Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

ART. 1.-THE ULTIMATE GROUNDS OF INFIDELITY.

1. The Historical Evidences of the Truth of the Holy Scripture Records, stated anew with special reference to the doubts and Discoveries of Modern Times, in Eight Lectures, delivered in the Oxford University Pulpit, in the year 1859, on the Bampton Foundation, by GEORGE RAWLINSON, M. A., late Fellow, and Tutor of Exeter College, Editor of the History of Herodotus, &c.—from the London Edition, with Notes, translated by Rev. A. N. ARNOLD. Boston: Gould & Lincoln. 1860. 12mo. pp. 454.

2. The History of Herodotus, A new English Version, edited with copious Notes and Appendices, illustrating the History and Geography of Herodotus, from the most recent sources of information, and embodying the chief results, Historical and Ethnological, which have been obtained in the progress of Cuneiform and Hieroglyphical discovery. By GEORGE RAWLINSON, M. A., late Fellow, &c.-assisted by COL. SIR HENRY RAWLINSON, K. C. B., and SIR J. G. WILKINSON, F. R. S. In four Volumes, with Maps and Illustra

[blocks in formation]

Vol. I.

tions. New York: D. Appleton & Co. 1859. 8vo. pp. 563. Vol. II. pp. 514. Vol. III. pp. 463. Vol. IV.

pp.

3. A Critical and Historical Introduction to the Canonical Scriptures of the Old Testament, from the German of Wilhelm Martin Leberecht De Wette,-translated and enlarged by THEODORE PARKER, Minister of the Second Church in Roxbury. In two Volumes-third edition. Boston: Rufus Leighton, Jr. 1859. 8vo. pp. 517, and 570.

4. An Historico-Critical Introduction to the Canonical Books of the New Testament. By WILHELM MARTIN LEBERECHT DEWETTE, Doctor of Theology and regular Professor in the University of Basel. Translated from the fifth improved and enlarged edition, by FREDERICK FROTHINGHAM. Boston: Crosby, Nichols & Co. 1858. 8vo. pp. 388.

ALL the objections that have been or can be urged against the credibility of the Holy Scriptures, admit of being referred to three classes.

1. Objections based on the inconsistency-real or supposed— between the teachings of the Scriptures and the ascertained facts and principles of Science.

2. Objections based upon historic inaccuracies-real or supposed-found in the Holy Scriptures, when compared with other authentic and reliable sources of information concerning the same historic events as those that are spoken of in the Bible, and,

3. Objections based upon the contents of the Scriptures themselves, when compared with other parts and teachings of the same Scriptures, or with the common sense and opinions of mankind.

It will readily be conceded, that objections to the credibility of any book claiming to have come from God, might exist, in either of these classes, sufficient to render its reception impossible, without an entire surrender of man's noblest faculties, and his subjecting himself to most debasing superstition and spiritual despotism. We naturally assume that whatever has come from God cannot but be true, and so, elevating to the

intellect; pure, and so, beneficial to the moral nature of man. And to these first principles of truth and right, we subject all systems and documents that come to us with a claim upon our assent and submission. But the scrutiny, however indispensable, is by no means an easy one. Nor is it without its peculiar and serious perils. And accordingly we have infidels, men who reject the Scriptures on grounds belonging to each of these classes; some of them, doubtless, honest and earnest minds, entangled in doubts that they cannot remove, and others as certainly disbelievers from an evil conscience, rejecting the Scriptures, because they do not want to believe what they teach. Still, however, it is an earnest and a blessed work to vindicate the claims of the Holy Volume to all our reverence and our confidence, as the sheet-anchor of our souls, the source of all our reliable and satisfying knowledge of Him in Whom we live and move and have our being.

Objections to the credibility of the Scriptures, based on the inconsistency between their teachings and the attainments of Science, must assume, of course, that what are regarded as the truths of Science are true; and so true, that they may be assumed as a test and standard by which to judge of the truth of all other books and teachings. Nay, these truths of Science must be regarded as absolutely true, and beyond possibility of error or mistake, before we can safely assume, that whatever is apparently irreconcilable with them must be rejected. and cast away as false. It is a work of no slight magnitude or responsibility to say, that that Volume-which is so dear to millions of human hearts, has led so many thousands to repentance and peace, sustained such multitudes in the hours of temptation and discouragement, and is in fact so inwrought into all our modes of thought and identified with our civilization, that it cannot now be discredited without leaving all our life and hopes a mere wreck of ruins-is, after all, but an imposture, full of errors, myths, contradictions and absurdities. And he who has closely considered the history of Science, how it has progressed with but faltering and erring steps, how many of its most vaunted teachings in one age have been repudiated as errors in the next, will certainly be very cautious about re

pudiating, on any such grounds, that which has been of such inestimable value as, in all ages, the blessed old Bible has proved itself to be. Doubtless there are thousands who will say, if worst must come to worst, 'Give us the old Bible, and raise no doubts of its truthfulness. Perish Science, if need be, we care nothing for that; we can live without it. But, without the hope of immortality, based upon the truth of God's teachings in His Holy Word, we cannot live, and do not dare to die.'

We must, then, be extremely cautious how we admit any proposition as a truth of Science which militates at all against the received teachings of the Holy Scriptures. But, besides this, we have another caution to give. We cannot go into any general discussion of the subject now, but we will remark in passing, that we must always remember that the Bible was not given us to teach us Science, but rather the way of salvation. And more than this; the writers of the Holy Scriptures could not accomplish their object without some allusion to matters that come within the domain of Science. For example, in speaking of the earth and the heavenly bodies, the Scriptures are speaking of objects that come within the teachings, discoveries and discussions of Astronomy and Geology. In speaking of the miracles of healing, the sacred writers encounter the theories of disease and cure. Now, at the time when the Scriptures were written, there were no Sciences of Geology, Astronomy, and of Disease and Health. Hence, in Astronomy, the sacred writers speak, according to appearances, of the sun's rising and setting, &c., notwithstanding modern Science has taught every school boy of our day, that not the sun but the earth revolves. So in regard to other Sciences, Geology and Medicine for example, in speaking of the creation of the earth and the cure of disease, the end in view was to teach that God created the world, and that Christ healed the sick, and not to inculcate any theory or science of the original formation of the earth, and the physiology and pathology of human life. The sacred writers must therefore, of necessity, have used the terms and formularies that belonged to the theories and views then prevalent, and thus have given to them a certain

amount of apparent sanction. Suppose, for example, that Moses, instead of the revelation he has given us in the first chapter of Genesis, had written in the phraseology and according to the views of modern Science in the department of Geology, who in that far off age would have understood him? Who, until within the last quarter of a century, would have believed him? Nay, it would have taken a volume much larger than all the five Books ascribed to him, to make the proper definitions and preliminary explanations, in order that he might state the fact that God created the earth and all things therein, as those things are now understood, and in terms and principles which are in accordance with modern Science. And so with our Lord's miracles of healing-were these actual demoniacal possessions? We do not propose to discuss the question. But that was, undoubtedly, the theory in His age of many forms of disease of which we now have a different theory, and which we refer to no such agency as their cause. Now suppose that the men of His age were wrong and we are right, was it the work for Him to do, to teach medicine, physiology and pathology, with the theory and practice of medicine? Certainly not. And suppose He had set Himself to correct their error; this work could not have been accomplished in all the time and with all the labor allowed for the three years of His Ministry and the preaching of the Gospel of our Salvation. Nay more, His contradiction of the commonly received doctrines concerning the things that pertain to this world, would have immeasurably increased the difficulties, already alarmingly great, in the way of His reception as the Son of God, and the acceptance of his teachings concerning God, the Soul, and Eternity. Doubtless the men of that age were as confident that what they regarded as scientific truth was true and indisputable, as the most pretentious savans of our day are or can be, with regard to the attainments of our age, notwithstanding they were wrong for the most part, and we are, as we believe, for the most part right in what we hold and teach.

It was therefore of inevitable necessity that the Sacred writers should assume and use some expressions which would imply

[blocks in formation]
« PreviousContinue »