« PredošláPokračovať »
governed by any private prepossessions respecting inspiration or any of the doctrines raised in this discussion, our whole aim is to rescue the Bible from those who, whether innocently or not, are striving to lower it from its high place as an inspired book in the faith of mankind, and are paving the way for the final extinction of religion; and until there is a change among college liberals, and a return to a safer standpoint of study, it will be our duty to reprove and expose their iniquity in attacking the foundations of the One Book which has furnished Protestantism all its inspiration, and civilization the hope of universal conquest.
JEREMIAH H. BAYLISS.
The exit of one human being from the present sphere, no difference what his relation to its varied interests, would not be an incident worthy of chronicle if it did not illustrate great principles and involve some of the great questions of religion. It is not enough to say that time is a fluctuation, or terrestrial things are in a state of Aux, as Heraclitus taught, or that the visible universe, with all that it contains, is marching on to the dreadful goal of a finished mission, as the Scriptures intimate; for unless it can be added that the wreck of matter interferes not with the continuity of intellectual and spiritual life once commenced in the earthly realm, the whole scheme of existence must be interpreted as a fiction and failure. Affected beyond the power of expression by the removal of Dr. Bayliss from the present life, we estimate it, not by the temporal loss it implies, but by its relation to the general system of things which provides for incessant change, and which can be perpetuated only by the gaps and catastrophies we deplore. We go in generations to the grave; but one generation goes in order to make room for another just behind, and crowding upon it. We ourselves are a part of this natural system. If we mourn, it is rather over the system than over the sacrifice that it entails; if we grieve, it is because there is no other way by which the world may be conducted to its end than to tear the friend from our side, or strike at us with seemingly vicious intention; if we seek the cypress-tree for our meditation, it is because the olive is withered and the almond ceases to blossom.
Immediately on the receipt of the intelligence of the demise of our editorial confrère we thought of personal loss, of biographical data, of pastoral statistics, of editorial habits, and of his honorable career of usefulness. After the lapse of a few weeks these liave faded away in the greater questions of the providential system of life, the provisional system of redemption in Jesus Christ, and the promised destiny of purchased immortality for those who endure to the end. By his death our brother revives among his friends an interest in all that pertained to him in this life, but it also projects into the common contemplation of those greater problems which are still the only safeguards of souls, and the only inspiration of life. On its human side, the event provokes a tear, a sigh; on the immortal side, a song and the hallelujah of an eternal triumph.
PROFESSOR LADD REBUKED FROM JAPAN.
[TAE Rev. C. S. Long, the presiding elder of the Nagoya District, Japan Conference, recently addressed a letter to Professor Ladd. Fearing that he may forget to publish it, we give him the benefit of its appearance in the Review.-EDITOR.]
NAGOYA, JAPAN, July 29, 1889. PROFESSOR GEO. T. LADD, YALE UNIVERSITY:
DEAR Sır: In your letter published in The Christian Advocate of July 4, you take it upon yourself to warn “the clergy of the Methodist Church” against Dr. Mendenhall, declaring that “no one else is exerting upon them (the young men of America) so injurious an influence; no one else is so hindering from the ininistry the choicest among them ; no one else is so helping forward the ranks of infidels," as he. I write to ask if you would repeat that charge upon cool deliberation? Is it not the result of an excitement or impetuosity to which a man of your dig. nity and position should not give place? And will it not rebound with double force upon you? Thoughtful men among the “clergy of the Methodist Church” will be pretty sure to ask, “How do you know Dr. Mendenhall's influence is producing such evil effects when you are so ignorant of who he is, or what he is, as to have to be “informed” at this late day that he is the editor of the Methodist Review? It is very clear that you measure his influence for evil by what he says against you, which is a modest way of setting yourself up as the unerring standard of truth. Your declaration that you are in no sense a Rationalist will create more surprise and call forth more comment than Dr. Mendenhall's charges against you.
“ Let us search and try our ways.” Yours respectfully,
C. S. Long.
NOT A QUESTION OF THEOLOGY. The Calvinist affirms that the warnings given to the saints are equally pertinent in their case to the warning given by Paul against the midshipmen leaving the ship; for, notwithstanding there was a moral certainty in both cases that all would end safely, still, as there was a natural possibility of their leaving the ship and all be lost, so non-perseverance of the saints is naturally possible, and all may be lost.
The Arminian replies: The midshipmen, viewed in relation to their determination to remain in the ship as a necessary antecedent, according to Paul, to their safe landing, had no ability of any kind to leave the ship. Let not the necessitarian go into an ecstasy, neither the weak-nerved Arminian into tremors; for this is not a question involving free agency, but is one of compatibility. The sole reason in the universe is, they could not both stay in the ship and also leave it. “No man can serve two masters." Adams, N. Y.
I. L. HUNT.
EXPLANATION OF THEORY OF MIRACLES.
There are four theories of miracles. One is that a miracle is a suspension of the laws of nature. This theory involves so many contradictions and absurdities that it has been universally abandoned.
A second theory defines or explains miracles as the action of the supernatural on nature, and regards the supernatural as a power distinct and separate from natural forces. This theory is based on the doctrine of dualism, and is so stated by Dr. Bushnell, its expounder, in his work on Nature and the Supernatural, in which he says (chapter iii), “nature is not the systein of God.”
A third theory, affirms that a miracle is the action of a new force introduced into nature counteracting or overcoming natural forces. This theory logically leads to polytheism, for a new force implics a new Power or Deity; besides it is not necessary to postulate a new force.
Another theory based on the doctrine of the divine Omnipotence and Omnipresence, that is, that God is the ever-present source of all the forces in the universe and in the system of nature, is this: that in the production of a miracle the force is not new, only its mode of manifestation is new. In the case of the raising of Lazarus the vitality imparted was not a new kind of vitality, but the same kind that animated his corporeal organism before his death and having the same source, emanating from himn who is the only source of life—“Lord of life;" from Christ himself as “God of very God." And thus it was that the power working this miracle proved itself to be divine.
In the criticism contained in the July-August number of this Review on explanation of theory of miracles contained in the March-April number of Review, the true iinport of the word “intensification” is misapprehended. The distinguished metaphysician, S. T. Coleridge, claims the paternity of that word, which has a special significance. It denotes an increase, strengthening, and augmentation of force within, and is applied to forces that act internally instead of externally. Such is the force of vitality. Lazarus was not raised up by mechanical force acting externally, but by a vital force acting inwardly. To designate such action we used the appropriate word, intensification. The term re-enforcement is also appropriate if we understand that the additional force imparted acted, as vitality must, inwardly.
This criticism of the July-August number bases itself manifestly on the doctrine of dualism—that is, that natural forces exist in nature independently of God, and are self-contained—where it says “the body thus reanimated would possess only an attenuated life” because “there must be a diminution of vitality in the past from which it has been withdrawn." Such a process would be only a distribution of the vitality remaining in the body, and not an intensification of vitality, which implies a ner supply of vitality within, imparted by the source of all vitality, the “Lord of life.”
The power of chemical affinity by which water is converted into wine is the divine power in nature. Christ revealed himself in his divine
power by changiyg its ordinary mode of action in the production of wine ..aCana of Galilee.
. I believe in the miracles of Christ because I believe in his divinity; and I believe in his divinity because he reveals himself as the Infinite of my own spirit in my spiritual consciousness—Rom. i, 19" because that which may be known of God is manifest in them."
My creed is that of the apostle, 2 Tim. i, 12, oida yap W TENIOTEVKA, “I know in whom I have believed." Such knowledge is no mere γνώσις, , “a doctrine," nor is it speculative knowledge, but an intuition—a beholding in consciousness—oida, “I know," from the root IAN, “I see.” Pulaski, N, Y.
CHRISTIANITY AND THE HEATHEN.
The admirable articles bearing upon the religious condition of the heathen, published in recent numbers of the Review, show very forcefully that the Andover future probation theories are the logical outgrowth of a false theology. Wesleyan Arminianism in its best form has no place for them. But cannot the argument against these theories, and the one for missions, be made even stronger than in these excellent articles? Do the statements made, true as they are, go far enough to logically meet the arguments of these second probationists based upon the Scripture truth that not only is there the ground of salvation in the historic Christ, but that it must be received through a knowledge of him? Such as “ He that hath the Son liath the life; he that hath not the Son of God hath not life” (1 John v, 12, R. V.); "and this is life eternal, that they should know thee the only true God, and him whom thou didst send, coen Jesus Christ.” (John xvii, 3, R. V.) See also John iii, 36, etc.
Can they not be scripturally met as follows ? Not only are general "faith and obedience toward God” a condition of salvation, but faith in Christ. Faith in Christ is not conditioned upon perfect knowledge of Christ and his work, for no man has this. As to the fact of receiving salvation, the amount of light is not determinative, but the attitude toward the light. The moral and religious light which any responsible heathen has is not merely isolated, it represents to him Christ; it contains rays (reflected, refracted, or distorted, it may be) from the Sun of Righteousness; his attitude toward it is his attitude toward Christ, and is determinative of character and destiny. His attitude toward the few refracted rays shows what it would be toward the full direct light. Christ was promised in Eden. The prophetic is the historic Christ. No responsible members of the race have ever lost all the influence of that promise. Again, “In him (the Word) was lise; and the life was the light of mon. ... There was the true light, even the light which lighteth every man, coming into the world." (John i, 4, 9.) If Israel “drank of a spiritual rock that followed them, and the rock was Christ” (1 Cor. x, 4), though their knowledge of his real nature was very limited, may not the heathen have the same rock, though their knowledge be still less? Christ says, “I am the good shepherd; and I know mine own, and mine own know me . . . . and other sheep I have, which are not of this fold.” (John x, 14, 16.) They know him, though perhaps not by his true name. Melchizedek, who was a type of Christ, and the magi, confirm the same.
But why send the Gospel to the heathen? Can we never get above the idea that Christianity means nothing but getting to hưaven ?" Are there not those who are "saved, yet so as through fire?" May not a saved soul have, because of lack of knowledge, a very small life? Christ says, "I came that they may have life, and may have it abundantly." (John x, 10.) “That they may have life” shows that the ground of salvation is in his work.
“And may have it abundantly” shows that the fullness of this salvation comes only by a knowledge of Christ's character, work, and teachings. While the attitude toward the truth one has determines character, the amount of light one appropriates determines the largeness of the life. The marvelous physical, intellectual, moral, and social development which Christianity begets wherever it enters heathendom gives testimony to the largeness of the life which it bears in its busom, and which will yet make this desert world blossom as the rose.
This view, which makes the Jehovah of the Old Testament and the Christ of the New the shepherd at once of Israel and the whole Gentile world-of the Christian and the heathen nations-does not degrade Christianity to the level of the heathen religions, nor belittle Christ; it rather exalts him by showing the universulity of his love and by giving unity to the Bible, and to the whole history of the world, showing that his purpose has ever been that all men every-where “i should seek God if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he is not far from each one of us."
E. L. PARKS. Atlanta, Ga.
THE SINNING ABILITY OF CHRIST.
Could Christ have yielded to temptation? Those who deny study him only as God, who cannot sin. They seem to forget that “God cannot be tempted with evil," and, therefore, as Christ was God, he could not be tempted at all. When admitting his humanity, they claim that his spotless purity could not respond to temptation, and so he could not yield. But were not Adam and the angels that sinned created equally pure?
But Christ was man. “He was made like unto sinful flesh." "It behooved him to be made like unto his brethren,” If “in moral nature he had nothing in commou with them,” as one asserts, his humanity was a myth. True, he did not inherit sin; sin did not taint him. But he was the second Adam, and was possessed of Adam's moral nature. Redemption by Christ rests on his assumption of our nature. That he possessed our physical or intellectual nature is of no moment, for it was the moral nature that lay in ruins and must be rebuilt. The being who has nothing in common with man's moral nature is certainly not human.
For restoration, man must have power to resist temptation. To aid him in resisting, Christ was tempted: “For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succor them that are tempted.” The