page break

Lecture VI.

Self-Evidencing Power of the Christ of the Gospels.

In the previous Lecture we had reached the conclusion that [unclear: distinetively] Christian faith cannot be reached simply and only by a process of historical investigation. If we believe that Christianity is a Divine revelation, we cannot escape the conclusion that the evidential grounds warranting this belief must be accessible to all classes of men. Further, the kind and degree of certainty, implied in Christian faith, can neither be created nor justified, by purely historical evidence, of the kind by which the ordinary historian establishes the contingent facts of secular history. I am very far from wishing to belittle the value of the external or historical evidences of Christianity, as presented, say by Paley, Chalmers, and hosts of others. These, and such like books, have been the means of enabling not a few to overcome those sceptical doubts or perplexities, which, humanly speaking, stood between them and that vision of God in Christ which is eternal life. The story of the conversion of Bowen, the author of a well-known volume of daily Bible readings, ought for ever to silence those who sneer at Paley and his "Evidences." But all the same, evidence of the purely historical kind only prepares the way for that deeper, and more direct know-ledge the substance of revelation, which is the soul of faith. Coleridge, who had a clear perception of the inadequacy of the purely historical, as a ground of Christian faith, puts the case clearly and well in these terms : "The truth revealed through Christ has its evidence in itself, and the proof of its Divine authority in its fitness to our nature page 72 and needs; the clearness and cogency of this proof [unclear: be] proportionate to the degree of self-knowledge in each [unclear: in] virtual hearer. Christianity has likewise its [unclear: histori] evidences, and these as strong as is compatible [unclear: wi] the nature of history, and with the aims and [unclear: objec] of a religious dispensation."

The whole course of modern thought makes [unclear: i] very evident that no amount of the kind of [unclear: historical] evidence which can be adduced in proof of the [unclear: realisd] of events separated from the present by many [unclear: hundre] of years, will be widely accepted as a valid ground of credence, if such events are of the nature either of [unclear: isol] or fantastic miracles. As matter of fact the great [unclear: mak] of Protestants simply refuse to consider such testimony [unclear: a] can be produced in evidence of the reality of the [unclear: ridicul] miracles ascribed to mediæval and other saints. For a [unclear: li] reason we simply dismiss with a smile of incredulity [unclear: su] absurd stories of witches as are seriously told by such thinker as Dr Henry More. I believe, therefore, that it [unclear: is] a mistake to suppose that we can effectively prove [unclear: Jess] of Nazareth to be the Son of God and the Saviour of [unclear: Me] by establishing, in a purely historical fashion, the truth [unclear: of] the Gospel miracles, as miracles—that is, apart from [unclear: th] relation in which they stand to Christ's person. The [unclear: n] proof of the miraculous is the recognisably [unclear: miracul] Christ as He stands revealed in Gospel story. The [unclear: mirac] lous, if it is to become for us the ground of rejoiciug [unclear: faith] must continue with us as something recognisably [unclear: super] natural either in itself or in its consequences. We [unclear: beli] in short in the Gospel miracles because of their [unclear: fa] congruity with the aims and nature of Him [unclear: whe] authenticates Himself to our own hearts or [unclear: co] experience as a Divine person. By some it has [unclear: bes] said that the miracles ascribed to Christ in our Gospel [unclear: and] a hindrance, rather than a help to faith. This is a [unclear: pe] found mistake. Is it credible that a Divine being [unclear: con] live among men, and never manifest his [unclear: superlhu] nature by acts evincing superhuman power and [unclear: goodnes] As a miracle-worker, Christs simply acts as befits [unclear: his] nature and mission. The miracles ascribed to Christ [unclear: has] page 73 therefore a most important evidential value, but this evidential value is only truly seen and felt when they are regarded, not as isolated events, but as the natural radiations of the love and power of the incarnate Son of God. It becomes more and more evident, both on theoretical and experiential grounds, that the real and effective source and ground of Christian faith is the self-evidencing power of Christ of history, as He stands revealed and depicted in our Gospels, and as He is accredited by the witness of history and personal experience to His redemptive power.

The problems, literary, and other, with which scholars concern themselves are by no means unimportant, but their theoretical solution is by no means essential to well-grounded faith. Only a very few, for example, are competent to deal with what is called the literary problem of the Gospels, and even these few can hardly pretend to [unclear: seh] anything like the certainty of faith by the method of purely historical and literary criticism. It cannot be denied that much ancient history is, to a large extent, anythical. It is equally undeniable that Jewish religious [unclear: literature], both before and after the times of Christ, was, to a considerable extent, pseudepigrahic. Apart, therefore, from the self-evidencing substance of our Gospels, the [unclear: picion] that they may have been distorted by myths and legends cannot be so effectively disposed of as to render doubt morally impossible. As a matter of fact, critics, like Strauss and Renan, contend on grounds more or less plausible, and at least satisfactory to themselves, that the Christ of our Gospels, and of the faith which we recognise as Christian, is, to a large extent, a mythical creation—that, in short, the miraculous element in our Gospels is [unclear: itious] and ought to be eliminated. How can this contention, be met, and set aside, in a way intelligible to all, and effective both in a rational and practical sense ? There is only, as far as I can see, one such effective method. The image of Jesus presented in our Gospels, if honestly considered by a mind fully open to the truth, and a heart capable of recognising what is highest and best, certifies itself veritable photograph. There never has been an age which, by an inexplicable process of popular elabora- page 74 tion, could invent a consistent, life-like biography of divine-human person who, by his teaching, and [unclear: m] especially, by that ineffable something which [unclear: breath] from his person and through his entire life, [unclear: mainfe] transcends all the ideals of goodness and greatness [unclear: whic] subsequent generations have been able to frame [unclear: eve] when helped by the light of which he is [unclear: th] source. Most assuredly the age of the Scribes [unclear: an] Pharisees was utterly incompetent to invent an ideal [unclear: be] in the least degree resembling or approaching the [unclear: divi] ness of Jesus of Nazareth. It need hardly he said that [unclear: t] circle of pious souls which gathered around Jesus [unclear: w] practically as incompetent to conceive anything so [unclear: tr] cendently great and beautiful and life-like and [unclear: unique] the Christ of our Gospels. The Apocryphal Gospels [unclear: ar] most precious and abiding witness to the utter [unclear: incom] ence of even professed Christians to produce anything [unclear: in] the way of a mythical history of the Christ which [unclear: com] rise above the level of a manifest and grotesquely [unclear: be] pulsive fiction.

We would be not a little surprised did some [unclear: o] hint the suspicion that the sum is an electro-[unclear: magn] phenomenon, got up by some scientist for our [unclear: dele] tion, and ask us to justify our belief in the [unclear: fiv] that human resource is not quite equal to the [unclear: product] of the luminous body called the sun. Is it essential more rational to affirm or hint that the Christ of [unclear: or] Gospels—the Christ whom so many of the best and [unclear: nobl] of men have felt to be the light of the world—is, to indefinite extent, the conscious, or unconscious, [unclear: invert] of an obscure group of unlettered religionists, who [unclear: lived] a comparatively dark age? It is possible to write fictitious human biography so life-like, so consistent [unclear: a] congruous with the facts of ordinary experience, [unclear: that] might be mistaken for the authentic life story of a [unclear: b] human being. Even this, however, is a literary [unclear: feat] no means easy of accomplishment, But is it in the [unclear: le] degree conceivable that the concentrated genius of [unclear: huma] could invent the Christ of the Gospels ? To the [unclear: theis] is most certain that our sun and the stars which stud [unclear: and] page 75 firmament are authentic Divine works, and not man-invented illusions. It seems to be as certain, on rational grounds, that the image of Jesus in our Gospels is a realistic, self-attesting likeness of a divine human person, and not a human invention or dream. Constructive or inventive imagination has its limits as certainly as arty other power, and if we allow ethical feeling to influence our judgment we will conclude that the power of imagination must have comparatively narrow limits when it escapes from the control of reason and conscience, and undertakes, consciously or unconsciously, to act the more than questionable part of myth-maker. A diseased or apart scrupulous imagination can hardly be credited with the production of an ideal personality which stands alone and apart as the loftiest and most-inspiring as yet revealed to the human mind.

I have more than once called your attention to the fact that the historical proof of isolated and ordinary incidents, supposed to have happened in the distant past, is difficult, and at best does not warrant the kind and degree of certainty characteristic of genuine religious faith. The fact that the mere image of Christ, as it stands before us in the Gospels, cannot be & mythical creation, but must be held to be the veritable likeness of a Divine reality, enables us to understand how faith in the historical Christ has all the vividness and force of the immediate vision of reality. The image on which we gaze is itself Divine, in the sense of being in itself, and recognisably a self-attesting voucher of its Divine original. I am disposed to think and say that the substance or contents of our Gospels is of such a nature that a perfectly candid and highly cultured critic, guided merely by his knowledge of literary possibilities, would be forced to conclude that our Gospels, as biographies, are only explicable on the supposition that they are in sub-stance faithful portraitures of a real person. Such a [unclear: aterary] judgment does not, of course, rise to the level of the deep over-mastering conviction wrought in the heart of him who by the Holy Spirit is constrained to call Jesus Lord, nevertheless I feet assured that it may be so moving page 76 that it will, apart from moral and spiritual [unclear: hindranc] conduct to genuine faith. I speak from personal [unclear: exper] ence dating away back to student days, when I affirm [unclear: the] such a hook as Young's " Christ of History," which [unclear: wif] singular freshness and power unfolds this aspect of [unclear: Chri] tian truth, is convincing and eminently calculated [unclear: to] foster and strengthen faith in Christ. To the same [unclear: cla] of books belongs Ullmann's "Sinlessness of Jesus."

Incidentally, modern religious scepticism has led [unclear: t] one result eminently good. It has concentrated attention [unclear: o] the self-attesting power of the person and work of [unclear: Chri] as they are exhibited in our Gospels. Because of the [unclear: self] certifying power inherent in the contents of our [unclear: Gospels] the light which evokes and justifies faith, is accessible [unclear: to] all classes of men, and to this extent the universality [unclear: of] Christian revelation is vindicated, because by its very substance it is light to the learned and the unlearned. It [unclear: is] not, however, to be imagined that the evidence [unclear: deducible] from the Gospels themselves by a purely intellectual [unclear: pre] cess, such as I have indicated, can be compared in [unclear: stren] and persuasiveness with that discernible by the [unclear: spirit] man. To know the Holy one of God, in the nature [unclear: of] things, demands a power of perception and feeling [unclear: not] possessed by those of whom it is true, that "even [unclear: the] mind and conscience are defiled." This to some may [unclear: see] a hard, and even arrogant, saying, but both truth and [unclear: love] enforce its utterance. The religious doubter who [unclear: com] eludes that his wavering beliefs can only be accounted [unclear: for] by the essentially doubtful nature of the objective [unclear: eviden] most certainly deceives himself by assuming that [unclear: dimne] or even positive lack of vision on his part, can only be, [unclear: es] plained by defect of revealing light. It is most [unclear: unquestion] ably the case that multitudes have such a sight [unclear: and] experience of the Divine glory and transforming power [unclear: of] Christ, that so far as their own faith is concerned, all [unclear: histor] cal investigations bearing on the historicity of our [unclear: Gospe] are utterly superfluous. Why trouble ourselves, [unclear: such] may say, with historical inquiries, which, at most, [unclear: ca] only issue in opinions more or less probable, when [unclear: as] possess the certainty which comes by clear and [unclear: dir] page 77 vision? For myself, I believe that greatly too much stress is laid on historical criticism as an instrument which may help either to confirm Christian belief or to shake it. He who has seen Christ in the deep sense of the word cannot be seriously disturbed even if he should be convinced that our Gospels are not free from errors of detail. Mere specks of dust passing across our field of vision do not affect our belief in the reality of the sun, or alter our estimate of bis illuminating or other powers.

The kind and degree of certainty possessed by those who enjoy what is called by our old theologians the internal witness of the Holy Spirit can no more be effectively described to those who possess it not than can the conception of colour be conveyed to one born blind. It is the peculiar and incommunicable treasure of him who experiences and enjoys it. A school of evangelical theologians, at the head of which stands Frank, makes personal experience of Christ's redemptive transforming power the ground of Christian certainty. Unquestionably the highest attainable degree of certainty implies assurance of salvation, but surely genuine faith may fall short of assurance, at least in its first stages. Those who bring the cognitive power of faith more fully into view, making the clear vision of God in Christ the very soul and ground of certainty, in my opinion, give the truer account of the first stages of Christain certainty. There is yet another impressive ground of Christian belief, less decisive to be sure than faith's direct vision of Christ, but for that very reason capable of being more or less fully appreciated by all who are not utterly devoid of moral and spiritual perception—viz., the witness borne to Christ by the visible fruits of His redemptive agency. We hear a good deal in these last times about verification, and sometimes we are told that no belief or theory can be legitimately entertained which is not capable of verification. Well, there are some necessary truths of reason which we do not need to be verified. There are other convictions, such as the belief in the unity of the thing which we designate by the word" I," which cannot be verified by the approved methods of physical science. We suppose that a physical theory is page 78 verified when it yields deductions accordant with observed fact, though it is notorious that the capacity of a [unclear: the] to explain facts is no absolute test of its truth. [unclear: T] phrase, working or laboratory theory, is familiar [unclear: enco] and its import is that no claim of absolute truth [unclear: is] set up on its behalf. In a broad, general way, [unclear: w] affirm that a truth or belief is verified when it is [unclear: accord] with the facts of experience.

Understood in this broad sense, it is only [unclear: reas] able that in all beliefs and theories should [unclear: be] subjected to such verifying tests as the nature [unclear: of] the beliefs and theories to be tested admit of. [unclear: We] cannot, for example, believe in the efficiency of [unclear: any] instrument which, in point of fact, proves itself to [unclear: be] worthless or powerless. A tree is judged by its [unclear: fruits] This suggests the question has Christianity, which [unclear: has] been well defined as "the religion of redemption," [unclear: verifie] itself by the quantity and quality of the results [unclear: which] has produced ? Or to put the matter otherwise, do [unclear: th] undoubted achievements of Christ, both as regards [unclear: in] viduals and society, justify the faith of those who [unclear: tab] Him to be the incarnate Son of God and the Saviour [unclear: of] men ? If history is something better than a futile [unclear: ques] of the unknowable, surely it is possible to reach some [unclear: very] certain conclusion as to the practical influence of [unclear: Chris] tianity on the life and civilisation of the world. In [unclear: the] regions embraced within the bounds of what is [unclear: call] Christendom, Christianity has been for centuries, and [unclear: to] greater or less extent, the moulding influence of life individual and national. In attempting to answer [unclear: bo] historical question—What degree and kind of influence [unclear: has] Christianity exerted in the world ? regard must be [unclear: had] the fact that Christianity is by no means responsible [unclear: for] all that has nominally, or apparently, been associated [unclear: wi] it by the perverse action of men and Churches [unclear: an] nations. Attempts have been made in anti-[unclear: Christ] literature to make Christianity responsible for all [unclear: the] flagrant vices and crimes of individuals, Churches, [unclear: and] nations nominally Christian. In the esteem of the [unclear: war] historian, this is an injustice so monstrous, that it [unclear: cal] page 79 only prove the bigotry and controversial straits of those who perpetuate it. It reminds us of the saying of a clever Frenchman who, in substance, remarks that the difficulty which would-be Atheists experience in proving that there is no God, ought to prove to them that there is a God.

In seeking to estimate historically the influence of Christianity, two points present themselves for consideration : (1st.) The broad general influence which it has exerted on the civilisation or social life of those nations in which it has been most truly operative; and (2nd.) The kind of effects gets which it has wrought in those individuals who in a marked degree have submitted themselves to its influence. As regards the first point, the fact is simply incontestable that there does not exist a stable civilisation, which has in in the promise of steady, healthy progress, that does not owe its existence to the action of Christianity. To all intents and purposes Christendom and civilisation are co-extensive. I make this assertion deliberately, and in view of the fact that a few peculiar people will set up claims in favour of Chinese Thibet, for there the Mahatmas are supposed to dwell. When we examine the moral genealogy of those great political and social reforms which are the glory of our age, we discover that the force which called them into being was Christian in its nature and origin. The abolition of slavery throughout the British Empire, justly described as one of the purest acts of national virtue which adorn our nineteenth century, was the product of Christian conviction and sentiment. Nor ought it to be forgotten that those who led the movement against Negro slavery, both inside and outside the British Parliament, were conspicuous for their Christian zeal.

A marked characteristic of the most advanced civilisations of our time is the stress laid on education. It is difficult to conceive anything more certain in a historical sense than the fact that our educational system, both primary and secondary, is substantially the product of Christian effort. In Scotland, which I believe is still, a king all in all, the best educated part of the British Empire, the history of education was, till quite recently, a section of the history of the Christian Church. None but page 80 careful students of history can have anything likes adequate idea of the impulse given to education and [unclear: le] ing by the great religious revival best known as "[unclear: T] Reformation." But I do not by any means propose to [unclear: g] you even a bare statement of the desirable social [unclear: re] which have been produced by Christian influence. [unclear: I] will find a sufficiently detailed account of the [unclear: man] ways in which Christianity has for eighteen [unclear: cent] nursed and perfected all that is best in our [unclear: civilisation] such books as " The Social Results of Early [unclear: Christian] by Schmidt, and "Gesta Christi," by Loring Brace.

Up to the present time, no force, secular or [unclear: religi] has exerted on the world an influence so potently [unclear: be] cent. If there has been, and is now, a redemptive [unclear: pe] working in human history, that power is [unclear: Christ] Surely, He is the Saviour to whose saving power [unclear: hi] offers such impressive witness. But here, as in all [unclear: th] pertaining to religion and morality, cavil is possible. [unclear: T] practically hostile to Christianity find peculiar [unclear: pleas] holding up before us the crimes and immoralities [unclear: wh] disgrace our social life, as a proof of the moral and [unclear: spir] impotence of the Christian religion. They present us [unclear: w] the largest and ugliest bundle of tares which they [unclear: o] collect. " Behold (say they) the fruitage which we [unclear: h] collected from the field in which the seed of [unclear: Chri] doctrine has been plentifully sown." But these [unclear: ca] critics have forgotten sundry essential matters. They [unclear: ha] nothing to say about the wheat. The unutterable [unclear: u] corruption of the Pagan civilisations of Greece and [unclear: B]—of which we have a classical description in [unclear: Tho] "Morality of Paganism," is also passed over in [unclear: sil] There is not the slightest allusion to the fact [unclear: that] France, the temporary ascendancy of Atheism has [unclear: in] ably resulted in a reign of terror. Are religious [unclear: sc] really of opinion that " Atheistic Democracy" is [unclear: eq] lent to the complete regeneration of society ? It is [unclear: s] true that Christianity has not succeeded in banishing [unclear: o] from the world, though what it has done for the well-[unclear: he] of humanity is more than human thought can [unclear: esi] The assertion that were Christianity all that it [unclear: clai] page 81 be, long ere this the world would have become a paradise, rests on the assumption that God has not made us free beings, capable, in a very real sense, of resisting His will.

I believe that among men of real culture, it is all but universally allowed that up to the present time Christianity has been beyond all comparison the mightiest of all the powers which have wrought for the good of humanity. But this concession, even when frankly made, does not always imply that he who makes it is of opinion that Christianity is anything more or better than a beneficent illusion, destined to lose all its power for good when men get to know that it is merely a beneficent illusion—merely a stage in the history of progress. A subtle, and for that reason, very pernicious moral error, as it seems to me, is implied in the belief that illusion can possibly exert a potently beneficent influence on human history comparable to that which must be ascribed to Christianity. Could we suppose that mere illusion has wrought so much good in our world, then must we also suppose that therein no real connection between the good and the true. To those who sincerely believe in a God infinite in goodness and truth, it does not need to be proved that what is supremely good, in the sense of being above all powers the one which accomplishes most good, is at the same time, supremely true, What a strangely chaotic and bewildering world ours would be were we forced to conclude that it is ruled by a power which makes superstition, or illusion, the main-ring and instrument of all kinds of progress?

Let us now consider the further question : What is the [unclear: stem] out of which grow the fairest forms of human life ? Among those men and women of whom we have had an intimate knowledge, who are they whom in our heart of hearts we reverence most ? Surely those who are rightly described as saintly, that is those who are the most thoroughly Christian. If we have an eye for the elevated, the pure, the beautiful, in human character, we must have [unclear: et] those about whom we cannot either think or speak without deep emotion, and I venture to speak for you as well as myself, when I say that these radiant ones are [unclear: recisely] the most Christian men and women of our page 82 acquaintance. Of course, we have aothing favourable say of Pharisees, and hypocrites, though [unclear: unfortunat] they are sometimes taken as specimen Christians, [unclear: H] you ever met this lustrous form of goodness among [unclear: th] who did not feel quite sure about the existence of God, [unclear: a] were, of course, tolerably certain that Christianity is in [unclear: t] main a superstition? If we cast our eyes back over the [unclear: hist] of the past eighteen centuries for the purpose of [unclear: discover] the men who stand highest in the world's reverence, [unclear: b] because of what they were and what they did, I think [unclear: w] will, without hesitation, assign the first place to those [unclear: wh] were great Christians as well as great men. The cloud [unclear: of] witness-bearers, who are most potent to kindle in [unclear: pot] tially noble souls holy enthusiasm and [unclear: unconqueral] hope, is made up of those who stand closest to the [unclear: Mast] and most fully reflect His light. These, next to [unclear: Chri] Himself, most impressively evidence the truth of [unclear: Chri] anity. Perhaps there is no mere man who has so [unclear: pro] foundly influenced the ages, and that for good, as [unclear: th] Apostle Paul. Protestants will not hesitate to allow [unclear: th] the real initiators of the new and better time, in which [unclear: w] rejoice, were great religious reformers, such as [unclear: Luth] Calvin, and Knox. It matters not where we look. [unclear: Every] where in Christendom, and in every period of its [unclear: history] we will discover that its true lights were those men [unclear: wh] by their Christ-like lives, made the redeeming, [unclear: uplifi] power of Christ a manifest and felt reality. Must we [unclear: the] believe that the fairest blossoms, and the best [unclear: fruitage] humanity, have grown on the stem of a rank [unclear: superstition] Such a belief is impossible for us till we have [unclear: extinguish] all the lights of reason and conscience, and when [unclear: these] extinguished, belief will have no meaning for us.

Here I must pause. It has been a main part of [unclear: t] aim in these Lectures to indicate what are the grounds [unclear: s] religious and Christian certainty, and as far as might [unclear: be] to vindicate the validity of these grounds by reference [unclear: t] the principles of a rational logic of credence. In [unclear: part] lar, I have made it my aim to prove that a large [unclear: fin] element underlies our convictions in every sphere of [unclear: know] ledge. It is a grand mistake, therefore, to suppose [unclear: that] page 83 the most firmly established doctrines of physical science rest on a basis of proof so absolute that doubt is logically impossible. This being so, it is both inconsistent and unreasonable to insist on doubt-defying proof as a Condition of legitimate religious belief. All analogies of our cognitive experience point to the conclusion that the higher the sphere of knowledge is, the more is sound belief dependent on moral and spiritual conditions. Or, to put the matter otherwise : In these higher spheres mere processes of reasoning become less and less adequate as instruments of investigation; and what may be described as the power of moral and spiritual intuition becomes more and more the only available organ of knowledge. And this is as it ought to be. If conscience is our highest cognitive power, then the category of the good is the supreme principle in accordance with which we ought to interpret the universe. Absolute goodness, that is an infinitely good God, is the light of all lights, and the law of all laws, and if not, all is darkness and death.