m %- ^' ^%. ^;*^„^o. IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-S) // % /. l/u 1.0 l.i 1.25 1^ 1.8 ,M Itt ^^ <^ r /i >^ w *^<>i^ y "? Photographic Sciences Coiporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 873-4S03 /^^ /#.^ ^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Coltection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiq ues Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notaa tachniquas at bibliographiquaa Tl tc Tha Inatituta has attamptad to obtain tha bast original copy avaiJabIa for filming. Featuras of this copy which may ba bibllographically uniqua, which may altar any of tha Imagas .'n tha reproduction, or which may significantly change tha usuat method of filming, are checked below. D D D Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagia Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restauria et/ou pellicuite Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartas gtographiques en couleur Coloured inic (i.e. other chan blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ ReliA avec d'autras documents D Tight binding may causa shadows or distortion along interior margin/ Lit reliure serr6e peut causer de i'ombre ou de la distortion la long de la marge intirieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within tha text. Whenever poss'ble. these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certainas pages blanches cjjouttes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela Atait possible, ces pages n'ont pas iH filmAas. Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplAmantairas; L'Institut a microfilm* la rneilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a *tA possible de se procurer. Les details da cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibllographlqua, qui peuvent modifier une image reprodulte, ou qui peuvent axiger une modification dans la mithoda normala da filmaga sont indiqute cS-dessous. |~n Coloured pages/ n Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagias Pages restored and/oi Pages restaurias et/ou peliiculAes Pages discoloured, stained or foxei Pages dAcolor^es, tachat^es ou piqu6e!i Pagas detached/ Pages d6tachi;as ShowthrouQh/ Transparence Quality of prir Quality InAgala de i'lmprassiofi Includes supplementary meterif! Comprend du material suppldmantaire I I Pagas damaged/ I I Pages restored and/or laminated/ ryr Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ nn Pagas detached/ r~l ShowthrouQh/ I I Quality of print varies/ I I Includes supplementary material/ Only edition available/ Seule Mitlon disponibie Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc.. have, bean refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiallement nbscurcies par un fauillet d'errata. una palure, etc., ont 6ti filmAeb A nouveai; de fa^on A obtenir la meillaure image possible. Tl P' 01 fi O b( t|i si 01 fii si 01 Tl sh Tl w M di er be rij re mi This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checkad balow/ Ce document est film* au taux de rMuction indiquA ci-dessous. 10X 14X I8X 22X 26X XX y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia Univenity L'exwmplaire film« fut reproduit grice A la g6nirosltA de: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Original copies in printed paper covers a^e filmed beginninfi with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page v.'ith a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a'printed or illustrated impression. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^(meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever np.->lies. IVIaps, plates, charts, etc.. may ba filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les images suivantes ant M reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettet6 de I'exemplaire fi!m«, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Las exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim^e sont f ilm6s en commenpant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, salon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont fiimis en commen^ant par la premidre page t}ui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. Un des symboles suivants apparaftra sur la dernidre image de chaque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — «»► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diffirents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul ciich6, il est film6 d partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite. et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombra d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m^thode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY AND THE DIFFICULTIES OF DISBELIEF. l3f Tn73 THE Credibility of Christianity AND THE Difficulties of Disbelief. BY CAPTAIN MOLONY (ROYAL ENGINEERS). Being a series of Six Addresses prepared for delivery in St. Paul's Church, Halifax, N.S.. and read there by the Rev. Dyson Hague, M A., and others. .->+-C- Toronto : The J. E. BRYANT COMPANY (Limited). Halifax : MORTON & COMPANY. It ! I' '. I Entered according to Act of Parliament in the office of the Minister of Agriculture by The J. E. Bryant Comi'any (Limited). I PREFATORY NOTE. A brief note explaining one or two facts about these addresses will be very interesting to the reader. Just before Lent I suggested to my friend, Captain Molony, that it would be a good thing to have a layman give a series of addresses on Sunday afternoons during Lent in the church, and, to my great delight, he consented himself to do this. It was arranged that the addresses should be given in the nave of St. Paul's Church, and that, after a brief prayer by one of the clergy, Captain Molony should proceed with his lecture or address on the evidences of the Christian faith. Accordingly, on the Sunday afternoon of February 19th, in the presence of a very large and appreciative congregation, the hrst lecture was delivered, and the subject for the following Sunday announced. Then a strange thing happened. JiO 1 ^G VI. PRKFATOKV NOTI- To the amazement, not only of Captain Molony, but of nearly all the Christian com- munity, orders came from the General in com- mand of the British forces in CdWddti forbiddiufi him to deliver any more of the addresses; and though representations were mode to the mili- tary authorities that they were being delivered under sanction of the rector of the church in an authorized manner, and were entirely devoid of the element of controversy, the authorities were inexorable, and Captain Molony felt it to be his duty to comply with the command, and discontinue delivering the addresses in person. I felt, however, that it would be a great pity to deprive the Christian public of the benefit of hearing the rest of the addresses, notwithstand- ing the fact that their author was restrained from delivering them ; so I waited upon the General, and received from him the assurance that it would not be considered an act of mili- tary disobedience on Captain Molony's part if the addresses were written by him, and read by another in the church. On the following Sunday afternoons, accord- ingly, during Lent, the rest of the addresses FRKF/TORY NOTK. Vll. were read by myself and others ; and, by request, they are now published in bof)k form in order that they may have a still wider influ- ence. I most heartily recommend them. In these days, when so many imaj^ine that it is only professionalism and the loaves and fishes that make the cler^^y such ardent defenders of the faith, it is a good thing to find a layman coming out to plead with men of reason on behalf of the faith of Christ. His words should have weight. They will carry weight, I am sure, with all who will read his argument with care and prayer; for their author is not only an efficient officer in Her Majesty's service, but a faithful follower of the King of kings, the Lord Jesus Christ. Dyson Hague, Rector of St. Paul's Church, Halifax, N.S. H ALU. AX, August 1st, 1893. *.*;rf^'.ir.9%5^-!^ The Credibility of Christianity and the DitfiCLiIties of Disbelief. Address No. I. INTRODUCTORY. ^^^^ Ii, M «% INTRODUCrORY. OF late years infidelity has been allowed to scatter its doctrines broadcast among the people. It aims at undermining and de- stroying the whole Christian system ; and thus It has now become al)soIutely necessary that every Christian should know what foundations his faith rests upon. It is not sufficient to say that we feel instinctively tiiat the Bible, which is, and always will remain, the great founda- tion for our faith— it is not enough to trust our intuition that this wonderful book is from God ; because this is an age of reason and argument.' Those of us who can trace God's providential car« in guiding our own lives, and His answers to pra>er,are only too apt to forget these proofs of His existence and love to us ; and if we allege that we feel the working of God's Holy Spirit in our own hearts, the world calls trust in such feeling foolishness, whereas if we say thac we may weH be content to believe what thousands have believed before us, we are told that we are going astrr.y like a flock of stupid sheep. In a word, the world will listen to noihing but hard logic, and, as the Almighty has given us THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. abundant lofrical reasons for believing in His existence and love to us, it is important that we should understand some of these reasons thoroup:hly. Most Christians feel a natural reluctance to examine the foundations of their faith. The very inquiry seems to be doubting God, and thus dishonouring to Him. But there are many passages in Scripture which disprove this view. St. Luke praised the Bereans for " searching the Scriptures daily whether those things were so." Now the only Scriptures which the Bereans possessed were those of the Old Testament, and the natural explanation of the passage is, that they were praised for search- ingtheScriptures to verify the existence of those prophecies that St. Paul claimed were fulfilled in Christ ; that is, they were praised for exam- ining the foundations of their faith. Now, with regard to these prophecies themselves — especially those of details of the crucifixion, which teach no doctrine or morals — how are we to account for their existence in the Bible, except on the supposition that the Almighty caused them to be written to prove the truth of the revelation He was making ? There are many passages all through Scripture which have only an evidential value — mentions of names, places, and occurrences of no special INTRODUCTORY. e importance; recapitulations of speeches and events of Christ's appearances, as in I. Cor. XV., etc. These teach us nothing, either about spiritual thin.i^s or about our own lives, and we must therefore presume that thev are placed in the Bible to fulfil a purpose foV which they are excellently adapted, namelv, to establish the f2:enuine character of the book, and the reality of God's revelation to man. We are thus led to conclude that this in- quiry is certainly right and well-pleasing to God. Now, is it advisable, not to say neces- sary? I said that infidelitv is scattering its doctrmes broadcast. It hris also gained for Itself a public hearing ; I propose to show how. Lectures on the subject are delivered in many of our large towns, sometimes under de- ceptive names. One evening I saw a lecture advertised on "Has Christianitv Tended to Progress ? " I thought there could be but one answer to such a question, that the lecturer must be favourable to Christianity, and went to hear him. I heard an out and out infidel ler- ture, very little of which was apropos to the subject. In the same way books are published and largely sold, with very high-sounding, ele^ vating titles, but of a most seauctive, faith- destroying nature. Their titles are such as would lead any one to suppose that it would do THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. I I' i. 1 one good to read them ; like poisonous berries, they are outwardly beautiful, even the language being often unexceptional, but when read and mentally digested they prove deadly. There is nothing sadder than to see such books in the hands of persons for whom one has a high regard. It is like seeing them eat fungi. Again, inlidelity is allowed to air its various views in our high-class magazines. Many of the articles in our standard newspapers are written by men with an evidently skeptical turn of mind. In- fidel tracts are left about in our post offices and other places of public resort, and its tenets of despair are often preached from the pulpits of nominally Christian churches. Thus people of all ages, sexes, and classes of the commun- ity must expect to have these infidel teachings obtruded upon their notice. How are we pre- pared to refute such teaching, and maintain our faith inviolate ? It must be acknowledged that most people are utterl}- unprepared, except by a slight gen- eral knowledge of Scripture and the teachings of their particular church. Many of the great- est thinkers of Europe have been racking their brains to find objections to Christianity. Some of these objections are on the tongues of all their followers. How few there are who know how to meet them! If a man studies the argu- A ^^m 55 INTRODUCTORY. J ments on one side of a question, and nothing but the bare facts on the otner side, the argu- ments are ahnost certain to carr)- the day ; yet most Christians, only knowing the facts of Scripture, and not how these facts can be used as arguments, imagine that their knowledge is sufficient to meet the specious reasonings of unbelievers, and that it is want of faith if they are not willing at all times to enter into the combat with this poor equipment. They say, " I like to hear both sides of a question," ami consequently read argumentative infidel books without examining the arguments on the Christian side at all. These latter are so numerous and varied that, had thev been bet ter known, there is no doubt infiddity would never have obtained the hold upon the public mind which It now possesses. But before exam ming the arguments pro and con, let me beg you to constantly remember the disadvantages under which Christianity labours in maintain- mg Its position. Infidelity is hvdra-headed and every head assumes a different form. First, there is the Materialist, who 'main- tains that there is nothing but matter in the whole universe, and that mind itself is hut a form of matter ; then the Atheist, who states that there is no God. Such are generally mate- nahstic evolutionists ; that is, they maintain a THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. It ' ii i. that the whole universe was evolved out of matter, without the assistance of any directing mind or God. The theory of evolution is abso- lutely essential to their faith ; without it, their views would be altogether irrational. (On the other hand, it may be here mentioned that the theory of evolution is not necessarily antago- nistic to the Christian faith.) Then there are the Pantheists, who believe that all nature is God ; such are the modern Hindus. The Budd- hists, Theosophists, and Spiritualists may al- most be called pantheists. Deists are those who believe in one God, but that He has never made a revelation to man. Theists believe that He has made such a revelation. The Mahome- tans are therefore theists, believing, as they do, that God revealed Himself in much of the Old Testament, and by Mahomet. Ciiristians are theists, believing that God revealed Him- self in the Old Testament and by Christ. So are Jews, who, however, still reject Christ as an impostor ; while Unitarians would not de- scribe Him as such, but deny that He was God, while admitting that He was sent by God. The above may be called a graduation from utter unbelief up to Christianity. There are some other forms of unbelief which, how- ever, cannot well be classified. Agnosticism allows that there may be, and .as INTRODUCTORY. !, and probably is, a God, but, for metaphysical rea- sons, we can never know anythinj^' about Him. Some Christians deride them by calling them self-confessed ignoramuses. It seems a pity to set an example of introducing scoffing mto a discussion on so vitid a matter as re- ligion, without which we should have "no hope in the world." In such a matter surely ridicule should at least be reserved for an opponent who flatly contradicts himself, or the common principles of reasoning. Freethinkers and Rationalists are names which have been usurped by infidels, and to which their systems have no exclusive right. It seems to me that any man whose circum- stances do not predispose him to any one form of belief is a "freethinker." Many Christian laymen have just as good a right to the title as unbelievers. If a man who is surrounded by infidels chooses to break with their notions and believe in Christ, he presumably does so from the pure convictions of an unfettered mind, and may claim to be called a freethinker. The rationalist only accepts reason for his guide. But if, on examining the Scriptures, he finds good reason for believing them to be the Word of God, and, further, his reason tells him that God's thoughts are higher than man's, and therefore it would be unreasonable to ex- 10 THE CKEDIIilLITY OK CHRISTIANITY pect to unclerstaiul all His purposes — if thus his reason leads hini to believe the P)ible, why may he not still be called a rationalist ? The fact is, infidelity assumes that everyone who is free to believe as he likes must necessarily doubt the Bible, and every one who trusts his reason must come to the conclusion that there is no reasoning power greater than his own. Skeptic is too general a term to dehne, un- less it be taken to mean a man wht) doubts everything, but positively denies nothing. Now, it is a remarkable fact that these vari- ous systems of infidelity can and do fraternize among themselves, but all unite in opposing Christianity. Have you ever heard of the Eng- lish agnostics sending men to overthrow the Mahometan faith ? or the Mahometans send- ing emissaries to teach Islamism in China ? or the civilized Japanese sending missionaries to the barbarians in Central Africa ? On the other hand, you will constantly hear English- men who have been in India, though of a skep- tical turn of mind themselves, praise eastern religions indiscriminately. ]t is not mere tol- eration which these creeds show to one another ; they are actively co-operating, for " in the year 1880 a mixed delegation of Hindus and Parsees were deputed by the Bombay branch of the Theosophical Society to assist the founders in H INTRODUCTORY. II or^Miii/ing Buddhist bninrhcs iti Ceylon. In i8(Si, the J^uddhists reciprocated 1)\ sending over delej^^ates to Tiniievelly to assist in or^^an- \zin^ a Hindu brancli. and these Huddliists were, to^^^ether with Colonel Olcott (a Theoso- phist), received with rapturous welcome, inside a most sacred Hindu temple." Pember also states: "A re ant cataloj,nie of the Psycholoj^d- cal Press Association (spiritualistic) presents a list of some four or five hundred works, among which ma}- i)c found vigorous attacks on the Christian faith, from every conceivable quarter. The greatest number of assailants seem, how- ever, to be either Buddhists or Agnostics." Here, again, we see three distinct systems co- operating, and doing so to attack Christianity. We have seen in how many ways the vari- ous infidel systems are assailing Christianity in our own land. I^ut foreign systems are also gaining entrance, with the object of destroy- ing Christianity—for instance, Theosophy and Mahometanism. Now, if you saw all the boys in a school uniting to attack one unfortunate youth, what would you infer ? Either that the majority were good and the one bad, or the majority in the wrong and the one in the right. Now, the majority of religions in the world can- not be in the right, for their teachings are utterly contradictory. Hence the fact that 12 THE CREDiniLITY OF CHRISTIANITY. H: they unite in c(nnl)atinj^' Christianity gives us a j)resunipti()n at starting that Cliristianity is the one true system. The fact that they occasionally offer to ally themselves with Christianity in no way dam- ages the force of this argument. I^'or, if the majority in our school offered to make friends with the one dissentient, we should feel all the more sure that he alone was in the right. A. P. Linnett, in The Occult World, writes of the identification of the occult system with the doctrines of the initiated organizations in all ages of the world's history. "Judaism, Chris- tianity, Buddhism, and the Egyptian theology are thus brought into one family of ideas. They who seek to wed Buddha to Jesus are of the celestial and upper, and they who in- terpose to forbid the banns of the astral and nether ; between the two hemispheres stand the domain and faith of Islam — not to divide, but to unite them." Thus it will be seen that this federation of other systems does seek to be allied to Christianity. Suppose A. wishes to enter into partnership with B., who will not agree to the proposal ; and suppose that, having an opportunity of examining their capital, you find that the bank notes of A. and B. are different, though they are both supposed to come from the one bank. INTKOnUCTOKY. li You wouKl imiiiL'diutcly f^ucss that one set of notes were si)urioiis, and that A., knowing' his own notes to l)e worthless, naturally wished to trade with B.'s ^ood ones. lu)r a similar reason, we infer that these false systems desire to be allied to Christianity in order that they may trade with its sound doctrines. Here, again, we have a presumj)tion that Christianity is the one true system. Nothinjj^ can vitiate this reasoniuf^ unless Christianity seeks to be allied to these f'llse systems. May God forbid such a catastrophe ! Hut, to return to our subject, it will be at once seen that the multiplicity of these systems immediately puts Christianity at a disadvan- tage in argument with infidelity. Christianity is hke one of the fortified towns besieged by the Prussians in 1870, and surrounded by a number of hidden and scattered batteries. If the shells fired from these batteries did not hit their exact object, they were pretty sure to do damage somewhere in the fortress. If the shells fired in reply from the town missed their mark, they were wasted. The fortress wr.s a definite, conspicuous target ; the siege batteries vague, indefinite, almost invisible. In the same way Christianity must be definite, and formu- late creeds for purposes of defence against in- ternal error, and must scatter its replies over X4 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. I I the whole area of infidel argument. If only it could concentrate on one form of infidtlity at a time, there is no doubt that it could crush the present forms of skepticism as easily as it has out- reasoned past forms of unbelief. And here we must do our opponents the justice to allow that they are wonderfully j^ood at the military manoeuvre of ** changing front." No crack regiment in He: Majesty's army has performed this evolution in action so well or so often. For instance, Lucian, about A.D. 170, ob- jected to Christianity because of the fortitude which Christians showed under martyrdom ! because of their brotherly love for each other! and because they lived according to the laws of Christ ! — which everybody has long acknowl- edged are the most beautiful rules of life ever put before the world. Celsus, the next ob- jector, about A.D. 180, imputes our Saviour's miracles to magic, thus admitting that people then generally believed in them ; attacks His divinity, and concentrates the bitterest raillery on the affecting narrative of our blessed Lord's passion (B. II., 21, 2^), which even skeptics now universally acknowledge to be the noblest example of fortitude the world has ever seen. Further, Celsus reproaches the Christians with their carefulness to proselytize the poor, and to INTKODl'CTORV. 15 convert the vicious (H. III., 44, 50, 59, 62, 74). Every iiHuiern philosopher acknowledi^es tluit these are duties of society. Porphyry, A.I). 270, took exception to the mention of the dispute' between St. Peter and St. Paul, as an instance of the admixture of human ingredients in the body of apostolic teaching. Nowadays we consider the meiUion of apostolic failings as a proof of genuineness. Next, Hierocles, A.D. 303, endeavoureu to develop the character of Apollonius of Tyana as a rival to our Saviour in miraculous power. Now, it is only (Chris- tianity which keeps alive the memory of this Apollonius among a few learned men, while Christ's name lives on the lips of millions. Porphyry and Julian (the apostate) both brought forward many of the arguments against the truth of Christianitv which are adduced at the present day. Nevertheless, the truth of Christianity prevailed; infidelity died out among civilized nations; but then, unfortunately, the church sank into deadly formalism. With the Reformation, infidelity again awoke, but at first took no very definite forms. Then came Voltaire, who denied the literary and monumental value of the Bible, and the moral influence of Christianity. Now, no think- ing skeptic would deny the literary beauty of the Bible ; nor could he deny its historic value, r- l6 THI-: CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY.. for it has been too well proved by the decipher- ing; of old inscriptions, etc. Neither — since our missionaries have been the means of attain- ing; such wonderful success in Madagascar, Uf^anda, and the islands of the Pacilic — can any one deny the moral influence for good of Christianity. Thomas Paine ascribed Christianity to im- posture ; but Paley has so well shown that it is absurd to believe that men who gave up wealth, comfort, and even life, for the sake of telling men of Christ, and saying, " Lie not one to another " — it is so absurd to believe that such men were impostors that even skeptics have dropped the allegation. The German, Paulus, explained the resur- rection by declaring that the death of our Lord was only apparent. The French skeptic, Renan, declares that "they," that is, the Jews, " must at all events have made certain that He was really dead." Strauss, in his " Leben Jesu," was unable to see the personality and originality of the sacred character which is the subject of his study; while Renan criticizes him for this want of insight. * Thus we see that unbelievers have been continually changing their minds as to what they should put forward as the alleged main fault or defect of Christianity. And we can- INTRODUCTORY. 17 not help feelinj^ certain that, had there heen any real and vital fault or defect, unbelievers would have so perse verin^dy advanced it as a reason for condemninj^ the whole system that Christianity would, long ago, have been C(M1- sigiied to oblivion. "Oh, but," skeptics say, "if inlklelity has been continually changing its front, so has Christianity. Did not most Christians once maintain that every word in the Hible was absolutely accurate? and now do tnev not allow that there are many insertions, alterations, and different readings of the text ? Were not Chris- tians once positive that the world was created in six days of twenty-four hours each ? and now has not science compelled them to believe that it may have been otherwise ? And did they not once pretend that every man in the Bible was intended as a pattern of goodness, and now do they not allow that the Hible chronicles men's faults as well as their virtues? " All these changes of opinion have taken place in the Christian church, but they do not constitute a change of front. Rather, to con- tinue the military simile, they are like the with- drawing of outpost positions which certain over-zealous defenders of Christianity have taken up v.'ithout orders, and which are now seen to be altogether untenable and dangerous. l8 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. I' ' To show you that Christianity has not changed front, I need only point to the Apostles' Creed, 3o named because it embodies the teaching of the very founders of Christianity, and in which no change whatever has been made, in spite of the wonderful advance of science and the per- sistent opposition of infidelity which has come about in the last fev/ centuries Let any candid person inquire into the mat- ter, and, if he separate the evil deeds which have been done in the name of Christianity from the actions of those who have really made the Scriptures their guide, he will soon be con- vinced that Christianity has executed none of those absolute changes of front which have marked the progress of skeptical opinions. But these frequent changes of front of infidel- ity, though they constitute a strong presump- tion in favour of Christianity, put Christians at a great disadvantage, from -he fact that it takes a considerable time to find out what leader any particular skeptic foUows. We can only compare the whole body of infidels to a Sunday-school treat in which the children are spread out over an immense length of road. The best educated are in front, intent on acquiring information, and anxious to dis- cover truth ; in the rear are the rogues, intent upon pranks and mischief. This uneducated INTRODUCTORY. 19 rabble adopt ideas which are about a century old, namely, those of Voltaire and Paine, who alleged that the Bible was such a useless book that it was hardly worth while assigning a date to it. The better educated generally adopt the views of Strauss, who thought that the Gospels must have been written about the third centurv. These views are now half* a century old. The best educated are led by such men as Renan, who believed that the three first Gospels were written soon after the year 70. Therefore, it is at once apparent over what a wide range infidel ideas extend. This makes it very hard to discover what any particular skeptic believes about the origin of the Bible. Speaking generally, it may b^ said that the better educated the man the more nearly will he ascribe the Gospels to the date at which Christians believe that they were written. Christianity, again, always has and always will meet with much opposition from many of those who call themselves philoRoph?rs or deep thinkers. Even as early as St. Paul's time they opposed Christianity ; and when St. Paul wrote about ** opposition of science falsely so- called," there can be little doubt that he meant what we should now call philosophy. Fortunately a philosopher. Monsieur Bor- deau, has betrayed one of the reasons why ■pp 2 THE CREDIBILITY Or CHRISTIANITY M, V those who call themselves deep thinkers are generally hostile to Christianity. He says : *' Every positive religion usurps the place which belongs to philosophy. Thus philoso- phers will always be at enmity with religion." This lets out the secret. Philosophers say, * We are wise enough to direct all your actions " ; but civilised nations are submitting to be ruled by Christianity, and acknowledging that the rules of life which it inculcates are the best possible. Hence the philosophers wish to destroy Christianity, to get it out of the way, to allow of their rule being introduced. One question for us is. Are we likely to be happier under such a philosophical regime ? We may well doubt it. Another reason why some deep thinkers oppose Christianity is this: Christianity pro- fesses to be a revelation from an almighty and omniscient God. Man is neitlier almighty nor omniscient. Hence, to start with, it seems very unlikelv that mortal mm should be able to un- derstand the reason for every part of the revela- tion which the everlasting God has given him. To put it in the words which God spake by Isaiah, " For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts." To speak reverently, this is a perfectly reasonable INTRODUCTORY. 2t Statement, at which we have no right to cavil; for we cannot nnagino that an alniiglity Chk\ could exist without a deeper understanding than our own. Tliis proposition is also agreed to l)y thoughtful skeptics, for Laing says: "We are obliged to admit that as the material uni- verse is not, as we once fancied, measured hy our standards and regulated at every turn by an intelligence resembling ours ; so neither is the moral universe to be explained by simply magnifying our own moral ideas, and explain- ing everything 1 y the action of a Being who does what we should have done in his place. ""-^ Hence, if even skeptics allow the reasonable- ness of the doctrine, we cannot be surprised if there are some things in God's revelation which we can never expect to fully comprehend. This one proposition will cover all our dif- ficulties; but sooner than accede to it the mod- ern skeptic will believe a serieF^ of infinitely more astonishing statements, which may be summarized in the following creed : He will believe that matter and force have existed from all eternity ; that the laws of nature came into operation without a lawgiver; that no mind ever prearranged the process by which this earth was evolved from a mass of gas ; that life came down to our earth on a flaming * " Modern Science and Modern Thought." I'age 221. 22 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. 1 meteorite, lieated to incLindescencc as it crossed the atni()S})herc ; that the process oy which man was evolved from t)ie lowest forms of life was also a chance process ; that mind anu all mental and spiritual qualities were evolved from reflex muscular action ; that the beauty we see in the sunset, and in birds, in- sects, and flowers, is a product of chance; that the most peculiar nation in the world, the Jews, have not been specially dealt with by God ; that the only perfectly good man who ever lived was a deceiver or a fanatic ; that all the thousands who subsequently gave their lives for Him did so under a delusion ; that all ^he money and time now given to Christ's cause all over the world is owing to a mista^ie ; and that the greater part of the Gospels, so prized and studied by many of our wisest men, were the invention of tradition — all these diffi- cult things your skeptic will readily believe, and then, forsooth, he will declare that the age of faith is passing away, and that no educated man in the present day can be expected to be- lieve what he cannot understand! This last is practically the position of many modern philosophers and scientists. It is only plausible on account of the immense recent advances in science. Men feel, " We who know so much must surely be able to under- It t % INTRODUCTORY. 23 stand everything;'"; consequently they pro- ceed to ar^ue that a revehition must be false if it contains anythinj^^ which they cannot fully comprehend. Of course these skeptics do not state their position, even to themselves, in all its hare unreasonableness ; but practically they are just like the rationalistic chicken in the fable, wliich, with a piece of eggshell on its back, refused to believe that it had just come out of the shell because it could not understand how it came to be packed away in such a small space. The statement, " What I can't see, I never will believe," is introduced so often at the present day as an argument that we need to be constantly on the watch for it. But intellectual pride opposes Christianity for another and a far more unworthv reason, and that is this: In no way can a man more cheaply earn a reputation among some for intellectual ability than by professing doubts about the truth of the Bible. For, if he does so, it is almost invariably inferred that his pro- found scientific knowledge puts him above be- lieving in the simple truths of the Bible ; while the natural antipathy among Christians to dis- cuss that which they hold sacred renders him comparatively safe from having his ignorance exposed in awkward discussions. Besides, it is always easier to criticize than to maintain .,4 wmm 24 THK CRKDTHII.ITY OI' CIIKISTIANITY. any system ; so that if he is involved in a His- russion, the kiiowledfj^c of a few apparent eon- tradietions in llie J^ible, culled from any inlidrl hook, will probably carry him thronj^di with flyinj; colours. This latter fact lea«ls us to another diHiculty that Christianity has to meet in its conflict with infidelity. To j;uard a/;ainst heresies within, Christianity nnist take up a delinit(^ position and state its belief in certain books and creeds — all these offer definite j)oints of attack. On the other hand, the infidel dis- putant need pin his faith to the views of no particular writer. If you prove that Voltaire was unreasonal)le in supposing; that the early Christians had any motive for practisinj^ decep- tion, he can allow that Voltaire was wrong, and proceed to j^ive Strauss' views ; driven from them, he can fall back upon Kenan, or vdiange his ground to Huxley's scientific objections. If only infidels would do the fair thing, and, at the beginning of a discussion, state their exact belief and views, the discussions would often have a different termination. How often we notice, in daily life, that it is easier to criticize than to construct ! Why — since we have the power — do we not at each election put the newspaper men into parlia- ment to do the wx)rk of those whom they have been so freely criticizing of late ? It is because INTRODUCToKV. ^5 il vvr know that it is far easier to lind fault with (Icfniitc nicasincs than to propose hcttcr ones. The fauU-fitider ^^mk rally confines his }^'a/e to one side of a thin^' \ui never takes all the con- ditions into account. I have very often noticed this in criticisms on military matters, which often apj)ear extremely plausihle, but which are really unreasonable, owin;^' to the critic beinj^' if^Miorant of some essential detail. Just so with ref^ard to Christianity and the Hibh; ; if our knowledf^e were {greater we shoidd, in this case, fmd nothin|j^ at all to criticize adversely. Aj;ain, this is an a^'e which hjves novelty. Our discoveries and progress have been so remarkable of late that we are accustomed to regard nothing worthy of attention which is not modern. Like the Athenians, we "spend our time in nothing else but either to tell or to huar some new thing." Now, the Bible is eighteen centuries old, and therefore there is a natural tendency to regard it as out of date, some boldly contending that it is so. Whether tliey are right or not, let its mighty influence on millions in Europe and America and Africa de- cide for us. But, even if we allow the Bible's power and usefulness, its very age puts it c't a disadvantage in an era which despises age. It contains an old story, to which we do not give half enough attention. No exposition of its 26 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRTSTIANITY. plain principles would probably ho. jMiblishcd in any secular inaj^azinc, because such truth may be old. Many niaj^^i/ines will, however, admit any views diverj^'ent from the j)lain meaninj^^ of Scripture because such are ncii'. Consecpiently many people who are in the habit of j^leanin^' all their viev/s from maj^azines imaj^ine that all modern thought and orifjinality is beinj,' used to attack the Bible, and that there is nothinj,' to be said in its defence. If only the numerous excellent books which hpve been written in its defence were more read, this mistake would soon be corrected. At this point it will be well, perhaps, that I should pause for a moment to explain to you exactly what it is that I am trying to demon- strate. Whenever we hear of clever men being- skeptics or becoming skeptics — and we either hear this sad fact or gather it from their writ- ings constantly — every time we come across a fresh case we are liable to think, "if that clever man is an infidel, perhaps there may be some truth in infidelity after all." Well, there is truth in disbelief, and we may even expect good to come of it u^hen it confines itself to pointing out the faults of Christians; and as the church has at various times been full of abuses — as in France, before the Revolution — so it is really the case M INTKODL'CTORY. 27 that flisbeliof has occasionally been propped up by truth, l)iit it never has been fouiuiid n[)on truth, and it never wdl be. Hut, as the doubt is certain to constantl>- insinuate itsrlf in our minds, it is inip;)rtant that we should know what dislfehff is founded upon ; tliat is, what are its real causes, and why it lias spread so much of late years. We have already seen that it may be caused by (i) the desire for power ; (2) the dis- like to admit that there is anything we cannot understand ; (3) the drsire to earn a cheap reputation for cleverness ; (4) the facility of criticism ; (5) the desire for novelty. But the chief difficulty which Christianity has to con- tend with arises from the rebellion of the human heart against the laws of God. Those laws were all framed for the good of mankind, and even infidels acknowledge that, were they obeyed in the spirit as well as in the letter, most of the social evils which we now deplore would trouble this world no longer. Some in- fidels try to contend that the seventh com- mandment is not necessarily for the good of man. This subject w^e cannot discuss here. Those who have the slightest knowledge of medicine must at once agre3 that there is no commandment which is so obviously intended for man's good. Our social and family life is 28 mi-: CRliDIHILITV OF ClIKISTIAMTY. l)as('(l oil tins commaiidiiK'Ht. TluTi-foro, all those who have or are enjoying' the i!iestimal)lc blessing; of a peaceful home can j'ul;^'e whetlier we can dispense with this law. Those wlio do must dispense with their home happiness alonj^ with it. This commandment, to^^ether witli the one to "remember the Sabi)ath day to keep it holy," shows us that the God of revelation is the God of nature, because the laws of revela- tion are so well adapted to meet the natural wants of man. This subject, however, will be more fully discussed in the second address. Suffice it for the present to remind you that any candid person, reading over the ten com- mandments, must acknowledfi^e that they were framed for the good of man. Why, then, should men desire to disobey them ? In the first place, many people have a natural hatred of any sort of restraint. Any thinking man must acknowledge that if God has given us a revelation, we ought to take it as a guide to our actions. Now, most people long to have their own way. Perhaps Chris- tianity has been misrepresented to them, and they imagine that it is made up of a round of dull observances and irritating restraints, and that, because they see Christians spending their time in work for God, they will necessarily be expected to throw themselves with ardour into -* INTKODl'CTORY. 29 such errployments directly they profess them- selves to be Christians. Before they have par- taken of any of the blessinj^s which come from a true union with Christ, they naturally feel no zeal for His cause, and look upon such employ- ments as hateful. Christians should, therefore, be very careful to let outsiders understand that, just as wise parents do not expect their chil- dren to enter upon their life work directly it would be physically possible for them to do so, so God does not recpiire us to work for Him till we learn to love His service, and to find it so apfreeable to our tastes and inclinations as to be perfect freedom. Numbers of men who have resigned their wills to Cod have found it to be so, and the missionaries of all denomina- tions, at home and abrojid, many of whom work for what we may call starvation wages, are proof to us of this fact. Every Christian who allows the world to suppose that he per- forms good works in spite of his natural inclina- tions had far better do no good works at all. When we start as Christians, it is only neces- sary for us to overcome our sins and confess Christ ; and when wo have learnt to love Him, we shall long to work for Him. But, to return. Many people become in- fidels on account of definite sins. First, they forget God and fall into gross sin, which they > . l. ii'il WWII 30 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. know to be displeasing to God. Then, the wish being father to the thought, they say "There is no God." And here we must state that universal experience goes to prove that, though many agnostics hve moral lives, the ignorant and scoffing form of decided infidelity, and immorality, are generally found together. Offences against a certain commandment, which I have already named, are unfortunately not punishable by the law of the land. Many young men say, "I have a natural longing to break this commandment, and that justifies me in doing so," forgetting that the same reason- ing would justify a hungry man for breaking into their houses and eating the meals provided for the household, or the greater part of an army for beating a retreat when exposed to a hot fire to which they cannot reply. If a man glories in being an infidel, my experience is that you may suspect him of being immoral. Do I, therefore, say that all skeptics lead immoral lives ? Not at all. Many, no doubt, are truly moral men — partly to justify their skepticism ; partly because they acknowledge the excellence of Christianity ; partly on ac- count of what may be called its reflex influence. When an engine-driver shuts off steam, does the train stop at once ? No. Why not ? Be- cause of the stored-up energy in it. When one INTRODUCTORY. 31 individual disallows Christianity, it would be about as reasonable to expect him to throw off all the ^ood habits he has acquired under it as to expect one among a thousand coupled-up engines, going at a mile a minute, to stop dead when its steam is shut off. Some skeptical writers have pointed to Renan as an example we all ought to follow ; for if he disbelieved Christianity, when appar- ently every worldly motive should have con- strained him to believe, surely, say they, he must have been influenced by overwhelming reasons, on the strength of which we may all follow him. Let us examine his case. In the first place, he was a Roman Catholic. Now, they do not ancourage the study of the Bible at all, far less from the evidential point of view; but they in- sist that all men must believe on the authority of the church. What, therefore, can poor Renan have known of our reasons for believing Christianity? Absolutely nothing. A beloved sister suggested to him a fev^' plausible reasons for disbelief. Logic, therefore, appeared to him to be all on the skeptical side, and consetjuently his very honesty forced him into unbelief. (Herein lies the necessity for our study of these matters. The more honest we are, the more likely to become skeptics, if infidel reasoning npnnp 32 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. finds US quite unprepared.) But, then, it is truly said, Renan became a great scholar, and studied the Bible and all books relating thereto. Why did he not subsequently see reasons for belief if, as Christians allege, these reasons are so convincing ? Because he studied with a view to disprove, and was never in a position to see the force of the cumulative evidence for Christianity till he became well known as a skeptic and had published skeptical books. Once upon a time an Indian doctor was at- tending upon a very autocratic Rajah, in whom all the power of the state vas • ntred, and who was its only judge or magisticiie. This Rajah had made many stringent laws for the good of his subjects, and heavy penalties were to follow disobedience, but he was very seldom seen in public. Now, the doctor became persuaded that the Rajah was smitten with a most rapid incurable disease, and that he was practically a dead man. He made this opinion public. The people said ; Such a wise man must neces- sarily be right. He knows far mo':^ about it than we do. We will take his wc c' t'lat the Rajah is practically dead, and live ai- . j lease. They did so, and broke practically all the Rajah's laws, thus rendering themselves liable to most heavy punishments. On further studj^- ing the case, however, the doctor came to the '« 't if* *1 INTRODUCTORY. had 33 conclusion tnat ne naa oeen quite mistaken, and that the Rajah was not sick at all. He nas conscious of havinj^^ acted up to his lights, but he knew the people would hold him re- sponsible for deceiving them and leading them to suppose that they could break their Rajah's laws with impunity. He dared not face the fury of the populace, and therefore fled the country. Though infidelity prevailed in I-'rance before Renan's time, who can doubt that he confirmed the French in their opinions? What do you imagine would he then have had to face had he — so to speak— gone back on the I'Yench nation ? He must have fled the ct)untry, besides separating himself from his family of unbelievers. Now, when we remember that the wish is father to the thought, need we wonder that Renan halted on the threshold of Christianity ? How near he was to belief I hope to show you in subsequent addresses. The illustrations I have used, however, will show how hard it is for any person who has once published infldel opinions to acknowledge himself a believer. Nay, seeing that we all acknowledge that every person influences those around him, \ e see that the same would apply to those who have written and published, or even stated, no infidel views at all, but have merely lived so that their decided skeptical opinions might be inferred. 34 I'"' (:Ki':i)iiiiLiiv oi- Christianity. When wt' .'itlributc unworthy motives to onr opponents we tread u|)on very dan^^erons j^ronnd, and rnn a terrible risk of j^Mvinj; un- pardonal)le offence to those who may l)e sincere in their doubts. We must be most cap ful to avoid the mistake of puttin^^ all intid<)ls and skeptics in one general category, and attribut- inj^: the base motives we see in some to the whole class. Mow, then, can we distini^uish them ? By endeavouring; to find out if they are wilhnj; to believe, should Christianity be shown to be true. In a word, are they seekers after truth ? If so, they deserve our sympathy and prayers, for are we not seekers after truth also ? Now, there are certain classes of skeptics who are evidently not seekers after truth. I3y "truth" I do not mean what we Christians ")ften intend by tiie term, namely, God's truth as revealed in the Bible; but I mean truth as opposed to falsehood, that which is as opposed to that which h not. Of course skeptics are not searching after the truths contained in the Bible, in which they do not believe ; but the (juestion is, Are they honestly endeavuuring to find out whether the book is true or not ? If they Irugh at it, or wilfully misrepresent it, we may be sure that they wish to prove it false. It was once my duty to read a skeptical book fNTRODUCTORV. 35 written under ;i very takinj^' and apparently edifyinj^ title. All tlironj^di, the author posed as a perfectly impartial seeker after truth. No- where did he lauj;h at Christianity; on the con- trary, he professed preat respect for it, speaking of Christ as a j^Teat teacher whom all should strive to obey. Almost at the end of his book, in referrinf^ to David, he said tiiat (rod not only condoned his ^reat sin, but actually reward- ed it by ^ivmf^ tlie succession to the throne to the son of (lis sinful intercourse with Hath-sheba. Now, as you all know, that child died, and its death was only one of the many pimishments which followed David's sin. Now, we cannot but conclude that this author either wilfully misrepresented Scripture, or else; showed most culpable nej^li^ence in not verifying his state- ments. The whole of a book deserves to l)e condemned for such fi^rave faults, and we need to be constantly on the watch for them ; for, as straws show which way the wind blows, so such statements will enable us to divine if skeptics oppose Christianity because they do not t£^ji7» to believe. At the conclusion of this lecture, wc; may briefly recapitulate the disadvantages against which we have seen that ('hristianity has to contend. First, there is the great multiplicity of the systems at variance with it — which sys- r^ -mm j6 THE CKKDIBILITY OI- CHRISTIAN ITV terns often fraternize with each other while bitterly resistinj^^ the advances of Christianity. Then there is the fact that infidels are so con- tinually chanf^ing their ground that it is diffi- cult to find out what school of thought any particular opponent belongs to. Again, there is the opposition of philosophy, partly due to the fact that they think Christianity has usurped their power; partly on account of pride of in- tellect, which shows itself in dislike of acknowl- edging that God is wiser than man, and in a desire to earn a cheap reputation for being wiser than others. Christianity also is at a disadvantage because it is a definite system, and thus offers many points of attack ; because it is ancient, and people nowadays love nov- elty ; and because it is always easier to criticize than to construct. Finally, the Christian sys- tem claims the right to control our actions, and mankind hates control, and naturally seeks to justify his rebellion. Do we therefore apologize for Christianity, arguing that, against such difficulties, it is no wonder that progress should be slow ? Not at all. Why should Christians apologize for their glorious and reasonable faith, which is steadily regenerating the world, overcoming and cast- ing out all sorts of sin and evil, penetrating into the most distant and uncivilized quarters ft INTRODUCTORY. 37 of the globe, and overthrowing systems of re- ligion which have existed for centuries ? Has not Christianity stamped out slavery where it has control, and limited it even where it has not control ? Has it not placed a check on gambling, as in Louisiana? Did it not reform the barbarous Pacific isles, and so impress the people of Uganda that some of them were willing to die for their faith ? Is it not over- throwing the ancient systems of India and Japan, and are not most of the thinking people of civilized countries gladly acknowledging its supremacy ? Why should we apologize for such a faith ? We desire to do nothing of the sort. But if we see an electric car run up a steep hill without horses, or a locomotive pull a train up a stiff gradient by no visible power, we confidently argue that suimr Invisible power must be doing the work. Just so, since Chris- tianity is making its way against such terrible difficulties, — when we see it, as it were, stead- ily lifting the weight of the world's sin and evil, we argue that there is a mighty invisible power within it, whence all its outward agen- cies gain their force. That power is the Holy Spirit of God, which will energize in the church until our Saviour Himself comes again. Our victory is assured. The object of addresses 3^ tHE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. i': such as these is not to help bring about that victory, but to lessen our losses in the terrible battle now being waged. Men! God wants you to help in this battle. You say that there is no room, and that every post of Christian usefulness is occupied ? There is no room with the baggage guard — plenty of nominal Christians there; you are not wanted with the re&erves — thousands of real Christians are in them. It is in the fighting line you are wanted, and where you will find abundant scope for the exercise of ali your powers, especi- ally if you bring forward plenty of ammunition with you. Some one has said, ** There is always room at the top." So we say there will always be room in the front, in this great battle against skepticism, sin, and Satan. that •ible ttle. very here tyof nted :ians 1 are dant peci- ition ways ways ainst The Credibility of Christianity and the Difficulties of Disbelief. Address No. II. The Existence of a Personal God and the Probability of a Rev ^lation. THE ICXISTICNCi: OF A PICRSONAL (;Ol) AND TIIi: PKOHAHILITY OF A KICVFLATION. OUR subject this Jiftcrnoon is, "Reasons for Ikliivinf; in the ICxistcnce of a Per- sonal Go(i," and the probability that such a (iod would give a revelation to make His per- son and will known to His creatures. It is a wide and deep subject, about which whole libraries of sound arguments have been written ; but it is not necessary that we should devote more than one ac'dress to it, because there are not very many persons who deny the existence of such a God. As you are aware, the only reasonable alter- native is to believe that matter and force have existed from all eternity, and that force has so acted on matter, through countless ages, as to th 11( hich sur- proauce tne marvellous universe w rounds us. Darwin and Huxley, and other scientific men, have endeavoured to show that, given a few germs which had the power of re- producing their kind with slight variations, these — by what is call^jd natural selection, and other laws — would have progressed through 'all 42 THE CKliDIHILITV OF CHRISTIANITY the forms of life till finally man stood upon the earth. Many skeptics have sei;jecl this idea, and concluded that it does away with any necessity for believing in a wise creator ; but they forj^'et that there are many gaps — or, rather, chasms — in their system which still remain unbndged. Each one of these constitutes a " difficulty of disbelief." A few of them I pro- pose to speak of this afternoon. In the first place, with reference to the starting assumption of materialists, while it is very difficult to conceive of matter as having existed from all eternity, the present position of our scientific knowledge shows us thut force cannot have existed from all eternity, because the solar system at least, 1 probably the uni- verse, is in the conditio. a watch running down. You are all familiar with the old illustration drawn from a watch — how its arrangements reveal not only the hand, but the mind of its maker. It is a totally different argument which I now wish to lay before you. If I examine this watch and find that, while it is going, there is a continual waste of force or energy by friction at the pivots, I infer that the watch cannot have been going from eter- nity, because then whatever amount of energy it first started with would long ago have been TUi: liXISTKNCi: OF GOD. 43 i been used up. And if I further find that the source of its enerpf\ , tlie mainspring, is slowly uncoil- ing itself, I am confirmed in my conclusion that the watch must have been set going by some one at some definite time. You are aware that the source of all the forces on this earth is the heat of the sun. Horse power, water power, steam power, electric power, can all be traced directly to it. Faraday calculated that the average amount of heat radiated in a (lav on each acre of ground is equal to that which would be produced by the combustion of sixty sacks of coal. Now, it appears that this vast quantity of heat is alnv t all used up on the earth, and so lost to the universe. If it is not lost, where does it go ? It might go to make the earth hotter, but scientific men tell us that our planet is cooling. It might be stored up in the form of coal, but we know that our coal supply is rapidly diminishing. It might go to increase the velocity of rotation, but astronomers tell us that the days are getting no shorter. It might be all radiated into space again, but the earth is far more like a heat- trap than a radiating mirror. The clouds act like the roof of a green- house and tend to keep the heat in, so that it is only on clear nights that the earth radiates any heat into space, and it certainly does not then 44 THE CREDIHILITY OF CHRISTIANHV give away as much as it has received on the clear and cloudy days. Now, we know that the sun consists mainly of the same chemical elements as our earth, and that il obeys srviie of the same laws; there- fore scientific men infer that the general laws of nature are the same for the sun as for the earth. Now, we know of no way in which heat can be created out of nothing, or even multi- plied without using up anything, on this earth ; hence we conclude that heat cannot be gener- ated out of nothing on the sun or elsewhere in the universe. Therefore all heat used up on the ear'^h is energy lost to the universe, as the heat generated by friction is a measure of the energy lost to the watch. Now, let us talk of the mainspring — the sun. It is continually radiating out heat waves in (as (ianot tells us) all directions. Those which fail to strike on any heavenly body must be wasted, unless we imagine a mirror all round the universe to send them back again. Wiien we remember that all but the nearest stars are to us merely mathematical points, having no magnitude in the most powerful telescopes, we see what an enormous propor- tion of the sun's heat must be wasted. Some have supposed its heat to be maintained by the impact of meteorites on its surface, but Ganot THE HXISTENCli OF GOD. 45 says: ** Although some of the sun's heat may be restored by the impact (^f such bodies iij^^ainst the sun, the amount must be very small." A proof by Sir W. 'Thompson (now Lord Kelvin) foUow^s, and then a theory that the sun's heat appears to be due t(3 its slow contraction, which of course must have a limit, so that scientific men are no doubt ri^dit in their present belief that the universe will ultimately become a uniformly warm mass. Hence vv'e Kjj^ically infer that the force or energy it now displays cannot have existed from all eternity. "Oh, but," you say, "al! this is takinf,^ no account of the doctrine of the conservation of energy." I am aware of th.'it theory, believe in it, and take it to mean that the Almighty h;is so arranged this earth that it shall be ver\- economical o( its heat, which passes through numbers jf different forms 'before it is finally dissipated and lost. Clerk Maxwell and others stated, some years ago, that energy could not be dissipated, and you will find the theory so put in many scientific books of twelve or fifteen years ago. Now, scientific men are abandon- ing this theory. Those who wish to prove it — i.e., "the indestructibility and possible eternity of energy" — are stnting their view with less confidence. Witness the articles on " Recent Science" in the X'"t'i:et'fitli Century, which i 1 : 46 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. allowed that the theory was still unproved ; while, on the other hand, scientific men are boldly declarinfi^ it unprovable, for Langley, in the Century Magazine for February, 1887, says : " Every process which we know tends to the dissipation or rather degradation of heat, and seems to point, in our present knowledge, to the final decay and extinction of the light of the world." Balfour Stewart, F.R.S., in his work on "The Conservation of Energy" writes: " Although, therefore, in a strictly mechanical sense, there is a conservation of energy, yet, as regards usefulness or fitness for living beings, the energy of the universe is in process of de- terioration." Sir W. Thompson, the greatest scientific authority in this line, wrote an article in the Fortnightly for May, 1892, on " The Dis- sipation of Energy," proving, by a totally dif- ferent line of argument than I have used, that energy is wasted. If the theory of the indestructibility and eternity of energy be abandoned, it will only be the last v/ith which skeptics have propped up their system, and which they have had to dis- card. What has become of Bathybius, from which Huxley had supposed all life had sprung, and on which Strauss rested the central arch of his argument against the supernatural? The "Challenger's" voyage proved it to be sulphate of lime. THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 4^ To return; when the Yankee, standing by Niagara, remarked, ''What a waste of mill power there is here! " he was stating a greater truth than he thought. The universe is wast- ing its force, which has not existed from all eternity. Whose mighty power, then, first gave rotation to the mass of nebulous matter out of which some maintain that the solar sys- tem — and possibly the universe itself — has grown ? Though this be its origin, we are still constrained to believe in a God who gave it motion. It would thus appear that those who wish to eliminate God from the universe have a very uncertain starting-ground, but there are many other missing links in their chain besides that which is supposed to come between mon- key and man. The principal of these is the origin of life. For a time it was supposed that life might spring from mere dead matter. Scientific men were never very sure of this, and the Encyclopaedia of 1875 says : "The properties of living matter distinguish it absolutely from all other kinds of things." And again : " The present state of our knowledge furnishes us with no link between the living and the not living," and speaks of "the so-called protein which has never yet been ob- tained except as a product of living bodies." 48 THi: CKKDIHILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. Cook, in his book on biolog}-, states that it is conceded b)' evohitionists " that spontaneous generation has never been known to occur* ; that it is against all the ascertained analogy of nature to suppose that it ever h?.s occurred ; that if spontaneous generation has not occurred, it must be admitted that a supernatural act originated life in the primordial cell or cells; that the doctrine of evolution, as held by Hux- ley, cannot be true, unless some bridge can be found to span the chasm between the living and the not living; that the present state of our knowledge furnishes us with no such bridge." Who makes all these far-reaching conces- sions ? Professor Huxlev. Where? In a most suggestive article on " Biology," published in the Encyclopaedia Hritannica. The agnostic Laing says : *' Science can give us no account of how these germs and nucleated cells, endowed with these marvellous capacities for evolution, came into existence, or got their intrinsic powers. "t Lord Kelvin says : " About twenty-five years ago I asked Leibig (the great chemist) if he be- lieved that a leaf or a flower could be formed or could grow b\' chemical forces. He answered : * I could more readily believe that a book on * Biology. J. Cook. I'. 32. t Modern Science and Modern Thought. J. Laing. THE KXISTENCK OF-' r.Ol). 40 1-* chemistry or botany could ^row out of dead matter by chemical process.' " * Thus we see that scientific men unite in affirming' that the origin of the primal germs of life is enshrouded in complete mystery. Finall}', Professor Drummond, in his "Nat- ural Law in the Spiritual World," stated that the theory of spontaneous g"eneration has been entirely given up ; that further experiments have shown that there can be no life without pre-existent life, and that this theory is victori- ous *'all along the line." If, then, man has been evolved from a primal germ, who gave life to that primal germ? Christians reply, "God, the author and giver of life." And here we should remark that many Christians now admit that God may have brought living creatures into existence by evolving higher types out of lower. And, in- deed, we have positive evidence of the inter- ference of an outside power in the process of evolution ; for Sir William Dawson, the author of "Acadian Geology," says that the present evidences "throw us back on a doctrine of a sudden appeajance of new forms, occurring at certain portions of geological time, rather than at others"; and, after some further geological arguments, he says : "It would seem, then, that *Fortnightly Review, May, 1892. 50 THK CREDIBILITV Ol- CHKISTf ANI'lV n.an must have been introduced, not by a process of jj^radual development, but in some abrupt and sudden way." The idea of God working by and superin- tending evolution is held by an increasing number of scientific men, both biolcjists and geologists, and is a perfectly reasonable belief; but to imagine that all the many forms of beautiful life have been evolved by the opera- tion of blind laws, acting without control or guidance, is most unreasonable, and to most persons utterly incomprehensible. The trouble is that skeptics have involved this part of the argument in a great deal of obrcurity by using long high-sounding words, forgetting that truth can always affr/d to be plain and simple. Ger- mans 5:.ay, " The clear is always the truth." Herbert Spencer, the apostle of agnosticism, says: "Evolution is a change from an indefi- nite, incoherent homogeneity to a definite, co- herent heterogeneity, by an infinite series of differentiations and integrations," which has been very accurately trans'. ited into plain Eng- lish thus : *' Evolution is a change from a no- how-ish, un-talk-about-able all-alike-ness to a somehow-ish, in-general-talk-about-able, not- all-alike-ness, by an infinite series of some- thing-elsifications and stick-together-ations." When we read the sentence clothed in its THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 51 long words, we are inclined to rather acknowl- edge that the author must be right than take the trouble to decipher his meaning. Thus, some men become skeptics more because they cannot understand skeptical books than be- cause they have really imbibed their teaching ; but when we translate it into plain English, we see that evolution by no means, even by Spencer's definition, does away with the neces- sity for believing in a God. For, otherwise, who first formed the new organs, before their use allowed of their development? and who combined the factors of evolution, so as to cause development ? Remember that it is a contradiction in words to talk of evolving out of a thing that which was never in it. You will have noticed by the above argu- ments that, at present, the highest science goes to prove that there is a God. There are many other reasons for believing in the existence of a great First Cause, but we will not linger among them, but proceed at once to state our reasons for believing that this great First Cause possesses intelligence, volition, free agency, love of order, a moral nature — in fact, is a per- son with a mighty mind, and has carefully arranged this world for our habitation. That the first cause possesses intelligence is proved to us by the numerous arrangements 52 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. and adaptations of the universe, which, as Dr. Row says, exist in numbers past all human comprehension. In one or two of his books he enlarges on the wonderful adaptation of the throat to produce sounds, the air to convey them, and the ear to receive them, arguing that such marvellous arrangements and designs must have proceeded from the mind of God. The argument is very strong, anu is only par- tially broken by the atheistical evolutionist con- tention, or rather assumption, that their primal germs had the power of altering themselves so as to take advantage of whatever they found upon the earth. Let us, therefore, take the case of a thing without life, which nobody believes has ever altered its nature. Take water ; I propose to show you how obviously all the laws relating to it, and all its history from the time when it falls as rain to the time when, having passed into clouds, it returns as rain again — how all this is evidently designed for the good of any sort of living beings which the mind can imagine, but particularly for the good of man as he now stands upon the earth. Water tirst comes to us as rain or snow, and is so distributed over the face of almost the whole globe, sufficient desert being left to show us how much we ought to value the rain. THE KXISTENCE OF GOD. 53 (And no one who has not been in the desert, as I have, can iniap^ine what it is to be withcjut water, or the peculiar force of the numerous passages of Scripture which refer to it.) For- tunately, the rain does not fall by bucketfuls, but by drops, which break nothing. Being dis- tributed, it can easily be obtained by almost every one ; being fluid, and obeying the law of gravity, it is very easily conveyed from place to place. Man uses it for drinking, cooking, washing, and countless other purposes, for all of which it is most perfectly fitted. It is abso- lutely necessary for the life of plants and ani- mals. What is not used either by animals or plants runs away in streams, which slowly wear valleys in the hills, and greatl\- add to the beauty and variety of our landscape's. These streams turn many of our mills, and convey produce down to the larger rivers, which we hnd so useful for purposes of inland communi- cation. At their mouths these rivers generally form harbours, invaluable to shipping, and so run into the sea, which is not only the great purifier of the globe, but also its great high- way ; without which, especially prior to the introduction of railways, the spread of civiliza- tion would have been immeasurably retarded. The heat of the sun, acting by complicated laws, draws the water up from the sea to form clouds; 54 THE CKLDllilLlTV OK CHKISTIANITY. winds are provided to carry these over the eartli, where tliey not only afford us a screen from what would otherwise be a monoto- nous ^lare, but also, when lit up at sunrise and sunset by reflected light, these clouds pro- duce some of the most marvellous scenes which man ever witnesses, and which alone have con- vinced many persons that ''the heavens are the Lord's." Acted on by other complicated laws, the clouds condense and again return in the form of rain, thus completing a cycle, every step of which is evidently thoughtfully arranged for our benefit by a personal, loving God. To say that man has been evolved so as to take advantage of these wonders in no way ac- counts for their existence, which is evidently altogether independent of every living thing. Thus you see that this argument is altogether independent of any theory of evolution, true or false. Much might be said about the other forms which water takes — how the snow, with its marvellously varied hexagonal crystals, tends to keep the ground warm, while its occasional absence allows of the frost getting down suf- ficiently far to break up the surface and render it more fertile. But there is only one other fact which I should like to draw your attention to, by an extract from Koscoe's chemistry, THE EXISTENCE (^F GOD. 55 .thi which I have onls altered l)\ turning,' decrees (.entifrrade into degrees Falirenheit. " When water is heated from ^J2° to 40" it contracts, thus forming a striking exception to the general law that l)odies expand when heated and con- tract when cQohng. On cooling irom 40 to j2° it expands again : above 40", however, it follows this ordinary law, expanding when heated, and contracting when cooled. Hence we conclude that water above or below 40 is lighter than water at 40 . This -ooling goes oil till the temperature of the top layer of water sinks to ^^2", after which a crust of ice is formed ; but if the mass of the water is suffi- ciently large, the temperature of the water at the bottom is never reduced below 40'. Had water become heavier as it cooled down to the freezing point, a continual circulation would be kept up until the mass was cooled to 32", when solidification of the whole would ensue. Thus our lakes and rivers would be converted into solid masses of ice, which the sunmier's warmth would be quite insufficient thoroughly to melt, so that many of our temperate regions would have had to endure a climate of arctic severity." This extract from Roscoe should be of peculiar interest to fishermen ; as, if it were not for this e.vception to general kuv, all the 56 TJII-: ciul we have only been speaking of the uses of one of the count- less chemical cond)inations which exist on this earth. Who, then, shall estimate the millions of adaptations which exist in the universe? Are we to believe that no superintending mind has arranged all these things, but that they have come about by blind chance ? No. We reject the idea with scorn, and firmly believe in a God, the perfection of whose might}' mind i? established by the universe He has arranged. The skeptic endeavours to break the force of this line of reasoning by denying the exist- ence of mind apart from matter. He argues : *' / know of no case in which mind exists with- out matter. / find that the intelligence of every animal is proportioned to the size of its brain. No phosphorus — no thought. If there be no matter, there can be no mind : therefore Tnr: j:xisti:n(:i: oi cod. 57 the mind of God (if there be a God) must exist in a material habitation. Hence either hiunan- itv, nature, or the universe is God, or th( re is no God at all." The fallacy of all this lies in its bein}< an ar/^'ument which is based on igno- rance. Suppose a lawyer defending a man in a murder trial, and a witness is called who pro- fesses total ignorance of the occurrence: his evidence is, of course, valueless. "Oh, but," you say, "even if he knows nothing of the murder, he can still be used to prove an alibi ; that is, that the accused person was far away when the murder was committed." Yes, but then his evidence is no longer based on igno- rance, but on knowledge. Unless he prac- tically says, " I knoii' that the accused was somewhere else at the time," his evidence is valueless. Thus we see that it is useless to argue from ignorance. But is not the material- ist arguing from ignorance when he says, " I do not know how mind can exist apart from matter; therefore it does not " ? Another form of this argument from ignorance is : "I do not know how personality can exist without limita- tion ; therefore, if God be a person. He cannot be almighty." A question thirty centuries old has not yet been answered by the atheists. It is: "Who hath put wisdom into the inward 58 IHK CRLDIBILITV Ol' CHRISTIANITY. parts ? or who hath i^iveii understanding^ to the heart ? " Job xxxviii. 36. Ex nihilo nihil fit — out of nothinj^, nothing comes. What attributes we possess must have been implanted in us by a Being who Himself possesses those attributes in greater perfection. If we have volition, God has it too. If we are free agents, so is He. This matter of the free agency of man is an intensely difficult subject, and is bitterly controverted by skeptics, though it is one of our primary intuitions. We can- not, for want of time, go into the subject. Suf- fice it to point out that, if there be no God, then man is not a free agent, and hence we have no right to punish anybody for evil deeds which an irresistible necessity compels them to commit. Whether a system can be right whose logical effect would be to limit us to restraining evil-doers, instead of punishing them, I leave you to determine. How are we to always pre- vent men from stealing unless we handcuff everybody ? Remember how murders increase when murderers are merely imprisoned for life instead of being executed. Nature punishes severely ; so may we ; so will God. That God possesses love of order is, I think, manifest from what we have already seen of the uniformity of law throughout the universe. This love of order extends into wonderful -mJ^ THE EXISTENXE OF GOD. 59 st have [iinself ection. we are he free ubject, though /e can- t. Suf- God, nee we il deeds hem to whose raining 1 leave ,ys pre- andcuff ncrease for Hfe unishes I think, seen of niverse. )nderful analogies between the natural nnd spiritual universe, as Butler and Drummoiid have so well shown. Remember, however, that God's love of order is not such as to prevent His making an exception to law ; for we saw He has done so in the case of water expanding as it cools at certain temperatures. That there is a God above us possessing love of order is further proved to us by our conscience. Man's con- science is different from a dog's in that, while a dog ne^'er appears to feel remorse apart from fear of punishment, man often feels remorse when no evil consequences seem likely to come upon him for his actions — as Scott said, in " M arm ion " : '" Tis minds of native pride and force That mainly feel thy pan^^s — remorse, rear for their scourge base cowards have ; Thou art the torturer of the brave." Thus we see that remorse is not to be ac- counted for by fear of punishment. V/hence is it, then ? Is it not because we know that we we ought — that is, " owed it " — to do differ- ently ? Owed it to whom ? To the Being who implanted conscience within us — that is, God. But there is a stronger argument than any of the above to show tl.at the universe is gov- erned by God, and cannot have been produced 1 6o THK CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITV. by the action of blind force upon mutter. This argument is drawn from the existence of our mental and moral attributes. Whence come all these things — reason, memory, love, hope, faith, trust, joy, sorrow ? Are we going to be- lieve that a mother's love is only a peculiar combination of force acting upon matter ? Whence comes our moral sense, which tells us what is right and what is wrong? How do we know that we ought to do to others ?s we would they should do to us ? To say that it is because Jesus of Nazareth told us so is not a sufficient explaneition for the materialist to offer ; because, if his theories are right, then Jesus of Nazareth was a mere man, and it is absurd to believe that the dreams of a Galilaean carpenter have given moral ideas to the civil- ized world. Besides, as our skeptical friends so often insist, there is some evidence to show that these ideas existed in India and elsewhere before Jesus Christ was born. What do the other side say ? They follow their usual plan. When a big difficulty to their system presents itself, they jump over it with a big statement, such as : " Nothing can be more certain than that moral ideas have been evolved by a pro- cess similar to that which produced the higher forms of life.'" Even granting their statement, they still have to account for the origin of ^ THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. 61 moral ideas, just as physical evolutionists have to account for the origin of life. Tyndall, the only one who, I believe, has dared to formulate, their creed in this matter, says : '* Emotion, intellect, will, and all their phenomena, were once latent in a hery cloud." That is to say, he believes man's moral attributes existed in matter, whose atoms he describes as so small, so strong, so wise. Now, you cannot apply any of the adjectives by which we describe matter to any moral at- tributes. Cook derisively asks : " What is the shape of love ? How many inches long is fear ? What is the colour of memory ? " By these absurd questions you see that matter and mind have wholly different, irreconcilable properties ; and how can wholly different, irreconcilable properties co-exist in the same atom ? In Germany, I hear, th'-jy consider that if a man is a materialist there must have been soni'ithing radically wrong in his education. The Germans are a people of very good, sound sense. I bope that all the above lines of reasoning will be clinched to your minds by the following argument — that moral ideas cannot have been the product of evolution. To this I invite your close attention. We have all heard about the law of the survival of the fittest. Darwin 62 tHE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. closes the sixth edition of his work on " The Origin of Species " with the words, " Let the strongest live, and the weakest die." The evolutionist claims that it is the operation of this law which has caused the race to pro- gress, by killing oif the weak and sickly, and all those who have any physical defect. Now, our moral sense of right and wrong has taught us to care for the weak and sickly ; for in- stance, to build hospitals, infirmaries, asylums, dispensaries, and to assist those upon whom the struggle for life presses too hardly. By so doing we break and strive to nullify the law that the fittest only should be allowed to sur- vive, and all those with any defect be left to perish. If, then, our moral sense of right and wrong be, as the atheist says, a product of evolution, then I say that evolution has pro- duced a force which is directed against its own laws. It is a case of Satan casting out Satan — a house divided against itself. Where, in nature, can we point to another law which is stopping itself and hindering its own opera- tions ? Science cries out against such an idea. No ; evolution has not produced our moral sense of right and wrong. That, at least, has been implanted within us by a Being who Himself possesses these moral attributes, of which ours are only a feeble copy, barely sufficient to en- -I f 4 THK EXISTENCE OF GOD. 63 able us to grasp a slight perception of His moral neiture, and His wisdom, goodness, and love. A darker side to this matter is now looming up before us. A few atheistical evolutionists are beginning to see that, to be logical, they must deny that man is right to assist his fellow- creatures ; for this assistance can only be given by some self-sacrifice, and — as a writer in a widely-circulated magazine recently said — self- sacrifice will soon be looked upon as just as foolish as self-mutilation. God help us if this idea should gain ground ! Who would attempt to lead a company into action if it were com- posed of men holding this notion ? Nay, who would even dare to travel by railway or steamer? — for is not the safety of travelling dependent upon men sacrificing their comfort, labour, and even life, to a sense of duty ? Good-bye to our home happiness; good-bye to our loftiest ideals. Shall we relapse into sav- age barbarism ? Nay ; from this ghastly fate, truth, and the assurance of God's existence, shall complete our deliverance. In summing up these argumenis, to what shall we compare the whole atheistical system? It is like a building so designed that it can only rest upon four pillars, each of which is absolutely necessary to its stability. The first 64 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. pillar is the eternity of matter and force, and is to be founded upon a first cause other than God. One stone onl\' for tliis pillar has been cut out. The second pillar is " spontaneous gen- eration." The atheists erected this with great rejoicings some years ago, but it tumbled down, and nobody knows how to set it up again. The third pillar is atheistic evolution, and is to be founded on the assumption that the germ produced by spontaneous generation had the power of reproducing its kind with slight variations — sufficient instinct for sexual selection, etc. The atheists are now dancing round this unfinished but already set-up pillar in great glee; but the pillar shows signs of tak- ing such a shape as to make it unfit for the atheistical structure, and more suited for an- other temple, that of Christian evidences, about which we will speak later on. The fourth pil- lar is the development of man's moral nature, and is to be founded, so some say, on reflex muscular action, or the latent wonders of a fiery cloud ; but the atheists are fighting shy of attempting to cut stones for this pillar. At best, the state of things is : One pillar up, one half up, one tumbled down and smashed, and one practically not begun ; and yet the atheists are demanding that we should leave oifr well-founded structure to take shelter un- der their ruin. No, thank you! Till': I.XISTHNCH Ol" COD. 65 So far, and as to the existence of a creator, most men are agreed ; but many refuse to acknovvledf(e the force of the next arf]fument, which is this: If there be a personal God, who has carefully arranged this work' for our habita- tion, is it not extremely probable that He would make Himself and His will known to His creatures ? In other words, that He would make some revelation of Himself to man ? Now, many unbelievers argue that what they call natural religion is quite sufficient for man ; in other words, that man can himself discover all that it is necessary that he should know about God, himself, and his duty, and can also find, or else impOvSe upon himself, sufficient motives for doing his duty. But we can only guess how much man would have found out about all of these things, because Christianity and the Bible have so permeated modern thought that we can never be sure whether certain ideas and motives spring from them or from the mind of man unless we refer to history. Let us, then, ap- peal this matter to the ordinary records of the Greeks and Romans, and see, not only what were their ideas of social duties, but how they actually lived ; for this last is the true test, seeing that a system is useless if it only teaches man what is right, but does not supply sufficient 66 rill': ( KICDIJUM'IY ()!• CIIKISTIANI I V. motive for him to do right. And as I show you the utter selrtshness and misery which underlaid the splendid civilizations of these refined and intellectual people, I hope you will contrast their wretched state, not only with the way we live now, hut with the state to which the world would attain if Christ's laws were obeyed in the spirit ; and I think you will see that we may draw from thrir moral debase- ment a double arfjument. First, that the state of the world before Christ came was such as to make a great revelation highly necessary, and therefore — if our former considerations have convinced us that there is a God — extremely probable ; and, secondly (whether we believe that there is such a God or not), that Chris- tianity is so reforming the world, and is so much better adapted to the needs and nature of man than any of the systems which man could or did discover by himself, that we start our course of Christian evidences with a strong presumption that Christianity was not invented by man, but was revealed from above. And here let me beg you to notice that I entirely discard an argument which has been so often advanced by well-meaning Christians ; thus : " We need Christianity, therefore let us believe in it." Although it would appear that man can believe in Christianity directly he Tin-: liXisiLNCL 1)1 Col). ^7 .'ickno\vlc(lf(L'S the possibilit\ that it may bo true, just as a man can trust his life to a rupc if lie sees the shf^htest reason to hope that it may bear the strain, yet no honest man can beheve in a thinf( merely because he wishes to do s(j. Skeptics say that we are continually cryinf^ out, "Oh, the pity of givinpf up Christianity! " We need to show them that we believe in Chris- tianity, not because we merely wish to, but be- cause we are really convinced that it has been ^iven us by divine revelation ; and, remember, the emotions of our hearts have nearly as much right to influence our convictions as the logic of our minds. Let us, then, put this particular part of the matter thus : We believe in Christianity, be- cause experience has shown that it is far bet- ter adapted to the needs of man's body and heart than any system which the mind of man has ever conceived, and we conclude that such a system was not invented by man, but was re- vealed by his Maker. Suppose, at the World's Fair at Chicago, the machinery section is found to contain an engine of novel construction, which no one can work properly ; and suppose a man comes along and says, ** I can make that engine work," and they reply, "Why, lots of men have tried, and no one can make the thing run, and no one has ever seen the likes of it 68 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. before," and the man again says : " I can make that engine work," and proceeds to do so — would not the bystanders feel certain that he was either the maker or his assistant? It is for a similar reason that we Christians, as we contemplate the success of Christianity, beheve that it was by Christ that God *' made the worlds." Let us, then, glance brieHy, first at the state of the bulk of the people under ancient civilizations; and then at the systems of ethics and philosc^phy which they composed. Have you ever heard of there having been any hospi- tals, infirmaries, asylums, dispensaries, orphan honi..s, or even poor-houses, in any of the grand cities of ancient Greece or Rome ? Look at Gel! and Gaudy's Pompeiana, with an indexed plan of the so long buried city, and with descriptions of tombs, fountains, towers, ramparts, amphitheatre, barracks, reservoirs, schools, temples, etc., is there a single build- ing that appears to have been put to any char- itable purpose? Not one. Do we read of such in ancient history? Nowhere. Had they no sick, injured, lame, blind, orphans-, or paupers in those days? Why, certainly they had. What did they do with them ? Simply nothing; just left them to beg or die. This was the wretched state of all those who suffered THF EXISTENCE OF GOD. 69 from any defect or ailment, and even the rich lived under the most uncomfortable assurance that, shcnild mislortune come upon them, they would obtain no mercy from their fellow-crea- tures, even as they had show n no mercy. But, leavinf]^ the sick, let ur. take the case of the whole. Have you read " Ben-Hur" — that most interesting^ sketch -story of the state of the world when Christ came? Do you recollect the ^reat sea-H}^ht ? Were you not struck by the misery of the wretched ^'^alley-slavcs, who rowed chained to the benches, though it en- tailed their being burnt alive if the enemy suc- ceeded in setting the trireme ahre ? That was a true picture of the misery of slavery under ancient Rome, both for sailors and landsmen. Yon have read ** Uncle Tom's Cabin," which gives another picture of slavery — and a slavery, mind you, based on the old Roman servile law, not on Hebrew slavery, which was (juite a different thing, and never allowed the bond- servant to be looked up(jn as a chattel. These books show \ou trie wretched condition of the slaves — a large proportion of the population in the days of Greece and Rome. If a Roman slave-owner was murdered, and his assassin could not be discovered, all his slaves had to be executed. Now, what was the state of the freemen in I i: ^ U yo THH CKKDIHIMTY OF CHRISTIANITY. Rome — first, of the lower classes ? We are by no means always just now in our treatment of the poor, but surely this was worse. In Macaulay's "Virginia" are the follovvinfj lines: "Exult, ye proud p.t'ricians, the hard-fought fight is o'er, We strove for honours, 'twas in vain ; for freedom, 'tis no more. No crier to the polling summons the eager throng, No tribune breathes the word of might that shields the weak from wrong. Our very hearts, that were so high, sink down beneath your will, Riches, and lands, and power, and state ; ye have them, keep them still. Still press us for your cohorts, and, when the fight is done, Still fill your garners with the spoil which our good swords have won ; Still, like a spreading ulcer which leech-craft cannot cure. Let your foul user eat away the substance of the poor ; Still let your hagg.ird debtors bear all their fathers bore ; Still let your dens of torment be noisome as of yore. No fire when Tiber freezes, no air in dog-star heat. But store of rods for freeborn backs, and holes for free- born feet. Heap heavier still the fetters, bar closer still the gate ; Patient as sheep, we yield us up unto your cruel hate." This hate was the dominant passion of Rome. All the different classes hated each other. Hate seems to have ^i^cnerally pre- rm: mxisti-nci-; oi <.<>i). 71 vailed, even in the families aiul social bodies, so much so that it afterwards became a mar- vel — *' See how these Christians l. 11 sensuous paradise, and join tiic religion of those who have so lonj^ carried on the terrible slave trade in the heart of Africa ? What is the state of things in India, where these systems hold sway ? M. Mitchell writes: "The burning of widows has l)een prohibited by enactment, but the awful rite would in many places be restored were it not for the strong hand of the British Government. Widows are subjected to treatment which they deem worse than death." To a European, who does not see much of the inner life of the people, their condition may seem tolerable ; but a lady who has been in their Zenanas recently stated in Halifax that the native men never speak to their little girls, who are so settled in sadness that they cannot even be made to laugh ; that thousands of Hindu girl babies are exposed in the jungle every \ear, and she had herself seen two which had been mangled by wild beasts, which never happens to boy babies. The Mahometans leave many of their girl babies to starve." (The Chinese drown them.) "All wid- ows have to fast and abstain from water all day, once every month." Well, if such wicked things are done under these systems, shall we just pick out the best teachings from all religions, and be guided by them ? Beware of such religious eclecti- j "■:-'\ ii' ill I, {' yH iMi-; c;Ki;i)ii!n.iTV or ( jfNfsfiAxifv. cisin ; for if there be a personal, loving God, who has given a revelation to man, He would surely have known that the bulk of mankind have not the time or the chance of examining all religious systems in order to choose out the best teachings from each. In fact, once we believe in a personal and loving God, we cannot help feeling certain that Chris- tianity is His revelation to man, for it is vastly superior to all other systems in four main points : First, it is the only system of religion which has given a perfect law to man, stigmatizing as sin all which is hurtful to him in all his rela- tions and circumstances of life ; and has also given man a perfect example of a faultless life. Secondly, it is the only system which has adecjuately shown man the awful nature of sin, by its doctrine that the Son of God must needs come down to earth to die for sinners. The magnitude of the price paid for man's redemption has enabled him to feel the peace of a conscience reconciled to God. This is the third point in which the Christian religion is immeasurably superior to all other systems, whose great want is a propitiation of value sufficient to atone for sin. "When once the Gospel is received by a Hindu, no question remains as to whether a pilgrimage to Delhi, or THH HXISTliNXE Ul- (..Ul). 79 penance before the car of Jujj^j^ernaut, e more efficacious than faith in an act of would not Christ." The fourth point in which Christianity vastly surpasses all other systems is that it is the only religion which is founded upon and by 1( )ft( Chi permeated fail to show that love which our system of re- ligion teaches — especially, perhaps, to out- siders ! The fault is ours ; it does not lie in Christianity ; for, first, we believe that *' God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life"; then that the love of Christ should constrain us to love others, conquer our sins, and give up our lives to His service, for ** this is love, that we walk after his commandments." How insep- arably happiness and iov«; an; associated to- gether! Why is a true hotn^ always a happy place? Is it not because of the atmosphere of love which reigns there ? It is this thought which makes us certain that heaven will be an abode of supreme happiness — for there love will be perfected. i .1 1 i'X .V ■ -I « I ii i'i' iiJ.'l; ■f ifi The Credibility of Christianity and the Difficulties of Disbelief. Mi \ '41 o U Address No. III. The Witness of Prophecy. •o N.B. -The extracts from Scripture are from the Revised Version. The extracts from Reiian are taken from Wil- bour's translation of the "'Vie de JOsiis." :1 THF. WITNESS OF PROPHIX V. THE title for this address was sugj^ested to me by the Kev. Dyson Haj^Mie, ;iiui is a sinpfularly appropriate one, because many of the prophecies to which I shall refei are a pres- ent witness to us of the truth of Scripture. In speaking of the " Evidences of Chris- tianity," we have to take some facts on the testimony or witness of others, but the super- natural character of prophecy we can test for ourselves. If we only know what tilings the Bible does foretell, our own eyes and the daily papers become evidences to us of its truth. "The greatest of the proofs of Jesus Christ are the prophecies." So wrote Blaise Pascal, the scientist, of whom an Englishman wrote: "We regard Pascal not only as the }', "t-'atest genius, but as the holiest man that France ever pro- duced." So much for the importance of the subject. It is the first pillar in the temple of Christian evidences which we hope to build up in these addresses; and, let me remark, it is a pillar which skeptics are very chary of attempting to overthrow. Laing, who professes to take a B I ill IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) i $',. %£0 1.0 I.I 1.25 ^i& Hi Li 2.0 M III 1.6 6' if i I ^' e /a >m / M "W '/ Photographic Sciences Corporalion ^ -^\ -u •^ «s^- V ^\^\. ^X WrS 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 145S0 (716) 872-4503 '% "^ c> 84 THI-: cRiiniHiiJiv oi ciikistiam rv. wide, impartial view of the evidences of Chris- tianity, scarcely touches on the subject of prophecy. Renan tries to overthrow the super- natural character of a prophecy here and there. Many critics are en<(a^ed in the same work. In the case of some prophecies they may pos- sibly succeed, but many will remain which we may be certain will turn the edge o{ their best- tempered tool' , and defeat all their efforts to overthrow. Now, the Scriptures, as you are av^'are,teem with prophecicF ; but they were intended for the benefit and encouragement of mankind during very many centuries, and therefore it is absurd to expect that they should all have an evidential value at the present day : that is, that they should all be useful to us for proving that the Scriptures were given by inspiration of God. Many persons fall into this mistake, and thus, if at any time they come to think that any book may not have been written quite so early as they supposed, they feel as if the foundations of their faith were slipping away ; whereas, most probably, they were never meant to found their faith upon that particular book, the prophecies in which were intended to assure former generations of men. Now, it is obvious that no prophecy can help prove to us that the Bible is God's book tMfi WltKF.SS ()!• PKOPTIKCV. 85 unless we can prove that the prophecy was publicly recorded before it l)e^aii to be ful- filled ; thpt it afterwards came to pass ; and that its fulfihnent was not a coincidence, nor a thing that could be foreseen by the prophet. I propose, therefore, only to alhide to what are undisputed prophecies. If in anv case modern criticism has attempted to insinuate doubts as to whether a prophecy may not have been writ- ten after the event, I will mention the fact, so that you may judge for yourselves whether, even if the whole of modern criticism is sub- stantiated, there are not sufficient undoubtedly fulfilled prophecies left to prove to us that they were given by God Himself. Let us consider, first, the prophecies relat- ing to the great nations and cities of the world. In the third chapter of Nahum we find a prophecy of the destruction of Nineveh by fire, written undoubtedly long before that event oc- curred. It reads: "And it shall come to pass, that all they that look upon thee shall flee from thee, and say, Nineveh is laid waste" * ; and, further on, " The fire hath devoured thy bars " t ; and, " There shall the fire devour thee." :j; The Ninevite remains indicate that this was the way the great city was destroyed. Layard says : ** The palace of Kouyunyik had been m "i Nah mil 111. 7. f V. I '5- ^1 H6 THE CUF.DtBitJTV ol^ CHRtSTfANlTY. f ■'■ destroyed by fire ; the alabaster slabs were almost reduced to lime. The whole entrance of the southwest palace at Nimroud was buried in charcoal " ; and Botta says : **I must acknowled;:(e I no longer doubt that this monu- ment (the Khorsabad palace) was destroyed by fire," etc. Nahum ends: ''There is no assuag- ing of thy hurt,"* etc., and Rawlinson says: " In accordance with the announcement of Nahum, we find that Assyria never rose again to any importance." Isaiah xiii. 19-21 contains a .striking pro- phecy of the desolation of Babylon. It reads: "And Babylon, the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldean's pride, shall be as when God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah. It shall never be inhabited, neither shall it be dwelt in from generation to generation : neither shall the Arabian pitch tent there; neither shall shepherds make their flocks to lie down there. But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there ; and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures." What is the use of skeptics saying that there may have been two Isaiahs, or twenty Isaiahs? We know that the book was written when the Septuagint version of the Old Testa- ment was composed — that is, two hundred * V. 19. THE WITNESS OF I'KtJPHECV. S? f?; t years before Christ ; and the prophecy was not completely fulfilled till after Christ, for Keith says: "About the beginning of the Christian era, a small portion of the site of Babylon was inhabited. It became gradually a desert place ; and, in the fourth century, its walls, repaired for that purpose, formed an enclosure for wild beasts, and Babylon was converted into a field for the chase." You remember that Isaiah had said: "But wild beasts of the desert shall lie there." The peculiar point of Isaiah's prophecy was that " It shall never be inhabited." Major Keppel writes : " The eye wanders over a barren desert in which the ruins are nearly the only indica- tion that it had ever been inhabited." Sir Robert K. Porter says: " There are many dens of wild beasts in various parts ; in most of the cavities are numberless bats and owls. These caverns, over which the chambers of majesty may have been spread, are now the refuge of jackals and other savage animals." The present desolation of Babylon is an existing witness to us of the reality of pro- phecy. Eligible sites for cities do not usually become desolations after being built over. Rome, Athens, and Jerusalem flourished with Babylon, and they are cities still, because their complete desolation is not foretold in Scripture. H Ml 88 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY ■ n Ezekiel, in his twenty-sixth chapter, pro- phesied the destruction of Tyre, saying: "And they shall destroy the walls of Tyre, and break down her towers : I will also scrape her dust from her, and make her a bare rock. She shall be a place for the spreading of nets in the midst of the sea : for I have spoken it, saith the Lord God," Of the fulfilment of this prophecy Maundrell writes : "Its present inhabitants are only a few poor wretches harbouring them- selves in the vaults, and subsisting chiefly upon fishing"; while the skeptic Volney writes: " Tyre is reduced to a miserable village. They live obscurely on the produce of their little ground, and a trifiing fishery." But how was Tyre to be humbled ? Ezekiel wrote : *' And they shall la\- thy stones and thy timber and thy dust in the midst of the waters.'" More than two hundred years afterwards this curious pro- phecy was exactly fulfilled by Alexander, for Diodorus Siculus* records : " Alexander, seeing that it would be a difficult thing to carry on the siege of lyre, because the city was separ- ated from the continent by an arm of the sea, demolished Old Tyre, as it was then called, and with the stones and fragments of the build- ings formed a mole, two hundred feet in breadth, extending from the mainland to the peninsula." * Vol. XVII., p. 4. THM WITNIISS OI" PKoi'm-.CV 89 Thus Alexander did precisely what had been foretold, for it must have been necessary to do a great deal of scraping to get the materials for that immense mole. Ezekiel xxx. i ^ contains the prophecy : "There shall be no more a prince out of the land of Egypt." The Encyclopaidia says : ** Thus miserably fell the monarchy of the Pharaohs, after an unexampled duration of nearly three thousand years, or, as some think, far longer. More than two thousand years have since passed ; and, though Egypt has from time to time been independent, not one native prince has sat on the throne of the Pharaohs.'' In the previous chapter, when speaking of Egypt, Ezekiel said : " It shall be the basest of the kingdoms ; neither shall it any more lift itself up above the nations : and I will diminish them, that they shall no more rule over the nations." History recounts the fulfilment of this prophecy, Egypt having been successively ruled by Macedonians, Romans, Moslems, Saracens, Mamelukes, French, Turks, and Eng- lish. A few weeks ago* a cartoon appeared in Punch, representing Mrs. Britannia, pointing to a troopship and saying to the Khedive : "Allow me to inform your Highness, here comes a box of soldiers, which you mustn't play with." * Fcl)riiary 4th, 1893. (jO Till': CKICDIHIMTV ()|- CIIKISI lANITY. The newspapers themselves are a w itness to us of the fulfthnent of propliecy. H. L. Hastings has arranged in parallel columns a long list oi prophecies such as the above, and acknowledgments of their fulfilment by well-known skeptics. On the other side, it is sometimes urged that the prophecy in Isaiah xvii. i was not fulfilled. It reads : "Be- hold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap." But this is explicable by a temporary desolation such as was actually inflicted by Tiglath-Pileser on the Syrian capital. You will note that Isaiah does not say, as of Babylon : *' It shall never be in- habited." He says: "The kingdom shall cease from Damascus," and so it has come to pass. Let us next take a few of the long series of prophecies which refer to the Messiah, to the Lord and Saviour of mankmd, Jesus Christ. And first let me remind you that all these are also bond fide prophecies ; that is, they were undoubtedly written long before Christ came. Now, how can we be sure of this ? Suppose that it is the duty of two clerks in a bank to keep duplicate ledgers ; then one may be almost sure that any series of entries which appears in both ledgers is correct, the only other possible alternative being that the THK WITNl-.SS OF lMa)I'Hi:CV. 91 clerks may have agreed to falsify them. Now, if the two clerks have quarrelled, one may be quite sure that the entries were made before they quarrelled, for in this case collusion is out of question. Now two clerks— the Jewish and the Christian churches — have each been custodians of the Old Testament. Immediately after the prophecies of the Messiah which that book contains were fulfilled they quarrelled, and have been at variance ever since. The Jews maintain that Jesus of Nazareth was not that Mes-iiah. Therefore they had the strong- est reason for altering the prophecies so that they should not so pointedly refer to Christ. Such was their respect, however, for their Scriptures that they have left them untouched, and Jews and Christians alike bear witness to the existence of the same Old Testament Scrip- tures, before Christ came. Further, you will notice that those Scriptures were safeguarded, not by single individuals, but by great churches, and that they existed in two languages, Hebrew and Greek ; for the Septuagint version was made two hundred years before Christ. There- fore it is undoubted that the whole of this class of prophecy w^as written before the event. As we take each part separately, we shall see that all was fulfilled, and that the prophecies were of such a nature that they could not have been the mere guesses of clever men. I 92 THE CKEDIlilLITY OF CHRISTIANITY. In the twelfth chapter of Genesis, God said to Abraham : "In thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed." Cairns justly asks : " I'roin what construction of history, or from what (lata in time, could the anticipation of a world-wide spiritual blessing in connection with one man have arisen ? " Now this prophecy is bein^ fulfilled before our eyes, as the nations of the earth are gradually learning to love the great Son of Abraham, Jesus Christ. The Illustrated London Nei^s of December 17th, 1892, contained the following statements about Uganda, by the Rev. R. H. Walker, a mission- ary who had just returned from that country: *' Fifteen or sixteen years ago, when Christian missionaries first went to Uganda, there was no written Luganda language. Now, ten thou- sand of the population, at all events, are able to read their own language. I have already alluded to the stamping out of Uganda as a centre of the slave trade, and with that went other barbarities. In times gone by, women used to make part and parcel of the tribute levied 1)\ tho king. Then all men took, by force of course, as many wives as they liked, the wives being merely domestic slaves. Poly- gamy is still the rule with the heathen and Mahometan sections of the community, but a Protestant or Roman Catholic has only one THE WITNESS OF PROPHECY. 93 wife. Mwanga might to-day order his chiefs to have this subject or the other butchered, but his order would not in the least be likely to be obeyed. Mika tells me that he does not quite know where Mwanga got his present wives — in raids in one quarter or 'another, no doubt — but he says the king is not likely to get any more. Nothing could better show the change which has come about, even in reference to the king and his wives." After hearing that, who can dispute that even the centre of Africa is beginning to enjoy a few of the many blessings which have come to us through Christ ? You are aware that it IS occasionally disputed, especially by those who call themselves secularists, that we have been blessed in Christ. Some have prepared a long list of the crimes which have been per- petrated in the name of Christianit}', and claim that this list proves that Christ's teaching has rather caused sorrow and injustice than other- wise. But even Renan allows that, though Christians have been intolerant, the spirit of Christ was that of toleration. Consequently, Christ cannot be charged with the crimes done in His name. On the other hand, what we saw of the state of Rome and Greece, when Christ came, should enable us to form a slight conception of the terrible flowing tide of crimes I Ji. ^4 mi; ckhdihiutv oi- ( iikistianity. I" of all sorts which would have rushed on iiii- checkcd had not Christ become, as Kenan him- self says, '* to humanity an inexhaustible source of moral regenerations."* It is easy to tabulate the crimes done in Christ's name, but who shall estimate those He has prevented ? Surely every candid person in western Christian lands will gladly acknowledge that we are blessed in Christ. But even heathen nations have been in- directly blessed through Christ. A Zenana lady recently stated iri this city that the British rule was the salvation of India. What if the bulk of our countrymen who rule o"t there are only nominal Christians ? We must remem- ber that they are the descendants of the old Bible-reading Puritans, permeated with their ideas ; and therefore if British rule be the best that India has ever seen, we may reasonably attribute it to the influence of the Bible, and its great central figure, Jesus Christ, in whom the millions of India are blessed, though they still disbelieve. Or, take slavery. Did not Christian Eng- land pay twenty millions sterling to liberate the slaves in a.U British dominions ? Has not Christian sentiment compelled our government to station cruisers to intercept slavers on the • I'age 370. mi \\irNi:ss ni i-koimii-cn U3 east cociFt of Africa ? Who can doubt that this course has lessened the profits to he jj^ained. and thus (hniinished tliosc terrible raids on harmless villa^^es in the interior, whose inhab- itants are thus already indirectly blessed by the coniinc; of a Saviour of whom thev have not yet heard ? When the ^real Taepinj^' rebellion was devastating China, was it not a Christian — Gordon — who put it down, and who \vas actu- ated by neither love of fame nor money, but only of humanity ? Are not ('hristians strivinj^ hard to stop the export of opium to China? Seeinjj that our missionaries, as well as our statesmen, are exerting a mighty influence all over the globe, may we not truly say that this old prophecy is being fultiiled before our eyes ? Next, let us ta'ic. Genesis xlix. lo. In the Revised Version it reads : "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, Nor the ruler's staff from oetween his feet, Until Shiloh come ; And unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be." Even the Jews take this as referring to the Messiah, and it contains three statements about Him. First, that He should be born of the tribe of Judah. Now, although there are a few difficulties connected with the genealogy of Christ, there can be no doubt that He came 96 Tin-' CRKDIHILITY O!' CHKIi>TIANTTY. 'iMfc i of the tribe of Judah.*' Then the prophecy states that there should he a rnler of the tribe of Judah till Christ came. When our Lord was crucitied, the rulership was departing from Judah. After the overthrow of Jerusalem, A.I). 70, the Romans took it away altogether, and the Jews have never regained it. Lastly, the prophecy states that the obedience of the people should be to Christ, or, as the Authorized Version has it, " the gathering of the people " ; either expression seeming to imply a voluntary submission to Christ's rule, which would not have come to pass had that temporal kingdom been established, of which the Jews so fondly dreamed. '* Passing by the striking Messianic pro- phecies of Moses, t Balaan^i,! and Nathan, § let us consider some which refer to more definite events in our Lord's life. Micah v. 2 contains a prophecy that the Messiah should be born in Bethlehem. As I have promised to tell you whenever anything is disputed, I must say here that Strauss and Renan declare that Jesus was born at Nazareth, thus charging the Virgin xVIary with wilful fraud ; for, as she lived after Christ's death, Matthew and Luke can hardly have failed to get the story of the birth at * ^tatt. i. 2. Luke iii. 33. tDeut. xviii. 15. 4-N"i"'*^'^s xxiv. 17. §11. Sam. vii. 15. Tiir: \vi'i-Ni':s:; f^i im<()I'iii;('\ 07 Bethlehem from her. Strauss quants that there is a (hfficiilty in maintainiiij^^ his theory, con- sidering^ that the facts were so widely known. Now, as Bethlehem was an ohscure villa^^e, I think we may accept this as a striking case o f fulfilled prophecN . Nexr, there are prophecies of a great fore- runner, who should be like Elijah,* and whose voice should be heard in the wilder!iess.t These were, of course, fulfilled in John the Bap- tist, to whose work Josephus bears independent testimony. I will pass over the prophecies that Christ's ministry should chiefly be in the land of Zebulon,:J; and the land of Naphtali, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gen'"'.s; and the prophecies that He should heal the blintl, deaf, and lame §> ; that He should discountenance popular clamour, and not "cry nor lift up, nor catise his voice to be heard in the street '" ; that He should be zealous for the honour of God's house If; that He should ride into Jerusalem upon an ass's colt, amidst rejoicinf,'s, etc.|| I will pass over all these most s.'»"ikinj,'^ prophecies without com- ment, because it might be contended that Christ fultilled them on purpose. Let us, there- fore, go on to the affecting circumstances *Mr\l. iv. 5, 6. 5^ Iha. XXXV. 5, (). t Is;i. xl. 3. tlsa. ix. I, 2. « i>^ /cch. is. 9. 98 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. Wm\ attending His death and passion, because all will allow that He then suffered at the hands of His enemies, who, if they recollected the prophecies at all, had the best of reasons for endeavouring not to fulfil them. Now, when we remember that the brazen serpent in the wilderness was God's way of delivering the Israelites from the snake-bites — whose poison so closely resembles sin — we can scarcely dispute that the lifting up of that ser- pent in the midst of the camp was a prophecy that the Messiah should be lift-^d up upon a tree. I say, we can scarcely doubt this, even if we had not St. John's authority that Jesus applied this to Himself when speaking to Nico- demus. As we go on with the prophecies, we shall see that all the details of the crucifixion are filled in, so that we can draw an exact picture of that most cruel form of execution from the Old Testament alone. Now, it cannot be said that the Jews drew this picture for themselves, and that it suggested crucifixion to their minds, for this was a Roman form of punishment, as Renan allows, and it was intro- duced before the Romans dreamt of studying the Jewish Scriptures. Here, to bring out the force of the argu- ment, I must quote for you Geikie's description of the sufferings of the crucified. He says : "The THE WITNESS OF I'KOPHECV. 99 suffering in crucifixion, from which death at last resulted, rose partly from the constrained and fixed position of the body and of the out- stretched arms. Intolerable thirst and ever- increasing pain resulted. The blood, which could no longer reach the extremities, rose to the head, swelled the veins and arteries in it unnaturally, and caused the most agonizing tortures in the brain. As, besides, it could no longer move freely from the lungs, the heart grew more and more oppressed, and all the veins were distended. The weight of the body itself, resting on the wooden pin of the upright beam, the burning heat of the sun scorching the veins, and the h'^t wind drying up the moisture of the body, made each moment more terrible than the preceding. The numbness and stiffness of the more distant muscles brought on painful convulsions, and slowly extending, sometimes through two or three days, at last reached the vital parts and released the sufferer by death." Compare this with David's prophecy of it in the 22nd Psalm : " I am poured out like water, And all my bones are out of joint : My heart is like wax : It is melted in the midst of my bowels. ^ My strength is dried up like a potsherd ; And my tongue cleaveth to my ja\Ys ; lOO lllli CKEDIJJlLirv oi" CHKIS TIANl FY. And thou hast brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have compassed me : The assembly of evil-doers have inclosed me : They pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones : They look and stare upon me.'' Now, who can doubt that these two are pictures of the same event, the one put in our own, the other couched in Oriental style? The psalni continues : " They part my garments among them, And upon my vesture do they cast lots." As Christ was nailed to the cross, and His disciples standing afar off, I suppose that no one would allege that they had anything to do with the fulfilment of this prophecy. The same psalm says : "All they that see me laugh me to scorn : They shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying : Commit thyself unto the Lord : let him deliver him : Let him deliver him, seeing he delighteth in him." We do not need the testimony of the evangelists to assure us that the Jewish passers- by fulfilled this prophecy with their mocking taunts. Ps. Ixix. 21 reads : " They gave me also gall for my meat ; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink." The scourging and spit- ting which prefaced the crucifixion are foretold in lsa.1.6: '* I gave my back to the smiters, and i\ THE WITNMSS f>F PKOPHHCV. TOt my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair : I hid not my face from shame and spitting." Also in Isa. liii. 5 : '* But he was wounded for our transgression, he was bruised for our iniqui- ties : the chastisement of our peace was upon him ; and with his stripes we are healed." Zech. xiii. 6 reads: "And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds between thine arms? (Margin, hands.) Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends." Now, we have seen that the Jews assure us that these prophecies existed long before Christ came. We will turn to another opponent of Christianity — the great French skeptic, Renan — for an acknowledgment that they were liter- ally fulfilled. He says: "Jesus was none the less, from that hour, a condemned man. He remained during the rest of the night exposed to the ill-treatment of a base varletry, who spared him no affront."* " Pilate thought himself obliged to make some concession ; but, still hesitating at bloodshed to satisfy people whom he detested, he endeavoured to give the matter a ridiculous turn. Professing to laugh at the pompous title given to Jesus, he caused him to be whipped. Flagellation was the ordi- nary preliminary of crucifixion." t " Accord- • Page 332. t Page 338. W 102 Tin-: CKEDinlLITY OF CHKIStlANITY. ^iiwifl ing to Jewish usage, the victims were offered a highly-spiced wine, an intoxicating drink, which from a sentiment of pity was given to the suf- ferer to stupefy him."* ** The cross was first set up, then the prisoner was fastened to it by driving nails through his hands ; the feet were often nailed, sometimes merelv tied with cords. "t " Jesus tasted these horrors in all their atrocity. A burning thirst, one of the tortures of crucifixion, devoured him. He asked for drink. There was at hand a cup of the ordinary drink of the Roman soldiers, a mixture of vinegar and water, called posca. Soldiers had to carry their posca with them in all their expeditions, among which executions were counted. A soldier dipped a sponge in this drink, put it on the end of a reed, and bore it to the lips of Jesus, who sucked it. The thieves were crucified on either side. The executioners, to whom were ordinarily aban- doned the minor spoils of criminals, drew lots for his garments, and, seated at the foot of the cross, guarded him."| "The passers in- sulted him. He heard about him vulgar raillery, and his death-cries of anguish turned into hateful mockeries. 'Ah, behold him,' said they. * He who called himself the son of God ! Let his father come now and deliver "Page 346. + Page 346. :l'age347. THE WITNESS OF PROPHECY. 103 him, if he will have him.' ' He saved others,' it was muttered, 'himself he cannot save. If he be the kin^ of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him.'"* "It appears that the two thieves crucified beside him also reviled him." Thus we see that Renan admits that there is sufficient evidence to prove that the pro- phecies were fulfilled. Now, did Renan, who is so careful to dispute every supernatural occurrence, make these astonishing admissions through inadvertence, because he forgot about the prophecies ? No ; he made them because he could not help doing so. All these things were part and parcel of an execution by cruci- fixion. Therefore, if we accept the testimony of the Roman historian, Tacitus, that Christ was put to death by Pontius Pilate, there is no room for doubt that all these things were done to Him. I have classed the above prophecies toRjether because Renan specifically acknowl- edges their fulfilment ; but there are many others which we cannot doubt also literally came to pass. Zechariah says: " If ye think good, give me my hire ; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my hire thirty pieces of silver. And the Lord said unto me. Cast it unto the II il Page 349. I04 THE CKLDIIilLITY OF CHRISTIANITY potter : the goodly price that I was prised at of them. And I took the thirty pieces of silver, and cast them unto the potter, in the house of the Lord."* We read the fulfilment of all this in Matthew's Gospel. Again, Isaiah fore- told that Christ should not have a fair trial when he said : ** By oppression and judgment he was taken avvay."t The Jews themselves acknowledge the fulfilment of this prophecy, for Geikie says : " So keenly, indeed, has the judicial murder of Jesus been felt by the Jewish nation, in later times, that the doctrine was afterwards invented in the Talmud, that any one who gave himself out as a false Messiah could be tried and condemned the same day, or even in the night." Isaiah also foretold that Christ held His peace before His accusers, for he says : '* As a sheep that beiore her shearers is dumb, yea, he opened not his mouth." To take events in the order in which they happened, we next find that Zechariah foretold the piercing by a spear. | Christ's having been crucified with two thieves, and buried by the rich Joseph of Arimathaea, was prefigured by Isaiah. Lowth translates the well-known verse thus : ** And his grave was appointed with the wicked, but *Zech. xi. 12. +Isa. liii. 8. ±Zcch. xii. lo. Till- WITN'KSS OI- PKdPIIICrV. tOn with the rich niaii wa^; his tomb,"* which, of course, was exactly what came to pass. Now, neither Renan, nor other modern 1 d skeptics, d( that jpt th( earned testimony of the evang^ehsts that these pubhc events really took place, and thus we have altof^ether a series of p: .phecies of all the circumstances attending the death of Christ whose fulfilment it is absurd to attribute to mere coincidences. We contend that for all these things to be nothing more than clever guesses, or simply a lot of coincidences, would be a far greater miracle than any which the Scriptures record. Skeptics say that we can- not beb'eve in miracles because modern experi- ence is against them ; but is not modern experience equally against the fulfilment of a series of guesses by coincidences such as these? We are therefore convinced that these pro- phecies were given by inspiration of God, to prove to all men that Jesus of Nazareth was the Saviour whom God had so long promised to redeem sinful man. From the prophecies of Christ's death and passion, we naturally pass to the prophecies of the general spread of a heartfelt religion, which that death for sinners is now bringing about. Jeremiah xxxi. 33 reads: "I will put mj' law * Isa. liii. 9. ! . i i tnfi THE CREniPII.TTY OF rilRlSTIANItV. in their iinv.ird parts, anH in their heart will I write it ; and T will !)e their God." Now, in Jeremiah's time, when most people felt reli|:;[ion to be an irksome restraint, what mere man could have foreseen that a time was coming when all true believers should love to serve God, when relii^ion should cease to be a mat- ter of outward ceremonial, and should consist of the inward communion of the heart with God ? Let us next turn to some prophecies in Isaiah ii. and xi.: ** And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob: and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths : for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem."* ** And the idols shall utterly pass away."t " For the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.":!; Here we see that the great spread of religion now taking place has been accurately foretold. Even the details are exactly delineated ; for instance, the start of Christian missionaries from Jerusalem, the abolishing of idolatry, and the voluntary sub- mission to Christianity of all the nations among whom the Gospel has been thoroughly preached. *Isa. ii. 3. tisa. ii. 18. 4^Isa. xi. 9. rm \viTNi:ss oi- rKopmcv T07 And let us remember that the Jew so hated and despised all Gentiles that no Jew was likely to invent such a prophecy. Well may Dr. C: urns say H ow, th en. was the Jewish enthusiasm for the salvation of th )rld f,Mnated in a race in many respects so narrow and limited ? How did it survive the damping effect of decay and corruption in their own religion, flourish in exile, and resist the incrustations of local and national sec- tarianism, till it found a glorious revival in Jesus and His disciples, who were ready to die for its fulfilment, and who actually did begin the fulfilment of it in a wonderful degree ? Whence this magnificent ideal of a universal religion totally wanting in paganism ; wanting, too, in Mahometanism, except with dependence on brute force and concessions to brutal lust which degrade and ruin it ? The Christian church has been struggling — as yet inade- quately — for eighteen centuries to realize it ; but it fires her warriors still with congenial ardour, and the noblest of them, falling in the field, throws the casket which contains it out- ward into the region which it is yet to conquer. The greater the soul, the more does it dwell with their spirits and with His who, from the rejection of the cross, looked forth upon a universal empire of truth and love. Is this II lU^ lllli CKIJJIIULUY (jr CIIUISI lAMTY. enthusiasm and the success which has crowned it sohd)le upon any principle of unbehef, or has unbehef in itself the moral greatness to sufj^gest an answer ? " Dr. Cairns continues: "The last element of wonder in these prophecies of victory is the shade of delay, reaction, and corruption that blends with success." This you v/ill find in the parable of the tares sown among the wheat, the net cast into the sea which gathered of bad and good, and in the second chapter of second Thessalonians, which speaks of a power of evil within the sanctuary of God. Thus we may well say that to account for all these prophecies, if they were not written by inspiration of God, is one of the standing difficulties of disbelief. That difficulty is increased and rendered insurmount- able when we consider the prophecies of the sad state of the Jews during this glorious spread of Gospel truth. In Deuteronomy xxviii. are the following : ** Thou shalt be tossed to and fro among all the kingdoms of the earth."* " Thou shalt be only oppressed and spoiled alv/ay."t "Thou shalt build an house, and thou shalt. not dwell therein. "| "And thou shalt become an astonishment, a proverb, and a byword among all the people whither the Lord shall lead thee away."^ " And the Lord V. 25. tv. 29. ^V. 30. §V. i7- i rill. \MINi;SS ol l'K()l'lll.( N. i()() shall scatter tint' iiiuoiif]; all pioplcs, finm tlu; one end of the earth even uiitt) the other end of the earth." ' " And anion}^' these nations shalt thou tind no ease, and there shall be no rest for the soul of thy foot."t- Those of us who are aware of the history of the Jews — how they have been hunted from one land to another, so that their present exodus from Russia is only the last of a lon\' series — I say, to us further comment is needless: and the marvel is increased when we remember that their remaininj^' a distinct people in spite of these mif^rations is foretold, for God said by Amos: " P'or, lo, I will rotnmand, and I will sift the house of Israel ainonj^ all the nati(ins, like as corn is sifted in a slave, yet shall not the least {j^rain fall upon the earth/'X The great catastrophe which caused the dispersion of the Jews — the terrible sicf^e of Jerusalem, lunl the final destruction of the Temple — are foretold in many prophecies, the most remarkable being those spoken by our Lord as He sat on the Mount of Olives, and which are recorded by three evangelists. § St. Luke's account contains these words : " Behold, the days will come, in which there sliall not be left here one stone upon another, •V. 64. tV. 65. t Anvjs ix. 9. § Matt. N\iv. ; Mark siii. ; I,ukt.- \.\i. , t ■ m** no THli CREDIlillJTY OF CHKISTIANITY. that shall not be thrown down."* " But when ye see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that her desolation is at hand."t "For there shall be great distress upon the land, and wrath unto this people. (; And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led cap- tive into all the nations : and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the (rentiles, until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled."^ And in the nineteenth chapter : " For the days shall come upon thee when thine enemies shall cast up a bank (palisade) about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall dash thee to the ground, and thy children within thee." II Some skeptics — as Hilgenfeld, Keim, and Kitzig — allow that these were real prophecies; Strauss hesitates, while Renan says of Luke : ** Chapter xxi., inseparable from the rest of the work, was certainly written after the siege of Jerusalem, and soon after"; and also he de- clares : " But if the Gospel of Luke is dated, those of Matthew and Mark are also, for it is certain that the third gospel is posterior to the first." Thus it will be seen that the learned Renan, after careful inquiry, considers that all fiiust have been written soon three gospels * V. 6. t \'. 20. jl Luke xix. 43, 4J. \ . 2: S\. 24. THK WITNESS OF PROPHECY. Ill after the year 70, when Jerusalem fell. It looks as though he would like to put them at a still earlier date, but is at a loss to account for the existence of the prophecy should he allow that they were written before the siejjfe. As it is, he tries to make out that a history of recent events was put into Christ's mouth as a prophecy. It is hard to believe this, for several rea- sons. Now, suppose 30U pick up Hake's " Chinese Gordon," which contains no account of his last mission to Khartoum and j^lorious death there. You rifjhtly conclude that it must have been written wnile he v>/as still alive. For precisely the same reason we conclude that the Acts must have been written while St. Paul was still alive ; otherwise St. Luke would never have omitted to chronicle the martyrdom which consummated the life of his principal hero. Now, ve know that St. Paul was beheaded under Nero, while Jerusalem was taken at the time of Vespasian, who reigned after Nero. Also, we know that St. Luke's Gospel was written before the Acts ; and hence we can be sure that either St. Luke wrote his gospel be- fore the takinf]^ of Jerusalem, or else committed fraud somewhere. However, we must not lay much stress upon this, for it is an argument I m i 112 THE CkEr)lBtIJtV Ol- rHK'tsTr.WItV. based on omission. Hut, if these prophecies were written after the event, why is no hint anywhere dropped chat the prophecy was ful- iilled,in Uke manner as Luke, who, after relatin^^ the prophecy of a dearth by Aj^^abns, adds : " Which came to pass in the days of Clau- (Hus'*?* If the three evan^^ehsts agreed to impute the prophecy to Chrrst, and left out any notice of its fnlhhnent on purpose, the\- showed a low cunninj^^ of which the j^ospels bear no other trace. Again, why is the prophecy of the end of the world mixed up with that of the destruc- tion of Jerusalem ? Surely, if the authors were writing after the latter event, thev would have managed to keep these two subjects separate. Again, why are the warnings to leave Jerusa- lem put in ? Because, if the people were not warned, their friends would surely object to the evangelists stating that they were warned, and con'sequently ought to have left the city. And, lastly, what possible motive had the evangelists for what must in this case, if skep- tics an? right, have been a wilful and deliberate fraud ? We may, therefore, well claim these as prophecies. History tells us how literally they were fulfilled. Eusebius relates how, after • Acts xi. 28. #11 THE vvitS'ess of prophecy. II-; Jerusalem had been first "compassed with armies" — that is, invested — Cestius Gallas withdrew his army, and then the Christians, remembering the Lord's words, retired to Pella in Perea, and so escaped destruction, josephus says that when Vespasian besieged Jerusalem, Titus in three days built Ji wall of thirty-nine furlongs, having thirteen castles in it, and so cut off all escape; and then, when the town had fallen after awful sufferings, Titus having commanded his soldiers to dig up the city, this was so fully done by levelling the whole compass of it, except three towers, that they who came to see it were persuaded that it would never be built again. It is said that over a million Jews perished in <^his siege. Here we come to another difficulty of dis- belief, and it is this : If the detailed prophecies of the destruction of Jerusalem were written before the event, how came any mortal man to foresee so clearly what was going to happen ? If thev were written after, why is there no hint that they were fulfilled ? Why are they left mixed up with other matters ? And what possible motive had the evangelists for the fraud ? _,__ However, there is another prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem which was c(>rtainly written before the event. It is in Deuteroiioni}' m Il lt4 THK CRRDIHILITV OF CHRISTIANITY. xxviii. : " The Lord shall brin^ a nation against thee frcm far, from the end of the earth, as the eagle flieth ; a nation whose tongue thou shalt not understand ; a nation of fierce counte- nance, which shall not regard the person of the old, nor show favour to the young . . . And he shall besiege thee in all thy gates, until thy high and fenced walls come down, wherein thou trustedst, throughout all thy land, which the Lord thy God hath given thee. And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the Lord thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall straiten thee." Josephus relates how these horrible things came to pass. The nation of fierce counte- nance, whose speech they should not under- stand, must refer to the Romans, for in earlier sieges the Jews had said : " Speak to thy ser- vants in the Syrian language, for we under- stand it,"* and there is no doubt that many also understood Chaldean. Now, if it be con- tended that all these prophecies were written by a series ol clever men, who guessed that they would come to pass at some time or other, and that, if true prophecies, they would have treated of fewer events in greater detail, * II. Kings xviii. 26. u THli WITNESS OF PROPHECY. 115 let us remember that then a difficulty would have arisen as to which event was meant. But, fortunately, we can silence this objection for- ever by pointing to the prophecies of the death of Christ. They cluster so thickly round that greatest of events that every detail was accu- rately foretold, and thus satisfy us, not only that it is a sure word of prophecy which our Bible contains, but that by far the most im portant event in the Bible is the death of Christ. Many men nowadays extol Christ's life as a pattern we all ought to copy, and imply, or even state, that His death was of minor importance. The whole drift of Scrip- ture is against such an interpretation, and shows us that the atonement Christ has pur- chased for us is infinitely more important than even the beautiful, perfect example He has set us. As the title of this address has directed our special attention to prophecies whose fulfil- ment we can watch at the present day, let us, before concluding, speak for a few moments of the prophecies of the '* time of the end," or the "last days." What are the main characteristics of the present times ? First, as to our mode of life. Our wonderful recent inventions have almost all been directed to facilitating travelling, or m W ■ Il6 THE CRlCDIHILrrV ()!• CIIKISTIANITV to researches into the physical sciences. Our discoveries have vastly increased our knowledge in all directions. There is no end to the 'ologies. The result of inventions and dis- coveries is that we travel much more than we used to do, that our knowledge is deeper and also much more diffused among the people. Two and a half decades of centuries ago, God said to Daniel : " But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end : inany shall run to and fro, and knuwledgc shall be increased.'"* It is said that on the strength of this prophecy the great Christian philosopher. Sir Isaac Newton, ven- tured to predict that men would travel at the rate of fifty miles an hour, a hundred and fifty years before railways were invented. Voltaire got hold of these words, and said : "Now, look at the mighty mind of Newton, who discovered gravitation ! When he became an old man and got into his dotage, he began to study the book called the Bible, and it seems, in order to credit its fabulous nonsense, we must believe that the knowledge of mankind will be so in- creased that we shall be able to travel at fifty miles an hour. The poor dotard! " Comment on the above is needless. Again, what are the characteristics of the * Dan. \ii. 4. niK \\ITNi:SS Ol" PKOI'HIXV. 117 present age as regards the state of society ? Are we not chiefly remarkable for our violent endeavours to make money by all possible means, covered by a show of churchgoing on Sunday, which outward profession of religion seems to have very little practical effect on the lives of most people? St. Paul prophesied: " But know this, that in the last days grievous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, haughty, railers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy . . . lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God ; holding a form of godliness, but having denied the power thereof."* Again, what is the state of religious thought ? Is it not chiefly remarkable for lack of faith, even among true Christians, t and the general spread of skepticism, taking the form of scoffing and often immoral infidelity among the uneducated, and a denial of the supernatural among the educated ? The doc- trine of Christ's second coming is especially scouted. St. Peter prophesied: "In the last days mockers shall come with mockery, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of his coming ? "t You will note that in each case the pro phecies have only been fulfilled within the last *II. Tim. iii. 1,2, 4,5. t Luke xviii. S. +11. Peter iii. 3. Il8 THE CKliDIBIMTY OF CHRISTIANITY. i; lii century. Does not this prove to us that we have come to the ** time of the end " ? and, as we watch the missionaries steadily penetrating into the darkest corners of the earth, should we not constantly bear in mind our Lord's words: "And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony unto all the nations ; and then shall the end come " ? * Finally, let me draw your attention to the fact that we can watch the fulfilment of God's promises. Bible-loving nations are now the leading nations of the world. If you would see the proof of this fact, enquire which nations give birth to most inventions, and *he most remarkable books ; which n?>tions were in a position to demand ** spheres of influence " in the recent partition of Africa ; which nations are n6w endeavouring to maintain the peace of the world, and thus proving their conscious strfc.igth. Are they not England, America, and Germany ? How doer the skeptic account for this ? We Christians say it is because ** Righteousness exalteth a nation. "t If sound reason cannot accord with belief in the Scriptures, how is it that so many prominent men in our days have been sincere Christians ? For instance, I will take those of * Matt. xxiv. 14. t Prov. xiv. 34. TIJE WITNESS or ruoPIIKCY. ttg my own profession, as its remarkable men are most familiar to me. Why was every flaj^ in New York harbour lowered to half-mast when news arrived of the death of Sir Henry Have- lock ? Why did crowds attend at Richmond to see General Jackson's body lyinj^ in state ? Why did the German Emperor exclaim, when he heard that the pious Moltke was dead : " I have losl a whole army!"? Why did the British House of Commons, by an anj^ry mur- mur, force Mr. Gladstone to add an eulogy, when he was casually mentioning the name of General Gordon ? Why did two members of the Royal family, and all the available dis- tinguished officers of the British army, go down to Chatham to be present at the unveiling of Gordon's statue — when the band played his favourite hymn, *' Forever with the Lord " ? Was it not because God has said : " Them that honour me I will honour, but they that de- spise me shall be lightly esteemed " ?* I. Sam. ii. 30. ■"-1 lli The Credibility of Christianity and the Ditllculties of Disbelief. Address No. IV. The Reality of Miracles. ^ Pi I r I I c t c fl e t t t r b f n THE REALITY OF MIRACLES, IN the second address of this course, we firnt considered a series of the stron^jest pos- sible reasons for beheving in the existence of a personal God. We then tprned to history, and learnt that the greatest misery and wretch- edness prevailed under the most splendid civil- izations of ancient times. From these facts we concluded that God would grant a revela- tion to make His will knovvii to His creatures, in order that their sad condition should be alleviated, and that they should learn to look up to the Giver of the blessings they would then begin to really enjoy. In the third address we considered some still more positive evidence that such a God exists, from the fact that He caused many prophecies to be written, the ful- filment of which we can watch with our own eyes. The question before us now is this: Would the fulfilment of these prophecies alone suffice to convince mankind that the book in which they stand is the Word of God, containing His revelation to man ? We answer : Their num- ber and variety ought to suffice to convince us ; I U i * i' «■;:. >' : »-li 124 f'"'' CRKniHIUrY Ol' CUKISTIANITY. but, inasmuch as many of them have only recently attained fulfilment, we cannot argue that they ought to have convinced former generations of men. Hut was it necessary that such should be convinced ? Certainly, it was at least necessary that the candid-minded people of foi mer ages should have been offered something to base their faith upon. We live in a favoured age, but have no reason to believe that the good things of the world were in- tended for us alone. What means were open to the Almighty for use in convincing the ancient Jews and early Christians of the truth of the revelation He was making to them? In the second address we saw that, when God planned and established the laws of the universe, His control over them was so absolute that He was able also to establish a remarkable exception to a certain very general law. He decreed that water should expand as it cooled from 40° to _^2°, in spite of the general law that cooling bodies should contract. How could this power be utilized for the above-mentioned purpose, to convince people who knew next to nothing of the general laws of the universe ? Clearly, only by making the exceptions tem- porary, so that the uneducated should see that they were exceptions ; and very striking, so Tin-: RliALlTV ()!• MnNA(I.i:3. 125 that the mind ot man should be constrained to admit that what he witnessed could he the work of none hut God. It was for this pur- pose that God caused miracles to he worked. Many persons, in recent times, have con- sidered that miracles are rather a hindrance than a help to believinj^ in Christianity, and have imagined that they would serve the cause of Christ by explaining away what were un- doubtedh' supernatural occurrences on natural lines. The reason why this has been done so much lately is because of the immense progress of science, which has shown us that our uni- verse is governed by fixed laws, which have been in operation for an inconceivable length of time. We have gradually come to believe that every phenomena in the physical universe is governed by law, and that these laws have remained unchanged for countless ages. Hence the difficulty of believing that exceptions to law — that is, miracles — have ever occurred. Hut her'^ we must remember that, if the physical universe is so governed by law that we can certainly predict what will happen if we know all the circumstances, the moral uni- verse is not subject to any such exact laws. Even if you were told everything that is going to hapj)en for the next twent}-four hours, you could net predict what mood } ou will then be §. 126 TMIC CKKDIHILITV OK CHRISTIANITY. in, for thinp^s that worry us one day do not do so another. Still less can you predict the mood another person will be in. In fact, in the moral world there seems to be a perpetual conflict goinji^ on between good and evil, and it is impossible to certainly foresee how it will end in any particular person, even if they be of fixed character and opinions. Still more dif- ficult is it to make a guess as to how persons who are wavering between good and evil will decide to act in any given circumstances. People do not always obey the stronresr motive. They often do grievous wrong when all their interest is to do right ; and they some- times have the courage to choose the right when it appears as if all their interests arc to do wrong. Thus we see that the moral uni- verse does not obey fixed, immutable laws; and now we come to the pomt. The miracles of the Bible were all per- formed for moral and not physical purposes ; and hence the immutability of physical laws is no argument against miracles performed for moral purposes, unless it be argued that the Almighty Creator of the universe had not the power to cause exceptions to take place in the working of His own laws. That the miracles of the Bible were performed for moral pur- poses is obvious from their grouping, they •I: t THE REALITY OF MIRACLES. 127 ■'I ^3 having always taken place when some great reformers — as Moses and his servant Joshua, Elijah and his servant Elisha, or Christ and His servants Peter and Paul — were endeavour- ing to effect a great moral reformation among the people. On this part of the subject Dr. Cairns says: " Besides, it is to be remembered that while in one sense miracles set aside law, in another and deeper sense they uphold it. The end of miracle through the coming and works of Christ is the restoration of moral order. The coming of Christ as a sinless being is a miracl*;. Christianity is not an ordinary histor}', or even a great moral system incorporated with the life of its founder. It is, if it is anything, a system of redemption, based on the incarnation of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, and upon the grace of the Holy Spirit, with a sequel of eternal results and issues, greater through union with Christ, or separation from Him, than the ordinary immortality with its hopes and fears. This scheme is wrought out by the life and death, the dominion and influence, the second coming to judgment and endless reign of Jesus Christ. Now, this whole plan and system transcends natural laws, in any com- mon acceptation of the word. It is believed to bs in harmony with the highest laws of the 1 t2 of ■fy se without any break that to say a miracle was worked seems to them like a confession that the laws of nature were originally imperfect. But you will observe that this misapprehension of some scientific men arises entirely from their thinking only of the physical sciences, whose laws are constant, and ignoring the moral sciences, whose laws are inconstant, and at the same time forgetting that the Christian miracles are alleged to have been worked for moral and not for physical purposes. In every locomotive there is a heavy lever called the reversing lever. It is not required for the ordinary and straightforward running of the train, which may go thousands of miles without its being used. Why is it provided then ? It is a power reserved in the hands of the engine-driver, for use in case of emerg- encies, to prevent things going from bad to worse. For instance, if danger threatens on the line, he reverses his engine, and, backing his train into a safe position, avoids a catas- trophe. When the lever is hauled over, the same forces act through the same mechanism, but the result is very different. We believe that the working of miracles is a power re- served in the hands of the Almighty for similar purposes. '!':; h IJO THK CRliDIIilKITV Ol' CHRISTIANITY. Hut wc have also to deal with litcrarv critics of miracles. We are informed that Strauss, Baiir, and Rcnan all dishe'ieved in miracles ; and that if such learned critics as they were concluded that nothing supernatural ever oc- curred, then we, whose learning cannot attain to theirs, are told that we should be willing to follow their example. To this we may repl}-, in the first place, that, just as more scientific men have believed than disbelieved, so far more learned literary criticf. have considered that there is sufficient evidence to prove the occur- rence of miracles than have thought the testi- mony insufficient or unreliable ; and, in the second place, that we caimot allow that either Strauss, Baur, or Renan were unprejudiced judges whose verdicts we may well be content to follow, because all three seem to have started their investigations with a conviction that no miracles had occurred — thus begging the questio.i at the outset. Strauss says that the main difficulty in accepting the gospels as historical is that they assume the existence of a personality in our Lord, and recognize the operation of powers in the course of His life to which we have no par- allel in any other history. And, again, he says : *' That which cannot happen, did not happen."* • Das lel)en Jesii fiir das Deutsche \'olk heailieitet. jid edition. Page 145. THL KliALlTY Ol- MIRACLES. I.il H; lur Si lys Th(j cardinal aiiriiinunt for tlic lat( )f til or origin ot our j^ospels remains always tins, that each of them for itself, and still more all of them together, relate so !nuch in the life of J 'hich, esus in a manner in vvnicn, in reality, it is impossible for it to have happened." * Kenan says : " But the question of the supernatural is decided for us with a complete certainty by this single reason, that there is no room for believing in a thing of which the world does not offer any experimental trace. "t Thus it will be seen that all three really beg the question ; that is, before investigating the evidence as to whether the miracles hap- pened or not, they give decided opinions that they cannot have happened. Now, whenever reasonable people want to get at the truth of a question, they take care to choose unprejudiced judges. The Army Act lays down that "the officer who investigated the charges on which a prisoner is arraigned shall not ... sit on the court martial for the trial of such prisoner"; and it is further explained that this is ordered because his doing so might have *' led him to form a conclusion on the merits * Kritische Untersuchungcn uher ilie Kanauschen Kvan- g>*lien. 1847. Paj^e 530. t Life of Jesus, 13th edition. I'ai;^ 9. 1^ • 132 THE CREDIBILITY OK CHRISTIANITY. of the case."* Again: "The officer ordering trial should be careful to avoid any expression of opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner, "t it being always considered in the Army that such an opinion should be based on evidence alone, and that premature conclusions are to be carefully avoided. In the above- mentioned passages, Strauss, baur, and Renan betrayed the fact that they formed foregone conclusions about miracles apart from the evi- dence, so transgressing the common rules of in- quiry into truth ; and our minds, therefore, may well refuse to be influenced by the verdict they arrived at, even while we gladly avail ourselves of their learning on subordinate parts of the inquiry. But besides the scientific and literary, there have been also historic critics of miracles. About the year 1820, George Stephenson met with certain gentlemen to talk over a proposed railway between Stockton and Darlington, which he desired to work by steam locomotives instead of horses, assuring them that he had done this successfully at Newcastle with the now famous ** Puffing Billy." Now, Hume advises us to reject miracles as contrary to experience, while it is not contrary to experi- ence that testimony should be false. (He * Manual of Military Law. t Queen's Regulations. THE KliALITY OF MIRACLES. ^55 means, of course, 0/^;' experience ; for, to assume that the experience of all men has always been against miracles is to beg the question.) Now, suppose those gentlemen had acted on Hume's principles, they would have refused to listen to Stephenson ; and, if every one had acted like them, railways would never have come into general use. What they very rightly did was to resolve to examine the evidence, and, having done so, they came to the conclusion that StephenscMi could not himself be deceived, for he had practically tested the matter at New- castle, and that he had no sufficient motive for deceiving others, because then he would have run such risk of detection. Now, in the case of miracles, we know that the evangelists and early Christians had no motive for deceiving, seeing that they gave up their positions, families, comforts, and lives to the propagation of a Gospel which enjoined the abandonment of lying and every evil habit at whatever cost. The only practical question now is: Were the people deceived? If they were not, then miracles must have happened ; and therefore a most determined effort has been made in modern times to throw discredit upon their testimony. F'or instance, in " Robert Elsmere," the contention is put somewhat thus : " They really, poor men, could not be :ri i^ ini'. cKi'Diiiiii I N ()i- ciiuisriANi rv. expected to relate what they saw correctly, seeing,' that they knew nothing alnnit the f,'reat science of history as we now understand it." You arc aware that great concessions can be obtained from most men by the aid of a little flattery. In the above, the flattery is no less effective because it is thinly veiled. The plain truth is that the great science of history, as we now understand it, seems to be the science of drawing inductions from facts as the author goes along, and choosing facts which powerfully support those inductions. St. John was the only one of the evangelists who seems to have written in support of any deflnite theory. Why the fact that St. Mat- thew, St. Mark, and St. Luke wrote plam, un- varnished tales makes their evidence as to facts less credible is a very difficult thing to under- stand. On the contrary, it appears very fortu- nate that they did nut understand the science of history as we practise it ; because if they had we might have suspected them, with more reason, of twisting facts to prove what they wished. But, then, objectors say that all the early founders of Christianity were such very simple people that they would believe anything, and never dreamt of suspecting fraud, or even mis- apprehensions, anywhere. The truth is that T'lIC KI-.AF.IIN Ol MIKA('l.i;S. I.i5 they lived in such a wicked iv^c- th;it probably they were more habitually on the watch for dece|)tion than we are ; and this fact is further proved by St. lY'ter's sayinj^^ in his second epistle: "For we did not follow cunninj^dv devised fables."*' Now, if tin; early Christians had been an unsuspecting' folk, it is certain that Peter would never have written this, for it would have been su^'gestin^' a doubt to their minds. And surely, too, when becoming a Christian meant an entire change of life, and a possibility of martyrdt)m, it seems only reason- able to suppose that men must have examined and weighed the evidence on which they were called to give up everything. Neither let it be said that the founders of Christianity were merely uneducated lishermen. St. Matthew was a customs-house officer, St. Luke a doctor of medicine, St. John was *' known unto the high priest," and St. Paul had received the best education which that ancient centre of learning, Jerusalem, could afford. "Oh, but," say the skeptics, "people in those days were so constantly on the lookout for miracles that it was easy to persuade them that the most ordinary occurrence was a miracle ; in fact, they expected miracles of every teacher or reformer." * II. Peter i. i6. ■it Ij^) TIN-: CKi;i)ll5IMTV ()|- CHUISTIANITV. Thk.,, however, hardly appears from history. The great crop of miracles which are said to have been worked during the dark ages were, of course, due to this cause — they being copied from Christ's. Hut, Ijeyond a few miracles alleged to have been performed in Rome and Greece, there is very little to show that people were expecting miracl(;s when Christ came. On the contrary, the Romans and Greeks, at least, were getting very skeptical about them, and even in Palestine the age of miracles seemed to have ceased, for the Scriptures con- tain no record of any having been worked for over five hundred years. Neither did they necessarily expect miracles of every reformer for they said of John the Baptist, the mighty teacher in the wilderness, "John did no miracle," and this statement is confirmed by Josephus. Thus there seems to be no reason to doubt that the early Christians were matter-of-fact, fairly-educated men, not necessarily expecting that the series of miracles which had been discontinued for five hundred years should be immediately resumed, nor refusing to listen to a teacher because he worked no miracles. Now, suddenly Christianity sprang into exist- ence, and spread with wonderful rapidity into countries far and near. This fact can be TlIM KI'wM.riV <)l' MIKA(l.i:S. K]7 proved by outside evidence — from I'liny's famous letter to Trajan, written from Asia Minor, only seventy years after Christ's death, in which he says: " Tliere are many (jf every af(c, and of both sexes; nor has the contagion of this superstition seized cities only, but smaller towns also, and the open country"; and he adds that the temples were ** almost deserted." Thus the fact of the very rapid spread of Christianity is undeniable. How can wc ac- count for it ? It has been my good fortune to meet with several excellent men of most attractive char- acter in the course of my life ; but their good inlluence on others was not so markedly effective as to show that the beauty of Christ s character and teaching alone may have caused the faith He founded to spread so rapidly against all sorts of obstacles and persecutions. If this letter of Pliny's stood by itself, it would give us a strong presumption that Christianity was founded on unimpeachable miracles ; for, if not, skepticism will always find an insur- mountable difficulty in accounting for its rapid spread at a time when men could inquire of eye-witnesses as to the truth of the alleged occurrences. Before commencing the direct argument for ■I 1 ill r i> ii iiK U P ■>■! 138 Tlili CKKDIlilLITY Ol- CHKISTIAMTY. m I miracles, we claim that the Bible itself is a miracle, even if we start with no theory of its inspiration. Where, in the world, is there another book like it ? Take the Koran, of which tlie skeptic, Gibbon, says : " The divine attributes exalt the fancy of the Arabian mis- sionary, but his loftiest strains must yield to the sublime simplicity of the Book of Job, com- posed in a remote a^e, in the same country, and in the same lan^ua^^e." Where is there another book of which we should be willing to acknowledge that all the inquiry of the ages has not searched out !ts illimitable depths ? Do we not assemble at our churches every Sunday in the expectation that new truths will be brought for our edification out of its inexhaustible storehouse ? Are not new books ■ about the Bible continually being published ? In a word, ever^ book written by man can be fathomed by man ; but this book the wisest of men cannot altogether fathom, and we therefore feel certain that its authorship is not of man. Now, with regard to the direct evidence that miracles were actually performed, we have, first of all, St. Paul's statements in those epistles which even French, German, and English skep- tics allow to be undoubtedly genuine — namely, Romans, I. and II. Corinthians, and Galatians. Kenan speaks of these as " incontestables et THE REALITY OF MIRACLES. 139 incontestces " * (indisputable and undisputed), and he adds that "the most severe- critics, such as Christian Baur, accept them without objection." Lain^, speaking of St. Paul, says: "There is no doubt that he was an historical person who lived at the time and in th(j manner described in the Acts of the Apostles, and that the Epistle to the Corinthians is a genuine letter written bv him."t In these undoubtedly authentic epistles he says: "In the power of signs and wonders, in the power of the Holy Ghost ; so that from Jerusalem, and round about even untoIUyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ."! While, in II. Cor. xii. 12, he says: "Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, by signs, and wonders, and mighty works " ; and in I. Cor. xii. 10 : "And to another workings of miracles " (margin, " pow- ers"). N(nv, would St. Paul have dared to write thus if not only he himself, but his con- verts in Asia Minor had not been tirmh' per- suaded that he worked signs and wonders ? Would he not have run the greatest risk of being contradicted by some traveller in Rome or Corinth, who would have said : " I heard * Saint Paul, pp. 5, 6. tModern Science and Modern Tliou^ht. I'atje 1 53. :{;Koni. w. 19. T40 rmc ckhi^'mility of Christianity Paul preach in Asia Minor, but never heard of his having worked miracles " ? Now, although not quite so undisputed by skeptics, Christians can be equally certain that the Acts were written by a companion of St. Paul. I hope to touch on the evidence for this in the next address; but, for the present, it may be sufficient to say that the learned French skeptic, Renan, allows its force. He says: "I persist in believing that the final composition of the Acts of the Apostles is due to the disciple of St. Paul who says * we ' in the last chapters." He further considers that the tradition is correct according to which this disciple is St. Luke. Now, you will notice that the "we" is used in the Acts before St. Paul's last visit to Jerusalem, as well as during the memorable voyage and shipwreck ; for Acts xxi. 15 runs: "And after these things wc took up our baggage, and went up to Jerusalem." Thus we may be sure that within thirty jears (at longest) of the time that the miracles recorded in the beginning of the Acts were worked their historian visited Jerusalem, and made the acquaintance, both of the agents and witnesses of those miracles. Before we enter upon the question as to whether St. Paul or St. Luke were deceived about these miracles, let us again for a moment The reality of miracles. i4t I contemplate the idea of their bein^ themselves deceivers. You will remember that St. Paul wrote to his converts: "Lie not one to another, seeinj( that ye have put off the old man with his doings."* Now, the difficulty of believing that the man who wrote this was himself a liar is further increased by the fact that in another epistle he added soui^d reasons for thus forbid- ding lying ; for to the Ephesians he wrote : " Wherefore, putting away falsehood, speak ye truth each one with his neighbour: for we are members one of another. "t And it becomes a moral impossibility to believe that St. Paul was a deceiver, when we remember all he gave up, did, and suffered for the cause of the world's greatest teacher of truth, Jesus Christ. Thus we cannot believe that St. Paul, or his companion, St. Luke, were deceivers. Now, can they have been deceived ? I have heard my mathematical master re- mark that St. Paul's epistles contained speci- mens of the finest reasoning he had ever met with. Any one reading those epistles must agree that St. Paul had a most acute and well- balanced mind ; and that, while it is hard to believe that he was taken in by the other I I • Col. iii. 9. t Eph. iv. 25. 142 THH CKKDIBIMTV OF CHRISTIANITY apostles, to believe that he thought that he had himself worked miracles, when he had done nothing of the sort, is altogether im- possible. Here we come to another difficulty of disbelief, which is this : How does it account for the fact that St, Paul, who insisted on truth- telling, and gave up everything for the Gospel of truth, claimed in authentic letters that he had worked miracles, if he really had done nothing of the kind? Before entering upon the proof that Jesus Christ worked miracles, we must briefly glance at our reasons for believing that the four gos- pels in our Bible were written by the men whose names they bear, and at a very early age of the Christian era. The Gospel of St. John is the one most disputed by all skeptics. We saw- in our last address that Renan con- siders that the first three gospels must have been written soon after the year 70. As we have not time to go into tiie proof for all the gospels, let us only consider the case of the one most disputed, relying upon the opinion of the learned Renan as regards the others. And in so doing we rest upon no insecure founda- tion, for we may be quite sure that neither Renan nor any (^ther skeptic would admit the earl}' date of an}- of the gospels if they could possibly help it. l^^or to sa}- that Matthew, Tllli KKAUrV Ol" MlKACLliS. M-5 Mark, and Luke were written soon after the year 70 is to say that they were received as correct accounts about forty years after Christ's death, when many persons must still have been living who perfectly remembered the events of His three years' ministry, and who would at once have contradicted any false statement of the evangelists. Therefore, if Renan allows that they were written at such an early date, we may be sure that he does so because the evidence is so overwhelming that he cannot help himself. Now, with regard to St. John's Gospel ; you are aware that its author avoids mention- ing the name John, as far as possible. This can only be for (jne of two reasons ; either it was John who wrote it, and he omitted men- tioning his own name from natural modesty ; or else the real author omitted John's name to make it appear that the book was written by John — in fact, committed a cunning fraud. So far, Renan agrees, saying: " Either the author of the fourth gospel is a disciple of Jesus, an intimate disciple, attached to him from the earliest moment ; or else the author has employed, for the purpose of giving himself authority, an artifice which has been followed from the beginning of the l)0(jk to the end, and which was designed to make it believed that - 1(1 'i- ill V M 144 ''"•"'- cKi-nnni.n V oi (hkistianiiy. he was a witness in the host position jiossihlc for reporting the truth of tlie events." Therefore we have just to elioose between beheving that the g()si)el was written l)y John, or a forj^er. Why do we beheve that it was written by John ? In tlie first place, we have the concurrent testimony of all the early Chris- tian church. That does not sound very con- vincing, but it is really a very strong argument. For instance: There lived with John himself a man named Polycarp. During a |)ersecution in A.n. 167, uc Smyrna, Asia Minor, the pro- consul urged him thus : '* vSwear, curse ('hrist, and I release thee." Polycarp noblv replied : "Eight • and six years have I served Ilim, and Ho hns done me nothing but good, and how could I curse Him, my Lord and Saxiour?" He was then burnt to death, aud his martvr- dom for truth may well convince us that he would not be a party to palming off c» forged gospel upon us. Now, only thirteen years after, Polycarp's pupil, Irena^us, wrote: "Then John, the dis- ciple who rested on the Lord's bosom, also published his gospel whilst he remained at Ephesu9, in Asia." Now, supposiiig that the gospel was forged during those thirteen years, surely Irenasus would have said: "Polycarp never told me of the existence of this gospel, Ilir; K1'.AI,1IV ()!• MllvACIJ.S. M5 and lu; was installctl as bislujp by Jolin him- self, and imist have known if it existed." It would be slill more diniciilt to ^'i;t a forged }^()sp(!l to be received as John's while Polyearj) was alive. Now, wluMi we say that we have tlu; con- current testimony of the early Christian church, it means that wc have a number of arguments like this, whi(di all combine to j)rove that the gospel was written by John. Besides, by A.l). l8o, before which time the gosi^cl was certainly written, a number of sects existed in the church, some of which had come into existence in St. John's time*, and all but one insignificant sect agreed that the fourth gos[)el was written by St. John. That one sect allowed that it was written at E[)hesus, dining St. John's life. I#)w, consider the difficulty of passing off a forged book ,as written by St. John. Do you think that, if some military man were to write an account of the commencement of the siege of Sebastopol, he cc^nld pass it off as having been written by Lord Raglan? Why, j)eople who had friends in the siege would show up its mistakes again and again. And what possible motive could he have had for the for- gery ? If he said, "I hav2 found a gospel written by St. John, and I want a large sum of i4<'> Till-; CKi:i)ii!ii.: IV ()!• ciiuisi iani i v. ! i money for it," don't you think the church would have looked upon it with double sus- picion? What a beautiful ^-"ospel is that according to St. John ! How naturally the incidents are related ! How dramatic it is in some places ! how pathetic in others ! how sublime towards the end ! Poor Renan altogether fails to ap- preciate the wonderful conversations related in it ; but those who can sympathize at all with the leading Character simply cannot believe that this remarkable book is the work of a forger — yet, as Renan says, it must have been either a forger, or else St. John himself, who wrote it. But what is there to be said on the other side, to prove that St. John did not write this gospel? The English agnostic, Laing, remarks that Papias did not seem to know abou^it in the second century. Skeptics are very fond of arguing from omissions. Because a man omits to mention a fact, they generally assume that he knew nothing about it ; whereas there are dozens of other ways of explaining an omis- sion, which can prove nothing. In this case, Laing's argument is demolished by Renan, who says: ''The first epistle also, attributed to St. John, is certainly by the same author as the fourth gospel. Now, the epistle is iden- THI-: kliAMTV ol" MIKACI.ES. M7 tified as St. John's l)y Polycarp, Papias, and Irena'us."* Then Lainj,' raises a number of further objections, due to his not reaHzin;^^ that the Synoptic Gospels relate Christ's ministry amonp^ the GalilR.'an peasants, while St. John relates His controversies with the Jews of Jerusalem. The skeptic Renan af^ain disposes of the objec- tion by pointing out in a footnote several cases in which the first three evangelists allude to visits to Jerusalem, or to people who lived there, t Thus we come to another difficulty of dis- belief (which applies to other books besides this). It is : If the fourth gospel was not tSee, es]iecially, Luke xiii. 34. * I give Laing's argument here in full, as an instance of the unreasonableness of skeptical special pleading: "This testimony of I'apias is very valuable and very in- structive. In the first ]ilacc, it seems conclusive that the ( lospel of John was not known to him, and not receive written docu- m i 14^ THi-: CKi;niiui.riv oi ciiuistianiiv. written by the Apostle John, how did its forj^^er succeed in passing' it off as John's ? What (Ud he pain by so doing ? And how is it that we find so many (juarnilHng sects attributing it to St. John before tlie close of the second century? Hence we may well believe that the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. John were written by eye-witnesses, and St. Mark and St. Luke by friends of eye-witnesses, of the occurrences which they relate. Now, these gospels are full of miracles, and therefore the question is: Were these really suf)ernatural occurrences? Only one bears the slightest resemblance to a conjuring trick — that is, the turning water into wine. Hut you must remember that conjurors do not usually work with your own common ments. He must have said: 'For, with the exception of the gospel of the blessed John, I found that little was to he got from hooks.' " Would not any one judge, from this extract, that we were in possession of "-uch considerable writings of Papias as to make his failure to (juote St. John's (lospel, if it existed, very remrrk- able? hut what is the true state of the case? Only a short fragment of Fajjias' writings has i)een preserved, and "there is nothing to prove that in other portions of his writings, now lost, this father may not have cpioted the fourth gospel." And what if he did prefer oral tradition? Remember that in Papias' youth some men who liad actually seen Clirist were probably still alive. Every court of justice prefers verbal to written testi- mony. \'ou can cross-examine a witness in a way that you cannot cross-examine a book. TMI- kKAMTY 0| MIKACI^KS. 149 household articles, and make you perform all the trick yourselves without your knowinjj^ how it is done. Vet this miracle was [)firformed with the at( (I l)v th( •mmon vants of the house. With the exception of this, feedinjj^ the mul- titudes, and stilling the storms, the miracles of our Lord were mainly miracles of healing. This, of course, was on account of the divine compassion of our Saviour's character; hut Renan avails himself of the fact to imply that the people were easiest imposed upon in this way, on account of the absence of medical science in those days. Kenan's explanation is one very likely to go down at the present time, proud, as we are, of our advances in medicine and surgery, as in all other sciences. Of our Saviour's time, Renan says : "• In such a con- dition of knowledge, the presence of a superior man, treating the sick with gentleness, and giving hnn by some sensible signs the assurance of his recovery, is often a decisive remedy."* This sounds very plausible, but have you ever known or heard of any one who could cure serious illness in this way ? That the illnesses were serious is proved by Luke the physician's diagnosis of them. The explanation seems to be altogether inadequate to account for the * Life of Jesus. Pp. 232, 233. '^ T50 THE cuKDinn.riN oi' Christianity. facts of the case, ik^sides, it does not in the least explain the cleansinj,' (^f the loathsome lei>rosy, opening,' the eyes of the blind, healing people without j^^oinfj near them, as in the case of the nobleman's son and centurion's servant : far less does it explain the raisinp^ of the dead, which, it is claimed, Christ did on three differ- ent occasions. Wisely does Kenan devote only one chapter to a general explanation of how he imagines people came to believe that Christ worked miracles! Had he treated each case separately, he would have involved himself in endless difficulties. For, let us briefly consider the raising of Lazarus, which is almost the onU' miracle of which Renan speaks in detail. After showing that the story cannot have sprung from a mere legend, Renan says: "Perhaps Lazarus, still pale froi; his sickness, caused himself to be swathed in grave clothes, as one dead, and shut up in his family tomb. . . . Jesus desired to see once more him whom he had loved, and, the stone having been removed, Lazarus came forth."* If this explanation were correct, of course Martha and Mary would have known of the proposed deception, and then, when Jesus met Martha and said to her, " Thy brother shall * Life of Jesus. J 'age 305. *• \\i\: \<\\\.\v\ or MiKACi.iis. 151 rise af^.'iin,"* would not Martlui liave n-plicd, ** Yes, if you call him to life," instead of petu- lantly sayinj;, " I know that he shall rise aj^ain in the resurrection, at the last day" ? A^'ain, would Mary's ^'rief have heen sufficiently natural to deceive ? Afj^ain, would Martha liave dared to state before all the people that her brother had been dead four days? Aj^ain, at the supper at Bethany, would Mary have acted in the manner which Kenan describes thus: " b'inally, carryin^^ the manifestations of her worship to extremes hitherto unknown, she prostrated herself, and wiped the feet of her master with her lon^ hair"?^ If Mary and Martha had known that Lazarus had never died, we cannot believe that they would have acted thus ; neither can we believe that the whole story is false, on account of the numerous naturid touches which it contains. To give a reasonable account cjf the origin of the story of the raising of Lazarus is another of the stand.'ng difficulties of disbelief. Having dealt with the case which Kenan chooses, let ;/.s select a case for detailed con- sideration. We will take that of the man born blind — perhaps the most lifelike story in all literature. It is related in the ninth chapter of St. John's Gospel : •John xi. 23. tLife of Jesus. I'agt 314. HI M 152 THE CKKDUiiLITY Oi- CHKISTIANITV. I And as he passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying. Rabbi, who did sin, this man or his paients, that he should be born blind ? Jesus ani>wered, Neither did this man sin, nor his parents : but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. We must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day : the night cometh, when no man can work. When I am in the world, I am the light of the world. When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and anointed his eyes with the day. And said unto him, (}o, wash in the pool of Siloam (which is by interpretation, Sent). He went away there- fore, and washed, and came seeing. The neighbours therefore, and they which saw him aforetime, that he was a beggar, said, Is not this he that sat and begged ? Others said, It is he : others said. No, but he is like him. He said, I am he. They said therefore unto him. How then were thine eyes opened .'' He answered. The man that is called Jesus made clay, anu anointed mine eyes, and said unto me. Go to Siloam, and wash : so I went away and washed, and I received sight. And they said unto him, Where is he? He saiih, I know not. They bring to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind. Now it was the sabbath on the day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. THE KHALITY OK MIRACLKS. 153 Again therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he received his sight. And he said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. Some therefore of the I'harisees said, This man is not from God, because he keepeth not the sabl)ath. But others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such signs? And there was a division vhs born blind : But how he now seeth, we know not ; or who opened his eyes, we know not : ask him ; he is of age ; he shall speak for himself. These things said his parents, because they feared the Jews : for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. Therefore said his parents. He is of age ; ask him. So they called a second time the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give glory to God : we know that this man is a sinner. He therefore answered, Whether he be a sinner, I know not ; one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see. They said therefore unto him, What did he to thee ? how opened he thine eyes ? He answered them, I told you even now, and ye i^^Z- ■m' 154 ""'- CKHDir.ILITY Ol' CUKISTIANITV. I did not hear : wherefore would ye hear it again ? Would ye also become his disciples ? And they reviled him, and said, Thou art his dis- ciple, but we are disciples of Moses. We know that God hath spoken unto Moses : but as for this man, we know not whence he is. The man answered and said unto them. Why, herein is the marvel, that ye know not whence he is, and yet he opened mine eyes. We know that God heareth not sinners : but if any man be a worshipper of God, and do his will, him he heareth. Since the world began it was never heard that any one opened the eyes of a man born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing. They answered and said unto him. Thou wast alto- gether born in sins, and dost thou teach us ? And they cast him out. Jesus heard that they had cast him out ; and fmding him, he said. Dost thou believe on thi Son of God ? He answered and said, And who is he. Lord, that I may believe on him ? Jesus said unto him.. Thou hast both seen him, and he it is that speaketh with thee. And he said. Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him. And Jesus said, Foi Judgment came I into this world, that they which see not may see ; and that they which see may become blind. Those of the Pharisees which were with him heard these things, and said unto him. Are we also blind ? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye would have no sin : ijiit now ye say, We see : your sin re- maineth. Tin: UliALlTV ()!• MIUACLKS. 155 It is ti beuutiful story, and we might well spend the rest of the evening talking about it : but our business now is to see how it can be used to prove that miracles really took place. How realistic the account is ! We seem almost to witness the astonishment of the people at the cure, the timorous behaviour of the brave man's parents, and the anger of the Jewish Pharisees at finding themselves com- pletely out-reasoned ; but the chief point to which I wish to direct your attention is that everything in the chapter turns on the miracle. If you cut out the miracle, you must cut out the chapter. New, you know that some skeptics say that the gospels were first related or written without any miracles, and that these were inserted afterwards; but this instance shows the impossibility of their theory. Many good stories, jokes, etc., arise from very simple incidents, and each person embellishes them before recounting them again. But }ou must have the point of the story or the joke there to start with, otherwise it will never be recounted. Now, the liracle is the whole point of this storv, and herefore we feel sure that the miracle was in it when first the story was recounted or written. If it be urged that the whole was invented, we cannot help thinking that an author of such dramatic talent would rN, i'v: tt^ li 156 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. have preferred to make his fortune in writing plays for the Greek stage. But the idea of in- vention is ahogether so wildly improbable that I am sure you will agree that it is far easier to believe that the man's sight was miraculously restored, though he was born blind (as we are told rtve times in the chapter). Let us try the plan of leaving out miracles from the Gospel of St. John, to see if it is pos- sible to arrive at the sort of gospel our skepti- cal friends would be willing to believe in. The last four verses of the first chapter nuist go. All of the second chapter, for surely clearing the temple was miraculous. Most of the third, in which Micodemus allows that Christ worked miracles, and Christ miraculously foretold His crucifixion. Most of the fourth, in which Christ convinces the woman of Samaria by His miraculous knowledge of her life, and the miracle of healing the nobleman's son is re- lated. All of the fifth, the discussion in which turns on a miracle at the beginning. The same with the sixth. The seventh must go, because the discussion turns on the miracle related in the fifth, and so on. Now, what does all this prove ? Why, it proves that St. John wrote this gospel with the miracles in; otherwise the divergencies ot style and language would have been sure to betray re- lich The ly, it h the style ftray THE REALITY OE MIRACLES. 15; the man who invented or inserted them after- wards. The satne arjjjiiment apphes to the other evangehsts, and thus we may feel con- fident that we have the written testimony of two eye-witnesses, and two friends of eye-wit- nesses, and the oral testimony of the whole church, that our Saviour, Christ, did indeed work miracles. The case for miracles will not be seen in all its strength till other skeptics try to explain them away ; and when a man doubts the divinity of Christ, we have the right to ask that he should do so, instead of merely railing, for surely any one who refuses to believe such testimony ought to put forward some theory as to how the alleged mistake arose. We have seen how insufficient it is to say that the stories of the miracles are legends, arising from popular love of the marvellous. We must re- member that we have a series of legends arising in this very way, namely, the stories of Christ's miracles related in the Apocryphal gospels. Now, if the four gospels really were legendary, these Apocryphal gospels would be nearly on a par with them ; instead of which Kenan says : " These compositions can in no wise be put upon the same footing as the canonical gos- pels. They are flat and puerile amplitications." While all the miracles related in the canonical 15'^ THE CKEDIHIF.ITY ol' ( HKISTIANITV. gospels agree in portraying a harmonious character in Christ, those in the Apocryphal gospels would throw Christ's character and motives into a perfect jumble. In fact, they are just such miracles as man would invent, and the most conclusive proof possible that man did not invent the whollv different series of miracles related in the canonical gospels. Practical people know that the simplest explanation of a matter is generally the true one, and the only simple explanation of the exist- ence of the present miraculous accounts is that Christ, as Lord of nature, could suspend the laws of nature. By insisting so strongly upon the in- variable character of the laws of nature, skep- ticism has rendered at least one great service to Christianity ; it has shown that divine power alone could cause the working of miracles. If we believe that Christ worked miracles, we may well believe that it was with reason that He claimed to be Ihe Son of God. Has the age of miracles passed ? Yes, if we consider the abrogating of physical laws only to be miraculous ; no, if we allow that the suspension of such laws as we can trace in the moral world be equally miraculous. Have you not found that gratitude is almost an un- known virtue in worldly society ? Yet most of those who believe that the Son of God can)e THK KliALI'IY Of' MIKACIJ-S. 159 fJown to die for their sins try to do something to show their gratitude to Him. How is it that a virtue not usually displayed is shown by this particular class of beneficiaries ? Is it not the miracle of the Holy Spirit's work in the hearts of Christians ? The reporter of a certain paper attended one of Mr. Moody's meetings. After it was over, he said to Mr. Sankey : "Why, how is this ? I never saw a lot of people so much moved. Numbers are in tears; numbers seem anxious, and intensely impressed with what they have heard ; and yet Mr. Moody is not a particularly good orator, and said nothing to- night that you might not hear from scores of pulpits." *' I can only reply to you," said Mr. Sanke}', "that 'the wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearcst the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth ; so is every one that is born of the Spirit." Is not Mr. Moody's success a miracle, and might not the same be said of many another evangelist ? If, through trusting in the blood of the Saviour Jesus Christ, you have received assurance of forgiveness and peace in your own heart, is not that evidence to yourself of a miracle of cleansing performed upon 3'our own soul ? And arc you not bound to show > ' t ' I t I l6() TIIK CRKDIIJILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. H\ the world that the aj^e of miracles is not past, by setting before men the standing miracle of a life given up to the service of your Redeemer ? Depend upon it, such an example will be more convincing in our days than ten thousand physical wonders. May God help us to prove to the world that the work of His Holy Spirit is the standing miracle of the present age. The Credibility of Christianity and the Difficulties of Disbelief. Address No. V. The Evidence of the Resurrection. ^1? k si If ^ h-- I THi: i:vii)i:nce of thi: rfsuk KJCCTION. A LL those who have been in the country for a few weeks in summer are acquainted witli the caterpiUars which are to be found feeding on all sorts of leaves in the hedgerows and gardens, ivlany people regard caterpillars as repulsive creatures, and they are certainly somewhat uninteresting, for their sole business seems to be feeding and growing. What a pit}' it is that few persons actually watch their subsequent history ! After passii:,\^ through various troubles in the shape of casting off the various coats they outgrow, they at last arrive at maturity, and then a wonderful change takes place. They apparently die. Some bury them- selves in the ground ; others fasten to boughs, or stems of grass ; but all change into a nearly lifeless form called the chrysalis. In this form they do not feed, cannot see or hear or move about ; but, though to all appearance dead, a most wonderful change is going on within. If the caterpillar was not bitten, during life, by its deadly enemy, the ichneumon fly, then, during this quiescent time, the structure of a beautiful butterfly or moth is being perfected within the t64 Till' rKi.:i)iiui.i IV oi- rnKMsriANFTY. chrysalis shell, and, when all is ready, the but- tcrtly einerfjes with little winp^s only about one- tenth of their proper size. The insect places itself so that these winp;s shah han^ down- wards, and in one or two hours they attain full size and the butterfly departs to enter upon a life of variety, sunshine, and enjoyment. What lessons in colouring an artist can draw from a butterfly's wing ! The combina- tions of tints are inimitable, unsuri^assable. Sometimes we see fancy pictures of butterflies, but they all come far short of the beauty of the real insects. What is it that produces such a dazzling effect on the wing of such a butterfly as the Peacock? Apparently it is a sort of dust, with which the wings are covered. Viewed under a microscope, these particles of dust become little shields, of regular shapes, overlapping each other like scales on a tish, and each magnificently coloured, some in sober tints, some glittering like rubies, emeralds, or diamonds. Yet this marvellous mosaic ex- panded ten times in each direction in the short space of two hours! And it was all contained under the homely caterpillar's skin, and pre- pared for perfection during a period of quies- cence resembling death. What a marvel it is! Watch it for yourselves. Understand it, who can ? After you have seen the butterfly emerge KVii>i:\rF. oi" iMi-: ki:si'IvU'i c iioN. 1^)5 from the cliiysalis, tluii .iiiswcr St. Piuil's (]uc;s- tion : " Why is it judged incrcdil)lc with you if God doth raise the doiid?"'^ It is not for us to start the inquiry with a prcctMiccivcd conviction that the resurrection is im|>()ssii)Ie. Our dut} is to examine the evidence, and form our conchisions upon that. St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians: "If Christ hath not been raised, your faith is vain ; ye are yet in your sins."t When he thus made the resurrection the test fact of Christianity, he showed that he was either inspired, or else endowed with extraordinary practical wisdom ; for we now find that there is better evidence for the truth of the resurrection than for any other fact in Scripture; and we may even say than for any other fact in history. There has been found on a wall at Rome a representation of a man with an ass's head, fixed to a cross, at the base of which a Roman soldier kneels, and underneath are the words: '*Alexaminos worships his j^od." This was undoubtedly drawn to ridicule some Christian soldier for worshipping Christ. Again, Lucian, about 165 or 170, writes: "They," that is, the Christians, "worshipped the crucified sophist, living according to his laws." Thus, apart * Acts xxvi. 8. tl. Cor. xv, 17. 766 TIIF. CREDTBTT.TTY OF CHRTSTIANITY. 1 I from the Bible, we have evidence that there were to be found in Rome in A.D. 170 a body of men who worshipped a crucified Jew as God. What possible explanation is there of this fact ? Suppose that we grant that the founder of this sect was a very good man and worked miracles, would not his having died as a malefactor have effectually contradicted any claims he advanced to be God ? Surely every one would say : "If he was God, why did he allow himself to be put to death?" And this argument would have convinced the most simple-minded that to believe in such a God was folly. For, if he were dead, what would be the use of obeying his laws ? Yet we know that this religion spread from Jerusalem to Rome in thirty years, for in Nero's time numbers* of men and women died cruel deaths on account of their faith in Christ. The only way to account for these facts is that the early Christians believed, not in a dead Christ, but in a Christ who had risen from the dead, and therefore claimed their worship, as well as their admiration. And, without proceeding to the Bible, we have still further evidence that this is the true explanation of how people came to worship a crucified Christ, for Eusebius says: "Our Saviour's resurrection being much taiked of * Tacilus says "a yroat multitmle." EVIDENCH ()!• TH1-: Ki:SUKKECTI()N. 167 '6 lie in )f tliroughoiit Palestine, Pilate informed the Em- peror of it, as likewise of His miracles, of which he had heard ; and that, being raised up after He had been put to death, He was already believed by many to be a god." These reports of Pilate are now lost ; but that they once existed is evident from the fact that Justin and Tertullian appealed to them when writinjj^ defences of the Christian Igion for the perusal of the very people U ..iiom the docu- ments belonged. So far, we have been reasoning as if the Bible did not exist ; but we saw, in the last address, that some books in the Bible are so undoubtedly genuine that we may fairly base arguments upon them. Skeptics agree with Christian critics that the two epistles of Paid to the Corinthians, that to the Romans, and that to the Galatians, were written by the man whose work is described in the Acts, and only twenty-tive years after Christ's death. Now, a genuine letter is a document of immense value to prove any facts which the writer refers to, as if they were known to the person addressed. For instance, if, at a robbery trial, a letter turns up, signed by Bill Sykes, which runs: "Dear Jim. What did you do with the money that we took out of the safe?"; as soon as that was proved to be a genuine, houd l68 TH1-: rKliDIlJII.FTV Ol' CHKISTIANITV fide letter, any jury would convict Jim as well as Bill on the strenj^th of it ; because Hill Sykes would never have written to Jim in that way if there v^as any doubt as to whether Jiin assisted at the theft. The only chance lor Jim's counsel would be to show that Bill wrote the letter with the intention of deceiving. Now, there is no evidence whatever to show that St. Paul wrote the above-mentioned letters with the intention of deceiving, and no skeptic alleges that he did ; therefore we may be sure that when he alludes to a fact as knov/n to the recipients of the letter, they believed it as well r.'i he. In I. Cor. xv. he appeals to the fact that he had recounted to them all the people who saw Jesus Chiist after He was raised. The third verse begins: "For I de- livered unto you first of all that which also I received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures ; and that he was buried ; and that he hath been raised on the third d^'v according to the scriptures ; and that he appeared to Cephas; then to the twelve; then he appeared to above hve hundred breth- ren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep ; then he appeared to James ; then to all the apostles ; and last of all, as unto one born out of due time, he appeared to me also." I EVIDPINCJ' Ol' THIC Ri:srKRi:CTFON. T^r) Now, Paul was in Corinth only twenty-fonr years after Christ's death ; therefore we may be as certain as that wc are now met together that, twenty-four years after a certain most important event happened, St. Paul was pub- licly saying: "This event was witnessed by more than five hundred people, of whom the greater part are still alive," implying: "You can consult them personally, if you wish.'" Now, though this epistle was written to a church in which there were four different parties,* yet St. Paul dared to say to it, alluding to what happened on the way to Damascus : "Have I not seen Jesus our Lord ? " t thus proving at least that all the parties in the Cor- inthian church believed in the resurrection. Again, in the Epistle to the Galatians, St. Paul says that, at a visit to Jerusalem, "James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship." This proves that these great apostles agreed with the main points of St. Paul's teaching, and it appears from the lirst verse in Galatians that St. Paul based his teach- ing on the fact of the resurrection. The fact 0;')f St. Peter and St. John Or/nly believed in the resurre/ lion is also proved by passages in their ■ t I. ("or, i, 12. t I. ('or. ix. I. 170 THE CREDIBILITV OF CHR1STIAN!TY. own writings,* almost as undisputed by skep- tics as those acknowledged epistles of St. Paul from which alone we are now reasoning. The fourth verse in Romans proves that a church containing a large Jewish element, which St. Paul had not visited, also believed in the resurrection. We say ''proves," for what had St. Paul to lose if he made a misstate- ment ? His clear conscience before God — almost the only thing he valued ; an:l if he was detected in a misstatement, he would have for- feited his reputation with the churches he had founded. Thus we may be perfectly certain "^hat, only twenty-five years after Christ's Joath, there were a series of churches, spread over a distance of fourteen hundred miles, who all believed that the resurrection of Jesus Christ was a fact attested by hundreds of witnesses then living. One of the greatest difficulties of disbelief is to account for this. So far, we have based our reasoning on the acknowledged letters of St. Paul only, but there is another book into which these four undisputed epistles dovetail with the greatest exactitude. That book is the Acts of the Apostles. It can be shown that the names of places and persons in this book agree exactly * I. i'clcr i. 21 ; l\ev. i. 18. liVlDKNCE OF THE KKSUKKECTION. I7I with the epistles. Also that the coincidences occur in such a natural way that it is obvious they were not intended for proofs. Further, it appears that the character of Paul, as de- picted in the Acts, is exactly the same as that which appears from the epistles. Now, if the Acts had l)een written mainly from invention, and at a late date, as some skeptics say, it would have required the utmost skill to so arrange events as to portray a man whose character should be identical with the already existing epistles. For we must remember that nowhere in the Acts does it say that Paul was a man of great industry, energy, and persever- ance — one who would not be turned aside by any obstacle, and yet a man who longed for sympathy and love ; a man of great tact, and of a very versatile mind, and yet very con- scientious in what he thought to be right. Nowhere do the Acts wyite out such a descrip- tion of Paul's character ; all these things coinc out in the accounts of his life, and so closely agree with his character as it appears in his letters that we see it would have recjuired the utmost skill to arrange this, if the Acts had been forged at a late date. Now, if skeptics, when it suits their pur- pose, make out the early Christians to have been a simple-minded folk who were so ignor- .i,i '■•"V'i 17^ Tllli CKliDUilLlTY Ol- CHRISTIANITY. I I i. if ^■: ■:i ant as to be no fit judges of what was going on under their own eyes, and utterly incapable of recording it correctly when they tried — if they make out the early Christians as extremely stupid in some cases, it is scarcely fair to assume that they were extremely clever in other cases ; hence we believe that the Acts would not agree so well with the epistles uuless it was a true history of facts which had just taken place. There are hosts of other arguments to prove the Acts to be a true account of what the apostles did. Th rcferei:ces tc' Roman governors, etc., all agree with secular history. The mention of places are all geographically accurate. The several accounts of the same events — as the three accounts of St. Paul's conversion, and two of Peter's preaching to Cornelius — all show marks of being the same story told in different ways, to suit the condi- tions and respective audiences. Let me remind vou that in the third lecture we noticed a difTerent argument, so strong that it convinced the French skeptic Renan that this book was written by that companion of Paul who says " we " in the last chapter. Let us, therefore, consider it proved that the Acts is, if not inspired, at least a reliable history, and generally accurate. What do we find in liVlDLNCli OF lllL KhbU KKI-.C IION. 17^ this book ? Wo tind that, always and every- where, the apostles proclaimed the resurrec- tion of Christ as a fact. Only fifty days after the crucifixion, Peter preached, at Jerusalem : "This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we all are witnesses."* The same fact is stated twice over before the Sanhedrim t ; again to Cornelius ; by Paul, at Antioch in Pisidia, at Thessalonica, at Athens ; in fact, it comes in almost every sermon of which a tolerably full account is given. Always and everywhere, Christianity was founded upon the resurrection of Christ stated as a fact. Now, it is inconceivable that this should have been made the basis of the apostles' preaching unless it was a matter of easy proof. Surely the people who were asked to give now practicall}- surrendered by the most prominent of our antagonists."* Now, skeptics are very fond of charging us with assuming the inspiration of Scripture, and then reasonin;; from that, instead of reasoning up to it, as we ought to do, seeing that it is the very point which we want to prove. To be on the safe side, let us assume that the gospels are not even documents of ordinary credibility, and let us even treat them with more distrust than any ordinary history, and reason on nothing which is not either vouched for by all four evangelists, or else appealed to as a still existent fact when the records were written, or else a matter written down in such a way as to reflect discredit on the writers or their friends, because no one makes out that he himself or his friends behaved foolishly unless a strong regard for truth compels the confession. Then no one can accuse us of assuming the authority of the gospels, for we shall be treating the evangelists more as if they were well-known * "The fJospcl and its Witnesses." Vngc 36. ,.-„-. KVIPKNCI ol nil. Ui;SUKKi:CTI()N. I77 liars thiin iiK'ti who h id no motive to write clown an^lit but truth. Now, all four evaii<:jelists vouch for the fact that the sepulchre in which Jesus was laid was found empty on the third day. What, tlion, became of the body of Christ ? Certainly, the !•! Jewi Ph: :h 'isii rnarisees did not remove it, or else they would have produced the remains after- wards, and triumphantly confuted Peter when he claimed, on the day of Pentecost, that Christ had risen from the dead. To remove the body, even temporarily, would have been the most foolish thinj^ the Pharisees could do. That the Pharisees neither removed nor de- stroyed the body is evident from the fact that they spread the report: "His disciples came by ni^ht and stole him awa} ." That this was their explanation of the occurrence we con- sider proved by Matthew's recording: "This saying was spread abroad among the Jews (and continueth) until this day." (The last clause brings this within the second class of facts which we agree to take on the testimon}- of the evangelists ; besides, Justin Martvr and the pagan Celsus here corroborate Matthew.) Now, V. o cannot believe that the Pharisees' explanation is correct, and that the disciples (h'(' ''teal away the body ; for, if so, it wor.ld be impossible to shoN.- why they shouiil after- % ^ ^% IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) T A -^-' '^'' >^' 10 WdA 1.0 I.I 1.25 ■^ J^ 12-5 ■so *'^~ MiSi 2.2 2.0 im % m w >> ..^S!!!> f '^ Photographic Sciences Corporation ■23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 A^ is '. iP i'l ! W 11*1 i i H\l 178 IHK CREDIHILITV OJ' CHRISTIANITY. w.iiils have given (ip their homes, positions, and lives lor what they woukl then have known to be a fraud. I l)elieve that this explanation is altogether abandoned by skeptical writers ; yet its having been advanced at the time by the Jews shows wnat a real difficulty the dis- appearance of the body then was, and still is, if we do not believe in the resurrection. The workingman and ex-skeptic, Cooper, after showing the practical certaint\- that the Pharisees did take those steps to secure the the tomb which Matthew relates, throws a great deal of deserved ridicule on the pharisaic explanation by paraphrasing their subsequent instructions to the soldiers thus: "Say, 'His disciples stole him away v%'hile we slept.' Say that you knew what was being done while you were fast asleep! Say that you think the dis- ciples must have stepped on tip-toe, when they removed the stone, for they did it without noise, or it must have awaked you ! " We have seen that neither the friends nor the enemies of Jesus could have removed the body, and we cannot believe that a neutral party hid it, for they must have known afterwards that the Pharisees would have given a large sum for its production. The only alternative 's the Christian way of accounting for the empty tomb; namely, that Cdirist rose from the P:yil)ENCli OF THE KliSUKKECTION. 179 flead. Mere we come to another p^reat diffi- culty of ili^bt^lief — liow to answer the question: What became of the body of Jesus ? Now, we are also ^'oin^' to assume as true any statement which the evan^^elists make to their own detriment. It is generally admitted that Peter superintended the writing of Mark's gospel. If so, he caused Mark to write : "And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes, and be kilied, and after three days rise again. And he spake the saying openly. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him. Fiut he turning about, and, seeing his disciples, rebuked Peter, and saith, Get thee behind me, Satan : for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men."* Now, no one likes to record a severe, well-merited rebuke which he has received from high authority. We may be perfectly certain, therefore, that this conversation really took place, and that Matthew is correct when he adds Peter's speech : " Be it far koin thee, Lord : this shall never be unto thee."t Thus we see that the crucihxion of Jesus Christ must have been a Mark viii 31 t Mafthf w xvi. 22. ■ 1 T ^ ^^ t 't iHo nil-. CKliDIJilLITY OF CHRISTIANITY. dcatli-blow to the cxpectatiuns of the leading apostle. Again, it is recorded in Mark that *' They had disputed one with another in the way, who was the greatest."* For so doing, Christ re- buked them, and the whole story is much to their discredit. No doubt they were disputing who were most fitted to occupy high positions in the earthly kingdom which they were expect- ing Christ to set up, for up to the last they failed to realize that He came is a suffering Saviour. We can easily understand, then, that it must have been in a tone of deep sad- ness that the two disciples said to Jesus, on the way to Emmaus : "But we hoped that it was he which should redeem Israel. "t It is evident that, up to the very end, they had expected that Christ would set up an earthly kingdom, and their hopes were completely dashed to the ground. Here we come to another difficulty of disbelief ; for if Christ did not rise from the dead, how do the skeptics account for the undoubted fact that the dis- ciples did take heart and begin the work again, and set up a spiritual kingdom, instead of the earthly kingdom on which their hopes were formerlv fixed ? The skeptic Laitig lays stress upon the fact *Maik i\. 34. t Luke xxiv. 21. EVIDliNCh. ()!• THE KESlKKLCTlON. 1^1 that Matthew, ahnost at the close of his j^'os- pel, records: "When thev saw him, they worshipped him : but some doubted."* As this statement was to the discredit of the dis- ciples, we may assume it true ; and we have therefore now proved three very important facts : First, that, when Christ showed Himself to His dii-cipl(;s after He rose from the dead, some doubted. Second, that they afterwards became so thorou^dily and absolutely convinced that their Master had risen from the dead that, abandon- ing old ideals, they f^^ave up the rest of their lives to preaching that fact. Third, that there is no reasonable way to account for what became of the body of Jesus, unless He rose from the dead. The fact that the disciples did not expect Christ to rise again from the dead is an important one, because, as you are doubtless aware, skep- tics try to account for the resurrection by say- ing that the disciples had visions, that they thought they saw a ghost, and that the whole thing was really a mere hallucination. Dr. Carpenter accounts for belief in spiritualism by " mental expectancy, prepossession, and fixed idea." We all know that it is the guest who * Matt, xxviii. 17. re L'Bli 182 THE CKljlDlDll^llV OF CHRISTIANITY. has been told that, unfortunately, there is no place for him to sleep but the haunted room, and who, thouj^di really frightened, lau^^hs at the idea of f(hosts, and lies down with his head full of them — he it is who sees the phan- toms walking in chains, etc. All the researches of the Psychical Society tend to show that people imafj^ine they see ghosts when they are expecting them. Now, it is clear that the dis- ciples were not expecting to see Jesus again ; hence wc feel sure that it was no ghost which caused them to believe that Christ rose from the dead. It is seldom that a number of people together imagine that they see a ghost, but all four evangelists agree in stating that the eleven apostles saw the risen Christ at the same time. Ghosts are supposed never to be tangible — that is, to allow themselves to be touched ; but three evangelists state that the risen Christ was touched. Also ghosts do not appear in broad daylight, as all four evangelists agree in stating Christ did. The same con- siderations may be urged with greater force against the idea that the apostles saw visions, and nothing more. A matter is related by John which is so much to the discredit of one of the apostles, Thomas, that w;: are entitled to reason from it. (I fancy tliat no one who reads the Acts can TY. re is no ■d room, LU^'hs at vith his le phan- Jearches 3VV that hey are the dis- '< again ; t which se from iber of ghost, ig that ; at the r to be to be lat the do not gehsts e con- force isions, is so 3stles, om it. s can KviDF-.N-ri: OF Tnit rksurrkction. 183 allege that the apostles purposely discMedited or told hes about each other. No traces of such viciousncss can be found in their hves or writings.) Rut Thom.-is, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. Hut he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger mto the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within and Thomas with them. Jesus cometh, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said. Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach liither thy finger, and see my hands ; and reach hither thy hand, and put It into my side : and be not faithless, but believing. Thomas answered and said unto him, Mv Lord and my God. * This is all very derogatory to Thomas. We must therefore assume that the apostles at least believed that it had taken place. We wonder how skeptics account for it. Did the disciples imagine that he said : " ICxcept I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe " ? Or did Thomas, after publicly declaring this *J<»hn XX. 24-2S. If iii iS| rill, ( ui:i)ii;ii.i I ^ oi ciikisiiani rv 1 •; ■' I * 4 resolution, allow himself to be convinced by a spectre of his own imaj^jination ? Again, all the evangelists agree that Christ spoke to the nsseinhlcd apostles Now, as ap- paritions or visions have no ma^ ^rial existence, if the apostles were convinced by mere mental illusions, (;ach man must have had a separate and distinct apparition before his mind's eye. How, then, was it that they all imagined the spectres of their respective minds to be all say- ing the same thing? For, had any one writ- ten down what the others did not imagine they heard, their remarks would have caused his account to be discredited. The skeptical contention is just as if, some time in the future, a person was to say: "I allow that a number of people were assembled at St. Paul's Church, Halifax, on the 19th of March, 1893, and that many of them knew b}' sight the person whom they imagined read an address to them. I allow that what was said was not only discussed, but acted upon, and the import of it subsequently put down in writing. I have never heard of any differences of opinion as to what was said, and I believe that the hearers agreed as to what should be done to carry out the instructions given them ; but nevertheless I affirm that the whole thing vvas a mental delusion, that no visible form f~"} liVIDENCl-: ()!• nil!. UKSIKUIXTION, iS^ Stood before those people, and that no words were spoken in their hearing." Well niij^dit a French savant exclaim : *' In trnth, I am not credulous enough to be an unbeliever!" To deny the resurrection is as if one should go to-ilay into the mess-rooms of any of those regiments which, in the Peninsu- lar War, at the battle of Albuera, cleared the hill with the loss of two-thirds cf their num- bers, and it is as if one should tell the officers there assemi^led that their predecessors in the regiment were altogether mistaken in imagin- ing that their well-known colonel was with them on that glorious day, and that any human voice gave those words of command that started them in the grand advance against overwhelming odds which changed defeat into victory.* And this illustration altogether comes * To brin}; out the force of the ilhistration, I (|iiote in full Napier's (le.scrii)tion of this attack, whicli may he likened to the advance of the Christian church, through the Neronian ptise- cution, uj) to its victories at the time of Constantine : " Such a gallant line, issuing from the midst of the smoke, and rapidly sei)arating from the confused and broken nudtitude, startled the -. uemy's masses, which were increasing and pressing onwards as to an assured victory ; ihey wavered, hesilaleil, and, then vomiting forth a storm of fire, hastily endeavoured to enlarge their front, while a fearful discharge of grape from all their artillery whistled through the British ranks . . The fusileer battalions, str\ick by the iron tempest, reeled and stag- gered like sinking ships ; l)ut, suddenly and sternly recovering. i(S6 iiii. c;Ki:i)ii}n.i TV oi- ciiKisriANiTY. short of represent iiif^^ the force of oiir argii- iiieiit ; for, at the battle of Albuera, the liritish soldiers, before the order was j^iven, had the will, the weapons, and the skill requisite for the advance, and we have seen that the apc^stles had none of these essencials till Christ rose from the dead. Stated briefly, the difficulty of disbelief is to stretch the vision theory sufficiently to ihcy closed on their terrible enemies, and then was seen with what a strength and majesty the Ikitish soldier lights. In vain did Soult with voice and gesture animate his Frenchmen ; in vain did the hardiest veterans break from the crowded cohnnns and sacrifice their lives to gain time for the mass to open out on such a fair field ; in vain did the mass itscK l)car up, and, fiercely striving, fire indiscriminately upon friends and foes, while the horsemen hovering on the flank threatened to charge the advancing line. Nothing could stop that astonishing infantry. No sudden l>urst of undisciplined valour, no nervous enthusiasm weakenin! the stai)ility of their order ; their Hashing eyes were bent upon the dark columns in their front, their measured tread shook the ground, their dreadful volleys swept away the head of every formation, their deafening shouts over- powered the dissonant cries that liroke from all parts of the tumultuous crowd, as slowly, and with a horrid carnage, it was pushed by the incessant vigour of the attack to the farthest edge of the hill. In vain did the French reserves mix with the struggling multitude to sustain the fight ; their eflorts only increased the irremediable confusion, and the mighty mass, breaking off like a loosened clill", went headlong down the steep; the rain lk)wed after in streams discoloured with blood, and eighteen humlred unwounded men, the remnant of six thousand unconcpierable Hritish soldiers, stood triumphant on the fatal hill!". EVIDKNCE or- rni- KhSlKKIXTroN. fS; account for all these thi'igs, .ind to explain how the disheartened apostles came to believe that they had a mission to rejjenerate the world, and were chanf,-ed from lambs into lions. th eir In examining: the Christian evidences hith- erto, we have not paused to examine many of the cavils with which skeptics endeavour t(j obscure the real issue; but, as we are now on a subject of the utmost importance, it is neces- sary to answer some of the objections which are ur^^ed a/:]^ainst the accounts of the resurrec- tion. At one time it was supposed that Christ did not really die. This theory havinj? been l^racticaliy given up by skeptics, we need waste no further tmie over it.* * The old theory was that Christ did not really die, hut was laid in the tomi) in a swoon ; that He then recovered of His wound, arose from the toml), showed Himself to the disciples, told them that He was risen fiom the dead, and, after spendinfj a short time with them, retired into the strictest seclusion to hide Himself from His enemies. Skeptics urge that the gospels allow that Christ's body was delivered into the hands of His friends, a..n the resurrection and the ascension allow ample time for all to return a^'ain from Galilee to Jerusalem, seeing the distance was only ninety miles. As for the so-called "direct contradiction " involved in the fact that Jesus had commanded His disciples to remain at Jerusalem, it is merely necessary to point out that this command immediately precedes two verses describing the ascension. The apostles received it, and obeyed it, after their return from Ualilee. Kenan, in endeavouring to explain away the resurection, says : " We may say, however, that the strong nnagination of Mary Magdalene here enacted a principal part. Divine power of love, bacred moments in which the passion of a hallucinated woman gives to the world a resurrected God." We may add, and starts a l)and of dow.icast country people, headed by a cowardly fisherman, to found a society on that halluciiiation which, progressing through Jeru.^cileni,' and descrilK's them as remaining there and witness- ing a number of appearances," he grossly misrepresents Scripture. l!|{ HjJ. THE CKiiDllJlLlTV Ol' CHKISTIANHV. all sorts of difficulties and persecutions, at last dominated the civilized world. That Kenan misstated the case when he said that it was Mary's imagination which j^ave to the world a resurrected God is evident from St. Paul's writing: "That he (Christ) appeared to Cephas ; then to the twelve ; then he appeared to above live hundred brethren at once thc.i he appeared to James ; then to all the apostles ; and last of all, as unto one born out of due time, he appeared to me also."* Lainjj^ copies Strauss in mrking out that St. Paul "places all the appearances on the same footin^,^ as that to himself, which was clearly of the nature of a vision, or strong internal impression. "t Does making a cate- gory of events necessarily "put them all on the same footing"? and was the appearance to St. Paul only a vision or strong internal impression ? On the contrary, St. Paul, in speaking to his enemies afterwards, appealed to the fact that " they that were with me beheld indeed the light, "t and to Agrippa he said : " And when we were all fallen to the earth," and in the first account we are told that all heard the voice (margin, ** sound"), though the • I. Cor. XV. 5, 6, 7, 8. t" Modern Thoiiijht." Page 133. X Acts xxii. 9. _ HVlDKNCi: OF THE KiiSUKUlXTIoN. I93 second account shows tbtit they could not dis- tin^uiish the words. Objections are raised as to liow Christ could have been ckul when He left the tomb. We who believe that He possessed the power of creating' bread, and even si^ht in a man born blind, need find no difficulty in this. In fact, all the objections based on the nature of Christ's risen body are only difficulties when the miraculous is denied. When our opponents criticize the details of the Gospel narratives, we become entitled to draw from these details further proofs of the reality of the resurrection, and directly we examine the narratives we see how utterly inadequate the "vision" theory is to explain them; for how does this theory account for the fact that Mary should first imagine Jesus to be the gardener, and the two disciples on the way to Enimaus take Him for a stranger? And if they were only under a hallucination due to the excitement of their minds, how could it be kept up during a long walk and discussion in broad daylight ? And how was it that Peter's plunge into the Sea of Galilee did not drive all feverish dreams out of his head ? And how did they come to imagine that a vision ate before them ? The proofs of Christ's resurrection are indeed weighty, but !r n I i III I 194 Till.: CREDIIJILITY Or CHRISTIANITY. thousands have been convinced of the fact without any of the reasons we have been con- sidering. How? By experience of the Hvinjj^ 1 Christ becoming a personal friend to them. And thousands who have never found a friend in Jesus have nevertlieiess acknowledged that He still lives, when they have watched His influence moulding the characters and directing the lives of those who are united to Him. But how can we be united to Jesus and have Him for a friend ? You remember that, when the party reached Ennnaus, Jesus " made as though he would go further."* Why ? Doubtless because He did not wish to be an uninvited guest. And the whole tenor of Scripture shows us that, just as no one is compelled to believe, so no one can expect to receive pardon and eternal life through union with Christ unless they invite the Saviour to take up His abode in their hearts. Do not imagine that because Christ rose from the dead you will necessarily be a par- ticipator in His resurrection. When science taught that energy is never wasted, people drew thence a strong argument for immortality, concluding that, when a wise man dies, all that he has acquired during life could not be wasted and lost. When speaking of this subject we * Luke wiv. 28. ! i HVIDKNCK OF THK KKsrRKHCTION. I95 saw that, in a mechanical sense, there is a conservation of ener^^y-that is, it is theoretic- ally possible to make machines which do not waste power, and nature does not unneces- sarily waste her powers ; but that, neverthe- ess sc.entihc opinion has now come round to the behef that, practically, in some of its changes of form, energy can be dissipated and lost. For instance, when water is poured over a water-wheel, there need be very little waste of power; but when it passes down a water- fall, a great deal of energy is dissipated. The course of humanity is often likened to a con tmually flowing river, and the analogy of nature teaches us that if a man directs the course of his life aright, and in view of the eternitv beyond, then, when death precipitates him into that eternity, very little of what knowledge and good habits he has acquired on earth need be wasted ; but if his life has been allowed to dritt with the main current towards selfish ends, then, when the catastrophe comes, (.yen that which is good in him may be almost or altogether lost. If I -■ II \ li i- .-^4^. The Credibility of Chrislianily aiul (he Diriicullies of Dislx^lief. Address No. V. The Proof of the Truth of Christianily Drawn from the Character of Christ. ^ ) li 'I ! THE PKOOI' OF THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANrrv DRAWN FROM THE CHARACTER OF CHRIST. A S our subject for th^s address is an cxcccd- /a in^dy wide oiiu, wc must keep strictly to thequestion, Was Jesus of Nazareth amerenian or more than a man ? For evidence to Iielp us solve this most important of all questions Irom considerations of character, we can only ^'o to the accounts of Christ's life contained in our four gospels. But, as we have not abso- lutely proved that the gospels were written by the men whose names they bear, or that they are accurate records, is it right and fair to reason from them ? It is certainly fair to con- template the general picture of Christ's life which they open before us. Having done so we may ask the question. Is this a picture drawn from real life, or from the imagination ^ If we become satisfied that the picture was drawn from real life, without the help of the Hnagination, then we may be certain that the hat, though details may be wrongly represented their being so damages instead of heightening 20() Till-; CKIIDIIJILITY OI- fllKISTlANITY. the effect. Clever artists often use models to assist their imaj^Hiiation, but students in art are only able to proiluce beautiful pictures when they coi)y their ori^Mnal faithfully. How, tiien, can we tell by which nietiiod the beauti- ful result was attained ? Whether by ^jivin^^ the iniaj^iuation full l)lay, or by carefully copy- inj^' a beautiful model ? One way of decidinj^' this fpiestion is by looking to see whether or not the subject has been idealiiied, by a roundinj^' off of anj^les and a softening,' of hard lines ; if so, we feel certain that iina|,'ination has been given way to. Hut a far more certain method is to set a second artist to depict the same subject. If he gives his imagination play, we are perfectly certain that he will not produce a sinular picture, let alone a corresponding picture. If the pictures do correspond in most points, we infer that they were faithfully copied from the model (and w(j know that no matter how faithfully the artists copy, there will be minor disagree- ments). If we set a third artist to depict the same subject, and he produces a corresponding picture, then our conviction that all have faith- fully copied the model is confirmed. But if we set a fourth to depict the subject under somewhat different circumstances, say, when 1 TMK PKOOl- o|- CHKISTlANrTV. 2()r the Ii^^ht IS coniinp: from another direction, a.ieiieve that any of these men used their •niafrmation in descrihing^ the character of their Master. Skeptics say that they did draw upon their imagdnation in ascrihin^r .niraclesto Hmi, hut wc are unaware that any skeptic ;^llc^es that they used their imagination to improve upon His character. And skeptics wisely refrain from so doings for it is evident hat the evangelists were not clever enough to depict an invented character, or we should have to helicve that they were all greater «;enmses than Shakespeare ; and again, hefore Christ came, no men had lived upon earth who were sufficiently good to hre the imagina- tion of the evangelists. For an artist cannot depict one heautiful feature, even from his imagination, unless he has formerly seen its prototype somewhere. It has been well said : - Imagination has again and again attempted at least to conceive and depict a character absolutely stainless, and 2()J TIIK CUKDIIUMTY OF cnKlSTIANITY. M^ Ml' yet, in the whole raiij^c of the world's poetry and fiction, h.is never attempted to do so without hopeless failure if it descended for a moment into details, ('.ould the i)easants of (ialilee have invented the sole perfect ideal which the world has been able either to imagine or describe ? " A^^'lin, when we examine the f^'ospels, we Hnd that the subject has not been ideali.'ed, the anf^des have not been rounded off, nor the hard lines softened. Where do the evanj^^elists indidf,'c in panc^^yrics of Christ ? Did not the Pharisees find His character to be very anjj^u- lar? Arc the hard and firm lines of His teachinf^ ever softened down ? Hut, af^ain, do not the three first evanj^cl- ists, looking at Jesus in the lifjjht of a Galibean philanthropist, produce an exactly correspond- ing; picture of Him ? And does not John, dcpictinj; Jesus as a controversialist at Jerusa- lem, produce a picture of which the f)nly differences from the others are due to the different light beating in on the character of Jesus ; namely, opposition instead of docile following ? Therefore we are sure that the evangelists did not draw upon their imaginations, but at least tried to portray Jesus faithfully. Which of their statemenis, then, may we faiily argue ■'■'"• i'«"'i- 01 oiKisriANnv. 203 fo N,il , ^'"^?''''^': """'-• ■^'^"--"« -Inch „., '" '-'"''' "I" tl'c picture, and which arc s.ul, n ~.rypartof,haM.ic.urc.ha.wcfcc;i^^ ;:;:;:;' i: '"•^•"""- ->■ '"-c .ha„ ti. whoi' JtMis tl alienee to the l>hari:xcs, " Which „f you co„v,„ccth ,„c of si„?" sta,uli„K alo c s aproof.hat He was sinless; iHUut/a;,; H.S nn,ocencc is proved hy the lifelike pic. , e soyofthetnals, because the story then tuns Tt ■ I :' ' ;""' T' '"^'-' '"^'^" ='" '"->'-' .1. Chr,s ,a„s tha, the trials took place as llic evanphsts relate the,.,. ]5efore we ,.,0 ceecl further, et us iii-,L-„ ., r ' show th-i* « , f , "'" 'l''"''''io„s to M,ow tha., so far, skept,cs afjree with us. Mr. Parker says : " Shall we be told s'lch a "KU, ncvej- lived ? the whole story i 1 S >pose hat Plato a„d Newton ,Ler i , utwho.hd their wonders and thought the r '-oughts ? It takes a Newton to forge a New ton. What ,nan could have fabricated a Je^sus ' None but a Jesus." 'Ji-^us. J- S. Mill said that " It would not be easv even now, even f,.r ,., 1 i- ' "e easy, w, even lor an unbe hever to find •, ub::^;;';:'"^''^^'"'''^"^-'-'^-''^^ aoscract into the concrete fh-in f^ i vwticicie uicin to endeavour 204 Tlili CKLDIJilLlTV Ol CHRISTIANITY. SO to live that Christ would approve our life."* Renaii sa^'s : " This foundation was truly the personal work of Jesus. "t "Jesus will never be surpassed. "t ** Let us, then, place the person of Jesus on the highest summit of human grandeur. "§ Thus we see tliat even skeptics allov/ that the picture of Jesus presented in the gospels is tliat of a grand and wonderful character, raised far above the characters of all other good men. How can we believe that myths and legends, the inventions of many men, would have suc- ceeded in building up this harmonious whole ?|| The fact that the Jewish prophets failed to describe the character of Jesus correctly weakened the argument from prophecy, but here it comes to our assistance, because it makes us leel certain that the recorders of Christ's character had no model before them from which to copy it except Christ Himself. In this way, therefore, we are entitled to reason from the gospels; but, as Bushnell says : " We do not assume the truth of the narrative by which the manner and facts of the life of Jesus are reported to us ; for this, by the sup- * "F,.,says on Theism." I 'age 255. t " Life of Jesus " : page 367. X Page 376. ij Page 36S. II In sl-oil, why does noi. the fi\niiliar old proverb about " too many cooks "" apply in tliis rase ? THE PKOOl- Ol- CHKISTIANITY. 205 position, is the matter in (incstion. \Vc only assume the representations themselves as bein^ just what they are, and discover their necessary truth in the transcendent, vvondrously self- evident picture of divine excellence and beauty exhibited in them."* How overwhelming is the very idea of attempting to point out a few of the excellencies of Christ's character! Nevertheless, as that character is the very consummation of the Christian system, so is it the main rock upon which our faith is founded, and it cannot, there- fore, be left out of a series of addresses on the Christian evidences. When we contemplate the character of a mere man, even though it be as complex, with as many points of excellence, as the Apostle Paul, we can all agree about the main characteristics. We say that he was wonderfully determined and ;iealous, and yet a man of quick sympathies, and longing for sympathy from others. We agree that Paul was extremely conscientious, and yet so large- minded that he could make himself all things to all men. We see that he was a man of powerful intellect, and yet sufficiently humble to acknowledge that he could not comprehend all God's dealings with men. All these things we can agree upon as the mam characteristics * <( The Character of Jesus." Page 1 1. I I i m 1 1 II 206 TUJi CKIiDIBlLITY Ol*' CHRISTIANITY. of Paul, but neither believer nor unbeliever can af^^ree about the main points of the character of Christ. \\'hy ? Because there are no main points. That character is so marvellously complete and rounded off that we cannot agree as to what shall be considered its peculiar excellence. Yet, if there be any trait in human charac- teristics which is lawful and right, and which any one of us specially admires, that trait we are sure to find carried to perfection in Christ ; and not only so, but probably coupled with some other good trait which we generally regard as its opposite, as fivr as virtues can be opposite to each other. For instance, W3 find that Christ's character, as portrayed in the gospels, couples incessant diligence with easy accessibility. Though He was always busily engaged in good worlds. He never rebuffed those who interrupted Him to crave His help. (Even in the case of the Syro-Phcenician woman, the blessing was first refused only that it might be ultimately wrought more speedily.) Again, we see zeal combined with prudence and discretion. When a man is very zealous, we are always afraid of his running into unwar- rantable extremes, and the fear is generally justified by after events. Again, we see elevation of mind coupled TH1-: PKoor of christianitv 207 with simplicity of manner. Low living together with high thinking is an ideal every right- thinking person since Christ's time has striven after. But how few begin to attain it! Then we see ineffable purity, coupled with forgiving pity ; in other words, the most pointed rebukes for the incorrigible, proceeding from the same lips as, on other occasions, uttered words of pardon and compassion for repentant sinners. Then we see power coupled with gentleness. The same form which on one occasion cleared the vast temple area, on another is seen bless- ing little children. Similarly, dignity went with condescension. The man whose bearing awed Pilate, at another time concentrated all His powers on enlighten- mg one despised vSamaritan woman. Again, the gospels depict a character of solitary greatness, which, nevertheless, was raised and made sacred by familiarity. Experi- ence teaches us that "no man is a hero to his own valet." Passing to more mental attributes, we find that Jesus possessed both reasoning power and intuitive perceptions. The man before whose logic scribes and Pharisees could not stand perceived at once when a lawyer came whose mind was more open to conviction. Now, fii *i 208 nil': CKKDIHILITY OK CHRISTIANITY. f^encraJly, people who trust to their lop^ic leave their intuitive faculties undeveloped, and vice versa. Also, the capacity for showinj:^- sympathy was combined with the profoundest wisdom. Here, again, men j^enerally fail, because the more we take thoujj^ht for others the less time remains for acquirinj^^ wisdom. I^or the same reason, tenderness does not usually go with steadfast decision, as the latter attitude of mind can only be maintained by constant attention to one object. Yet the raiser of Jairus' daugh- ter was also the rebuker of Peter. Neither is humility often coupled with severe indignation. Yet the same man who washed the disciples' feet also said to the Pharisees: "Ye serpents! Ye generation of vipers ! " Courage implies self-reliance, and therefore is not often found with dependence upon others. Yet the same man who *' stedfastly set his face to go up to Jerusalem " lived in such depend- ence upon God that the busier He was, the more necessary He found it to spend time in prayer. Dr. Stalker has well pointed out* that Christ combined capacities which are not often found in the same man. Thus He could both * " Imapn Christ!.'' I 1 If TIIK PROOI' OF.' CIIRISTIANITV 209 work and suffer. He was a threat preacher and a p^reat teacher. He was a ^Teat controversial- ist, and yet a man of intense feeh'n^. How can words ever convey an i(!ea of the virtues, quah'ties of mind, and capahih'ties for active work which went to make up the character of Christ ? Now, it is not contended that these virtues are essentially Christian- that is, that they are never found among: those who have not be- lieved in Christ. On the contrary, some men exhibited one or more of these frood qualities in a high degree even before Christ came, and we may candidly acknowledge that some modern skeptics do so also. But it is con- tended that the combinat^'ons, or pairs, of virtues are never found in a high degree in the same man unless he has attained them by sedulously copying Christ as his pattern. Christ's char- acter, then, was the only one which the world has ever seen in which the virtues were j)cr- fectly balanced. None carried too far, and ^et nothing wanting. In Christ we find : Earnestness without austerity. Self-denial without severity. Fortitude without rashness. Constancy without obstinacy. i[^ 210 THE CKKDIHILITY OF CHHISTIANITV. Humility without meanness. Dif^nity without pride. Tender benevolence without weakness. Exalted piety without enthusiasm.* Napoleon said, at St. Helena : " I know men, and I tell you that Jesus is not a man. Everythinfi^ in Him amazes me. His spirit outreaches mine, and His will confounds me. Comparison is impossible between Him and any other being in the world. He is truly a being by Himself. His ideas and sentiments; the truth that He announces; His manner of convincing, are all beyond humanity and the natural order of things. His birth, and the story of His life; the profoundness of His doctrine, which overturns all difficulties, and is their most complete solution ; His Gospel : the singularity of His mysterious being; His appearance ; His empire ; His progress through all centuries and kingdoms — all this is to me a prodigy, an unfathomable mystery." ** From first to last," said the great Napoleon on another occasion, "Jesus is the same ; always the same — majestic and simple, infinitely severe and infinitely gentle. Through- out a life passed under the public eye, He never gives occasion to find fault. The pru- dence of His conduct compels our admiration * McClilvray on " The Evidences." THE I'KOOF OF CHKISTIANITV. 211 by its union of force and gentleness. Alike in speech and action, He is enlightened, con- sistent, and calm. Sublimity is said to be an attribute of divinity. What name, then, shall we give Him in whose character was united every element of the sublime ? " * We shall only have time to consider in detail one of these combinations of contrasting virtues in Christ's character. Let us, then, see how the Gospel records describe Him as combining courageous decision with considerate love. Many of the incidents we shall use in this inquiry are inseparably connected with miracle ; but, inasmuch as we are establishint: a number of separate and distinct proofs of Christ's divinity, we do not wish to base this proof on either of the former ones, and there- fore we will not assume that the miracles were really performed. We only say: These episodes show Christ to have possessed certain charac- teristics, and we have already seen how impossible it is to suppose that the evangelists were four very clever men, who agreed to invent certain episodes which would impute those * Liddun, in "The Divinity of Our Lord," page 150, KMvesa list of autiiorities for this annt we have no reason to helicve Hiat, in the time of jesiis, public opinion had even be;,'un to formulate itself a^^ainst the hypocrisies of the priestly class, and Jesus knew that His enemies sought Ilis life, for He had Inm living away from Jerusalem for some time to preserve it.* If used only when necessary, vehement lanf,niage recpiires no justification unless it oversteps the bounds of truth. vSkeptics have not shown that Chi 1st was the l(,'ast unfair to the Pharisees on this occasion. Renan quotes His words at length, practically applauding such ** vigorous eloquence. "t Considering the occasion, Christ's words were temperate, but it is hard for us to realize how bold they were. This episode alone would stamp Him as a courageous man, but it is only one of the many occasions when He showed this virtue. First, to set before men a perfect example, and then to redeem mankind by His own death upon the cross, was the object which our Saviour followed with the most steadfast deter- mination throughout His ministry. For this reason He refused to be set up as a temporal ♦John vii. i. t " Life of Jesus." I'age 296. 2l8 THIi CKHDIHILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. I ■ 1 ■|| f If king,* thoufi^h, humanly speaking, it must have appeared as if His ends could be mucli more easily reached in that way ; and, even when danger was most innninent, He refused an asylum among those Greeks who took an interest in His person and teaching. For this reason He endured all the discomforts of a wandering and precarious life,t and at last steadfastly set His face to go up to Jerusalem,:}: knowing well that it was full of unscrupulous men who sought His destruction. § The people thought Christ was Elijah returned to life again. Elijah's main charac- teristic was determined courage, and this mis- take of the Jews shows us in what light Jesus' character appeared to them. Christ's teaching reflects the determination of His character. He taught His disciples : *' No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God."|| No man who was not himself so acting would have dared to insist on such a maxim. Again, He taught His dis- ciples to persevere in spite of all opposition, even from the lawful authorities. 1[ All this is important, because Renan implies that Jesus lived a sort of idyllic, pastoral life in Galilee, and subsequently changed His objects * Jolin vi. 15. gjohii xi. 8. t Luke ix. 58. Luke ix. 62. X Luke ix. 51. 1[ Luke xii. ii. THF PROOF OF CHRISTIANfTV. aiQ and His methoHs. Renan says: "We must also recoiiect that in this impure and oppressive city of Jerusalem Jesus was no longer himself. His conscience — by the fault of men, and not by his own — had lost something of its primitive clearness. Desperate, pushed to extremities, he no longer retained possession of himself."* Thus Rcnan implies that Jesus allowed Him- self to be put to death to relieve the tension of an intolerable situation. It is impossible to believe that a mere man would have so acted if he foresaw the end in time to escape it. Yet Renan, speaking of the last journey up to Jerusalem, allows that " Already, on various occasions, he had spoken to them of his future sufferings, and they had listened unwillingly. Jesus finally broke the silence, and, no longer concealing his presentiments, he spoke to them openly of his approaching end." If the gospels be at all reliable, we cannot doubt that Jesus foresaw the end from almost the beginning of His ministry, and that He prepared for it with steady determination, manifesting the same character in Jerusalem as among His friends in Galilee. Surely the weight of such a stupendous mission ; the sense of such gigantic opposition ; Life of Jesus." Pages 303, 304. 220 TMK CKKnUULITY OF' CHRISTIANITY. B> I the mere presentiment only of such a terrible tragedy to come, would have overwhelmed th3 mind of any mere man, and caused him to be entirely preoccupied with his own work in a manner which could not be described as selfish egotism in such unprecedented circumstances. Yet Christ showed the most considerate and compassionate love to others throughout His earthly course. Especially was this the case at the end, when we should have expected Him to have been entirely absorbed in His own terrible sufferings. Christ's considerate and compassionate lo -o, was shown in the performance of each luul .Ji of the miracles related in the canonical gospels. (We cannot too often insist on the fact that these characteristics do not appear in the legendary miracles of the apocryphal gospels.) However, as we are not to assume the miracles, we will not argue from the love shown by the actual healing, but from the minor thoughtful kindnesses which the evangelists agree in re- cording. In raising Jairus' daughter, why did J'isus allow the parents to be present, while excluding the bulk of the disciples, whom it would have been apparently more important to impress ? Was it not out of kindly considera- tion for their feelings ? And did He not take the child by the hand that she might have TH|.; I'KOOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 221 support and feel amonR friemls when her senses returned ?* In restoring sifiht to the Wind, our Saviour showed the same consideration. On one occasiont we are told that '■ He took hol.l of the blmd man by the hand, and brouRht him out of the village " ; when he was thus removed fro,a scenes of excitement, his sight was gradu- ally restored. Similarly, the man born blind wa. sent to a poo, outside Jerusalem, where his ..ght was .mowly obtained as the clay was washed away. ' pamed by words of love which doublcl their value. 1 h„s mimediately after the messenger had brought Jairus the sa,l news of his dangh- tes death, Jesus said to him: " Fe.ar n^.t only beheve "J To the widow of Nam He nor' r A ," .''"'"'' -"'P--on : ■' Weep not. § And the true sympathy- with which hose words were spoken is evident from the stor> of the rajsini^ of La/irnQ who,. .^, , ,, , ^ '^' ^ti/carus, wnen we arc told^that the Saviour's feelings overflowed .n f.c/^' ''''" "^ ^^"'''' •'«'"•' '^ -^Iso mani- fested to us m His teaching ; for instance, when * Mark v. 40. ■TMaik V. 36. t Mark viii. 23. ?! Luke vii. 13. 222 THH CRKDIHILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. He commanded His disciples to bid the poor to their feasts ; and also in the parables. The story of the good Samaritan exhibited practical love ; the prodigal son, paternal love ; the ninety and nine sheep, pastoral love ; while the illustration of a man giving good gifts to his children exemplified the love of God. The most terrible bodily sufferings could not prevent Jesus taking thought for others. While He hung upon the cross, He. provided for the welfare of His sorrowing mother by consigning her to the care of the loved apostle John. While the air was full of the taunts of His enemies, He could distinguish one voice which uttered words from a repentant, believ- ing heart. Immediately He gave the dying thief the fullest assurance of his acceptance, prefacing His words with that ** verily " with which He enfo»*ced the most important truths, showing him that he was immediately forgiven, and giving him the strongest possible assurance of happiness in the unseen world which he was so soon to enter. We are certain that, in Jesus of Nazareth, courageous decision was blended with con- siderate love. I have selected these three virtues — de«- cision, courage, and love — for detailed con- THE PROOF OF CIIKISTlANi TY. 223 sideration because they ^^o with truthfulness, and necessitate truthfuhiess in the person who exemphfies them. To act with steadfast decision throu^di Ufe is to be true to an ideal. Christ acted with steadfast decision through hfe, as we have seen. We say that He was certainly true to His ideal. The moral courage which Christ showed can only accompany truthfulness. " Oh, what a tangled web we weave When first we practise to deceive !" wrote Scott. No man who is conscious of deceiving will dare the things which Christ did. At Suakim, in 1885, the Arabs used to attack us at all times, and from all directions. One night they passed right round the camps and attacked the ordnance store depot in the rear. Men who had seen them fight would only advance into the desert with the utmost caution, expecting an Arab to spring out at them from behind every mimosa bush. So experience teaches us that the results of untruthfulness dog our footsteps, and may at any time spring up to overwhelm us. Had Christ been an accomplice after the fact in the raising of 224 THF. CRKDIBILITY OI' CHRISTIANITY. Lazarus, would Hu have dared to subsequently denounce the rulinj^ classes in their stron^^- hold ? After playing the hypocrite, could He have denounced hypocrisy ? We cannot be- lieve it. Even had He been devoid of noble feelings, fear of the consequences alone would have deterred Him. Lazarus or his sisters might have revealed the fact. The deception might have come to light in a hundred ways. Let tht^ deceiver hide himself, lest he be covered with shame. But Christ knew that He had raised Lazarus at Bethany ; there- fore His noble courage in the temple at Jerusalem. Finally, love cannot abide untruthfulness, for to deceive a person is usually the most unkind thing you can do to him. What do we think of a family where deception is prac- tised ? We say that love has departed from it. Ev-n Renan acknowledges that Jesus died for th(3 human race. With what possible motive ? On account of His great love for mankind. We will not believe that He pur- posely deceived us. " What is truth? " said jesting Pilate, and would not wait for an answer, for he considered that the riddle insoluble to his philosophers must be beyond the comprehension of the |i THE PROOF OK CHRISTIANITY. 225 despised Galilaean before him. Why are the Bible-reading nations of the earth the most truthful ? Is it not because they have learnt from Jesus Christ to speak the truth ? The falseness of Indian natives is proverbial, and I am unaware that contact with Englishmen cures their habit of lying. But contact with Christ will. My brother in India wrote to me about a native catechist : ** I have never found him doing or saying anything in the least shady as regards truth or honesty." That man had learnt of Christ, who, we believe, was " the way, the truth, and the life." Therefore the only remaining question for us is: What did Christ say about Himself? What did He claim to be ? Christ made both direct and indirect claims to be more than a man. If we could discover sufficient motive for the fraud, it would be conceivable that the evangelists should have agreed to insert the direct claims, but we can- not imagine such guileless men inventing the indirect claims. We shall notice that often either sort amounts to a claim to divinity. The best of men freely acknowledge theiroivn imperfections. Speaking generally, the better the man the more he feels the need for repent- ance. Christ never showed the slightest signs 226 THE CREDIBILITY OF CHRISTIANITY. of contrition. Are we to infer from that that the denouncer of all hypocrisies was Himself an arch hypocrite ? No. We feel sure that He never felt the sense of personal sin. Yet His nature was a very sensitive one, and He undoubtedly knew what was right. If He had fallen short in any way, we feel instinctively that the sense of guilt would have been as overwhelming as the sense of shame which made Him stoop down and write on the ground when the Pharisees confronted Him with the woman taken in sin. Christ's prayer in the seventeenth chapter of St. John's Gospel could never have been conceived, far less uttered or written. But, laying aside St. John's Gospel, which is so full of proofs of the divinity of Jesus Christ that we cannot touch upon them, let us consider Christ's words in the three first gos- pels. What did He mean when He said : •* Come unto me " ?* Could any mere man, no matter how good, have used these words? Put them into Gordon's or Wesley's mouth, and see how they sound. Intolerable. Why did Jesus, trained in the strictest school of Jewish monotheism, assume the unprecedented right of pronouncing sins to be forgiven ?t Was He justified in promising a reward to * Matt. xi. 28. tLuke vii. 48. Matt. ix. 2. i j' 3 Y. lat that rlimself ire that n. Yet md He He had nctively 3een as i which ground ^ith the in the el could ered or , which i Jesus I, let us rst gos- 2 said : e man, words? mouth, Why hool of idented [iven ?t /ard to THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 227 " whosoever shall give you a cup of cold water to drink, because ye are Christ's " ?* These, and other passages,t can only be explained by allowing that Christ claimed to be more than human. Christ praised Peter for saying : " Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."| Was not this a direct claim to divinity? Again, He frequently implied that He was to be the judge of the world,§ and He coupled His own name with that of God the Father in such a way that He either blasphemed, or claimed to be the Son of God.|( -We cannot logically stop short with the admission that Jesus of Nazareth was only a very good man. If He was not what He claimed to be. He was a deceiver and an arch hypocrite. Even Renanll writes : '• His title of Son of God, which he openly avowed in vivid parables," instancing the householder who sent his son to the husbandmen.** Finally, let us always remember that it was the assumption of this title, Son of God, which caused Jesus to be condemned by the high *Markix. 41. tMatt. xn.6. Luke x^^^^! * Matt. xvi. 16, 17. § Matt. vii. 21-23. Luke xxi. 36. !i Mark xiii. 32. ^ Page 299. Matt, xxviii. 19 ; xj. 27. ** Matt. xxi. 37. I. like X. 22. ■ < !K ll