Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

the false philosophy of the times; and he burned to overthrow it and to deliver the church. He was not a mere interpreter of the language of the Bible, but a man of large, common sense, philosophical views, which gave him great power in expounding and enforcing its true doctrines. His discussions abundantly show this. He commenced his work early by breaking all the bands of human authority and thus giving truth freedom on every field. This was the spirit which eminently characterized Luther and by the aid of which the Reformation struggled into existence. He early began his assaults upon the philosophy of Aristotle. He said of him; "For nothing does my heart so intensely burn as to unmask and expose to the many that old buffoon, who, with his Greek visor, has so long befooled the church. If I did not know Aristotle to be a man I should certainly take him for the devil himself." It was his effort as he says, to "unmask and expose" the errors of this false philosophy, not simply by arraying against it the doctrines of revelation, but by the exhibition of truth, developing its falsehood. And he was tolerably successful. The power of this philosophy was quickly broken in Germany.

And yet, had there been no more thorough and extended philosophical investigation than Luther was able to make, the light of the Reformation might have been enveloped in the darkness of false philosophy and become extinct. But the spirit of independent investigation which he introduced, gave birth to more full developments on the field of science and philosophy. Men of Christian hearts entered this field and by the principles appropriate to it, worked out the demonstrations of truth, so that more true deductions of philosophy were made and established within two centuries after the Reformation, than had previously been during the entire period of the world's existence, And these deductions have been the bulwarks of Christianity. They had their origin from this Christian spirit of independence, and have harmonized with the true doctrines of the Bible, and aided their development. From this source came the correction of the erroneous doctrines of Aristotle, that the sun revolves round the earth, which had so long held the world in error. It was not accomplished by making the deductions of philosophy bend to the interpretations of the Bible. This was attempted, and the very principle of the reviewer was put in full force; a principle which had its origin in the dark ages, and was a main support of human authority against truth. Every attempt to correct this philosophical error by philosophy was resisted, because these new deductions of philosophy conflicted with the established interpretation of the language of the Bible. This was done by pains and penalties, which we are sure the reviewer would not advocate. But philosophy has, nevertheless, given an interpretation of this lan' Von Gerlock's Luther, 1.21-translated by Prof. Stowe.

guage which it otherwise could have never received. To the same independent spirit of the Reformation, also, may be traced some of the most important developments in the mental and moral sciences which the world has ever received. The Puritans, too, derived their principles of independent investigation from the same source, and have more or less clearly and vigorously maintained them to the present time. Within the last century, great investigations and developments have been made respecting the number and variety of languages spoken on the earth; respecting the origin of the human species, and its several families; and in the science of geology. In all these past developments of philosophy, the doctrines of the Bible have not taken the lead in correcting philosophical error, and in establishing truth, as this reviewer prescribes. This, indeed, was not the province of Revelation. But when these new developments of philosophy have appeared, numbers have been ready to pronounce them false, simply because they seemed to conflict with the interpretations of the Bible. And thus the erroneous principle of making the doctrines of Revelation modify and control philosophy, has, at every successive step in the progress of philosophical investigation been used to protect error, and to prevent the development of truth. It has for ages held bound in iron chains free investigation. But Christian philosophy has burst these chains, corrected philosophical error, and worked out on its own field its demonstrations of truth.

And what has been the effect on revealed truth? Just what we should anticipate, since truth everywhere is harmonious. It has never, in the slightest degree, shaken the foundation of Revelation, but has shed light upon its doctrines, and contributed much to a clearer understanding and a firmer establishment of them. Many views of revealed truth, before supposed to be sacred and immovably settled, have been greatly modified, or entirely displaced; and others, better harmonizing with related truths, have taken their place. And thus the past history of the development of philosophy has repeatedly illustrated, in the fullest and clearest manner, the correctness of the method we advocate, that a thorough and correct understanding of philosophical truth is important and necessary to a full and correct understanding of revealed truth.

And yet in the face of all these facts this reviewer still maintains the doctrine, that philosophy must not be allowed to modify our interpretation of the doctrines of the Bible, but these doctrines, thus interpreted, must control philosophy. And this implies that the Bible is a book so plain, that man with any degree of knowledge can fully understand its teachings; that he needs only to learn and read it correctly, as the child learns his lesson, and then the work of developing its sublime truths is done. How much learning does this method require of the expounder of the Bible? He need not pretend to enter the field of philosophical

research, and carefully survey its ground, and see whether its deductions are true or false. He may abandon thus this entire field to the infidel, allowing him to occupy it, and to work out his own demonstrations, true or false, and then employ these tremendous engines to undermine the system of Revelation. And whenever the philosophical deductions of the infidel conflict with his interpretation of Scripture doctrine, all he has to do is to assume the infallibility of his interpretation, and call upon the deductions of philosophy to surrender: and then his work of expounding and defending the system of Revelation is perfected. In this he assumes that there is a contradiction between the deductions of philosophy and Revelation itself—that one or the other must be false

and he stakes the truth or falsehood of the entire system of Revelation on the issue, and that too while he is wholly ignorant of the field of philosophical investigation. This is yielding all that the infidel can claim. It is yielding first the field of philosophy as a field of investigation, and then the assumption that there is a necessary contradiction between the deductions of philosophy and Revelation itself. But there is no necessity of yielding this vantage ground. It is this false method of the reviewer that yields it. The infidel may legitimately be required to show that there is this necessary conflict, without our yielding or affirming it. The method we advocate assumes the doctrines of the Bible to be consistent with all true deductions of science, until they are proved to be inconsistent with them. But this is the work of the infidel, and we give him no undue advantage for doing this, by assuming the infallibility of our interpretation. From the true deductions of philosophy the firm believer in Revelation will have nothing to fear. If he fears that erroneous philosophical deductions will be introduced, and made to extend their perverting influence to the doctrines of the Bible, then our method at once dispels his fears. It requires him to take the only fair and honorable course-viz. to enter the field of investigation, and there correct erroneous deductions, and develop the truth as a prerequisite to a full interpretation of the doctrines of Revelation. By this means, instead of chaining down the Christian system in a place of concealment, he gives to her wings of truth, with which she is able to rise above the fog and mists of error, and show her heavenly origin.

But the reviewer seems to be moved with great fear lest this method should weaken the Divine authority of the Bible. We apprehend this is not the real ground of his fear. For if so, it would disclose a fearful want of confidence in the ability of Revelation to sustain its claims to truth in all its teachings, when brought to the fair and honorable test of truth on the field of philosophy. We believe his fear arises from an apprehension that some philosophical dogma which he has adopted cannot bear the test of scrutiny, and consequently some views which he has de

rived from the Scriptures, by this erroneous method of interpretation, must be abandoned. We are not surprised that a man who adopts the dogmas that sin is inherited, and that ability is not necessary as a basis of moral obligation, should fear philosophical investigation. For these dogmas could not stand the test of true philosophy, and yet they are appropriate subjects of philosophical scrutiny. But the true Christian philosopher, ever solicitous to know the truth, and ready to modify his views whenever truth requires it, will manifest a very different feeling. Instead of shrinking from the light, or trembling at every breeze that blows from the land of philosophy, he will feel himself standing on firmer ground. He will affirm the Bible to be true, because he has evidence of its truth, and finds no necessary conflict between it and the true deductions of philosophy. As its "Author borrows not leave to be," so this book, on his principles of interpretation, asks no concessions from philosophy to support its truth. He will maintain that true philosophy is ever the handmaid of Revelation, and her aid is necessary to a full development of its teachings. This indeed requires a learned ministry, or at least some men qualified to traverse the whole field of philosophy, and develop its truths, as the opposite method does not. But there is no safety for Revelation-none for Christianity in any other course.

Here then is room for progress even in the development of the truths of Revelation; progress in a clearer understanding of its distinct and individual doctrines; progress in the knowledge of the relations of one truth to another, both within and without the field of revealed truth; and progress in giving perfect symmetry to all the parts of this system. As the developments of philosophy have been and may yet be slow, so we believe the developments of moral and revealed truth, which in no small degree depend upon them, will also be slow. There is yet much to be learned respecting those doctrines of Revelation which involve a correct knowledge of the science of mind, of moral obligation, and of moral government; and not a few of its doctrines relate to these subjects. We do not therefore censure Mr. Finney for the manner of constructing his Theological System, namely, by attempting first to establish the philosophical principles on which it is based. We believe this to be the true and Christian method, and whatever of error there may be in the system, it can only be overthrown by carefully examining and understanding these fundamental principles.

ARTICLE III.

THE DOCTRINE OF MAN'S IMMORTALITY, AND OF THE ETERNAL PUNISHMENT OF THE WICKED, AS SET FORTH IN THE ANCIENT SCRIPTURES.

By ASAHEL ABBOT, New York.

THAT the ancients were ignorant of a future state, or of the doctrine of eternal rewards and punishments, we should be slow to admit. The patriarchal saints are said to have "died in the faith;" which faith is also made to include "the resurrection of the dead." The oldest prophecy on record since the Fall, implies the same: "It shall bruise thy head." How? Plainly by undoing the works of the Serpent; of which temporal evil and death just before threatened, are a part; where "the seed of a woman" should break the bars of death and raise the bodies of his saints to glory and unfailing life. In the prophecy of Enoch it is said: "Behold the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints to execute judgment upon all the ungodly." How can this be unless they are immortal? In the Book of Job it is said: "Till the heavens be no more, they shall not be awakened out of their sleep." Thus to those early patriarchs was known both the resurrection and the end of the world; and it is not wonderful that we hear the same Job exclaim: "My Redeemer shall stand at the latter day upon the earth, and in my flesh shall I see God." To the same effect we find the Psalmist exulting even while he perceives the temporary greatness of ungodly men, as penetrated with a just sense of piety toward God, he exclaims: "I shall be satisfied when I awake with thy likeness."

66

The vengeance which fell upon Cain for the murder of his brother had the same meaning. One brute might slay another at will and nothing said; but the moment man falls upon man it is shown that man is better than a beast," by the terrible punishment inflicted upon the murderer. Abel had faith; and faith lays hold of God as the rewarder of them that diligently seek him. And certainly they who knew of the translation of Enoch, could not have remained ignorant of immortality, and the change of this corruptible into incorruptible, whether to the dead or the living. And they who saw the Son of God face to face, and communed with his angels as familiar friends, whether in Eden or in Ararat, in Arabia, Egypt or Canaan, they could not but know something of a life to come, and of the beings inhabiting that world where there is no more death.

We are told that there is nothing beyond the present world in the Books of Moses; for though we may have glimpses of a life to come in Job, the Psalms and the Prophets, yet the emigrants from

« FöregåendeFortsätt »