« FöregåendeFortsätt »
Rudiments of Theological and Moral Science. The work itself contains a number of articles written at different periods, many of which have, in one form or another, previously appeared in print. These articles have been collected, revised, enlarged, and arranged in this volume, in order to present, in a compact and durable form, the best thoughts of the author upon the sub jects therein treated, during a ministry of more than forty years. They set forth the doctrines and principles which were, and still are, among the most serious and solemn convictions of his judgment. To their promulgation and defense his life has been devoted. In their belief he has lived, and in that belief he expects to die. He is well persuaded that, of all views of Christian doctrine, they are the best calculated to promote the moral and spiritual welfare of mankind. A calm and child-like trust in God, a steadfast confidence in the undeviating rectitude of all his ways, and an unwavering belief in that unalterable and eternal love of the Father, which embraces all created intelligences, constitute the highest powers and graces of the Christian character. And these can proceed only from an abiding and deep conviction that God is, and that He reigns in supreme and in unmingled goodness over all the affairs of the universe that He has made. This last is the central truth sought to be inculcated in the following work. If any captious objector, who peruses these pages, should be disposed to say, “this is an attempt to revive Calvinism,” the answer is, there are five distinguishing points in Calvinistic theology, only one of which is elaborated in this work, viz.: the sovereignty of God in and over all the events of time. But that also is a prominent feature of Mohammedanism, and yet it will hardly be claimed, that for this reason the present effort is an attempt to revive the theology of the Arabian prophet.
The author gives this, perhaps his last work, to the public, fondly hoping that it will receive at least a share of that favor, which has been accorded to the previous efforts of his pen,
and invoking upon it and all its readers the blessing of the Heavenly Father.
THEOLOGICAL AND MORAL SCIENCE.
THEOLOGY AND ANTHROPOLOGY.
Theology and Anthropology–Necessity of a Distinction between them—The
Freedom of the Will— Theology in its Elementary Principles—The Fundamental Truth—The Finite and Infinite-Theology comes from RevelationGod Revealed to Man-Knowledge and the Pride of Intellect- Philosophers of the Old and New School-Kant-Hume's Argument on Consciousness Six Distinct Schools of Philosophy-Sir William Hamilton—Theology an Appeal to Human Faith.
The word Theology comes from Theos (God) and logos (word or discourse), and means literally a discourse concerning God. Whatever relates to the being, the character, the government, the law or purposes of God, belongs, therefore, to the domain of Theology.
Anthropology comes from anthropos (man) and logos (word or discourse), and means simply a discourse concerning man. To it legitimately belongs whatever relates to the nature, the character, the powers and faculties, the duty and destiny of man.
The relation of man to God, the duties growing out of that relation, and the destiny intended for him, of God, may indeed come within the scope of Theology, on the
principle that the greater contains the less. It is well, however, to distinguish between the two, and to have care that we do not so mistake the one for the other, as to imagine that we are discussing grave and serious questions of Theology, when, in truth, we are merely employing ourselves with some inferior question of Anthropology. Thus, for example, “The freedom of the human will” is not, strictly speaking, a theological question at all. It relates merely to the nature and the powers of man, and is, therefore, referable, primarily, to the science of Anthropology, which treats of man, and not to Theology, which treats of God. Hence it is well for the philosophers to discuss it, as they have done, at length; but it is difficult to perceive what right it has to come in and assume to mold and modify a whole system of Theology.
In reference to the relative position of Theology and Anthropology, it may not be improper to observe in this connection somewhat as follows:
If we assume that we have a Theology which is given us of God himself, then that Theology must be divinely and immutably true, and it must occupy a position immeasurably higher than any mere human system of Anthropology. In this case, if we ever attempt to bring the two together, the part of wisdom would seem to be to make our Anthropology harmonize with our Theology, rather than to conform the latter to the former. But if it be admitted that Theology is a mere human science, then, of course, it has no pre-eminence over Anthropology, and the two must be regarded as standing upon precisely the same basis, and occupying the same position. It is this practical admission of the equality of the two, and the consequent mingling of theological and anthropological science in one mass, that has infused mist and confusion into many a ponderous volume professedly devoted to the