely independent of St. Paul. The + evidence afforded by this Epistle as to the importance and universal + prevalence of the belief in the Resurrection, and to its early origin + is conclusive. The allusions to it are more numerous than in any + other of St. Paul's Epistles. Most of them are of an entirely + incidental character, and their general nature proves beyond the + possibility of question that both the writer and those to whom he + wrote must have viewed the fact as the fundamental groundwork of + Christianity. The reference to a few passages will render this point + indubitable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">An allusion of a + most incidental character as forming the ground of the writer's + apostleship occurs in the very opening words of the Epistle: + <span class="tei tei-q">“And declared to be the Son of God with + power, according to the Spirit of holiness, <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">by the resurrection + from the dead</span></em>; by whom we have <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">received grace and + apostleship</span></em> for obedience to the faith among all nations + for his name.”</span> It is inconceivable that St. Paul should have + thus addressed a body of strangers, at the very commencement of his + letter, unless he had been certain that they accepted this belief as + an unquestionable fact.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Besides several + references in the intermediate chapters, there are three allusions to + it in the sixth chapter of the most incidental character, in which + the belief in the Resurrection is directly connected with baptism, + and affirmed to lie at the very foundation of Christianity, and to be + the divine power exhibited in the renewed Christian life. + <span class="tei tei-q">“Know ye not that as many of us as were + baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page438">[pg 438]</span><a name="Pg438" id="Pg438" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> his death? Therefore we are buried with + him by baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised up from the + dead by the glory of the Father, even we also should walk in newness + of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his + death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: knowing + this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin + might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. For he + that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we + believe we shall also live with him: knowing that Christ being raised + from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. + For in that He died, He died unto sin once; but in that He liveth, He + liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed + unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our + Lord.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + to read this passage without feeling that it is conclusive of the + question before us: the whole community to whom it was addressed must + have accepted the Resurrection as a fact, and that acceptance must + have been contemporary with the very commencement of their + Christianity. A portion of the baptismal rite to which they had all + submitted was viewed by them as symbolical of their Master's death: + the other portion, of His Resurrection. His death and resurrection + were considered by them as setting forth their cessation from their + old habits, principles and character, in which they had lived as Jews + or Pagans; and their entrance into that new moral life into which + they were brought by Christianity. The Apostle directly appeals to + the recollection of those whom he is addressing, to say whether it + was not a certain fact that their entire Christianity, including all + its moral influence, centered in this truth. His words <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page439">[pg 439]</span><a name="Pg439" id="Pg439" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> therefore carry this belief up to the + first origin of this Church. They go, moreover, a step further, and + involve the belief and testimony of those by whom its first members + had been converted.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: the + Apostle, throughout this chapter, speaks of the Resurrection of + Christ as being the great moral and spiritual power of Christianity. + The members of the Church had entered on a new moral and religious + life. They had died to their former sinful habits and practices. They + were living to God, and were reaping the fruits of holiness instead + of receiving the wages of sin. That these facts were true, the + Apostle appeals to their consciousness to witness. Was this a fact or + was it not? It would have been impossible for St. Paul to write in + this manner unless he had been assured that those to whom he wrote + thought so. This power had for its centre the belief in the + Resurrection of Christ. It was caused by their connection with Him as + a living person to whom all their regards were due.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + to have stronger historical evidence that this belief was esteemed by + the Church to be fundamental to Christianity when this letter was + written. I shall therefore only quote two more passages as showing + the purely incidental character of the allusions:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It + is God that justifieth; who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that + died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand + of God, who also maketh intercession for us. Who shall separate us + from the love of Christ?”</span> (Rom. viii. 38, &c.) Again: + <span class="tei tei-q">“He that regardeth the day regardeth it unto + the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not + regard it. He that eateth, eateth to <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page440">[pg 440]</span><a name="Pg440" id="Pg440" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that + eateth not, to the Lord he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. For + none of us liveth to himself, and no man dieth to himself. For + whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die + unto the Lord.... For to this end Christ both died and rose, and + revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living.”</span> + It is impossible that any words could make it clearer than these do + that the belief in the Resurrection formed the centre of the daily + life of Christians at the time when the Apostle was writing. The + Christian was a man who was consecrated to the service of Christ as + to a living person, who had a right to his supreme regard.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is therefore + established beyond the possibility of a doubt that the belief in the + Resurrection of Christ was universal in the Church when St. Paul + wrote these letters, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> within less than thirty years + after the event. At this period of time the traditional recollection + of it, according to the principles laid down by Sir G. C. Lewis, + would have formed the best material for history. All the other + writings of the New Testament, whatever be their supposed date, give + a uniform testimony in complete agreement with this. One of them + demands a special notice—the book of Revelation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Unbelievers do not + dispute that this is a contemporaneous document, the work of the + Apostle John, and freely use it to support their own theories as to + the intensity of the opposition between the Jewish Apostles and St. + Paul. I am quite sensible that a book which is professedly an + apocalypse must be used with caution as an historical document, or we + may fall into numerous errors in drawing inferences from obscure + allusions contained in visions. But if there is one point more than + another which this book makes clear, it is the <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page441">[pg 441]</span><a name="Pg441" id="Pg441" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> strength of the author's belief in the + Resurrection of Jesus. The frequent allusions to it, and to Jesus as + being the Christ, put this beyond all dispute. We have here the + testimony of a book which unbelievers concur in considering to have + been composed not later than a year after the death of Nero, and + allow it to be the one solitary writing in the New Testament composed + by one of the twelve Apostles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">According to the + opinions of the opponents of the historical character of the Gospels, + St. John was the most Judaizing of the original apostles of Christ. + Of this they think that they discern very distinct traces in the book + of Revelation. His opposition to St. Paul was in their opinion + extreme; and they think that he is actually referred to in the second + and third chapters as teaching the Jewish Christians to apostatize. + To discuss the truth or falsehood of these opinions can form no + portion of the present work; but it is plain that in either case we + cannot have a more unexceptionable witness. If these views are + correct, the Apostle may be considered as the spokesman of the Jewish + Christians. At any rate he was one of the original followers of + Jesus. Now there is no book in the New Testament which testifies more + strongly to the completeness of the belief in the Resurrection of + Christ, and of His continued Messianic life in the heavenly world. + The writer had conversed with Him before His crucifixion. The vision + is to a considerable extent a description of His resurrection + life.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This testimony + alone carries with it the belief of the primitive Church at + Jerusalem, and proves that on this point at least they and St. Paul + were at one. This his Epistles place beyond the possibility of + question. The parties in opposition were beyond all doubt Judaizing + Christians. According to those <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page442">[pg 442]</span><a name="Pg442" id="Pg442" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> against whom I am reasoning, they represented + the opinions and claimed to act under the authority of St. James and + the Church at Jerusalem. But as these Judaizing teachers were at one + with Paul about the fact of the Resurrection, it follows that the + leaders of that Church concurred with him in opinion also. If their + opposition was as strenuous as has been attested, if there had been + any difference between St. Paul and the twelve on so fundamental a + point, it is impossible that they could have avoided adducing it to + the Apostle's prejudice.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The strength of + St. Paul's assurance, that there was no diversity of opinion in the + Church respecting this fact is remarkably illustrated by a passage in + 1 Cor. xv. Had it not been so, his reasoning would have been simply + absurd. There were persons in that Church who denied the fact of a + future Resurrection. Yet they must have admitted the truth of the + Resurrection of Christ. This is clear from the following + words:—<span class="tei tei-q">“If there be no resurrection of the + dead, then is Christ not risen.”</span> The reply to this argument is + so obvious that it could not have escaped the dullest apprehension; + if those who denied the reality of a future resurrection of the dead + had entertained the smallest doubt as to the Resurrection of Christ, + they would have had nothing to do but to affirm that the fact was + doubtful, and the whole argument would fall to pieces. On the + contrary, however, St. Paul thought that they were so fully persuaded + of the truth of Christ's Resurrection, that he could safely use the + fact to prove the possibility of that future resurrection which they + denied. It is clear, that unless the belief was of the firmest + character, no logical position could be more dangerous than this line + of argument.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Epistle to the + Romans establishes the same <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page443">[pg + 443]</span><a name="Pg443" id="Pg443" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + conclusion. The belief of this Church in the Resurrection as the + fundamental fact of Christianity can be traced up, as I have already + observed, not only to the commencement of their own Christianity, + which was palpably of many years' standing, but even to the birth of + Christianity itself. Of this, one brief incidental allusion offers + decisive proof: <span class="tei tei-q">“Salute,”</span> says St. + Paul, <span class="tei tei-q">“Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and + my fellow-prisoners, who were of note among the Apostles, who were + also in Christ before me.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This passage makes + the following points clear. Andronicus and Junia were converted to + Christianity before St. Paul, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> within less than ten years + from the date of the Crucifixion. They must therefore have been + members of the Jerusalem Church. They were of note among the + Apostles. This expression cannot mean less than that they were highly + esteemed by the original twelve, and by the leaders of the Church at + Jerusalem. Yet the Apostle wrote this Epistle in the fullest + confidence that they would accept his Christology, including his + account of the Resurrection. This proves that both they and the + Church at Jerusalem, including all its chief leaders, accepted the + Resurrection as a fact within a very short interval after its + supposed date. But it does more: it proves that its importance as + vital to Christianity was fully recognized; or, in other words, it + proves that the belief must have been contemporaneous with the origin + of the Church.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Equally decisive + is the proof afforded by the Epistle to the Galatians. It mentions + two visits which the writer made to Jerusalem. One in which he paid + Peter a visit of fifteen days, during which time he communicated with + James. On the second occasion he went up to Jerusalem as a member of + an embassy <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page444">[pg + 444]</span><a name="Pg444" id="Pg444" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + from the Church at Antioch, for the purpose of settling points under + dispute between the Jewish and Gentile converts. On this occasion he + tells us that he had a formal interview with the leaders of the + Jewish Church, of which Peter, James, and John were esteemed the + pillars. He expressly informs us that he communicated to them the + leading points of the Gospel which he preached among the Gentiles; + and that he received from them the right hand of fellowship, which + can only mean that they sanctioned his views and fundamental + principles. It is true that the Resurrection is not expressly + mentioned as one of these; but it is impossible that the statement + that he communicated his Gospel to them can be true, if this was not + one of the facts which he imparted to them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is a very + important fact, and worthy of special notice, that in the account + given in the Epistle to the Corinthians of the appearances of Jesus + after His Resurrection, St. Paul expressly affirms that the risen + Jesus was seen by Peter and by James; the latter appearance being + mentioned nowhere else: and the former only referred to in the + exclamation which greeted Cleopas and his companion on their return + from Emmaus. It seems, therefore, morally certain that St. Paul had + heard an account of these two appearances from the Apostles in + question. If so, it brings us directly into contact with two of the + most important of the apostolic body, who must have believed that + they had actually seen him. Respecting the belief of St. John, the + third pillar of the Church at Jerusalem, the testimony of the book of + Revelation leaves no room for doubt. These writings enable us to + affirm that three of the original Apostles believed that they had + seen Jesus, risen from the dead. It is evident, therefore, that this + brings us into the presence of historical <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page445">[pg 445]</span><a name="Pg445" id="Pg445" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> evidence of the first order, quite + independently of the affirmations of the Gospels.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If the first + Epistle of St. Peter is genuine (and there is nothing but surmises + and <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang= + "la"><span style="font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> + assumptions about the opposition of his views to those of St. Paul on + which the doubts respecting its genuineness are based) then we have + the affirmation of the fulness of his belief in the Resurrection + under his own hand. Besides the strong external testimony that it was + written by St. Peter, there is one proof of its genuineness which is + almost conclusive, and to which sufficient weight has not been + attached by either the defenders or the opponents of Christianity. It + is hardly possible to read this Epistle carefully without feeling + that the writer of it is the same man as the Peter of the Gospels; + the one being separated from the other by a considerable interval of + time; the Peter of the Epistle being in fact a mellowed form of the + Peter of the Gospels. But this has not only a direct bearing on the + evidence of the Resurrection, but also a most important one, which I + shall notice hereafter, on the historical character of the Gospels + themselves.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One more writing + of the New Testament must be alluded to, because whoever was its + author it belongs to a school of thought distinct from the other + writings of the New Testament. I need hardly say that I allude to the + Epistle to the Hebrews. The testimony of this writing to the fact + that the belief in the Resurrection of Jesus was fundamental to + Christianity is no less decisive; it not only proves what were the + individual opinions of the writer, but of the school of Christian + thought for whom it was intended. It affords abundant proof that the + writer knew that their opinions on the subject were entirely in + accordance with his own.</p><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page446">[pg + 446]</span><a name="Pg446" id="Pg446" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have now shown + on the strongest historical evidence that it is impossible that the + belief in the Resurrection can have grown up slowly and only + succeeded in gradually establishing itself. On the contrary, I have + proved that it was coeval with the birth of the Church, and that it + formed the one sole ground of its existence. I have also proved that + the belief in it was universal, and that it was accepted by the + entire Christian community without distinction of party; and that + their belief can be traced up as the sole cause of the renewed life + of the Church after the crucifixion. I shall consider in the + following chapter the bearing of these facts on the truth of the + Resurrection, and show that the facts before us are inconsistent with + any other supposition but that of its objective occurrence, and that + it is impossible to account for it by any theory which endeavours to + explain it on the supposition that the belief originated in the + credulity and enthusiasm of the followers of Jesus.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page447">[pg 447]</span><a name= + "Pg447" id="Pg447" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc41" id="toc41"></a> <a name="pdf42" id="pdf42"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XX. The Resurrection Of Jesus + Christ An Historical Fact.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have proved in + the preceding chapter, on the testimony of the highest order of + historical evidence:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">1. That the belief + in the Resurrection of Jesus was universal in the Church when St. + Paul wrote these Epistles.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">2. That this + belief was held by every section in the Church, by the strongest + opponents no less than by the admiring friends of St. Paul.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">3. That the + Churches holding this belief were separated from each other by a wide + geographical area, and consisted of a great diversity of character, + thereby affording the greatest obstacle to the spreading of an absurd + story.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">4. That these + Churches did not merely accept the Resurrection as a bare fact, but + that they considered that their existence as communities was based on + its truth.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">5. That they + viewed the fact of the Resurrection not only as the great bond of + union, but as the source of the moral power of the Christianity which + they professed, and fully believed that their acceptance of it had + exercised a mighty influence in turning them from the low and + debasing pursuits of their previous life.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">6. That their + belief in the Resurrection was closely bound up with all the pursuits + of their daily life.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">7. That these + Epistles not only afford indisputable <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page448">[pg 448]</span><a name="Pg448" id="Pg448" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> proof that this state of things existed in the + Churches within less than twenty-eight years after the crucifixion, + but they no less clearly show that the earliest Christian + communities, such as the Churches of Antioch and Jerusalem, + entertained similar beliefs.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">8. That it is an + unquestionable historical fact that the belief in the Resurrection + was co-eval with the restored life of the Church which had been + extinguished by the crucifixion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">9. That the three + pillar Apostles of the Church of Jerusalem believed that they had + seen Jesus after His Resurrection, and that the entire body + entertained a similar opinion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">10. That as late + as <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 57 or 58 more than 250 + persons were still living who believed that they had seen Jesus after + His Resurrection; and that originally more than five hundred persons + entertained a similar persuasion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are plain + facts of history. The question now before us is, how are they to be + accounted for? Only three possible alternatives present themselves. + Either:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Some of the + followers of Jesus must have fancied that they saw Him risen from the + dead, and have communicated this delusion to the rest. Or:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">That He did not + actually die, when He was supposed to have done so; and that His + subsequent appearance, when partially recovered, was mistaken for a + resurrection. Or:</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">That He rose from + the dead in veritable reality, and was seen by His followers, and + conversed with them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I omit another + possible supposition, that the belief in the Resurrection was due to + a deliberate fraud, because no one capable of appreciating moral or + historical evidence ventures to affirm it. The idea that the greatest + and purest of human institutions can owe <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page449">[pg 449]</span><a name="Pg449" id="Pg449" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> its origin to a deliberate imposture is a libel + on human nature.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Around one or + other of these alternatives the contest lies. It is useless to + attempt to becloud the question with a number of barren and + indefinite generalities, such as myths and legends, vague charges of + enthusiasm, fanaticism, and credulity, or general assertions of + developments brought about by a succession of compromises between + hostile parties. We are here in the presence of stern historical + facts, which require a clear and definite solution. The Christian + Church exists as a fact. We can trace it up to its first origin. It + asserts that its existence is due to the Resurrection of Jesus + Christ, and to nothing else. If unbelievers affirm that the fact is + false, they are bound to offer some theory which is true to human + nature, and lies within the possibilities of things, to show us how + this belief originated, and how it was able to consolidate the life + of this new community.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The idea that the + greatest moral power which has ever appeared among mankind has had no + other origin than a baseless delusion is supremely melancholy. That + Christianity has been such a moral power will be disputed by few; and + a large number of unbelievers will allow that notwithstanding the + faults which they attribute to it, nothing has equally contributed to + the civilization and elevation of the race. Yet if it be a delusion, + it must be recognised as such, and we must submit to our hard fate. + Still it is a terrible proposition to realize, that the noblest of + human institutions has originated in a lie, even if it be one which + was not deliberately intended as such.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is evident that + however great may be the general credulity of mankind, it is a very + difficult matter to get any number of men to accept as a fact the + assertion <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page450">[pg + 450]</span><a name="Pg450" id="Pg450" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + that a person who has actually died has returned again to bodily + life. Such a belief will only be effected by the production of + evidence which, if not true, is at all events in the highest degree + plausible. This, as I have already observed, is fully established by + the history of the past, for however numerous the narratives of + marvellous occurrences may be, whether in histories or fictions, it + is next to impossible to find reports of beliefs in the actual + occurrence of a resurrection, or even in the possibility of one prior + to that of Jesus Christ. Now St. Paul's conversion cannot be dated + later than within ten years of the crucifixion; most probably it was + earlier. It is clear that, prior to his conversion, communities of + Jewish Christians must have existed in considerable numbers—in such + numbers, in fact, as to raise his wrath and indignation to the + highest point. The spirit of persecution is aroused by a sense of + danger. It is clear, therefore, from the fact of the persecution, + that the persons in power saw danger from the progress of the new + sect, and that its numbers most have been considerable. From St. + Paul's testimony, it is also certain that Christianity had spread at + least to one place beyond Judæa. The inference, therefore, seems + irresistible that in the period which elapsed between the crucifixion + and St. Paul's conversion, the number of the believers in the + Resurrection of Jesus had increased to several thousands. Those, + therefore, against whom I am reasoning, cannot help admitting that an + interval of eight or ten years is a very short one for the conversion + of such a large number of persons to the belief that a man who had + been publicly executed, in the very city in which many of them lived, + had been restored to life.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + that this belief could have been entertained by only a few solitary + individuals who <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page451">[pg + 451]</span><a name="Pg451" id="Pg451" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + treasured it up secretly in their bosoms. On the contrary, the + conditions of the case prove that it must have spread rapidly. It was + not sufficient for the creation of the Church that a few solitary + enthusiasts should believe that their Master was risen from the dead, + but it was necessary that the Society, which Jesus had formed in his + life-time, should be immediately reorganized on the basis of this + belief. The belief in the Messiahship of Jesus constituted the + original bond of union. A dead Messiah was, in the eyes of a Jew, an + absurdity; still more so one who had been publicly crucified. With + the death of Jesus, therefore, the bond of union among His followers + must have been severed. Unless the Church was to perish in His grave, + it was absolutely necessary that it should be re-constructed on the + basis of His renewed life. The slowness with which any large number + of even credulous people will accept the fact of a resurrection from + the dead, must have formed an obstacle, the force of which it is + impossible to over-estimate. Yet the work was done, and, within a + period of seven or eight years, the belief had spread so widely that + its adherents could be numbered by thousands. The truth of the + Resurrection, founded on the direct testimony of a considerable + number of persons who had had sufficient opportunity of testing it by + the evidence of their senses, would fully account for the rapid + growth of the belief. If, however, it originated in the brain of one + or two crazed fanatics, if the belief of so prodigious an event could + propagate itself at all, a considerable interval of time was + absolutely necessary for its doing so. The memory of the Crucifixion + was fresh and recent. What would have been the natural effect of + announcing the fact of His Resurrection? Incredulity! What has become + of His body? Why does He not appear to His former friends? The + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page452">[pg 452]</span><a name="Pg452" + id="Pg452" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> strangeness of the event must + have prompted even the most credulous to make some inquiry about the + matter, and the inquiry must have dissipated the delusion. Such a + belief could only readily propagate itself after recent memories had + grown dim, and a long interval of time had elapsed, sufficient for + the Founder of Christianity to become surrounded with a halo of + imaginary glory.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us now + consider the position in which the followers of Jesus must have found + themselves on the night of the Crucifixion, and during the following + days. Their hopes had been based on Him as the Messiah, who was to + reign in the kingdom promised by the prophets; and they expected + important places in that kingdom as the reward of their fidelity. + These hopes must have been annihilated. The Messiah whom they + expected to reign had perished at the hands of His enemies. What was + to be hoped for more? Many could not help thinking that he had been a + self-deceiver, if not an impostor. Was there any ground for hoping + that He could be raised from the dead? Many of the prophets of the + ancient Church had perished by the authority of former governments, + or by the violence of the mob. But God had never interfered to + vindicate the cause of one of them by raising him from the dead. The + utmost that He had done was to raise up some new prophet to take his + place. But this man was more than a prophet—he was the Messiah. Did + not all the old prophets promise Him a kingdom and a glory and a + mighty triumph? Yet He had been cut off by His enemies, instead of + triumphing over them; and His dead body was silent in the grave. Any + hint that the Gospels allege Jesus to have given His followers of His + own Resurrection is, according to the theory of those with whom I am + reasoning, a late invention. On the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page453">[pg 453]</span><a name="Pg453" id="Pg453" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> days, therefore, which followed the + Crucifixion, the Church must have presented the stillness of death, + broken only by a few utterances of loving despair.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the Church did + not perish; it set itself to the work of reconstruction. It expanded + and grew. Within the space of eight years after the Crucifixion, the + believers in the Resurrection could be numbered by thousands. This is + an indisputable fact. Again it expanded and grew, and it never ceased + to grow until in less than three hundred years after the public + execution of its Founder by the authority of the Roman government, + one of its professed adherents mounted the imperial throne, and found + its strength sufficient to enable him to make it one of the + institutions of the State. These facts are without a parallel in + history. How are they to be accounted for? The followers of Jesus + affirmed that their Master rose from the dead; and that He thus + resumed His place as the Messiah of His Church. Unbelievers, in the + face of the evidence before us, cannot deny that the great body of + His followers must have believed that He had done so within the short + interval of a few months after His public execution. Our documents on + this point are distinct and definite. They affirm that He was not + only seen but handled by many of His disciples after His + Resurrection, that He ate with them, and that they had interviews + with Him individually and collectively. I must now examine the + alternative positions; and first, that His supposed appearances were + delusions of the imagination.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The loose and + general affirmation has been made that the followers of Jesus were so + enthusiastically attached to Him that the idea of His death was + simply unbearable, and that they attempted to get rid of the fact by + supposing that He had risen from the dead.</p><span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page454">[pg 454]</span><a name="Pg454" id="Pg454" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I reply first: + that all such general statements are worthless. We have specific + facts before us; and these can only be accounted for by facts which + are equally definite, and not mere fancies. The assertion before me + is not only a bare supposition without one atom of evidence to rest + upon, but it contradicts all the known facts of the case. So far is + it from having been the case that the disciples were in such a state + of enthusiastic exultation, that our own documents inform us that + they had fallen into the lowest state of despondency.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: when + a theory is propounded to account for an historical fact, the + possibility of the supposition must be supported by some analogous + cases in the history of man, more or less resembling it. All theories + which are devoid of this support are worthless as history. Let those, + therefore, who would urge this on our acceptance as an account of the + origin of the greatest event in history, show that something like it + has occurred in the records of the past. Let them show us one + instance of a body of men whose enthusiasm for their leader was so + great that, when he had been put to death by the authority of the + government of the country, they got over this by fancying that he had + been raised from the dead, and then took to persuading others of its + truth. The enthusiasm of followers for their leaders has urged them + to form plots, and even to make attempts to rescue them from the + hands of their enemies. Such enthusiasm, however, is not even hinted + at in the case of the disciples of Christ. No whisper of tradition + has reached us that any of them formed a plot, or made a solitary + attempt to rescue their Master. Are we then to believe that they + imagined a resurrection to repair the damage of His Crucifixion? Such + imaginative conceits would never have made a single convert to their + story. They left <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page455">[pg + 455]</span><a name="Pg455" id="Pg455" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + their Master to perish in His agony, and when He had expired under + the hands of His executioners, restored Him to an ideal life by + imagining that He was risen from the dead. Such fictions may be + safely dismissed without further notice.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: Let us + suppose that some one of His disciples thought that he actually saw + Him, and in the height of his enthusiasm converted a fancy into a + fact; and persuaded the other disciples that He was risen from the + dead: that these too, in turn, were wrought up into so high a state + of enthusiasm that they likewise fancied that they saw Him: thus the + delusion spread. I reply:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: As I have + already observed, we are entitled to demand that some analogous case + should be adduced before we can be rationally asked to accept such + theories as to the solution of an unquestionable historical fact. + Surely, if such are the workings of human nature under influences so + general as enthusiasm and credulity, some similar occurrence must be + no uncommon event in history. Let one therefore be adduced.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: Nothing + is easier to affirm than that some credulous and enthusiastic + follower of Jesus mistook a fancy of his imagination for a fact, + thought that he had seen Him alive, and communicated his enthusiasm + to the rest. Whatever may be said as to the possibility in fits of + enthusiasm of a few half-crazy fanatics mistaking fancies for facts, + it is clear that to communicate this enthusiasm to others is a very + difficult undertaking, especially when they are in a depressed state + of mind. As I have already shown, it is in the highest degree + difficult, if not impossible, to persuade even very credulous persons + of the occurrence of an actual resurrection, as all history and + fiction prior to the Advent testify. A case of a person who professed + to <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page456">[pg 456]</span><a name= + "Pg456" id="Pg456" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> have seen, touched, + conversed, and eaten with one who was raised from the dead is not on + record. The belief in ghost stories and apparitions of the departed + is to be met with at every turn. Sorcery professed to be able to + bring departed spirits from the under-world, but it never attempted + to restore to life a body which once was dead.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Between these two + classes of facts the distinction is most important. The enthusiasm or + credulity which easily creates the one belief, refuses to accept the + other. What we have to account for in this case is, not that some + imaginative follower thought that he had seen the spirit of the + crucified Jesus, come from the under-world to make a communication to + his followers, and that the other disciples credulously accepted the + report: but that the appearance was that of his body restored to the + functions of animal life—in one word, a <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Resurrection</span></em>, able to repair the + damage which had been occasioned by his Crucifixion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But for the + purpose of arguing the question we must suppose that some one of the + enthusiastic followers of Jesus fancied that he saw Him after His + death, and mistook that fancy for a fact. I own that it is very + difficult even to assume the existence of enthusiasm in the present + instance, because all the known facts as well as the conditions of + the case prove that whatever enthusiasm had once existed, it was at a + very low ebb on the morning of the supposed Resurrection. Still, + however, the assumption must be made, or argument will be impossible. + As one enthusiast will be as good as another, let us assume that our + supposed enthusiast was Mary Magdalene, who went early to the + sepulchre, found the stone gone, saw the gardener in the dim light, + mistook him for Jesus, and went and told her friends that she had + seen Him risen from the dead: or <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page457">[pg 457]</span><a name="Pg457" id="Pg457" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> to put the case more simply, that her excited + brain created some spectral illusion; and that under its influence + she thought she saw Him, and proceeded to convey the report to her + friends.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It at once strikes + us as most unaccountable that, enthusiastic as she must have been, + she did not do something to assure herself of the reality of the + bodily presence of her Master. It was hard even for an enthusiast to + believe that it was He. If she had spoken, and it was the gardener, + she would have been at once cured of her delusion. If she had + attempted to embrace Him and it had been a phantom, the same result + would have followed. Surely the intensity of her love, however + credulous or fanatical she might be, would not have allowed her to + leave the spot without some suitable demonstration. Equally + incredible is it that she should have left Him, without inquiring + whither He intended to betake Himself, or obtaining the promise of + some future meeting at which His disconcerted friends might see Him. + However enthusiastic she may have been, it is simply untrue to human + nature, that she should have thought that her much loved Master had + appeared to her in bodily reality, and that she should neither have + spoken to Him, touched Him, nor endeavoured to ascertain the place of + His proposed retreat, nor what His intentions were about the future. + If she had done any of these things, it would have dissipated her + delusions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us suppose, + however, that all these difficulties do not exist, and that she is + gone to publish among the friends of Jesus that she had seen Him + risen from the dead. His death had proved to them a stunning blow; + but let us suppose that they were still eagerly desirous of the + occurrence of something which might renew their old faith in their + Master's Messiahship. It is <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page458">[pg + 458]</span><a name="Pg458" id="Pg458" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + clear that nothing short of a belief in His resurrection could have + accomplished this. Yet however desirous they may have been of His + return to life, they were confronted with the stern fact that He had + been publicly executed, and that the credulity of the past had not + succeeded in restoring dead men to life. Their despondency occasioned + by the events of the last three days was extreme. Let us suppose that + Mary Magdalene rushes in with the announcement: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“I have seen the Lord,—the tomb is empty,—He is risen + from the dead.”</span> However desirous they might be that the news + should be true, it is evident that such an announcement must have + filled the minds of even the most credulous with astonishment. What! + not the apparition of His departed spirit, but a bodily reality, the + very man himself? Is it possible that none of them suspected that it + was the dream of an enthusiastic woman? Is it conceivable that men or + women, passionately attached to their Master, asked her no questions + about the interview; what He had said to her; where He was to be + found? Some replies to these and kindred questions were inevitable; + and unless they were distinct and satisfactory, the rising enthusiasm + must have been checked. Is it true to human nature that the most + enthusiastic credulity could have accepted these things as facts, or + that the dead Jesus could have straightway assumed His place of + Messianic dignity in their minds, if He had made no appointment where + He could meet His friends; or if that appointment was created by the + imagination of the Magdalene, but when tested by the attempt to see + him, it proved a delusion?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But even + credulity, when united with profound love and attachment to a + departed friend, must have some farther satisfaction than a fancied + sight. If the disciples, in the height of their enthusiasm, imagined + that <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page459">[pg 459]</span><a name= + "Pg459" id="Pg459" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> they saw Him, they + surely would have spoken to Him. Could they have helped embracing Him + on his return to life after His cruel sufferings and ignominious + death? Above all, what about the future? Was He going to teach again + in public? Was He not going to bring confusion on His enemies? Was He + actually going to retire from public view out of their way? And if He + did so, what about His Messianic claims? Who was to head the party + for the future? Could they have no secret interviews with Him? If He + henceforth retired into obscurity, what announcement were His friends + to make to His opponents? The most fanatical enthusiasts must have + asked some of these questions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Either no answer + was returned, and the delusions must have been immediately dispelled; + or the enthusiasm which generated a phantom, and mistook it for a + reality, invented an answer likewise. Any reply which fell short of a + promise to appear for the future at their head, and either convince + or confound His adversaries, must have extinguished their belief in + His Messiahship. They either fancied they saw Him again, or they did + not. If the former was the case, they must have had repeated + interviews, all created by the imagination, at which something + definite must have been supposed to have passed sufficient to + establish the belief that He was a Messiah returned to them from the + grave. If His old Messianic character had ceased, some definite plan + must have been propounded of the mode in which He was going to enter + on a new one. If, however, we accept the alternative that He saw them + no more, we shall possibly be told that His followers accounted for + His absence by imagining that He had for a time been taken up into + heaven, whence He was shortly coming again to destroy His enemies. + But in that case it must have been a cruel blow to enthusiastic love. + What! their <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page460">[pg + 460]</span><a name="Pg460" id="Pg460" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + much loved Master, for whom they had sacrificed their all, to afford + them one mute interview after His resurrection, immediately to go + into heaven, and leave them without a head, exposed to the assaults + of the opponents who had murdered Him?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But let us imagine + all these difficulties got over, and that they fancied that they + caught one solitary glimpse of Him, and that He was taken up into + heaven, whence He would come again to revive His sinking cause. Was + He to return in a few days, or months, or years? If the days became + months, and the months years, what was to be done with the Church in + the meantime? Was it to organize itself? If so, on what new basis? + Was it to confront His foes? Was it to make converts; or quietly to + await His return? If the latter, as months and years passed away, the + Church must have simply died of inanition, and we should have heard + no more of Christianity. If the former hypothesis be preferred, then + it is plain that His followers must have determined to start His + Messiahship on a new basis. But what was this? How was it to be + propounded to the world? How were His other disciples to be persuaded + to accept it? Instead of an earthly, the Church for the future must + be headed by a heavenly Messiah, who was coming at some future day to + take vengeance on His foes. Such a change of tactics must have been + resolved upon, and that speedily; the whole plan must have been + conceived and executed by a few credulous enthusiasts, or the belief + in the Messiahship of Jesus must have been extinguished in His + grave.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further; the + necessity of converting the other disciples to this belief was most + urgent; for until this could be done, the society was dissolving into + its individual elements. How was it to be accomplished? It is easy to + say that these enthusiasts communicated <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page461">[pg 461]</span><a name="Pg461" id="Pg461" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> their enthusiasm to the rest. But this little + sentence conceals behind it whole mountains of difficulty. Every one + to which I have already alluded, must have had to be surmounted in + each individual case. There must have been many other disciples who + dearly loved their Master. What must have been their feelings on + hearing that He had appeared to only four or five of them, and had + gone up into heaven? What! He, whom we loved, who dearly loved us, + risen from the dead, and gone to heaven without affording us the + consolation of a parting interview? Such a thought was enough to + chill all ordinary enthusiasm. Was His mother one of those who + fancied they saw Him come again from the grave? If she was, could she + have been mistaken? If she did not see Him, what must have been her + feelings at the thought that He had left the world, without allowing + her to behold Him? What would have been the feelings of the women, + whose beneficence had contributed to His support, or of His intimate + friends among the Apostles? Surely all these would have thought it + more certain that their companions' report originated in a heated + imagination, than that Jesus should have acted thus.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the idea that + a few fanatics only fancied that they saw Jesus alive after His + Crucifixion is negatived by an historical fact distinctly affirmed by + St. Paul in the face of his opponents in the Corinthian Church. + Having mentioned His appearance to Peter and the twelve, St. Paul + asserts: <span class="tei tei-q">“After that, He was seen of above + five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain unto + this present, but some are fallen asleep.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Here then we are + in possession of direct contemporaneous testimony. This assertion is + boldly made in the face of the powerful party who denied St. Paul's + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page462">[pg 462]</span><a name="Pg462" + id="Pg462" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> apostleship. It is clear that + if they had not believed in the truth of his assertion, they would + not have lost such an opportunity of throwing discredit upon him by + convicting him of falsehood. The Apostle affirms in the presence of + his adversaries that there were then living more than 250 persons who + believed that they had seen Jesus Christ after He had risen from the + dead; and not only so, but that upwards of 500 persons had seen Him + on one and the same occasion. If this assertion was false, nothing + was easier than for the opponents of the Apostle to refute it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">On the + supposition, therefore, that the belief in the Resurrection + originated in a delusion, it must have been one on a prodigiously + large scale. Unless St. Paul, and the opposing section of the + Corinthian Church, who must have represented the opinions of the + Church at Jerusalem, were misinformed on this subject, it is + necessary to frame an hypothesis which shall not only account for + three or four fanatics, fancying that they saw Jesus Christ alive, + when it was nothing but the creation of a disordered imagination, but + for the fact that more than five hundred persons laboured under a + similar delusion. The assertion of the Apostle is express, not that + more than five hundred persons were persuaded to believe that some + others had seen Jesus Christ after He was risen from the dead, but + that they had actually seen Him themselves.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The only way of + evading the force of this testimony is either by directly impugning + St. Paul's veracity, or by supposing that he made an assertion based + on a vulgar rumour. The whole character of the Apostle renders the + supposition of a deliberate falsehood incredible, besides the danger + already alluded to of certain detection by his opponents. Nor is the + other alternative more tenable, that on such a subject he + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page463">[pg 463]</span><a name="Pg463" + id="Pg463" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> adopted a mere idle rumour. No + subject more occupied his mind than the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. + For Him he sacrificed everything. To Him he devoted his entire life. + Is it conceivable that such a man would not, under the influence of + common curiosity, have inquired into the alleged facts of his + Master's Resurrection? But these letters prove that he was a man of + far more than ordinary curiosity. It is clear from them that he kept + himself acquainted with the details of the events which took place in + the Churches which he had planted. Messengers were sent by him to + supply him with all necessary information. Even in so distant a + Church as that of Rome, which he had not even visited, he knew no + small number of the chief Christians by name, and took the deepest + interest in their affairs. Are we to believe that such a man received + such a fact connected with the dearest interests of his life without + taking the trouble to ascertain its truth? Moreover, his former + character as a persecutor must have rendered it necessary that he + should institute a diligent inquiry into the alleged Resurrection of + one whom he considered an impostor, and whose adherents he was + endeavouring to compel to renounce their allegiance. We must, + therefore, conclude that what St. Paul here affirms must have been + true, that on one definite occasion several hundreds of persons + thought that they had seen Jesus Christ after He was risen from the + dead.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But if it is in + the highest degree difficult to account for the possibility of three + or four of the disciples of Jesus fancying they saw their risen + Master, when they saw nothing but a creation of their own + imagination, what theory can be framed to account for the fact of + several hundreds of persons having become the prey of a similar + delusion? Large numbers of persons <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page464">[pg 464]</span><a name="Pg464" id="Pg464" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> do not fall into delusions of this kind. Are we + to suppose that some of them affirmed that some distant object which + they saw was Jesus, and that the remainder accepted the assertion + without inquiry? If He had not come near to them, would they not have + rushed up to a man, who was believed to have come up again from the + grave, and endeavoured to converse with him? Let all history be + searched for any fact at all like this. Until something like it can + be found, we are justified in pronouncing such a delusion impossible. + Nay: however common the belief in ghost stories, it would be + impossible to find a case of several hundred persons who believed + that, on some one definite occasion, when they were all assembled, + they had seen the ghost of a person who had recently been executed, + appear before them, and on the strength of this belief, constituted + themselves into a new society;—a society which has endured through + eighteen centuries? However cynical our views may be, it is + impossible to believe that human nature is a lie.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: If for the + purposes of the argument we accept the impossible supposition that a + few deluded fanatics persuaded themselves that they had seen their + Master risen from the dead, and that they set themselves to persuade + others that this was a fact, then it is clear that the wish of making + converts to their belief must have been a very gradual and slow + process. This, in the face of all the evidence supplied by history, + does not require further proof. It would be impossible to make + converts at all, without adducing some overwhelming evidence of the + truth of their assertion. But on the supposition that it was a + delusion of the imagination, such evidence could not be forthcoming. + Such beliefs are only possible after the lapse of very considerable + intervals of time, if they are possible even then.</p><span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page465">[pg 465]</span><a name="Pg465" id="Pg465" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But in the present + case recollections were all fresh. Will the attempt to persuade + persons who live in the city where a public execution has taken + place, that the man executed is alive again, succeed? Will it succeed + anywhere in the neighbourhood, while the events are still in + everybody's recollection? Living actors must have died out, memories + of the past must have become faint, before such things can be made to + wear even the semblance of possibility. But the plain historical + facts refuse to concede the requisite interval during which such a + belief could slowly grow up. While the belief was growing, the Church + would have been perishing from want of a Messiah to step into the + place of the dead Jesus. On the contrary, the growth of the belief + was rapid. The Church speedily rose from its ruins. Before St. Paul's + conversion, it had increased to such numbers as to be worth + persecuting. There was a Church at Jerusalem; there were Churches in + Judæa; there were Christians in Damascus. Before this event the small + knot of deluded fanatics had persuaded thousands; they had formed the + Society which subverted the religion and institutions of the Roman + empire, and of which all the progressive races of men profess—now in + the 19th century of its existence—to be still members. The facts of + unquestionable history utterly refuse to the advocates of this theory + the time necessary for imparting to it even a passing + plausibility.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I infer, + therefore, that the theory that one or more credulous enthusiasts + among the disciples of Jesus fancied that they saw their Master risen + from the dead, while in reality they were labouring under some mental + hallucination, and that they communicated their enthusiasm to the + rest, and that these created the Christian Church, is unsound in + philosophy, contradicts the facts of history, and the phenomena of + human nature, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page466">[pg + 466]</span><a name="Pg466" id="Pg466" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> as + testified to by past experience, and is destitute of the possibility + of verification, and also is contrary to analogy. It follows, + therefore, that this portion of the alternative before us must be + pronounced utterly inadequate as a solution of the facts.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us now + consider the other alternative, that Jesus did not actually die, but, + although He had been crucified, escaped with His life; that His + disciples saw Him after His crucifixion; and, being persuaded that He + had expired, mistook His appearance for a restoration to life.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This alternative + need not detain us long. It is involved in a considerable number of + the difficulties which are connected with the assumption that some + one or more of the disciples fancied that they saw Him when they did + not really see Him, and that they persuaded the others that He was + risen from the dead. These difficulties I have already disposed of. + But it has in addition some difficulties peculiarly its own, which I + will now briefly notice.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I admit that it + was possible to recover from the effects of crucifixion, if taken + down from the cross in time. This we learn from Josephus, who, on his + return one day from going to examine a place for the encampment of + the Roman forces, found that three of his friends had been crucified + during his absence. By his entreaties, he obtained the orders of + Titus for their being taken down. Two died under cure; one recovered. + Josephus is silent as to whether they had been scourged before they + were crucified. This was no doubt an important point in reference to + the possibility of recovery. Such was the usual practice; although + when the Romans crucified the Jews in large numbers, as they had now + been in the habit of doing for some time, it may be a question + whether it was always inflicted. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page467">[pg 467]</span><a name="Pg467" id="Pg467" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> These persons had probably been suspended on + the cross for some hours before they were taken down. They were + treated with the utmost care, with a view to their recovery; yet two + out of the three died. Such are the facts, as related by + Josephus.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + suggested that Jesus was only in a swoon when taken down from the + cross; that in the sepulchre He recovered His consciousness, to which + the large quantity of spices used at His burial might have + contributed; that He managed to creep out of the grave to some place + of security, where He was seen by a few of His disciples, but that He + died not long after. This, it is said, the disciples mistook for a + Resurrection, and that it formed the basis of the renewed life of the + Church. Let it be observed that there would be the same difficulties + in re-constituting the Church on such a basis, and in procuring + converts to this belief, as there would have been on the other + alternative, which I have shown to be untenable. These, therefore, I + need not consider.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This theory + pre-supposes not only that the body of Jesus was interred, but that + it was committed to the custody of His friends. This fact we have + from the Gospels; as well as the additional fact that the time during + which He was suspended on the cross did not exceed six hours at the + utmost. But we also learn from them that, before Pilate ordered the + body to be delivered up, he took care to ascertain, from those in + charge, the certainty of the death; and the fourth Gospel affirms + that one of the soldiers, in order to remove all doubt on the + subject, pierced his side with a spear. Now without the aid of the + Gospels it would not have been known that the body was committed to + the custody of His friends. If, therefore, their historical testimony + is good for this fact, it is absurd to refuse <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page468">[pg 468]</span><a name="Pg468" id="Pg468" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> them credence when they testify to the + other facts. We say distinctly: if the truth of the one set of facts + is denied, because the Gospels are unhistorical, the truth of the + other set (for the Gospels are the sole authorities) must not be + assumed on their testimony. Apart from this, we are only at liberty + to assume that the crucifixion was conducted in the usual manner; and + that the bodies were disposed of accordingly, <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> + that, if the crucified persons were buried at all, they were buried + ignominiously. It has also been affirmed that Pilate sacrificed Jesus + by compulsion, and that the centurion on guard was not ill-disposed + towards him. This again, I say, we only learn from our present + Gospels, and I must again protest against the practice of accepting + their testimony on one side and ignoring it on the other. The Romans, + moreover, were not the sort of men to allow a crucified victim to be + taken down from the cross until they were well assured that he had + hung there long enough to extinguish life; and from the frequency of + such executions they would learn how long it would require, and what + on such occasions were the symptoms of death; nor did they concede to + persons so executed an honourable burial.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: It + never occurred to the Jews that it was possible that the crucified + Jesus had escaped with His life, and that this fact was really at the + bottom of the announcement of His resurrection. If it was known to + any person concerned that He had thus escaped, nothing could have + been more dangerous on the part of His followers than to announce + that He was risen from the dead. This was the very thing to promote + inquiry, and to arouse a suspicion among His enemies that He had not + really died, and thus to induce them to make every effort to + ascertain the place of His retreat. The quickest way to put an end to + the story of the Resurrection <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page469">[pg 469]</span><a name="Pg469" id="Pg469" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> was to produce the living Jesus, weak and + exhausted from His wounds; or, if He had really died, to produce His + body. But not a single whisper has come down to us from the opponents + of Christianity that He did not really die. If such an idea had + afforded even a probable account of the story of the Resurrection, it + would certainly have occurred to Paul when a persecutor, and he would + have had recourse to it as a means of dissipating the delusion. Such + are some of the first difficulties which surround this mode of + accounting for the story of the Resurrection. A sepulchre was a place + ill-fitted for a man, exhausted by scourging and crucifixion, to + recover in; nor was there a retreat at hand. But, as we scrutinize + the matter more closely, these difficulties become + impossibilities.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear that + from the hour of His supposed death on the cross, Jesus disappears + from history, except in the form of Jesus the Messiah raised again + from the dead, the great Founder of the Christian Church. If, + therefore, His supposed Resurrection was nothing but a recovery from + a swoon, one of two things is certain: either He died shortly after + from exhaustion, or He lived somewhere in deepest retirement, only + receiving visits from those of His followers who were in the secret, + and in due course He expired. Perhaps it may be urged that His + friends succeeded in carrying Him off into some distant country, and + that some one or more of His followers, who had seen Him slowly + recovering, mistook this for a resurrection, and propagated the + story.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We must keep + steadily in view that what we have to account for is not a mere story + of a resurrection propagated by a crazed fanatic, but the erection of + the Christian Church on its basis. It is a plain fact that Jesus + appeared no more in public, and that His earthly <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page470">[pg 470]</span><a name="Pg470" id="Pg470" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> history ends with His crucifixion. What + became of Him? It is impossible to over-estimate the importance of + this question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us take the + first supposition that He recovered from a swoon, but died shortly + afterwards from exhaustion. This theory involves the necessity that + some one or more of His followers should have seen Him alive and + dying of exhaustion. Was it possible, I ask, for the most deluded + fanaticism to mistake such a condition for a resurrection from the + dead? Was this a basis on which to revive the hopes of the disciples, + and to re-construct the Church? Would any amount of enthusiastic + credulity mistake such a person for the Messiah of the future? If He + died shortly afterwards, what became of His Messiahship? Did His + other followers pay Him no visits during His illness? Did they see + Him die, or attend His burial? Surely such positions do not require + serious argument.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But let us suppose + that He recovered, lived in retirement and only received the secret + visits of a few followers, and that out of this the story of the + Resurrection grew. How grew? I again ask. Such growths require + considerable periods of time, and these, history utterly refuses to + grant. Would it be possible, I ask, for any deluded follower to + mistake such facts for a resurrection from the dead? Could Jesus + himself have so mistaken it? or, however well the secret might be + kept, would a Messiah, living in privacy, out of the sight of friends + and foes, be a possible Messiah, who could impart a new life to the + Church? In such a case it is impossible to exonerate the persons + concerned from fraud, even the Great Teacher himself. Are we to + suppose that He himself actually mistook His recovery from a swoon + for a resurrection, and justified His followers in publishing a + report of it? Why then did <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page471">[pg + 471]</span><a name="Pg471" id="Pg471" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> He + not appear in public and assert His Messianic claims? But could His + followers have persuaded themselves that a man who must have shown + distinct indications of slow recovery, and who never ventured to + appear again in public, was raised again from the dead to continue + His Messianic work? If this is the true account of the matter, it was + not a delusion but an imposture. If we suppose that a few friends + only visited Him, what did His other disciples say about the matter? + Did the few, with the concurrence of their Master, propagate the + belief that He was gone into heaven, knowing that He was still on + earth? Be these things as they may (and those who have started the + idea should solve it), if the real basis of the story of the + Resurrection be a recovery from a swoon and a subsequent life of + privacy, Jesus must have shared the common fate of humanity and died. + This must have been known to those with whom He lived; it must have + been known to those who visited Him. His death must have dispelled + their delusions. Henceforth the propagation of their story must have + been due to wilful fraud—a fraud for which it is impossible to assign + a motive, and which it is not the modern practice to charge on the + first propagators of Christianity.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The remaining + supposition, that Jesus, after having been seen by one or two of His + followers alive and slowly recovering, was conveyed away to some + distant place, where they saw Him no more, and that out of this grew + the story of His Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven, is not only + in itself intrinsically incredible, but it offends against every one + of the principles which I have established. I need not, therefore, + discuss it further.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The existence of + the Church is a fact. It is professedly based on another fact, + namely, the Resurrection <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page472">[pg + 472]</span><a name="Pg472" id="Pg472" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + Christ. If this be true, it fully accounts for the existence, origin, + and growth of the Church. No other theory can account for it. The + Resurrection is a fact, or a delusion. If it is not a fact, two + suppositions respecting its origin are alone possible. These have + been proved, on the strongest historical evidence, to be impossible. + It follows, therefore, that the only remaining alternative is the + true one: that <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">Jesus Christ rose from the + dead</span></span>. Its attestation is stronger than that of any + other fact in history.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page473">[pg 473]</span><a name= + "Pg473" id="Pg473" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc43" id="toc43"></a> <a name="pdf44" id="pdf44"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XXI. The Historical Value Of + The Gospels As Deduced From Previous Considerations.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have proved in + the preceding chapters that one of the miracles recorded in the + Gospels is substantiated by the highest form of historical testimony, + on evidence quite independent of their contents. I have adopted this + course because unbelievers affirm that the miraculous narratives + contained in them are alone sufficient to prove them to be + unhistorical. It has therefore become necessary to prove the truth of + the greatest miracle which they narrate, without any reference to + their assertions. Christianity unquestionably existed before the + Gospels were written, and the all-important fact on which it rests + can be substantiated without their aid, on data which are conceded by + our opponents. Its truth or falsehood therefore does not rest on any + mere question as to what was their actual date, or who were their + authors. Still they are the only records of the life of Jesus Christ + that the Church possesses. The question therefore as to whether they + are true in all their chief outlines, is one of such importance as to + render a few observations on this subject indispensable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There can be no + doubt that no one would have ever thought of denying their general + authenticity, except on account of the miraculous narratives they + contain. This has made them the battle-field of Christianity, + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page474">[pg 474]</span><a name="Pg474" + id="Pg474" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> because it has been supposed + that if their historical character can be shaken, Christianity would + be disproved as resting on no other basis. For this purpose every + variation in them, even the smallest, has been noted, and these + variations have been magnified into contradictions. There is no + weapon which criticism has not employed for the purpose of impugning + their veracity. But the real ground of offence is the miraculous + narrative. As, however, I have proved that the most important miracle + recorded in them can be established on grounds quite independent of + their testimony, we can now approach their consideration with this + great antecedent difficulty removed. If the Resurrection of Jesus is + an actual occurrence, the other miraculous events recorded in them no + longer stand in the way of their acceptance as genuine histories. + This one miracle is sufficient to carry all the rest; not, of course, + that it proves that they occurred, but it gets rid of the entire + <span lang="la" class="tei tei-foreign" xml:lang="la"><span style= + "font-style: italic">à priori</span></span> difficulty with which + their acceptance is attended. Nay, further, if Christ rose from the + dead, it is more probable than not, that this was not the only + miracle connected with Him: or, in other words, if the authors of the + Gospels attributed to Him no other miraculous action, it would rather + afford a presumption against them as credible historians. It follows + therefore, that although the proof of the Resurrection does not by + itself establish the reality of the other miracles recorded as having + been performed by Him, it renders them so far probable, that the same + amount of evidence, which is sufficient to establish the ordinary + facts of history, is sufficient to establish the general truth of the + events recorded in the Gospels. I do not mean to affirm that some + miracle may not have been incorrectly attributed to Christ in the + traditions of the Church, from which the narratives in the Gospels + have been <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page475">[pg + 475]</span><a name="Pg475" id="Pg475" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + derived, in the same manner as some inaccurate reports of facts have + obtained admission into ordinary histories. But as these latter do + not affect the general credibility of history, so errors of this + description would not affect the general credibility of the Gospel + narratives. All that I claim for them is that they should be both + alike tried by the historical canons of criticism applicable to the + same species of documents. Let me state once for all the position + that I occupy. I am not called upon to prove that no error can have + crept into their accounts; that events are all arranged in their true + order of sequence; that variations do not exist in them which with + our present knowledge of the details, it is difficult to reconcile, + or even that the Evangelists themselves may not have misconceived + their true order, or grouped them in one that was the result of + religious considerations. The determination of such questions may + affect our views as to the nature of the inspiration under which we + suppose the Gospels to have been written, but it is one wholly + foreign to an historical discussion. The question which I have to + consider is, not the extent of the inspiration of their authors; but + whether they do or do not contain genuine history; and if they do, to + what class of historical writings they belong, and to estimate their + testimony accordingly.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will consider + this last question first. The Gospels most distinctly affirm that + they do not belong to the class of professed histories, but to that + of memoirs. This is a very important consideration; for if they only + claim to be memoirs and not histories it is absurd to demand of them + an accuracy of arrangement and of detail, which would be essential to + a history, but which forms no portion of the plan of a memoir. But + they not only affirm that they are memoirs, but memoirs of a peculiar + character; that is to say, religious <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page476">[pg 476]</span><a name="Pg476" id="Pg476" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> memoirs, composed with a double purpose, viz. + that of setting forth the events of a life, and at the same time of + teaching a religion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This point is so + important, and is so generally overlooked in the arguments both of + those who affirm and of those who deny their historical character, + that it will be necessary to prove it. It is not only evident from + the general nature of their contents, but three of the Evangelists + directly affirm it, and two of them, Luke and John, in express terms. + The former distinctly asserts that he composed his Gospel in order + that a person called <span class="tei tei-q">“Theophilus”</span> + might know the certainty of the things in which he had been + instructed. <span class="tei tei-q">“Forasmuch as many have taken in + hand to set forth a declaration of these things that are most surely + believed among us; even as they delivered them unto us, which from + the beginning were eye witnesses and ministers of the word; it seemed + good to me also, having perfect understanding of all things from the + first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, that + thou mightest know the certainty of those things in which thou hast + been instructed.”</span> (Luke i. 1-4.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Here we have the + purpose of the writer definitely affirmed. It is to set forth a + statement of the leading facts of the life of Jesus, for the purpose + of communicating instruction in the Christian religion. In one word, + the author proposed to teach a religion by means of a narrative of + facts. It is hardly possible to give a more accurate description of a + memoir as distinguished from a history. He also tells us that he + meant to compose it in an orderly arrangement, but he does not tell + us whether the order was intended to be strictly chronological, or + merely regulated by the avowed religious purpose of the work. It is + quite <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page477">[pg 477]</span><a name= + "Pg477" id="Pg477" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> possible for a writer + to adopt an orderly arrangement, who arranges his matter as much by + religious considerations as by chronological ones. According to the + statement of this preface, the religious purpose is clearly the + predominant one; and it is therefore only reasonable to suppose that + it has exerted considerable influence on the grouping.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We learn also from + this preface that the things most surely believed among Christians + consisted of a number of facts, which had been delivered to them by + persons who from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of + the word. Several persons had already set forth written accounts of + them before the author composed this Gospel. It is implied that he + did so because he possessed better and more accurate sources of + information than previous writers. The object, however, is clear; it + was that Theophilus might know the certainty of those things, + <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the great facts on which the + Christianity, in which he had been instructed, was based.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The assertion of + this religious purpose in the composition of the fourth Gospel, and + that the materials are a selection from a large mass of others is + even more distinct and definite. <span class="tei tei-q">“Many other + signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not + written in this book, but these are written that ye may believe that + Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye may have + life through his name.”</span> (John xx. 30, 31.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Words could hardly + have been framed which more definitely assert that this Gospel is a + memoir, and not a history; and that the religious purpose, in its + composition, was the predominant idea of the writer.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The assertions of + the author of St. Mark's Gospel, although not equally full, are + sufficiently definite. He <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page478">[pg + 478]</span><a name="Pg478" id="Pg478" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + designates it as <span class="tei tei-q">“The beginning of the + gladsome message of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.”</span> Here, + again, the religious idea is plainly the predominant one in the + writer's mind, and the obvious conclusion is that he intended his + work to be a memoir, and not a history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We have no such + direct affirmation by the author of St. Matthew's Gospel, unless the + opening words, <span class="tei tei-q">“The book of the generations + of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son of Abraham,”</span> are + intended to cover the entire work. The nature of its contents, + however, leave not the smallest doubt that his design in writing was + precisely the same as that of the other Evangelists, viz. to teach + Christianity by setting forth a memoir of the life of Jesus + Christ.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such, then, is the + avowed purpose of the authors of the four Gospels. Each of them is a + religious memoir. This being so, it is absurd to demand of such + writings what can only be found in regularly composed histories.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In what, then, + does a history differ from a memoir? The object of the historian is + not only to give an account of the events which he narrates precisely + as they occurred; but the order of his narrative is regulated by the + definite sequences of time and place. The writer of a memoir, on the + contrary, is not bound to observe this order, but he is entitled to + vary it in reference to the special object he has in view, and the + points which he requires to illustrate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the religious + purpose is most definitely affirmed to have been the predominant one + in the minds of the authors of the Gospels. It would therefore have + an important influence on their arrangement of their materials. We + should expect to find them grouped far more in reference to this end, + than to the mere sequences of time and place. When certain of the + actions or portions <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page479">[pg + 479]</span><a name="Pg479" id="Pg479" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + the teaching of our Lord illustrated the particular subject which + each Evangelist had before him, he would neglect the exact historical + order, and group them in reference to this special purpose.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">In writings of + this description, therefore, while all the chief points of his life + and his discourses ought to present a substantial agreement, we + should naturally expect to find a considerable number of minor + divergencies. While we have the fullest right to expect that the + facts will be accurately reported, we have no right to demand that + the writer should observe no other order in his narrative than the + mere sequences of time and place. It is on the assumption that the + authors of the Gospels intended to set forth an exact historical + account of the ministry of Christ, instead of taking them for what + they have affirmed them to be, religious memoirs of that ministry, + that no inconsiderable number of their alleged discrepancies have + originated.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The presence of + variations, or if it is preferred to call them contradictions, in + writings of this description by no means invalidates their historical + character. It has been well observed by a writer in the <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Westminster Review,”</span> that they are to be found in + every historical writing from Herodotus to Mr. Froude. As these + discrepancies in the Gospels are so largely dwelt on by unbelievers, + I subjoin a passage from Dean Stanley's account of the murder of + Thomas a Becket, in his <span class="tei tei-q">“Memorials of + Canterbury Cathedral,”</span> as showing the existence of such + inaccuracies even in the accounts of persons who were actual + eye-witnesses of events in which they were deeply interested. + Speaking of the number of existing accounts of the murder, he + says:—</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-q">“Of these thirty narrators, four, Edward Grimes, William + Fitzstephen, John of Salisbury, who unfortunately supplies but + little, and the anonymous author <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page480">[pg 480]</span><a name="Pg480" id="Pg480" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> of the Lambeth manuscript, claim to have been + eye-witnesses. Three others were monks of the convent, and although + not present at the massacre, were probably somewhere in the + precincts. Three others, though not in England at the time, had been + on terms more or less intimate with Becket, and two of them seem to + have taken the utmost pains to ascertain the truth of the facts which + they narrate. From these several accounts, we can recover the + particulars of the death of Archbishop Becket to the minutest + details. It is true that having been written by monastic and clerical + historians, after the national feeling had been raised to enthusiasm + in his behalf, allowance must be made for exaggeration, suppression, + and every kind of false colouring which could set off their hero to + advantage. It is true, also, that <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">in some points the + various authorities are hopelessly irreconcilable</span></em>. But + still a minute comparison of the narrators with each other, and with + the localities, leads to a conviction that on the whole the facts + have been substantially preserved; and as often happens, the truth + can be ascertained in spite and even in consequence of attempts to + distort and suppress it.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear, + therefore, that the presence of variations, nay even <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">hopeless + contradictions</span></em> in such narratives, does not interfere + with their general historical character. It appears that from + narratives which contain <span class="tei tei-q">“exaggeration, + suppression, and every kind of false colouring,”</span> we can + ascertain the particulars of the death of Becket to the minutest + particular. Why do not unbelievers apply the same rule to the + Gospels? Why are their minor variations in details alleged to prove + that the entire narrative is unhistorical? One thing respecting them + is clear: instead of presenting indications of <span class= + "tei tei-q">“exaggeration, suppression, and false colouring,”</span> + they are <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page481">[pg + 481]</span><a name="Pg481" id="Pg481" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + characterized by a uniform sobriety in their statements. They offer + no comments, and allow the facts to produce their own impression on + the reader.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore that if the Gospels were ordinary biographies, the + variations in them would not interfere with their historical + character, and that differences in mere details would leave the main + facts unaffected. Still more true is this with respect to memoirs, + and especially with those composed with the object of teaching a + religion. Attention to this obvious fact will get rid of a large + number of the objections which have been so pertinaciously urged + against them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With respect to + their general credibility, it is important to observe that even if + the date of the Synoptics be placed as late as that assigned to them + by those critics who deny their historical character, viz. somewhere + between <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 90 and 115, still the + time when they must have been composed lies, according to the rule of + Sir G. C. Lewis, within the period of trustworthy historical + tradition. In this case the earliest of them would bear date about + sixty, and the latest of them about eighty-five years after the + events they narrate. Renan is of opinion that their internal evidence + proves them to have been composed before the destruction of + Jerusalem. Be this as it may; even at the date assigned to them by + the most sceptical critics, good traditionary information lay within + the reach of their respective authors. The interval is about the same + in the one case as that which separates us from the invasion of + France by the allies in 1814, and in the other case from the outbreak + of the French Revolution. Many persons are still alive who can + remember the former event; and although nearly everyone who could + remember the latter has passed away, yet large numbers of the + existing generation, whose recollections will be <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page482">[pg 482]</span><a name="Pg482" id="Pg482" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> good for twenty years to come, have + conversed with those who took the deepest interest in the scenes in + question. While this generation lives, it would be impossible for the + whole outline of the facts to become falsified. Minor errors might + creep into the details; their precise order and sequence might not be + accurately preserved; yet their general outline would be handed down + correctly, and it would be impossible to hide the true history behind + a set of legends. If the authors of the Synoptic Gospels were only + separated by this interval of time from the events that they narrate, + they must have had all the materials of true history within their + reach. Persons must have been living when the first Gospel was + written who could accurately remember the events in question; and + even at the latest date which can be assigned to the other Gospels, + large numbers of persons must have been living who had heard + narratives of them from their fathers, which, as unspeakably + interesting, they would treasure up with the liveliest + recollection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows, + therefore, that even if we assume the latest date which has been + assigned for the publication of the Synoptic Gospels it lies + considerably within the period of accurate historical recollection, + even if we suppose that their authors composed them from traditional + sources only, and were not assisted by written documents. But the + existence of documents is expressly asserted by the author of St. + Luke's Gospel. And even if we were devoid of this testimony, we might + infer it from the inherent probability of the case. This was + inevitable, as the basis of the religion was placed on a personal + history. The system of instruction must have involved a constant + reference to the details of that history. When, therefore, the + members of the Churches heard them from the lips <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page483">[pg 483]</span><a name="Pg483" id="Pg483" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of original witnesses, the interest of + the subject must have induced those who were able to write, to + compose brief memoranda for the purpose of assisting their + recollections. In this way a considerable amount of Christian + literature in connection with the life of Jesus must have grown up in + the course of years, and the necessity for it would become the more + urgent in proportion as the original disciples who had heard His + discourses and seen His actions passed away from the scene. This is + exactly in conformity with the statement made by the author of St. + Luke's Gospel.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear, + therefore, that even if the publication of our present Gospels did + not take place before the time assigned to them by unbelievers, the + historical materials at the command of their authors must have been + ample. It would have been impossible that facts and legendary + inventions should have become blended together within so short a + period. Consequently nothing but neglect to use the materials at + hand, or a deliberate purpose of falsification could have prevented + them from giving an account of the ministry of Jesus which would be + substantially accurate in all its main features. If on the other hand + we suppose these Gospels to have been written for the purpose of + falsification, then their contradiction to the accounts which had + been hitherto accepted by the Church must have destroyed their + credit. It would have been impossible for the authors to have + succeeded in concealing the facts behind a mass of myths and legends + while they formed the very groundwork of the daily life of the + community. Under the peculiar circumstances of the Christians of the + first century some portion of the events of the life and teaching of + Christ must have been brought to their minds every day. The hostility + of the Pagan world around them was alone sufficient <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page484">[pg 484]</span><a name="Pg484" id="Pg484" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> to ensure this. Moreover, the religion + was not one which was committed to the custody of a caste or + priesthood; but it appealed directly to the individual. As + distinguished from the other religions of the world Christianity may + be not incorrectly defined as the religion of the individual. It + awoke emotions of the profoundest nature in the hearts of even its + humblest followers, addressing itself both to their consciences and + their affections. These emotions were all centered in a personal + life. If one fact is more certain than another, it is that Jesus was + viewed by the early Christians as their religious King, to whom they + owed a personal allegiance. This must have rendered it necessary for + them to treasure up all the facts of His history with the deepest + care.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Further: the early + Christians not only lived in the midst of a society extremely hostile + to them, but were also zealous proselyters. This alone would have + been sufficient to compel them to keep in lively remembrance the + chief events in the history of Jesus. How else was it possible for + them to persuade others that He was the Christ? The Church was not a + school of philosophy, but consisted of a body of men whose bond of + union was adherence to a leader. To make converts to such a religion + would have been impossible without an accurate acquaintance with the + facts on which His claims were grounded.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Corporate bodies + possess a power of handing down a traditionary knowledge of events in + a far greater degree than individuals. The Christian Church consisted + of a set of communities which had not only an individual, but also + the strongest corporate life. Although it contained no priesthood, + properly so called, the cohesion of these communities, placed as they + were in the midst of a hostile population, in Jewish or Gentile + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page485">[pg 485]</span><a name="Pg485" + id="Pg485" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> cities, was of the strongest + character, and in proportion to their smallness, the action of each + individual member would be important. Each separate Church therefore + formed a corporation as opposed to the Jewish and heathen world by + which it was surrounded; and each separate unit felt himself animated + by a similar life, which dictated to him the necessity of conquering + or perishing. From this arose an intense desire of making new + converts and of increasing the number of the faithful. How was this + to be accomplished? An organization was necessary. Each of the + communities had one which was suitable to its need. One of its most + important functions must have been to instruct new converts in its + principles, and to keep actively burning the zeal of its original + members. But as the existence of the community was founded on an + adhesion to a person, the course of instruction must have consisted + to a considerable extent of details of the actions and teaching of + Jesus. <span class="tei tei-q">“How shall they believe on him of whom + they have not heard?”</span> was a pertinent question of St. Paul, + <span class="tei tei-q">“or how shall they hear without a + preacher?”</span> No society has ever existed in the world which has + had an equal inducement to hand down accurately the events of its + founder's life, or had equal facilities for detecting any attempt to + substitute a fictitious account of him for the true one.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It follows + therefore that at the period in question it would have been simply + impossible that a fictitious or legendary account of the life of + Jesus should have taken the place of the one which these Churches had + accepted at the time when they first came into existence. I have + already proved that the Epistles of St. Paul put it beyond the + possibility of question that an account of the chief facts in the + ministry of Jesus formed the <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page486">[pg 486]</span><a name="Pg486" id="Pg486" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> foundation of the religious life of the + Churches at the time when he wrote them, and that it had done so from + the first. The difficulty therefore of introducing an entirely new + version of it must have been insurmountable. A doubtful fact or two + might have become incorporated, but while the religious life of the + community was thus strong, it would have been utterly impossible to + give a new colouring to the whole.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: this + difficulty must have been greatly increased by the wide separation of + such Churches as those of Rome, Corinth, Galatia, Jerusalem, and + others, from one another. Each Church must have had an account of its + own of the chief facts of our Lord's ministry. If one of them could + have been induced to accept a new set of facts, there would have been + the greatest difficulty in persuading the others to follow its + example. Daily experience teaches us how very slow religious bodies + are in changing the fundamental articles of their belief. However + much the sentiments of individuals may have changed, the original + confessions of faith are retained with the utmost tenacity, even + after they have ceased to embody the religious life of the community. + What confessions of faith are to modern Churches, the chief facts of + the ministry of our Lord must have been to the primitive one; the + only difference being that these latter lived with a far greater + tenacity in the minds of the early Christians than the former have in + modern Churches. If therefore a single Church could have been induced + to accept a new version of its Founder's life, the separation of + these different communities from one another, would have placed an + insuperable barrier in the way of imposing such an account on the + other Churches. The inquiry must have at once arisen, Whence has this + Church <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page487">[pg 487]</span><a name= + "Pg487" id="Pg487" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> derived its new + Gospel, thus fundamentally different from that which has from the + first formed the basis of our religious life?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear + therefore that even if we accept the latest date which had been + assigned to the publication of the Synoptic Gospels, their authors + must have been in possession of abundance of materials for setting + forth an account of the ministry of Jesus, which would have been + correct in all its great outlines; and that even if they had been so + minded it would have been impossible for them to have succeeded in + palming off a previously unknown set of facts in place of those which + had hitherto formed the groundwork of the life of the different + Churches. We have seen also that when St. Paul wrote his Epistles, + the different Churches were in possession of an outline of the + ministry of Jesus Christ which contained within it, as a matter of + the highest importance, the most remarkable miraculous fact which is + recorded in the Gospels. Is it to be believed that this was the only + one; or, is it possible that a set of miraculous narratives could + have succeeded in taking the place of the account of His life and + teaching which was in possession of the Churches, within the interval + of time which separates St. Paul's Epistles from the publication of + the first of the Synoptic Gospels?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I conclude, + therefore, that the original narratives must have attributed a number + of miracles to Jesus Christ; that the accounts of them must have been + handed down to the time when our opponents allow that the Gospels + were published, and that by this means they have been incorporated + into them. Not only has the alleged late date of the publication of + the Gospels been urged as a reason for discrediting them as reports + of historical facts, but also the uncertainty of their <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page488">[pg 488]</span><a name="Pg488" id="Pg488" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> authorship. It will not fall within the + scope of this work to examine the value of the testimony by which + each Gospel has been assigned to its respective author. It will be + sufficient here to observe that it is as strong as that by which the + authorship of any other ancient writing is ascertained. The internal + character of two of these Gospels fully agrees with the traditionary + account. Although the assertions of the early Fathers vary as to the + precise relation in which Mark stood to Peter, the ancient traditions + are unanimous in connecting him in some way or other with the + Apostle. The phenomena of this Gospel are precisely such as we should + expect if this was the case. In nearly every case where we can + ascertain, either from this or from one of the other Gospels, that + Peter was an eye-witness of an event recorded in it, St. Mark gives + precisely such a description of it as we might expect would be given + by a man of the peculiar temperament of Simon Peter. We know, both + from the Acts of the Apostles and from the Epistles of St. Paul, that + St. Luke was a companion of that Apostle. The peculiarities of the + Gospel that bears his name are precisely such as we should have + expected if its author was a companion of the great Apostle of the + Gentiles. There is also every reason for believing that Luke was not + an eye-witness of the ministry of Jesus. The author of the Gospel + affirms that he was not an eye-witness. In conformity with this the + Gospel bears the most distinctive marks of compilation. So far the + internal structure of these two Gospels entirely agrees with the + external testimony as to their authorship. We know also on the + authority of the early Fathers that Matthew composed a Gospel in the + Hebrew language which was designed for the use of Jewish Christians. + Now whoever is the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page489">[pg + 489]</span><a name="Pg489" id="Pg489" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + author of the present Greek Gospel which bears his name, it is + distinguished by precisely the same characteristics as those which + are described as appertaining to the Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew, + that is to say, that the proportion which the discourses bear to the + narrative portions of it is very large; and its contents make it + evident that it was chiefly designed for the use of Christians of the + Jewish race. If therefore our present Gospel was not set forth by the + Apostle himself in Greek, both the external testimony and the + internal evidence prove that it is a representation of its contents + sufficiently accurate for all the practical purposes of history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the question + as to the names of the persons who actually set forth our Gospels has + been made of far more importance than it deserves, both by the + defenders and the opponents of Christianity. The all important point + is, are they faithful accounts of the primitive traditions of the + Church respecting the chief events of its Founder's ministry; and + were they composed within that period of time, when the recollections + of it must have been so fresh as to render it impossible to + substitute a body of fictitious and legendary narratives in place of + those which had been handed down in the Church from the beginning? + Unless we know enough about an author from external sources of + information, to enable us to form a definite opinion as to his + judgment and means of information, our mere knowledge of his name + will help us little. The information which ecclesiastical tradition + affords us respecting the authors of the Synoptic Gospels is little + beyond that which is contained in the New Testament itself, and is + insufficient to enable us to form a judgment respecting their + character. That judgment must be formed <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page490">[pg 490]</span><a name="Pg490" id="Pg490" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> exclusively from the writings themselves, and + can only be arrived at after a careful examination of their + contents.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It will be urged + that if our present Greek Matthew could be shown to have been the + work of the Apostle, we should then have the testimony of an + eye-witness of the ministry of Jesus; and if we have no certain + evidence that it was composed by him, then none of the events + recorded in the Synoptics rest on autoptic testimony. The truth of + this position I entirely deny. The real question is, do the events + recorded in them faithfully represent the traditions of the Church? + Have we evidence that the traditions which were current when these + Gospels were composed, are accurate representations of the accounts + of the ministry of Jesus, which were handed down by our Lord's + original disciples? If so, they must rest on autoptic testimony, as + they could only have been derived from our Lord's companions. The + mere knowing the name of one of them, unless we knew a great deal + about his judgment and discretion, is of far less importance than the + assurance that we are in possession of the general testimony of the + entire body. Nor does it necessarily follow that any one follower of + Jesus, even an Apostle, was in constant attendance on His person. We + know from the Gospels themselves that this was not always the case. + If such a person had narrated events which occurred during his + absence, he must have been indebted for his knowledge of them to the + testimony of others. If therefore the present Greek Matthew could be + proved to be the work of the Apostle, still it by no means follows + that he was an eye-witness of every one of the events recorded in it. + If, however, it was set forth in its present form by some other hand, + I fully admit that <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page491">[pg + 491]</span><a name="Pg491" id="Pg491" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + neither of the Synoptics was composed by an Apostle. But this is a + wholly different point from the consideration whether they do or do + not embody the testimony of the eye-witnesses of the ministry of + Jesus Christ. This does not depend on our knowledge of the names of + their respective authors, but whether we have good evidence that they + faithfully embody the primitive apostolical traditions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A careful perusal + of the Synoptics will convince the reader that neither of them + professes to embody a set of personal reminiscences. On the contrary, + they bear the strongest indications of being a collection of + apostolic traditions. Of this I shall offer distinctive proof in the + next chapter. The only Gospel which embodies such personal + reminiscences as indicate the authorship of an eye-witness is that of + St. John. But the indications of the presence of an individual + personality in St. Matthew's Gospel are almost entirely wanting. In + its general structure it forms a striking contrast to that of John. + Supposing it to have been composed by the Apostle, he has entirely + hidden his individuality in his narrative.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The question, + therefore, really turns on the conclusion at which we are able to + arrive as to whether the Synoptic Gospels are faithful + representations of the primitive apostolic traditions. I have proved + that even at the latest date to which opponents assign their + publication, they must have been written within the period when all + the requisite materials existed for composing a substantially correct + account of all the leading facts; that such a traditionary account + was certainly handed down in the Church; that it formed the + ground-work of its existence; that it must have been derived from + apostolic men, who had ample means of knowing <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page492">[pg 492]</span><a name="Pg492" id="Pg492" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the facts; that the Church possessed the + means of transmitting them accurately, such as were never possessed + by any other Society; and that it was under the necessity of doing so + as the condition of its life; and that while this account remained + fresh in the recollections both of the community and of its + individual members, it would have been impossible to foist on them a + fictitious story. I shall now proceed to inquire how far the + phenomena of the Gospels tend to establish these positions.</p> + </div><span class="tei tei-pb" id="page493">[pg 493]</span><a name= + "Pg493" id="Pg493" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc45" id="toc45"></a> <a name="pdf46" id="pdf46"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Chapter XXII. The Historical Character + Of The Gospels As Deduced From Their Internal Structure.</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This subject is an + extremely extensive one. The utmost, therefore, that I can do is to + notice a few of the most important points which bear on the argument. + I have already shown that the general principles of historical + evidence point to the conclusion that the Synoptic Gospels are three + different versions of the primitive apostolical traditions respecting + the actions and the teaching of Jesus Christ, and that even on the + assumption that the dates assigned to them by the opponents are the + correct ones (which however I would by no means be understood as + conceding, for all the internal evidence points to a much earlier + period), they were still composed within the period when such + traditions possess the highest historical value. I must now inquire + whether the general structure of these Gospels confirms this + conclusion.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The question + therefore at once arises, what is their general character? Do they + present the marks of traditionary history; or of being three works + composed by three different authors, who not only wrote independently + of each other, but who used no common source of information? Do their + narratives present us with the characteristics of historical truth or + of fictitious invention? The facts before us are ample, <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page494">[pg 494]</span><a name="Pg494" id="Pg494" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and they ought to enable us to return a + definite answer to these questions.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The most + remarkable trait which first strikes the reader is the presence of a + common narrative interwoven with a considerable amount of matter + peculiar to each Gospel. Many of the events, and several of the + discourses are narrated by all three Evangelists; others by only two. + Besides these common narratives and discourses, which form the larger + portion of the Gospels, each of them contains narratives and + discourses peculiar to itself. While they possess much that is + common, it is clear that each writer had a distinct object in view in + the compilation of his Gospel; that of St. Matthew being chiefly + designed for Jewish Christians; that of St. Luke for Gentile + converts, and that of St. Mark occupying an intermediate place + between the two. It was also obviously the object of the author of + St. Matthew's Gospel to set forth the discourses; of that of St. + Mark's to give a graphic description of the actions of our Lord. Each + of these Gospels is also distinguished by a number of minor + peculiarities.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">When the common + narrative comes to be closely scrutinized, it presents us with + phenomena more remarkable than any that can be found elsewhere in + literature. These narratives are couched to a considerable extent in + the same words and phrases, closely interwoven with a number of most + singular variations, which have an important bearing on their + historical character. As far as the words are identical, they force + on us the conclusion that they must have been derived from some + common origin. These identities are more striking in the narrative + than in the discourses. Three independent writers, if they intended + to hand down the general sense of a body of discourses, on the + supposition that they were in possession of accurate <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page495">[pg 495]</span><a name="Pg495" id="Pg495" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> information, would repeat them to a great + extent in the same words. But that three independent writers, who + used no common source of information in narrating the same + occurrences, should have employed the same words to the extent to + which it has been done by the authors of these Gospels is simply + impossible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But if they had + all copied from the same document, these identities of expression + must inevitably have been more complete. It would have been + impossible that they could have been of the capricious character + which they present to us in the pages of the Evangelists. Even in the + narratives, frequent as is the use of the same words, the variations + are numerous; nor are they much less so in the discourses. They are + of the most singular character, and without the smallest apparent + purpose. Sometimes they are simple changes in grammatical + construction, or a word of nearly the same meaning is substituted for + another. Then we find one or more lines, sometimes a whole sentence, + transposed. Sometimes words or lines which are inserted by one + Evangelist are omitted by another, the omission obscuring, and the + insertion throwing light on the sense. At other times, a whole + incident is omitted which, if it had been inserted, would have made + an obscure context plain. In the discourses it occasionally happens + that a part of one which we read in the same context in another + Evangelist, and which seems to be required by the connection, is + omitted, when words of nearly the same import have been attributed to + our Lord elsewhere. Again: sayings are reported in which, while many + words are the same, others are varied without any conceivable reason + for the variation. In one or two instances, when words are put into + the mouths of persons different from those to whom they are + attributed by another Evangelist, the grammatical <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page496">[pg 496]</span><a name="Pg496" id="Pg496" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> structure is altered to suit the + variation. Of this we have two remarkable examples in the account of + the healing of the Centurion's servant, and in the narrative of the + request which the two sons of Zebedee and Salome presented to our + Lord. The words are precisely the same, while the grammatical forms + differ, according as the one or the other is regarded as the + speaker.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are the chief + phenomena. But the full extent and character of these variations, in + the closest union as they are with identities of expression, can only + be appreciated by a careful comparison of the parallel narrative of + the Gospels. Numerous, however, as are the variations, it must be + observed that they exert scarcely any appreciable influence on the + general sense. They utterly negate the idea that they can have + originated in any set or deliberate purpose. Let us take for example + the account of the feeding of the five thousand. The Synoptics employ + the very remarkable expression, that after the performance of the + miracle, our Lord <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">constrained</span></em> the disciples to embark, + without giving us a hint of the reason of so unusual an occurrence. + We turn to St. John's Gospel; he says not one word about our Lord's + constraining the disciples to embark, but tells us that the multitude + were designing to come and take Jesus by force and make Him a king. + This notice, which is of the most incidental character, gives as the + fullest explanation of an event which would otherwise have been + extremely obscure.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But further: in + the account of the miracle itself, one of the Evangelists tells us, + that the numbers who were fed were about five thousand, besides women + and children. How then were the numbers ascertained? and how came it + to pass that the men only were numbered, and neither the women, nor + children? Another Evangelist <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page497">[pg 497]</span><a name="Pg497" id="Pg497" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> tells us that the multitude were directed to + sit down in companies by hundreds and by fifties. This at once + explains how the numbers were arrived at. But if this was the case, + how came it to be known that the men were about five thousand; and + how came it to pass, that the women and children were excluded from + the total enumeration? Here again another Evangelist comes to our + help; and informs us that although the order was given to the whole + multitude to sit down in companies, those who actually did so were + the ἄνδρες not the ἄνθρωποι, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> that the men only sat down, + but the women and children did not. This is told us in the most + incidental form, appearing only in the Greek.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This last case is + perhaps the most remarkable example in the Gospels, of the manner in + which an incidental variation in one Evangelist throws light on the + obscurities of another. Can such a narrative be otherwise than + historical? This note of veracity is so entirely incidental that it + has in all probability escaped the notice of nine hundred and + ninety-nine out of every thousand of its readers. There are many + others, though less striking, all of which are of the same incidental + character, and it is impossible to attribute them to design. Surely + this can only have resulted from our being in the presence of facts + and not of fiction.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the variations + in the discourses require a further notice. When variations occur in + highly important discourses, it is open to the suspicion that they + have originated in the deliberate purpose of giving a different + doctrinal meaning to the words. But when we closely examine those in + the Gospels, although they are very numerous, we find them of a + purely incidental character, exerting a very inconsiderable influence + on the sense. I am aware that attempts have been made to show that + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page498">[pg 498]</span><a name="Pg498" + id="Pg498" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> some few of these variations + have originated in design; but these attempts only prove the straits + to which those who make them are driven. Thus in the account of the + Sermon on the Mount as we read it in St. Matthew, the passage runs: + <span class="tei tei-q">“Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is + the kingdom of heaven.”</span> In the corresponding passage in St. + Luke it runs: <span class="tei tei-q">“Blessed are <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">ye</span></em> + poor,”</span> <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> the poor people who were our + Lord's disciples, for the Evangelist expressly tells us that these + words were addressed, not to the multitude generally, but to them. + The supposition that this variation indicates the presence of + something resembling communistic views in the author of St. Luke's + Gospel is too absurd to be worthy of serious discussion. Taking them + as a whole, these discrepancies create no appreciable difference in + the teaching of Jesus as reported by the different Evangelists.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">One thing + respecting them is clear—they bear the strongest testimony to the + historical character of the writings which contain them. It is simply + inconceivable that the authors of the Gospels made them deliberately. + They must have found them in the sources from which they drew their + information. They form one of the strongest proofs that neither a + forger, nor an accommodater of facts for the purpose of making them + fit in with particular doctrinal theories, has had any hand in + originating them. In simple changes in grammatical structure, purpose + or design is inconceivable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the variations + in narratives, such as those above referred to, are even more + important as constituting an attestation of their historical reality + than variations in discourses. Four separate versions of a fictitious + incident fail to clear up one another's obscurities. But the ability + to do so is the distinctive <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page499">[pg + 499]</span><a name="Pg499" id="Pg499" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + mark of imperfect narratives of facts, told by different witnesses. + When two things of a complicated mechanical construction exactly + dovetail into each other, it is a proof that they have originated in + the same mind. In a similar manner, when a number of distinct + narratives, each of which is more or less incomplete, exactly fit + into each other, this constitutes a proof, that they did not + originate in a fiction but in a fact.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">An illustration + will aid in showing the force of this reasoning. The early history of + Rome is unquestionably of a highly legendary character. We have two + versions of it, one by Livy, and another by Dionysius. These writers + do not give us direct accounts of the primitive legends, but their + narratives are compiled from authors of a much earlier date, who + first reduced them to writing. Still these historians may be viewed + as substantially accurate reporters of the legendary history, as it + was compiled by the earlier writers. An important question therefore + arises, does the twofold account which we possess of these legends, + after all the efforts made by Livy and Dionysius to weave them into a + consistent whole, bear the smallest analogy to the narratives + contained in four Evangelists? It is clear that great disagreements + existed among the original authorities. Let us take any account of + the supposed events of three years—do the variations in the two + accounts bear the smallest resemblance to the singular phenomena + which we find in the Evangelists? Will they dovetail into one + another? Will the small additions in one throw light on the + obscurities of the other? Do the speeches present any indications of + being copies of a common original? All these questions must be + answered in the negative. Whence then comes this difference between + the narratives of the <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page500">[pg + 500]</span><a name="Pg500" id="Pg500" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + Evangelists and the legendary accounts of the origin of the Roman + power? I answer, because the one is founded on fact and the other on + fiction.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is not my + intention to discuss the innumerable theories that have been + propounded as to the origin of the Gospels, for the purpose of + accounting for the common narrative, its variations, and the + additions peculiar to each. Many of these theories violate the + principle of common sense; and if the contrary were not known to be + the fact they would suggest the idea that their authors had never + practised the art of literary composition. Among them I shall only + notice the theories which suppose that the Evangelists had before + them one common document when writing their Gospels; or that one of + them had before him the Gospel of another; that they deliberately + copied the common words and phrases, and no less deliberately made + the alterations, additions, and transpositions which the common + narrative presents. Let us take for an illustration the supposition + that the author of Mark's Gospel had that of Matthew before him, or + the converse. In the one case he must have deliberately retained all + the common words and phrases, after making the most capricious + variations and suppressions. Next, he must have inserted all the + little additions which distinguish the Gospel of St. Mark from that + of St. Matthew, and made the requisite transpositions. But what is + still more remarkable, he must also have taxed his invention to + insert in the midst of its impersonal narrative all those graphic + descriptions which impart to Mark's Gospel the appearance of ocular + testimony. Besides all this he must of set purpose have omitted + nearly all the discourses in which Matthew's Gospel is so full, or + have placed them in a different context. If, on the other hand, we + suppose that Mark's Gospel is the original <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page501">[pg 501]</span><a name="Pg501" id="Pg501" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> and Matthew's the copy, the whole process must + be reversed, and above all the author must have deliberately struck + out the graphic portions of Mark, except in one or two instances, + when he has added some of his own. All theories which are founded on + the supposition that the authors of either Gospel used a common + document and deliberately altered it, or that one of them formed his + Gospel out of that of another by a number of additions and + subtractions axe simply incredible.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the common + narrative exists with the identities of expression interwoven with + its variations. How are we to account for this remarkable fact? The + identities of expression must have had a common origin. But what do + the variations prove? Evidently that the narrative had passed through + a period of oral transmission. No other theory can adequately account + for them.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such variations + would naturally spring up in the course of oral transmission. We have + already seen that the circumstances of the Church rendered such a + mode of transmission necessary, as details of our Lord's life must + have formed regular portions of Christian instruction. In doing this, + variations would inevitably arise. After a while they would assume a + distinctive type in different Churches. If then the Synoptic + narratives are three versions of an oral Gospel handed down in as + many Churches, and put together with additions by their respective + authors, this affords a reasonable explanation of the phenomena which + the common narrative presents. In this case the only thing which + involves a difficulty is the large number of identities preserved by + the Evangelists. This proves the strong hold which the words must + have had on the minds of the members of the different Churches.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The existence of a + traditionary narrative is still further proved by the fourth Gospel. + No one can deny <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page502">[pg + 502]</span><a name="Pg502" id="Pg502" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + that this is an independent record, and that its origin must have + been wholly different from that of the other three. Yet in those + portions which cover common ground with the Synoptics we meet with + phenomena of a similar order, all proving that there must have been a + narrative in existence which had impressed itself indelibly on the + mind of the Church; so much so that an entirely independent writer + fell into the same mode of expression when his subject led him to + narrate incidents common to the other three.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Every + consideration which can be brought to bear on this subject tends to + prove the existence of a traditionary narrative of the actions and + teaching of Jesus which was handed down in the Churches prior to the + publication of either of the Synoptic Gospels, and that their common + matter must have passed through a period of oral transmission. It + follows therefore that our three Synoptics are three different + versions of the same oral Gospel modified in the course of + transmission and supplemented by additional information introduced by + their respective authors. We know as a fact that a traditionary + narrative maintained its place in the Church far into the second + century. Papias deliberately expressed his preference for it as + compared with written records; and the writings of other Fathers show + their acquaintance with it.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is clear + therefore that a number of traditionary narratives existed in the + Church; and that if a number of persons had set themselves to reduce + these accounts to writing, they would have presented phenomena + analogous to those of the Synoptic Gospels. I have also shown that + these Gospels present all the phenomena which distinguish this + species of narrative. The substantial agreement of the three, both as + to facts and as to the discourses, is a guarantee that the actual + traditions <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page503">[pg + 503]</span><a name="Pg503" id="Pg503" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of + the Church have been accurately reported. Their diversities also + afford the strongest proof that these reports were composed in + perfect independence of each other.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is remarkable + that the great majority of those against whom I am reasoning admit + that the discourses in the Synoptic Gospels are fairly accurate + representations of the actual utterances of Jesus, although they must + have passed through a period of oral transmission. Yet it is certain + that the accurate transmission of discourses by oral tradition is far + more difficult than that of a report of facts through the same + medium. The difficulty of preventing the intrusion of foreign + elements is much greater. Slight alterations may materially affect + their meaning. Yet the discourses recorded in the Synoptics bear the + indelible impress of a single mind, that of Jesus Christ.<a id= + "noteref_6" name="noteref_6" href="#note_6"><span class= + "tei tei-noteref"><span style= + "font-size: 60%; vertical-align: super">6</span></span></a> It + follows therefore that if the traditions of the Church were able to + hand down accurately the discourses of our Lord until the time when + they were reduced to writing, still more easily would they transmit a + correct account of His acts as narrated by His original followers. + Except on account of the antecedent difficulty with which the + miraculous element in the narrative is supposed to be attended, it + would be absurd to accept the one and to reject the other as mere + legendary invention. But having once established the fact of the + Resurrection, the antecedent difficulty of the miracles is + effectually disposed of, and the facts resume their place in + history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It forms no + objection to the general argument that some of the Synoptics contain + narratives of considerable length, which are omitted by others. It + was precisely <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page504">[pg + 504]</span><a name="Pg504" id="Pg504" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + what was to be expected that the traditionary accounts would vary in + this respect, and have incidents reported by different witnesses of + our Lord's ministry incorporated into them. They abound in the Gospel + of St. Luke, who distinctly states that it is a compilation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">A careful study of + the Gospel of St. Matthew must lead to the conclusion that its + narrative portions are derived from the same general sources as those + of the other two. We find in it precisely the same verbal identities + which have been already noticed as affording proof of the existence + of a common source of information, and the same variations which + prove that it must have passed through a period of oral transmission. + Nor are the indications of autoptic testimony stronger in Matthew + than in the other two Evangelists; in fact, they are less so than in + Mark. The discourses in Matthew, viewed as a whole, are a far more + complete collection of the sayings of our Lord, than those in Mark or + Luke. It seems to have been one of the chief purposes of the author + of this Gospel to make a collection of them, and to unite them by a + brief narrative of events. But even in the discourses, some of the + variations found in Mark and Luke possess stronger claims to be + regarded as the original form of the utterances of our Lord, than the + corresponding ones in Matthew. In the parts which are common to the + Synoptics, they are evidently founded on one common source of + information; and in this respect neither of them can put in a higher + claim to originality than the other.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Such are some of + the chief characteristics of these Gospels, which have the most + intimate bearing on their claims to be regarded as genuine historical + productions. They are accounts of the traditions of the Church + respecting the life and teaching of its Founder at the time when they + were composed. I have already shown, <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page505">[pg 505]</span><a name="Pg505" id="Pg505" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> that if they were composed at any time between + the ministry of Jesus Christ and the first twenty years of the second + century, it would have been impossible to have substituted a + legendary narrative for the account which was handed down in the + Church. I am not concerned to prove that no inaccuracies could have + crept into these traditionary accounts. The only question of the + smallest importance is, are they substantially historical? On this + question mere minor details, the order and arrangement of events, or + even the introduction of two or three erroneous accounts, has no more + bearing than it has on the general credit of other histories. Our + question is, what is their value as sources of history? This must be + kept perfectly distinct from the question as to the nature and extent + of the inspiration of the writers.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">With respect to a + large number of alleged discrepancies, their whole force as + objections to the historical character of the Gospels is disposed of + by the simple consideration that their authors assert them to be + memoirs, and not histories. No small number of others can be shown to + exist only in the imagination of those who allege them. A few real + difficulties will probably remain; but these no more invalidate their + historical character, than similar ones which are to be found in + every writer <span class="tei tei-q">“from Herodotus to Mr. + Froude.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It must not be + forgotten that a careful examination of the Gospels discloses a mass + of additional evidence on this subject which is inconsistent with the + idea that their narratives are a mere congeries of legendary + inventions. It would be impossible to investigate it in a work like + the present, or even to give an idea of its value, as shown in the + intimate acquaintance of the authors with the events, ideas, customs, + and general circumstances of the times. To compose such stories + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page506">[pg 506]</span><a name="Pg506" + id="Pg506" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> out of any materials which + could have been at his hand at the beginning of the second century, + supposing him to have been devoid of all personal knowledge on the + subject, would defy any modern writer of fiction, even one possessed + of the highest genius; not to speak of the incompetence of the + ancient world in this class of literature, rendering the attempts of + such writers as existed among the early Christians simply + hopeless.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">There are two + additional points to which I must draw attention here, in the + internal structure of the Gospels, as establishing their historical + character.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The strongest + evidence which the Gospels afford of their being historical + narratives is the unquestionable fact that they contain a delineation + of the greatest of all characters, Jesus Christ our Lord. This + character is there depicted, even in the opinion of unbelievers of + the greatest eminence, with a matchless perfection. Why will they not + grapple with the question of its origin, and show how it is possible + that such a character should ever have found a place in the Gospels, + on any theory which they have propounded to account for their origin? + It does not originate in any formal sketch or delineation. This the + Evangelists have nowhere given. It is the combined result of all the + facts and the discourses which they contain. The whole subject matter + of the Gospels is in fact the material out of which this great + character is delineated. How came it there if the Gospels consist + only of a mass of mythic and legendary stories which gradually + accumulated in the Church? How is it possible that a bundle of + legends thus thrown together can have created the perfect character + of Jesus Christ, forming, as it does, an harmonious whole? How has it + come to pass that the authors of our Gospels, if they each composed + their narratives from a mass of fictions which grew up <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page507">[pg 507]</span><a name="Pg507" id="Pg507" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> during a period of seventy years, have + each given us a delineation of the same Jesus? These are problems + which have an intimate bearing on the question whether they belong to + the order of historical or fictitious compositions, but with which + unbelief has hitherto most prudently declined to grapple. I shall not + pursue them further here, as I have discussed them fully in the work + already referred to, and shown that the portraiture of Jesus Christ + as delineated in our Gospels is inconsistent with any theory of their + origin which has been propounded by our opponents. To this work I + must refer the reader.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But there is a + second character which is harmoniously delineated in the Gospels, to + which I have not alluded in the work above referred to, that of Simon + Peter. This character, though a subordinate one, is also a perfect + delineation of its kind, instinct with historic life. It differs from + that of Jesus Christ in being that of a purely human character, + possessed of many of the virtues and not a few of the frailties of + ordinary human nature. No student of the Gospels can rise from their + perusal without a lively conception of it. If they are historical, + the account of the origin of this second character of which they + present us so perfect a delineation is a very simple one. It is that + of a genuine man, whose actions they have correctly recorded. But if + the Gospels are such as my opponents affirm them to be, I must + earnestly put to them the question, How came this character there + also? Each Gospel presents us with a delineation of Peter. In each + the same living man is before us, in all his virtues and in all his + failings. How, I ask, is it possible that the author of each Gospel + has succeeded in creating a character of Simon Peter—each true to + nature and each manifestly a delineation of the same person—out of a + number of <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page508">[pg + 508]</span><a name="Pg508" id="Pg508" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + fictions, myths, and legends? Can any one affirm that the Peter of + the Gospels presents us with one single trait of a character formed + by legend?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But the existence + of this delineation in each of the Gospels involves those with whom I + am reasoning in a yet further difficulty. The New Testament contains + a fifth delineation of the character of Simon Peter, professedly + drawn by himself. I allude to his first Epistle. This unbelievers say + is not his genuine production, though the external evidence for it is + strong. In either case it will be equally available for my argument. + If it was written by him, it is separated by an interval of from + thirty to forty years from the Peter of the Gospels. After such a + period of time we ought to find the same substantial lineaments of + character, but chastened, improved, and softened by the influence of + Christianity. This is precisely what we do find. The Peter of the + Epistle is the Peter of the Gospels, in all the substantial elements + of his character, but raised to a greater moral elevation. The Peter + of the Gospels is the Peter of youthful aspirations, who has had + little experience of the trials and struggles of human life. The + Peter of the Epistle while continually reminding us of the Peter of + the Gospels, is a deeply softened man, with many of his infirmities + changed into the graces to which they are allied.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Now if the four + Peters of the Gospels are fictions, how have their inventors + succeeded in delineating him true to his youthful character, and true + to human nature? If, on the other hand, the Peters of the Gospels and + of the Epistle are all five creations of the imagination, the + difficulty is increased to impossibility. How was it possible for the + forger of the Epistle to have delineated a Peter who should be true + to the legendary character of the Peter of the Gospels, and + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page509">[pg 509]</span><a name="Pg509" + id="Pg509" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> at the same time such an + improved version of it as would naturally result from the trials of + between thirty and forty years spent in the service and in attempts + to put in practice the teaching of his Master? It follows, therefore, + that the five portraitures of Simon Peter presented us in the New + Testament, are so many distinctive proofs that the Gospels are + historical realities, and not the mere offspring of the imaginations + of their respective authors.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I am now in a + position to restore the Gospels to their place in history, and to + estimate the value of their testimony. The Synoptics are so many + versions of the traditions, preserved in the different Churches + during the first century, of that portion of the life and teaching of + Jesus which formed the groundwork of Christianity. Such an account, + more or less full, must have been handed down from the first origin + of the Church. This account received enlargements from different + narrators who had been witnesses of different events of our Lord's + life and ministry; but so completely was it interwoven with the daily + course of Christian life, that it is impossible that matters + inconsistent with its fundamental conception can have become + incorporated with it. Moreover, the whole period lay within the + limits of time during which traditions are strictly historical. No + community ever existed which had equal facilities for handing down + accurately the events of its Founder's life, or had stronger + inducements to do so. The Church was struggling for existence, and + seeking to assimilate to itself the elements by which it was + surrounded. This alone must have kept steadily in its memory the + leading events of the life of Jesus. These, as we have seen, must + also have formed the subjects in which its converts were habitually + instructed. Jesus Christ, to use the expressive language of St. Paul, + must have been to <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page510">[pg + 510]</span><a name="Pg510" id="Pg510" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the + primitive Christian community from the hour of its birth <span class= + "tei tei-q">“all and in all.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">From the various + direct and indirect references in St. Paul's Epistles we can form a + general idea of the life and teaching of Jesus, as it must have been + accepted by the Churches to which he wrote. All the outlines + furnished by these Epistles may be traced in our present Gospels. If + we descend to a still later period, we shall find that accounts, + substantially the same, were spread over the entire Church. Even if + it is true that the early Ecclesiastical writers do not cite the + Gospels, it is evident that they were in possession of accounts, + either written or unwritten, which were for all practical purposes + the same. It follows, therefore, that as the Synoptics contain three + versions of the ministry of Jesus which were handed down by the + Churches of the first century, their claim to the character of + historical documents substantially accurate in all their main + features is unquestionable.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Nothing is more + lamentable than the manner in which a number of minute verbal + questions have been introduced into this great controversy. Both + parties have freely indulged in it. The life of Christianity has been + made to depend on whether some passage in a particular Father bears a + precise verbal agreement with another passage to be found in our + present Gospels. Such matters may be interesting as mere literary + questions, but surely they are not worthy to be dignified by the + title of historical ones. To represent the life of Christianity as + depending on them, is to leave the broad basis of historical + investigation, and descend to the mere technicalities of legal + evidence, by which the parties who are most capable of throwing light + on the case are excluded from giving evidence at all, while many + minor points are debated with the utmost ardour. I desire to + <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page511">[pg 511]</span><a name="Pg511" + id="Pg511" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> express no opinion as to + whether this is right or wrong in judicial processes; but the + principles of history are widely different. All evidence must be + accepted for what it is worth, and for no more. The issues are great + ones, and are not dependent on any mere set of barren + technicalities.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Christianity is + not only one of the greatest facts in history, but the greatest; and + its truth or falsehood can never be dependent on whether a passage + more or less in Justin Martyr is an accurate citation of another in + St. Matthew's Gospel. The only questions of real importance are: Do + the numerous references of the early Christian writers to the life + and teaching of Jesus Christ substantially agree with the accounts of + that life and teaching given in our Gospels? Do they contain any + account which gives a really different version of it? If such + agreement exists, although there may be minor differences, the matter + is settled as an historical question. The Gospels, in all their great + outlines, are virtually accurate accounts of the traditions of the + primitive Church respecting the actions and the teaching of its + Founder, and as such they satisfy all the conditions of history.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is impossible + that I should in this place enter on the question of the authorship + or the date of the Fourth Gospel. The literature on this subject + would fill a library of no mean size. I shall only refer to Mr. + Sanday's able vindication of its historical character. One thing + respecting it is clear. It is either the veritable work of an + eye-witness of the facts which it records, or it is a consummate + fiction, such as can be found nowhere else, either in the ancient or + the modern world. Its author must have united a fixed determination + to perpetrate a forgery on a most sacred subject, with one of the + loftiest ideals of morality, and an inimitable power <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page512">[pg 512]</span><a name="Pg512" id="Pg512" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> of simple description, and of inventing + fictitious scenes in a manner which is in the highest degree true to + human nature. If this work was really written by a person who was not + a Jew, one hundred and fifty years after the events which are + described in it, and a century after the destruction of Jerusalem, + the accuracy of its descriptions is one of the most singular + phenomena in literary history. Wherever it runs parallel with the + Synoptic Gospels, it throws light on their obscurities without the + smallest apparent intention of doing so. In some places it helps to + correct erroneous impressions into which the reader of the Synoptic + narratives might otherwise have fallen. Even in that most striking + disagreement between them, respecting the Paschal character of the + Last Supper, we find in the Synoptics hints which corroborate St. + John's account of it. One simple alternative, and one only, lies + before us; either to accept this Gospel as a history of the highest + authority, or to reject it as an audacious forgery.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It now remains for + me very briefly to consider the value of the testimony of the Gospels + to the truth of the Resurrection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If one thing more + than another is evident respecting them, it is that they were not + written for the purposes of controversy with unbelievers, but for the + instruction of Christians. It is certain that the last thing which + occurred to their authors was to guard their narratives against + possible objections. This is made clear by every page. At the time + when they were composed, the Resurrection had long been accepted by + the entire body of believers, as the foundation of their faith. It + was therefore not necessary for the Gospels to prove it, as it would + have been if they had been composed with a direct view to + unbelievers. This is a point which it is important to bear in mind in + considering <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page513">[pg + 513]</span><a name="Pg513" id="Pg513" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> the + nature of their testimony. Two of the narratives of it are entirely + incidental; and it is quite clear that their authors never intended + to give an exhaustive account of the facts. The other two, though + giving us more details, participate largely in the same character. It + is impossible to read either narrative with care and not feel that it + was never intended to be a systematic account of all the facts with + which the author was acquainted respecting the Resurrection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is objected + against these narratives that they abound with variations, amounting + to contradictions. The variations are unquestionable, and it will + readily be conceded that it is extremely difficult to piece together + all the details of the existing accounts so as to weave them into an + harmonious whole. In fact they are inevitable whenever the incidents + described are of exciting interest. Such must have been the character + of those connected with the Resurrection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The chief + difficulty is found in the details of the morning of that important + day. They are in an extremely fragmentary form, and it is quite clear + that we have not all the events before us. If we had, we should then + be in a position to judge what is the precise nature of the + variations in the minor details. But even if contradictions could be + proved to exist, how does their presence invalidate the main facts, + whose truth is established by wholly independent testimony? The only + way in which it can be made to do so is by mixing up questions + involving particular theories of inspiration with considerations + purely historical. Such discrepancies exist in connection with some + of the most important facts of history in their minor details, + without in the smallest degree invalidating their historical + credibility.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This may be easily + tested by examining a number of <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page514">[pg 514]</span><a name="Pg514" id="Pg514" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> newspaper accounts of any exciting event, which + are derived from reporters entirely independent of each other. One + witnesses one thing, and one another; and it is often difficult to + weave the whole into a perfectly consistent narrative. No one can + doubt that the morning of the Resurrection must have been one in the + last degree exciting to the disciples of our Lord. They were not mere + reporters, but persons profoundly interested in the various + occurrences. It would therefore have been inconsistent with the + historical truth of their position, if their narratives had presented + us with no variations.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It is certain that + several women accompanied our Lord on His last journey to Jerusalem. + What was more likely than that they would visit the sepulchre at + different times, and with different purposes? Can any one doubt that + their excitement must have been great? What conceivable difference + can it make to the great fact of the Resurrection, that one account + mentions two Marys as going to the sepulchre; that the second adds to + these Salome; that the third mentions several women; and that the + fourth mentions Mary Magdalene alone? There might have been, as far + as anything which appears in the narratives is concerned, several + different visits; or the same person may have returned more than + once. Or what is the use of urging that there is an apparent + variation of about an hour between the different accounts, as to the + precise time when these visits were made? Do variations of this + description, which are found in accounts derived from eye-witnesses + of Louis XVI's flight from Paris, in the smallest degree invalidate + the fact? Or what conceivable difference does it make that one + narrative represents the women as seeing one angel, and another two; + and that one describes the appearance as taking place <span class= + "tei tei-pb" id="page515">[pg 515]</span><a name="Pg515" id="Pg515" + class="tei tei-anchor"></a> inside, and another outside the + sepulchre? It is quite possible that all these accounts may be true, + and that these occurrences took place on different occasions. If they + were true, nothing was more unlikely than that the women could have + given an orderly narrative of them. Variations must occur in all + reports of events when the witnesses see only a portion of them. The + great facts before us are plain and evident; and unless they are + falsehoods, there could be no possibility of mistake respecting them. + Different bodies of women found the sepulchre empty. Some of them + affirmed that they had seen Jesus risen from the dead, and that He + sent a message by them to His disciples. Peter and John visited the + sepulchre, and found it empty. Later in the same day, Peter affirmed + that Jesus Christ appeared to him; on which day also two other + disciples affirmed that they had seen Him on a journey, at first + without recognizing Him, but that they did so afterwards. On the + evening of the same day, these two disciples, ten of the Apostles, + with other persons in company, saw Him in a body, and were permitted + to test the reality of His Resurrection by handling His Person, and + by seeing Him eat. About such facts there could be no mistake. Most + of them were well known and accepted when St. Paul wrote his + Epistles, when the means of testing their truth was ample. We know on + the same authority that the whole apostolic body asserted that they + had seen the Lord, and that as many as five hundred other persons + made a similar assertion. These are the chief facts, and a number of + minor variations such as those above referred to cannot affect their + credibility.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">It has been + objected that the author of St. Matthew's Gospel was ignorant of some + of these appearances. On what ground is the objection made? On the + fact <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page516">[pg 516]</span><a name= + "Pg516" id="Pg516" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> that he has not + mentioned them? Does a writer always report all he knows, especially + when his writing is intended for the use of those who firmly believe + the fact already? Nothing can exceed the fragmentary character of + this portion of his narrative. If this Gospel was composed at the + late period assigned to it by those against whom I am reasoning, + namely, <span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-variant: small-caps">a.d.</span></span> 90, it is incredible + that these were the only facts known to the writer, at least thirty + years after St. Paul wrote his Epistles. The charge of ignorance + might be sustained with far greater plausibility if it were admitted + that St. Matthew was the author of this Gospel, because it might have + been expected that he would mention the first occasion on which his + Master had appeared to him rather than the third. But his authorship + is denied, and the publication of the Gospel assigned to the last ten + years of the century, when it was impossible that the author, whoever + he may have been, could be ignorant that it was alleged that our Lord + had appeared on other occasions besides those mentioned by him.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I will now + consider the threefold account of the great appearance on the morning + of Easter-day. One of them is contained in the supplement to St. + Mark's Gospel; the other two are those in Luke and John. Let us first + carefully observe the mode in which they are narrated in the + supplement.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Its author seems + to have entertained a stronger view of the indisposition of the + disciples to believe the truth of the Resurrection than the other two + narratives appear to warrant. He first notices the appearance to Mary + Magdalene on the morning of that day, and says that the disciples + refused to credit her report. Next, he tells us of the appearance to + the two disciples as they went into the country; and states that on + their return they told it to the remainder, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Neither believed</span> <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page517">[pg 517]</span><a name="Pg517" id="Pg517" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a><span style="font-style: italic">they + them.</span></em>”</span> <span class="tei tei-q">“Afterward,”</span> + he adds, <span class="tei tei-q">“he appeared <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">to the eleven as they + sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of + heart, because they believed not those who had seen him after he was + risen</span></em>.”</span> It is evident that the author of the + supplement entertained a strong view of the incredulity of the + disciples when their companions reported to them the fact of the + Resurrection.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Let us now examine + how the facts stand in Luke's narrative. It opens with a detailed + account of the journey into the country of Cleopas and his companion, + and of our Lord's appearance to them. Our Lord addresses them in the + following words: <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">O fools and slow of + heart,</span></em>”</span> (Ω ἀνόητοι, καὶ Βραδεῖς τῇ καρδίᾳ) + <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">to believe all that the prophets have + spoken.</span></em>”</span> After their recognition of Jesus, they + are described as immediately returning to Jerusalem, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">and find the eleven gathered together and those + that were with them, saying, the Lord is risen indeed, and hath + appeared unto Simon.</span></em>”</span> <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">And they</span></em>”</span> (<span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> + Cleopas and his companion) <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">told what things were + done on the way, and how he was known unto them in the breaking of + bread.</span></em>”</span> The narrative then proceeds: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">And as they thus spake,</span></em>”</span> + (<span class="tei tei-hi"><span style= + "font-style: italic">i.e.</span></span> Cleopas and his companion) + <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and + said unto them, Peace be unto you.</span></em>”</span> It then + informs us that they were terrified and supposed that the appearance + was that of a spirit. On this our Lord reasons with them: + <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Why are ye troubled, and why do thoughts arise + in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet that it is I myself, for + a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see me have. And when he had + thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his + feet.</span></em>”</span> The writer then adds: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“And when they yet believed not for joy and wondered, he + said unto them, Have ye here any meat? And they gave him a piece of a + broiled fish, <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page518">[pg + 518]</span><a name="Pg518" id="Pg518" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> and + of an honey-comb, and he took it and did eat before them.”</span> The + author then proceeds with his narrative: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“These are the words that I spake unto you, while I was + yet with you, that all things might be fulfilled that are written in + the law of Moses, and in the prophets and in the Psalms concerning + me.”</span> And he adds: <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Then opened he their + understanding, that they might understand the + Scriptures.</span></em>”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The following is + the account given of the same meeting in St. John's Gospel. After + having given a full description of the appearance to Mary Magdalene, + he thus describes our Lord's appearance on the evening of Easter-day: + <span class="tei tei-q">“Then the first day at evening, being the + first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples + were assembled for fear of the Jews, <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">came Jesus and stood + in the midst, and said unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had + so said, he showed them his hands and his side.</span></em> Then were + the disciples glad when they saw the Lord. <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Then said Jesus unto + them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so + send I you. And when he had said this he breathed on them, and said, + Receive ye the Holy Ghost.</span></em>”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The difference + between the supplement of Mark's Gospel and the narratives of Luke + and John is very remarkable. Are the variations such as would be + found in different reports of a set of fictions, or are they such as + distinguish brief but inexact reports of actual occurrences? This is + a very important question.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">First: the three + accounts bear the clearest indications of being independent. It is + incredible that any one of the three writers having before him one or + both of the other two accounts should have composed his own as it now + stands.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Secondly: the + author of the supplement uses very strong language in describing the + unbelief of the disciples. <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page519">[pg + 519]</span><a name="Pg519" id="Pg519" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> He + says that when they told it to the others, they did not believe their + report. St. Luke, on the other hand, informs us that as soon as + Cleopas and his companion entered the room where on their return they + found the Apostles and others assembled together, they were received + with the exclamation: <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">The Lord is risen + indeed, and hath appeared unto Simon.</span></em>”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Again: the author + of the supplement says that when Jesus appeared to the eleven as they + sat at meat <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">he upbraided them + with their unbelief and hardness of heart</span></em> (ὠνείδισε τὴν + ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν καὶ σκληροκαρδίαν) <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">because they did not + believe them that had seen him after he was + risen.</span></em>”</span> St. Luke tells us that not only were + Cleopas and his companion received with the joyful exclamation, + <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">The Lord is risen indeed</span></em>,”</span> + but instead of upbraiding them Jesus addressed them with the words + <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Peace be unto you</span></em>;”</span> which is + confirmed by the author of the fourth Gospel, who, if St. John was + really the author, must have been present. In neither of these + Gospels is there one word of <span class="tei tei-q">“upbraiding the + disciples with unbelief;”</span> while both affirm that Jesus + proceeded to give them rational grounds for believing that He was + actually risen from the dead, by showing them, according to one, + <span class="tei tei-q">“his hands and his feet,”</span> according to + the other, <span class="tei tei-q">“his hands and his side.”</span> + It is quite probable that He may have done both. St. John adds, + <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Then were the disciples glad when they saw the + Lord.</span></em>”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But St. Luke's + account is more specific. He tells us that immediately on His entry + fear took possession of their minds. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">They were terrified and + affrighted</span></em>,”</span> and supposed that it might be a + spirit, and not Jesus actually raised from the dead. Our Lord + therefore before showing them His hands and His feet proceeded to + reason with them as to the reality of His appearance. <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Handle me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh + and bones</span> <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page520">[pg + 520]</span><a name="Pg520" id="Pg520" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a><span style="font-style: italic">as ye see me + have.</span></em>”</span> Here there is nothing of reproach, such as + is suggested by the supplement to St. Mark's Gospel. Yet there was + incredulity of a certain kind in the room, but not one which was + worthy of reproach. We learn from St. Luke that it was not the + incredulity of <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">unbelief, but of joy</span></em>; in other + words, that the news seemed too good to be true, and they dared + scarcely trust the evidence of their senses. On this however nothing + in the form of a <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">reproach</span></em> passes the lips of Jesus; + but for their further satisfaction, <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">he asks for food and + eats it before them</span></em>.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">On all these + points the narratives of St. Luke and St. John throw light on each + other, as such accounts, if founded on fact, ought to do, while their + independence is indisputable. According to those with whom I am + reasoning, the Gospel of St. John is much the latest written. If + therefore the author had borrowed from Luke, it is incredible that a + writer who had such powers of setting forth fictions in the garb of + facts, should have omitted the other remarkable incidents mentioned + by St. Luke, and not have dressed them up with the art of which he + was so consummate a master, for these would have communicated a + striking reality to the scenes. It is therefore unquestionable that + these two accounts present all the phenomena of history, and none of + those of fiction.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">But how stands the + continuation of St. Mark's Gospel, which affirms that our Lord + upbraided the eleven with their unbelief and hardness of heart on the + occasion of His appearance on Easter evening?</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The author of the + supplement was probably not aware that Cleopas and his companion were + present in the room when our Lord appeared to the eleven, or even + that others besides the eleven were present, as is expressly affirmed + by St. Luke to have been the case. <span class="tei tei-pb" id= + "page521">[pg 521]</span><a name="Pg521" id="Pg521" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> The impression which it leaves on the mind is + that they reported the Resurrection to the disciples generally on + their return, and that it was disbelieved by them, and that the + appearance to the eleven was a subsequent event.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">We are now in a + position to see how this misapprehension may have originated; and + that instead of invalidating the account, it forms a strong + confirmation of its truth. There were persons in the room whom our + Lord had actually reproached for their unbelief, viz. Cleopas and his + companion; though He reproached none who were present on the occasion + of His appearance. The words stated by St. Luke to have been used by + Him were, Ω ἀνόητοι καὶ Βραδεῖς τῇ καρδίᾳ, <span class="tei tei-q">“O + fools and slow of heart.”</span> Those used in St. Mark in describing + the address to the eleven are ὠνείδισε τὴν ἀπιστίαν αὐτῶν καὶ + σκληροκαρδίαν, <span class="tei tei-q">“He upbraided their unbelief + and hardness of heart.”</span> The one expression is the very + counterpart of the other. There were persons present who had been + thus reproached but a few hours before: the author of the + continuation was aware of the fact that some had been thus + reproached, and he supposed that the reproach was addressed to all + the assembled disciples, instead of the salutation of peace with its + attendant circumstances.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Then as to their + having been received with expressions of incredulity on their return, + St. Luke tells us that they returned to Jerusalem, <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">and found the eleven gathered together, and them + that were with them.</span></em>”</span> Now as they had set out + early in the day, it was necessary on their return that they should + make some inquiry as to where the Apostles were to be found. In doing + this it is probable enough that they went to inquire of some + disciples who received their account with incredulity, and that then + this incredulity may through misapprehension have been transferred to + the whole <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page522">[pg + 522]</span><a name="Pg522" id="Pg522" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + assembly. I submit therefore that notwithstanding this disagreement + between the three accounts, that of the continuation of St. Mark's + Gospel gives a strong corroboration of the statements of the other + two. These are precisely the kind of variations which we find in + reports of events after they have passed through a few stages of oral + transmission.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The narratives of + St. Luke and St. John furnish us with one more very incidental + confirmation of each other. St. Luke informs us that on the occasion + of this interview our Lord <span class="tei tei-q">“<em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">opened their + understanding, that they might understand the + Scriptures.</span></em>”</span> St. John says that <span class= + "tei tei-q">“<em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">He breathed on them, and said, Receive ye the + Holy Ghost.</span></em>”</span> The words and the mode of expression + differ greatly; but both statements point to one and the same fact, + that on this occasion the persons present supposed that they received + a supernatural enlightenment. St. Luke describes the effect produced + on the minds of the disciples; St. John gives the actual medium of + its production. Coincidences of this kind prove that the narratives + must be founded on facts, and are beyond the skill of a forger to + imitate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">I have now + considered a few of the leading features of the Gospels, which + establish the general historical character of their contents. A close + examination of them would put us in possession of a large amount of + additional evidence, but to enter on such an inquiry here would be + inconsistent with the limits of the present work. As I have already + observed, the minute scrutiny of a number of minor details, as far as + the great historical question is concerned, would be a needless + expenditure of labour. The real question at issue is: Is the account + of our Lord's life and teaching, as it is handed down in our present + Gospels, substantially true in its great outlines, or has one of a + wholly different <span class="tei tei-pb" id="page523">[pg + 523]</span><a name="Pg523" id="Pg523" class="tei tei-anchor"></a> + character been substituted for the true one, and usurped its place in + the teaching of the Church? On a broad question of this kind, minor + discrepancies in the accounts have no real bearing. If the narrative + is true in its great outlines, it follows that our Lord's character + must have been beyond all question superhuman, and justifies us in + affirming that He must have been a <span class="tei tei-q">“teacher + come from God.”</span> Such a conclusion will still leave open a + number of questions of the deepest importance, but they belong to the + province of theology to investigate, and form no necessary portion of + an historical inquiry. If the Gospels <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">in their broad + outlines</span></em> are historical; above all, <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">if Jesus Christ rose + from the dead</span></em>, it follows that the New Testament must + contain a divine revelation.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">As this last fact + forms the central position of Christianity, I have made its + historical truth the chief subject of my investigation. In doing this + I have relied only on documents which are contained in the New + Testament itself, and chiefly on those whose genuineness is conceded + by opponents. I have shown that no species of documents can possess a + higher historical value than these, and that the circumstances under + which they were written, the nature of their contents, and the + persons to whom they were addressed, form an attestation to the truth + of the facts asserted in them, which is unrivalled in the whole + course of literature. By means of these I have firmly established the + fact that the belief in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ was the + foundation on which the Church rested as a community from the first + dawning of its existence, and the basis of the life of its individual + members; and that considerable numbers of the followers of Jesus + Christ affirmed that they had seen and conversed with Him after He + had risen from the dead. I have shown that <span class="tei tei-pb" + id="page524">[pg 524]</span><a name="Pg524" id="Pg524" class= + "tei tei-anchor"></a> these facts rest on the highest form of + historical attestation. This being so, there can be only two + alternatives respecting them. Either the belief in the Resurrection + was founded on the fact that He actually rose from the dead; or it + must have originated in the delusions of His followers. I have shown + that the various theories which have been propounded to account for + it on the latter supposition, when tested by the actual facts, are + untrue both to human nature and to the possibilities of the case. + From this it results, as a necessary consequence, that <span class= + "tei tei-hi"><span style="font-variant: small-caps">Jesus Christ rose + from the dead</span></span>. If He rose from the dead, the truth of + His divine mission is established, and His claim to be the King and + supreme Legislator of the Church is vindicated. This claim may be + fully set forth in two sayings of His own, recorded in St. John's + Gospel: <span class="tei tei-q">“I am the light of the world; he that + followeth Me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of + life.”</span> (xiii. 12.) <span class="tei tei-q">“Thou sayest that I + am a king. For this end was I born, and for this cause came I into + the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that + is of the truth heareth my voice.”</span> (xviii. 37.)</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The practical + conclusion which this investigation suggests cannot be better + expressed than in the words of the same divine Teacher: <span class= + "tei tei-q">“He that believeth, believeth not on me, but on Him that + sent me; and he that seeth me seeth Him that sent me. I am come, a + light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide + in darkness. And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge + him not; for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. He + that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth + him; the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the + last day.”</span></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">THE END.</p> + </div> + </div> + <hr class="doublepage" /> + + <div class="tei tei-back" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 6.00em"> + <div id="footnotes" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <a name="toc47" id="toc47"></a> <a name="pdf48" id="pdf48"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Footnotes</span></h1> + + <dl class="tei tei-list-footnotes"> + <dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_1" name="note_1" href= + "#noteref_1">1.</a></dt> + + <dd class="tei tei-notetext">My quotations throughout this work are + taken from the first edition. The passage here quoted is somewhat + altered in the third edition, but not so as to affect the general + meaning.</dd> + + <dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_2" name="note_2" href= + "#noteref_2">2.</a></dt> + + <dd class="tei tei-notetext">The word which is here translated in + the A. V. <span class="tei tei-q">“miracles”</span> is in the + original σημεῖα.</dd> + + <dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_3" name="note_3" href= + "#noteref_3">3.</a></dt> + + <dd class="tei tei-notetext">J. S. Mill, in his recently published + essays, considers this the most formidable objection against + theism.</dd> + + <dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_4" name="note_4" href= + "#noteref_4">4.</a></dt> + + <dd class="tei tei-notetext">See for example, Matt. v. 39-42, Luke + vi. 20, 21, 24-26, and various others of a similar + description.</dd> + + <dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_5" name="note_5" href= + "#noteref_5">5.</a></dt> + + <dd class="tei tei-notetext"><span class="tei tei-q">“The Jesus of + the Evangelists.”</span></dd> + + <dt class="tei tei-notelabel"><a id="note_6" name="note_6" href= + "#noteref_6">6.</a></dt> + + <dd class="tei tei-notetext">Mr. Mill, in his recently published + Essay on Theism, has strongly expressed his belief that these + discourses are the veritable utterances of Jesus.</dd> + </dl> + </div> + <hr class="doublepage" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 5.00em; margin-top: 5.00em"> + <div id="pgfooter" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 4.00em; margin-top: 4.00em"> + <pre class="pre tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"> +***END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE SUPERNATURAL IN THE NEW TESTAMENT*** +</pre> + <hr class="doublepage" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"> + <a name="rightpageheader49" id="rightpageheader49"></a><a name= + "pgtoc50" id="pgtoc50"></a><a name="pdf51" id="pdf51"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">Credits</span></h1> + + <table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" style= + "margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"> + <tbody> + <tr> + <th class="tei tei-label tei-label-gloss">August 19, + 2014 </th> + </tr> + + <tr> + <td class="tei tei-item tei-item-gloss"> + <table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" + style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"> + <tbody> + <tr class="tei tei-labelitem"> + <th class="tei tei-label"></th> + + <td class="tei tei-item">Project Gutenberg TEI + edition 1</td> + </tr> + + <tr class="tei tei-labelitem"> + <th class="tei tei-label"></th> + + <td class="tei tei-item"><span class= + "tei tei-respStmt"><span class= + "tei tei-name">Produced by David King, and the + Online Distributed Proofreading Team at + <http://www.pgdp.net/>.</span></span></td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + </td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + </div> + <hr class="doublepage" /> + + <div class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"> + <a name="rightpageheader52" id="rightpageheader52"></a><a name= + "pgtoc53" id="pgtoc53"></a><a name="pdf54" id="pdf54"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">A Word from Project + Gutenberg</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This file + should be named 46630-h.html or 46630-h.zip.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This and all + associated files of various formats will be found in: <a href= + "http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/4/6/6/3/46630/" class= + "block tei tei-xref" style= + "margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"> + <span style= + "font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span><span style= + "font-size: 90%">/dirs/4/6/6/3/46630/</span></a></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Updated + editions will replace the previous one — the old editions will be + renamed.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Creating the + works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law + means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, + so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the + United States without permission and without paying copyright + royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use + part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project + Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the Project Gutenberg™ + concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered + trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the ebooks, + unless you receive specific permission. If you do not charge + anything for copies of this ebook, complying with the rules is + very easy. You may use this ebook for nearly any purpose such as + creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. + They may be modified and printed and given away — you may do + practically <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">anything</span></em> in the United States + with ebooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution + is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial + redistribution.</p> + </div> + <hr class="page" /> + + <div id="pglicense" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 3.00em; margin-top: 3.00em"> + <a name="rightpageheader55" id="rightpageheader55"></a><a name= + "pgtoc56" id="pgtoc56"></a><a name="pdf57" id="pdf57"></a> + + <h1 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 3.46em; margin-top: 3.46em"> + <span style="font-size: 173%">The Full Project Gutenberg + License</span></h1> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style="font-style: italic">Please read this + before you distribute or use this work.</span></em></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">To protect the + Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of + electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any + other work associated in any way with the phrase <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span>), you agree to comply with + all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License (<a href= + "#pglicense" class="tei tei-ref">available with this file</a> or + online at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/license" class= + "tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/license</a>).</p> + + <div id="pglicense1" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"> + <span style="font-size: 144%">Section 1.</span></h2> + + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">General Terms of Use & + Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works</span></h2> + + <div id="pglicense1A" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h3 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">1.A.</span></h3> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">By reading + or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, + you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and + accept all the terms of this license and intellectual + property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree + to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease + using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ + electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for + obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ + electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms + of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or + entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph + <a href="#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8.</a></p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1B" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h3 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">1.B.</span></h3> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"> + <span class="tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> is a + registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in + any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be + bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things + that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works + even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. + See paragraph <a href="#pglicense1C" class= + "tei tei-ref">1.C</a> below. There are a lot of things you + can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow + the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future + access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph + <a href="#pglicense1E" class="tei tei-ref">1.E</a> below.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1C" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h3 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">1.C.</span></h3> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (<span class= + "tei tei-q">“the Foundation”</span> or PGLAF), owns a + compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ + electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the + collection are in the public domain in the United States. If + an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the + United States and you are located in the United States, we do + not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, + performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on + the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are + removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project + Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic + works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in + compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the + Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can + easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping + this work in the same format with its attached full Project + Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with + others.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1D" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h3 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">1.D.</span></h3> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The + copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern + what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most + countries are in a constant state of change. If you are + outside the United States, check the laws of your country in + addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, + copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating + derivative works based on this work or any other Project + Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations + concerning the copyright status of any work in any country + outside the United States.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h3 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">1.E.</span></h3> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Unless you + have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:</p> + + <div id="pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.1.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The + following sentence, with active links to, or other + immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License + must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project + Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> appears, or with + which the phrase <span class="tei tei-q">“Project + Gutenberg”</span> is associated) is accessed, displayed, + performed, viewed, copied or distributed:</p> + + <div class="block tei tei-q" style= + "margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 0.90em"> + <span style="font-size: 90%">This ebook is for the use of + anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts + of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions + whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it + under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included + with this ebook or online at</span> <a href= + "http://www.gutenberg.org" class= + "tei tei-xref"><span style="font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span></a><span style="font-size: 90%">. + If you are not located in the United States, you'll have + to check the laws of the country where you are located + before using this ebook.</span></p> + </div> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E2" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.2.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If an + individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived + from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not + contain a notice indicating that it is posted with + permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied + and distributed to anyone in the United States without + paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or + providing access to a work with the phrase <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Project Gutenberg”</span> associated with or + appearing on the work, you must comply either with the + requirements of paragraphs <a href="#pglicense1E1" class= + "tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> through 1.E.7 or obtain permission + for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ + trademark as set forth in paragraphs <a href= + "#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8</a> or 1.E.9.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E3" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.3.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If an + individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted + with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and + distribution must comply with both paragraphs <a href= + "#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> through 1.E.7 + and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. + Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ + License for all works posted with the permission of the + copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E4" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.4.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not + unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ + License terms from this work, or any files containing a + part of this work or any other work associated with Project + Gutenberg™.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E5" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.5.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not + copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this + electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, + without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in + paragraph <a href="#pglicense1E1" class= + "tei tei-ref">1.E.1</a> with active links or immediate + access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ + License.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E6" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.6.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You may + convert to and distribute this work in any binary, + compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, + including any word processing or hypertext form. However, + if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project + Gutenberg™ work in a format other than <span class= + "tei tei-q">“Plain Vanilla ASCII”</span> or other format + used in the official version posted on the official Project + Gutenberg™ web site (http://www.gutenberg.org), you must, + at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide + a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of + obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original + <span class="tei tei-q">“Plain Vanilla ASCII”</span> or + other form. Any alternate format must include the full + Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph + <a href="#pglicense1E1" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.1.</a></p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E7" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.7.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Do not + charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, + performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ + works unless you comply with paragraph <a href= + "#pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-ref">1.E.8</a> or 1.E.9.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E8" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.8.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">You may + charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access + to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works + provided that</p> + + <table summary="This is a list." class="tei tei-list" + style="margin-bottom: 1.00em; margin-top: 1.00em"> + <tbody> + <tr class="tei tei-labelitem"> + <th class="tei tei-label"></th> + + <td class="tei tei-item"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"> + You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits + you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works + calculated using the method you already use to + calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to + the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but + he has agreed to donate royalties under this + paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive + Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 + days following each date on which you prepare (or + are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked + as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary + Archive Foundation at the address specified in + <a href="#pglicense4" class="tei tei-ref">Section + 4, <span class="tei tei-q">“Information about + donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive + Foundation.”</span></a></p> + </td> + </tr> + + <tr class="tei tei-labelitem"> + <th class="tei tei-label"></th> + + <td class="tei tei-item"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"> + You provide a full refund of any money paid by a + user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) + within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree + to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a + physical medium and discontinue all use of and all + access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ + works.</p> + </td> + </tr> + + <tr class="tei tei-labelitem"> + <th class="tei tei-label"></th> + + <td class="tei tei-item"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"> + You provide, in accordance with paragraph <a href= + "#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">1.F.3</a>, a + full refund of any money paid for a work or a + replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic + work is discovered and reported to you within 90 + days of receipt of the work.</p> + </td> + </tr> + + <tr class="tei tei-labelitem"> + <th class="tei tei-label"></th> + + <td class="tei tei-item"> + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"> + You comply with all other terms of this agreement + for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ + works.</p> + </td> + </tr> + </tbody> + </table> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1E9" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.E.9.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">If you + wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ + electronic work or group of works on different terms than + are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission + in writing from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive + Foundation and The Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the + owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the + Foundation as set forth in <a href="#pglicense3" class= + "tei tei-ref">Section 3</a> below.</p> + </div> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1F" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h3 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">1.F.</span></h3> + + <div id="pglicense1F1" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.F.1.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project + Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable + effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe + and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in + creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these + efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the + medium on which they may be stored, may contain + <span class="tei tei-q">“Defects,”</span> such as, but not + limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, + transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual + property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other + medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or + cannot be read by your equipment.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1F2" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.F.2.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">LIMITED + WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES — Except for the + <span class="tei tei-q">“Right of Replacement or + Refund”</span> described in <a href="#pglicense1F3" class= + "tei tei-ref">paragraph 1.F.3</a>, the Project Gutenberg + Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project + Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a + Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, + disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and + expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO + REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF + WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN + PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK + OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE + LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, + PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF + THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.F.3.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">LIMITED + RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND — If you discover a defect + in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you + can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it + by sending a written explanation to the person you received + the work from. If you received the work on a physical + medium, you must return the medium with your written + explanation. The person or entity that provided you with + the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy + in lieu of a refund. If you received the work + electronically, the person or entity providing it to you + may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the + work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy + is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing + without further opportunities to fix the problem.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1F4" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.F.4.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Except + for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in + <a href="#pglicense1F3" class="tei tei-ref">paragraph + 1.F.3</a>, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS,' WITH NO + OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING + BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS + FOR ANY PURPOSE.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1F5" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.F.5.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Some + states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied + warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types + of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in + this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to + this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make + the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the + applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of + any provision of this agreement shall not void the + remaining provisions.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense1F6" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h4 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + 1.F.6.</h4> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"> + INDEMNITY — You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, + the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the + Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ + electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any + volunteers associated with the production, promotion and + distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, + harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including + legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of + the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) + distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) + alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any + Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.</p> + </div> + </div> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense2" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"> + <span style="font-size: 144%">Section 2.</span></h2> + + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">Information about the Mission of + Project Gutenberg™</span></h2> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project + Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of + electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of + computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new + computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of + volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Volunteers + and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance + they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™'s goals + and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain + freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a + secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future + generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary + Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, + see Sections <a href="#pglicense3" class="tei tei-ref">3</a> + and <a href="#pglicense4" class="tei tei-ref">4</a> and the + Foundation web page at <a href="http://www.pglaf.org" class= + "tei tei-xref">http://www.pglaf.org</a>.</p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense3" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"> + <span style="font-size: 144%">Section 3.</span></h2> + + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">Information about the Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</span></h2> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The Project + Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit 501(c)(3) + educational corporation organized under the laws of the state + of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal + Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax + identification number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is + posted at <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf" + class= + "tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/fundraising/pglaf</a>. + Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive + Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by + U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The + Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the + mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, + but its volunteers and employees are scattered throughout + numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North + 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email + business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact + information can be found at the Foundation's web site and + official page at <a href="http://www.pglaf.org" class= + "tei tei-xref">http://www.pglaf.org</a></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">For + additional contact information:</p> + + <div class="block tei tei-address" style= + "margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"> + <span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style= + "font-size: 90%">Dr. Gregory + B. Newby</span></span><br /> + <span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style= + "font-size: 90%">Chief Executive and + Director</span></span><br /> + <span class="tei tei-addrLine"><span style= + "font-size: 90%">gbnewby@pglaf.org</span></span><br /> + </div> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense4" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"> + <span style="font-size: 144%">Section 4.</span></h2> + + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">Information about Donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation</span></h2> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project + Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread + public support and donations to carry out its mission of + increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that + can be freely distributed in machine readable form accessible + by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. + Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important + to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">The + Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating + charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the + United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it + takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to + meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit + donations in locations where we have not received written + confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the + status of compliance for any particular state visit <a href= + "http://www.gutenberg.org/donate" class= + "tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/donate</a></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">While we + cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we + have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no + prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors + in such states who approach us with offers to donate.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"> + International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot + make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations + received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp + our small staff.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Please check + the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods + and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways + including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To + donate, please visit: <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/donate" + class="tei tei-xref">http://www.gutenberg.org/donate</a></p> + </div> + + <div id="pglicense5" class="tei tei-div" style= + "margin-bottom: 2.00em; margin-top: 2.00em"> + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: left; margin-bottom: 2.88em; margin-top: 2.88em"> + <span style="font-size: 144%">Section 5.</span></h2> + + <h2 class="tei tei-head" style= + "text-align: center; margin-bottom: 2.40em; margin-top: 2.40em"> + <span style="font-size: 120%">General Information About Project + Gutenberg™ electronic works.</span></h2> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em"><span class= + "tei tei-name">Professor Michael S. Hart</span> is the + originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of + electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For + thirty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ + eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Project + Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed + editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by + copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. + Thus, we do not necessarily keep ebooks in compliance with any + particular paper edition.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Each ebook + is in a subdirectory of the same number as the ebook's ebook + number, often in several formats including plain vanilla ASCII, + compressed (zipped), HTML and others.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Corrected + <em class="tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">editions</span></em> of our ebooks replace + the old file and take over the old filename and etext number. + The replaced older file is renamed. <em class= + "tei tei-emph"><span style= + "font-style: italic">Versions</span></em> based on separate + sources are treated as new ebooks receiving new filenames and + etext numbers.</p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">Most people + start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + <a href="http://www.gutenberg.org" class="block tei tei-xref" + style= + "margin-bottom: 1.80em; margin-left: 3.60em; margin-top: 1.80em; margin-right: 3.60em"> + <span style= + "font-size: 90%">http://www.gutenberg.org</span></a></p> + + <p class="tei tei-p" style="margin-bottom: 1.00em">This Web + site includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including + how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive + Foundation, how to help produce our new ebooks, and how to + subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new ebooks.</p> + </div> + </div> + </div> + </div> + </div> + </div> +</body> +</html> diff --git a/46630-h/images/cover.jpg b/46630-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..5ed50ce --- /dev/null +++ b/46630-h/images/cover.jpg |
