1
10
11
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/d6dc3935a28147ca7f0eaa728f5fd4ad.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=UXVP%7EtI1thTJ4Plfn19BJfjE%7EP6rz4UM-RLczBep6DU1XoMWW%7ETjKW0u49OOPhk277bGyvbedeqYYPnJvzZJLu8iJlcDM9O7gYE-L2tRk-vz3AQHgMBQXmUNxuTPJUZWc0xlyZEGW2sT%7Epn9ifg18CbkNF3cX3NvEDc-uSvRZZhf2qxc69nGO4TAeOW2jrEGP6mKkWTey90ihbvSZn0%7Ek2EhXQJrPRwYKOhjN6SY0PlCZ%7EIqTPZ0fVCase-2i1027Rpk6BfRoKHdLYXGWnis3BNKoGltdqmFZVwH69rQbBXRmJK6R7kkOv500uRlRl3z604jGkM3Yzg22vSROwTN-Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5c031b343beb68360832a78228d41823
PDF Text
Text
CRITICAL CATECHISM.
BY
THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE,
DATE A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price Threepence.
�Note.—The materials used in the following pages have
been taken from “The Eible; is it the Word of God?”
(N. Trubner & Co.), by the same author.
�A CRITICAL CATECHISM,
RESPECTFULLLY OFFERED TO THE CONSIDERATION
OF THE ORTHODOX.
Catechist.—Taking John to be the precursor of
Jesus the Messiah, did he fulfil his mission in “ turn
ing the hearts of the fathers to the children/’ and
“the disobedient to the wisdom of the just,”
“ making ready a people prepared for the Lord ” ?
(Luke i. 17.)
Disciple.—He effected nothing of the kind.
Though “the world ” was “made” by Jesus, “the
world knew him not.” “He came unto his own, and
his own received him not.” (John i. 10-11.) Jesus
was in effect rejected and put to an ignominious death.
C. —Was John “filled with the Holy Ghost, even
from his mother’s womb” 1 (Luke i. 15.)
D. —I should scarcely think so.
C. —Why ?
D. —Because his disciples “ had not so much as
heard whether there was any Holy Ghost,” (Acts
xix. 2.)
G.—Was Jesus of the lineage of David? (Luke i. 32.)
D.—No. His mother “was found with child of
the Holy Ghost ” (Matt. i. 18.)
C. —What certainty is there of the fact ?
D. —His mother Mary was told thereof by an angel.
C.—Did she communicate the information to her
affianced husband Joseph 1
�4
A Critical Catechism.
D.—No • as when he found out her condition, and
“thought on these things,” he was “minded to put
her away” (Matt. i. 19, 20.)
C. —Whom did she teach Jesus to look upon as his
father ?
D. —Joseph, to whom she adverted as such when
speaking to Jesus of him. “ Behold, thy father and
I have sought thee sorrowing ” (Luke ii. 48.)
C. —Does it appear, nevertheless, that Mary herself
apprehended that Jesus was of divine origin ?
D. —It would seem not. When she heard Simeon
in the temple proclaim the greatness of his mission,
she “marvelled at those things which were spoken
of him” (Luke ii. 33.) When at the age of twelve
she found him in discussion with the doctors in the
temple, she, with “ all that heard him,” was
“ astonished at his understanding and answers ” (Luke
ii. 47.) And when he said that he was then engaged
in his heavenly “ Father’s business,” she, and the
others, “ understood not the sayings which he spake
unto them ” (Luke ii. 49, 50).
C. —Supposing Joseph to have been the father of
Jesus, would that make him out to have been of the
lineage of David ?
D. —Matthew and Luke give genealogies to that
effect.
C. —Do these genealogies agree?
D. —They do not. Matthew (i. 6-16) traces Joseph
from the regal line of Solomon, through twenty-three
descents, to one Jacob, whose name is given as that
of his father, while Luke (ii. 23-31) derives him from
the unregal line of Nathan, Solomon’s brother,
through thirty-eight descents, to one Heli, who is
said to have been his father.
C. —For what purpose can these genealogies have
been introduced unless Joseph is to be looked upon
. as really the father of Jesus ?
D. —I am at a loss to understand.
�A Critical Catechism.
5
C. —Was not Joseph a carpenter 1
D. —He was (Matt. xiii. 55.)
C. —And yet lie came from a whole race of kings ?
D. —He did. Pursuant to Matthew all the reign
ing sovereigns of Judah were his direct ancestors,
numbering, according to the Old Testament, eighteen
rulers from David to Jehoiakim.
C. —Strange, is it not! To what calling did Joseph
bring up Jesus 1
D. —To his own. He made him a carpenter (Mark
vi. 3). The tradition, according to Justin Martyr
(a.d. 140), was that Jesus worked at the construction
of ploughs and other agricultural implements.
C. —And yet we are to believe that both Joseph
and Mary were well assured of his divine birth 1
D. —We are.
C. —Was Jesus, when an infant, in peril from
Herod, as stated by Matthew ? (ii. 13, 16).
D. —No ; for, according to Luke, he was taken
openly to the temple, and there proclaimed as the
expected redeemer or Messiah by Simeon and the
prophetess Anna (ii. 22, 27-38).
C. —Did not his parents, under divine instructions,
flee with him to Egypt, and thence return and take
up their abode in Nazareth ? (Matt. ii. 13-23).
D. —Not according to Luke. He shows that they
went direct from Jerusalem to Nazareth without going
near Egypt (ii. 39).
C. —Was Jesus, “immediately” after his baptism,
“driven into the wilderness” of Judea, where he
remained “forty days tempted of Satan ?” (Mark i.
12, 13).
D. —John has it that on “ the third day ” after
meeting with the Baptist, he was at Cana in Galilee,
some sixty miles off, where he turned water into
wine (ii. 1).
C.—So that if Jesus underwent his temptation, he
did not perform the miracle at Cana; and if he per
�6
A Critical Catechism.
formed the miracle at Cana, he did not undergo the
temptation ?
D.—Just so.
C. -—When did Jesus purify the temple ?
D. —Matthew says four days before his death (xxi.
1, 12, 18 ; xxvi. 2).
C. —Is that sustainable 1
D. —No. John says it happened at the beginning
of his ministry, at the first of three passovers with
which he associates him, or two years before his
death (ii. 13-16).
C. —Is John (ii. 13 ; vi. 4 ; xix. 14) supported in
his statement that the ministry of Jesus lasted over
three passovers ?
D. —No. The other evangelists limit it to a portion
of a year, embracing but one passover, namely that
occurring at the time of his death.
C. —Where was the ministry of Jesus carried on
during the last six months of his life according to
Matthew, Mark, and Luke ?
D. —Always in Galilee, till within three or four
days of his death, when he came to Judea.
C. —What does John say as to this 1
D. —He makes it appear that Jesus was all this time
in Judea. He shows him to have been at Jerusalem
at the feast of tabernacles (vii. 2, 10), which was held
in Tisri, or October; and at the feast of dedication
(x. 22), which was in Chisleu, or December; the
passover, when he suffered, occurring in Nisan, or
April.
C. —When Jesus left Galilee, pursuant to the
earlier evangelists, by what route did he go to
Judea1
D. —According to Matthew (xix. 1) and Mark
(x. 1), he crossed over the Jordan, and kept along its
eastern side, thus avoiding Samaria.
C. —What does Luke say 1
D. —According to him he did not cross over the
�A Critical Catechism.
1
Jordan, but “ passed through the midst of Samaria”
(ix. 51, 52 ; xvii. 11).
C.-—What support is there for John’s account of
the raising up of Lazarus from the dead 1
J),—None. The other evangelists show no knowledge
of such a person as Lazarus, and make it appear that
the event could not have occurred. John has it that
when Jesus was summoned to attend on Lazarus at
his illness, he was at Bethabara on the Jordan (x. 40);
that he remained there two days ; and that on going
to Bethany he found that Lazarus had been dead and
buried four days (xi. 6, 17); and at some interval
after the resurrection of Lazarus, he goes on to say
that it wanted six days to the passover (xii. 1).
Here we have Jesus occupied about Lazarus, at least
say a fortnight before his own death. But pursuant
to Matthew and Mark he was then in Galilee, not
arriving at Bethany until three, or at most four,
days before his death; and when he did arrive,
they describe his doings till his death without saying
a word about any such miraculous action.
C. —Is John upheld in his statement (xii. 1-3) that
Jesus was anointed at Bethany in the house of Lazarus 1
D. —No. Matthew (xxvi. 6) and Mark (xiv. 3) say
it occurred at the house of Simon the leper of Bethany.
C. —What does Luke say on the matter 1
D. —That it was at the house of Simon the phari
see, who was not of Bethany, which is in Judea, but
of Galilee (vii. 37, 40).
C. —Is John borne out in saying that it was Mary,
the pious sister of Lazarus, who anointed him ?
D. —No. Matthew and Mark describe her as an
unknown female who entered the house for the pur
pose ; while Luke says she was a well-known sinner.
G-—Did the woman, whoever she was, apply the
ointment to the head of Jesus, as related by Matthew
and Mark 1
D.—That is altogether uncertain. Luke and John
�8
A Critical Catechism.
declare she anointed his feet, and wiped them with
her hair.
C. —Did Judas Iscariot object to the act as waste
ful, as John states ?
D. —That cannot be relied on, for Luke says the
objector was Simon the host, and that the objection
taken was the contamination of the woman’s touch.
C. —Can it be said that Luke was describing a
different occasion from the others ?
D. -—It cannot. The four all agree that it occurred
while Jesus sat at meat, and was objected to; Luke
has it, in correspondence with Matthew and John,
that the host’s name was Simon, and that the oint
ment was in an alabaster box; the incident was of
an unusual character, having a special import, and
Matthew and Mark, who place the event at the latest
period, distinctly make it appear that such a thing
had not occurred before, saying that the act should
be cited, in memorial of the devotion to their lord
thus manifested, “ wheresoever this Gospel shall be
preached in the whole world.”
C. —Did Judas betray Jesus with a kiss as related
by Matthew, Mark, and Luke?
D. —John represents the matter otherwise, and
says that Jesus proclaimed himself; and with such
boldness and miraculous power, that the armed party,
who came to take him, retreated “backward and fell to
the ground” (xviii. 5, 6.)
C. —What did Judas do with the wages of his
treachery ?
D. —Matthew (xxvii. 3-8) says that he cast the
money down in the temple, whereupon the chief
priests and elders bought a field with it.
C. —May that be accepted?
D. —No ; in the Acts (i. 18) it is stated that Judas
himself bought the field.
C. —What became of Judas afterwards ?
D. —He went out of the temple, according to
Matthew, and hanged himself.
�A Critical Catechism.
9
C. —What is the statement in the Acts?
D. —That, after purchasing the field, he “ fell
headlong, and burst asunder in the midst,” apparently
coming to his end by some accident.
C. —Why was the field in question called “ The
field of blood ” ?
D. —The accounts differ. Matthew says it was
in commemoration of the blood of Jesus, with the
price of which it had been bought; while in the
Acts it is stated that it acquired its name “ inas
much ” as the blood of Judas, when he met with his
■accident, was shed there.
C. —How is John borne out in his statement that
Jesus suffered death on the day of the paschal
offering (xviii. 28 ; xix. 14) ?
D. —Not at all. The other evangelists declare
that he “ ate the passover ” with his disciples on
the evening before his death (Matt. xxvi. 17-19 ;
Mark xiv. 12-16 ; Luke xxii. 7-15), differing thus
with John’s allegation that this “ last supper” was
held the day “before the feast of the passover ” (xiii.
1, 2, 29).
G.—John (xix. 25-27) represents that when he
and Mary, the mother of Jesus, with Mary Magda
lene and another female, were standing by the cross,
Jesus committed him and Mary to each other. Is
this borne out by the other accounts ?
D.—It is not. None of the other evangelists
speak of the presence of the mother of Jesus on the
occasion of the crucifixion, and Matthew (xxvii.
55, 56) and Mark (xv. 40, 41) state that Mary
Magdalene and the other women, who were there,
were not near the cross, but were “looking on afar off.”
C.—John (xix. 31-34) says that Pilate, in order
that the bodies of Jesus and of the thieves who were
crucified with him might be taken down from the
crosses before the approaching sabbath-day, directed
the soldiers to put an end to them by breaking their
�IO
A Critical Catechism.
legs, but that Jesus being found already dead, one
of the soldiers contented himself with thrusting a
spear into his side. Do the other evangelists sup
port this representation ?
1).—They do not. They say nothing of such a
circumstance, which was of a character not possibly to
be overlooked. Luke (xxiv. 39, 40) has it that Jesus,
after his resurrection, pointed to the wounds on his
hands and feet, not indicating any on his side.
Mark (xv. 42-45) observes that when permission was
asked of Pilate, in the evening, to bury Jesus, he
was surprised to hear that he was already dead.
Pilate, consequently, could not have issued the order to
put the criminals to death by the violent means at
tributed to him by John, and on which he builds
his statement as to the wound on the side.
C. —Was it the case that three females visited the
tomb of Jesus, as stated by Mark (xvi. 1,2)*?
D. —No. Matthew (xxviii. 1) says there were but
two.
G.-—Can two then have been the number ?
D.—No. John (xx. 1) says there was but one.
C. —May we hold to this, that there was but one ?
D. —No; for Luke (xxiii. 55 ; xxiv. 10) declares
there were a considerable number.
C. —May it be believed that Jesus first showed him
self in resurrection life to two females, as represented
by Matthew (xxviii. 1,9)?
D. —No. Mark (xvi. 9) says that he showed him
self but to one.
C. —Is that believable ?
D. —No. Luke (xxiv. 23, 24) shows that the wo
men had merely had “ a vision of angels,” from whom
they heard that Jesus “ was alive.” On this some
men went to the tomb, “ but him they saw not.”
Up to this time, therefore, which was late in the day
(ver. 29), Jesus had been seen by no one.
�A Critical Catechism.
11
C. —If Jesus was not first seen by women, one or
more, to whom did he first reveal himself?
D. —Luke (xxiv. 13-15, 31) has it that his first ap
pearance was to two disciples at Emmaus.
C.—Is that clear ?
£).—-No. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 5) says he was first seen
by Cephas (Peter).
C. —Where is the account of that apparition ?
D. —Nowhere.
C. —-Is the apparition to the disciples at Emmaus,
described by Luke, supported by the other evange
lists 1
D. —It is not. Matthew (xxviii. 7, 10, 16, 17)
says that after the alleged apparition to the females,
the next manifestation was to be in Galilee, and there
took place. He says nothing of the occurrence at
Emmaus, for which, in fact, he gives no room.
Neither does Mark say anything of it. John speaks
of an apparition in Galilee, of which he says, “ this
is now the third time that Jesus showed himself to
his disciples, after that he was risen from the dead ”
(xxi. 14), the first to ten persons, and the second to
eleven, having occurred in Jerusalem (xx. 19, 24, 26).
This, therefore, excludes the alleged apparition to the
two at Emmaus.
C. —Is Matthew supported in his statement (xxviii.
7, 10) that the manifestation of Jesus to his disciples
was appointed to be in Galilee ?
D. Luke declares otherwise, saying that Jesus en
joined it on them to “ tarry in the city of Jerusalem,
until endued with power from on high ” (xxiv. 49).
The Acts supports this, saying that he “ com
manded them that they should not depart from Jeru
salem, but wait for the promise of the Father,” which
promise was fulfilled fifty days afterwards at Pente
cost (i. 4 ; ii. 1-4).
C.—Is it clear that the apostles were kept thus,
for such a period, without the gift of the Holy Ghost ?
�12
A Critical Catechism.
D.-—No. John assures us that it was imparted to
them on the evening of the day of the resurrection
(xx. 22).
C. —Allowing that it is uncertain which was the
first manifestation that Jesus made of himself after
death, is it apparent which was the last occasion on
which he so showed himself ?
D. —According to the Acts (i. 3) “ he showed him
self alive after his passion by many infallible proofs,
being seen of them (the apostles) forty days.”
C. —Is that supported elsewhere ?
D. —It is not. John implies that Jesus exhibited
himself to the apostles but three times, namely, on
the day of his resurrection, eight days later, and then
at some subsequent time in Galilee (xx. 19, 26;
xxi. 14).
C. —Is that representation corroborated 1
D. —It is not. Matthew declares that Jesus ap
peared to the apostles but once in Galilee, at a
spot “ where he had appointed them,” and there
parted with them after giving them his final instruc
tions (xxviii. 16-20). Matthew thus negatives the
appearances described in Mark, Luke, and John to
have taken place in Jerusalem, and where he speaks
of one in Galilee it is in a different locality to that
described by John. John says the occurrence was
“ at the sea of Tiberias,” and Matthew on a certain
“ mountain.”
C. —How does Matthew’s statement stand the test
of examination by those of Mark and Luke.
D. —Not at all. If Jesus enjoined it on the
apostles to remain in Jerusalem for a particular pur
pose, which was fulfilled only fifty days afterwards
at Pentecost, as stated by Luke and in the Acts,
then there could have been no such appointment to
meet in Galilee as Matthew describes. Moreover,
Mark and Luke declare that on the evening of the
day of his resurrection Jesus was “received up into
�A Critical Catechism.
13
heaven,” and there assumed his appointed seat “ on
the right hand of God” (Mark xvi. 19 ; Luke xxiv.
51); so that as Galilee is at least fifty miles from
Jerusalem, or at a distance of two or three day s
journey, there was no time for the apostles to have
gone there to meet with Jesus. This statement of
the ascension by Mark and Luke also negatives
John’s accounts of a second and third manifestation,
as also all those, enduring for forty days, spoken
of in the Acts.
C. —So that Matthew disallows the apparition at
Emmaus, described by Luke, the several appearances
in Jerusalem recounted by Mark, Luke, and John,
and the meeting in Galilee declared by John; while
Mark and Luke disallow the appearance in Galilee of
which Matthew speaks, and the second and third
appearances in Jerusalem and in Galilee which we
hear of from John !
D. —It is so. Each several representation is dis
tinctly negatived by some other representation.
C. —Is Paul’s statement that Jesus “was seen of
above five hundred brethren at once” (1 Cor. xv. 6)
in any way corroborated elsewhere 1
D. —On the contrary, it is shown that no such
manifestation occurred. Peter declares that Jesus
showed himself, “ not to all the people, but unto wit
nesses chosen before of God” (Acts x. 41); that is,
not to a large promiscuous multitude, but to a select
few, namely, the apostles. Nor were there so many
as five hundred brethren to whom he could have
shown himself, for when all were gathered together
in these early days, their number was but “ about an
hundred and twenty” (Acts i. 15).
C. —According to Mark and Luke the ascension
occurred at the close of the day of the resurrection.
How does the matter appear by the accounts else
where 1
D. —According to Matthew it could not have taken
�J4
A Critical Catechism.
place until several days later, so as to give time for
the appearance in Galilee he describes. According
to John it could not have happened until ten or
twelve days later, as he mentions a second appear
ance in Jerusalem eight days after the first, and then
one in Galilee. And according to the Acts it did not
occur for forty days.
C. —Where did this great event take place ?
D. —Pursuant to Matthew from a mountain in
Galilee (xxviii. 16-20); to Mark from a house in
Jerusalem, where Jesus met with the apostles at
meat (xvi. 14-19); to Luke at Bethany (xxiv. 50);
and to the Acts from the mount of Olives (i. 9-12).
John says nothing on the subject.
C. —And yet the fact of the resurrection is an
essential point of doctrine, is it not ?
D. —So essential, that it is absolutely fatal to ques
tion it. “ He that believeth not,” said Jesus at one
of these apparitions, “ shall be damned” (Mark xvi.
16). “ If Christ be not risen,” declares Paul, “ then
is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.
Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; be
cause we have testified of God that he raised up
Christ. And if Christ be not raised, your faith is
vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which
are fallen asleep in Christ are perished” (1 Cor.
xv. 14-18).
C. —What an advantage, is it not, that these histories
have been transmitted through inspired channels, and
may therefore be accepted, without hesitation, as re
liable, notwithstanding all these irreconcileable con
tradictions 1
D. —It is so. In that faith all Christendom have
stood for now above eighteen hundred years.
Any one is at liberty to reprint or translate this Catechism.
TUKNBULL AND SPEAKS, PKINTEKS, EDINBURGH.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A critical catechism
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 14 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh. "The materials used in the following pages have been taken from 'The Bible; is it the Word of God?' (N. Trubner & Co.)" [Title page verso].
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1871?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5540
Subject
The topic of the resource
Theology
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A critical catechism), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Bible-Criticism and Interpretation
Catechisms
Conway Tracts
Doctrinal
Theology
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/8bdb6eb30f3f63857b9d63714cd36f78.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ZblJaDaSW-3s52VYEI7P8BWtprRSnRUYqNl0fGnOpKY8qtT2nQuz8bSHli2DOn3okG0YlMsEdH3Novp17mJh5KPXy4NWsL87jdhHu4Ca2dhRmEu5PM0I9PIvHl-IdazSKTxzOZr26CZWcWiqJ6p2YKnoSs5hjjGmJhSgbJc5B94Q9UnEsTn2RjEzkcI%7EvyQLTEw1bxs8RhZc8-66dFZaE0frIBxbKd4GWkd-3zD6hRSZS4JpPNdMndyUO9Y0DOen%7E6k9Fps5iTxb9BRq2sZLCA74rpipvasadAIpMrycehSX0lc97JpfdLbgl8MZFZa5aREHut9z1UegORu9rwxw3A__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
d0344e73ecdfe9fbb59b09950cf35ea9
PDF Text
Text
ct
AN ADDRESS
TO
ALL
EARNEST CHRISTIANS.
BY
T. LUMISDEN STRANGE,
LATE JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS.
AUTHOR OF “THE BIBLE, IS IT 4 THE WORD OF GOD, * ” “THE SPEAKER’S
COMMENTARY. REVISED,” “ A CRITICAL CATECHISM,” ETC.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
�AN ADDRESS
TO ALL
EARNEST CHRISTIANS.
The Christian Evidence Society maintain their posi
tion, such as it is, in seeming composure. They have
a world of their own, and abstract themselves from
what is outside their circle. They are at sea, aware
of the storm blowing around them, but prefer the
shelter of their cabins to facing the troublesome
elements. They have nailed their colours to the
masthead ; the old vessel tumbles about sadly, and
creaks in all its timbers; but it still floats, and they
trust will continue to do so. They wish not to
alarm the crew with the revelation of what is assailing
them. They keep them, therefore, battened down
under the hatches. Mr Scott and his writers habit
ually knock at their doors, but they are not to be
disturbed. His personal appeal to them, made two
years ago, has met with no attention. Mine, of April
last, remains similarly unnoticed. We appear to have
been addressing “watchmen,” such as those of old,
who are “ all dumb dogs,” and “cannot bark
and
are allowed to roam about, unscathed, like the relent
less Philistines, when the chosen people, in the time
of their first king, hid themselves in holes, conscious
�3
that they had not a weapon among them wherewith
to face the enemy.
The Christian Evidence Society are not the only
persons guilty of evading their opponents. There are
multitudes bound up in the same cause, provided also
with a host of professional standard bearers. Many
of these are continually appealed to, and in vain.
It ’ is sad, but true, that those professing to have
divine truth on their side hesitate to have it examined
by the light of the present day. With indifference
we cannot charge them. Many of them abound in
zeal, doubtless; but it is a zeal so tempered with
caution, as to be practically, on such occasions as I
speak of, inoperative. We doubt not that they would
match themselves with us were they reasonably con
fident of the results. It is just, we must conclude,
the apprehension that the issue might be otherwise
than favourable that deters them from incurring the
venture. This is neither manly nor honest. Nor
can it avert the threatening danger. In the confid
ence of the power of insubvertible truth, we advance
openly and boldly, fearing no adversaries. The day
is our own, but as yet only in the distance. We
earnestly desire to hasten the march of that enlighten
ment which has visited ourselves. We have a duty
to perform towards those still shrouded in darkness.
We should be untrue to them, as well as to ourselves,
were we to be guilty of retaining in silence the sense
we have of the prevailing error. We know its
potency, and how it enslaves the understanding and
debases the thoughts and sentiments. We know of
the miserable dominion of fear it establishes, and of
the forbidding nature of the representation it makes
to mankind at large of the author of their beings. To
be silent would be to leave the erroi' to free currency.
�4
We should be maintaining a forced indifference to its
prevalence such as we do not feel. We therefore
speak out with what power of expression we can
command. We are called destructors, and. should be
so had we no better thing to offer than the scheme
we denounce.
I have personally had considerable experience of
both elements. I lived for years upon the food
presented by the religious system I have turned from.
I thought its records came from the source of all
truth, had been uttered by instruments divinely
inspired, and contained all that was to govern me in
this life, and fit me for the life that has to come. I
fervently and undoubtingly believed, and strove to
conform myself in all respects to what was thus put
before me. And when facts and considerations, too
plain to be misunderstood, presented themselves to
disturb my faith in the sources of my dependence, I
struggled for years before the strands were severed
which bound me to my past convictions. Now I am
willing to be tested in every way by those remaining
in the position I have left, and for whom I have in
truth the deepest sympathies. If any one of them
will open a correspondence with me, he has my per
mission to probe my present faith to the utmost. I
should be glad, at the same time, if not too painful to
his feelings, to be allowed to make some searching
inquiries connected with the foundations of his frith.
Either side should be at liberty at the close of the
correspondence to publish the results.
T. L. STRANGE.
. Great Malvern,
September 1873.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
An address to all earnest Christians
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 4 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT97
Subject
The topic of the resource
Christianity
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (An address to all earnest Christians), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Christianity-Controversial Literature
Christians
Conway Tracts
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/7a301320f183fd5e99c33258f53b5789.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=wHSxLP4F3od5IfDQkLJtbi65JKZsD61i2xeOFuOHO8Uuqh%7EOYTM7mKkmH6Sa-LR%7EruNHqxwFxxic8MdgKolvHj4eGyOPLPStjKowcj8MkQQvSETMgQotN3s0t8HBbkME7eFz3pKnxO8Ob-rk%7EsrnbLh2%7EvWMg0N-c2lTkbAX05GKK3VBzDnVEstgkCkNcHySUFj%7EP1H%7EA-2pKup00cKk15xtrukDk%7E-%7EyEaUzNOtdQB4Se-N9tFzAPLLpOOPk6kdOB8ujt9eyWhv4x4b8zt27irvJ5NPNlzGg%7EttwGgDZY1LedYme649RjcW0JO6q7%7EBS3SNf4FGHIXTYcYdCYaBVA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
6a238836117898fda7d124ab5bb33e1f
PDF Text
Text
CLERICAL INTEGRITY.
BY
THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE,
AUTHOR OF “THE BIBLE; IS IT THE WORD OF GOD?” ETC.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price Threepence.
��CLERICAL INTEGRITY.
----------- ♦------------
HE Record of the 27th May, 1872, notices, with
animadversion, the
Mr
TVoysey has received encouragementof which clerical
from some
his
brethren, whose names are published among his avowed
supporters, and who retain their position in the ranks
of the Church of England, while thus manifesting their
sympathy with the free utterances of one who holds
and inculcates a line of doctrine so conflicting with that
to which they themselves stand officially committed.
No doubt the position of these gentlemen, if they are
in accord, broadly, with Mr Voysey in his views, and
that of all similarly situated, is one which every friend
to consistency must deeply lament. They profess to
fight under banners the devices on which they no
longer respect. They have to lead their followers by a
way other than along the “ old paths ” hitherto
venerated. Their trumpets give forth uncertain sounds,
or what assuredly cannot be recognized as the regimental
calls. If the freethinking laymen are out of place, who,
for the sake of appearances, swell congregations to
which in heart they do not belong, much more so are
those clergy who have habitually to enact beliefs at
violence with their real sentiments. The Record does
well to call for integrity of profession on the part of
the recognized ministers of the Church of England. It
sees no advantage in having possession of the persons
of the clergy without their operative souls: while, on
�6
Clerical Integrity.
the other side, those who feel that the inner men are
with themselves, naturally desire to see the outer men
openly associated with their convictions. No one,
therefore, is satisfied with the anomalies of a position
so false as that pointed to, while the subjects of the
disorder themselves, can scarcely find satisfaction in
the self-examination which at times must press itself
upon them.
The only cure that can be offered, where self-cure is
not effected, is to unmask the real character of therprofessions made and abused. A recent pamphlet by a
beneficed clergyman, entitled “Clerical Dishonesty,”
wherein the writer assumes that the ordination vows
pledge the utterer to nothing seriously binding on him,
is one among many evidences that such an exposition,
though dealing with much that must to most minds be
self-evident, is not a task altogether supererogatory.
The distinction between the two parties who are in
question—the orthodox anglican and the free-thinker,
is one concerning practice rather than principle. The
free-thinker avows that his belief is one not formulated
for him, but arrived at under his proper convictions.
He is under no compulsion but that of his own ex
ercised mind and conscience. The other party profess
to enjoy a like liberty, but are far from really possessing
it. There was a time when the whole Christian world
found themselves under the dominion of a priestly body,
from whom they had to accept their creed in all its
material characteristics. The mould was made for
them out of which they were to be cast, all in the same
shape. Some freer and more enlightened spirits, after
a course of centuries, objected to the thraldom and its
results. The mould they saw to be a piece of human
machinery, designed to effect conformity to other
human minds, but not securing, what was professedly
aimed at, conformity to the divine mind. That they
conceived to be exhibited in a certain book, and by
that book, and that alone, they claimed to guide their
�Clerical Integrity.
1
ways. These, accordingly, made their protest, which
in effect was, that the Bible was the sole, sufficient, and
perfect rule of faith, by which each, according to his
apprehension, was to govern himself. Nor was it com
ceded that even the Bible stood on a platform beyond
the reach of judgment. The Protestants chose to
exercise their discernment thereupon, and excepted
from its pages, as apocryphal, a considerable portion
of its hitherto received contents. Now if the move
ment represented a real freedom, the very book itself,
evidently, stood in the utmost jeopardy. The process
of excision might advance until nothing was left of
the work but its binding. There are many in fact,
at this moment, who would gladly expunge from it
much that it asserts, and who would question the
genuineness of whole sections of its writings. It
is clear that the principle avowed was one that could
not be maintained. To abide by a revealed faith, by’
something outside of human thought or experience, a
recognized vehicle for the faith was obviously necessary;
and beyond proclaiming the vehicle, and stamping it
with the signet of authority, practically it was found
necessary, also, to educe from it the creed to be followed.
All this the Church of England has done for herself in
her Articles and other formularies. The liberty to each
to shape his faith according to his convictions is gone.
The Romish mould, it is true, has been removed; but
the Anglican mould has been substituted for it.
A variety of subordinate protests and dissents have
ensued, as an inevitable consequence. Whenever the
restraint upon the convinced and dissatisfied mind be
came unbearable, and sufficient numbers joined to form
a new section, there was a departure from the parent
stock, or a split among the already divided members, as
when Protestantism came originally out of Rome. The
elements for these divisions have continually multiplied,
and several very decided offsets are now visibly ripen
ing for independence in the bosom of the original in
�8
Clerical Integrity.
stitution. The difficulty is an inherent one, never to
be surmounted. The revealed creed cannot be ascer
tained, or maintained, without descriptive bounds.
The Anglican mould has therefore been repeatedly cast
' away for the adoption of some one of the hundred
minor Protestant moulds that have appeared to approach
nearer to the ideal truth aimed at.
Some years ago a notable effort was made by some
fervent spirits to establish a basis of Christianity with
out a formal creed. I refer to those currently known
as the Plymouth Brethren, though the designation is
not one of their own adoption. They said, let com
munity of faith be our sole requisition for fellow
ship. The proposition was, however, far from realizing
an entire liberty of conscience, seeing that the faith it
self had to be defined, and the possession of it ascer
tained. Still it was the best attempt that circumstances
allowed of towards freedom of thought in the avowal of
a revealed religion. For some years this party stood
together in happy communion without a formulated
creed, but liberty of thought over the accepted vehicle
of the faith led to its unavoidable l’esult. On one im
portant subject in particular, the ascription, construc
tively, of a sinner’s position to Christ, and the con
sequent character of his alleged sufferings, independent
views in a certain quarter prevailed. From another
quarter these were denounced as heretical. And then
a fresh term of communion was introduced. One
“ Article of Religion,” if not thirty-nine, was prescribed,
and all who held the reprehended views, and even all
who tolerated those who held them, were ejected, and
.the broken fragments of the party exist to this day in
a state of irremediable disunion.
It may then be accepted for a certainty that what is
to be upheld as a revealed faith can only subsist by
means of an organized system. The book conveying
the faith has to be acknowledged, and its recognition
made sure. After which the characteristics and bounds .
�Clerical Integrity.
g
of the faith, as ascertainable out of the revelations of
the book, have to be precisely described. The work,
accounted a divine one, has, inevitably, to poise and
support itself on humanly devised props and founda
tions. Can such an unseemly partnership be’’based
upon any true reality ? Man’s portion therein is most
apparent. That attributed to the Almighty is what
has to be severely questioned. Whatever their views
on this momentous point, the clergy of the Church of
England stand bound to assert the divine origination
of the incongruous and ever-failing system.
Then there is the status of the clergyman himself.
He professes to be an ambassador for God. Is he sure
of his credentials ? Has the Divinity, who is accessible
equally to all, chosen out a select few on whom to
confer special power and obligations ? Such is in truth
the theory; but how are these elected ones separated
to their work and held together ?
Again, it is apparent, if the thing designed is
ascribable to God, the whole apparatus for its realiz
ation is palpably of man. The calling of the clergy
is ordinarily taken up at the outset of life as is
any other calling. It has its pecuniary and social
advantages, with prospective temptations, conferring
wealth, dignity, and power. Certain formulae are pre
scribed, passing which the ambassador for God comes
forth fully equipped with his human testimonials.
Whether the Divinity has complacently endorsed these
is of course a question. But, whatever his own con
sciousness may be, the individual himself has, hence
forth, and for ever, to assert his divine appointment and
heavenly mission. What a standard has he adopted
by which to test, in all sincerity, himself and his
appointed work!
And thus we really get back to Rome. The freedom
of the Protestant movement becomes swamped in the
method taken to give it realization. The articles, the
creeds, the formulated services, the organized ministry,
�io
Clerical Integrity.
are all required to ensure to the machine its appointed
action. Seeking for God in his asserted word and
work, we everywhere fall in with the human agency.
Nor is the operation attended with anything like
success. The object is to ascertain the truth as coming
from Divine revelation, and then to secure conformity
to this truth. For this purpose, all the stated defini
tions are given, and the appointed teachers tested and
banded together. And the result of all is failure.
The Church of England, in its ministers and congrega
tions, represents every shade of opinion, from the type
of Rome to the utmost bounds of liberalized Deism.
Are the tests so loosely drawn as to justify such
latitude? Judicial decisions would certainly warrant a
reply extensively in the affirmative, but will the appeal
to the conscience endorse such a conclusion, especially
in the instance of the free-thinkers ?
The author of the pamphlet on “ Clerical Honesty ”
appears to flatter himself that the bonds are of this
imperfect nature, or have been made so by the prevail
ing laxity with which they are put to use. He con
fines himself to the actual questions and answers which
occur when the candidate offers himself for ordination,
without attempting to define the tenets then supposed
to be avowed. The candidate, he thinks, may be per
mitted to express the hope that “ the Holy Ghost ” has
moved him to take up his office ; that he has been
truly called thereto “ according to the will of the Lord
Jesus Christ, and the due order of the realm; ” that
he “ unfeignedly believes all the canonical Scriptures
of the Old and New Testament,” as much, at least, as
do some of the questioners ; that he will read the same
to the assembled church, however painful it may be to
him to do so; that, “ by the help of God,” he will
“ gladly and willingly ” perform all his appointed duties,
with whatever repugnance to his mind and conscience :
that he will “fashion” his life to “the doctrine of
Christ,” “the Lord being his helper;” and that he
�Clerical Integrity.
11
will “ reverently,” and 11 with a glad mind',” obey his
clerical superiors, and conform himself to their “ godly
admonitions.”
After this follows the ordination of the priesthood,
or, as the writer prefers to read the term, the presbytery,
in which very much the same ground is gone over,
except that here the doctrine of 11 eternal salvation
through faith in Jesus Christ ” is expressly required of
him in his ministrations, and that he receives a com
mission to forgive, or refuse, forgiveness of sins, which
the writer hopes may be considered to mean no more
than transgressions against ritualistic order, “ involving
no question of morals.”
On one of these points the writer confesses
that his conscience stands wounded by the pledge to
which he has been subjected; and that is the expression
of his “unfeigned belief” in the whole of the canon
ical Scriptures. The details given of the process of
creation, for example, he has the evidence of his en
lightened senses are untrue, and there is much more,
no doubt, of that stamp, in these pages, which the
knowledge of the day must make it impossible for him
to receive. He laments, then, for himself, and his
clerical brethren, the being “ compelled to read as God’s
word what we know well God never said.” The admis
sion is an important one, and in fact concedes the whole
question. If a clergyman can surmount such a difficulty
as this, to what stretch of elasticity may he not bring
his ministrations? When can we be sure that his
belief and his tongue are in real unison ? That many
are guilty of such a compromise, in no way affects the
character of the evil, save to enhance it.
The ordination service is the Church’s safeguard for
the maintenance and promulgation of her doctrines, and
the pledges then exacted are by no means of a loose
and insufficient sort. It binds the candidate to the
whole contents of the Scriptures, not as he may choose
to understand them, but as interpreted for him by the
�i2
Clerical Integrity.
Church herself, and commits him to matters of faith at
least as difficult of acceptance as the account of the
creation, or any other of the representations made in
the record at variance with physical facts.
The service opens with the Litany, containing these
well known protestations.
“ 0 God the Son, Redeemer of the world: have
mercy upon us miserable sinners.
“ 0 God the Holy Ghost, proceeding from the
Father and the Son : have mercy upon us miserable
sinners.
“ 0 holy, blessed, and glorious Trinity, three persons
and one God: have mercy upon us miserable sinners.
“ Spare thy people whom thou hast redeemed with
thy most precious blood.
“ From the crafts and assaults of the devil; from
thy wrath, and from everlasting damnation, good Lord
deliver us.
“ By the mystery of thy holy Incarnation ; by thy
holy Nativity and Circumcision ; by thy Baptism, Fast
ing, and Temptation, good Lord deliver us.
11 By thine agony and bloody sweat; by thy cross
and passion; by thy precious Death and Burial; by
thy glorious Resurrection and Ascension; and by the
coming of Holy Ghost, good Lord deliver us.
“ Son of God : we beseech thee to hear us.
“ 0 Lamb of God : that taketh away the sins of the
world ; have mercy upon us.
“ 0 Christ, hear us.
“ Christ have mercy upon us.
“ 0 Son of David, have mercy upon us.”
The doctrine of the Trinity, the incarnation of the
second person of this triune Godhead in the form
of Jesus of Nazareth, all the circumstances associated
with his alleged birth, vicarious sacrifice, and resur
rection, are here openly paraded as the faith of the
recipient of the ordination, and of all concerned with
him in this appointed service. When he himself speaks
�Clerical Integrity.
13
of being moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon him his
office, he acknowledges the existence and functions of
the divine emanation, so designated, which is alleged to
have proceeded from the other two persons of the
Trinity, the Father and the Son. When he describes
himself to be acting “ according to the will of the Lord
Jesus Christ,” he is referring to the teacher of Nazareth,
now translated to heaven and ruling there as a divinity ;
and when he declares he will fashion his life to “ the
doctrine of Christ,” in glad submission to the admoni
tions of his seniors, he avows all that the Church
maintains to be involved in this doctrine—the con
dition in himself of a lost sinner, heir of the wrath of
God, and saved from that wrath by the outpouring of
the blood of the Nazarene teacher. He also proclaims,
through the means of the Litany, his belief in the
being, power, and attributed operations of the devil.
We have the expression here of all that characterizes
what is known as orthodoxy, and no essentially un
orthodox person can minister to such a system without
violation to his estimate of truth. The Record, justly,
and warrantably, calls upon all such to abandon their
false positions, and not to weaken the community to
the support of which they stand pledged by a fictitious
adherence. A party to an engagement is not warranted
in straining the document to free himself of his obliga
tions. He is bound to understand what is expected of
him, and to do it faithfully. Mental reservations,
undisclosed to the other side, form no part of a
genuine transaction. The Church of England has
carefully and fully announced her doctrines through an
extensive range of formularies, and they are not to be
misunderstood, in their broad features, by any intelligent
mind seeking to apprehend them. The clergyman is
engaged to propagate these doctrines, and it is im
possible that he can deflect therefrom, materially, without
being conscious of the divergence. He professes to
have been called of God to his ministrations, and has
�Clerical Integrity.
14
engaged to discharge them with unfeigned mind, gladly
and willingly. Under no other conditions would the
Church have accepted his services; and when he finds
that he cannot, with a free conscience, meet the condi
tions, the path of duty should be clear to him. He
should not flatter himself that he is doing good in the
measure that he is advancing his true sentiments. A
sermon can have little power which is contradicted,
out of the same mouth, in the liturgy. He is but
confusing truth with untruth, schooling his hearers in
subtleties, and bringing them down to his own level
of conscious inconsistency.
Great Malvern,
June 1872.
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Clerical integrity
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 14 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date of publication from KVK.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1872
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT110
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Clerical integrity), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Church of England
Clergy
Church of England
Clergy
Conway Tracts
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/7d8a6e2f0be8d06fb9fd11cc07f51039.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=G3nGAhn0MrGFdUB1MNJruWBJJ4ijGzeCEduJDLaFItQg0vMHnXv34wOayvdCLZ--Ooka0MFfSdWaU15NiasZuHfC4%7EY2a%7Ea3xaZ4FCDahuikXruAJXmvkUXtNpKeqenSkDtBPDbp5g-j8d6oHTi3Iwv19hweju9mf9cJmuNCWS3XhyFBJVaIP1-3sA5rpQlDJln1gJonrsMaPH-n3xissgBnKJ7r7kuSqW2E8h6V9dM7Qwt8ybaZ2GI3aREhiRK-O2GC5wWIod80Kj6GzxDAh6XrBpKTFHwIaUtn132t4viUJyvkGpbHMCYfYP7RpyYGAwDPdMzzAr-mhh43j9sZJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
9dda271986750c327029486a5c356463
PDF Text
Text
COMMUNION WITH GOD.
THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE,
AUTHOR OF “THE BIBLE; IS IT THE WORD OF GOD?” ETC.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Threepence.
��COMMUNION WITH GOD.
HE philosophers have of late trenched upon ground
whereupon they are ill fitted to lead the way.
Their studies, and the habits of their minds, induce
them to govern themselves by conclusions formed upon
what may be presented to their material senses, but of
any field of knowledge that may be cultivated out of
sources for which the physical perceptions afford insuf
ficient medium, they are practically unconscious. No
one need quarrel with their pursuits. They are most
useful and legitimate. What is questionable is the
assumption on their parts that there lies nothing
beyond the experiences they thus acquire. Their want
of personal comprehension of acquisitions belonging to
a sphere unapproached by them, is assuredly no evi
dence that there is no such sphere to be resorted to.
The exponent, whose observations, offered in his
paper in the Fortnightly Revi&w of August last, on the
efficacy of prayer, I have now particularly in view, is
Mr Francis Galton. The parties marshalled before him
are his fellow creatures in their various grades and con
ditions in life, and their Almighty Creator; and he
presumes to pass judgment on the possibilities of inter
course between the two, in view of a statistical inquiry
pursued by him on this and kindred subjects. The
method is one that would commend itself to the mere
philosopher. If prayer is heard and answered by the
Almighty, instances will abound, and proofs be mani
fest, and the conduct of human affairs will be materially
influenced by the existence of so potent an agency,
T
�4
Communion with God.
Sovereigns are prayed for, but they are not longer lived
than their subjects. This nation, I may observe, has
had of late years notable instances of prayer exercised
in this direction. The Prince Consort was publicly
prayed for, but died. His son, the Prince of Wales,
was prayed for, and recovered. What conclusion, Mr
Galton might have asked, is to be drawn from this con
flict of result ? Prayer, he goes on to notice, is not, as
a rule, called in by physicians for the advantage of
their patients. Professor Tyndall, wrhether seriously or
otherwise, has suggested the singling out one ward of
an hospital and praying for its inmates, watching
what might be the consequences. The nobility, Mr
Galton observes, are prayed for, but without apparent
benefit. The clergy and the missionaries, who devote
themselves to the divine service, are not endowed with
longer years than their fellows, or specially protected.
The vessels of devout sailors, or those engaged for mis
sionary expeditions, are not less subject to the perils of
the sea than other vessels. The insurance offices make
no account of prayerful constituents. The conclusion
arrived at by Mr Galton is, that however soothing and
fortifying it may be to the mind of man to suppose
himself capable of communion with his maker, evi
dences of such intercourse, as traceable through effects,
are not to be observed by such an enquirer as himself.
Are the tests that have been applied of a fairly suffi
cient nature 1 and is a bystander competent to judge of
the question ? Certainly, as tried by the standard of
the creed everywhere surrounding him, Mr Galton has
been amply justified in his method of investigation, and
in the results to which he comes. If material conse
quences are the evidence of communion with God, then
the adequate demonstration of such communion, it
must be confessed, is commonly wanting.
Let us study the Christian instructions on this sub
ject.
Is prayer to be depended upon for renovation of
�Communion with God.
5
health ? Certainly this is explicitly taught. “ Is any
sick among you ? let him call for the elders of the
church ; and let them pray over him, anointing him
with oil in the name of the Lord : and the prayer.of
faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him
up ; and if he have committed sins, they shall be for
given him. Confess your faults one to another, and
pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The
effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth
much.” Then follows the instance of Elias shutting up
the heavens for three years and a-half, and subsequently
withdrawing the bonds placed by him over nature and
bringing down the rain, prayer being his instrument on
both occasions (Jam. v. 14-18). Sickness, it will be
observed, is here represented to be a special visitation
for sin. It is so put elsewhere. When Jesus healed
the palsied man, he coupled the act with the forgive
ness of his sins ; and when he cured the impotent man
lying at the pool of Bethesda, he said to him, “ Behold,
thou art made whole ; sin no more, lest a worse thing
come unto thee.” Death itself, we are assured, only came
in by sin (Rom. v. 12), and with this change in the con
stitution of man, all other physical sufferings were, it
would appear, introduced. The pains of child-birth,
for example, were a direct consequence of the first
transgression (Gen. iii. 16), and “the whole creation,’
tainted and smitten at the fall of man, is described as
“ groaning and travailing in pain together,” waiting for
deliverance (Rom. viii. 20-22). But there is a sin for
which there is no remedy. This is the “ blasphemy
against the Holy Ghost,” in whatever form the offence
may possibly be perpetrated. For such sin there is no
forgiveness (Matt. xii. 31, 32 ; Heb. vi. 4-6 ; x. 26, 27).
Prayer then, against the consequences of this sin, is
unavailing. “ If any man see his brother sin a sin
which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give
him life for them that sin not unto death.” But should
he have committed the unpardonable blasphemy, the
�6
Communion with God.
resort to prayer in his behalf will be a vain exercise.
“ There is a sin unto death : I do not say that he shall
pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin ; and there is a
sin not unto death ” (1 John v. 16, 17).
The case of the sick has been thus instanced as a
proper subject for the intercession of prayer; but
the fact is, this power may be successfully exerted,
according to the Christian tenets, in respect of what
ever object, of an innocent sort, the desires may be
directed to. Anything, and everything, may be prayed
for, with assurance of its acquisition, provided the re
quest is made in the name of Jesus, and with faith.
“ If two of you shall agree upon earth, as touching any
thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of
my Father which is in heaven ” (Matt, xviii. 19).
“ AU things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believ
ing, ye shall receive ” (Matt. xxi. 22). “ Whatsoever
ye shall ask in my name, f/zaf will I do, that the Father
may be glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing
in my name, I will do it” (John xiv. 13, 14. See also
Matt. vii. 7 ; Mark xi. 24 ; John xv. 7, 16 ; xvi. 23,
24; 1 John iii. 22). Nor is a refusal to be put up
with. The Almighty, seemingly against his proper
judgment, is to be forced into compliance through the
wearying application of constant entreaty, as in the in
stance given of the widow with the unjust judge (Luke
xviii. 1-7).
It is easy to pledge the Almighty to a given course ;
but if he takes it not, the assertion of the pledge be
comes demonstrably presumptuous. Either Christians,
as a body, have put themselves out of the pale of
the influence of prayer, by sins that may not be
forgiven, by want of faith, or want of persistence;
or the allegation that God is on all occasions to be
controlled by prayer, has been made without war
rant. All sicknesses should, by this time, have disap
peared ; death itself should have been held in abeyance;
poverty should be unknown; wars should be impos
�Communion with God.
7
sible; the whole world should have been brought to
the faith of Jesus, if the bold promises held out in his
name had been founded on a true estimate of the divine
appointment. Mr Galton amply proves the inade
quacy of prayer in the several channels examined by
him. The economy of the world is not carried on upon
the idea that such governing power rests absolutely
with man. If prayer may be offered acceptably to the
Almighty, it must be in some method, in some direc
tion, and under some conditions, other than we have
been contemplating.
The error of both parties, the physicists and the
Christians, is the materiality with which they associate
the subject.
The physicists can do no otherwise
than confine themselves to tangible evidences, consist
ently with the limitations they impose upon themselves
in the exercise of thought. The Christians will be
little disposed to admit the justice of my imputation as
concerns their tenets, and I must explain myself
further.
We have had before us the Christian view of sick
ness and death. These, with them, are the conse
quences of moral transgression. The body suffers for
the sin of the soul. The fact itself is a challengeable
one. The exhibition is too frequent of sturdy repro
bates, and suffering saints, to support the idea that the
presence of sickness is the token of active transgression.
And it is at the period of dissolution, that moment
when sin is said to be so expressly judged, that the saintly
virtues ordinarily shine out the brightest. It is the
materiality inherent to the system that has led to this
mistaken representation. The eye of the Christian, in
his scriptures, is ever directed to tangible objects. The
visible sickness is to him the expression of the invisible
moral guilt. Then he is taught to fly, naturally, to
physical remedies for the removal of the spiritual
stains. The waters of baptism have their efficacy,
whatever that may be ; and above all, the blood of the
�8
Communion with Cod.
actual sacrifice poured out for sinners, however applied,
washes away every sin. The spiritual life, moreover, is
built up, in some inscrutable manner, with bread and
wine.
The whole scheme is of this complexion, based upon
what is material. A peculiar people are adopted as the
channel of the divine operations. God communicates
his mind through the medium of inscribed writings
committed to them. The teaching through that medium
is assigned to the Spirit of God, which for that end is pre
sented as a distinctive being, with a descriptive appella
tion, and capable of exhibition in material forms,—at one
time descending on earth as a dove, at another as “ cloven
tongues like as of fire.” Out of the peculiar people,
one particular family is selected through whom to pass
the blessing. A virgin is chosen as its special vehicle.
The Almighty subjects her to an over-shadowing of
himself, whatever this may express, on which she con
ceives, as if coupled with a human associate, and gives
birth to an incarnate god. “ Mine eyes,” exclaims the
devout Simeon, on receiving the babe in the temple,
11 have seen thy salvation.” He had before him, con
sciously, “God manifest in the flesh” (1 Tim. iii. 16).
“ That which was from the beginning, which we have
heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have
looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the word of
life ; for the life was manifested, and we have seen it ”
(1 John i. 1, 2), was thus brought into physical being.
“The Word” (Plato’s Logos) “was made flesh, and
dwelt among us” (John i. 14.) He was recognisable as
“ the image of the invisible God ” (Col. i. 15), “ the ex
press image of his person ” (Heb. i. 3). “ We know,”
it was alleged, “ that the Son of God is come.” “ This
is the true God, and eternal lifeit being, neverthe
less, here strangely added, “ Little children, keep your
selves from idols” (1 John v. 20, 21). The heathen of
old longed for the actual exhibition of the Almighty.
Drawing upon their fancies, they personified the powers
�Communion with God.
9
of nature as representing him; and in process of time,
they advanced to place him before themselves in sculp
tured imagery, and with ideal action. The Jews, bolder
in their assertions, declared that he was repeatedly seen
seated upon a heavenly throne, surrounded by attend
ants, and with every adjunct of material splendour,
such as any earthly potentate might seek to surround
himself with (Exod. xxiv. 9-11 ; 1 Kings xxii. 19;
Job i. 6 ; ii. 1 ; Isa. vi. 1-5 ; Ezek. i. 26-28; x. 1;
Dan. vii. 9. See also Gen. xxxii. 24-30 ; Exod. iii. 6 ;
xxxiii. 18-23), But it was for the Christians to debase
him to their own image, and have him visibly dwelling
with them. They introduce him as procreated on a
female, and passed out of her womb. lie is carried
through the stages of infancy, adolescence, and manhood
(Luke ii. 40), is subjected to the invasions of every descrip
tion of human infirmity and temptation (Heb. ii. 17,18 ;
iv. 15), and suffers ordinary death at the hands of those
hostile to him. When in life, he made his exhibitions
according to the materiality belonging to him. By
visible action he sought to render apparent his divinity.
His appeal was to the physical senses, healing the sick,
giving sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, speech to
the dumb, and even life to the dead. Then, desiring
to have “ eye witnesses of his majesty ” (2 Peter i. 16),
he gave some of his select followers an exhibition of
himself in glory, associated with the ancient and de
parted Moses and Elias. Finally, he inspired his
people with the sense of his godhead by manifestations
of himself after death. “ I,” he had asserted while in
life, “ am the resurrection and the life ; he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live :
and whosoever liveth and believeth in me, shall never
die ” (John xi. 25, 26). “I am the way, the truth,
and the life : no man cometh unto the Father, but by
me ” (John xiv. 6). Accordingly, after death, having
power in himself to resume his place in life (John x.
18), he reappeared to his disciples and “ showed him
�IO
Communion with God.
self alive after his passion by many infallible proofs ”
(Acts i. 3), among which he called upon them to
“ handle ” him, “ and see ” that he was no “ spirit,” but
was constituted as they were, with “ flesh and bones ”
illustrating his bodily condition by partaking of food
with them. “ Reach hither thy finger,” he said to the
incredulous Thomas, “ and behold my hands ; and reach
hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be
not faithless but believing; ” on which the convinced
sceptic acknowledges him, as what he himself professed
to be, “ his Lord and his God ” (Luke xxiv. 36-43 ;
John xx. 26, 27.) The end to be expected is the
return to earth of this incarnate divinity, to triumph
over all his enemies. He comes “ in the clouds of
heaven, with power and great glory,” attended by his
risen saints and angelic hosts. The concluding triumph
is at a great battle at Armageddon. Then he reigns on
earth for a thousand years, ruling his enemies with a
rod of iron. The picture is materialistic from the
beginning to the end.
. Such being the character of the Christian dispensa
tion, it is but in keeping therewith that the elements
of nature are conceived to be at the disposition of their
prayers, and the name of Jesus capable of magically
securing them all they ask for. The projectors of the
scheme little knew that their allegations would be sub
jected to the ordeal of the centuries which have inter
vened. They persuaded themselves, in the fervour of
their imaginations, that the Almighty had summed up
his operations in the production of Jesus, and that the
existing generation would see the close of his dealings
with mankind (Matt. x. 23 ; xvi. 27, 28; xxiv, 34).
They could boldly declare that every prayer made in the
name of Jesus should be effectual, and furthermore,
that his power of working miracles had been conferred
upon his followers, to be freely used by them in visible
demonstration of the truth of what they believed in
(Mark xvi. 17, 18, 20; John xiv. 12 ; Acts v. 12-16 ;
�Communion with God.
ri
viii. 6, 7 ; xiv. 3 ; 1 Cor. xii. 4-28 ; Heb. ii. 3, 4).
The inexorable testimony of facts has refuted the whole
of these allegations. The return of the triumphant
mediator remains still in abeyance. The prayers for the
governance, or rather disturbance, of the operations of
nature, offered in his name, are found without avail.
The believers in him are as destitute of miraculous
powers as the most open sceptics.
We must turn away from fables if we would seek a
true acquaintance with our associations with the Al
mighty, and equally must we over-pass the restricted
limits of knowledge, in the contemplation of material
phenomena merely, to which the physicists would con
fine us. In such a field each must follow his own ex
periences, and I desire to approach so deep a subject
with becoming reverence and humility.
Happily, there are few -who question the existence of
the unseen Creator, or doubt that he has given evidence
of himself in his works. It is a fair question to raise,
even in view of the posture of the physicists,—Can he
have launched into being a living and ever-working
creation, and have divided himself from all active
contact therewith ?
Has he so perfectionised the
governing laws, as to dispense with the need of his
own presence operating in them ? Have his produc
tions, in continuing themselves and repeating their
various forms, the power of evolving the first motive
energy, or pulsation of life, without causation from him ?
It seems to me irrational to suppose that such can be
the case—that the work can ever remain independent
of the workman. If the Almighty has relinquished
the control over what he has brought into existence, he
makes void, henceforth, as respects them, the purposes
of his own being ; his laws supersede and supplant
himself; he avows the finiteness of his resources in his
impotence to undertake more for the abandoned obj ects
of his creation,—conclusions which one and all contra
dict every estimate we can make of the Omnipotent
Creator.
�12
Communion with God.
I accept, then, the alternative that God is acting evermore in what he has produced. The physicists have
never been able to detect the essence of that energy or
life, which is at the root of all active operations, in or
ganized and unorganized matter. There is something
here then which exists that is beyond their methods of
research. The limits to be assigned to knowledge, as
dependent on what may be known by such means as
they pursue, cannot be marked out even by themselves.
We may overstep all their ascertainments by pointing
to what lies confessedly still beyond the reach of their
capacity of observation. And in this essential ethereal
property of life or energy, may possibly exist the point of
contact between the Creator and what he has projected
from himself in the visible objects of the creation.
We atoms in this universe he has made, have neces
sarily to conform ourselves to the established laws pre
vailing around us.
Fire must needs burn, water
drown, rocks crush what they are thrown down upon.
But- though we presume not that the laws of the crea
tion are to be subverted for our sakes, or indeed on any
account whatsoever, yet we may believe in the infini
tude of the resources of the Creator, known and un
known, to deliver us, if he pleases, in every peril, and
to satisfy every need. Nature itself, whereby I mean
God s appointed method, drives us, when in extremities,
to look for help beyond and above ourselves to him.
He has the direction of everything, and can guide it by
his will. He can influence matter, and mind, and
bring about any purposes he may decide on. To deny
this is to set up something that is outside of, or greater
than the creator. The how and the when, if ever, are
with him. Whatever happens, he steers a rightful
course, and is the unceasing controller of our destinies.
Once having committed ourselves to him, sooner or later,
should life endure, we shall feel that we have been
heard and cared for.
Then there are the deeper wants of the soul. A con-
�Communion with God.
13
sciousness of God should lead to the desire to he con
scious of his presence, so as to benefit sensibly and in
structively by his guidance. When evil thoughts spring
up within us, his restraining power, on being asked for,
is indubitably conferred, and ordinarily with a prompti
tude that is expressive of a direct answer to the appeal
made. This is an experience which each must acquire
for himself. And there is the silent admonition of the
conscience which never fails those who give ear thereto.
There is also the great discipline of life, the progress
of which none can have watched without perceiving
how consistently, intelligently, and constantly, it has
been conducted for our moral and spiritual advance
ment. Above all, there is the sense of God’s perpetual
goodness flowing round us, and embracing the whole
created universe; the assurance of our own happy
portion in the scheme of his beneficence; the feeling of
the perfection of his ways; the knowledge that all is
working to some consummate ends worthy of himself.
The mathematically adjusted bolts of the mere external
intelligence, must be withdrawn to admit of the experi
ence of this inner and truer life. If the Creator has
linked himself to his creation in the outflow and the
continued processes of life, it is irrational to suppose
that he has divided himself from the fruition of his
work,—that the cultivated soul has no access to him
who has so carefully educated and matured it to an
ever-improving comprehension of himself.
Great Malvern,
September 1872.
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�Tke following Pamphlets and Papers may be had on addressing
a letter^ enclosing the price in postage stamps to Mr THOMAS
SCO TT, No. 11, The Terrace, Farquhar Road, Upper Norwood,
IhOTLCLOH^
1
Eternal Punishment. An Examination of the Doctrines held bv th? C1Pr<™
England. By “Presbyter Anglicanus.” Price 6d
7
gy °f the CImrch of
Letter and Spirit. By a Clergyman of the Church of England. Price fid
A 1< ew Self-Contradictions of the Bible. Price Is., free by post
Against Hero-Making in Reugion. By Prof. F. W. Newman. Price 6d
Church of England. By “Presbyter Anglicanus.” Price 6d
1 he Religious Weakness of Protestantism. By Prof F W Newman Prien 7d ’ nn <• r
The Difficulties and Discouragements which attend the Study of thl Scriptures
Rv
Ttri?le Rlfi ht Rev' *K,ANCIS Hare, D.D., formerly Lord Bishop of Chichester Price 6d
7
The Chronological M eakness of Prophetic Interpretation. By a Beneficed Clfrcv
man of the Church of England.
Price Is. Id., post free
benlficed ClergyThe Church and its Reform.” A Reprint. Price Is
Orichna^Sin^CATECHISM EXAMINBD'” By Bentham. A Reprint. Price Is.
BasiTof'Tnew ReXm^i:nST?SF°KGIVENESS °* SlNS’ AND GeACE‘
Miracles and Prophecies. Price 6d.
The Church: the Pillar and Ground of the Truth. Price 6d.
Modern Orthodoxy and Modern Liberalism. Price <3d.
Ihe Gospel of the Kingdom.
By a Beneficed Clergyman.
L^ISo?Hir^EDSA
R
Mce 6d’
Price 6d
6d d-
-ith introductory Remarks. By
of Crof^rrta^Se pl7 th6 K- TH0MAS P-
A.S., &C„ Rector
Practical Remarks on 11 The Lord’s Prayer” Bv aT avmaw
Dignitary of the Chureh of England. Price fid
7 L
wul a«
*. A.
,
With Annotations by a
^"oVeTgX! Nprlc" d N” Rei“-Go™ ^d Evil. By a Clergyman of the Church
C0™r°pXeA?d\ach“TS; °r’ The H°neSt7 °f CMstian Commentators.
FKEpart~ce R RPart iGrice R 6PySaMUEL Hinds-
In Two
^te Lord Bishop of Norwich
The Evangelist and the Divine. By a Beneficed Clergyman Price Is
The Thirty-Nine Articles and the Creeds,-Their Sense and their Non-sense Bv a
Country Parson. Parts I., II., III. Price 6d each part
■ a
BiBL7”THByQProSfessol ‘fSew^n^
°N’
™ °A1W°T ReW ™
The Dean of Canerbury on Science
and
Revelation.
A Letter by M P
Price 6d
«■«a.
KSSKS1
°RpENvPE0TESTAnNTISMA Reply to the Question,
a
KX™ AKTEK DBATH?
Tree
and
Serpent Worship.
W..M,
J1?6 Author of “The Philosophy of Necessity.’ Price 6d.
Apart from Supernatural Revelation. What is the Pros
Price 6d.
By SAMUBL HinDS’ D.D., lateX-rB^hoW
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Communion with God
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 13, [1] p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Publisher's list on unnumbered page at the end. In large part a comment on a paper by Francis Galton which appeared in "Fortnightly Review of August last, on the efficacy of prayer". Article dated September 1872. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1872]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5505
Subject
The topic of the resource
God
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Communion with God), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Francis Galton
God-Attributes
Prayer
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/82a18f9a4b3235c2d4fb2ac8a85547c1.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=jGHuEQnV6bpVV%7Ekiq%7E95umyJcGLY26WSDYD30U-XsNKsg0cf4mWYME7x5aNczHZSNDczz3%7EhWnnq9wMnfb7nf-rc6B-ukc6nN0QO%7E9WgKydDWDDXmKdV5TAiEIEX89SENShITYDJMFOdZR7Apx1ftVlmsBJu5YvnFNzHL0-I5OtSDMDcdPWHtThr42XU7JscNQlo0OvE2hYZi5EG33pk-SLS5haE4uaAQgTBCC9hUaGmaT20LrKkptJgMLeyLYRGfr91vwN79mLFrF9aGxGtKrtrPj22z-DdAPB6izzKZylLfQukV7oIwB0%7EWOKtDzrLz0nSzSNM%7EkcmuKm5vVJiVw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
663419c2ec7863a7f58481d2aedc90df
PDF Text
Text
SCRIPTURE AND SCIENCE
By THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E,
1 87 6.
Price Sixpence.
��SCRIPTURE AND SCIENCE.
UMEROUS have been the attempts to make it
appear that the statements respecting the world
and its products presented in what is assumed to be the
word of God, and the facts coming to us from scientific
observation, are not at variance. At the outset of this
contest the biblical defenders made a more or less
plausible stand against the advancing knowledge bear
ing upon the subject, but as information has increased
they have been driven to new shifts to keep their
ground, or have had to retreat where the adverse testi
monies have proved too strong to be resisted. Eor
example, no one now maintains that the earth is the
centre of its associated system and is motionless, not
even revolving on its axis, while in respect of its anti
quity most biblicists are satisfied that the scripture
has to be read in some manner to allow of a period of
immeasurable duration being accorded thereto. On the
antiquity of man the battle is still maintained, though
here also some are disposed to make concessions by
giving up the integrity of the scripture genealogies.*
I have selected, to promote the examination of these
questions, the work of the late Archdeacon Pratt, en
titled “ Scripture and Science not at Variance,” as one
that has occupied its place through a good many edi
tions for nearly twenty years, and as coming from one
of recognised scientific attainments, who was at the
same time a dignitary of the church. The writer thinks
N
* The Legends of the Old Testament (Triibner & Co.), pp
186-189.
�6
Scripture and Science.
the position he has taken up so satisfactory, that, what
ever the facts yet discoverable in the realms of science,
believers in the Bible may rest assured that none can
appear to contradict the statements of the scripture.
The Archdeacon’s examination is confined to what
appears in the first eleven chapters of Genesis. His
view of the narrative of the creation is that the first
and second verses in Genesis relate to a period ante
cedent to the six days, the acts of which are described
from the third verse onwards. In this early period he
conceives all the strata of the earth were laid down,
with their fossilized deposits, till we reach the Quater
nary period in which we stand, and he holds that then
occurred the present creation which was accomplished
in six natural days. Thus the vast antiquity of the
earth and of its stocks of ancient vegetation and animals,
as demonstrated by the geologists, is admitted, while
the existence of the human race is limited to the six
thousand years traceable in Genesis.
The interruption claimed between the first and second
and the third verses of Genesis is not expressed in the
text. To the natural eye a continuous narrative is pre
sented. The first and second verses, as a prelude,
declare that “ In the beginning God created the heaven
and the earth,” and that the earth at this time was
“ without form and void,” and then we are told in what
manner he carried out his work through the six days
occupied in completing it. All that can be designated
creation was, we are to understand, embraced in these
six days. There was no creation before their occurrence,
and none subsequent thereto. This is what in the
natural .acceptation of the text we are taught in Genesis,
and this is the construction that all men put upon the
narrative till facts appeared to disturb its statements.
That in the beginning, before the occurrence of the six
days, there was a vast development of creative power
upon the earth, is a piece of information not communi
cated in the text, but arises solely, as the biblicists must
�Scripture and Science.
7
admit, from the facts ascertained by the scientists, of
which, otherwise, the Bible readers could have possessed
no knowledge. On the contrary, they would come
away, and did come away, with the conclusion that the
operations of God in connection with the earth began
on the first day the text speaks of. Nor is it con
sistent with the statement that previously the earth
was “ without form and void,” to allege that during
this prior period all those orderly strata, stored with
the remains of vegetal and animal forms, which we
see prevailing to the end of the Tertiary deposits, were
laid down upon the primeval crust. The Carboniferous
and Cretaceous sections may be particularly instanced as
occupying each its place in very distinct form, and as
teeming, the one with the remains of terrestrial vegetal,
and the other with those of marine animal life, in
prolific abundance.
The Archdeacon concludes that “ an interval of time
of untold duration ” intervened between the ancient and
the modern creations, and supports himself with the state
ment of M. D’Orbigny, “that not a single species,
either vegetable or animal, is common to the Tertiary
and the human periods/’ admitting, however, that this
is a view commonly disputed by other geologists, and
especially so by Sir C. Lyell. The fact is, in nothing
are competent observers more united than in the opinion
that the products of the earth and sea have been raised
up by continuous action, the changes effected being
graduated by the interlacing of forms with one another,
so that nowhere has there been a belt indicating ab
solute interruption of the creative processes prevailing
at any one period over the whole surface of the earth,
as the view now in question necessitates. The sections
I have just instanced, namely the Carboniferous and
Cretaceous deposits, give evidence of continuity, linking
the old with the modern operations, and showing that
there has been no such disjunction in the courses of
creation as the writer contends for. The peat bogs now
�8
Scripture and Science.
on the surface of the earth appear to be coal in embryo,
and assuredly large tracts of marine exuviae recently
found at the bottom of the Atlantic must be chalk in
embryo. The climatic changes from temperate to
tropical or arctic degrees which the earth has under
gone in remote ages, and is still undergoing, also
demonstrate the continuousness of the creative acts.
M. D’Orbigny, it is to be observed, speaks of there
having been twenty-nine creations separated from one
another by catastrophes which have swept away the
species preceding them. This goes beyond the require
ments of Genesis as interpreted by our author, and it
may be assumed that the observations on which the
statement depends were made over detached surfaces of
the earth, and do not therefore embrace its entire super
ficies. The occurrence of such partial changes or dis
ruptions to which our globe has been subjected by floods,
alterations of levels, or marked alternations of climate,
all geologists will acknowledge, but this by no means
presents us with the chaos of Genesis, for which, it is
universally allowed, the requisite marks are wanting.
It is difficult to conceive the state of things appearing
in the biblical record, as put to us by the Archdeacon,
when even the atmosphere, or ether, with which the
globe is surrounded, had in some manner to be formed
and adjusted when the new creation was undertaken.
The author, in endeavouring to support the language
of the scripture as to this atmosphere, fails to deal with
all that belongs to the representations made.
He
allows that “ the ancients conceived the heavens to be
an enormous vault of transparent solid matter, whirl
ing around the earth in diurnal revolution, and carrying
with it the stars, supposed to be fixed in its substance,”
and he strives to make it appear that the scripture
statements do not necessarily involve such an idea;
but he does not touch upon the true meaning of the
scripture phraseology, or the conditions associated with
this atmosphere, all of which imply its solidity.
�Scripture and Science.
9
The Hebrew term is rakia, which the author describes
as meaning merely an expanse, and therefore possibly an
ethereal expanse, while its true signification is something
expanded by being beaten out thin as might be a solid
substance. It is used in Isaiah xlii. 5 of the earth
which is said to have been thus “ spread forth,” and
accordingly it is rendered in the Septuagint stereoma,
and in the Vulgate firmamentum, in keeping with the
idea of solidity attaching to the atmosphere in early
times.
The uses attributed to this expanse in Genesis require
for it the element of solidity, or it could not have
divided the waters that were above it from the earth
and the waters that were below, the writer here
showing his ignorance of the mode in which rain is
generated by the free passage of exhalations from the
earth to the heavens. Consequent upon the exist
ence of the solid intervening expanse, when any pas
sage had to be effected from the heavens to the earth,
it became necessary that openings should be made
through the interposed medium. These are termed
“ doors ” (Ps. Ixxviii. 23 ; Rev. iv. 1), or “ windows ”
(Gen. vii. 11, viii. 2 ; 2 Kings vii. 2, 19 ; Isa. xxiv. 18 ;
Mai. iii. 10). The “ windows of heaven had to be
“ opened ” to let down the rain for the deluge, and
to be “ stopped,” or closed, when the rain had to be
shut off (Gen. vii. 11; viii. 2) ; “the doors of heaven”
were “opened” when manna was ‘‘rained down” to
feed the Israelites in the wilderness (Ps. lxxviii. 23) •
“ a door was opened in heaven ” to admit John to the
celestial glories which were above (Rev. iv. 1) : “ the
heavens ” were in like manner “ opened ” when “ visions
of God ” were imparted to Ezekiel (Ezek. i. 1), when
the celestial dove descended on Jesus at his baptism
(Matt. iii. 16 j Mark i. 10 ; Luke iii. 21), when “the
Son of Man standing on the right hand of God ” was
displayed to the sight of Stephen (Acts vii. 56), and
when a vessel full of four-footed beasts was “ let down”
�io
Scripture and Science.
in view of Peter (Acts x. 11) ; and John saw in
anticipation “ heaven opened ” when Jesus, as the em
bodied “ word of God,” has to come down in judgment
upon the earth, seated on a white horse (Rev. xix. 11).
This intervening expanse is also described as something
tangible that admits of being “stretched out” or
“spread out” (Job ix. 8; Isa. xlii. 5; xliv. 24; xlv. 12;
li. 13; Jer. x. 12; Zech. xii. 1), as might be a “ cur
tain” or “tent” (Ps. civ. 2; Isa. xl. 22) ; and in
the last day it is to be “folded up” as a “vesture,” and
“rolled together as a scroll,” and so removed and
“changed” (Ps. cii. 26; Isa. xxxiv. 4; Heb. i. 12 ;
Rev. vi. 14).
The formation of this substantial medium in
terposed between heaven and earth was the work
of the second day. The Archdeacon discriminates
between the various Hebrew words employed to de
note what was “ made ” or “ created,” according the
highest significancy to the term bara. This word
occurs over fifty times in the scripture, and signifies
the creation of something that before had no existence.
It is applied in the first verse of.Genesis to what was
done “ in the beginning,” which the writer contends
was the primitive creation, and it is equally applied to
objects of the last or modern creation, which he distin
guishes as belonging to the “human period.”. Por
instance, it is employed to designate the creation. of
man, of all the animal tribes, and in fact of everything
made during the six days (Gen. i. 27 ; ii. 3; v. 2 ;
vi. 7), and it is specially used in regard to the expanse
or firmament with which we are now occupied (Isa.
xlii. 5). It is apparent thus, according to the writer of
Genesis, as interpreted by the Archdeacon, that this
expanse, or as we now know it to be, ethereal space, had
no existence during the pre-human period, and we
have to understand, how we may, in what manner the
teeming products, vegetal and animal, of the prior
period, whose fossilized remains give evidence that they
�Scripture and Science.
if
were constituted as the life forms now on earth, re
quiring air to support their vitalities, could have
existed without the surrounding ether.
The conversion of the “ days ” of Genesis into ages,
while meeting one difficulty, involves others which are
fatal to this theory. The period, whatever it was,
embraced divisions that represented the occurrence
therein of “ western light ” and “early dawn,” which
the translators recognize as meaning “ evening” and
“morning,” It consisted thus of what we know as
night and day ushered in by the “ western light ” and
the “early dawn.” The third age gave forth seed
bearing herbs and fruit-bearing trees. How was this
to be accomplished without the presence and influence
of the sun which was not “ made ” till the introduction
of the fourth age ? How could plants exist with the
long-sustained alternations of darkness and light in the
ages thus constituted ? During the half age of sunlight
the earth and its vegetable contents would be burnt up
by the continuous heat, and the terrestrial animals
would perish from lack of food. During the supposed
half age of darkness, how could the animals obtain
the constant supplies they need every few hours for
their sustenance ; and are we to conceive the sparrow,
through this long period, perched in repose upon one
leg with its head under its wing ? When the division
of night and day is represented by ages, what meaning
are we to attach to the ordinance that the heavenly
bodies were to “rule over” the “day” and “night,”
“dividing the light from the darkness” as now
effected? We have moreover presented to us the
serious disturbance of geologic order in the existence
of the terrestrial seed and fruit-bearing plants, with an
age intervening, before marine products were created.
The Archdeacon reasons against this class of interpre
ters, disputing the conclusions of Miller, M‘Caul,
Dawson, M‘Causland, and Warington, and supporting
himself on his side with the names of Chalmers, Buck
�12
Scripture and Science.
land, and Sedgwick. Thus the doctors differ, and the
simple student of nature finds them resorting to forced
interpretations and violent assumptions, not warranted
by the text, to free the scripture statements from the
pressure of the realities which, to the natural mind,
ever defeat the asserted revelation.
However the days of Genesis are to be estimated, all
agree that with the formation of man on the sixth day
the acts of creation ended. The Creator “rested” from
his labours, whatever he had designed to do having
been accomplished. People appear to forget the para
sitical growths which infest all organized objects, plants,
and animals. “The human body,” the last of the
forms produced in the days in question, Mr Herbert
Spencer notices is “ the habitat of parasites, internal
and external, animal and vegetal, numbering, if all
were set down, some two or three dozen species, sundry
of which are peculiar to man.” These must have been
introduced after the supposed rest set in. If there
were no men, observes Professor Huxley, there would
be no tape worms. The course of creation consequently
did not end with the production of man. But in fact
there could be no such rest as has been declared, the
maintenance of all things depending on the ever active
sustaining and directing power of him who made them.
No atom in creation is ever at rest, every form is under
going continual change, assimilating what is appropri
ate to it, and advancing or receding and waning under
a constant process of development or decay, and as it
decomposes fresh forms are built up out of its consti
tuents. Can such operations be carried on without the
agency of the constructor of all things ? Has matter
independent capacity to enter into combinations, the
divine ruler refraining from all interference as not re
quired to regulate the results 1 This position biblicists
cannot possibly admit. If “ in him we live and move,
and have our being,” there can be no such cessation of
agency on his part to constitute the rest imputed to
�Scripture and Science.
13
him. It is one ignorant of the processes of nature
going on around us who makes the assertion.
We are told that “by one man sin entered into the
world and death by sin.” Death is hence said to have
been introduced into this creation through the trans
gression of Adam. The remedy appointed is a new
creation, ’wrought out in Christ, in substitution for that
thus tainted and under judgment. The first Adam in
this manner becomes displaced by Jesus, who is
exhibited as the head of the new order of things.
“ The whole creation,” it is said, “ groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now,” waiting for the
deliverance; upon which there is to be “no more
curse,” and “ no more death.” Thus death is brought
in and removed according to the scripture account. It
was the penalty for sin, and disappears when sin no
/ more prevails. Butin the ages prior to man myriads of
animals passed away through subjection to death, and it
is apparent that death is due to an universal law applic
able to all terrestrial fife, and has not been brought into
the world at the particular time, and under the special
circumstances, which the biblical doctrine asserts; and
with the dispersion of the asserted cause of death the pro
vided remedy for death is equally made void. The Arch
deacon allows the feature of the extinct animals to present
“ a formidable difficulty,” and from it he endeavours to
escape by the supposition that man, as originally con
stituted, was exceptionally organized, so as not to be
liable to that end of his physical being which overtakes
plants and animals, and now man himself, as by an
-apparent universal law. The writer confesses that “no
doubt, while ignorant of the fact which the book of
nature reveals, we should conclude from the Apostle’s
words that it was the sin of Adam that had brought
death upon the irrational as well as the rational
creation.” This, he says, is an instance where “ science
comes to our aid to correct the impressions we gather
from scripture,” a result which the students of nature
will of course fully appreciate.
�14
Scripture and Science.
Archdeacon Pratt examines various other matters in
respect of which the scripture statements are ordinarily
called in question on the basis of being at variance with
facts in nature scientifically ascertained, such as the
form and motion of the earth, its antiquity, the
unity of the human race, the common origin of
languages, Hindu and Chinese astronomical calculations,
creation in specific centres, and the phenomenon of the
deluge, reviewing various well-known works touching on
these subjects, namely, Bunsen’s “Egypt’s place in
Ancient History,” Lyell’s “Antiquity of Man,” Dar
win’s “ Origin of Species,” Huxley on the “ Physical
Basis of Life,” and “Man’s Place in Nature,” and
Bishop Colenso on the “ Pentateuch.” Over this well
trodden ground it is not necessary that I should con
duct my readers. I will endeavour, preferably, to meet
the Archdeacon’s challenge that there is nothing possibly
obtainable from natural sources, as observable scienti
fically, beyond what he has treated of, that can prove
at variance with the scripture representations. I have
met him in regard to the earth’s antiquity, showing
that if the subject-matter of the first and second verses
of Genesis relates to that of the verses that follow, the
ancient deposits, stocked with vegetal and animal re
mains, now known of, contradict the idea derivable
from Genesis that the first day of creation occurred
about 6000 years ago. I will now occupy myself, on
grounds hitherto little discussed or understood, with the
time that man may be shown to have been on the earth,
to which the like limit of the 6000 years is commonly
assigned, a position attaching to the Bible statements
from which there seems to be no fair means of
escape.
It is a well ascertained fact that there have been
very marked alterations of temperature upon the
earth, the same region having been visited, for lengthened
periods, with a climate that was at one time tropical, at
�Scripture and Science.
15
another temperate, and at another polar. Europe has
at present a temperate climate, but its coal fields, which
occur in all directions, demonstrate that it had formerly
a degree of warmth equal to the production of tropical
plant growth, and the glacial boulders scattered over
its surface prove that it has also been under the
domination of ice. The fossilized remains of its animals
afford the like indications. When the climate was
temperate, the ox, deer, boar, horse, bear, fox, badger,
weasel, otter, lynx, and beaver possessed the land;
when tropical, the elephant, lion, tiger, hyena,
rhinoceros, and hippopotamus; and when arctic, the
alpine hare, reindeer, musk sheep, woolly mammoth, and
woolly rhinoceros. Melville Island, one of the coldest
places visited by arctic explorers, has coal deposits, and
marks of glaciers have been observed in Europe to about
50°, and in America as far as 31°, north latitude, and
similar signs prove their prevalence within the tropics
in India and Africa.
The indications of glaciers are of a well recognized
order. From some ill understood cause, these ice
formations are subject to a slow, constant movement
upon the earth’s surface, and in their progress they
leave behind them indubitable signs of their passage.
The first is till, or a stiff clay, they grind up as they
move along. This has been found in places to a thick
ness of a hundred feet and upwards, proving the
density and mighty weight of the moving ice deposits.
Another evidence of the passage of glaciers is the
scorings on the rocks over which they have passed.
The till carries with it hard pieces of rock which are
themselves thus scored, and they act as ice chisels,
graving the rocks below along which they are grated.
These marks of scoring run necessarily all in the same
direction, and demonstrate the agency by which they
have been effected.
A third evidence is the occurrence of erratic boulders.
When the lower surfaces of the land are covered with
�i6
Scripture and Science.
a thick coating of ice, the mountain tops standing above
the icy plain are subjected to extreme cold which
splinters off from them pieces of rock, often of consider
able size, and these fragments, falling on the ice below,
travel with it and are deposited wherever the ice finally
disappears. In Scotland, Professor Geikie* informs us,
they are to be traced from the Highlands to the Pent
land Hills, from fifty to eighty miles off, to the lowlying parts of Fife, to the Lammermuir Hills, and
onwards to Strathallan, the Ochil Hills, and the vale of
the Forth, and they are found also in the valleys of the
Clyde and the Irvine. They are met with on the
slopes of the Jura, borne thither from the adjacent
Alps. In India I have seen them on the high plains
of Bellary, eastward of the great range of mountains
running from Bombay to Cape Comorin, and on the
opposite side westward a few miles out at sea off the
coast of Malabar, where they bear the name of the
Sacrifice Rocks, the distances from the mountains being
some hundred and fifty miles in one direction, and fifty
in the other. A correspondent of mine, a scientific
observer, has seen them strewed over the table-land of
Mysore and the lower level of Chittoor where they lay
“ scattered over a grassy plain extending for many
miles/’ this latter region being some 250 miles from
the mountains; and he observed one on St Thomas’s
Mount, near Madras, which must have travelled thither
more than 300 miles. Du Chaillu gives testimony to
the existence of these boulders in equatorial Africa,
which is the more interesting as coming from one who,
while recording the phenomenon, was wholly unable to
account for it. He says, “Not far from Mokenga there
was a remarkable and very large boulder of granite
perched by itself at the top of a hill. It must have
been transported there by some external force, but
what this was I cannot undertake to say. I thought
it possible that it might have been a true boulder
* The, (treat Ice A ge.
�Scripture and Science.
17
transported, by a glacier, like those so abundant in
northern latitudes. . . . Whilst I am on the subject of
boulders and signs of glaciers, I may as well mention
that, when crossing the hilly country from Obindji to
Ashera-land, my attention was drawn to distinct traces
of grooves on the surface of several of the blocks which
there lie strewed about on the tops and declivities of
the hills. I am aware how preposterous it seems to
suppose that the same movements of ice which have
modified the surface of the land in northern countries
can have taken place here under the equator, but I
think it only proper to relate what I saw with my own
eyes.”* The boulders here in question must have
travelled hundreds of miles from the central mountain
region. These ice-borne masses are sometimes of vast
dimensions. Thegreat rock, estimated to weigh 1500 tons,
which forms the pedestal of the statue of Peter the Great,
is one of them. The Needle Mountain in Dauphiny,
measuring 2000 paces in circumference at its base, is
supposed to be another. Others measure 40 feet by 50,
and there are estimates specified of cubic contents of
some running from 1200 to 2250, 10,296, and 27,000
cubic feet, and of weights ranging from 680 to 2310 and
5400 tons. There is one in Sutton Common, Craven,
of about fifty yards in circumference and ten yards in
height, and those I saw off the coast of Malabar werelarge blocks of the size of ordinary buildings.
A fourth sign of glaciers are the moraines, or rubbish
heaps, which have been thrown out laterally in the
onward course of the ice. The moraines of past times
appearing in the Alps denote the passage of glaciers of
immense magnitude, compared with which those of the
present day are mere pigmies. In Canada the ice has
left a bed of drift from 500 to 800 feet in depth.
In hilly regions the depth which the ice has
attained may be estimated. In Scotland the till has
been seen at heights of 2300 feet, and the stones* A Journey to Asliango-land, 1867, pp. 292-294.
�18
Scripture and Science.
embedded therein have left their marks upon hill-tops
to elevations of 3500 feet. The erratic boulders have
been met with there at all levels up to 3000 feet. On
the Jura they lie to the height of 3450 feet above the
sea. Norway has been under the pressure of ice
estimated at a thickness of 6000 or 7000 feet, and in
Connecticut it has been supposed to have attained in
places that of 6000 to 8000 feet. When the ice
coatings terminate in the ocean, masses are broken off
by the action of the water and are sent adrift as ice
bergs, and some of these are of stupendous size. Capt.
Boss met with one that had stranded in 61 fathoms
of water which was supposed to weigh about thirteen
hundred millions of tons, and Dr Hayes found one to
the north of Melville Bay that was aground in water
nearly half a mile in depth, the weight of which has
been estimated at two thousand million tons. The
glaciers of polar regions are considered to be from
3000 to 5000 feet in thickness. The vast area of
Greenland, containing 750,000 square miles, is, with
the exception of a little strip on its western shore,
covered with ice. The antarctic continent is similarly
buried under ice. Sir J. Ross sailed for 450 miles
along its precipitous cliff of ice, which rose in places
180 feet above the water. From all these indications
Prof. Geikie concludes that Scotland and the neigh
bourhood of the Jura must have been under the
pressure of ice 3000 feet thick. The contiguous
countries were of course similarly circumstanced. It
must have taken long ages to accumulate and disperse
such vast deposits, and Sir Charles Lyell raises the
assumption that glacial epochs are to be measured
by hundreds of thousands of years.
The visitations of the ice have been frequent, and
between them a warm climature prevailed. Professor
Geikie informs us that deposits of glacial till are found
intercalated with stratified beds of sand and clay, these
beds varying in thickness from twenty to forty feet,
�Scripture and Science.
19
and containing layers of peat and other vegetable re
mains, with bones of the extinct ox, Irish elk, horse,
reindeer, and mammoth. Borings at the estuary of the
Forth have disclosed four several deposits of till with
stones, divided from each other by intervening beds of
sand. Similar evidences occur in England, Scandi
navia, and North America. Professor Newbury has
described the occurrence of a regular forest-bed, inter
calated among true glacial deposits, with bones of the
elephant, mastodon, and great extinct beaver. Professor
Geikie comes to the conclusion that there have been
similar alternations of climate through all the older
deposits, as low down as the Silurian beds. Mr
Groll says there is evidence of at least three ice periods
prevailing during the deposition of the Tertiary forma
tions, and he says there are marks of their occurrence
• in the Cretaceous and Permian deposits. Professor
Ramsay considers that there are ice-borne boulder
beds in the Old Red Sandstone of Scotland and the
North of England, as also in the Permian strata. Mr
Milton informs us of such boulders being found in
mines, at the depth of seventy-four fathoms or four
hundred and forty-four feet below the surface. The coal
formations indicate the like changes. “ Every foot of
thickness of pure bituminous coal,” observes Professor
Huxley, “ implies the quiet growth and fall of at least
fifty generations of Sigillariae, and therefore an undis
turbed condition of forest growth through many cen
turies.” The coal seams are separated from one another
by intervening beds of shale and clay-slate, the coal being
evidence of high tropical fertility, and the shale and clay
marking absolute sterility, and thus probably repre
senting the intervention of glacial temperature. In
Coalbrookdale there are ninety such alternations; the
Saurbriicker coal, according to Humboldt, consists of
120 beds, besides many which are less than a foot
in thickness; and the Cumberland, Durham, and
Northumberland coalfield has 147 different strata, the
�20
Scripture and Science.
coal alternating with limestone, sandstone, and clay
slate ; in the Hainaut (or Mons and Charleroi) basin,
says Mr Prestwich, the coal measures are 9400 feet
thick, containing 110 seams; in the Liege basin they
are of 7600 feet, with 85 seams; and in Westphalia
they are of 7200 feet, with 117 seams. The coal seams
in Melville Island and other places in the arctic circle
are evidences of alternations of climate in those parts.
Shells indicating the warmth of the Mediterranean have
been found in the Pliocene strata of England; such as
belong to Senegal occur in the Upper Miocene of
France; fossil palms and other tropical plants have been
met with in the Lower Miocene strata of Iceland; speci
mens of hazel, poplar, alder, beech, plane, and lime
appear in the Miocene of North Greenland within 12°
of the pole, Spitzbergen, the banks of the Mackenzie
Fiver, and Bank’s land; and remains of tropical palms,
and fossil fruits of the cocoanut and custard apple, with
tropical shells, are found in the Lower Eocene strata of
the Isle of Sheppey. Professor Geikie comments on
the long intervals of time necessary to have effected
these changes. “ The disappearance of a mer de glace,”
he observes, “ which in the lowlands of Scotland at
tained a thickness of nearer 3000 feet than 2000 feet,
could only be effected by a very considerable change of
climate. Nor, when one fully considers all sides of
the question, does it appear unreasonable to infer
that the comparatively mild and genial periods, of
which the inter-glacial beds are memorials, may have
endured as long as those arctic or glacial conditions
which preceded and followed them. We have a diffi
culty in conceiving of the length of time implied in the
gradual increase of that cold which, as the years went
by, eventually buried the whole country underneath one
vast mer de glace. Nor can we form any proper conception
of how long a time was needed to bring about that other
change of climate, under the influence of which, slowly
and imperceptibly, this immense sheet of frost melted
�Scripture and Science.
21
away from the lowlands and retired to the mountain
recesses. We must allow that long ages elapsed before
the warmth became such as to induce plants and ani
mals to clothe and people the land. How vast a time,
also, must have passed away ere the warmth reached
its climax, and the temperature again began to cool
down! How slowly, step by step, the ice must have
crept out from the mountain-fastnesses, chilling the air,
and forcing fauna and flora to retire before it; and
what a long succession of years must have come and
gone before the ice-sheet once more wrapped up the
hills, obliterated the valleys, and, streaming out from
the shore, usurped the bed of the shallow seas that
flowed around our island! Finally, when we consider
that such a succession of changes happened not once
only, but again and again, we cannot fail to have some
faint appreciation of the lapse of time required for
the accumulation of the till and the inter-glacial
deposits.”
Various suggestions have been offered to account for
the extremes of climate to which the earth has been
subjected. Sir Charles Lyell has thought that the
altered relations of land and water may have produced
these changes, but in so saying this eminent geologist
can scarcely have weighed all the conditions. It is
obvious that to bury a country at one time under 3,000
feet of ice, and at another to cover its surface with
a heavy growth of tropical plants, requires some far
more potent agency than the distribution of its sur
rounding waters could occasion. Professor Geikie com
bats this view. A possible change of climature incurred
in the progress of the whole solar system through space
is another idea that has been offered. That we pass in
this way through torrid and frigid regions is purely
ideal, nor is it reasonable to suppose that these should
be constantly alternating in correspondence with the
necessities of the case as marked upon the earth’s sur
face. The swaying of the poles in effecting what is
B
�22
Scripture and Science.
known as the precession of the equinoxes, is another
suggested cause. This is a circular movement, the
radius of which is commonly held to be of 23° 28',
accomplished in a period of 25,870 years. Colonel
Drayson,* in view of strengthening this agency,
maintains the radius to be of 29° 25' 47", and the
time 31,840 years. No doubt some change of climate
must be induced as the earth in this movement
alters its position relatively to the direction of the
sun’s rays, but would the variation be sufficient for *
the phenomena ? We are told, and the circumstances
appear amply to warrant the supposition, that the
glacial epochs, in the magnitude of their results,
must be measured by hundreds of thousands of years,
but here a torrid, or an arctic temperature, if thus
to be induced, would recur every 13,000, or at most
16,000 years; nor is the explanation projected as
covering the whole conditions before us. Those
who offer it aim only at changes affecting Europe
to 50°, and America to 31° north latitude, while the
reality is, though hitherto not observed or acknow
ledged, that we have to account for the equator being
covered with ice as the polar regions are at this day,
which the movement in question could not effect.
Another cause for the climatic changes proposed is the
variation in the ellipticity of the earth’s orbit. The
diameter of the ellipse is held to vary by 13 J millions
of miles, which means that the earth is at times 6J
millions of miles nearer to the sun than at others, and
a computation made by Mr Stone of the Greenwich
Observatory for Sir C. Lyell, would show that it occu
pies 515,600 years to bring the earth from one extreme
in this distance to the other. Every 1,031,200 years,
consequently, the earth is nearer or farther away from
the sun by the said 6| millions of miles, and has
travelled back again to the said extreme points. Here
we have certainly the element of time for the periodical
* The last Glacial Epoch of Geology.
�Scripture and Science.
23
climatic changes in what approaches apparent sufficiency,
but will the earth’s altered position in its orbit induce the
requisite variations of heat and cold ? Professor Geikie,
in adopting this movement as a cause of the changes of
climate that are in question, admits “that mere prox
imity to the sun will not necessarily produce a warm
season.” We see in fact that it does not do so. The
sun is not situated centrically to our orbit, and in our
annual course we are therefore at times nearer to him,
and at others more distant, and it happens that when
nearest to him it is mid-winter, and when furthest from
him mid-summer. The heads of the Himalaya and
Andes are nearer to him than their bases, but the re
sult is that the tops of these mountains are covered
with perpetual snow, while a tropical temperature rules
at their feet. This circumstance demonstrates that
atmosphere is an essential instrument in conducting
heat to the earth’s surface; when dense the heat is
freely imparted, when ratified it is dissipated. The
mere alteration therefore of the earth’s distance from
the sun as the ellipticity of its orbit is altered, would
induce no variation of climate, the change being effected
in a space void of atmospheric properties. Professor
Geikie suggests that the two movements last discussed,
namely, the precessional gyration of the earth’s poles,
and the alteration in the ellipticity of its orbit, combine
together to effect the extremes of heat and cold to which
the same parts of the earth are at different times sub
jected. It is not apparent how movements with such
vastly differing periodicities can act in unison for their
results, nor does the Professor here explain himself.
The need to make use of both these movements to
account for the phenomena in view, amounts to an
admission that singly neither of them is adequate for
the purpose. Nor would these movements disturb the
existing alternations of summer heat and winter cold,
so that the extremes of temperature would still annually
succeed each other, over the parts that are in question,
�24
Scripture and Science.
and not be maintained continuously as the exigency
requires.
The true way to account for natural phenomena
the immediate cause of which is not apparent, is to
presume that what occasions the like effects under cir
cumstances open to our observation, must be that which
has produced the same results in the instances remain
ing to be judged of. The disturbances to which the
planet Uranus was subjected led to the discovery of the
planet Neptune. It was known from the conditions of
the spheres in view that their approaches towards each
other in their courses induced such perturbations, and
this caused a search to be made for the unseen sphere
whose presence was necessary to account for the de
flections of Uranus, and thus the existence of Neptune
was brought to light. It is observed how through
atmospheric and other causes rocks and hill-sides are
worn down, and their debris cast upon the lower levels;
how these lower levels are washed away by surface
waters; how still heavier drifts are effected by fluvial
operations; and how sediments in ocean-beds or Jake
bottoms are accumulated; and we become satisfied that
the strata composing the earth’s crust, layer upon layer,
must have been brought together and deposited by
similar agencies in the past ages. The various circum
stances that are connected with the existing glaciers—
the till, the scorings of the rocks, the erratic boulders,
and the lateral moraines, where they occur, prove to us
that glaciers have occupied the land where now no ice
can hold its ground. The conclusion should follow, as
an inevitable consequence, that the conditions which
have produced and maintain the ice coatings in the
present day, must be those which produced and main
tained them when ice similarly prevailed elsewhere in
the bygone ages. That is, the conditions which have
induced the heavy coating of ice with which Greenland
is at this moment covered, are those that were present
and operated in former times when the low-lying parts
�Scripture and Science.
25
of equatorial India and Africa were buried under the
like glacial covering ; and we should be equally assured
that the circumstances which cause the growth of
tropical vegetation in the warmest portions of the globe,
are the same which brought about similar growths in
Melville Island, Baffin’s Bay, and other regions near
the pole, where coal formations, the product of such
growths, are found.
It is evident that the extremes of heat and cold wit
nessed in various places on the earth are due to the
positions of those parts relatively to the sun, his rays
falling in the warm regions vertically, or nearly so, and
in the cold regions very obliquely or for seasons not at
all. We should be prepared then to recognize the
necessity that to induce tropical growths near the pole,
and heavy domination of ice at the equator, the relative
positions of the earth and the sun must have been other
than they now are, and that there have been times
when the sun’s rays fell vertically at the poles and
obliquely at the equator.
It is necessary to apprehend in what manner the
earth undergoes that diurnal revolution which consti
tutes it a globe revolving on an axis. No one will be
prepared to deny that the power, whatever its descrip
tion, is one exerted upon it by the sun. Magnetism,
which the sun indubitably sheds upon the earth,
would effect such a movement. Baron Reichenbach
informs us that the sun’s rays will restore the power of
a weakened magnet, and have converted an iron key
into a magnet. Mr Proctor, citing General Sabine,
says that the magnetic action, connected with the
earth, varies according to the earth’s propinquity to the
sun, being intensified in both hemispheres in December
and January, when its orbit is nearest to the sun.
Magnetic disturbances or storms are now traced to solar
agency, and the aurora is also associated with the same
agency. An iron vessel will exercise a different effect
upon its compass according as it has been constructed
�26
Scripture and Science.
in the line of the magnetic poles, or north and south,
or of the magnetic equator, east and west. The vessels
have thus become magnetic according to the direction
in which they have been exposed to the sun’s influence.
Professor Tyndall notices that magnetic currents will
set a body in rotation, exercising a repulsive force
which drives the object in one direction while an
attractive force draws it round in the opposite line. A
correspondent of mine has verified these circumstances
in illustration of the sun’s operation upon the earth. He
says, “ one of Farraday’s experiments I have myself
made in model. A round ball of wood floats in water,
with an iron wire through its poles. This wire has
been made magnetic in the ordinary way, so that it has
a north and south pole. The ball and its poles now
represent the earth floating in space. By means of an
electro-magnet at some little distance from it, the ball
can be made to rotate on its axis.” Humboldt, citing
Halley, states that there are four magnetic poles on the
earth’s surface, a representation which Mr Proctor en
dorses. These are situated north and south of the
equator, at positions removed therefrom by from 70° to
75°, and lie about 80° on each side of the axis of the
earth’s rotation. There is thus a broad belt of magnet
ism reaching the earth’s surface, prevailing as far as
its spherical form will arrest the magnetic current, and
directed towards it in the line of its axis, by means of
which it may be presumed the earth’s diurnal rotation
is effected or promoted. Mr Crooke’s discovery that
light has a motive power introduces another equally
potent agency, it being apparent that as his disks revolve
in an exhausted receiver by means of the light of a
candle, so will the earth poised in space revolve under
the powerful action of the sun’s rays.
Such being the circumstances under which it may be
presumed the earth is made to rotate upon its axis,,
namely, by the means of power, magnetic and luminous,
cast upon its surface by the governing orb, the sun, in
�Scripture and Science.
17
the direction of its axis, it requires but an alteration in
this line of action to effect those great climatic changes
that have to be accounted for. If this line of action
slowly moves from its present position, passing from the
direction of the poles to that of the equator, the polar
regions become equatorial and the equatorial polar, and
as it completes its circuit these regions return to their
former conditions. Thus may be brought about all
that we have seen to have occurred upon the earth's
surface, tropical plants raised in the polar regions and
ice dominating in the equatorial, nor does it seem reason
able to assume that these effects have been induced in
any other manner.
The sun, it must be remembered, is a moving body,
liable to disturbances from other spheres outside of it,
equally as is the earth. That is, it revolves on its axis,
taking twenty-five days to effect the revolution, and it
is believed to be in progress round some very distant
centre. There are thus systems within systems belong
ing to the heavenly orbs, each under its proper govern
ance. The satellites are specially associated with the
planets that possess them, and are held circling round
their respective governors ; the planets, with their satel
lites, are similarly held circling round the sun; and the
sun, with its attendant orbs, is apparently holding a
like course round its distant governor. The planets
are liable to disturbances from the influences of the
bodies associated with them as these approach them.
The earth has various indications of experiencing such
disturbances. It is swayed at its poles, whereby the
precession of the equinoxes is effected ; this movement
is made in a nutatory or waving line; the earth's circuit
round the sun is elliptic and not circular; its position is
not centrical to this ellipse; and the diameter of the
ellipse is continually changing; furthermore, a constant
alteration in the angle of the ecliptic shows the earth
to be ever undergoing a geographical change rela
tively to its path round the sun. There is then no
�28
Scripture and Science.
improbability, but on the contrary a likelihood, that
the sun is in a similar manner affected by orbs with
which it may be associated in regions beyond our sys
tem, and some consequent disturbance to which it may
be thus subjected might alter the direction of its radiation
towards the earth in the manner contemplated as that
bringing about the climatic changes which are in question.
That astronomers have not detected such a variation
of the polar axis should not be conclusive against its
occurrence. We maybe said to be still in the infancy
of science. It is not three hundred years since G-alileo
was denounced by every astronomer in Europe for
maintaining that the earth revolved daily on its axis.
The nutation of the poles at the precessional movement
was first noticed by . Bradley two hundred and twenty
eight years ago ; the planet Uranus was discovered by
Herschel less than a hundred years ago; it is but
thirty years since Adams detected the existence of
Neptune ; and at the beginning of the current century
but seven minor planets circling between Mars and
Jupiter were known of, and their number now is found
to exceed a hundred, and is constantly being added to.
The nutation of the poles, their precessional gyration,
the variation in ellipticity of the earth’s orbit, and the
change in the earth’s position indicated by the altera
tion of the angle of the ecliptic, are all circumstances
disturbing the earth’s relative position towards the
sun which would interfere with close observation of the
movement of the polar axis that is in question. The
conditions, namely, the long maintenance of the ice
where it prevails, and of tropical heat where that
exists, necessitate that this movement should be a very
slowly executed one, and it would take long intervals,
between accurately recorded observations, to establish
such a movement. It is possible, therefore, that in the
course of time it may yet be ascertained.
I here introduce a communication received by me
in respect of the present production, from a scientific
�Scripture and Science.
29
friend to whom I am already under deep obligations for
aid in following out the theory connected with the
■changes of climature the earth has undergone, which
I have ventured to advance. He says,—
“The grand movement of the earth’s mass* originating
primarily from the sun which is here sought to he
•established to account for the climatic changes every' where evident upon its surface, cannot at the present
day be clearly proved by astronomy, inasmuch as the
change alluded to occupies or involves probably millions
of years during only one revolutionary cycle. To
•detect so slow a change by merely optical observations,
involving errors of refraction of light, in so short a
period as two or three hundred years, is not to be ex
pected. We have no certain method even at this
moment to tell within 8" or 10" what the refraction of
the air really is, and also it varies at different times,
so that to fix the precise position of any part of the
earth’s surface astronomically with sufficient accuracy
to detect the small movement referred to, would be to
imply the non-existence of all disturbing influences.
Even the parallax (the difference between the real and
apparent place) referring to any of the heavenly bodies
is by no means correctly ascertained. This of course
involves most important results. For mere approxima
tion of stellar distances it is accurate enough, but what
is now in view is an exceedingly slow motion of the
mass of the earth corresponding with that of the sun,
leaving the rotation of the two bodies still at their
natural angle—-which as far as our observations extend
has not yet been detected. To prove how easily so
small a quantity has been overlooked : in the most
ordinary observations for transit, it is usual to allow for
what is called a personal equation, that is one man
* This is not as I have expressed the suggested movement. I
take it to be an alteration of the polar axis relatively to the earth,
and not a movement of the mass of the earth relatively to the
polar axis. My correspondent concedes that the case may be as I
have stated it.
�30
Scripture and Science.
looking through the same transit instrument will not
see the sun or a star pass his centre wire at the same
instant of time which another will do with equally good
eyesight. It is therefore obviously inaccurate to cite
the merely optical measurements of astronomy as any
argument against the slow change of the earth’s surface
here asserted in unison with that of its primary the
sun. In hundreds of years hence it will probably be
detected. Several astronomers have lately hinted at the
probability of such a movement.
“ The late observations to ascertain the sun’s parallax,
or, in other words, his mean distance from the earth,
by the transit of Venus over his disc, although taken
in all parts of the globe, so far as we yet know of them,
are singularly discrepant. The French astronomers, with
first-rate instruments, make the parallax 8". 8 79. Our
own deductions are not yet all published, but several of
them show many decimals under this result. Therefore
astronomy is not to be appealed to at present in the
face of geological facts, and these being undeniable, re
main for acceptance to the full measure of their value.”
The contemplated change in the axis of rotation
involves another circumstance, the bearings of which
have to be taken into account. A globe always
revolves on its shortest axis. The earth now does
so, the diameter from pole to pole being shorter by a
little above 26|- miles than the diameter at the equator.
The crust of the earth is known to be elastic, being
subject to continual upheavals and depressions, and
especially at the equator, so that every portion of the
globe has been under water, or raised up out of the
water, becoming at one time sea bottom, and at another
dry land, and its surface, whether below or above the
water, is ordinarily undulating and diversified by high
and low levels, forming the hills and valleys which are
before us. The bulge of the earth at the equator is
attributed to the centrifugal force violently operating in
that direction as the globe whirls in space in effecting
�Scripture and Science.
31
its diurnal revolution. It follows if the axis of rotation
is varied, the equator is correspondingly varied, and the
new region becoming equatorial is subjected to the
high degree of centrifugal force exerted in that direction.
In this way there would be a constant change effected
in the form of the earth as the line of its axis of rota
tion underwent alteration, and the conditions would be
maintained of the shorter diameter in the line of the
axis, and the longer one in that of the equator.
The reasonableness of the solution offered will better
appear upon reducing the proportions of the earth to
dimensions that the mind can easily appreciate. The
crust of the earth, judging from the known stratifica
tions is supposed to measure about twenty miles. Let
this be expressed by one inch, when the earth may be
represented by a globe about thirty-three feet in
diameter. It is quite conceivable that the thin elastic
crust of such a globe would yield to the pressure
of great force continually acting at its centre, so
that its diameter in that quarter might be distended
by about an inch and a quarter, which is all that
the circumstances before us require. But as this
crust is also persistent, brittle, and fragile, the operation
could not be effected without leaving marks of the
exerted force, and these indications actually do appear.
The strata originally laid down horizontally by deposi
tion in water, are twisted and turned in every direction,
and the more so the lower down they are situated, and
in mines, whether of coal or of metals, the seams or veins
are invariably broken through, the fractures often
occasioning in the metallic mines the loss of the lode
that has to be followed up, it being difficult to discover
where the severed portion has been left. These faults,
as they are termed in mines, are sure to occur at suffi
cient depths. The process of the equatorial distention
is, it must be assumed, maintained continuously, and as
the same portion of the globe is brought repeatedly to
undergo it, it follows that the deeper we penetrate the
�32
Scripture and Science,
earth’s crust the more will there be evidence of its
disturbance. The marks of violence that the crust of
the earth exhibits, and the constant alteration effected
in its levels, are thus circumstances necessarily to have
occurred under the polar movement contemplated. The
theory offered of the change in the direction of the axis of
the earth’s rotation may hence be seen to embrace all
the conditions which it should cover, nor has any other
solution yet been proposed that can he admitted as
affording a satisfactory explanation of the observed
phenomena.
There are other features which illustrate the move
ment in question, and which at the same time afford
the means of rebutting Archdeacon Pratt’s conclusion
that there have been two distinct creations, an ancient
and a modern one, and that the latter period, having
man connected with it, is to be confined within the
limits of 6000 years. These are the cave deposits, and
especially those of Kent’s Cave, near Torquay, which I
will proceed to trace out.
The explorations in Kent’s Cave have been conducted
under the supervision of a Committee of the British
Association since the year 1865, two of the body being
the well known geologists Messrs Vivian and Pengelly,
whose reports are annually laid before the public through
the medium of the Association. In this cavern are six
distinct deposits, namely (1) of back mould forming
the surface floor of the cavern ; (2) a floor of granular
stalagmite ; (3) a stratum of red cave earth ; (4) a floor
of crystalline stalagmite ; (5) a stratum of brown rock
like breccia; (6) another floor of stalagmite. The
bottom of the cave has, in most parts of it, not yet
been reached. The soft or granular deposit of stalag
mite, forming the second in the above series, remains
intact as originally laid down; the next floor of stalag
mite, which is hard and crystalline, is in parts undis
turbed, and in parts has been broken up into large
fragments which have been in places forced through
�Scripture and Science.
33
the three superior strata, and thus sometimes exhibit
themselves at the surface floor of the cave; the rock
like breccia and the third floor of stalagmite have both
been broken up. The stalagmite formations which
have thus suffered run to several feet in thickness, in
some places to as much as twelve feet, and are thus of
great density and strength, and through all these
deposits are large blocks of the solid rock of the cavern
that have been from time to time torn from its sides
and roof. The present condition of the cavern is quite
sound, not a splinter being detached within it by the
heavy blastings that occur. The question arises, What
has led to the recurrent floors of stalagmite and to the
disruptions of the stalagmite and of the rocky lining of
the cavern ?
The stalagmite floors are formed by the dropping of
water through the limestone roof, which slowly deposits
the lime below. Something must have occurred to
have arrested the drip at the completion of one of the
floors, and to have set it free again for the formation of
another floor, and from the extent of the intervening
accumulations of cave earth or breccia, the period of the
interruption must have been a lengthened one. The
phenomenon, it is apparent, is due not to a local but a
general cause, for there are distinct floors of stalagmite
in other caverns; for example, there are two in the
Windmill Hill Cave at Brixham, also in Poole’s Cavern
Buxton, in the Caves of the Wye, and in the Trou de
la Naulette, near Dinant, in Belgium. The recurring
glacial and warm periods which visit the earth at once
account for what has happened. When the cave has
passed into the icy temperature, the drip has been frozen
up and arrested, and when it has passed into a suffi
ciently warm temperature, the drip has been let loose,
and the formation of a fresh floor of stalagmite has
ensued. The breaking up of the stalagmite floors, and
the disruption of the rocks within the cave, are just
what would occur when the cavern entered into the
�34
Scripture and Science.
equatorial region and ’became subjected to the violent
distention in that quarter effected by the centrifugal
force there in operation. The Committee who are
exploring the cavern say that some power like that of
an earthquake has been necessary to cause the disrup
tions in question, and the polar changes contemplated
would introduce just such a power. The upper floor of
stalagmite can have passed but once under the pressure
at the equator, and being soft and yielding has not
suffered in the process. Time has altered the consist
ency of the second and third floors, and made them
hard and unyielding, as is the condition of the com
pacted breccia between them ; these have been
equatorial more than once, and the pressure upon them
which twists the strata of the earth and snaps solid
beds of coal across, has sufficed to break them up. The
same cause has also splintered off the rocks within the
cavern, and left masses thereof occupying every stage of
its deposits.
Cape Farewell, or the southern point of Greenland,
stands in about 60° N. Lat., and Disco Island,
off the western coast of Greenland, in about 70°
N. Lat. The glacial line may be said to lie mid
way at about 65°.* In the entire circle, consequently,
there would be two sections at the North and
South Poles, measuring about 50 degrees each where
ice would prevail, and between them would be two
regions of warmth, temperate and tropical, measuring
about 130 degrees each. The cavern may be supposed
to have been in a position relatively to the sun corre
sponding to 65° S. Lat. on the Eastern hemisphere
when the third, or lowest floor of its stalagmite,
began to be formed, the same being completed when
the cave reached a position corresponding to 65° N.
Lat. Then it may be presumed a glacial epoch ensued,
* Capt. Bach says that the sub-soil, twenty inches below the
surface, is perpetually frozen in latitude 64° North (Narrative of
Arctic Land Expedition, p. 479-)
�Scripture and Science.
^5
and the drip was frozen up and ceased till the cave,
passing across the pole, came to be in a position
corresponding to 65° N. Lat. on the Western
hemisphere, when the drip was resumed and the
second floor formed. After that must have occurred
another glacial epoch, till 65° S. Lat. on the
Eastern hemisphere again became its position, when
the first or uppermost floor now in course of completion
began to be formed. The cave would seem thus to
have experienced two seasons during which ice domi
nated, and three (the last not yet concluded by the
measure of about 15 degrees), during which warmth,
temperate and tropical, prevailed. The animal remains,
which are found chiefly in the cave-earth intervening
between the superior and the second floors of stalag
mite, denote the passage of the cave through these
various climates, there being those of the ox, horse,
sheep, deer, hare, rabbit, pig, rat, fox, wolf, badger, bear,
and beaver to mark the prevalence of a temperate
climate, those of the hyena, elephant, lion, and rhino
ceros to show a tropical climate, and those of the rein
deer to indicate an arctic climate.
It would have been interesting had the Committee
afforded the means of judging what the periods may
have been that have been requisite for the formation of
the floors of stalagmite, and so of estimating the time that
may be occupied in effecting a complete revolution of
the polar axis. But though they have not ventured
upon any such calculation, they give us grounds of
assurance that the periods in question have been very
lengthy ones. At one spot where a former explorer
cleared away the stalagmite twenty-eight years ago, a
constant drip has left a formation, covering a few inches
only, to the thickness of writing paper. At a place
called The Crypt of Dates are inscriptions of names and
initials cut into the stalagmite by visitors, with dates
reaching back to 1618, and yet after a lapse of two
centuries and a half, in a region where the drip is un-
�36
Scripture and Science.
usually copious, and the stalagmite, consisting of the
superior and second floors, here brought together, is
above twelve feet in thickness, these letters, which it is
supposed were never more than an eighth of an inch in
depth, remain still unobliterated. At another place
called The Arcade, there is a boss of stalagmite measur
ing forty feet in circumference, and fully thirteen feet
in height, on the upper part of which is an inscription
of the year 1604, the condition of which shows that the
stalagmite “ has undergone no appreciable augmentation
of volume ” during the period of more than two and a
half centuries that has gone by. Mr Vivian, in a paper
of his on the evidences of Glacial Action in South
Devon, referring to a place in Kent’s Cave called The
Cave of Inscriptions, containing names and initials on
the stalagmite, one of which is of the year 1688, sug
gests that the rate of deposit thereupon may have been
“one-tenth of an inch” “during each one thousand
years.” He does not give the thickness of the stalag
mite at this spot, but supposing his rate may be appli
cable to the twelve feet of stalagmite at The Crypt of
Dates, the period required for that accumulated deposit
would be 1,440,000 years.
The glacial phenomena have been traced by geologists
through the Tertiary and all lower strata down to the
Silurian formation, and here in Kent’s cavern is appa
rent proof that in the modern period in which the
cavern stands have occurred two glacial epochs. Thus,
in correspondence with other abundant indications of a
like tendency, we have evidence of the continuity of
the creative processes, and that there has been no such
interruption thereof as Archdeacon Pratt calls for in
order to establish his idea that there have been two
distinct creations, an ancient and a modern one; and
the vast time that must have been occupied in forming
the stalagmite floors of the cavern, three in number,
with interruptions between the periods caused by the
domination of ice, puts an end to the supposition by
�Scripture and Science.
$7
which he is bound, that what he terms the modern
creation can possibly be brought within anything like
the limits of six thousand years.
The duration of man upon earth, hundreds of thou
sands, and it may be millions of years, beyond the
period marked out in Genesis, is also apparent from the
same quarter. The upper floor of stalagmite in Kent’s
Cave contains, with the remains of extinct animals,
paloeolithic flint implements and charred wood, and in
a portion twenty inches in depth in this deposit have
been found a human tooth and portion of a jaw-bone
containing four teeth. In the cave-earth below have
been discovered similar flint and chert instruments,
burnt bones, charred wood in great quantities, and
“ bone tools and ornaments, consisting of harpoons for
spearing fish, eyed needles or bodkins for stitching
skins together, awls, perhaps, to facilitate the passage
of the slender needle or bodkin through the tough
thick hides, pins for fastening the skins they wore, and
perforated badger’s teeth for necklaces and bracelets.”
In the breccia, below the second floor of stalagmite,
which is described to be in places upwards of twelve
feet in thickness, have been found fifty-six flint and
chert implements and flakes, together with numerous
teeth of the cave bear, five teeth and a portion of the
skull of the lion, and the jaw of a fox—the remains of
the hyena, with his coprolites, which abundantly appear
in the superior cave-earth, and the bones of the various
animals which he may have there dragged in, not
occurring in this more ancient deposit. “ A glance,” it
is said, “ at the implements from the two deposits,” (the
cave earth, and the breccia), “ shows that they are very
dissimilar. Those from the breccia are much more
rudely formed, more massive, have less symmetry of
outline, and were made by operating, not on flakes
purposely struck off from nodules of flint or chert, as
in the case of those from the cave-earth, but directly
on the nodules themselves.” A great age, the Committee
�38
Scripture and Science.
conclude, has intervened between the two eras with
their distinctive deposits, tools, and men; one particular
massive implement they specify, measuring 4'5 inches
by 3 inches, as the finest and the oldest specimen
in the breccia, and this was met with four feet down
in this very ancient and solid deposit.
The evidence for the antiquity of man afforded by
Kent’s cave is consonant to what appears in other
directions. Just such remains of men and animals
occur in other limestone caverns below their stalagmite
floors. So far back as the year 1774, human bones
and fragments of rude pottery, with bones of bears and
hyenas, were found in such a position in caves of
G-ailenreuth in Franconia ; in a similar position, under
a dense crust of stalagmite, Dr Schotte and Baron von
Schlotheim met with human bones, some of which
were eight feet under the remains of a rhinoceros, in
the caves of Kostritz in Upper Saxony; in a breccia
floor, below cave-earth and stalagmite, in the Caverne
de Chauvaux, near Namur, Belgium, Professor A.
Spring discovered five human jaw-bones, a parietal
bone, and a flint hatchet, in contact with remains
of the eland, auroch, and other animals; and in sandy
clay, three metres and a half below the second floor of
stalagmite in the Trou de la Naulette, Belgium, were
found a human jaw-bone, two teeth, and an arm-bone,
with the fragment of a reindeer horn, which had
apparently been bored by some sharp instrument.
Archdeacon Pratt, as his theory made imperative on
him, disputes the fact that vestiges of man have existed
in the Tertiary deposits, but there are certainly seem
ingly reliable statements, showing that they have there
appeared. Mr James Watson is reported to have dis
covered portions of a human skull at Altaville, near
Angelos, Calaveras county, California, in a stratum of
undisturbed Tertiary, at a depth of 130 feet, in a min
ing shaft; M. Desnoyers and the Abbe Bourgeois are
said to have found bones of the elephant and rhinoceros,
�Scripture and Science.
39
with figures of animals engraved thereon, in the upper
Pliocene strata at Prest, near Chartres; in a similar
deposit at Calle del Vento, near Savona, M. Issel, and
in the still deeper Miocene at Selles-sur-Cher (Loire-etCher) the Marquis de Vibraye, are said to have dis
covered bones in like manner exhibiting the figuresMf
animals engraved on them ; and in 1873, Mr Prank
Calvert made known, through Sir John Lubbock, that
from a cliff of the Miocene period, in the vicinity of
the Dardanelles, he extracted a fragment of the joint
of a bone of the dinotherium or mastodon, measuring
nine inches in diameter and five in thickness, with the
figure of a horned animal deeply incised thereon, and
traces of seven or eight other figures which were nearly
obliterated, as also a flint flake and some bones of
animals that had been “ fractured longitudinally,
obviously by the hand of man for the purpose of
extracting the marrow, according to the practice of
all primitive races.”
Mr Calvert concludes from
his own and other such like discoveries, that it is
“ established beyond a question that the antiquity of
man is no longer to be reckoned by thousands, but by
millions of years.”
"With the statement in Genesis, in respect of the
period when the world was formed and occupied by the
human race, thus violently overthrown, the whole
scheme of artificial religion prevailing in Christendom
falls to the ground. The history of Adam, biblically
given as that of the first man, is an essential feature in
this scheme. If he disappears, or was not the first of
the race, the tale of what happened in the garden of
Eden is made void ; and the circumstances narrated to
account for the introduction of sin into the world
becoming unreal, equally unreal must be the special
provision offered to our acceptance as made for the
sin. If we have to do away with the first Adam, it is
impossible to retain upon the scene the second Adam
who was to replace him. The latter is derived from
�4©
Scripture and Science.
“ Enos which was the son of Seth, which wTas the son
of Adam, which was the son of God,” hut if there was
no such root for man as this Adam, created hut 6000
years ago, and the family have really been in existence
hundreds of thousands, and it may be millions of years,
and have sprung from some other stock, the genealogy
proves to be a nullity, and the personage in whose
favour it has been constructed, in the position asserted
for him, becomes in like manner removed from the
field of fact. And thus knowledge, based on possession
of the actualities, always puts an end to fiction, or the
imaginative representations of the ignorant.
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Scripture and science
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 40 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. A critique of John Henry Pratt, Archbishop of Calcutta's 'Scripture and Science Now at Variance' (London, Hatchard, 1858) using evidence of glacial geology. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1876
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT187
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Scripture and science), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Religion
Science
Conway Tracts
Religion and science
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1fb1b1f454636f79af7dd1db633d69a9.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=kDzaLnTC3FQi9P41GkM2CUO7dvplzOXas7ZctyE-7F-4lM6k9H5TWfPLEi8m3uCvNKcL6j31U-Qj9fXBpgQM5ZeXVOYLO1iIKaBZDiQVifqGVyyK8vnEWLhMzgjQRHDV43Q%7Eo85qEdjLqPLkD-JcB82P1mHU4y7FPYIl23-5IzeWmWKjRErNTzivAc4x4Or%7E6-1uoLAslWfrHCjXMgzWl8Xr8qbqKUxGfmvXkz%7E7DgMKc0RJgdzri6XEqr-KXobZigyWz-m2BHQqLg5AXt4k0Lr4jeSh9ede7cSxMbQWLZkVynRz9u0L8-9R2ZIzAHHHhMF5dBGoW5F%7Er29%7E-T7zPA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b3552901809400a685bbbab35bd3c022
PDF Text
Text
THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE,
LATE A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS,
.
AND AUTHOR OF “ THE BIBLE ; IS IT THE WORD OF GOD ?" ETC.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
MOUNT PLEASANT, RAMSGATE.
Price Threepence.
.
��THE BENNETT JUDGMENT.
HE condition to which the Established Church is
gradually tending, necessarily awakens deep
anxieties in those who are interested in upholding it.
The safeguards provided to maintain its integrity, as
successively proved, are found absolutely wanting in
cohesion and strength. The great desideratum for
mankind is to bring the soul into conscious contact
with its maker, to realise the sense of his presence and
action on the mind and spirit, for the governing our
selves in the paths of rectitude and holiness. The
Church recognises a change to be wrought in man from
nature to grace, which is ecclesiastically termed regene
ration. The question of how this was to be effected
was in a manner tried in the Gorham case, and the
issue was that it is quite uncertain whether the regene
ration can be produced by applying water, in baptism,
to an infant, or has to be wrought out otherwise by influ
encing the conscience at some later period. Then,
being brought to God, it had to be judged what guid
ance he might have provided to give man an insight
into his mind and will, whereby man might direct his
ways in conformity to the divine purposes. The Bible
was offered as the all-sufficient medium. But upon in
vestigation, in the instance of the Essayists and Re
viewers, the judgment was, that it should be left to
each to decide for himself how much of the book came
from God and was indubitably true, and how much
came from man and was questionable. Furthermore
T
�4
The Bennett Judgment.
Christ being apprehended to be the medium between
God and man, it had to be ascertained in what manner
the communion between Christ and man is to be kept up.
A special service is appointed for that end, the true import
of which had to be declared. In some sense Christ
was held to be fed upon by the believer when partak
ing of the bread and wine in the Eucharistic rite. The
point raised was, whether he is only presented to him
on the occasion spiritually, or, as Mr Bennett holds, is
actually incorporated in the elements taken into his sys
tem by the recipient. The judicial result arrived at, not
so much in words as in fact, is, that however much Mr
Bennett’s doctrine is to be discountenanced, in point of
actuality, he, or any likeminded to him, is at liberty to
promulgate it in terms such as lie has employed in ex
plaining himself.
At every turn, then, of the inquiry what the views
of the Church of England really may be on any mate
rial subject, so far as depends upon judicial guidance,
the end to which we are brought is confusion. And
the reason of this is self-evident. In corning out of
Home, she carried with her so much that belonged to
Rome, that those whose sympathies are in this direction
have little difficulty in fastening the doctrines of Rome
upon her.
The Evangelical body, with folded hands and half
closed eyes, endeavour complacently to flatter them
selves that there is no such unsoundness at the core of
their beloved institution. The Record, an organ of
this party, has teemed with editorial notices and cleri
cal correspondence on the matter of the Bennett Judg
ment, but in no one instance has the essential link be
tween Rome and the Church, in the constitution of the
Eucharistic service, been touched upon. Mr Bennett’s
views are loudly denounced and repudiated, but with
out an attempt to dislocate them from those foundations
with which the Church herselfhas obviously provided him.
I hazarded a letter on this subject to the Record, in
the hope that possibly it might find admission, and
�The Bennett Judgment.
5
bring before its readers the difficulties with which the
administration of the Eucharist, as appointed in the
Church of England, is assuredly environed.. This I
now give as describing the features of the service which
X desire to bring under consideration.
To the Editor of the Record.
“ Sir,—The Bennett judgment has naturally attracted
much attention from yourself and your clerical correspond
ents. Mr Bennett had committed himself in his discourses,
to the full measure of the Popish doctrine of the divine
presence in the sacramental elements, from the moment of
their consecration. The object of his prosecution was to
disconnect the Church of England from such doctrine. The
issue, however, leaves Mr Bennett at liberty to continue
enunciating it. You and your correspondents are dissatis
fied with such a result, and consider it perilous to the
interests of the Church. Mr Ryle’s letter, in your issue
of the 28th instant, is particularly candid on this head. I
do not however see,in the efforts made through your columns
to free the Church of England of the imputed obnoxious
doctrine, that the question of what the Church’s design in
the sacramental service really may be, is fairly approached.
Permit me, therefore, to put a few propositions in your
paper, in order to elicit such explanation of this abstruse
matter as it may be considered susceptible of.
“ Some presence in the elements, beyond what belongs to
them naturally, is apparently expressed. The Catechism
declares that the partaking thereof, at ‘ the supper of the
Lord,’ is ‘ generally necessary to salvation,’ which amounts
to saying, that, in some way or other, the act ministers to
the ‘ salvation ’ of the recipient; and the explanation pro
vided is, that it affords a ‘ means whereby’ ‘an inward and
spiritual grace ’ is ‘ given,’ ‘ the body and blood of Christ ’
being, it is said, ‘ verily and indeed taken and received by
the faithful ’ through this channel. Mr Horace Noel, in
your said issue of the 28th, insists that as the body and
blood are received ‘ by a bare act of faith,’ which is ‘ an
act, not of the body, but the soul,’ there can be no question
of any such divine presence as Mr Bennett alleges in the
bodily nourishing materials. But in disallowing the possible
effect of faith as altering the conditions of matter, is Mr
Noel true to the scriptural account of the power of faith ?
�6
The Bennett Judgment.
We hear that 1 the prayer of faith shall save the sick,’ that
Elias, by earnest prayer, stayed the rain, ‘ so that it rained
not on the earth by the space of three years and six months,’
and that if there be ‘ faith as a grain of mustard seed,’ one
may ‘ remove ’ a ‘ mountain ’ ‘ hence to yonder place.’ In all
these instances faith acts upon matter, affecting the physical
circumstances of the sick man, arresting the rain clouds, and
transposing the mountain. And why may it not take effect
upon the bread and wine, as when bread was multiplied out
of nothing, and water changed to wine ?
“ The services of the Church of England seem to lead up to
such an idea. The ‘ Priest ’ has ‘ to lay his hand upon all
the bread,’ and, ‘ upon every vessel, (be it chalice or flagon,)
in which there is any wine to be consecrated ;’ ‘if the con
secrated Bread or Wine be all spent before all have com
municated, the Priest is to consecrate more; ’ ‘ when all
have communicated,’ he has to ‘reverently place upon the
Lord’s table what remaineth of the consecrated elements,
covering the same with a fair linen cloth ; ’ and, ‘ if any of
the Bread and Wine remain unconsecrated, the curate shall
have it in his own use ; but if any remain of that which was
consecrated, it shall not be carried out of the church, but
the Priest and such other of the communicants as he shall
then call unto him, shall, immediately after the blessing,
reverently eat and drink the same.’ There is evidently here
some work seen to have been wrought upon the elements,
making them to differ from what is unconsecrated. The
question is in what the difference consists, if not in the
association of the body and blood of Christ therewith.
“ It is at what is called an ‘ altar,’ or ‘ the Lord’s table,’
that the bread and wine are to be taken, and not elsewhere;
they must be dispensed by the ‘ priest ’ or ‘ minister ’ alone;
and his hand must first have carefully been passed over
them ; and when received, it must be in the posture of ‘ all
meekly kneeling.’ There is a disclaimer at the close of the
service introduced by you in your issue under notice,
in which it is disavowed that this kneeling involves an
adoration of the elements. But why the appointed altar,
the intervention of the priest, and the meek kneeling are all
enjoined, together with the ‘reverent’ replacing of the re
sidue, and the ‘reverent’ consumption thereof, on the spot,
by the communicants only, after the service is over, has in
some way to be explained, if there is no special significance
of a change wrought divinely at the time in these elements.
�The Bennett Judgment.
7
‘ ‘ I have noticed the efficacy attaching to the reception of
the bread and wine in the Catechism. The same appears in
the Communion Service itself. It is therein declared that
the communicants ‘ then spiritually eat the flesh of Christ
and drink his blood;’ that ‘then' they ‘dwell in Christ,
and Christ in them ; ’ and, contrary to Mr Noel’s theory, it
is expressly asked that their ‘sinful bodies may-be made
clean by his body,’ and their ‘souls washed through his
most precious blood.’ It is evident that the ’•then’ attaches
to the act some participation at the time of Christ, secured
to the recipient, such as does not belong to the Christian
ordinarily, and at all times ; and that his ‘ body,’ through
the material ingredient introduced into it, as well as his
soul, undergoes some actual beneficial operation. How are
the elements thus effectual if not by an incorporation of
Christ therein ; and if the Eucharistic act is simply one of
commemoration, why is the process, more than once, de
scribed as involving a ‘holy mystery’?—-I am, Sir, yours
obediently,
T. L. Strange.
Great Malvern, June 1872.”
The Editor has not lent himself to the sifting of the
question by himself or readers, which it has been
my object to promote. A feeling for truth in the
abstract can scarcely consist with the sense of truth
apprehended only in some cherished system. My
investigation must therefore be conducted independ
ently from my own point of view.
The account of the last supper in the synoptic
gospels certainly does not place the eating of the bread
and the drinking of the wine in any higher light than
that of a commemorative act. Neither was the distri
bution associated with any ceremonial. The injunction
to the disciples to use these elements in memory of
their master’s death was given in the course of conver
sation relating to various disconnected matters which
both preceded and followed it. The bread which stood
for the body given for them, and the wine which stood
for the blood shed for them, could have so stood in the
way of representation merely, and not of actuality, at
a time when, as yet, the body had not been given, and
�8
The Bennett "Judgment.
the blood had not been shed. The bread appears to
have been given to the disciples collectively, and not
to each separately and formally, as obtaining at the
dispensation of the Eucharist. That the wine was
given thus informally is evident from Luke’s phrase—
“Take this and divide it among yourselves.” There
was no exhibition of a priest dealing severally with
each participant, as if there was virtue in the reception
of the elements direct from his hand. The reprobate
Judas was present on the occasion, and there is no
note that he was excepted at this distribution. If,
after the action was over, he could dip his hand in
the dish with Jesus, as is plainly said to have been
the case, his part in the then passing sociabilities had,
it is clear, not been disturbed. There was then no
mysterious dispensation enacted from which the trans
gressors were to be carefully excluded. It is evident
that the type of the ceremonial in use in the Church of
England is not to be found in the representations of
the synoptics. It is equally evident that the model
followed is that supplied by Home. In adopting this
model, has the church avoided the significancy attach
ing to the forms as employed by Pome ? Has she
adjusted them to a mere commemorative observance ?
If so, she has been guilty of empty mummeries for
which no other object can be conceived than a delu
sive one.
Eome is not without warrant for the meaning she
has attached to the observance. The teaching of John
affords her ample support in the declaration that
Christ had to be fed upon for the sustenance of the
life of his people. “I am the bread of life,” he makes
him declare. ‘‘ Except ye eat the flesh of the son of
man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.
Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath
eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood,
dwelleth in me, and I in him.” And Paul completes
the instruction. According to him, it was an essential
�The Bennett Judgment.
9
constituent that “ the Lord’s body ” should be 11 dis
cerned” on the occasion, failing which the “unworthy”
recipient became “ guilty of the body and blood of the
Lord;” here calling up, as does Rome, the association
of a continually-recurring sacrifice in the rite ; and,
as a consequence, the guilty one became liable at once
to sickness, and even death. Putting these matters
together, we have the awe-striking dispensation in all
the purport and power attributed to it by Rome, whose
meaning ritual is unmeaningly followed by the Angli
can community.
The warranty of Rome becomes significantly strength
ened when wrn trace back the idea upon which she
works to its true parent germ. The Christian faith,
professing to be exercised on “ things not seen,” is
truly, in all its essentials, materialistic. There is the
necessity that “God” should have been made “manifest
in the flesh;” that the genius of evil should have an out
ward form, which atone time is to be bound in chains and
at another cast into the flames of hell; and that physical
blood should be provided to wash out spiritual sin. Then
the eating and drinking the flesh and the blood of
Jesus readily present themselves as absolute realities.
The feature here associated with the sacrifice of
Jesus has ever belonged to the practice of sacrifices.
In those of the Jews a portion was burnt on the altar
and went up as “ a sweet savour unto the Lord,” and
the residue was consumed by the priests, who repre
sented the people. God and man partook of the same
material feast. “The Hindu gods,” says Professor
Monier Williams, “are represented as living on the
sacrifices offered to them by human beings, and at
every sacrificial ceremonial assemble in troops eager
for their shares. In fact, sacrifice with the Hindus is
not merely expiatory or placatory; it is necessary for
the actual support of the gods” (Indian Epic Poetry,
52, note). At the Bacchanalian rites, in old times,
Mr Baring-Gould informs us, they killed a man and
partook of his flesh. This was put an end to by the
�io
The Bennett Judgment.
Senate in b.c. 186. In sacrifice, he adds, the victim
is held to be united with God. Hence sacramental
eating almost invariably accompanies the act (Origin
and Development of Religious Belief, I. 407, 411).
Positive virtue is considered to be inherent in what is
thus received into the system, as when in India tiger’s
flesh is eaten to obtain the courage of the tiger, and in
New Zealand the body of an adversary, in the belief
that all his martial valour may be thus secured to him
who eats him. John’s idea of participation in Christ
by eating his flesh and drinking his blood carries out
this superstition most completely.
The tree of life, in the garden of Eden, capable of
imparting life, represents the same sentiment that
spiritual advantages can be materialistically conveyed.
The belief is traceable to the Egyptians, who pourtray
the goddess Neith in the branches of this tree, pouring
out the water of life into the mouths of departed souls
(Sharpe’s Egypt. Myth. 66 ; Barlow on Symbols, 59).
The real source of the idea is the Soma of the Hindus,
becoming the Haoma of the Persians. This was the
juice of a plant producing, when drank, an exhilarating
effect. The gods drank this beverage. It was “ the
water of life, giving health and immortality, and pre
paring the way to heaven.” The Persians say that the
“ Haoma is the first of trees, planted by Ahura Mazda
in the fountain of life. He who drinks of its juice
never dies!” It “imparts life at the resurrection”
(Muir’s Sanskrit Texts II., 471, citing Dr Windischmann). The plant haoma is “ the symbol of the Deity
in the Zoroastrian creed.” “ It is spoken of in the
Zend-Avesta as the Word of Life, the Tree of Life, and
the source of the living water of life.” “ When con
secrated, it is regarded as the mythical body of God;
and when partaken of as a sacrament, is received as the
veritable food of eternal life. . . . The Hom (liaomd),
when consecrated to God, was regarded as God himself,
and was supposed to give life, being the person of God
eaten by man ” (Barlow on Symbols, 115-117.) The
�The Bennett ’ udgment.
J
11
Haoma-drink was the sacrament of the Zoroastrian reli
gion ; nay, more, it was the medium through which
the Deity manifested itself. It gave health and im
parted life in the resurrection. Men received the white
sap and became immortal (Dollinger’s Jew and Gentile,
I, 401, 411). The intoxicating Soma juice is an early
Aryan divinity. It was the- beverage of the gods, and
made men like them immortal (Muir’s Sansk. Texts, V.
258, 262). Soma is addressed as the god giving future
felicity. “Place me, 0 purified god, in that everlasting
and imperishable world where there is eternal light and
glory. . . . make me immortal in the world where king
Vaivasvata(Yama, the king of death, the son of Vivasvat)
lives, when in the innermost sphere of the sky” (Muir
in Journal of As. Soc. Pew Ser. I. 138). Soma, says
Dr Muir, was the Indian Bacchus (Idem, I. 135). Its
worship may be identified with that of the Greek god
Dionysus (Bacchus), who discovered and introduced to
mankind the juice of the grape for the alleviation of
their sorrows (Muir’s Sansk. Texts, V. 259, 260).
In the remarkable incident of Melchizedek meeting
Abraham and bringing him bread and wine, we have
the sacramental elements associated together. This has
the appearance of legendary matter, derived probably
from a Phoenician source, and it is introduced with no
very apparent purpose. The personage in question
comes from we know not where, and reappears no more.
He is seemingly the Sydyk of Sanchoniatho. The name
signifies “ the just man,” the adjunct Melik meaning
king. Accordingly in Hebrews ,Melchizedek is declared
to be, “ by interpretation,” the “ king of righteousness.”
Noah, it is said, “ was a just man,” whence Baber iden
tifies him with Sydyk (Mysteries of the Cabiri, 55).
Noah’s planting a vineyard, and drinking of the wine
thereof, has possibly a mythological purport. Wine
figures at the outset of the ministerial career of Jesus,
his miracle in producing it being, according to John,
the manner in which he first “ manifested his glory
and it is emblematical of his final glory. “ I will not
�12
The Bennett Judgment.
drink henceforth,” he said at his last supper, “ of this
fruit of the vine, until that day when 1 drink it new
with you in my Father’s kingdom.” The hlood is the
life of the animal. The wine, therefore, would appro
priately represent his hlood, and it is an animating or
life giving substance. The follower of Christ, as we
have seen, has “ no life in him” unless he drink it. We
appear to have in all these figures and practices the
re-embodiment of Soma, and by consequence of Bacchus.
It is singular, moreover, that the monogram of Bacchus,
which is THS or IHS, should have been adopted for
Christ (Higgin’s Celtic Druids, 128).
The other element, the bread, also bears its part in the
older mythologies. Cakes are among the offerings made
to theHindu gods from the earliest Vedic times (Taiboy’s
Wheeler’s Hist, of India from the Earliest Times, I. 11).
Rice cakes are also used at the sraddhas, or funeral
ceremonies, of the Hindus (Monier Williams’ Epic
Poetry, 38, note). The mourners offer it to the dead
and eat thereof themselves. “ Offering cakes and water,”
says the legislator of the Hindus, is “ the sacrament of
the Manes” (Institutes of Manu, iii. 70). The partak
ing of the bread and wine were connected with the
death of Jesus, which was thus to be shown forth till
he comes. In this there is some approximation to the
sraddhas. The Brahman has to present cakes of bread
to the progenitors of mankind (Manu i. 94). After
making his offerings to the household gods, the offerer
may eat what remains untouched (Manu iii. 117).
Just so the Christian priest and the communicants are
to consume the residue of the consecrated eucharistic
elements. The efficacy of the heavenly bread in gener
ating life, or creating immortal souls, is instanced in
the Ramayna, one of the great Indian epic poems.
Raja Dasaratha performed a sacrifice to obtain a son.
On this the pdya-^a, or food of the gods, was divinely
conferred upon his three wives, who, on partaking
thereof, conceived and bore four god-born sons, one of
whom was the illustrious incarnation Rama (Taiboy’s
�The Bennett Judgment.
13
Wheeler II. 20, 21; Monier Williams, 64). The early
Greeks, from so far back as the times of Cecrops, had.
consecrated loaves and cakes which were sold at the
entrance of the temples and offered to the gods (Bryant’s
Ancient Mythology, I. 371-373). Jeremiah (vii. 18;
xliv. 19), tells of cakes and drink offerings presented to
the queen of heaven. The Homeric gods had their food
as well as their liquor—their ambrosia and their nectar.
So the Israelites in the wilderness were fed with “ the
.corn of heaven,” constituting “ angels’ food” (Ps. lxxviii.
24, 25).
The doctrine of Home, maintained in the eucharistic
service, belongs thus to an ancient and very wide-spread
mythology. It has the authority of India, Persia,
Egypt, Phoenicia, and Greece. It is based upon mate
rialism—the sense that spirit can be built up with that
which nourishes the body. It is founded also upon
belief in the visible manifestation of the Deity. If
clothed upon with flesh, why not also with bread and
wine ? The Evangelicals, such as the Record represents,
clirg to the one form of the manifestation, and revolt
at the other. They ape the ceremonials of the eucharist, while disallowing what the ceremonials can alone
signify. In the conflict between truth and error they
belong to neither side. They bear a testimony against
the error, and yet foster it. With very remarkable pre
science, and much descriptive power, Dr Newman,
thirty-three years ago, has pointed to the forces between
whom the great issue has to be decided, whether reason
is to govern the human race, or superstition ; in which
struggle the Evangelicals, unfortunately, are nowhere.
“ Of Evangelical religion,” he said,—
“ we have no dread at all. ... It does not stand on en
trenched ground, or make any pretence to a position; it does
but occupy the space between contending powers, Catholic
f ruth and' Rationalism. Then, indeed, will be the stern en
counter, when two real and living principles, simple, entire,
and consistent, one in the Church, the other out of it, at
length rush upon each other, contending not for names and
�14
The Bennett Judgment.
words or half views, but for elementary notions and dis
tinctive moral characters. ... In the present day mistiness
is the mother of wisdom. A man who can set down half-adozen propositions, v’hich escape from destroying one
another only by being diluted into truisms, who can hold
the balance between opposites so skilfully as to do without
fulcrum or beam, who never enunciates a truth without
guarding himself against being supposed to exclude the con
tradictory,—who holds that Scripture is the only authority,
yet that the Church is to be deferred to, that faith only
justifies, yet that it does not justify without works, that
grace does not depend on sacraments, yet is not given with
out them,that bishops are a divine ordinance, yet those who
have them not are in the same religious condition as those
who have,—this is your safe man, and the hope of the
Church; this is what the Church is said to want, not party
men, but sensible, temperate, sober, well-judging persons to
guide it through the channel of no-meaning, between the
Scylla and Charybdis of Aye and No (The Manchester Friend,
33, 34).”
From the day that this was written to the present
time, the progress of the two opposed bodies has been
very manifest. On the one side Romanism has become
rampant, introduced into the Church of England through
the many channels which her hollow’ unguarded system
allows of. On the other, the advocates of free thought
have been advancing rapidly in knowledge, in courage,
and in numbers. Their tread is now firmly on the
ground, never to be disturbed; and in the process of
time, vre may hope and believe, the human race will be
released from the bondage of error in which dark days,
rooted in Paganism, have involved them, to recognise
in simplicity, in fulness, and in truth, the Being who
has made them, as revealed to them daily in all his un
disputed works and ways.
Great Malvern,
July, 1872.
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The Bennett judgement
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: Ramsgate
Collation: 14 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Date of publication from KVK. Reprinted from the 'Literary Churchman' and 'The Edinburgh Review', Vol. 136, No. 277. William James Early Bennett was an Anglican priest. Bennett is celebrated for having provoked the decision that the doctrine of the Real Presence is a dogma not inconsistent with the creed of the Church of England. This followed the publication of his pamphlet 'A Plea for Toleration' in the Church of England (1867) in the form of a letter to Edward Bouverie Pusey.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1872]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5538
Subject
The topic of the resource
Church of England
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The Bennett judgement), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Church of England-Doctrines
Conway Tracts
Eucharist
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/b6efdcd8a409e985794ecc7331448a1f.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=IZvJdcH2M5j-eSz1WDrkRViZmzX7JMK%7E56nuFTFKpWQZCL98sxv8BRfgz8c8WVbEx67ZpASQ32%7ErpssmyRgGJZSuvytyI9kSA9ZkDp3vxD1f3%7El4dBLWo8b6b%7ERsIQc1-h3FCFA5BFW82yNayg3zyhfy3HLPyu8QUtr8pJO7LEX0zXl2o5sTMMgPK5fVZIAu34c%7EN2WcGlb%7Ep5glecJbSgLkD%7E4IcHbriU-mwoqyY1TTOe1nVTWyu0K8LAub2Y%7EP4Pfj59nMC35TlIpzr6gSEoEkzak7Rr1hswPG779RmfzXApUa40cX2K4T3QtyStqu5PmvT5GkldhoJyPyjd4eFA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
c7cfb4ff88d55caee826c58e02230b03
PDF Text
Text
THE CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES.
BY
T. L. STRANGE.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO.
11,
THE TERRACE,
FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Sixpence.
�j-
h
i
I
�THE CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES.
N my article for this series on. “ The Portraiture ana
Mission of Jesus ” I dealt with Prebendary Row’s
book, issued at the instance of the Christian Evidence
Society, and designed to be a reply to the first portion
of the anonymous publication entitled, “ Supernatural
Religion,” which treats of the asserted Christian
miracles. I now take up the work of the Rev. W.
Sanday, also put forth in behalf of the said Society,
and offered to meet the latter portion of “ Supernatural
Religion,” which discusses the integrity of the received
gospels so far as this depends upon the supports of the
•early Christian writers.
The author of “ Supernatural Religion ” does not
advance beyond the school Fof German critics, who
make concessions in respect of the early history of
Christianity which I, for one, am not prepared to
subscribe to ; but he has done the cause of free thought
the inestimable service of putting forth his views in so
masterly and comprehensive a form as to have engaged
public attention, and thus has forced the advocates of
Christianity to leave their shelter of silence and come
forward to answer, as best they can, the representations
of an enlightened and modern adversary. Mr Sanday’s
volume is thus to be hailed by us with satisfaction,
and it occupies even a more important sphere con
nected with current pending questions, than does that
of Prebendary Row, which we have already welcomed.
Mr Sanday allows, as all must do, that there is ££ a
manifest gap between the reality and the story of”
I
�6
The Christian Evidences.
Christianity (8).* The matter to be solved, as nearly
as we can, is the extent of this gap. He also raises
the question “ What is Revelation ” ? but only to show
that this is still an unsettled term (9, 10). We have
consequently to follow him in a bare line of critical
examination, to ascertain, as far as we possibly may
at this date, of what value the Christian statements can
be held to be in the light of history, the acceptability
of Christianity turning mainly on this issue.
And here I am prepared to admit, what is not the
line taken by the author of “ Supernatural Religion,”
or the generality of adverse critics, that where any
early Christian writer may show a knowledge of the
facts and doctrines belonging to Christianity, that
circumstance serves to fill up the “gap” respecting
which our investigation is to be maintained, even when
it is not exactly apparent that such writer is making
use of the canonical scriptures. But it is obvious that
to be of value for the purpose in view, it is absolutely
necessary that the era of such writer should be satis
factorily ascertained. And just in respect of this
vital question, Mr Sanday leaves us without materials,
saving the martialling of sundry names current in
critical circles of those who can only be said to have
made guesses on this subject; whereby it becomes
apparent that tangible facts, on which we may be
permitted to exercise judgment for ourselves on these
points, cannot be readily put before us. He says, “ To
go at all thoroughly into all the questions that may
be raised as to the date and character of the Christian
writings, in the early part of the second century, would
need a series of somewhat elaborate monographs, and,
important as it is that the data should be fixed with
the utmost precision, the scaffolding thus raised would,
in a work like the present, be out of proportion to the
superstructure erected upon it. These are matters that
* Here, and elsewhere, when figures are thus introduced, they
refer to pages in Mr Sanday’s work.
�The Christian Evidences.
must be decided by the authority of those who have
made the provinces to which they belong a subject of
special study : all we can do will be to test the value
of the several authorities in passing ” (58).
Thus on two very serious considerations involved in
the discussion of Christianity, we are left by this
advocate, when meeting a formidable adversary, un
aided by information ; namely as to the precise times
of the earliest writers who show a knowledge of
Christianity, and the value of the accepted scriptures,
whenever it was that we got them, as being based
upon that divine authority which is currently alleged
for them.
Mr Sanday sets out with an appeal to certain of the
Pauline epistles as the “undoubted writings of St
Paul,” here making use of the unguarded and un
warrantable admission by the German critics of four of
these epistles, and from this source he naturally holds
that there is early “historical attestation” for the
Christian miracles, and especially for the great miracle
of the Resurrection, in respect of which “ external
evidence, in the legal sense,” he observes with satisfac
tion, that “ it is probably the best that can be produced,
and it has been entirely untouched so far” (11, 12).
But if it can be shown that there is no evidence for
the existence of Christianity during the first century,
or for far on in the second; that there has been no
such age as the asserted apostolic age; and that these
Pauline epistles have the characteristics of forgeries,
put together at some unknown times, by Gentile hands,
this source of support disappears, and we have to look
elsewhere for the first traces of Christianity.*
Before occupying ourselves with those who are com
monly considered to be the earliest Christian writers,
* See The. Twelve Apostles ; Our First Century ; Primitive Church
History; The Pauline Epistles; The Portraiture and Mission of
Jesus, all in this series; and The Sources and Development of
Christianity (Triibner & Co.).
�8
The Christian Evidences.
it will be well to examine the pretensions of those on
whom dependence is placed for the existence and
times of the supposed primitive writers.
The first who claims attention is necessarily the
ecclesiastical historian Eusebius. In his day, it is
apparent, Christianity was an established circumstance,
and our task, consequently, is to endeavour to discern
its earliest traces in the period anterior to him. Writ
ing about the year a.d. 315, Eusebius admits that in
prosecuting his investigations, he was “ the first ” who
had engaged in such an attempt, and that he had
entered upon his researches on “ a kind of trackless
and unbeaten path,” “ totally unable to find even the
bare vestiges of those who may have travelled the way
before him,” unless “ in certain partial narratives,” and
with a dubious light to guide him as that of “ torches
at a distance.” The result is, with these imperfect
means, he presents us with a volume, purporting to be
an exhibition of multitudinous facts, but at the same
time shows himself to be one not qualified to act as a
pioneer whom we may safely follow in the difficult
field before him.
The age he had to deal with, was one abounding in
literary forgeries, especially on the part of Christian
writers, who justified themselves, by supposing that
the importance of the cause they sought to promote,
warranted the means they took to advance it. Euse
bius has vouched for, and given currency to, such
forgeries, not having detected them; he was personally
credulous ; and he has been guilty of historical incon
sistencies and uncritical representations.* Dr Donald
son says of him, “ Like all the rest of his age, he was
utterly uncritical in his estimate of evidence, and
where he, as it were, translates the language of others
into his own, not giving their words but his own idea
of their meaning, he is almost invariably wrong.
Every statement therefore which he makes himself, is
* The Sources and Development of Christianity, pp. 2-16.
�The Christian Evidences.
9
to be received with caution”; and yet the learned
doctor, in endeavouring to place Christianity on an
historical basis, has to add, il my first, my best, and
almost my only authority is Eusebius. ... All
subsequent writers have simply repeated his statements,
sometimes indeed misrepresenting them, Eusebius
therefore stands as my first and almost only authority
(“ Hist, of Christ. Lit.” I. 13, 14). For whatever relates
to the first two centuries of the alleged Christian era,
in respect of its facts and dates, we have to look to this
writer, and no impartial mind can rest satisfied with
the statements of one circumstanced as he was, and
shown to be what he is, unless these may be found
reasonably supported with such corroborative materials
as should naturally belong to them.
The next name of importance to the Christian cause
is that of Irenaeus, an authority constantly cited by
Eusebius, and to whom is traceable the first notice we
have that the received gospels are four in number. In
treating of this supposed person, I am under d.eep
obligations to an article in this series entitled “ Primi
tive Church History,” and a forthcoming one by the
same learned writer on “ Irenaeus,” which I have been
privileged to see in the manuscript.
Beyond being frequently cited by Eusebius, Irenaeus
is mentioned by Tertullian, but no others of the
alleged early writers, not even Hippolytus who
is said to have been his pupil, show any knowledge of
him. There is a treatise “ Against Heresies ” bearing
his name of which some fragments in the original
Greek remain, and a version in barbarous Latin.
There is no certainty as to the date of his birth ; he is
said by some to have been of Greece, by others of
Smyrna or elsewhere in Asia Minor; Mr Sanday
speaks of “his well-known visit to Home in 178 a.d.”
(199), not however citing his authority, who is probably
Eusebius; Tertullian is reported to say that he was
made bishop of Gaul, it is supposed about a.d. 180 ;
�io
The Christian Evidences.
otherwise we have no particulars of his life. We hear
of his martyrdom in a.d. 202 from Eusebius, but
there being no other authority for the circumstance,
we may consider the date of his death to be as un
certain as that of his birth.
Mr Sanday holds that the treatise “ Against Heresies ”
must have been written between the years a.d. 180
and 190 (326). This production shows an acquaint
ance with the various branches of Gnostic heretics, and
the writer assumes an ascendancy over them as belong
ing to the orthodox party in the church, denouncing
all 44unauthorized meetings” as opposed to apostolic
traditions and the “ pre-eminent authority ” of “ the
very ancient ” church of Home. To have lived at a
time when orthodoxy had raised itself above surrounding
heresies, and when supremacy and a lengthened
measure of antiquity could be ascribed to the church at
Rome, necessarily places the writer at a period much
nearer the time of Eusebius than is supposed, unless,
indeed, his writings have been tampered with at a later
day. That he belongs to an era not so remote as is
assigned to him, appears also from other indications.
He speaks of “ good and ancient copies ” of the book
of Revelation (329), and of the existence of many
ancient copies of the “ Shepherd ” of Hermas (“ Against
Heresies” v., c. 30); moreover Saturninus, writing it is
thought in the beginning of the fourth century, says,
“ scattered churches of a few Christians arose in some
cities of Gaul in the 3rd century,” from which we
may judge that no bishopric could have been erected
there in the second century.
Tertullian is quite as questionable an authority as
Eusebius, and the collateral and internal evidence
certainly points to the time of the writer of the treatise
in question, being of a considerably later date than is
assigned to him. But we may even doubt whether
the name of Irenaeus, which figures so prominently
in the ecclesiastical history, attaches to a real person
�The Christian Evidences.
11
age. The word
va/og, as observed by Eusebius,
and dwelt upon by the learned writer I have before
referred to, signifies “peaceful,” and affixed to a
treatise designed to put down heresies and induce
concord of religious sentiment, it may very well
have been adopted by the writer as a designation
appropriate to the purpose of his work, so that we
may be entitled to end our examination with the
supposition that it is quite possible we have nothing
before us, under the heading of Irenaeus, but an
anonymous production, written when or by whom we
know not, saving that it came out at some time ante
cedent to Tertullian and Eusebius.
Tertullian is known of from Eusebius and the
writings he has left behind him. He is said to have
been of about the period of the supposed Irenaeus,
but we can only say that he preceded Eusebius.
He is described to have been a bishop of Carthage,
but we have no incidents of his life or death. He
wrote against Valentinus, Marcion, and other “heretics,”
which places him beyond the earliest times of Chris
tianity. He was of an age when the sacred text had
become extensively corrupted by various readings,
and had his part therein. Mr Sanday is engaged
with this subject in connection with Tertullian from
page 332 to 343. He says, “The phenomena that
have to be accounted for are not, be it remembered,
such as might be caused by the carelessness of a
single scribe. They are spread over whole groups of
MSS. together. We can trace the gradual accessions of
corruption at each step as we advance in the history
of the text. A certain false reading comes in at such
a point and spreads over all the manuscripts that
start from that; another comes in at a further
stage, and vitiates succeeding copies there ; until at
last a process of correction and revision sets in ; re
course is had to the best standard manuscripts, and a
purer text is recovered by comparison with these. It
�12
The Christian Evidences.
is precisely such a text that is presented by the Old
Latin Codex F. which we find accordingly shows a max
imum difference from Tertullian ! ” Then assuming
that we have the real time of Tertullian, he observes,
“ To bring the text into the state in which it is
found in the writings of Tertullian, a century is not
at all too long a period to allow. In fact I doubt
whether any subsequent century saw changes so
great, though we should naturally suppose that cor
ruption would proceed at an advancing rate for every
fresh copy that was made.”
Now it is apparent that the argument can be turned
quite another way. If nothing is known of the
appearance of the received scriptures till a late time,
say the latter part of the second century, as a large
class of critics maintain, then the condition of the
text and Tertullianus part in it, according to this
reasoning, would place him a century later, or far
on in the third century. The fact is, throughout
this investigation we are left to the operation of
the merest guesses. We know not when the text
came out, or when it was interfered with by Ter
tullian and others. The end is that of the actual
time of Tertullian we remain ignorant, but see that
there may be grounds for placing it considerably
nearer that of Eusebius than has been currently
asserted.
Whatever was the period filled by Tertullian, as an
authority to be appealed to he proves himself to be
utterly unreliable. In the first place he was very
credulous. He recognized in certain osseous remains
the bones of the giants. He believed in the agency of
good and evil angels, and that most people had a
demon attached to them, who could rule their des
tinies. He says, “ There is hardly a human being who
is unattended by a demon; and it is well known
to many that premature and violent deaths, which
men ascribe to accidents, are in fact brought about
�Ehe Christian Evidences.
13
by ’demons.” He makes use of the fable of the
Phoenix as an actuality illustrating the resurrection.
He says, as if coming within his personal knowledge.
“ I am acquainted, with the case of a woman, the
daughter of Christian parents, who in the very flower
of her age and. beauty slept peaceably (in Jesus), after
a singularly happy though brief married life. Before
they laid her in her grave, and when the priest began
the appointed office, at the first breath of his prayer
she withdrew her hands from her sides, placed them
in an attitude of devotion, and after the holy service
was concluded, restored them to their lateral position.
Then again, there is that well known story among
our own people, that a body voluntarily made way
in a certain cemetery, to afford room for another
body to be placed near it ” (“ On the Resurrection of
the Flesh,” c. xlii. ; “On the Soul,” c. xxxix., li.,
lvii.). . If we are reading Tertullian, and not introduced
monkish fables, the writer is shown to be positively
untruthful, as well as possessed of an inordinate love
of the marvellous.
That Tertullian in his aim to support the Chris
tian cause was little restrained by scruples in making
his statements, is very apparent. He is Eusebius’
warrant for the fact that Pontius Pilate transmitted
to the emperor Tiberius an account of the miracles
of Jesus, and of his resurrection from the dead, re
presenting that the mass of the people believed him
to be a god, on which Tiberius proposed to admit
Jesus into the Roman pantheon; so that knowledge
from Rome reaches Carthage, of a character to establish
the incidents of Christianity, after a lapse of say
nearly two centuries, which had escaped the notice of
all others occupying the intervening space and time.
In respect of the tale of the Thundering Legion, when
in a time of extremity the Christian soldiers in the
ranks of Marcus Aurelius are said to have called down
rain by their prayers, and so saved the army from
�14
The Christian Evidences.
perishing of thirst, Eusebius likewise received the state
ment Tertullian has had the assurance to make, that
there were letters by the emperor still extant recounting
the occurrence, Carthage again standing alone in supply
ing us with information from Rome. And in his tract
“Against the Jews,” he boasts, with little attention
to truth, of the vast spread of the Christian faith,
saying-—In whom but the Christ now come have all
nations believed ? For in whom do all other nations
(except the Jews) confide ? Parthians, Medes, Elamites,
and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, Armenia, Phrygia,
Cappadocia, and inhabitants of Pontus, and Asia,
and Pamphylia; the dwellers in Egypt, and inhabitants
of the region beyond Cyrene ; Romans and strangers ;
and in Jerusalem, both Jews and Proselytes; so
that the various tribes of the Getuli and the num
erous hordes of the' Moors, all the Spanish clans,
and the different nations of Gaul, and those regions
of the Britons inaccessible to the Romans, but sub
ject to Christ, and of the Sarmatians, and the
Dacians, and Germans, and Scythians, and many
unexplored nations and provinces, and islands un
known to us, and which we cannot enumerate: in
all which places the name of Christ, who has already
come, now reigns.” This wonderful observer was
not only able, in the behalf of Christianity, to draw
upon records in the archives of Rome unseen by
any other eye, but, as Mosheim points out, he can
give us intelligence of “ what was done in unex
plored regions and unknown islands and provinces ; ”
and, as observed upon by the author of “ Primitive
Church History,” from whom I have the passage,
he can people Jerusalem with Jews at a time when
under the ban of Hadrian not one of that race could
revisit the land without incurring death.
Clement of Alexandria and Hippolytus are the
next authorities relied on by Mr Sanday, as by Chris
tian advocates in general. They are mentioned by
�The Christian Evidences.
*5
Eusebius, and having left writings behind them, it
may be conceded that there were such persons, but
the notice of them by Eusebius is too meagre to afford
satisfaction. They are said to have been about the
time of Tertullian, but the end is that we know no
more of their true age than we do of his.
The last of those who are now in question as
authorities cited by Mr Sanday, is Origen. Eusebius
says that this writer suffered persecution in the reign
of Decius (a.d. 249-251). Niebuhr, while con
sidering the earlier alleged persecutions to have been
highly exaggerated, accepts that by Decius as the first
“ vehement ” one suffered by the Christians, because
mentioned by Pagan as well as Christian writers, the
Pagan authorities being the “ Historia Augusta ” and
Zosimus (“Prim. Ch. Hist.,” 67). We may thus with
apparent safety admit Origen as of the period attributed
to him, namely, as having lived somewhere towards the
middle of the third century.
We have now to consider the circumstances of the
earlier Christians, standing as it thought nearest to the
time alleged for Christianity, in view of judging what
testimony is to be had from this source. I take the
names in the order in which Mr Sanday has arranged them.
Clement of Rome (58-70). Mr Sanday says that
the learned place this individual at from a.d. 95-100,
but that some put him back to a.d. 70. The dates
depend upon purely ideal considerations. There are
many writings attributed to this Clement, the whole of
which are rejected by Eusebius and the modern crit
ics, with the exception of an epistle addressed to the
Corinthians. Mr Sanday cannot satisfy himself that
this epistle makes use of the canonical gospels which
is the point of his inquiries.
The state of the case is this. Eusebius considers
Clement to have been the third bishop of Rome on the
word of the doubtful Irenaeus, who says that “ the
blessed Apostles Peter and Paul ” founded this church
�16
The Christian Evidences.
and appointed Linus to be the first bishop, that after
him came Anencletus, and then Clement. According
to the epistle to the Romans, the church of Rome was
flourishing before Paul had visited it. He consequently,
pursuant to Christian authority, was not instrumental
in founding this church. Peter, according to the
epistle to the Galatians, was to confine his labours to
the Jews, and the Protestants universally disallow that
he set up the church at Rome. There is even room to
doubt that there were Christians in Rome, during the
so-called apostolic days, it appearing, notwithstanding
what is said of the world-wide fame of this church in the
epistle to the Romans, that when Paul is represented
to have gone to Rome, his inquiring Jewish brethren
there'knew nothing of the circumstances of the Christian
faith (Acts xxviii. 22). Josephus, moreover, who was at
Rome from a.d. 70 to 93, whenhe wrote his “Antiquities,”
makes no mention of Christianity prevailing there or
elsewhere. Wrong as to the foundations of this church,
the so-called Irenaeus may be equally wrong as to its
third successional bishop. Tertullian has it that
Clement was the first bishop of Rome, so that such
statements as have been made on the subject are con
tradictory. Of the epistle attributed to this Clement,
on which his existence may be considered to depend,
we have really no evidence. In 1628 the Patriarch of
Constantinople presented our Charles I. with an ancient
MS. as derived from Alexandria, and therefore styled
the Alexandrine Codex, but its further history is un
known. Attached thereto is an epistle to the Corin
thians, the writer of which is unnamed. Hence it be
comes a bold statement, after alleging with Eusebius, on
the very questionable grounds before him, that there
was a Clement bishop of Rome, to declare this epistle
to be his work.
Barnabas (71-76). The time of this person is given
as a.d. 130. For this conclusion Mr Sanday has nothing
to'offer, but that he has arrived at it by “arguing
AL
7
�The Christian Evidences.
17
entirely from authority.” He allows that there is no
certainty that the epistle attributed to this individual
has any citation from the received scriptures, though he
thinks it probable that such has been the case. All
therefore connected with this name rests upon the
merest surmise.
An epistle by Barnabas is first mentioned by Clement
of Alexandria. Eusebius knew of such a production
but considered it spurious. The Sinaitic Codex, itself
a document of doubtful origin, has an epistle appended
to it which it is supposed may be the work of this
Barnabas, but as it does not bear its author’s name, or
show to whom it is addressed, or from whence it was
written, it requires the utmost hardihood to accept such
a production as evidence for Barnabas.
Ignatius (76-82). To this person many spurious
writings have been attributed. Mr Sanday relies on the
criticisms of Dr Lightfoot for such of his ascribed works
as may be genuine. Dr Lightfoot does not appear to
acknowledge the seven epistles in the shorter Greek
recension as from the pen of Ignatius, but says they
may be “accepted as valid testimony at all events for
the middle of the second century,” the grounds for which
conclusion are not stated. The three Syriac epistles
Dr Lightfoot looks upon as “the work of the genuine
Ignatius,” while Mr Sanday cautiously observes that
they may “probably” be such. There are two dates
for the martrydom of Ignatius, namely a.d. 107 and
115, to one or other of which Mr Sanday supposes
these Syriac epistles may be attached, but as respects
any testimony to be derived therefrom, in support of
the canonical scriptures, he is unable to come to a
satisfactory conclusion.
Of fifteen epistles ascribed to Ignatius, eight, being
unmentioned by Eusebius and Jerome, are universally
disallowed. There are two Greek editions of the seven
others, a longer and a shorter one, but the learned have
been divided as to which to accept. The tendency has
B
�18
The Christian Evidences.
been to relinquish the longer edition, which Mr Sanday
has not deemed it necessary even to notice. Dr Cureton
has brought to light three epistles in Syriac to which
critics now preferably lean, thus abandoning the Greek
versions altogether. According to Eusebius Ignatius
wrote his alleged seven epistles when he was on his way
to suffer martyrdom, but as he describes himself as then
bound to ten men guarding him on the way, of such
ferocity as to be referred to as ££ wild beasts ” and
“ leopards,” opportunity for such effusions is not pro
perly conceivable. Not only the date but the place of
the asserted martyrdom is uncertain, some saying it
occurred at Rome, and some at Antioch. This Ignatius
is spoken of by the dubious Irenaeus, whose testimony
meets us at every turn, and by Polycarp whose person
ality is also most questionable. The statement offered
in the name of Polycarp is also weakened by its
acknowledging the whole of the fifteen epistles
attributed to Ignatius, when, according to Eusebius,
there were but seven.
Polycarp (82-87). We hear of him and his epistle
to the Philippians from Irenaeus, which, believing in
this name, Mr Sanday considers to be “ external
evidence ” of unanswerable weight. Polycarp is said
to have been martyred about a.d. 167 or 168, but Mr
Sanday prefers Mr Waddington’s surmise that it was
in a.d. 155 or 156. He considers it not clear that
Polycarp drew from the canonical scriptures.
The statement imputed to Irenaeus is that Polycarp
had held “familiar intercourse with John” and others
“ that had seen the Lord,” and had often recounted
their discourses in his hearing. Judging by the
ordinary limits of human life, these contemporaries of
the Lord may have survived to a.d. 80 or 90. If
Polycarp were martyred in A.D. 155, sixty-five or
seventy-five years had then passed away from their
time; if in a.d. 168, seventy-eight or eighty-eight
years had gone by. We may reasonably ask of what
�The Christian Evidences.
19
age Polycarp could have been when he listened to and
profited by the said discourses'? Assuming that he
lived to be ninety, he was possibly then from two to
twelve years of age, or from fifteen to twenty-five, but
the whole is a matter of uncertainty and depending
upon the seemingly fictitious Irenaeus.
Mr Sanday has not ventured to touch upon the
particulars associated with the martyrdom of Polycarp,
which are of a fabulous order. The saint, it is said,
was taken to the stadium there to be put an end to; a
voice from heaven greeted him ; he was bound to a
stake to be burnt alive, but the flames arched round his
sacred person and refused to invade it; then he was
stabbed to death, and the blood gushing out from his
body extinguished the flames. He was thus dealt with
simply because he was a Christian, and yet a body of
his fellow Christians were allowed to witness the
spectacle themselves unscathed. They are stated to
have written an account of what they had seen, and the
same has been transmitted to us through the neverfailing Irenaeus.
Mr Sanday sums up his examination of the writings
of the above parties with the supposition that they
either employed the accepted gospels, or some other
writings closely resembling them, so that they thereby
establish “ the essential unity and homogeneity of the
evangelical tradition,” a verdict which will ill satisfy
those who are looking for early traces of the inspired
record. And thus ends this little band of “ Apostolic
Fathers,” the imperceptible links to the undiscernible
Apostles.
Justin Martyr (88-137). “Ko one,” observes Mr
Sanday further back (59), “ doubts the Apologies and
the Dialogue with Tryphon” attributed to Justin
Martyr.
“Modern critics,” he says, “seem pretty
generally to place the two Apologies in the years
147-150 a.d. and the Dialogue against Tryphon a little
latter.” Following Mr Hort, Mr Sanday considers that
�20
The Christian Evidences.
these productions were put forth from a.d. 145-147,
and that in the next year Justin died. It appears that
Justin had a substantial knowledge of the Christian
narratives and doctrines, but what text he followed is
a matter of doubt. Mr Sanday’s conclusion is that
“either Justin used our Gospels, or else he used a
document later than our Gospels, and pre-supposing
them” (102). “If Justin did not use our Gospels in
their present shape, as they have come down to us, he
used them in a later shape, not in an earlier.” “ Our
Gospels form a secondary stage in the history of the
text, Justin’s quotations a tertiary.” “This however
does not exclude the possibility that Justin may at times
quote from uncanonical Gospels as well” (128, 129).
He followed a corrupted text, which Mr Sanday argues
“ is a proof of the antiquity of originals so corrupted ”
(13 6), an argument however not helping us to understand
when these Gospels were written and corrupted.
Justin and his works have hitherto been accepted
upon trust, while being clearly open to question. I am
thus more concerned in testing the authenticity of these
works than in judging of the acquaintance they exhibit
with the Christian scriptures.
“ The best part of the information which we have
with regard to Justin Martyr,” says Dr Donaldson, “is
derived from his own writings. The few particulars
which we gather from others relate almost exclusively
to his death.” He is spoken of as having been a
martyr by Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, and
Eusebius, “ the circumstances of his death, however,
are involved in doubt.” “There is no clue to exact
dates in the history of Justin.” “The ‘Chronicon
Paschale’ places ” his martyrdom in a.d. 165, a probable
date; but there is no reason to suppose that it is any
thing more than a guess.” “ If we cannot trust
Eusebius, our only authority for placing Justin’s
martyrdom in the reign of Marcus Aurelius, we know
nothing in regard to the date of Justin’s death. The
�The Christian Evidences.
21
value of Eusebius’ opinion is not great, but it is infinitely
to be preferred to the utterly uncritical statements of
Epiphanius or Cedrenus,” who suggest that he died in
the reign of Hadrian, or onwards to the year a.d. 148
(“Hist, of Christ. Lit.” II. 62-74, 85). I think it is
apparent that whatever is to be known of Justin, must
be gathered from his imputed works, and should these
prove not genuine, that we shall have to part with this
long cherished name as that of an evidence for early
Christianity.
“ Probably,” says Mr Sanday, “ not one half of the
writings attributed to Justin Martyr are genuine” (59).
This should induce caution as to the remaining works
assigned to the same name. Of the two “ Apologies ”
ascribed to Justin, the second, if not incorporated in
the first, which is a matter of doubt, has been lost.
The “Apology” we possess is addressed to the Emperor
Antoninus Pius, his adopted sons Verissimus and
Lucius, the holy Senate, and the whole people of the
Romans, and its asserted object was to obtain for the
Christians a fair trial, to ascertain in what they might
have offended the laws of the state, in lieu of subjecting
them to death, simply because they were Christians.
On such a subject- an appeal to the Emperor as the
Chief Magistrate, responsible for the due administration
of the laws, would be all that would be required, and
it would be an indignity to him to make it appear that
his authority had to be supported by that of his sons,
the Senate, and the Roman nation at large. The one
referred tosby his familiar cognomen of Verissimus, who
was the heir to the empire, would assuredly in a public
document have been addressed by his proper designa
tion of Marcus JElius Aurelius Verus Caesar. The
other son, Lucius, was at the asserted time a child, and
could not have been thus appealed to. The so-called
“ Apology ” transgresses its required ends in entering
upon the tenets of Christian heretics, discussions which
could have been only irksome to Roman authorities
�22
The Christian Evidences.
It is also contentious and provocatory, in lieu of being
deferential and conciliatory, as such an appeal, if a
real instrument, would naturally be. The gods of the
Romans are described as sensual and false-hearted
demons who had imitated the circumstances associated
with Christ in the Jewish prophetic scriptures in order
to defeat the mission of Christ when he should come,
and the rulers addressed are adverted to as possibly no
better than robbers. And if Christians suffered death
in the time of Antoninus Pius, merely because known
as such, Justin exposed himself to that fate in openly
putting forth this “ Apology,” and is yet said to have
survived to address a second Apology to Marcus
Aurelius. Melito is represented to have offered an
Apology to this latter Emperor, in which, to urge his
case, he said, “ Eor now the race of the pious is perse
cuted, an event that never took place before” (Donald
son, “Hist, of Christ. Lit.” III. 230), a statement
giving the assurance that no persecution of Christians
occurred under Antoninus Pius, and thus putting an
end to the “ Apology ” of Justin.
The genuineness of the “Dialogue withTryphon” has
been questioned by some, and not without very sufficient
cause. It begins with an apparently fanciful representa
tion after the method of the fictitious dialogues in
Lucian and Plato—“While I was walking in the
morning in the walks of the Xystus, some one, accom
panied by others, met me with the words Hail, Philo
sopher!” and so induced the discussion. Justin
describes the course of his own studies. At first, in
pursuit of the “ knowledge of God,” he “ surrendered
himself to a certain Stoic.” Then, leaving him, he
“ betook himself to another, who was called a Peri
patetic.” After this he “ came to a Pythagorean, very
celebrated—a man who thought much of his own
wisdom,” but was dismissed by him because ignorant
of music, astronomy, and geometry. In his helplessness
“ it occurred to him to have a meeting with the Pla-
�The Christian Evidences.
23
tonists, for their fame was great,” and he fell in with
“ a sagacious man, holding a high position ” in this
school. Finally, when meditating in a “ certain field
not far from the sea,” he was followed by “ a certain
old man, by no means contemptible in appearance, ex
hibiting meek and venerable manners,” who made a
convert of him to Christianity. All is here vague and
unreal. We are not told who were these celebrities—
the Stoic, the Peripatetic, the Pythagorean, the
Platonist, and above all the venerable Christian
teacher who might have been an intimate of those of
the apostolic age. Tryphon, with whom the dialogue
is conducted, is unknown, as is Marcus Pompeius to
whom the production is dedicated. A Jew is
represented as courting discussion on religious subjects
with a Gentile philosopher, whose opinions to him
would be valueless, and with facile complaisance
habitually yields the victory to his opponent; and
every word that passed between them is reported over
a space covering in the translation above a hundred
and eighty pages of the Antenicene Christian Library.
The circumstances have only to be set forth to expose
the true character of this composition.
Hegisippus (138-145). Mr Sanday supposes this
author to have written in the time of the alleged
Irenaeus, or about a.d. 177. He thinks he must have
made use of the canonical Gospels, but this is only
problematical.
We hear of this person from Eusebius who says he
wrote an ecclesiastical history, no part of which is
extant. He is stated to have been of the period of
Hadrian (a.d. 117-138) and to have “lived during the
time of the first succession of the apostles.” Knowing
of him only from Eusebius we can have no assurance
of the age he belonged to, saving that he preceded
Eusebius.
Papias (145-160). This individual Mr Sanday
observes is reported to have suffered as a martyr about
�24
The Christian Evidences.
the same time that Polycarp was martyred. A com
mentary on the Oracles of the Lord is attributed to
him, from which Eusebius presents statements. After
discussing these extracts Mr Sanday says : “ Every
where we meet with difficulties and complexities.
The testimony of Papias remains an enigma that can only
be solved—if ever it is solved—by close and detailed
investigations.” He concludes that as far as he can
see “ the works to which Papias alludes cannot be our
present Gospels in their present form.” We derive
our knowledge of Papias from the so-called Irenaeus,
upon whom no dependence is to be placed.
The Clementine Homilies and Recognitions (161187). “ It is unfortunate,” says Mr Sanday, “ that
there are not sufficient materials for determining the
date of the Clementine Homilies.” “ Whether the
Recognitions or the Homilies came first in order of
time is a question much debated among critics, and the
even way in which the best opinions seem to be.
divided is a proof of the uncertainty of the data.”
These writings Mr Sanday believes draw upon the
Synoptic Gospels.
Clement of Rome purports to be the author of these
productions, but they are universally allowed to be
spurious. The editor of the Antenicene Christian
Library looks upon the “ Recognitions ” as “ a kind of
philosophical and theological romance.”
Basilides (188-196). This person was a Gnostic
who is said to have taught at Alexandria in the reign
of Hadrian (a.d. 117-137). He is spoken of by
Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Origen and Euse
bius, as also by Epiphanius who is said to be of a.d.
367. There is a gospel attributed to him, hut what it
contained appears to be subject of doubt. Mr Sanday
thinks he or his followers may have served themselves
of the first and third accepted gospels.
The authorities cited are too far removed from the
time alleged for Basilides to be satisfactory as to his
�The .Christian Evidences.
date, nor does it appear that the facts or doctrines of
Christianity are properly traceable to him. “Practi
cally,” says Mr Sanday, “the statements in regard to
the Commentary of Basilides lead to nothing.”
Valentinus (196-203). Our knowledge of this
Gnostic teacher is derivable chiefly from the supposed
and ever-ready Irenaeus, but Mr Sanday allows that “ it
cannot be alleged positively that any of the quotations
or allusions,” ascribed to this person, “were really
made” by him, it being possible that they come
from his school.
The acceptance of the four
gospels in this quarter he observes, “ rests upon the
statement of Irenaeus as well as upon that of the less
scrupulous and accurate Tertullian.” A passage asso
ciated with the third gospel is given by Hippolytus,
but “it is not certain that the quotation is made from
the master and not from his scholars.” Mr Sanday
claims for this teacher and his followers a time spread
ing from A.D. 140 to 180, but the dates must be taken
as merely supposititious.
Marcion (204-237). Mr Sanday places this person
at about A.D. 139-142, but allows that in connection
with him “there is some confusion in the chronological
data.” “ The most important evidence is that of
Justin,” but who is to answer for Justin himself?
Mr Sanday also seeks to support himself with the
shadowy and never-failing Irenaeus, the untrustworthy
Tertullian, and Epiphanius, himself an ignorant un
critical man,* and standing too far removed from the
time spoken of to be an authority on that head. “A
certain Gospel ” is attributed to Marcion, but “ the ex
act contents and character of that Gospel are not quite
so clear.” In judging thereof, Mr Sanday points out,
that a critic of “ the nineteenth century should be able
to thread all the mazes in the mind of a Gnostic or an
Ebionite in the second.” The question is did Marcion
mutilate our third Gospel, “ or is it not possible that
* The Sources and Development of Christianity, p. 38.
�0,6
The Christian Evidences.
the converse may be true, and that Marcion’s Gospel
was the original and ours an interpolated version?”
At this date of time it is not possible to decide such a
question, though Mr Sanday and others have their
opinions on the subject.
Tatian (238-242). This individual is said to have
been converted to Christianity by Justin Martyr. “ The
death of Justin,” says Mr Sanday, “is clearly the pivot
on which his date will hinge.” “ An address to the
Greeks ” is attributed to Tatian, “ but it contains no
references,” as Mr Sanday allows, “ to the Synoptic
Gospels upon which stress canbelaid.” A “Diatessaron”
is traced to him which the ever-ready Irenaeus
describes as having been a harmony of the accepted
Gospels.
Justin’s era, and even identity or personal existence,
being matters of uncertainty, we are equally in the
dark as to what relates to his alleged disciple Tatian.
“We know nothing of the time of his birth, or of his
parents, or of his early training.” Irenaeus “speaks
as if he knew very little about him.” “Nothing is
known of his death ” (Donaldson, “ Hist, of Christ.
Lit.” III. 4, 8-10, 20).
Dionysius of Corinth (242, 243). The interest in
this person turns upon his use of the phrase “The
Scriptures of the Lord,” which, having “ Irenaeus in
his mind’s eye,” Mr Sanday thinks may probably refer
to the canonical Gospels. We know of him only from
Eusebius whose information relates almost exclusively
to his letters. To his date there seems to be no clue.
Meuto (244, 245). Mr Sanday says nothing as to
this person’s time, and observes that the fragments
imputed to him “ contain nothing especial on the
Gospels.”
He is said to have addressed an Apology to Marcus
Aurelius. “We know nothing of his life,” says Dr
Donaldson, “ except that he went, as he tells us himself,
to the East.” “ Our principal authority in regard to
�The Christian Evidences.
the works of Melito is Eusebius ” (“ Hist, of Christ.
Lit.” III. 221-223).
Apollinaris (246-248). He is said to. have
addressed an Apology to Marcus Aurelius, and is thus
placed by Mr Sanday at from a.d. 176-180. There is
a fragment attributed to him connected with the Paschal
controversy by a writer in the “ Paschal Chronicle, but
as this takes us to the seventh century, Mr Sanday does
not insist upon the reliability of the fragment. He
is mentioned by Eusebius who cites one Serapion, but
who he was no one knows.
Athenagoras (248-251). Though not noticed by
either Eusebius or Jerome, Mr Sanday looks upon this
person as “an author of a certain importance.” An
Apology addressed to Marcus Aurelius and Commodus,
and a treatise on the Resurrection, are ascribed to him.
The Apology, Mr Sanday considers may be dated about
a.d. 177. He cites a passage from this writer having
a close correspondence with one in the first Gospel, but
says that “he cannot, on the whole, be regarded as a very
powerful witness ” for the Synoptic Gospels..
The earliest to mention Athenagoras is Philip of Sida,
a Christian writer of the fifth century, removed by about
two centuries and a half from the alleged time of the
author spoken of, and concerning whom no one appears
to have had knowledge during this long interval. . Dr
Donaldson looks upon Philip of Sida as an unreliable
writer.
The Epistle of Vienne and Lyons (251-253). .The
persecution spoken of in this letter Mr Sanday considers
to have occurred in a.d. 177. He is satisfied that
there is a phrase in the letter taken from the third Gospel.
The extracts we have from this letter come from
Eusebius. In his history he says the persecution, in
question occurred in the seventeenth year of the reign
of Marcus Aurelius, which is the statement Mr Sanday
has followed, but in his “ Chronicon” it is alleged to have
happened ten years earlier. In the letter the allegation
�28
The Christian Evidences.
is that Christians, on the mere ground that they were
Christians, were fastened into iron chains and burnt to
death, ot thrown before wild beasts and torn to pieces,
acts said to have been sanctioned by the mild, philo
sophic, and law-respecting emperor we have in view.
Dr Donaldson appears to accept the letter as a genuine
production by some unknown writer of the period, but
says, “The style is loose. It abounds in antitheses
and strong expressions. It also mixes up incongruous
figures. Its statements are not, therefore, to be looked
on as cold historical accuracies ” (“ Hist, of Christ. Lit.”
III. 250-274). In treating of Irenaeus I have pointed
out that there is room to question the existence of
churches in Gaul during the second century, and it •will
be seen hereafter that these alleged early persecutions
cannot be said to rest upon any true historical basis.
Ptolemaeus and Heraclion (254-260). These are
Gnostic teachers who are spoken of by Irenaeus,
Clement of Alexandria, and Hippolytus. Mr Sanday
considers that Irenaeus wrote of Ptolemaeus in a.d. 182,
and may have met with him on his visit to Home in a.d.
178 when he had already formed a school. Clement of
Alexandria shows that Heraclion was acquainted with
the third Gospel, and Origen says he wrote a commentaryon the fourth. Epiphanius attributes to him an
epistle to one Flora containing references to the first
Gospel. Heraclion is always coupled with Ptolemaeus,
and is therefore supposed to be of the same standing.
We can derive no certainty of the times of these
Gnostic teachers from Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria,
and Hippolytus, whose own eras are so uncertain.
From the testimony of Origen we may admit their
existence at some period preceding the middle of the
third century.
Celsus (260-263). We know of this writer through
the pages of his opponent Origen, who considered him
to be an Epicurean of the time of Hadrian or later;
“ exact and certain knowledge, however, about Celsus,”
�The Christian Evidences.
29
Mr Sanday observes, “ Origen did not possess.”
Towards establishing his period the effort is made
to identify this Epicurean with one bearing the name of
Celsus who was a Neo-platonist, and a friend of Lucian,
whose time is known of, and this identity is maintained
by Keim, whom Mr Sanday considers it safe to follow;
and it is on these hypothetical grounds that Origen, who
wrote at some time during the first half of the third
century, is supposed to have been matching himself with
Celsus of about a.d. 178. Mr Sanday appears, however,
a little uncertain about the position, as he winds up by
saying, “ At whatever date Celsus wrote, it appears to
be sufficiently clear that he knew and used all the four
Canonical Gospels.”
The Canon of Muratori (263-268). A fragment
of this canon alone is extant, beginning with a reference
to the third and fourth Gospels, whence Mr Sanday
fairly enough concludes that in the wanting part of the
document the first and second Gospels were included.
Most of the other writings of the New Testament are
spoken of in the fragment in question. “ The Pastor” of
Hermas is alluded to as a then recent production put
forth in the time of Pius, the brother of the author,
who was bishop of Rome. Pius is said to have occupied
the episcopate from a.d. 142-157, on which grounds Mr
Sanday presumes that the Muratorian Fragment was
put forth from a.d. 170-180.
We have first of all to accept as reliable the statement
which would associate this canon with the asserted
Pius of Rome, and having done this we have to accept
his time ; but we are without any assurance that there
was such a bishop other than the appearance of that
name in the list of bishops of Rome given by Euse
bius for which he has adduced no authority.
Mr Sanday concludes with discussing the evidences
to the recognition of the fourth Gospel, and the
state of the canon in the latter part of the second
century, but as his dependence in respect of these
�30
The Christian Evidences.
matters is on the names we have already discussed, it is
not necessary to go over these grounds with him.
It has not fallen within the scope of Mr Sanday’s
work to introduce possible evidences for Christianity
in the early times from the circle of writers outside
the Christian field, but it is essential to the position
I have to maintain that this branch of the subject
should be understood. I state my conclusions on
this part of the inquiry, but must refer my readers
for the supports thereto to my work on the Sources
and Development of Christianity.
The Jewish writers of the period alleged for the
uprise of Christianity naturally first deserve our atten
tion. The earliest of these is Philo Judaeus, whose
works are fortunately extant, and untampered with.
He wrote upon the Old Testament and other associated
subjects of interest to his people, and being of Alex
andria and of the Neo-platonic school there prevailing,
he embarked in representations of the Logos, or per
sonified Word of God, corresponding closely to what
were afterwards attributed to Christ in the fourth
Gospel. He is seen to have visited the temple at
Jerusalem as every devout Jew was bound to do,
and he also went on a mission to Borne in a.d. 42. The
next to be noticed is Nicolaus of Damascus, a learned
and eloquent Jew, more than once the chosen advocate
of his people, and the friend and defender of Herod
and of his successor Archelaus before the court of
Borne. We hear of him through Josephus. The third
is Justus of Tiberias, that city on the border of the
lake of Gennesareth with which so much of the action
described in the Gospel histories is connected. He
was a contemporary of Josephus and opposed his
measures in Galilee. He was thus of the generation
succeeding that alleged for Christ, and wrote a his
tory of the Jews which is referred to by Josephus,
and has been described by Photius, a well-known
�The Christian Evidences.
31
Byzantine writer of the ninth century. The fourth
is Josephus who was born in a.d. 37, and wrote his
account of the Wars of the Jews in a.d. 75, and his
“Antiquities” in a.d. 93. He was of Jerusalem, was
deputed to put down a sedition in Gralilee, was cog
nizant of the circumstances of Antioch and Damas
cus, and lived at Rome from a.d. 70 to the close.of
the century. He was one occupied with Jewish in
terests, and familiar with all the alleged earliest centres
of Christianity in the generations when it is said that
the faith first prevailed and was promulgated.. The
last source to be considered is the Talmud. This vol
uminous collection of writings represents the phases of
Jewish thought, religious, scientific, literary, and his
torical, for about a thousand years calculated from the
return from the Babylonish captivity. The earliest
edition thereof certainly dates after the establish
ment of Christianity, but it is looked upon as a faith
ful record of the more ancient traditions. Now. if
Jesus was what he is declared in matured Christianity
to have been, a god on earth, filling the regions round
about him with the fame of his wondrous works, and
realizing the position of the Jewish Messiah, he must
have been heard of in the quarters occupied by the
writers described, and he himself, and the movement
he is said to have instituted, would have found a
place in their several historical and literary productions;
but not a notice of him or his followers appears there
in, from which silence, on such a subject, by the in
terested Jews, no other conclusion can be fairly drawn
than that the narratives we have of this personage are
not based upon actual occurrences, but are mere fanciful
representations composed in later times for the support
of an ideal and highly artificial faith. So clearly did
it appear to the early Christians that some allusion to
Christ and his people should have occurred in these
Jewish histories, that they have not hesitated to intro
duce in the pages of Josephus passages respecting Christ,
�32
The Christian Evidences.
John the Baptist, and James the just“ the brother of the
Lord,” which, when exposed as forgeries, serve to prove
the barrenness of a cause that has to be thus supported.
When we turn to Pagan sources for any genuine
record of the existence of early Christianity, the
same absolute dearth of evidence and unscrupulous
attempts to 'supply the need, meet us. The writings
of Pliny the younger, Tacitus, and Suetonius, have
been tampered with in a manner similar to that adopted
in the instance of Josephus, in order to make it appear
that Roman writers of note were cognizant of the move
ment ; but, as noticed by the author of “ Primitive
Church History,” the persons so guilty of endeavouring
to practise upon our credulity, in furnishing materials of
evidence for the -first century of the asserted Chris
tian era, have committed the mistake of overlooking
that to keep up the fictitious representation it was re
quisite that similar evidence should have flowed on in
the second century.
A fertile expedient for the exhibition of Chris
tianity in the early days asserted for its existence,
is the statement that Christians in those times
frequently suffered persecution because of the faith
they held. The emperors Nero, Domitian, Trajan,
Hadrian, Antoninus, Aurelius, Severus, and Maximin,
re J said so to have oppressed them at various times
from a.d. 64 to the early part of the third century,
leading to formal apologies, or explanations of the tenets
of Christianity, being presented to avert such per
secutions. Hadrian is stated thus to have been
addressed by Quadratus, and Aristides; Antoninus
Pius and Marcus Aurelius in succession by Justin
Martyr ; and the latter emperor furthermore by Melito,
Apollinarius, and Athenagoras ; and ostensibly to his
reign the epistle of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons
belongs. The persecution by Nero depends on passages
in Tacitus and Suetonius, and that by Trajan on the
alleged letter of Pliny the younger to that emperor,
�The Christian Evidences.
33
all of which may be shown to be fabrications ; * and
the testimony of Melito clears all preceding Marcus
Aurelius of the imputation in question.f The remain
ing Apologies, four in number, coupled with the letter
ascribed to the Churches in Gaul, are associated with the
pamp, of Aurelius. The selection made of this emperor
for the support of the Christian allegations is an
unfortunate one, his character being quite other than
would belong to an oppressor and destroyer of harmless
people. He was styled Verissimus because of his
sincerity and love of truth; when Cassius sought
to usurp his throne he mercifully forgave those con
cerned in the conspiracy; he devoted himself to
philosophy and literature; “in jurisprudence especially,
he laboured throughout life with great activity, and
his constitutions are believed to have filled many
volumes ; ” his “ education and pursuits ” “ exercised
the happiest influence upon a temper and disposition
naturally calm and benevolent.” “ He was firm without
being obstinate; he steadily maintained his own prin
ciples without manifesting any overweening contempt
for the opinion of those who differed from himself;
his justice was tempered with gentleness and mercy.”
“ In public life, he sought to demonstrate practically the
truth of the6Platonic maxim, ever on his lips, that those
states only could be truly happy which were governed
by philosophers, or in which the kings and rulers were
guided by the tenets of pure philosophy.” “No
monarch was ever more widely or more deeply be
loved. The people believed that he had been sent
down by the gods, for a time, to bless mankind, and
had now returned to the heaven from which he des
cended” (Smith’s “Diet, of Greek and Roman Bio
graphy”). This was certainly not the man to have in
itiated the violent and cruel persecutions with which the
Christians charge him.
* The Sources and Development of Christianity, pp. 32-36.
t See ante, p. 22.
C
�34
The Christian Evidences.
From such questionable and unsupported accusations
we may turn to something like reliable history.
“ After many years,” says Lactantius, who lived to a.d.
325, “that execrable animal appeared, Decius, who
persecuted the church.” “ Most of the Roman
emperors of this (second) century,” observes Mosheim,
“were of [a mild character.” “But when Decius
Trajan came to the imperial throne (a.d. 249), war, in
all its horrors, burst upon the Christians.” Decius,
says Niebuhr, “was the first who instituted a vehement
persecution of the Christians, for which he is cursed by
the ecclesiastical writers as much as he is praised by
the Pagan historians ” (the latter being the writers of
the “Historia Augusta” and Zosimus). “The
accounts,” Niebuhr continues, “ which we have of
earlier persecutions are highly exaggerated, as fHenry
Dodwell has justly pointed out. The persecution by
Decius, however, was really a very serious one ; it in
terrupted the peace which the Christian church had en
joyed for a long time” (“Prim. Ch. Hist.”, pp. 66,
67).
The learned author of “ Primitive Church History ”
takes his stand upon this event—the persecution of
the Christians by the emperor Decius—as affording the
first date connected with Christianity, historically
demonstratable, that can be put before us, and in this
conclusion I entirely concur. We are not to be in
fluenced by mere authority on such a subject. Credner, Volkmar, Hilgenfeld, Baur, Ewald, Keim, and a
host of others of the German school, and Westcott,
Scrivener, Lightfoot, Hort, and M'Clellan of the
English school, depended upon more or less by Mr
Sanday, are not more likely to see the unseen or dis
cover the non-existent than others. What we look for
are facts, and not surmises, however ingeniously arrived
at or learnedly sustained, and if there be a date, resting
on independent grounds, for any event or person con
nected with Christianity, antecedently to a.d. 249, we
4
�The Christian Evidences.
35
are persuaded that it has yet to be brought to light
and put before us.
It is apparent that there were Christians in existence
before the time of Decius, who, meeting with them,
sought to put them down by violent measures; but
it is not necessary to suppose that it occupied any
lengthened period to establish Christianity, even in its
matured form. The various phases of Christianity have
had their antecedent expression of doctrinal belief; the
Gnostics grew out of the Neo-platonists of Alexandria;
the Judaic Christians or Ebionites followed Judaism,
■especially as exhibited by the Essenes and Therapeuts ;
and the Pauline Christians, finally becoming the
orthodox party, are derivable from Grecian Paganism.*
We have seen how readily diversities of religious
persuasions can be built up on what has gone before,
and can suppose for Christianity a like facile origin.
Thus Mahommedanism flourished in the days of
Mahommed; Protestantism in those of Luther; the
Quakers became a considerable body in the time of their
founder George Fox; Wesleyanism was established
on broad foundations in that of John Wesley ; Irvingism in that of Edward Irving; Puseyism, leading on to
Eitualism, in that of Dr Pusey • Brethrenism in that of
John Darby; Mormonism in that of Joseph Smith ; and
New Forest Shakerism in that of Mrs Girling. A genera
tion or two therefore might have sufficed to produce
■the Christianity against which Decius Trajan set his face.
The positive evidence for Christianity in its asserted
•early times having failed us, we become entitled to
weigh the negative evidence affecting the question. The
time of Nicolaus of Damascus covers the period of the
.alleged divine nativity of Jesus and of the slaughter
by Herod of the infants of Bethlehem; that of Philo
Judseus embraces the whole period attributed to Jesus ;
those of Justus of Tiberias and Josephus represent
the generation following Jesus, the time of Josephus as
* The Pauline Epistles.
�36
The Christian Evidences.
an author extending to a.d. 93 ; the times of Pliny the
younger, Tacitus, and Suetonius occupy from a.d. 106
to 110; and the Talmudic traditions comprehend the
age ascribed to Jesus and several centuries preceding him.
These being sources from which evidence for Christian
ity might be reasonably looked for, and none appearing
therein but what has been fabricated, we may conclude
that to inquiring and interested minds of the earliest
periods nothing was known of Christ or his followers
through his asserted life-time and onwards to a.d. 110.
The Synoptic Gospels, in the guise of a prophecy,
show a demolition of the temple at Jerusalem so com
plete that not one stone was left upon another, and in
1 Thess. ii. 16 we hear that the “wrath” of God had
“ come upon ” the Jews “to the uttermost”; circum
stances true of the time of Hadrian rather than of that
of Titus, and advancing us to a.d. 135. The scripture
records containing these material statements we may
presume were not put together till after the year in
question when Hadrian devastated Judea. The Apolo
gists are represented to have lived and written of
persecutions occurring from the era of Hadrian to that
of Marcus Aurelius, or from a.d. 117 to 180; but when
it becomes apparent that these representations are
destitute of foundation, we may be satisfied that they
have been introduced to support Christianity with
proofs of its prevalence at times when there was no
real evidence of its existence to be offered. We arrive
thus at the conclusion that to the year a.d. 180, or for
five generations following the period assigned for the
death of Jesus, there was no such thing known of or
professed as Christianity.
There occur then about seventy years to the time of
Decius, during which we are to presume that Christian
ity had its rise, and prevailed sufficiently to have
attracted the opposition of this persecuting emperor.
The writer of the third Gospel shows us that “ many
had taken in hand ” to describe the life of Christ be-
�The Christian Evidences.
37
fdre the appearance of his effort. These were necessar
ily unauthorized or apocryphal scriptures, as Origen has
recognized to have been the fact, of which we know
that there were upwards of fifty such apocryphal
gospels, whereof seven are still extant. The earliest
Christian writers made use of these unauthorized
scriptures, as for example the reputed Clement of Rome,
Justin Martyr, Papias, and the author of the Clemen
tine Homilies. The heretics, who were a numerous
body, held to these and not to the accepted scriptures.
The so-called Irenaeus, while limiting the gospels to
four in number, cites the “Shepherd” of Hermas and
incidents still found in the gospel according to
Nicodemus as authoritative, and in disregard of
the statements in the canonical scriptures, maintains,
from some other source, that it was necessary that
Christ should pass through the different stages of
human existence, and thus did not end his days till he
was upwards of fifty years of age. Athenasius, in the
fourth century, followed the gospel of Nicodemus in
respect of the descent of Christ to Hades, an event
also indicated, we may assume from the same source,
in the accepted scriptures (Eph. iv. 9 ; 1. Pet. iii. 19 ;
iv. 6), and which has been presented as an object of
belief to the church in what is called the Apostle’s
Creed. At the same period Eusebius informs us that
the gospel according to the Hebrews maintained its
ground with some to his time (“ Ec. Hist.” III. 25).
There are other passages of the received scriptures, as
pointed out by the author of “ Primitive Church
History,” which would seem to be traceable to
apocryphal productions, such as occur in Matt, xxiii.
35; Acts xx. 35; Rom. xv. 19, 24; 1 Cor. xv. 6;
Jude 14.
Mr Sanday’s very candid treatment of the testimony
of Papias affords valuable material in dealing with the
subject now before us. He admits freely that the
Gospel of Mark to which Papias referred is not the one
�8
The Christian Evidences.
admitted into the canonical collection, this latter, accord
ing to the conclusion he is obliged to arrive at, not
being “original but based upon another document
previously existing” (149). “No doubt,” he continues
to observe, “this is an embarrassing result. The
question is easy to ask and difficult to answer—If our'
St Mark does not represent the original form, of the
document, what does represent it”? Papias had
described the Gospel of Mark he knew of as not written
in order, while Mr .Sanday finds that “the second
Gospel is written in order,” and therefore cannot be the
“original document” of which Papias has spoken (151).
The testimony affecting the canonical Gospel according
to Matthew is of an equally fatal nature. This Gospel,
as Papias has shown, should have appeared in Hebrew,
which was the form in which he was acquainted with
it, but ours is in Greek, and as Mr Sanday further
notices it uses the Septuagint and not the, Hebrew
Scriptures, and it has “ turns of language which have
the stamp of an original Greek idiom and could not
have come in through translation.” “ Can it have been,”
he asks, “ an original document at all”? To which his
reply is, “ The work to which Papias referred clearly
was such, but the very same investigation which shows
that our present St Mark was not original, tells with
increased force against St Matthew” (152).
We may next consider the condition in which these
writings have been transmitted to us, and no one could
-more faithfully and unreservedly describe this than has
done Mr Sanday.
The scheme of the New Testament is avowedly based
upon what appears in the Old Testament. Mr Sanday
says, “the whole subject of Old Testament quotations
is highly perplexing. Most of the quotations that we
meet with are taken from the LXX. version: and the
text of that version was at this particular time
especially uncertain and fluctuating” (16, 17). Mr
Sanday is here occupied with the quotations made b\
�The Christian Evidences.
39
the early Christian writers, but the time alleged for
them approaches that asserted for the Canonical Scrip
tures, and Mr Sanday’s observations embrace the latter
description of writings also. He says, for example,
that “in Eph. iv. 8 St Paul quotes Ps. lxxviii. 19, but
with a, marked variation from all the extant texts of the
LXX.” (17). Again he adds, “ Strange to say, in five
other passages which are quoted variantly by St Paul,
Justin also agrees with him” (18). “ In two places at
least Clement agrees, or nearly agrees, with St Paul,
where both differ from the LXX.” (19). “Another
disturbing influence, which will affect especially the
quotations in the Gospels, is the possibility, perhaps
even probability, that many of these are made, not'
directly from either Hebrew or LXX., but through the
Targums. This would seem to be the case especially
with the remarkable applications of prophecy in St
Matthew” (19). Mr Turpie is referred to for the
details he exhibits. Of 275 quotations from the Old
Testament in the New, 37 agree with the LXX., but
not with the Hebrew; 76 differ both from the Hebrew
and the LXX., where the two are together; 99 differ
from them where they diverge; and 3, “though in
troduced with marks of quotation, have no assignable
original in the Old Testament at all” (20, 21). “But
little regard—or what according to our modern habits
would be considered little regard—is paid to the sense
and original context of the passage quoted,” the in
stances given being Matt. viii. 17; xi. 10 ; 2 Cor. vi. 17;
and Heb. i. 7 (24). “ Sometimes the sense of the
original is so far departed from that a seemingly
opposite sense is substituted for it,” the instances
being Matt. ii. 6; Rom. xi. 26; and Eph. iv. 8 (24).
In Matt, xxvii. 9, 10, Jeremiah has been cited in lieu
of Zechariah; in Mark ii. 26, Abiathar has been
named in lieu of Abimelech; and “in Acts vii. 16
there seems to be a confusion between the purchase of
Machpelah near Hebron by Abraham and Jacob’s
�40
The Christian Evidences.
purchase of land from Hamor the father of Shechem”
(25). Matt. ii. 23; John vii. 38, 42; Eph. v. 14, and
the second of the citations in 1. Tim. v. 18, “can he
assigned to no Old Testament original ” (25).
The text of the scripture in the various versions
made thereof became corrupted, of which Origen and
Jerome have seriously complained. Mr Sanday cites
Dr Scrivener who observes, “ now it may be said with
out extravagance that no set of Scriptural records
affords a text less probable in itself, less sustained by
any rational principles of external evidence, than that
of Cod. D. of the latin Codices, and (so far as it accords
with them) of Cureton’s Syriac. Interpolations as
insipid in themselves as unsupported by other
evidence abound in them all .... It is no
less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that the
worst corruptions to which the New Testament has ever
been subjected originated within a hundred years after
it was composed.” To which Mr Sanday adds, “This
is a point on which text critics of all schools are
substantially agreed. However much they may differ
in other respects, no one of them has ever thought of
taking the text of the Old Syriac and Old Latin tranlations as the basis of an edition. There is no question
that this text belongs to an advanced, though early,
stage of corruption” (135, 136).
“The first two
i chapters [of Matthew] clearly belong to a different stock
of materials from the rest of the Gospel.” “ If Luke had
had before him the first two chapters of Matthew, he
could not have written his own first two chapters as
he has done” (153). “For minor variations the text
of Irenaeus cannot be used satisfactorily, because it is
always doubtful whether the Latin version has correctly
reproduced the original.” The text of Tertullian hav
ing “ been edited in a very exact and careful form,” Mr
Sanday says, “I shall illustrate what has been said
respecting the corruptions introduced in the second
century chiefly from him” (332, 333). Mr Sanday
�The Christian Evidences.
4i
quotes from Dr Scrivener who states, “ Origen’s is the
highest name among the critics and expositors of the
early church; he is perpetually engaged in the discus
sion of various readings of the New Testament, and
employs language in describing the then state of the
text, which would be deemed strong if applied even to
its present condition with the changes which sixteen
more centuries must needs have produced ....
‘ But now,’ saith he, ‘ great in truth has become the
diversity of copies, be it from negligence of certain
scribes, or from the evil daring of some who correct
what is written, or from those who in correcting add or
take away what they think fit ’ ” (328).
In the Pauline epistles, the author constantly refers
to his having written them with his own hand (1 Cor.
xvi. 21; Gal. vi. 11; Col. iv. 18; Philemon 19),this being
“ the token in every epistle” (2 Thess. iii. 17), and when
another hand was employed, he was mentioned by name
(Rom. xvi. 22). The reason for the alleged caution
apparently is that the churches were disturbed by
spurious epistles as coming from the alleged Paul
(2 Thess. ii. 2). Peter is represented as using the like
precaution of naming his scribe (1 Pet. v. 12). If these
autographs were of importance to establish the auth
enticity of the text, it is clear that we should have had
the autographs as well as the text. Tertullian, to whom
it cost little to make an assertion, assured those he
addressed that there were such autographs (327), other
wise they have never been heard of. Speaking of
Origen, Dr Scrivener says, “respecting the sacred
autographs, their fate or their continued existence, he
seems to have had no information, and to have enter
tained no curiosity : they had simply passed by and
were out of his reach,” (328), or, it may be better
concluded, had never existed.
We may now judge of the tale of Christianity by its
proper historical foundations. A divinity is born on earth
�42
The Christian Evidences.
visibly moving among mankind; heavenly voices
announce his advent; when he opens his ministry the
spirit of God alights upon him in visible form, and the
Deity acknowledges his divine origin in audible tones ;
Satan appears in bodily form to subvert him with
temptations, but is defeated ; he turns water into wine
and creates cooked food out of nothing for the support
of thousands; he controls the elements, quelling a
storm and walking on water as on dry land; he heals
the sick with a word or a touch, restoring the lame, the
deaf, and the blind; the devils then infesting mankind
leave their victims and vanish at his command; the
dead rise to life obedient to his word ; the ancient
Hebrew worthies, Moses and Elijah, return to earth to
glorify him; angels come and minister to him; he is
publicly put to an ignominious death, but rises from,
the grave, visits and comforts his followers, and ascends
before them into heaven; from thence he sends forth
the Spirit of God to be for ever with his people, guiding
and instructing them in all things till he should
speedily return and take them to himself.
One would think that the revelation of such a being,
attended by demonstrations designed to attract attention
and fill all minds with wonder and awe, would not fall
dead upon the generation so visited, and that every
word and outward manifestation from the divine
personage so exhibiting himself for the benefit of man
kind, would have had its due and full effect, and have
left its impress upon the favoured witnesses of these
occurrences, and those who immediately succeeded
them. Equally should we expect that the mission of
the Holy Ghost would not be in vain, that the task
committed to him would be duly performed, and that
the divinely taught and guided people would stand out
in open relief as an exemplar to the darkened world
that was to be illuminated by their presence and
benefitted by their instructions. Nor could we antici
pate that the promise of the early return of the divine
�The Christian Evidences.
43
founder would remain, even at a distant day, unre
deemed, as a vain utterance, not to be realized. Such,
however, is the imaginary portraiture, and such the
reverse with which the stern progress of events
indubitably presents us.
The facts offered for acceptance are of a character to
contradict all experience, and involve a series. of
disturbances of the governing laws in nature which
operate around us in unvarying consistency; a fatal
interval of five generations occurs between the facts and
their known acceptance by any one, and we have to
depend for them, not on witnesses, but on records
suspiciously introduced at a later era j nor has the
integrity of these records, though said to have been
divinely inspired, been preserved. The first to avow
belief in the founder of the new faith are those who
are condemned as heretics, and the earliest representa
tions about him are in documents rejected as unauthor
ized and apocryphal. The Holy Ghost abstains from
action for five generations and upwards,. leaving the
field open to the enemy, who occupies it with false
professors and spurious narrations. At length a body
claiming to be orthodox make their appearance and
produce four accounts of the founder for which they
claim divine support. With the aid of a Christian
advocate we may assure ourselves that two of these are
not what they purport to be, but are substitutes for the
original writings which in some unaccountable manner
have disappeared. A third hangs upon these two and
necessarily falls with them. The fourth contradicts all
that has gone before it, is obviously framed for dogmatic
effect, and is so surrounded with difficulties as to its
authenticity as to have become a vehicle for disputations
never to be solved satisfactorily by those who would
uphold it. On the other hand improving knowledge
sets us above the condition of those who in ignorance
have accepted these more than questionable scriptures.
The proved antiquity of the human race makes us bid
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The Christian evidences
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 44 p. ; 18 p.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. The oval portrait on title page is a photo [of the author?] that has been cut out and pasted. A review of the Rev. W. Sanday's work: "The Gospels in the Second Century." Includes bibliographical references. Date of publication from KVK. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1877]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G5473
Subject
The topic of the resource
Book reviews
Christianity
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The Christian evidences), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Book Reviews
Conway Tracts
Gospels
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/e40e6f51c5be6e25f58cdeff14f4f48b.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ZMnkm5CGdv9xqgxpNnmkPfFK6eREa%7E-VZox%7EPMrPnrL4f41jACaNw9T8985YPkBCYV1j-YZ3T7de7AKHc0OayGC1hRZNPBK-SWESDNQoqyJftqMxz7f0%7ETFzS7UtYhsZ5zWSGOEGM5K0Zw1dmNXZuLj71DZ%7EZf59ZygLvwpY%7Ebd5ayeVBwPO5fb9ob-Xizm6HEyRrPPZIqhfJFCBei5V2q8YicMr77VVQpNyWMTDdtlYA1Q1iqpAXZLIPQS%7EjXdqBWxRcsODazFhy-I9bF3M25qq5yLCC75AtsSx2jxZiytt0WE7Hl1tbwsQR-vxzpzbEwScjzcAR-LMAPi3AaWJzA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
51575f56889e196e29f586dcf3318ce6
PDF Text
Text
THE
EXERCISE OE PRAYER.
BY
THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE.
LATE A JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS.
AUTHOR OF “THE BIBLE, IS IT ‘THE WORD OF GOD,*” “THE SPEAKER’S
COMMENTARY REVIEWED,” “ A CRITICAL CATECHISM,” ETC.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
•*’.* ■«- ■
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Threepence.
��THE EXERCISE OF PRAYER.
E have had an interesting article on the “ Province
of - Prayer,” from an able writer in this series,
who signs himself W. E. B. He describes what others
have said on the proper action and effects of prayer,
and gives his own conclusions on this momentous sub
ject. There are some positions taken by him to which
many will be ready to yield assent. We may, for
example, cordially agree with a writer cited by him
from the Contemporary Review, who says, “ I cannot
express my repugnance at the notion that supreme
intelligence and wisdom can be influenced by the
suggestion of any human mind, however great.” It is
also most true that the phenomena of the exact sciences
are beyond the province of prayer, and that it is only
because ignorant of the prevailing laws which govern
the weather, or the progress of disease, that persons,
who would not dream “ of praying that the sun should
always be visible in England,” expect by prayer to
change the weather and avert disease. But if we are
to conclude, as W. E. B. appears to do, that all con
nected with ourselves is so absolutely under the do
minion of fixed regulation, as to make variation in the
distribution of effects an impossibility, and that the
result of prayer is merely to put into operation our
own proper resources, mental and spiritual, and to
create a “reflex action” -upon our individual minds,
without causation by any power beyond us, it seems to
W
�6
The Exercise of Prayer.
me that we are introduced to two very serious nega
tions ; \st, that the Creator has ceased to interfere
with the concerns of those whom he has created, but
has committed all affecting them to the ministration of
his appointed laws; 2d, that no desire expressed by
us reaches him, but merely serves to excite emotions or
thoughts of our own, which are turned back upon our
selves. If this be so, there is an end of prayer. No
one would address a being who cannot be moved, or
put his aspirations in the shape of prayer, when all
that is to be looked for is the promotion of his own
mental activities. Reflection and resolution would be
his resources, hut never prayer.
The physicist, cited by W. E. B. from the Contem
porary Review, in the consciousness of the immutability
of the laws of the universe, describes himself as one
who “ fears no catastrophe—regards calmly all that
happens. . . . Bor the future he has no anxiety ;
the supreme order in which he has a place and work
cannot fail to provide, and he submits, without suggest
ing limits, or a definition, to the plan he never could
have devised, and cannot compass—too glad to believe
that all such order is not to be influenced by human
interference.” This is an enviable condition to have
arrived at, doubtless; but are we limited to the acquisi
tion of mere contentment ? Have we no thought of
bettering ourselves, dr those around us ? Have we no
aspirations for what lies beyond us ? Are existing
conditions for ever to satisfy us ? Is every considera
tion to centre in the narrow element of ourselves ?
Man is assuredly not constituted for this impassive
and isolated state. He has relations with all that is
present to his senses, which draw him continually
beyond the contemplation of his individual being.
He can enter into the joys and woes of others. He
can exert himself to minister to their necessities, or to
take part in their gratifications. He has sentiments
and desires of his own that are never stagnant. He
�The Exercise of Prayer.
7
has aspirations of the highest order. There is nothing
existing, within his reach, but what he grasps at, seeks
to understand, and to utilize. He places before hinr
ideal perfections to which he strives to attain. He is
in continual progress to what is higher, better, vaster,
than what characterizes his existing status. A creature
go greedy of gain, so willing to associate all creation in
the wealth of his advancement, can never rest, with
out something like the process of emasculation, in the
cold immovable condition of placid resignation to
which the physicist would condemn himself. The
question is, can a being, large-hearted, emotional, and
ambitious, as I conceive man to be by nature, be de
pendent, for the realization of his most exalted aims,
upon himself, without requiring, or receiving, external
guidance and support ? If the answer can be yes, then
prayer is uncalled for. If otherwise, then he will
surely address himself to the source wherein may lie
his hope of help.
In respect of his physical state, man is by no means
a self-contained being. He has innumerable wants,
all of which have to be satisfied from what is external
to him. He has to build up his abode, to weave his
apparel, warm his dwelling, and feed himself. He has
to guard himself from hostilities and dangers, to trans
port himself from place to place by sea and land. He
resorts to endless devices to procure himself all that
his necessities require. All his materials are gathered
from outside his system; nor does he work alone. Mostly
he serves himself through the means of others. His
mental wants are similarly satisfied. Many have
laboured in the fields of knowledge, and he profits by
the accumulated results. Is he, in respect of spiritual
attainments, cast only upon himself ? When he takes
in his food, assimilates it, and adds it to the replenish
ment and support of his physical system; when he
feeds, enlivens, and sustains his thinking powers by
resorting to the intellectual productions of others ; is
�8
The Exercise of Prayer.
the process a “ reflex action. ” created out of his indi
vidual resources ? Has he not been drawing upon
materials outside himself for the invigoration and ad
vancement of his own proper condition? And in
seeking the satisfaction of the higher desires of the
soul, in striving to avoid what is hurtful to his spiritual
state, and to acquire that which will fortify and promote
the powrer of his inner life, is he cast absolutely upon
himself ? Are there no wells, no magazines, beyond him,
to which he may look for continual and unfailing supplies?
Centralization presents itself to us everywhere as the
universal method of arrangement. Every organized
object, vegetal or animal, is endowed with some
governing power which watches over and promotes all
its interests. In our social systems, whether constitut
ing families, communities, or nations, there is always
an ultimate ruler and director, from whom the different
administrations derive their authority, and whose
edicts they have to obey. In physics the same rule
obtains. The various forces of nature act together to
effect some common end, the scheme of which betrays
the existence of some influencing medium. Isolation
exists nowhere. All that we come in contact with
exhibits combination, and there must be some combin
ing power. The globe which we inhabit is associated
with other globes, the whole being placed under the
domination of a central governor. There are countless
systems beyond us, which are apparently similarly
associated and directed. And these, there is room to
believe, are held together in one mighty embrace, and
revolve in subordination to some universal centre. Has
the designer of these magnificent arrangements left
himself without any proper action of his own ?
In physics there is always some subtle source which
evades detection. We see certain chemical effects,
but how produced, no one can describe. How our
food is converted into the various elements upon
which our bodies subsist we have not discovered.
�The Exercise of Prayer.
9
Certain combinations terminate in the production of
life. But what life is, and how introduced, none can
say. The prime origin of any force or movement is
beyond our means of discernment. The region of
thought, how it germinates, develops, and multiplies
itself, none have apprehended. Is it not possible that
in these phenomena we have the threads which lead
up to some central influencing and governing power—
the links of the creation with the Creator ?
We have to do on all sides with infinitude. Our
minds stretch back to trace the course of time. We
are satisfied that it has had no beginning, and can
have no end. The same of space; it cannot be con
fined within any bounds. The same of power; it
must have existed always, and can never be absolutely
expended. The same of all the sensations of the mind ;
they are illimitable. Atoms as we are, we are bound up
with this infinitude. Perfect satisfaction is a condition
never attained, and would seem to be unattainable.
With an inexhaustible storehouse before ,us, we are, and
probably shall for ever be, emulous of further good.
The highest result of the creative mind of which we
are conscious is man himself. With his faculty for
adaptation, for designing ends to be accomplished by
selected means, he is continually rearranging, transform
ing, and utilizing the objects around him. He turns
clay into bricks, cuts down the trees and shapes them
to his purposes, quarries and makes use of the slatey
deposits of the hills, and so constructs for himself
dwelling-places. Where there was a marsh, he drains
and converts it into dry arable land. He digs up the
ore, smelts it, and makes therewith an endless variety
of useful implements. He tunnels the mountains,
diverts the course of rivers, bridges their channels,
crosses in comfortable habitations the ocean, skims the
earth in conveyances with the fleetness of a bird, and
sends his messages across seas and continents, round the
globe, with the speed 'of lightning. In these operations
�io
The Exercise of Prayer.
he does not controvert nature, but makes use of her
resources. Is the contriver of all these means debarred
from interference with his provided materials ? Has he
no voice in the endless adaptations and developments
of which they are susceptible ? Is man himself placed
beyond his reach for direction and control ? Does he
call the individual into being, and not rule his cir
cumstances ?
We see it to be otherwise. The discipline of life
gives us the highest testimony of the operation of a
purposing director. Its events, as they pass before us,
each occupy us with their seeming importance; but the
combination of them, and their effect in influencing
our apprehensions and estimate of all with which we
are associated, convey lessons, arriving to us from out
side ourselves, as from a supreme instructor. The
culture of the soul, to those who are awakened to
obedience, produces very marked and durable effects
upon the character. The action of the inward monitor
is as an inspiration from one beyond us. A watchful
and enlightened mind is conscious of being under better
direction than its own. Such a one can compare his
former with his existing self, and be satisfied that he
has been brought under systematic and effectual train
ing by a master-hand. This experience is beyond
estimate in its value. Any one who has had it should
evermore resign himself with gladness and entire con
fidence to the guidance of his maker. He is no
isolated atom, but is in communion, for everlasting
interests, with the central ruler of the universe.
If, then, we do in truth stand associated with some
common centre—the source of life, of power, and of
thought—the creator of every visible object, the ruler
of all that exists—one who has planned everything,
ordered everything, purposed the ultimate design of all
that he has called into being—who commands the
abundance, and the perfection, of all that we can desire;
what more reasonable and allowable exercise of the
�The Exercise of Prayer.
11
mind than that we should turn to him in every
emergency and every need ?
W. E. B. holds that “ Science owes no allegiance to
Religion.” He probably is' here referring to what
passes for revealed religion. Science introduces us to
the works of the Creator, enabling us to comprehend
something of the wTisdom and beneficence with which
they have been ordained, and to appreciate the certainty
with which all the appointments answer their ends.
To study the laws of nature, moral as well as physical,
is therefore, so far, to study the Creator himself. They
read us, in their action, perpetual lessons by which we
may judge of the fitness of things, and estimate results.
We can see the unerring consequences of conforming to
or disobeying these laws. They never violate their
integrity, and they execute their designed sentences
with unfailing fidelity. No sane person should dream
of requiring the disturbance of such a system. He
would be warring in mind against his central ruler,
and courting evil, and not good. No request can be
effectual, but what may consist with the constitution of
the authority addressed. If we could not legitimately
ask an earthly potentate to break through, in our be
half, the settled laws of his dominions, still less should
we expect the supreme ruler to set at nought, for us,
his decreed arrangements. In the compass of our own
necessities, to express the sense of a felt want, or the
fear of a threatening danger, is a natural and a perfectly
legitimate movement. We do our best to obtain a
remedy, and may call upon one mightier than ourselves,
who is ever present, to direct and aid us. We may not
get what we ask for. Seldom is there such a response
as to make it clear that we have had a direct answer to
the particular prayer uttered. But relief in some way
is certain. The apprehensions will in time be tran
quillized, the sense of destitution removed, or positive
help may be brought in. Or we may undergo the
feared calamity, and eventually find we have been
�12
The Exercise of Prayer.
introduced to what has been profitable to us. And
should the danger, to ourselves or another, end in
death, there is a further sphere, beyond this life, in
which the Creator’s action has to be maintained; and
we may look forward for others, and for ourselves, in
hopefulness, beyond the dark inevitable passage that has
to be made. One who sets himself against at,t, evil,
ONE WHOSE POWER AND RESOURCES ARE LIMITLESS,
KNOWS HOW TO TRIUMPH IN EVERY INSTANCE, AND TO
CONDUCT HIS CREAT.URES, BY ASSURED STEPS, TO THEIR
ULTIMATE GOOD.
The writer whose pamphlet is before me has appar
ently a sense of this desired end. He notices the
existence among us of “ a natural craving for sympathy,”
and observes, “there is never perfect sympathy between
two human beings. To no human friend, however
dear, can we talk as unreservedly as we can think and
feel. But we can pray, at least silently, with a freedom
as unrestrained as the thoughts and desires of our
minds. The Divine Being is to us the infinite personi
fication of our purest ideal. We may believe, in an
indefinite way, that He is also infinitely more than this;
but it is as this that we pray to Him. Prayer, then,
in its highest, purest, and, as I think, its only useful
form, consists in a yearning after the loftiest ideal.”
With such a goal before us, with such a friend to
whom to open out our inmost thoughts and aspirations,
may we not ask for help, as we feel the need of it, at
every step of our onward progress; and when we have
the support and guidance wanted, acknowledge, grate
fully, the source beyond us as that from whence the
aid has come ?
Great Malvern,
September 1873.
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The exercise of prayer
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 12 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Printed by Turnbull and Spears, Edinburgh.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1873
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT112
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The exercise of prayer), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Prayer
Conway Tracts
Prayer
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/1089a3f52f4d25571a8c7c90f9c36d03.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=LD7PzDD6BMMCn-p1FQ99AW1UomhczSyNzRMqFrwqYVmduxgsbDxnvBhmiYzmVviwZQ23S3-CdM%7EUEUHmZjGcI-3TZ3tkcS130JUmEZ67CwZ-TMCXV-31JY9KkRTVmQTTsNTd8A8yD7Wox3YiK6Hab71uIv1eX53vvcuquG4T77pC%7E6in2GyJb2NbPmZ0zhEh4DT03gEdll01W9I%7EXh-YBJ4g1-LSLTXH3tWkF2vt9iHjQfLr4FGTB%7Es4AgYAnnoJIMGnknMwCtNGgPdvcOBlzaLgsfmvAw18eSt6XX8-9KkmU98VYULF3NgdVnD0utamNd0KeppI4a2EWt0DnyNnug__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4904dce84f26cbceb47b6652a330adb0
PDF Text
Text
THE
PAULINE EPISTLES
BY
THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Sixpence.
��THE PAULINE EPISTLES.
rnHE Canonical Gospels have received much attention
JL from critics, and their integrity has heen effectively
challenged. The prefatory verses of Luke’s Gospel
show that the writer was no eye-witness of the events
described by him, but owed his information to others
whom he even failed to name. The Gospels according
to Matthew and Mark are linked with that according
to Luke in the same scheme of narration, the three
obviously at times following some common document.
Luke’s want of originality therefore attaches also to the
other two so standing associated with him in the repre
sentations made by them. Luke and Mark make no
pretension to being of the number of the apostles, and
the tradition that the Gospel of Matthew was put
forth in Hebrew destroys the credit of the document
we have in this name as coming from a possible apos
tolic source. The writers therefore simply belonged to
the church at large, and were not persons who had
ever been in the society of the asserted founder of the
faith whose history they undertook to give. The ex
istence of their productions can be traced only to times
removed by several generations from the alleged apos
tolical age, and their facts are found occasionally so
discordant as to be mutually destructive. The result
therefore arrived at is, that these narratives cannot be
accepted as representing.history. Standing associated
with a crowd of similar marvellous tales which are
universally disallowed as authorities, they are them
�6
The Pauline Epistles.
selves found, when critically examined, equally un
reliable. The Gospel according to John is condemned
even more conclusively. It is of a later time than the
productions of the synoptists ; it is in violent opposi
tion to their representations in nearly all its particu
lars ; and it betrays itself as composed for dogmatic
effect after Christianity had become matured. But in
certain of the epistles attributed to Paul even
advanced critics have thought that we have the genu
ine works of a renowned preacher standing in the
apostolic age, and that there is consequently an exhi
bition of Christianity at a period approaching that of
its alleged foundation in the life of its reputed origi
nator. These are admissions which seem to me to
have been made without sufficient consideration, and
I propose now to show grounds why the Pauline epis
tles may be relegated to the region of the apocryphal,
equally as the Gospels.
The Acts of the Apostles purports to be an account
of the labours and doctrines of the first followers of
Jesus. The time is that immediately ensuing after the
asserted resurrection of Jesus, and it extends to the
close of the active ministry of Paul, terminating when
he was placed, as is said, under restraint in Rome.
Jesus is described as having surrounded himself with a
special band of twelve witnesses, and it was thought
of such importance to keep up this apparent institu
tion, that when a vacancy occurred from the alleged
apostacy and death of Judas, the number is stated to
have been filled up by an appeal to the Deity through
the process of a selection by lot. We are to under
stand that to these the founder had committed his
testimonies, and through them had provided the
means of disseminating the doctrines of the new
faith propounded by him. We are plainly informed
that the appointed preachers at the outset confined
their ministry to the Jews only, feeling no liberty to
address the Gentiles; and when Paul and Barnabas
�The Pauline Epistles.
7
introduced the gospel to the Gentiles, we find mem
bers of the original Judean Church seeking to bring
the new converts within the pale of Judaism by re
quiring that they should be circumcised. The Jewish
faction failed in their endeavour, and from thence
forward an open door was afforded to the Gentiles.
But it has been seen necessary to show adequate
authority for this departure from the original institu
tion in which was the expression of Jewish exclusive
ness.
The founder, when he was in life, had peremptorily,
as it is said, enjoined it on his followers not to go into
the way of the Gentiles, nor even of the Samaritans,
but only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, and
had encouraged them to expect that his second and
final advent would be accomplished ere they had pro
secuted their labours over the cities of Israel, or the
region to which he so restricted them. When we find
his first followers obeying such a rule, we must con
clude that we are to understand that their founder
left them unprovided with any other. But we are
nevertheless called upon to believe that at his resur
rection Jesus abrogated his previous instructions, and
required that his gospel should be preached to “ every
creature ” on the face of the earth. To accept the
statement it is necessary first to admit the fact of the
resurrection; but even passing over this difficulty,
there are conclusive grounds to show that the com
mand alleged could not have been given. The rule of
exclusiveness is represented to have been broken
through under the force of the vision accorded to
Peter, who, when taxed with the undue liberty by his
brethren, sheltered himself under the authorization of
this vision. It is plain that the disciples could not
already have had an injunction to address the Gentiles
given them from the lips of the risen Jesus. Nor is
the authority of the vision itself sustainable. In evi
dent ignorance of any such sanction, Paul and Barna
�8
The Pauline Epistles. .
bas are seen addressing themselves to Jews only, and
then to have turned to the Gentiles on the mere ground
that the Jews had refused to accept them, supporting
themselves in their action hy an appeal to the Jewish
scriptures. Now if these scriptures gave the adequate
warrant attributed to them, all the circumstances pre
viously recited become negatived. Jesus, in the face
of these scriptures, could not have shut a door upon
the Gentiles, or have needed to open it by special
command, as a being raised from the dead; nor, sup
posing there was no such command, was there a call
for the mystical vision said to have been exhibited to
Peter. The Holy Ghost, acting upon the believing
body, especially after Pentecost, would have quite
sufficed to have given them the sense of the scriptures
described to have been independently arrived at by
Paul and Barnabas. In the action ascribed to Paul
and Barnabas we have a natural representation of the
passage made by Christianity out of Jewish exclusive
ness into the free sphere it has since occupied, and in
some such manner we may understand the transition
to have been effected. The result is that the Gentiles
owe their access to the faith adopted by them to some
other source than the ordinance of the asserted
founder of the system, whether as possibly communi
cated during his lifetime when in the flesh, or, as is said,
by an appearance made by him after his resurrection.
But the introduction of the Gentiles, it is apparent,
did not effect their complete amalgamation with the
Jewish party. The Hebrew scriptures relied on by
Paul and Barnabas, as it is stated, say no more in
respect of them than that they should be visited with
“ light.” (Isa. ix. 2 ; xlix, 6). The Messiah was to be
“ for a light of the Gentiles,” but “ for a covenant of
the people,” meaning, of course, Israel. “When the
Eedeemer shall come to Zion,” it is said of the sacred
city, “ Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the
glory of the Lord is risen upon thee;” but for the Gen
�The Pauline Epistles.
9
tiles the provision was that they ‘ ‘ shall come to thy
light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising;” and
it is expressed of Jesus by the evangelist (in, probably,
an interpolated portion) that he should be “a light to
lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of his people
Israel ” (Isa. xlii. 6; lix. 20; lx. 1-3; Luke ii. 32).
The Jewish party, it may be judged in the book of
Acts, retained among themselves the symbol of cir
cumcision, while not imposing it on the Gentiles.
Accordingly Paul circumcises Timothy even after he
had opened the dispensation to the Gentiles. A lower
standard, derived, however, from Jewish sentiment,
was prescribed for the Gentile converts. They were
to “ abstain from meats offered to idols, and from
blood, and from things strangled;” being also required
not to indulge in promiscuous intercourse with females.
In the Apocalypse the distinctiveness of the Jewish
race is ever maintained in the ages of futurity there
depicted, and place is ever afforded for their temple
and holy city, while the Gentiles are represented as a
promiscuous body held in subordination to them
(Rev. vii. 4-9; xi. 1, 2; xxi. 2, 3, 12, 24-26; xxii. 2).
These various features require to be kept in view in
judging of the Pauline epistles, where the association
of the Gentiles with the Jews is otherwise maintained.
The great question in biblical religion is, how to be
freed of the consequences of sin. The Mosaic law pro
fessed to effect the deliverance by the sacrifice of bulls
and of goats ; but in later times fervent spirits, ele
vated above the trammels of Mosaism, saw that this was
a vain resource, and were sensible that the sinner’s
heart had to be changed to secure for him acceptance
by the Deity (Ps. xl. 6-8; 1. 7-15 ; li. 15-17; Isa.
i. 11-17; Hos. vi. 6; Amos v. 21-24; Mic. vi. 6-8).
The Essenes, who are nevertheless accounted as of the
Jewish persuasion, practised this higher form of faith,
not resorting to sacrifices, but striving to commend
themselves to the Almighty by devotion of heart and
�10
The Pauline Epistles.
harmlessness of conduct. John the Baptist, as
described, was of this type. He is said to have initiat
ed Jesus by baptism; and the traces of Essene doc
trine, especially in the abnegation of the enjoyments
of life to promote spiritual growth and secure everlast
ing bliss, are discernible in the teachings attributed
to Jesus. His described method was that men should
seek acceptance by the Deity through repentance and
good works. They were to ask for forgiveness as they
forgave others. This he illustrated by the parable of
the unforgiving servant and that of the two debtors,
showing that all debts, or transgressions, would be
“ frankly ” forgiven for the mere asking; and he gave a
marked instance of such a result where he portrayed the
heavenly Father receiving the prodigal son with open
arms on his turning to him in repentance. He himself
undertook freely to forgive the man sick of the palsy,
and the woman who anointed him, all their sins. The
condition of a sacrifice in these instances was not merely
not pointed to, but excluded. In his didactic dis
courses, and the illustrations given by him in parables,
he placed the acceptance of mankind on their main
tenance of good works. The entry into the kingdom
of heaven was to be accorded to those who did the
will of his father; the tree was to be judged of by its
fruits ; the wise man, who built his house upon a rock
or sure foundation, was he who heard his sayings and
did them; they who did his Father’s will stood to
him as brother, sister, and mother; in the parable of
the sower those with whom the seed sown is fruitful
are the accepted; in that of the net the “just” are
severed from the “ wicked in that of the sheep and
goats, those who fed the hungry, sheltered the stranger,
clothed the naked, and visited the sick and imprisoned,
were to inherit the heavenly kingdom. We are to
judge how far the doctrine of the first described fol
lowers of Jesus was consistent with what we are to
consider thus traceable to his lips as the founder.
�The Pauline Epistles.
11
We learn that they invariably tanght that forgive
ness was to be freely expected on exercising repentance
and faith in Jesus, unqualified by other conditions
(Acts ii. 38 ; iii. 19 ; v. 31; viii. 22 ; x. 43 ; xiii. 38 ;
xvi. 31; xx. 21; xxii. 16 ; xxvi. 18). The particular
circumstance in respect of Jesus insisted on was his
resurrection. It was to bear personal evidence to this
alleged fact that the apostolic body are said to have
been constituted (Acts i. 8, 21-26 ; x. 41), and
thereto they assiduously offered their testimony (Acts
ii. 32; iii. 15; iv. 33). Their doctrine was that, as
prophesied, Christ must needs suffer to pass onwards
to glory (Acts iii. 18). He was, consequently, “led as
a sheep to the slaughter; ” and “his life” thus “taken
from the earth ” (Acts viii. 32, 33). They attached no
other sense to his death than that it was thus accom
plished. “ By wicked hands ” he had been “ crucified
and slain,” and “all the house of Israel ” were to know
assuredly that “ God had made that same Jesus, whom
they had crucified, both Lord and Christ;” they had
“ killed the Prince of life, whom God had raised from
the dead;”—“whom they crucified” he had “raised
from the dead.” “ The God of our fathers,” they said,
“raised up Jesus, whom ye slew and hanged on a
tree;” “whom they slew and hanged on a tree, him
God raised up the third day ” (Acts ii. 23, 36 ; iii. 15 ;
iv. 10; v. 30; x. 39, 40). Such was the character
of the death. As the Jews had “persecuted” the
“prophets,” and “ slain them which showed before of
the coming of the Just One,” so of him, when he
ca.me, had they “ been now the betrayers and mur
derers ” (Acts vii. 52). This negatives the idea that it
was a death effected sacrificially. It was a mere
murder, constituting the sufferer a martyr. And his
reward was his exaltation to be the deliverer of all
who looked to him for help. The early preachers con
sequently “preached peace by Jesus Christ,” pro
claiming him to be “Lord of all.” “Whosoever,”
�12
The Pauline Epistles.
they declared, “ shall call on the name of the Lord
shall be saved.” “ Neither,” they insisted, “is there
salvation in any other, for there is none other name
under heaven given among men whereby we must be
saved” (Acts ii. 21; iv. 12 ; x. 36).
The preaching of the Paul described in the Acts
consists with what has been thus attributed to the
apostolic body. He declared that “ Christ must needs
have suffered and risen from the dead,” for so had it
been foretold by “the prophets and Moses” that he
“ should suffer, and that he should be the first that
should rise from the dead.” He had been “slain”
though “ no cause of death ” was found in him—which
negatives the idea, promulgated in the later teaching,
that he had been put to death for a very sufficient
cause, namely to bear the sins of mankind, undergoing
in their room the Creator’s “ curse,” and so suffering.
Christ being raised from the dead to be constituted a
deliverer, Paul ever showed that it was in the recog
nition of his resurrection that the deliverance was to
be secured. He who had been “dead” he “affirmed
to be alive,” and so he “preached Jesus and the re
surrection.” God had “ given assurance unto all men
in that he had raised him from the dead,” that he had
“appointed a day” in which he should “judge the
world” by him; but his people, whom he had “pur
chased with his own blood, ” could find their safety in
him. In this manner, through the resurrection of the
deliverer, God, he assured his brethren, had “ fulfilled
the promise which was made unto the fathers.” It
was for “ the hope and resurrection of the dead,”
simply, that he himself was “called in question;” in
the way in which his accusers termed “ heresy,” so, he
declared, “ worship I the God of my fathers, believing
all things which are written in the law and in the
prophets; and have hope toward God” “that there
shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just
and unjust.” It was “touching the resurrection of
�The Pauline Epistles.
13
the dead” that he had to defend himself. “Why,”
he asks, “should it be thought a thing incredible”
“that God should raise the dead.” It was for this,
“ the hope of the promise made of God unto the
fathers,” for which he stood to be “judged ;” “ for the
hope of Israel,” he stated, “ I am bound with this
chain” (Acts xiii. 18-20, 32, 33 ; xvii. 3, 18, 31, 32 ;
xx. 28; xxiii. 6 ; xxiv. 14, 15, 21; xxv. 19 ; xxvi.
6, 8, 23 ; xxviii. 20).
The synoptic gospels have descriptions of Jesus
constituting him a mere man, and where the contrary
may appear the case, as in the accounts of his divine
nativity, there is room to conclude that we have ad
ditions made after the creed had assumed that ulti
mate form in which his divinity was maintained. The
genealogies tracing Joseph as descended from David
are without purpose, unless Joseph is to be accepted
as the father of Jesus. That he was so is repeatedly
intimated (Matt. xiii. 55; Luke ii. 41, 48; iv. 22).
The birth of Jesus involved the defilement of his mother,
from which she had to “purify” herself as in the case
of every natural birth; he had himself to be redeemed
from penalties incurred by his mere birth; and, as an
ordinary mortal, he is represented as growing “ in
wisdom” as well as in “stature.” He repudiated
possessing that goodness, or that prescience, which be
longs alone to God; he had need constantly to resort
to him in prayer for personal support; when he saw
his end approaching he repeatedly asked God to de
liver him; and in his last anguish, so destitute was
he, that he concluded God had forsaken him (Matt,
xix. 17; xx. 33; xxvi. 38-44; xxvii. 46; Mark xiii.
32 ; Luke ii. 22-24, 52 ; v. 6). And he commonly was
accepted in no higher capacity than that of a prophet
(Matt. xxi. 11, 46 ; Mark vi. 14-16 ; Luke iv. 24; vii.
16; xxiv. 19).
In the Book of Acts it is apparent that the lirst
�14
The Pauline Epistles.
teachers, including the Paul there depicted, had no other
apprehension of Jesus than that he was a mere man,
specially exalted at his resurrection. He was traced
lineally to David as “ the fruit of his loins,” and
being “ of this man’s seed” God had “raised’’him
to be “a Saviour ” unto “ Israel.” He was that
“ prophet ” of whom Moses had spoken who was to be
of the Jewish “ brethren ” “ like unto him,” simply a
human leader, “ a man approved of God,” as Moses
had been, “ by miracles, and wonders, and signs.” It
was at his resurrection only that his divine sonship
was conferred upon him, according to the saying of
the psalm, “ Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten
thee." “Through this man,” consequently, was for
giveness to be preached, and by this “ man ” are the
dead to be judged (ii. 22, 30 : iii. 22, 23 : vii. 37 ;
xiii. 33, 38; xvii. 31).
These doctrinal views, it is to be observed, did not
go beyond the limits of Judaism as understood by
certain sections of the Jewish community in those days,
and the persons represented as holding them are in
fact described as in strict Jewish association. Jesus
is so put before us in the synoptics. His pedigree in
Matthew is traced only up to Abraham; at the
annunciation to Mary he is proclaimed as the future
king of Israel; as such Herod is put in apprehension of
him; in this aspect he formally enters Jerusalem;
and under this title he is arraigned, mocked, and
crucified. John’s sphere of ministry as the precursor
of Jesus, the one who was “to go before the face of
the Lord to prepare his ways,” and “ to make ready
a people prepared for the Lord,” was confined to
“ Jerusalem and all Judea,” and to these limits Jesus
restricted his followers. His was a dispensation de
signed to raise up “children unto Abraham,” and
to bring in those who were to “sit down -with
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of
heaven; ” and there, in a heavenly region, Abraham
�The Pauline Epistles.
15
receives and comforts Lazarus, and refers those on earth
to the testimony of “ Moses and the prophets,” as all
sufficient.
Jesus accordingly announces that his
mission required that he should observe the law in
every “jot ” and “ tittle.” As a Jew he underwent
circumcision; was himself redeemed with the ap
pointed offering; frequented the temple at its festivals ;
purged it as being to him the “ house ” of God; and he
was buried as was “ the manner of the Jews.” The
lepers he cleansed were directed by him to go to the
priest with the gift “according as Moses commanded;”
the woman bowed with infirmity was restored “ as
being a daughter of Abraham;” the centurion’s servant
and the Syro-Phenician woman’s daughter were dealt
with exceptionally, but still in recognition of Jewish
privileges—the centurion being found with faith sur
passing that of any “in Israel,” and the Canaanitish
woman being first made to understand that she was an
outcast; Zaccheus was accepted “ for as much as he
also was a son of Abraham; ” the fall of the temple
was bound up with the day of judgment; and in the
futurity the apostles were to sit on thrones, judging
the still recognized twelve tribes of Israel.
In like manner, the apostles are found described as
remaining strictly within the bounds of Jewish mem
bership. They are said to have been at the outset at
Jerusalem waiting for the divine visitation brought to
them at Pentecost; on parting with the risen Jesus,
their anxiety was to know whether he was about to
“restore again” “the kingdom” promised “to Israel;”
there were then “ Jews, devout men out of every
nation under heaven,” to whom Peter addressed the
first reported Christian discourse, distinguishing them
as “men of Judea,” and dwellers “at Jerusalem.”
“ Ye men of Israel,” was his common form of appeal,
and he brought the Deity before them as “ the God of
Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob ; ” as devout
Jews they used “ to continue daily with one accord
�16
The Pauline Epistles.
in the temple ; ” Peter and John went up together
there, “at the hour of prayer,” when the notable
miracle on the lame man was wrought; the address of
the proto-martyr Stephen was presented strictly to
Jews, and was made up of the elements of their sacred
history, interesting only themselves; to this time
the “ disciples ” had “multiplied,” but only “in Jeru
salem ; ” at the dispersion consequent on the death of
Stephen the members of the Church addressed them
selves “ to none but unto the Jews only; ” and Philip
was divinely commissioned to convert a eunuch of
Ethiopia, but he was one who “had come to Jerusalem
for to worship,” and was thus a Jew (Acts i. 4, 6;
ii. 5, 14, 22, 46 ; iii. 1, 12, 13; v. 42; vi. 7; viii. 1,
27; xi. 1-19).
And so also as to the Paul of the Acts. He prima
rily addresses himself to “men of Israel; ” he circum
cised Timothy; to conciliate Jewish brethren, “all
zealous of the law,” he “purified” himself in the
temple, and was at “charges ” to enable four men to
“shave their heads,” and make an “ offering,” and
thus keep a vow they had undertaken ; when on his
defence he states he frequented the temple “for to
worship,” and was never “ found ” there “ disputing
with any man;” his brother Jews “found” him
“purified in the temple ; ” he had never, he alleged,
“ offended anything at all,” “ neither against the
law of the Jews, neither against the temple ” (xiii.
16 ; xvi. 3 ; xxi. 20-26 ; xxiv. 11-15, 18 ; xxv. 8).
The doctrine of the resurrection, which he preached,
was unacceptable to the Sadducees, who had managed
to have the apostles cast into prison. Paul, when
brought before the Jewish council, took advantage of
the schism between them and the Pharisees, who be
lieved in a resurrection, and exclaimed, “ Men and
brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee : of
the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in
question,” and so enlisted the Pharisees in his favour,
�The Pauline Epistles.
17
they testifying, “ We find no evil in this man,” de
monstrating thus that he and his doctrine could stand
scrutiny as strictly consonant to Jewish tenets (iv.
1-3 ; v. 17, 18 ; xxiii. 6-9).
Thus stands the quasi-historical record. We may
accept the representation so far as relates to the doc
trinal position of the first Christians, without being
obliged to admit also the framework of the picture
given. For example, we may reasonably disallow the
statement that the apostles had been in intercourse
with the risen Jesus for forty days ; that they wit
nessed his ascension, and just before the occurrence
held with him the conversation respecting the coming
kingdom, the words of which are reported ; that a
divine manifestation, with physical symbols, was ex
hibited at Pentecost, whereby the disciples were
enabled to speak in foreign tongues ; that the apostles
were armed with miraculous power so as to be able to
strike some persons dead, to raise others up from
death, and to cure the sick, even through the instru
mentality of their shadows and handkerchiefs or
aprons. We may even go further, and dispute the
constitution of the apostolic body, and the existence
of Christianity during the era alleged for it.
*
With
these subjects I am not now dealing. I am merely
occupied with the doctrinal teaching of the first Chris
tians, as described in their own record, with the view
of contrasting it with what is put forward in the
Pauline epistles, and estimating the value of these
epistles as an authoritative class of writings.
The history, then, of the doctrinal standing of the
first Christians, (always excepting the later delineations
in the gospel according to John, and those additions
made in the synoptic gospels in view of establishing
« The Twelve Apostles, Our First Century, and Primitive Church
History, all by the same able author in Mr Scott s series; 2 ne
Sources and Development of Christianity, by T. L. Strange. (Trubner & Co.)
�18
The Pauline Epistles.
a correspondence with the tenets taken up at a more
advanced period), represents these earliest professors
of the Christian faith as members of the Jewish per
suasion; they describe their founder as such, attribute
to him the design to keep up Jewish institutions, and
derive from him a command to limit their ministra
tions to their Jewish brethren. The hope set before
them was the restoration of the kingdom of Israel, the
instrument of which was to be their asserted founder,
whom they accepted as the Jewish Messiah. He had
undergone death. They represented him as having
incurred martyrdom, and. held that his sufferings were
the necessary passport to his glory. He was a mere
man, but approved of God, who raised him from the
dead and thus constituted him in sonship to himself.
In his exalted condition he became the deliverer of
his people. Repentance sufficed to insure pardon, and
faith in the risen Christ made them partakers in his
glory. With these doctrines in view as making up
the sum of primitive Christianity, we may now turn
to the consideration of the Pauline epistles.
We early notice in certain of these epistles a decided
change of view in respect of the death of the founder.
It is no more merely that of a martyr, incurred as a
stepping-stone to glory, but an expiatory offering made
sacrificially for the sins of mankind. The narratives of
the trial and execution of Jesus, given in the gospels, in
volved no such features as that he bore the sins of
others, and suffered for them atoningly. He is de
scribed to have been interrogated on his own behalf,
to have been charged with offence against Jewish sen
timent rather than with moral guilt, and to have been
judicially acquitted, even (according to this strange ac
count) when sentenced to execution. The expression
is the death of a blameless man sacrificed to popular
clamour. It is just the martyrdom which the first
Christians set up, the wicked murdering the godly.
But it involves no one element of the sacrifice for sin
�The Pauline Epistles.
19
needed for the support of the position in the Pauline
epistles. The victim was taken to the cross forcibly
by an armed party; he had earnestly prayed the
Deity to avert his fate ; he was hence no willing offer
ing ; he had been exculpated and thus bore the sins of
none ; there was no religious ceremonial, no altar,
no priest, or sacrificial knife, associated with the occur
rence. He died exactly as the thieves said to have
been executed on either side of him. The Pauline
epistles, which are now in question, take no account
of the gospel narratives, but, on independent grounds,
maintain their own representation. It is therein
alleged that Christ was “ delivered for our offences,
and raised again for our justification that he “ died
for the ungodly “ while we were yet sinners, Christ
died for us; ” we are “justified by his blood; ” we are
“ reconciled to God by the death of his Son
“ God
spared not his Son, but delivered him up for us all; ’
the writer, in his earnest zeal for his doctrine, “ deter
mined not to know anything ” among those addressed,
“ save Jesus Christ, and him crucified ; ” “ Christ,”
he maintained, had “ died for our sins according to
the scriptures.” “ If one died for all, then were all
dead, and that he died for all, that they which live
should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto
him which died for them, and rose again ; ” he had
been “ made sin for us, who knew no sin; that we
might be made the righteousness of God in him.’
“0 foolish Galatians,” the writer exclaims, “who
hath bewitched you, that you should not obey the
truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evi
dently set forth, crucified among you ; ” “ Christ hath
redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a
curse for us ; for it is written, Cursed is every one that
hangeth on a tree
“ God forbid that I should glory,
save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom
the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.
“We have redemption through his blood, the forgive-
�20
The Pauline Epistles.
Hess of sins ; ” we, 11 who sometimes were far off, are
made nigh by the blood of Christ; ” he has “ recon
ciled both unto God in one body by the cross, having
slain the enmity thereby,” “ so making peace; ”
“ Christ hath loved us, and hath given himself for us
an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling
savour; ” a we have redemption through his blood,
even the forgiveness of sins.” “It pleased the
Father ” to make “ peace through the blood of his
cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by
him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things
in heaven ; ” he “ died for us, that whether we wake
or sleep we should live with him ” (Bom. iv. 25 ;
v. 6-10 ; viii. 32 ; 1 Cor. ii. 2 ; xv. 3 ; 2 Cor. v. 14,
21 ; Gal. iii. 1, 13 ; xvi. 14 ; Eph. i. 7 ; ii. 13, 16 ;
v. 2 ; Col. i. 4, 20 ; 1 Thess. v. 10 ; 2 Tim. ii. 11).
Another question of doctrine raised in these epistles
has respect to the constitution of Jesus. Was he
mere man, or something more than man 1 Could he
be placed on a level with the Deity him self?
In the leading epistle in this set he is simply an
nounced as “made of a woman, made under the law ”
(Gal. iv. 4). That is, he was by birth one of the
human family, as the same phrase is employed to
express in various other scriptures—(Job xiv. 1;
xv. 14; xxv. 4; Matt. xi. 11; Luke vii. 28); and
-as such had to rule himself by the propounded laws
of God. I associate with this epistle, in common
authorship, the epistles to the Corinthians, where the
doctrine is similar. “For since by man came death,
by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For
as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made
alive.” The sin and the remedy were due to exactly
the same agency, namely, a human one. “ Hence
forth know we no man after the flesh; yea, though
we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now hence
forth know we him no more.” In the flesh Christ
was, as others, a mere man. The writer could recog-
�The Pauline Epistles.
21
nize him only as he stood in risen life as “a new
creature.” He was still a created being, though an
exalted one. When he refers to him as 11 the image
of God,” it must be remembered that he could view
ordinary man in like manner as capable of reflecting
“the image and glory of God ” (1 Cor. xi. 7; xv. 21,
22 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4; v. 16, 17). The doctrine is similar
also in the Epistle to the Bomans. Jesus is described
as “ made of the seed of David according to the flesh.”
The expression has great positive value. It points to
his paternal origin, and in no way refers to the
maternal association. “By one man sin entered into
the world, and death by sin; ” to meet which circum
stance “the grace of God, and the gift by grace,” was
introduced by the means of one man—Jesus Christ.”
“By one man’s offence death reigned by one,” and
therefore it was so appointed that “the gift of
righteousness” should “reign in life by one—Jesus
Christ.” Christ, when going through this office,
was necessarily therefore none other than a human
being. Afterwards, at his “resurrection,” he was
endowed “ with power ” to become “ the son of God,”
“according to the spirit of holiness.” It follows that
he had no such position previously while in life.
The phrase “God blessed for ever,” appearing in
chap. ix. 5 of this epistle, after what has foregone,
cannot possibly be an expression made applicable by
the writer to Jesus.
It is either an ejaculation
addressed to the Deity himself, or, if respecting Jesus,
it must have been interpolated after the doctrine had
advanced to the recognition of his divinity. The
writer is seen to reprobate the idea of a divinity pre
sented in human form. It was, he says, the charac
teristic of the heathen, when they had become “ vain
in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was
darkened,” to have “changed the glory of the incor
ruptible God into an image made like to corruptible
man,” and of course he could not have been guilty of
�22
The Pauline Epistles.
the error he was denouncing by accounting Jesus an
incarnate god (Rom. i. 3, 4, 21-23; v. 12, 15, 17).
The Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians stand
together in parity of doctrine, and probably in com
munity of authorship. They give us an enhanced
view of the constitution of Christ. As in the in
stance of the Alexandrine Logos, he is said to have
pre-existed before all that has been created, and to
have been the active agent of the Almighty, who
“created all things by Jesus Christ.” “In him,”
it is stated, his people have been chosen “before the
foundation of the world.” He is, moreover, declared
to be “the image of the invisible God,” possessing in
himself all his “ fulness, ”—“the fulness of the Godhead
bodily.” But we are not«to conclude that this in
volves his essential divinity. Christ still remains
a created being, though “the first born of every
creature,” and whatever he possesses is by the en
dowment of God. It is as it has “pleased the
Father,” and “according to the good pleasure of his
will,” that Christ is what he is. And the ultimate
manifestation was when the Deity put forth “ his
mighty power” and “raised him from the dead,”
and gave him the supremacy over the whole universe
(Eph. i. 4, 5, 19-23; iii. 9; Col. i. 15, 19; ii. 9).
The last phase, namely, as it would seem, the
absolute divinity of Jesus, is arrived at in the Epistle
to the Philippians, and those to Timothy and Titus.
He is said to have been not only “in the form of
God,” but to have “thought it not robbery to be
equal with God;” to have been “God manifest in
the flesh; ” and to be about to exhibit a “ glorious
appearance” of himself as “the great God and our
Saviour Jesus Christ” (Phil. ii. 6 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16;
Tit. ii. 13).
A third feature to be observed in these epistles is
the strong anti-Judaic spirit they exhibit, a feeling
so removed from what characterized the first disciples,
�The Pauline Epistles.
23
and prominently Paul himself as described in the
book of Acts. “ The blessing of Abraham ” was
declared to have “ come on the Gentiles ; ” his “seed,”
in whose favour the promises ran, were not his natural
progeny, but merely Christ and those who were his,
and all distinction of Jew and Gentile was at an end.
The Jewish dispensation was a thing of naught, con
sisting of “weak and beggarly elements,” serving
only to bring the soul under “ bondage ” (Gal. iii. 14,
16, 28, 29 ; iv. 9). “Circumcision is nothing, and
uncircumcision is nothing,” the sole requisition being
“ the keeping the commandments of God.” All are
“ baptized into one body,” whether they be “ Jews or
Gentiles.”
“All things” have become “lawful,”
the Jewish interdicts being at an end. “ Whatsoever
is sold in the shambles ” may be eaten ; “ whatsoever
is set before us ” we may eat, “ asking no question for
conscience sake” (1 Cor. vi. 12 ; vii. 19 ; x. 25, 27 ;
xii. 18). The Jewish dispensation was a “ ministra
tion of death,” and with all other “ old things ” has
“passed away,” in favour of what is “new” (2 Cor.
iii. 7 ; v. 17). “ There is no respect of persons with
God,” and the idea of an elect nation is at an end.
The law on which they depended for divine guidance
is found to be a work of supererogation, the action of
the “conscience,” as among “the Gentiles,” being
all-sufficient. “ Circumcision ” avails nothing over
“ uncircumcision.” He is “ not a Jew, which is one
outwardly,” but he only is one “ which is one in
wardly ” through “ circumcision of the heart.” Abra
ham, we are reminded, received the “ seal of circum
cision ” in recognition of the faith manifested by him
while “yet uncircumcised.”
Those are not the
“ heirs ” who can plead only “ the law ” in their
favour, the true heirs being such as are “ of the faith
of Abraham,” who in this manner exercises paternity
for all. “The children of the flesh—these are not
the children of God.” Faith is the sole qualification
�24
The Pauline Epistles.
accepted, and this obliterates all distinction “ between
the Jew and the Greek” (Rom. ii. 11, 15, 25-29 ;
iv, 11, 14, 16 ; ix. 8 ; x. 12). “ Circumcision ” is
merely what has been “ made by hands in the flesh.”
Those who are without it have been made “ nigh by
the blood of Christ,” “ the middle wall of partition ”
being “ broken down,” and “ the law of com man dments ” 11 abolished.” Everything “ in heaven ” and
“ on earth” is gathered together “in one,” “in
Christ.” “ The Gentiles ” are thus “ fellow heirs, and
of the same body,” and “ partakers ” of the “ promise ”
in Christ (Eph. ii. 11—15 ; iii. 6). The true “ circum
cision ” is that “ made without hands.” “ The writing
of ordinances,” or the Jewish code, has been taken
“ out of the way ” by Christ “ nailing it to his cross.”
No man is now to be judged in regard of “ meat,” or
“ drink,” or “ in respect of an holiday, or of the new
moon, or of the sabbath days.” All such ordinances
are merely “ rudiments of the world,” and made to
“perish with the using.”
Henceforth, “there is
neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircum
cision,” “but Christ is all, and in all” (Col. ii. 11,
14, 16, 20-22 ; iii. 11). The writer’s sympathies
are evidently not with “ the circumcision,” who abound
in “ vain talkers and deceivers,” circulating what he
denounces as “Jewish fables” (Tit. i. 10, 14).
So low an estimate of the elect Jewish nation and
their divinely propounded system, could not possibly
be held by any who were themselves of the privileged
people. It must be a Gentile mind that is guilty of
overthrowing all Jewish advantages, levelling all dis
tinctions between race and race, and appropriating
the specific Jewish promises for all mankind. There
are other indications in these epistles that such was
the character of the authorship. The writer of the
Epistle to the Galatians elects to be known as the
apostle “ of the uncircumcision,” a title which no Jew
could have emulated, and classes himself as of those
�The Pauline Epistles.
25
who are “Jews by nature,” which the tenor of the
doctrine held must mean in a non-Jewish sense ; that
is, he is of the believing body who in newness of
nature constitute the true Israel (ii. 7, 15). The
writer of the 2d Epistle to the Corinthians announces
his Jewish standing in a manner not necessary to be
insisted on by a true Jew, and especially by the appa
rently well-known personage in whose name the
epistle is put forward (xi. 12). And in the Epistles
to the Romans and to the Philippians there is the like
appeal, the very tribe to which alliance is claimed be
ing specified (Rom. xi. 1 j Phil. iii. 5), an allegation
no real Jew could have made, seeing that the nation
have had no sense of their tribal distinctions since the
'captivity.
*
It is clear that in the Pauline epistles we have a
Gentile movement operating after a large accession of
Gentiles to the Church. The Acts of the Apostles
more than once notices that the Jews refused to accept
the new creed founded on Christ, and that the
preachers consequently turned to the Gentiles, with
better prospects of success. The result has been such.
The Jews, as a body, have rejected Christ, and the
Gentiles have accepted him. What is disclosed by a
comparison of the doctrine held in the Acts and in
the Pauline epistles is, that in the early days of the
formulation of the Christian creed, the Gentiles, when
introduced to the faith, varied its terms, bringing in
elements of religion cherished among themselves.
Prominently, they believed in the efficacy of human
sacrifice, and they converted the martyrdom of Jesus
into an atoning sacrifice; and it was a current idea
with them that gods incarnate had appeared on
earth and mixed with mankind, and they ascribed to
Jesus the like constitution. Eventually, they had him
(in the first and third gospels) procreated by a divinity
on a human female, in keeping with the origin of many
* The Legends of the Old Testament, p. 113.
�26
The Pauline Epistles.
■of their demi-gods and heroes, a circumstance, how
ever, not traceable in the Pauline epistles.
No such change from primitive Christianity, as cur
rent among the Judaic section, could have been made
without a severe struggle and a defiance of the so■called apostolic authority; and the leading epistle,
that to the Galatians, gives ample evidence of such
■consequences. The writer, who is outside the ap
pointed order of the twelve apostles, nevertheless
claims for himself the title of apostle, and upon en
tirely independent grounds. He has it, “ not of
men,” “neither by man,” but by the appointment of
the risen Jesus. Equally had he his doctrine from an
independent source.
“ I neither received it,” he de
clares, “ of man, neither was I taught it, but by the
revelation of Jesus Christ.” Directly it pleased God
•“ to reveal his Son ” in him, “ immediately,” he as
serts, “ I conferred not with flesh and blood, neither
went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles
before me.” His “ gospel,” consequently, was an ori
ginal communication made by the risen Jesus to him
self, and it was of such special import that he could
wish any one “accursed” who might preach any other.
It is apparent that this gospel involved a line of doc
trine not known of to the leaders at Jerusalem, for he
alleges that, seventeen years after his conversion, he
went thither and “ communicated ” it to them, but for
some unrevealed reason “privately.” Nothing can be
more apparent than that we have here the admission
of what we see really occurred, namely, the introduc
tion of new doctrine not held by the primitive body
of Christians, but brought in among them, (seemingly
in a covert manner), after Christianity in some other
form had been maintained for a course of years. And
when we find springing up in this epistle, and en
forced with earnestness, the doctrine of the sacrifice
•of Jesus, coupled with the levelling of all distinctions
between Jew and Gentile, it is equally clear that we
�The Pauline Epistles.
27
have here the expression of Gentile sentiment to the
subversion of the Judaic position and doctrine of the
first Christians.
The writer so acting has to establish the indepen
dence of his position. The Paul of the Acts was
otherwise circumstanced. He is said, after his con
version, to have fled from Damascus to Jerusalem,
where, when the brethren mistrusted him, as having
been a persecutor, Barnabas became his warrant, and
introduced him to the apostles, after which he was
“ with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem ”
preaching Jesus (Acts, ix. 26-29). All this the writer
to the Galatians, having a Paul of another stamp to
exhibit, stoutly denies, finding it necessary to support
himself with an appeal to God that he was not lying.
He alleges—“ Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them
which were apostles before me, but I went into Arabia
and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three
years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode
with him fifteen days. And other of the apostles
saw I none, save James, the Lord’s brother.”
So far from maintaining an independent ministry,
and preaching for years a doctrine specially revealed
to himself, and not known to the central body at
Jerusalem, as ascribed to the Paul of the Epistle to
the Galatians, the Paul of the Acts is seen to be in
close correspondence with the central body; to have
preached his gospel under their shadow; to have been
indebted to Barnabas more than once for his media
tion ; to have been under the ordering of his own
church at Antioch for his ministrations, whether as
the bearer of their alms, or as their representative at
a doctrinal conference, or in respect of his missionary
labours; and it is observable that he was in the habit
of giving an account of his labours to the churches
with which he was associated at Jerusalem and An
tioch (Acts ix. 26-30 ; xi. 25-30 ; xiii. 2, 3; xiv. 27;
xv. 2, 4, 25 ; xvi. 4).
�28
The Pauline Epistles.
Without at all designing to endorse the account of
Paul given in the Acts, that in the Galatians, I must
remark, is on the face thereof incredible. It is im
possible to believe that the alleged founder of Chris
tianity should have provided for the dissemination of
his faith through the agency of the apostles, and then,
after he had left the world, from heaven have selected
quite another instrument in the Paul of the Galatians.
It cannot be that a new convert should at once have en
tered upon the scene, setting the constituted ecclesiastical
authorities and their doctrine at defiance, and have pro
pounded, in entire independence, a novel doctrine of his
own. Nor would he have been able to preach such doc
trine for seventeen years uninterfered with by the cen
tral body, and then have managed to give it currency
among them and elsewhere acceptably. Whatever
may be said of the Paul of the Acts, the Paul of the
Galatians is an imaginary character with a career attri
buted to him that could not have had occurrence.
The doctrine of the epistle of course in some way
sprung up, and the writer of the epistle is an earnest
advocate of it, but the framework through which he
seeks to impress it upon his readers with authority,
namely, a direct revelation from the risen Jesus to the
depicted Paul, is unreal. The writer thinks to re
commend his doctrine under the shelter of the name
of Paul. It is a doctrine peculiarly Gentile in its
complexion, and Paul was the reputed opener of the
gospel to the Gentiles. He constitutes him, accor
dingly, the “apostle” “ of the uncircumcision,” makes
him set his face against all Jewish pretensions, and
endows him for the Gentiles with a distinct indepen
dent commission from above. He does not hesitate
to make an appeal to the Deity for the truth of his
asserted facts, and denounces as “ accursed ” all who
differ from him.
We have thus before us two several Pauls, and
sundry others are fairly traceable. I associate with
�The Pauline Tpislles.
29
the Paul of the Galatians the Paul of the Epistles to
the Corinthians, because of parity of spirit and of doc
trine. The Paul of the Epistle to the Romans I take
to be a third Paul. He is of a far calmer and more
philosophic temperament than the writer of the Epistle
to the Galatians, who is characterized by impulse and
violence. He avows his beginnings to have been from
the alleged region of the apostles, saying, “ that from
Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum,” he had
“fully preached the gospel of Christ;” and he shows
that he had maintained constant connection with
that region (Rom. xv., 19, 25, 31). He therefore
cannot be the Paul of the Galatians, who made a merit
of having kept himself aloof from the asserted locality
of the apostles and their influence. I class the epistles
to the Ephesians and the Colossians together. Those
epistles I have hitherto noticed hold to the strict
humanity of Jesus while in the flesh ; but these latter
assert for him a pre-existence before the world was
formed (Eph. i. 4, 5, 19—23; iii. 9; Col. i. 15, 19; ii.
9). This gives these epistles a distinct standing
ground. At one time they assert the same doctrine in
the very same words (Eph. i. 7; Col. i. 14), which
could scarcely happen in an epistle save when it is the
same author expressing himself. Nor can the writer
of the Epistle to the Ephesians be associated with that
of the Epistle to the Galatians, for, far from maintain
ing an independent course for himself, and especially
an absence of reliance on apostolic support, he acknow
ledges that the church has been “ built upon the foun
dation of the apostles and the prophets;” and says
that the dispensation of the Gentiles, which the other
alleges had been committed to himself specially and
solely, had, in fact, been “now revealed” by Christ
“ unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit ”
(Eph. ii. 20; iii. 5). We are thus provided with a
fourth Paul. A fifth occurs in the Epistle to the Philippians. This writer has advanced to the recognition
�30
The Pauline Epistles.
of the absolute divinity of Jesus (ii. 6), which places
him on a platform for doctrine distinct from that of
the writers of the epistles I have hitherto dealt with.
Lastly, in the Epistles to Timothy we have a sixth
Paul, who may also have been the author of the parallel
Epistle to Titus. The Paul of the Epistle to the Philippians, as also the Pauls of some of the other epistles,
had raised Timothy to his own level, using him in co
ordinate ministry as qualified equally with himself to
hold forth and enforce doctrine upon others; but the
writer of the Epistles to Timothy has to remind him
of his own authority, saying that he stood as an apostle
of Jesus by the “ commandment ” and the “ will” of
God. “ I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle,”
he declares, “ and lie not; a teacher of the Gentiles in
faith and verity.” The two, it is clear, could not have
been working together in joint and equal authority.
This Paul furthermore reduces Timothy to a state of
tutelage, and builds him up and exhorts and stimulates
him with sundry instructions for his guidance. In
point of doctrine, however, the Epistles to Timothy
stand associated with that to the Philippians, and
divided from the other epistles, in maintaining the
essential divinity of Jesus (1 Tim. ii. 13; iii. 16).
With the Epistles to the Thessalonians and that to
Philemon, I do not occupy myself, as they throw no
light in judging of their writers by the scale of doc
trine ; and I make no use of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
as it does not bear the name of Paul, and is ordinarily
excluded by critics from the Pauline collection.
The grand result atwhichwe arrive from this examina
tion of the Pauline Epistles is, that Christianity, as it
is, is traceable to them, and not to the teaching ascribed
to Jesus and his first disciples, and that it is impos
sible, by any fair treatment of the subject, to reconcile
the two lines of doctrine with one another. The author
of the Epistle to the Galatians gives the key-note to
�The Pauline Epistles.
31
this discrimination. He defiantly trumpets forth his
own doctrine as distinct in itself, and as distinctly de
rived by him from an independent source, and he
accounts those who have gone before him as teachers
of Christianity as “ nothing,” and is prepared to hold
them and all others as “ accursed” who may venture
to differ from him. Another subsidiary result we
arrive at is, that the novel doctrines of the Pauline
epistles are of Gentile character and origin, coming to
us from no better source than the religious conceptions
that were current in Grecian circles. So that the
Christianity that has ripened to the accepted form is
not expressive of the spirituality and the maturity of
the Jewish faith, but is a mere exhibition of easily-tobe-recognized Paganism.
Great Malvern,
March
1875.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The Pauline Epistles
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 31 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. From the library of Dr Moncure Conway.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1875
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT127
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The Pauline Epistles), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Bible
Conway Tracts
Saint Paul
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/bde3004f4c8c58fe17e13272474df252.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=KGXyrWFZpur-x-iH%7EslqlVDoJ2pbpThqhbzSyi%7EOGaxnquxsbShGvZ3SWWmW3na65nFvvlTJpyAI%7E6qGM-OX-JsPSDP5j2AXeBkmrM-7q4dc5Wpn4fx-A61wjAD4AcOPURupBWccZSaH2rGBlpxXcRN8n6e7B6B9KvhnGBr%7ENc9L9b6yUNgk%7E1SyCkBLRUmC8O8SWtYQh7YzQlnTu5xUlthYJQRm5k%7EzowJN4RF363mBk5qlqNLz4MjAHoEOmmFCCz-OSGIOO88Eb9o1sqLIeCfhnJFdg5JRLqDJkSSQqQXXaxEA1X8n1cBXGsMv6LPBeVIi2TxQAcENZ9hqNHSDig__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
fc8960e812414c43c21aa7a3b758865a
PDF Text
Text
PORTRAITURE AND MISSION
OF JESUS.
BY
THOMAS LUMISDEN STRANGE.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,
,
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
1 8 7 6.
Price Sixpence.
��THE PORTRAITURE AND MISSION
OF JESUS.
IIAVE been, drawn to this subject by the work of
Prebendary Row, entitled “ The Supernatural in
the New Testament.” This defence of Christianity has
been undertaken by Mr Row at the desire of the Chris
tian Evidence Society, of which he is an active member,
as a reply to “ Supernatural Religion,” the extensive
currency of which able work has aroused action in
Christian circles.
Mr Row strengthens himself with his previous effort,
“ The Jesus of the Evangelists,” and in endeavouring
to meet him I must refer inquiring readers for a fuller
exhibition of the subjects I now handle to my volume,
“The Sources and Development of Christianity”
(Trubner & Co.).
Mr Row, in his earlier work, acknowledges the in
sufficiency of the endeavours hitherto made to clear
Christianity of the difficulties raised against the creed
by objectors of the present day, but, unfortunately, in
his attempt to supply a remedy, he shows himself un
acquainted with the sentiments of the more advanced
opponents of his cherished beliefs, who remain thus,
so far as he is concerned, still unanswered.
Mr Row considers the idea of the Christ, as embodied
in the Christian scriptures, to be a representation so
pure, so exalted, so consistent, so unprecedented, and
so realistic, that man was incapable of figuring such a
being out of his imagination, and that, consequently,
in this description, we have before us a true personage,
drawn from the life, and that life superhuman and
I
�6
The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
divine. But he sees the need at the same time to
point to the offered proofs of the alleged reality, and
his great source of testimony is that Jesus rose from
the dead. Here human supports are requisite, and
that upon which he substantially builds is the evidence
derived from the epistles attributed to Paul, who, it is
assumed, at a very early period, preached the resurrec
tion to audiences already cognizant of the’fact.
The conclusion I have come to is that there is not a
reliable trace of the existence of Christianity, from any
quarter, Jewish, Pagan, or Christian, for a hundred
and fifty years from the time alleged for the death of
the asserted founder. The sphere of Christianity I judge
must have been Alexandria, and not Jerusalem, which
had ceased to be, whence we have the Grecian, Egyp
tian, and Eastern elements, mingled with what was
derivable from Judaism, so characterizing Christianity,
and of which Alexandria was the focus. The tale of
Christianity thus with me is not dependent upon
enacted facts. I can allow that there was a person
such as the alleged founder of Christianity. His being
a carpenter, occupying the field of barbaric Galilee, and
suffering death as a culprit, are not features which the
constructor of an imaginary tale would go out of his way
to introduce wherewith to associate his hero, and there
fore, probably, we have here real facts presented to us;
but all beyond these circumstances, in illustration of the
being, preaching, and actions of the founder, I take to
be purely pictorial.
Mr Row, in dealing with the author of “ Supernatural
Religion,” insists on the possibility of what are termed
miracles. He assumes his adversary to be a Theist, one
who acknowledges the existence of a divine Creator,
handling created objects, and moulding them according
to his will. Introducing new force, such a Being may
convert water into wine without the intervention of the
grape; he may satisfy multitudes with supplies suffi
cient for but two or three persons, the debris of the
�The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
7
feasts amounting to more than the quantity of food
originally begun upon; he may enable a heavy body to
move upon water without sinking into and displacing
it; he may cure all diseases with a word, eject by a
command demons invading mankind, and raise the
dead. These are exercises of power liberally appealed
to by the heathen, in common with Jews and Chris
tians, from the remotest to the latest times. But it has
to be considered whether the Creator ever thus indulges
in exhibitions in reversal of his fixed rules of procedure;
and whether, when so many tales of the kind are sum
marily dismissed as unfounded, these particular instances
appearing in the Christian record may not be equally
untrue. What we should not credit now, whoever
asserted the facts, why should we receive because men
of old have made the assertion of the occurrences ? The
very essence of such testimony is the conviction arising
from ocular demonstration. Would the Creator need
to resort to such a source of evidence as this which can
only be passed on, in a diluted form, in the way of hear
say, and may be left to expire, as at this day, without
other support than unestablished tradition ? The ar
gument for the possibility of a miracle is of little account
when weighed against its improbability. Things of
divine origin stamp themselves as such by their inherent
properties. If the Creator has a testimony to offer of
his hand in the production of an object, it is never of a
dubious character. Between what he has done, and
what man may have done, there is no room to raise a
question. A blade of grass or a leaf reveals itself as
truly of his origination as the most stupendous orbs
circling in space. But when we come to miracles, there
is always the doubt to solve, were these manifestations
real ? Might they not have been due to trickery 1
Have they been rightly reported ? May not the whole
representations be figments, resorted to for an end 1
Mr Row does not, as far as I have observed, clear his
matter of these defects.
•
�8
The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
Mr Row apparently is not himself sure of the ground
on which he would have us place our feet as being per
fectly stable. Some of the representations he seeks to
reduce within limits that may be reasonably accepted.
The being of Satan, as currently apprehended, staggers
him. Wicked men are capable of exerting evil in
fluences, and Satan’s power is merely a higher sample
of such influence. If so, the agency of good may be
placed on the same sort of sliding scale, and the Deity
be figured as only a more exalted example of a benefi
cent man. The scripture distinctions are, however, as
absolute between Satanic and human capacity and
power, as between what is divine and what is human.
Again the temptation of Jesus is more than Mr Row
can receive in the naked form of the narrative. He
does not accept the idea of a personal Satan holding
intercourse with Jesus, transferring him bodily to a
pinnacle of the temple, or to the top of an exceedinghigh mountain, whence he was able to see “ all the
kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them.” Mr
Row is satisfied that there could be no such mountain,
or such exhibition, especially upon a spherical globe,
and would dispose of the whole representation as para
bolic. The sacred writer really did not mean what he
has apparently said. Drawing upon the infinite re
sources of the Creator, Mr Row observes of the multipli
cation of the few loaves and fishes upon which thous
ands were fed, that the materials were already existing
in the ground, the water, and the air, and had only to
be put together in the required forms by the additional
exercise of creative force he demands ; but he seems to
have overlooked that somehow, to produce bread, the
corn required to be ground and baked. The demons
transferred to the swine is an action he does not like to
contemplate as a reality. “The ‘going out from the
man ’ and 1 entering into the swine,’ may only denote the
cessation of the influence of the demons over the man,
and its exertion on the swine, without determining the
�The Portraiture and Mission of festis.
9
mode in which, that influence was exerted.” If we may
thus deal with the recounted miracles when they seem
to us too hard for belief pursuant to the terms in which
they have been narrated, these representations may one
and all be readily disposed of without offending reason
or warring against experience. The wine converted
water at the feast of Cana would be merely joy diffused
into the human heart; the diseases overcome would be
moral defects remedied; the restoring the blind, the
deaf, the dumb, and the lame, would be the imparting
moral and spiritual faculties where these were wanting
or dull and inactive; and the raising the dead would
be the introduction of spiritual life into a soul dead in
trespasses and sins. If the chosen advocate of a Society
constituted for the defence of Christianity may thus
lead the way in the path of rationalistic interpretation,
there will soon be nothing left of Christianity either to
object to or to defend.
Mr Row lowers the scripture representations in cer
tain other respects to have them reasonably received.
When Philip is said to have desired to see the Father,
and Jesus to have sought to satisfy him by pointing to
himself, this is held to imply no more than that in
Jesus was an exhibition of the Father’s character, his
person not being in question. Elsewhere we are told
that Jesus was “ the image of the invisible God,” “ the
express image of his person,” than which no stronger
phrases could be employed to denote a personal exhibi
tion. The choice being between rationalism and Chris
tianity, we cannot elect to have both.
Again, the allegation that miracles should be “signs”
which should “ follow them that believe,” affords a
test applicable to faith in miracles to the present day.
Mr Row, conscious that there is no such power among
believers, chooses to assert that it was a special tempo
rary endowment, “ designed for the building up of the
church into a distinct community, and when that
purpose was accomplished they (the miracles) were to
B
�io The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
cease.” The limitation in question is not in the text,
and is of Mr Row’s creation. And we may ask, when
has there ever been a “ distinct community” exhibiting
Christians in happy union in the faith ? The “ signs ”
effected nothing of the sort in the so-called apostolic
days, heresies and schisms having prevailed among the
body from the earliest age, and this condition has
accompanied Christianity through every period of its
existence to the present day. May we not then
reasonably doubt whether such “ signs ” were ever pro
vided for the effectuating that which never was accom
plished ?
Mr Row’s theory is, that miracles were provided in
order to vouch for a mission, and not for the purpose
of supporting lines of doctrine. “ Can miracles,” he
asks, “ prove moral truths 1 I answer emphatically in
the negative.” “ Moral truths cannot be proved by
the evidence of miracles, but must rest on their own
inherent evidence.” The existence of the Deity has,
he sees, been made known to man irrespective of any
written revelation. All the real elements of religion
are thus provided for the spiritual governance of the
human race without any appeal to miraculous agency,
which has been resorted to, it would seem, merely to
support certain wondrous tales. Judged of in this light,
of what value, it may be asked, is the scheme of Chris
tianity to the moral man, who stands so completely free
of and above its specialities ?
Restricted as is the use of miracles, as thus under
stood by Mr Row, we find them unessential even with
in this described, confined, sphere. Where was the
miraculous attestation to the mission of John the
Baptist ? He is described as the forerunner of the
Messiah, appointed to “ go before the face of the Lord
to prepare his ways,” “ to give light to them that sit in
darkness and in the shadow of death, to guide their
feet into the way of peace,” “ to make ready a people
prepared for the Lord.” So important were his func-
�The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
11
tions considered to be, that he stands proclaimed as a
prophet, “and more than a prophet,” “greater” in
effect than any who had yet been “ born of women,”
surpassing thus Elijah, Samuel, and even Moses him
self ; and yet his mission, so necessary to the introduc
tion of that of Jesus, is ushered in without a miracle.
On the other hand, the most stupendous miracle that
ever is alleged to have been exhibited, namely, the
resuscitation of a corpse by accidental contact with the
bones of Elisha, was a manifestation unassociated with
any mission. Thus we have the chiefest of all human
missions presented without the voucher of a miracle,
and the chiefest of all miracles enacted without alliance
to a mission, and Mr Row must find some other pur
pose for the miraculous than that assigned by him to
such action.
But supposing it the case that miracles were to attest
missions, does not the repetition of them involve the
weakness of the testimony they are to supply ? One
miracle apparently proves nothing unless followed up
by another, and another, and we have to ask whether
one or more insufficiencies will supply us with a suffi
ciency. And the whole collection of these wonders,
it would seem, required the corroboration of the
supreme miracle of the resurrection; and this again
required and received confirmation from the wonder
workings of the first Christians. Thus Mr Row weaves
his web to the entanglement of his own feet.
An essential to a miracle, according to Mr Row, is
that it should have been preannounced. Judged of by
this test, how will the miracle of the resurrection stand
its ground ? It is true there are passages attributing
to Jesus, when in life, that he said he was to rise again
on the third day from the dead; but there are circum
stances, taking them as stated, which completely defeat
the representation that he ever made such a declara
tion. The women who are said to have visited his
tomb on this third day, went there for the purpose of
�12 The Portraiture and Mission of fesus.
embalming the body. They could not have expected
that the body was just then to pass into restored life.
Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus are declared to
have actually embalmed it. According to the fourth
Gospel, Mary Magdalene first visited the tomb, and
finding the body gone, went in bewilderment to Peter
and John saying, “ They have taken away the Lord out
of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have
laid him.” The apostles are said to have ran and
.satisfied themselves of the fact, but as yet, it is re
marked, “ they knew not the scripture, that he must
rise again from the dead.” Any announcement of the
coming resurrection by Jesus himself is not referred to,
and as to the scripture testimony, it must be observed,
it is nowhere fairly discoverable. According to the
third Gospel, the women were told distinctly by two
angels, who were standing at the tomb, that the resurrec
tion had been effected; and when they went and made
their report to the apostles, so little was the event
looked for, that their words were accounted as “idle tales,
and they believed them not.” The two disciples, said
to have been met with at Emmaus, showed that their hopes
in Jesus had been extinguished by his death. Thomas
is described as stoutly refusing to credit any evidence to
his re-appearance in life but that of his own senses. And,
according to Matthew, when the eleven had the risen
Jesus before them, some of them even then “ doubted.”
The announcement that he should rise from the dead,
had it been made by Jesus, was a circumstance of too
simple a sort to be misapprehended, especially from the
lips of one said to have repeatedly shown his power
over death by restoring others to life ; had he, conse
quently, made this announcement, the disciples, on
the day specified, would have been expecting his reap
pearance, and certainly would not have refused evi
dence to the event when it was certified to them that it
had occurred. Mr Row’s desideratum of preannounce
ment of the coming marvel, as necessary to the accept-
�The Portraiture and Mission of fesus.
i3
ance of a miracle as such, is assuredly wanting in
respect of this chief instance on which he depends as a
fundamental testimony for Christianity.
Mr Row’s most important authority for the fact of
the resurrection is Paul, and of the occasions mentioned
by him when the risen Jesus manifested himself, he
selects, as entitled to most consideration, that when he
is said to have shown himself to “ above five hundred
brethren at once.” Mr Row supposes that this may
have happened when there was the apparition in
Galilee, recorded in Matthew, but here the text is
against his conclusion. It is said in Matthew, that
after his resurrection Jesus told the two Marys to
direct his “ brethren ” to “ go into Galilee,” where they
should see him. “ Then,” it is added, “ the eleven dis
ciples went into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus
had appointed them,” showing that the message was to
these only, and to them the exhibition. And this is
in accordance with the statement in the Acts, that he
manifested himself “ not to all the people, but unto
witnesses chosen before of God, even to us, who did
eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead.”
This excludes the idea that Jesus ever appeared after
death to an indiscriminate multitude exceeding five
hundred in number; nor can we see that he had so
many followers at this time, as the believers were num
bered, it is said, after Pentecost, and then found to be
but “ about an hundred and twenty.”
The evidence thus attributed to Paul, which was at
best only hearsay, is found to be wanting in every
characteristic of true evidence, as judged of by other
associated scripture. Still Mr Row is entitled to say
that Paul asserted the fact of the resurrection, and he
makes much of this assertion as coming from him within
twenty or thirty years of the alleged occurrence.
Here Mr Row builds upon the circumstance that
four of the Pauline epistles—namely, that to the
Romans, the 1st and 2d to the Corinthians, and that
�14 The Portraiture and Mission of fesus.
to the Galatians—are currently accepted by even ad
verse critics as genuine. I am aware that this is so,
but on the other hand know not on what grounds this
assurance is founded. Certainly there are no collateral
supports for Christianity, of a recognizable character,
from any quarter, during the so-called apostolic age, or,
it may be added, for a century later; and the mere
occurrence in these epistles of features to exhibit the
writer as a living personage, moving in the midst of
events and persons alluded to by him, may show him
to be a clever draftsman, but do not prove the realities
of any part of his descriptions, or that he was that Paul
of the apostolic period he professes to be. To me there
is abundant room for concluding that he was not that
Paul, and that these and the other epistles bearing the
name of Paul are from Gentile hands at indeterminate
periods.
It is apparent that the Paul of the Acts stood in a
very different position from the Paul of the epistles.
The Paul of the Acts is described as visiting Jerusalem
at an early stage in his Christian career, as associating
himself with the constituted apostles, as acting in
subordination to the churches of Jerusalem and Antioch, and as in every respect of the type of the first
Christians, who were merely a Jewish sect. He pro
claimed himself, it is said, a Pharisee, and had never
diverged from the law of Moses or the temple ordi
nances. But the Paul of the Galatians, we are told,
kept himself aloof from Jerusalem and the apostles,
held a particular line of doctrine of his own which he
traced to a revelation made specially to himself, asserted
for himself independent authority coming to him, like
his doctrine, by commission from above, thought lightly
of the apostles, and swept away every reliance on
Judaism as being a system powerless for good, and
absolutely superseded by the new dispensation. The
other associated epistles inculcate the same view of
Judaism. Here we have, assuredly, between the Acts
�The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
15
and these epistles, two or more several Pauls; and the
scene being laid in the extinguished Jerusalem, it be
comes evident, as in the instance of the gospel descrip
tions of Christ personally, that we have in the Paul of
the alleged apostolical age merely pictorial representa
tions of such a preacher.
The epistle to the Romans presents special difficulties
to its acceptance as a genuine address to the Church of
Rome in the era ascribed to it. The faith of this
church, at this early period, is said to be “ spoken of
throughout the whole world,” and yet when Paul,
according to the Acts, at a later time visited Rome, so
little had this alleged church influenced the neighbour
hood, that the inquiring Jews of Rome are shown to
be totally ignorant of what constituted Christianity,
and to have looked to Paul to enlighten them; and as
Josephus made Rome his place of abode from the year 7 0
to the end of the century, there inditing his history of
all that concerned the Jews, it is apparent that, had
there been a sect flourishing in the city who were pro
claiming the risen Jesus as the Messiah in his time,
the circumstance was one this careful and discerning
writer could not have failed to notice and to comment
on. Furthermore, the last two chapters of this epistle
contain matters inconsistent with other portions of
Paul’s accepted history, and attribute to him an ac
quaintance with residents of Rome which he could not
have had before visiting the place ; to save the epistle
from which defects it is usual to sever these chapters
from it as spurious additions. When, however, the in
tegrity of the whole epistle may be called in question,
the occurrence of these particular chapters, we may
suppose, very possibly, to be indiscretions on the part
of the hand that fabricated the earlier portion.
The scripture shows that there was a time when the
disciples Considered themselves precluded from offering
the gospel to the Gentiles, and the restriction is ac
counted for by the founder when in life having enjoined
�16 The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
it on them to confine their ministry to the lost sheep
of the house of Israel. The church was then in Jewisli
form, and accordingly in the Acts we find the first
teachers, and prominently the alleged Paul, described
as frequenting the temple and practising and upholding
Judaism. At some undiscernible period the door was
opened to the Gentiles, and the character of the dis
pensation became materially altered. Attempts are
made to place the change upon a warrantable footing,
but the statements here are so inconsistent, that all the
conclusion we can come to is that we have not true
history before us. The proclamation of the gospel to
the Gentiles could not have been owing, as alleged, to
a command issued by Jesus at his resurrection, else it
would not have been necessary to provide Peter with a
vision from heaven to encourage him to exercise this
liberty ; nor could there have been this vision to Peter,
or Paul and Barnabas would not have had to resort to
a questionable interpretation of the Jewish scripture to
justify their free ministry among the Gentiles ; and, it
may be added, were there this scriptural support, either
Jesus could not have been conscious of it, or he could
not have given the edict of exclusion against this scrip
ture. We arrive, therefore, at this result, that at some
unrevealed time, and under some circumstances not
properly disclosed, the Judaic form of Christianity
became altered and a dispensation for the Gentiles was
introduced, and in this unknown period, and certainly
not within twenty or thirty years of the alleged resur
rection, as assumed by Mr Row, the Pauline epistles
made their appearance, and probably from Gentile
hands.
Mr Row comforts himself with the idea that no one
looks upon the Christian narrative as a deliberate in
vention. It is time assuredly to remove from the
advocates of Christianity such a refuge. What is the
meaning of that host of criticism in which, in modern
times, Dr Strauss has led the way, founded upon the
�The Portraiture and Mission of fesus.
17
conflict of statement in the gospel narratives, one repre
sentation destroying or excluding another, if it be not
that these critics disallow the historical value of the
narratives ? They may admit some sort of foundation
for the proferred history, but in its essential parts,
figuring the hero in a desired form, they see that reali
ties have not been followed. Marks, in fact, indicating
what must be looked upon as deliberate fabrication on
the part of the gospel writers are not wanting, and I
will point out a few.
It is transparent that these writers have had the
desire to exhibit Jesus as fulfilling ancient prophecies,
and there must always have been a tendency on their
parts to find events to correspond with the predictions.
Some of the circumstances so brought together are of a
character to give evidence of designed adaptations, as
that of Jesus being taken to and brought from Egypt
merely to carry out the saying, “ Out of Egypt have I
called my son;” the “voice of him that crieth in the
wilderness,” said to have been realized literally in the
instance of John the Baptist; the being borne up by
angels lest his foot should he dashed against a stone, as
being met by Jesus when Satan tempted him to throw
himself down from a pinnacle of the temple; the people
of Zabulon and Napthalim being visited by a great
light, provided by Jesus in his ministrations in those
among other localities; the attempt to prove John to
be the precursor before “ the great and dreadful day of
the Lord” spoken of by Malachi, of which no more
could be said than, “ If ye will receive it, this is Elias,
which was for to come;” the purging the temple be
cause Jeremiah had complained of God’s house being
converted into a den of thieves; the casting lots for
the garments of Jesus to accomplish a saying of the
Psalmist; and Jesus calling out in his last moments
“I thirst” in order to fulfil another passage in the
Psalms. A history composed with materials thus
selected carries with it on its face the appearance of
�18 The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
having been so arranged for a purpose, and if there are
anywhere positive indications of statements introduced
of a nature warring with fact, the whole representation
becomes tainted as based upon fiction.
The gospels of Matthew and Luke contain genealogies
deriving Joseph in a direct line from David. Now, as
it is freely admitted in Jewish circles that the people
had no knowledge of their tribal distinctions from the
time of the Babylonish captivity, it is clear that the
family of Joseph, a carpenter of Galilee, could have
had no means of ascertaining their lineage as traceable
through David to the tribal patriarch Judah. It was
held desirable, to meet the requirements of assumed
prophecy, in presenting Jesus as the Messiah, to show
him lineally descended from David, and therefore it is
that we have these genealogies. They were framed by
the two writers independently of each other, and they
effectually disagree, as might be expected when put to
gether with imaginary data.
These same writers also give us a divine nativity for
Jesus, a circumstance to entirely defeat the aforesaid
genealogies; for if Jesus had no human father, he be
comes cleared of association with Joseph and David,
who had no part in his paternity. The event of this
divine procreation is never made use of again to the last
page of the sacred record, and the probability is that it
was a late introduction. The tale could not have been
current in the times depicted in the Acts, else it would
have been an offence charged against Paul, that he had
preached the new divinity, whereas he stood acquitted
of having transgressed in any way against accepted
Judaism as expressed by the law of Moses and em
bodied in the ordinances of the temple; nor would it
have been said at this time, as it has been said, that
Jesus obtained his divine sonship only at the day of
his resurrection, according to the saying applied to him
from the second Psalm.
With the account of the divine nativity in Matthew
�The Portraiture and Mission of fesus.
19
is linked Herod’s slaughter of the infants at Bethlehem,
a matter the want of historical support for which has
been commonly noticed. The conspiracy of Pheroras,
as recounted by Josephus, would seem to have sug
gested this portion of the tale. Certain Pharisees,
supposed to be gifted with the power of seeing into the
future, predicted that Herod’s line should be over
thrown in favour of that of Pheroras. On this Herod
put these prophets, and all of his own family who
favoured the pretensions of Pheroras, to death.
Pheroras he drove away to his own tetrarchy, and
he went swearing with many oaths that he would
not return till Herod was dead. Thus we have the
prophecy of the subversion of the line of Herod, the
consequent slaughter, the withdrawal of the rival, and
his remaining in retreat till the death of Herod, all
which circumstances the gospel writer has apparently
made use of, and converted them in altered form to
embellish his history of Jesus. As Josephus’ history
was not indited till the year 93, it follows that this
portion of the narrative respecting Jesus was not even
imagined until a later time.
Jesus is described as having been of Nazareth, and
the distinction is kept up even by a voice from heaven
alleged to have addressed Paul in effecting his conver
sion. Josephus mentions no such place, and we first
hear of it, outside the pages of the scripture, from
Eusebius, in the fourth century, when it is called
Nazara, and said to be a village not of Galilee but of
Judea. Matthew, ever striving to adapt fact to pro
phecy, asserts that it had been predicted that Jesus
should be “called a Nazarene,” but by which of the
prophets he did not venture to point out. Possibly
he was thinking of the term Nazarite, and there is the
appearance that the name Nazareth has been coined
under a play upon the Hebrew word nazar, consecra
tion.
The second Psalm has a saying which has been
�20 The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
frequently appealed to in the Christian scriptures as
applicable to Jesus. The phrase is, “ Thou art my son;
this day have I begotten thee.” The question is of
what day did the Psalmist speak ? He shows in the
verse next preceding that the time involved was when
it could also be said of the personage adverted to, “yet
have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion,” which
was to be effected when the confederacy of the kings and
rulers of the earth against him had been overthrown.
This is sufficiently definite, and shows the eventful
birth to be still in the womb of futurity. The Chris
tian writers, anxious for the support of so marked a
declaration, blind themselves to its surroundings, and
Say that it took effect in the instance of Jesus. The
earliest statement, namely, that in the Acts, was, that
it was by the means of his resurrection that this sonship was conferred upon him. The epistle to the
Romans supports this representation, and twice in the
epistle to the Hebrews the passage in question in its
integrity is made applicable to Jesus. At some later
time, seemingly, various other and conflicting allegations
were introduced to support the title of Jesus to this pro
phesied sonship. An angel informs Mary that he was
to acquire the divine sonship at his birth, his procreator
being the Holy Ghost; a voice from heaven proclaims
his sonship thirty years later at his baptism, as if then
conferred on him, using the words of the Psalm, but
(suspiciously) in a modified manner; and there is the
same declaration, with the same modified use of the
language of the Psalm, brought in at the transfigura
tion. On this one important point, therefore, how and
when Jesus was made to be the son of God, we have a
variety of conflicting statements, the leading statement,
namely, that of the Psalm, which is the foundation of
all the others, showing that it is an event that has yet
to be accomplished. It is a mockery of our senses if
the specific “ this day ” when the son in question was
to be “ begotten,” is applicable to five different occasions.
�The Portraiture and Mission of fesus.
21
One would think also if God could introduce among
us an individual thus begotten by himself, his divinity
would have been recognizable without the need of the
offices of any herald.
There are some minor matters in which the hand of
the constructor is also shown. To meet a prophecy,
Jesus has to enter Jerusalem as its king upon an ass.
The writer of Matthew, misapprehending the Hebrew
phrase, brings upon the scene two animals, and curi
ously enough places Jesus upon them both. Mark and
Luke, reading the Hebrew aright, have but one
animal. Matthew and Luke state that Jesus predicted
that before the cock crowed Peter should deny him
thrice, and accordingly it is said, after his denial of any
knowledge of Jesus three several times, 11 immediately
the cock crew.” Mark has it that the saying of Jesus
to Peter was, “before the cock crow twice, thou shalt
deny me thrice and accordingly he makes it out that
there was a crowing of the cock after the first denial,
and again after the third, shaping his events to suit
his sense of the prophetic utterance. At the crucifixion
of Jesus the soldiers are said to have cast lots for his
garments in fulfilment of a saying in the twenty-second
Psalm. Matthew, Mark, and Luke agree that the
whole of the garments were thus disposed of by lot.
John, misapprehending the force of the Hebrew, thinks
that it was meant that the “ vesture,” or upper “ coat,”
as he takes it to have been, had been referred to dis
tinctively, and was alone to be subjected to lot, and he
puts his facts accordingly, saying that the “ garments ”
were divided into four portions, for each soldier a por
tion, and that as the “ coat ” was without seam theycould not divide, it, but cast lots to decide which of
them should have it.
Mr Row furthermore supports himself with the
belief that the representation of Christ, as given in the
gospel accounts, is so drawn as to demonstrate that it
must have been taken from a real life, and that life of
�'ll Pbe Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
such a character as to have been of divine mould.
Assuredly the picture of a god-man was one difficult
to portray. We may say indeed that there is an im
possibility to conceive the incidents proper to prove the
being to be described as at once truly man and truly
God, the conditions of the two natures and spheres
being so diverse, and that of one of the two standing
essentially beyond our cognizance. That the gospel
writers in their portraiture have had nothing to draw
from but human models, and that they have failed to
present their subject with the attribute of perfection, or
to maintain the composition of the divine with the
human in consistency, was to have been expected; and
we may readily see, in the imperfections of their work,
that in a dark and ignorant age, building upon imagina,tion and not upon fact, they have ventured upon a task
which could not have been even attempted in an
enlightened one.
The object placed before us is a carpenter, the re
puted son of a carpenter, living in remote and barbaric
Galilee, suddenly presenting himself, at the mature age
of thirty, as in being an incarnate god, and in office the
long-expected Messiah of the Jews. His credentials
are his mighty works, or a system of thaumaturgical
displays, his own assertions, and the character of his
teaching, all to be judged of in an age incompetent to
discern or weigh the facts, and to be sustained through
all time by the hearsay reports of we know not who.
The humanity of the mother is certain, but we are
perplexed to decide whether on the father’s side he
sprang from a human or a divine parent. It is as when
the renowned conqueror Alexander was traceable either
to Philip or to Jupiter Amon; or as when Hercules
was derivable from the same supreme god or from
Amphitr.yo; or, nearer still in parallelism, as when
the imprisoned virgin Danae was visited and “ over
shadowed” by this divinity and brought forth the
heroic Perseus. Both parentages are asserted and sup-
�The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
23
ported, the divine by angelic messengers, visiting, how
ever, only the ostensible parents, the human by elabo
rate details of the father’s pedigree. What Jesus said
of himself is equally doubtful. His pleasure appears
to have been to style himself “ son of man; ” when
devils, cognizant of his divine constitution, were about
to disclose who he was, he authoritatively shut their
mouths; when at a late period in his ministry Peter
asserted his divine sonship and position as the Christ
or Messiah, he attributed his knowledge of him to a
direct revelation from heaven, showing that hitherto he
had never thus proclaimed himself; and at the same
time he interdicted his disciples from declaring him to
others. Currently he was considered to be a prophet,
and if, as held in the Acts and the Epistle to the
Romans, his condition as the son of God dated only
from his resurrection, his career in the flesh must have
been devoid of the divine ingredient. His place in the
godhead has therefore, it is apparent, been imagined for
him under the ordinary stimulus of the desire of his
followers to magnify their master, as in the instance of
the Hindu reformer Buddha, or of the Roman em
perors, or of any other example of apotheosis or
canonization.
The appeal to miracles is a very questionable resort.
Now as Jesus is repeatedly represented to have
exhorted those on whose behalf they were wrought to
keep the matter secret to themselves, and as when such
signs, upon being asked for, were refused to be accorded
by him, and the desire to have them was repressed as
sinful, it is to be gathered, in spite of the sayings to the
contrary, that the writers were aware that there was no
such public sense of the occurrence of these marvels as
must have attached to them had they really been
enacted, and we are left to the conclusion that there
were in fact no such demonstrations. Not only there
fore was the divine Messiahship, it may be seen, not
asserted in the lifetime of Jesus, the testimony of the
�24 The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
miracles to fall back upon as evidences of his super
human being and mission, was also, it may be under
stood, equally wanting. Such displays of alleged power
are after all a very weak and hacknied device, common
among the Hebrew prophets, asserted as current among
the followers of Jesus, and traceable in every mythology
that has prevailed, Hindu, Chaldean, Egyptian, Grecian,
•and Roman, with which the Christian writers were
familiar when they drew up their narratives, and from
which sources, it may be judged, they derived their
models.
Nor were the acts ascribed to Jesus of a character
uniformly to sustain the pretensions asserted for him of
his divinity. It certainly was not ennobling that he
should by a miracle have supplied a vast quantity of
wine to promote the revelry of those who had already
“ well drunk; ” that he should make clay with his
spittle to anoint the eyes of a blind man and restore
him to sight; that he should drive swine to self-destruc
tion by infesting them with demons; that he should
look for his tribute money in a fish’s mouth ; that he
should curse and blight a senseless fig-tree for not pro
ducing fruit out of due season; that he should castigate
with a whip, made up by him of small cords, merchants
and money changers assembled in the temple courts, in
promotion of the ordinary temple services. These are
defective pictures betraying the pencils of inferior
artists.
We have Jesus represented as stretching out his arms
longingly to Jerusalem, exclaiming, “How often would
I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen
gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would
not;” but as his divine sonship and Messiahship were
both profound secrets, in what capacity, it must be
asked, could he have offered himself to Jerusalem and
been refused 1 In fact there is no such action towards
the city on his part described, and the attitude in ques
tion is a mere sensational protraiture.
�The Portraiture and Mission of Jesus.
25
We have him described as speaking as never man
spake before, but such a thing as a novel elevated senti
ment is not recorded as falling from his lips. He retails
what was current among Essenes and devout Jews of
his day, and preaches natural religion as prevailing
among the godly in all times. His famous sermon on
the mount, for example, contains nothing but what is
fairly traceable to the teachers of his people who had
preceded him, as transmitted to us in the Talmudic
traditions. But in these unequal delineations he is
also represented to us as designedly withholding from
the people instruction in godliness. He veils his dis
courses in parables with the professed intention that
they should not be intelligible to his hearers, to their
benefit, “lest at any time they should see with their
eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand
with their heart, and should be converted, and he should
heal them,” (the parables, however, nevertheless, being
simple in structure, and transparent as to their import) ;
and he solemnly thanks God that “these things,”
necessary for their salvation, are “ hid ” from the wise
and prudent, and revealed only to those who are without
discernment as “ babes.”
He is made, contrary to all sense of modesty, to an
nounce himself as “ meek and lowly,” ever ready “ to
seek and to save the lost ones.” We find him far from
accessible to those who looked to him for instruction,
rebuffing them with short and enigmatical answers; he
reviles Scribes and Pharisees as hypocrites, whitened
sepulchres, liars, and children of the devil; he is rude
to his own mother ; he holds earthly ties of relationship
in small account when measured by his personal mission,
and represents that he has “ come to set a man at vari
ance against his father, and the daughter against her
mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-inlaw,” adding that under his dispensation “ a man’s foes
shall be they of his own household.” “ There is nothing
more remarkable,” acknowledges Mr Bow himself, in
�26 The Portraiture and Mission of fesus.
his earlier work, “ The Jesus of the Evangelists,”—“in
the Evangelical portraiture of the Christ than the
manner in which the humblest of men is depicted as
habitually preaching himself.’’ “In no other man
would such an assumption wear anything but the
appearance of arrogance.” And yet we are to accept
the feature as consistent with a perfect specimen of
humanity fortified and exalted with a divine essence
ever permeating through it.
The being so composed is in truth a mass of bewilder
ing inconsistencies. God is said to have “ so loved the
world ” that he gave up his son “ that the world through
him might be saved,” and yet the son solemnly inti
mates to the Father, “ I pray not for the world ; ” he
is “ the light of the world,” “ the true light which
lighteth every man that cometh into the world,” and
nevertheless consigns multitudes to perdition, of whom
he will say, “ I never knew you; ” he expresses in him
self the type of poverty, as one who had not a hole
wherein to lay his head, but can pass forty days and
forty nights without food, create sustenance for thou
sands out of nothing, fabricate wine out of water, and
supply himself with cash from a fish’s mouth; he is
at once the bridegroom, the centre of joy, and spreading
joy around him, and the man of sorrows and acquainted
with grief; he is the source of life, and yet cannot pro
tect his own life from his enemies ; he is God, “ equal
with God,” and nevertheless, in an agony of distress,
“ with strong crying and tears,’’ entreats God for
deliverance, and his prayer is unheeded ; again he is
God, and yet feels himself abandoned by God ; he came
to lay down his life as a sacrifice for others, and when
he undergoes his destined fate, not recognizing his own
work, he upbraids God with forsaking him, and wonders
“ why” he has done so.
It is a relief to know that this is no true life, but a
mere portraiture of an ideal personage drawn by ignorant
men, for ignorant classes, in days of darkness. Josephus
�The Portraiture and Mission of°Jesus.
27
knew nothing of these wonderments, and he wrote up to
the year 93, being familiar with all the chief scenes of
the alleged Christianity. Nicolaus of Damascus, who
preceded him and lived to the time of Herod’s successor
Archelaus, and Justus of Tiberias, who was the con
temporary and rival of Josephus in Galilee, both Jewish
historians, equally knew nothing of the movement.
Philo-Judseus, who occupied the whole period ascribed
to Jesus, and engaged himself deeply in figuring out the
Logos, had heard nothing of the being who was realizing
at Jerusalem the image his fancy was creating ; and for
about a hundred and fifty years from the time given as
that of the death of Jesus, there is not a single reliable
name or record connected with Christianity which can
be safely associated with the period. After this lapse
of time, when Jerusalem had been destroyed and the
Jews exiled by Hadrian, the Christian representations
were conceived and gradually put together. The Jewish
scriptures and the traditionary teaching of their doctors,
the Essenes and Therapeuts, the Greek philosophies, the
neo-platonism of Alexandria, and the Buddhism of the
East, gave ample supplies for the composition of the
doctrinal portion of the new faith; the divinely pro
created personages of the Grecian and Roman pantheons,
the tales of the Egyptian Osiris, and of the Indian
Rama, Krishna, and Buddha, furnished the materials
for the image of the new saviour of mankind; and
every surrounding mythology poured forth samples of
the “ mighty works ” that were to be attributed to him
to attract and enslave his followers ; and thus, first
from Judaism, and finally from the bosom of heathen
dom, we have our matured expression of Christianity.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The portraiture and mission of Jesus
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Strange, Thomas Lumisden
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 27 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. The pamphlet, in part, challenges the work of Prebendary Row entitled 'The Supernatural in the New Testament'.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1876
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT179
Subject
The topic of the resource
Jesus Christ
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (The portraiture and mission of Jesus), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Conway Tracts
Jesus Christ
Superstition