PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION

Footnote: fta1 Literature

Footnote: ftb1 The Marquis of Salisbury’s speech at the Pavilion, Brighton, on the 19th of November, ftb2 Dean Mansel

Footnote: ftc1 See Appendix, Note

Footnote: ftd1 This possibly may be what Mr. Gladstone means in the statement criticized at (p. 25 ante .) But if so, I am at a loss to understand either his language or his argument. He seems to suggest that the “alleged” miracles may yet be explained to us, just as the predicted eclipse of the moon which terrified the South Sea Islanders might afterwards have been explained to the savages. My own meaning an illustration may make plain. That fire should come down from the sky and kindle a pile of wood is a commonplace phenomenon. It might occur during any thunderstorm. But if I heap wood together upon a certain spot, and at my word lightning falls upon it and consumes it, this is a miracle; and the element of the miraculous is in the fact that I have set in motion some power that is above nature and competent to control it. ftd2 Bishop Van Mildert’s “Boyle Lectures,” sermon 21. Of the truth of these last words Hume’s celebrated treatise supplies most striking proof. He takes exception to the evidence for the Christian miracles; but when he goes on to speak of certain miracles alleged to have occurred in France upon the tomb of Abb Paris, the famous Jansenist, he admits that the evidence in support of them was clear, complete, and without a flaw. But yet he rejects them, and that solely because of “the absolute impossibility, or miraculous nature of the events!” It behooves us to regard such evidence with suspicion; but to accept the evidence and yet to reject the facts thus established, is indeed “to destroy the very foundations of all human testimony.”

Footnote: fte1 If any should quote the case of Simon Magus as an exception, they are welcome to their argument! fte2 Greek Test. Com., John fte3 1 Peter 1:23. Still more definite are the Lord’s words addressed to Peter in response to the confession of His Messiahship, “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jonah; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but My Father which is in heaven.( Matthew 26:17) fte4 St. Paul’s testimony gains in emphasis because of the vision on the Damascus road which, but for his explicit words, might lead us to call him a miracle-made disciple. fte5 Very strikingly is this exemplified in John the Baptist’s case ( Matthew 11:2-5; see also John 5:36). fte6 Luke 24:27-44. This threefold division of the Old Testament was the one commonly adopted by the Jew-the law, the prophets and the “Hagiographa.” The Psalms stood first in the third division and thus came to give its name to the whole. fte7 As regards the use of the word “Religion”, see Appendix, Note

Footnote: ftf1 Acts 10. This is made still more clear by chapter 15:2. ftf2 The prophetic utterance of Matthew 16:18 will not be deemed an exception to this. ftf3 The Bampton Lectures, 1864. ftf4 Such was the spirit of their inspired Scriptures. See, e .g ., Chronicles 6:32, 33; Psalms 67:1-3, etc. ftf5 “If,” says the author of “Supernatural Religion,” “Christianity consist of the doctrines preached in the Fourth Gospel, it is not too much to say that the Synoptics do not teach Christianity at all. The extraordinary phenomenon is presented of three Gospels, each professing to be complete in itself, and to convey the good tidings of salvation to man, which have actually omitted the doctrines which are the conditions o 441502 f that salvation.” This is a fair specimen of the sort of statement which, owing to prevailing ignorance of Holy Scripture, suffices to undermine the faith even of cultured people in our day. The Gospels were not written “to teach Christianity,” but to reveal Christ in the different aspects of His person and work as Israel’s Messiah, Jehovah’s servant, Son of Man and Son of God. No one of them is “complete in itself”; and the Fourth alone expressly professes to teach the way of salvation ( John 20:31). ftf6 See Appendix, Note 3. ftf7 2 Timothy 2:16. This passage disposes of the tradition that St. Peter was Bishop of Rome.

Footnote: ftg1 Froude’s “Cesar, a Sketch” p.87. ftg2 We know, and it is our pride to know, that man is by his constitution a religious animal; that atheism is against, not only our reason but our instincts; and that it cannot prevail long” (Edmund Burke). “Street arabs and advanced thinkers,” is Mr. Balfour’s classification of the exceptions to this rule (“Defense of Philosophic Doubt “). ftg3 For a calm, scholarly, and crushing refutation of those who, like de Bunsen, Seydel, & etc., represent Buddhism as the original of Christianity, and of those who, like Sir Edwin Arnold, read Christianity into Buddhism; see Prof. Kellogg’s “Light of Asia and Light of the World” (Macmillan).

The Buddhism of Gautama, I may add, has no claim to be reckoned a religion , for it has no God. It was not a religion at all, but merely a philosophy. But his followers, in obedience to the instinctive craving of human nature for a religion, made Gautama himself their God. And the Buddhism of later times has invariably assimilated some of the elements of the base polytheisms by which it has been surrounded.

Footnote: fth1 Remember this book was first published in fth2 “The Place of Christ in Modern Theology,” by Principal Fairbairn, D.D., p. 267. fth3 A dozen years before Baur’s “Paul” appeared, the truth thus attributed to him was discussed at the then celebrated “Powerscourt meetings” in Ireland! fth4 Though the Revisers have reproduced St. Peter’s words in one important passage which the Authorized Version has misread, yet to take these simple words in their plain and obvious meaning is to risk being looked upon as either fool or faddist. The words are: “Repent ye therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that so there may come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord; and that He may send the Christ who hath been appointed for you, even Jesus; whom the heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, where of God spoke by the mouth of His holy prophets.... Ye are the sons of the prophets and of the covenant which God made with your fathers” ( Acts 3:19 etc .). The whole passage should be carefully studied, and by all means see Alford’s notes, showing how fully and definitely all this refers to Jewish hopes and promises. fth5 Acts 8:1,4; cf 11:19. It is noteworthy that at this time all the believers went out preaching except the apostles . And yet there are those who maintain that preaching is an exclusively apostolic function! fth6 Acts 11. The words “they that were of the circumcision” might seem to suggest that there were Gentiles at that time in the Church. But, as Dean Alford says, Luke uses the phrase from the standpoint of the time when he was writing: “In this case all those spoken of would belong to the circumcision.” fth7 ( Acts 4:4) If “the number of the men came to be about five thousand,” it is reasonably certain that the whole company was double this number at least. fth8 They are never so called in the Acts. Indeed, our English word “deacon” has no equivalent in ancient or in Biblical Greek, and if the Revisers had been true to their avowed principles of translation the word would have disappeared. Dia>konov is used twenty-two times in the Epistles, and should be rendered “minister” in every case, and especially in Philippians 1:1, and 1 Timothy 3:8 and 12, where ministers are distinguished from bishops. In the Gospels it occurs eight times, and always as equivalent to “servant” in the common acceptation, save in John ( 12:26), where it is used in a higher sense. fth9 Acts 5:21, 33-40. I use the word murder advisedly, for under the Roman law the Jews had no power to put any one to death. See John ( 18:31). The crucifixion was a judicial murder; the stoning of Stephen was murder pure and simple. fth10 Acts 5:34-40; cf 22:3. A quarter of a century later they were still known as “the sect of the Nazarenes” ( Acts 24:5) fth11 The victims of the so-called Christian persecutions have been wildly estimated at over fifty millions! Of the victims of pagan Rome I have never seen any estimate. And pagan persecutions also were in the name of religion! From the death of Abel in primeval times down to the massacres of Armenian Christians today, religion has heaped up the tale of human guilt and sorrow. fth12 Mill’s “Autobiography,” p. 40.

Footnote: fti1 Acts 24:5-14 “After the Way, which they call a sect, so serve I the God of our fathers” (see also 28:22), and he goes on to appeal to the law and the prophets. “The Way” came to be the common expression for their teaching \see, e.g., Acts 19:9,23, 22:4, 24:14, 2 R.V.). And speaking before a heathen judge he purposely uses, not the Jewish expression, oJ qeorwn hJmw~n , but the term familiar to the heathen, oJ patrw~|ov qeo>v , the ancestral or tutelary God. fti2 See Appendix, Note fti3 This is the position assumed by “Lux Mundi.” fti4 The Old Testament we owe, of course, entirely to the Jews. fti5 The Church of England teaches unequivocally that there is neither salvation nor infallibility in the Church, and that the Church’s authority in matters of faith is controlled and limited by Holy Writ (see Articles 18-21). And this is Protestantism; not a repudiation off authority in the spiritual sphere, but a revolt against the bondage of mere human authority falsely claiming to be Divine. It delivers us from the authority of “Church”, that we may be free to bow to the authority of God.. “The Church” claims to mediate between God and man. But Christianity teaches that all pretensions of the are both false and profane, and points to our Divine Lord as the only Mediator.

Protestantism is not our religion, but it leaves us with a free conscience and an open Bible, face to face with God. It is not an anchorage for faith; but it is like the breakwater which renders our anchorage secure.

It shields us from influences which make Christianity impossible. fti6 These men declare that to them our faith in Holy Writ seems foolishness. But Holy Writ warns us that “the natural man receive not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him ” ( Corinthians 2:14). fti7 To record the points on which the Bible was formerly attacked, marking off those which modem research has disposed of — this is a task which awaits a competent pen. And when the book is written it will astonish both friends and foes.

Footnote: ftj1 W. R. Greg’s “Creed of Christendom.” ftj2 Dia< tou~to ejk pi>stewv i[na kata< ca>rin ( Romans 4:16). Theology has no better definition of grace than that given by Aristotle (Rhet. ii. vii.).

Footnote: ftk1 Our English versions have distorted the passage, first by a punctuation (I have followed Dean Alford’s), which makes the mystery a characteristic of the power to stablish us, whereas it characterizes the preaching by which we are stablished; and secondly, by their rendering of the words dia> te grafw~n profhtikw~n (cf . Matthew 26:56, “the scriptures of the prophets”). It claims notice also that both “revelation” and “mystery” are anarthrous; but while the English idiom seems to require the article before the former word, its insertion before “mystery” is not only unnecessary, but misleading. ftk2 See appendix, Note ftk3 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8. Within the Church, of course. Lawlessness in the world is as old as sin. ftk4 “Synonyms,” (Part 2. p. 123) ftk5 2 Corinthians 5:18-20. This passage is inseparably associated in my mind with an incident once narrated to me by the late Sir Robert Lush.

When Sergeant Wilkins returned to the Law Courts after an illness which practically ended his career Mr. Lush (as he then was) saw him sitting with his face in his hands, and he noticed that tears were falling from between his fingers. The Sergeant was not of his acquaintance, but when he saw him hurriedly leave the court, he followed him, and delicately referring to what he had seen, he asked if he was in any trouble in which he could be of service to him. The Sergeant gratefully acknowledged his kindness but explained his seeming distress by the fact that the words above quoted, which he had been reading that morning, had come back to his mind as he sat in court, and he could not restrain his emotion. The incident will be appreciated by those who know the sort of man he was. Suffice it to say it had not been his habit to read the Bible. But how many such there are who turn to it in times of sickness or trouble? ftk6 Such a statement will be resented by that school of religious thought which boasts as its founder one of the greatest of the Church’s teachers. But let us appeal from the disciples to their master. Here is Calvin’s commentary upon the verse above quoted ( Romans 5:18). “He makes this favor common to all because it is propounded to all, and not because it is in reality extended to all; for though Christ suffered for the sins of the whole world and is offered through God’s benignity indiscriminately to all yet all do not receive Him.” And the following extract from his commentary on the third chapter of the Gospel of St. John is no less apposite. Referring to the sixteenth verse he says: “Christ employed the universal term whosoever both to invite indiscriminately all to partake of life, and to cut off every excuse from unbelievers. Such is the import of the term world. Though there is nothing in the world that is worthy of God’s favor yet He shows Himself to be reconciled to the whole world when He invites all men without exception to the faith of Christ, which is nothing else than an entrance into life? And if any one ask, how then is Judgment possible?

The answer is that Judgment is based upon this very truth. (See c. 12. post .)

Footnote: ftl1 See Appendix, Note 6. ftl2 Zechariah 3:1,2. In 1 Chronicles 21:1 and <19A906> Psalm 109:6, the word rendered Satan in A.V. is merely an adversary . And I cannot avail myself of Isaiah 14:12, etc ., Ezekiel 28:14, etc ., much as they would help me, because there is no way of ascertaining certainly whether Satan is there intended. I have no doubt of it myself. The word devil does not occur in the Old Testament. In the four places where “Devils” is used in A.V. the R.V. adopts other words. ftl3 In Matthew 12:24-27, our Lord neither adopted nor rejected the Jewish belief. How grotesque is the suggestion that at such a time He should have discoursed to them on demonology! Passing the subject by, He turned their taunt back upon themselves by the words, “If I by Beelzebub cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out?”

Unless the phenomena described by spiritualists may be explained by delusions or fraud, they must be attributed to demons; and there seems strong reason to believe that some men are possessed by “unclean” demons. ftl4 Ephesians 4:26. The words are quoted verbatim from Psalm 4:4 (LXX). ftl5 Old Bailey is the Criminal Court in London ftl6 John 8:44. See Appendix, Note 7. ftl7 This is probably the explanation of the “coincidences” between Christianity and some of the old religions of the world. I do not allude to Buddhism, for its seeming “coincidences” admit of a much more prosaic explanation (see, e .g ., Professor Kellogg’s work referred to at p. 68 ante , note) but to the cult of Tammuz and ancient Babylon.

Scripture warns us that in the future Satan will travesty the Divine mysteries; is it strange if he has done so in the past? ftl8 See appendix, Note ftl9 In 1 John 2:2 and 4:10. He is called the iJlasmo>v . In ( Romans 3:25) He is called the iJlasth>rion (mercy-seat). The word occurs but once again in the New Testament, i .e ., ( Hebrews 9:5). ftl10 In John 11:35 the word used betokens silent tears. The word in Luke 19:41 means to lament with every outward expression of grief. ftl11 For a further discussion of the general question, see Appendix, Note 8.

Footnote: ftm1 “The Scotch Catechism” it is commonly called, as though Westminster were somewhere north of the Tweed! This catechism was compiled by pious and learned “Dons” of Cambridge University, and adopted by “an assembly of learned and godly divines” convened in Westminster Abbey. ftm2 “The Gospel and its Ministry”, Kregel Publications ftm3 See Appendix, Note

Footnote: ftn1 hJ basile>ia tou~ ko>smou ( Revelation 11:15). ftn2 Anything which is manifest is of course raised out of the sphere of doubt or question; and God declares that in the Cross of Christ His grace and kindness and love have been manifested ( Titus 2:2, 3:4; John 4:9). But, ignoring the stupendous fact that, for our sakes, He “spared not His own Son,” men seek to put Him upon proof of His love; and the test is whether He complies with some specific appeal urged in the petulance of present need or sorrow. ftn3 Romans 10:9 (R. V.). The true Buddhist will declare himself by the way in which he names his master, never omitting some title expressive of his reverence for him. And the true Christian will declare himself in the same way. If a man habitually writes or speaks about “Jesus,” we may be sure, whatever his creed may be, that he is a Socinian at heart.” That Jesus Christ isLORD” is the special testimony of Christianity and the Christian will not forget it even in his words. ftn4 See Appendix, Note 10. ftn5 Here is an ascending scale of experience: “Hath God forgotten to be gracious? Hath He in anger shut up His tender mercies?” ( Psalm 77:9). “I was dumb, I opened not my mouth, because Thou didst it” ( Psalm 39:9). “I have learned in whatsoever state I am therewith to be content” ( Philippians 4:11). “Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities… I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake” ( 2 Corinthians 12:9,10). ftn6 Psalm 93:4 (R. V. revised . The word voice is in the plural, but it is obviously the Hebrew poetical plural: not several voices, but “the great voice”). ftn7 Every candidate for ordination must publicly declare, in reply to the Bishop, that he “unfeignedly believes all the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments.” Whether such a pledge ought to be required I will not discuss. The fact remains. And this being so, when clergymen set themselves to discredit the Bible, the primary question suggested concerns their own honesty. Has the Church a lower standard of morality than the Clubs? ftn8 Appendix, Note 11. ftn9 “The lives of the Newmans afford an apt illustration. Both made shipwreck of their faith — the one in religion, the other in infidelity.

The “Apologia” and the “Phases of Faith” are among the saddest of books. ftn10 swth>riov pa~sin ajnqrw>poiv , ( Titus 2:11). ftn11 filanqrwpi>a ( Titus 3:4). ftn12 As an infidel writer has somewhere said, “Nature knows nothing of any such foolery as ‘forgiveness of sins.’” ftn13 See Appendix, Note 8. ftn14 In proportion to our appreciation of the Christian revelation will be our appreciation of the argument that God cannot now intervene, or declare Himself, directly and openly. But this leaves unanswered the difficulty that He so often fails to intervene indirectly on behalf of His own people. The life of faith has always been a life of trial, and it is so specially in this dispensation of a silent Heaven. But it is our joy to know that our Divine Lord “was in all points tempted like as we are, apart from sin” ( Hebrews 4:15). The statement seems to involve a contradiction, for how could He be tempted as we are tempted if, as the added words (cwriav ) imply, “throughout these temptations, in their origin, in their process, in their result, sin had nothing in Him; He was free and separate from it”? (Alford). The explanation will be found in what has here been unfolded (Chap. 11, ante ) respecting Satanic temptations as primarily designed to destroy our confidence in God. The thirty years before our Lord entered on His public ministry, spent in enforced inaction in the midst of abounding sorrow and evil and wrong, must have been to Him a living martyrdom, the Tempter ever taunting Him with the seeming apathy of God. And when we read that “He suffered , being tempted” ( Hebrews 2:18), we can realize how truly He was human, and how deep and real was His humiliation. ftn15 Such have been precisely the criticisms this volume has evoked. One of the chief organs of cultured thought in England describes it as “a book full of religious mysticism.” And one of the leading press organs of the “Sadducees,” while speaking in flattering terms of the way in which the problem of the book is stated, can see nothing in the proposed solution of it. So it ever was. To the Jew the gospel of Christ was an offense because it set aside religion; to the cultured Greek it was foolishness because it ignored what he was pleased to call wisdom. The “philosopher” was thinking of evolution and the upward progress of humanity, but the gospel spoke to him of grace that would pardon his sins and of judgment to come. If the leaders of the school of thought and teaching here alluded to could only be brought to apprehend the truth this volume contains, their whole position and testimony would be changed. But their literature will be searched for it in vain. Such a statement is easily made, but if untrue it can as easily be answered; let the book be cited which refutes it.

APPENDICES:

Note: fto1 Because if Gentiles had been evangelized during his first visit, there would have been no need to announce on his return that God had opened the door of faith to Gentiles.

Note: ftp1 The whole passage from ver. 18 claims careful study. Science explains the condition of civilized man by evolution — although the only law it can point to is degeneracy: the rest is all mere theory — Revelation explains the state of the world generally by the fact that, having originally the knowledge of God, they willfully lost it, and so God left them to the darkness of their own deliberate choice. ftp2 See 1 Timothy 4:1-4. It may be noticed here in passing that during recent years, both in Europe and America, these doctrines have been insidiously taught by certain spiritualists, who commend their teaching by seemingly pure and blameless lives. ftp3 In the N. T. “the flesh” means usually either the body, or bodily nature, of man, or else human nature as a whole in its fallen and corrupt condition. But in Ephesians 2:3 it is contrasted with “the mind,” and therefore it appears to mean man’s corrupt bodily nature.

In Ephesians 1:18; 4:18 (as also in 1 John 5:20), dia>voia is translated “understanding.” (In 1:18 the R. V. reads kardi>a .) St. Paul uses the word flesh in different senses even in the same passage; see Ephesians 2:3,11,15, ex . gr . ftp4 “Idylls of the King.”

Note: ftq1 ( James 5:13) may seem to be an exception. But without raising the question where “the Elders of the Church” are to be found in our day it may suffice to notice that this Epistle, being expressly addressed to Israel (Chap. 1:1), belongs dispensationally to the Pentecostal era, which will be renewed when Israel is restored. ftq2 See Chap. 5 ante . I am convinced that they will be equally true in a dispensation which is still future; but I do not enter on such topics here.