Foundations of Christian belief; studies in the philosophy of religion

Contents

PAGE

Preface 11

Introduction

The Aim and Method in the Philosophy of Religion 13

The Purpose: A Rational Interpretation of the Religious Life, 13. The Method Both Scientific and Philosophic, 18. Justification of the Philosophic Treatment of Religion, 18. Historical-Critical Treatment of Sources, 22.

Chapter I

Early Christianity and Philosophy, 25. Jesus No Philosopher, 26. The Early Christian Writings Not Philosophical, 27. Christian Writings Soon Dominated by Philosophy, 28. Clement of Alexandria, 28. Origen and Athanasius, 29. Augustine, 30. Scholasticism, 32. Dante, 33. Luther, 34. Modern Philosophy and Christianity — Descartes, 34. Spinoza, 35. Hegel, 36. Lotze, 39. Eucken, Ward and Bowne, 40.

CHAPTER II The Philosophic World- Views 42

Philosophy and Life, 42. Religion a Great Fact in Life, 43. Religion and the Philosophic World- Views, .46. 1. Materialism: Criticism of Materialism, 51. Matter Incomprehensible Apart from Mind, 52. Materialism and the Origin of Life, 55. Materialism and the Origin of Consciousness, 58. Materialism and Moral Values, 62. Materialism and Religion, 64. 2. Agnosticism: Meaning of Agnosticism, 65. Kant's Agnosticism, 66. Spencer's Agnosticism, 67. The Sensational Theory of Knowledge, 68. The Agnostic's Unknowable, 70. Conclusion, 73. Agnosticism and Christian Thought, 74. S. Pantheism: Meaning of Pantheism, 77. Pantheism a Monism, 78. Pantheism and Deism, 78. Criticism of Pantheism, 80. Pantheism and Theism, 82. Pan-

6 CONTENTS

PAGE

theism and the Moral Life, 84. Pantheism and Religion, 86. 4. The Christian World-View: Theism the Only Christian World- View, 87. The Aim of Religious Philosophy, 88. Christian Theism Outlined, 88. No Explanation of Creation, 90. God's Moral Purpose, 92.

CHAPTER III Knowledge, Belief, and Faith 95

Religious Knowledge, 95. Authority of Religion — Its Basis, 95. Divine Revelation and Religious Authority, 96. Experience the Ground of Religion's Authority, 98. The Nature of Belief, 99. Religion Claims Knowledge, 100. Analysis of Knowledge, 102. The Growth of Knowledge, 106. Evolution of Subject and Object, 108. Logical Demonstration and Knowledge, 110. Assumption and Knowledge, 111. Knowledge Tested by an Appeal to Values, 112. Knowledge Vindicated in Experience, 115. Knowledge and Belief — Conclusions, 116. Faith, 117. The Certainties of Faith, 119.

CHAPTER IV The Growth of the Christian Idea of God 122

Christianity and Philosophy, 123. Human Thought about God a Gradual Development, 124. Begins with Primitive Conceptions, 125. Mythology, 125. Anthropomorphism, 126. The Lower and the Higher, 126. Comprehension of the Divine Possible Only in Terms of Human Experience, 128.

CHAPTER V The Meaning and Implications of Personality 133

The Fundamental Elements of Personality, 133. Personality and Freedom, 135. Meaning of Freedom, 136. Meaning of Determinism, 137. Weakness of Determinism, 138. Determinism and Truth, 140. Determinism and Moral Responsibility, 141. Modified Determinism, 143. Determinism and Character, 144. Determinism and Repentance, 145. Our Consciousness of Freedom, 146. The Abstract Problem of Freedom or Determinism Insoluble, 147. Freedom and Life, 148. Meaning of Freedom, 149. Freedom Not Lawlessness, 150. Freedom and Monism, 152. Grounds for Affirming Freedom, 153. Creative Thought Points to Freedom, 153. Freedom Fundamental to Personality, 156. Moral Love and Personality, 157. Importance of the Feelings, 158. Personality Grows Out of Social Relations, 160. Conclusion, 160.

CONTENTS 7

PAGE

Chapter VI

Limitation Not an Essential Element in Personality, 162. Objections to Thinking of God as Personal, 163. An Abstract "Absolute" Serves No Useful Purpose, 166. Moral Relation Involves Obligation, 166. Speculative Conception of God Results in Practical Atheism, 167. God's Limitations Self-imposed, 169. Divine Personality the Only Basis of Religion, 170.

CHAPTER VII Conceptions op the Divine Activity 173

God's Being Manifested in His Activity, 173. 1. Transcendence: Meaning of Transcendence, 174. Resulting View of Creation, 175. Leads to False Idea of Nature's Independence, 176. 2. Immanence: Meaning of Immanence, 179. God "In the World" Not Spatially, but Dynamically, 179. Meaning of Natural Law, 182. Creation is the Eternal Manifestation of Divine Energy, 182. Personality Saves Immanence from Pantheism, 186.

CHAPTER VIII The Revelation op God in Nature 188

Meaning of Revelation in Nature, 188. Adaptations in Nature, 189. Evolution and the Design Argument, 190. Divine Purpose and the Problems of Providence — Conclusion, 191.

CHAPTER LX

The Revelation op God in the Non-Christian Religions... . 196

Modern Knowledge of the Great Religions of the East, 196.

All Great Religions Born in Asia, 197. Great Truths Found in

the Oriental Faiths, 197. Non-Christian Religions a Phase of

the Divine Revelation, 200. Weakness of the Ethnic Religions,

CHAPTER X The Revelation op God in Human Personality 203

The Revelation Through Nature Not Sufficient for a Moral Religion, 204. Personal Relations Demanded, 205. Speculative Objections, 206. "God is Love," 207. Moral Love Made Known Only Through Personality, 209. God Revealed in Particular Personalities, 210. God Revealed in Humanity, 211. Most Perfectly in Jesus Christ, 212. Significant Facts Pointing to This, 213. Divinity of Jesus, 215. Divinity Revealed Through Humanity, 216. The Divine in the Human, 217.

8 CONTENTS

PAGE

CHAPTER XI The Revelation of God in Individual Experience 219

Revelation of God Through Individual Experience, 219. The Objective Reference in Sense-Experience, 220. "Subjective" Objects of Thought, 221. Meaning of Subjective and Objective, 222. Conversion of Paul, 223. Perfectly Real to Paul, 224. Objectively Real, 226. Was a Divine Call "Spoken" to Paul? 226. God "Spake"; the Essential Meaning, 227. Prayer: The Christian View of Prayer, 230. Alwaj's According to God's Will, 231. Prayer Not a Form of Physical Energy, 232. Knowledge of God's Purposes May Limit Our Prayers, 233. Answers to Prayer a Fact of Experience, 234. Another Objection, 236. "Subjective" Value of Prayer, 237.

CHAPTER XII The Bible as a Record of Divine Revelation 239

The Bible a Record of Human Experiences in which God Has Made Himself Known, 240. The Facts About the Bible, 242. The Bible Interpreted in the Light of Experience, 243. Authority of Bible Not Grounded in Inerrancy, 244. The Bible Is First a Human Record, 244. The Epistles, 247. The Gospels, 248. The Growth of the New Testament, 250. Meaning of Inspiration, 251. The Progressive Nature of Revelation, 253. The Bible and Other Sacred Writings, 254. The Supremacy of the Bible, 256. Redemption the Great Purpose of the Christian Revelation, 259.

Chapter XIII

The Place of the Supernatural in the Christian Revelation 262 Origin of Belief in the Supernatural in Early Religion, 263. The Problem, 264. Modern Tendency to Depreciate Importance of Miracle, 264. Value of Miracle for Christian Faith, 265. Meaning of "Supernatural" and "Miracle", 267. Divine Purpose in a Moral World Order, 271. God as Personal Implies His Moral Purposes, 273. Divine Purpose Realized in the Historic Christian Revelation Through Miracle, 275. Miracles and Christian Faith, 278. Miracles and Historic Christianity, 279. Belief in the Supernatural a Practical Demand of Faith, 281.

CONTENTS 9

PAGE

CHAPTER XIV The Christian Faith in Immortality 283

Belief in Life After Death in Early Religions, 283. In Religion of Assyria and Babylonia, 283. In Early Aryan Religion, 284. In Religion of Ancient Egypt, 286. Hebrew Beliefs, 287. Immortality in the New Testament, 290. Faith of the Early Christians Based on the Teaching of Jesus, 290. The Christian Faith in Immortality, 291. Foundation of this Faith in Immortality, 294. The Teaching of Jesus, 294. The Resurrection of Jesus from the Dead, 295. Grounds for the Christian Belief in Immortality from Science, 298. Grounds of Belief in Personal Immortality — from Philosophy, 306. Faith in Life Beyond Death a Spiritual Achievement, 316.

Preface

These pages are addressed to all who have an interest in the deeper problems of present-day religious thinking. The purpose is to draft sound philosophy into the service of religion. Thoughtful men and women who love the Christian faith not infrequently find their horizons of knowledge widening and some of their fundamental religious conceptions undergoing change. When this happens the fogs of perplexity and doubt are apt to drift in. It is hoped that these pages may afford some guidance to thought, so that even though modifications of belief may become necessary, the deeper convictions may not be weakened nor religious faith lose its spiritual content. Religion is not primarily a matter of clear or correct belief ; it is an experience of the soul entered into through faith, obedience, and love. But clear thinking on the great fundamental issues is of prime importance. The soul does not generally nurture great convictions while reason is groping. And clear and strong Christian thinking is very necessary if the Christian Church is to make an authoritative appeal to the life of to-day.

We shall attempt to discuss some fundamental matters in the philosophy of religion. The method will not be that of abstract speculation. We shall consider fundamental truths in the philosophical spirit but from the standpoint of religious values. Matters of doctrinal theology and literary criticism which do

not belong to a philosophical treatment of religion are

ll

12 PREFACE

excluded, the purpose being broadly constructive, not critical. Christianity is the most complete expression of the religious consciousness and the summit of the divine revelation. It is the only faith great enough and pure enough and divine enough to meet the needs of the soul.

My debt to my teachers is great. Foremost among these was the late lamented Dr. Borden P. Bowne, of Boston University. I also acknowledge guidance and help from the scholars whose works are cited in notes at the end of several chapters. My thanks are due to my friends Professor Albert C. Knudson, of Boston University School of Theology, and Professor William North Rice, of Wesleyan University, for valuable criticism after they read a portion of the manuscript.

If these pages shall help some to see more clearly that, in spite of the changes wrought in human thinking by modern science and philosophy, "the foundations of God stand fast," they will have found a justification.

Francis L. Strickland.

INTRODUCTION

THE AIM AND METHOD IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

The Purpose: A Rational Interpretation of the Religious Life. In the philosophy of religion we seek a systematic and rational interpretation of religious experience. And here we use the term "religious experience" in its broadest sense as including all human thought and action which has to do with religion. It includes all fundamental religious beliefs, and all acts of worship and other practices which exist because of men's belief in a world of supersensuous or spiritual reality. It is the task of philosophy to interpret our conscious experience — to seek those basal principles or truths which give to our conscious experience in all its infinite variety a fundamental unity and harmony. And surely no one will deny that religion is a great and exceedingly important part of human experience. Religion is a fact in the life of every man. He who makes no profession of having had an "experience of religion" in the commonly accepted sense of a personal crisis in religious thought and feeling, nevertheless has on every hand an experience of religion in the philosophical sense. The evidences of religion are all about him, in human customs and institutions, in the beliefs, habits and practices of men. Philosophy of religion, then, in the broad sense, is the attempt rationally to interpret a great and important part of our experience. Leaving aside now the question of the origin of religion or its ultimate ground of validity, the fact remains that religion exists — and that its manifestations comprise a considerable portion of our life experience. For this reason the justification of philosophy of religion rests upon precisely the same grounds as that of philosophy itself. Indeed, it is implied in what has just been said that philosophy of religion is but the aim and method of philosophy applied to the interpretation of a definite portion of experience.

It will be seen at once that the scope of religion and the complexity of the problems it presents make its treatment by a philosophical method far from simple, for in the systematic study of the religious life we are not dealing with forces which are constant and invariable like those, for instance, dealt with in physics. We are dealing, rather, with phases of life as they manifest themselves in those variables named human belief, emotion and will. In other words, we deal with life on the plane of the personal. This makes a philosophy of religion particularly difficult. It also makes it all the more important that we develop a proper method, a method which will recognize constantly that when we deal with religion we are dealing with personal life, and with a great factor in human history which has always stood in the closest relation to the practical concerns of life.

But any attempt to find a rational and systematic interpretation of religion must take account of all the essential elements of the religious life. Far too many attempts at religious philosophy have been partial and one-sided because there was a failure to recognize that religion involves the whole personality. Thus Kant wrote his "Religion within the Limits of the Purely Rational." His ideal was a rational and ethical religion freed from all elements of emotion and mysticism. It is not strange that under this treatment he makes religion to be little more than a performance of our duties because of the obligation laid upon us by God's will and the moral law which embodies that will. And Kant's error has been followed by many others, with the result that religion has often been set forth as a matter of correct intellectual conceptions under the mistaken apprehension that if men can only be made to see the truth clearly, they will govern their lives by it.

Schopenhauer's treatment of religion was equally onesided and its outcome even worse. He revolted from Kant's doctrine that we can never know things as they really are. He affirmed that in the human will we find a way of passing from a purely relative knowledge of the world to a knowledge which represents objective reality. But noting also how weak and inadequate the human will is, and how it leads men into all sorts of terrible evil, he developed a pessimistic view of the world and wrote a philosophy of religion in which patient resignation appears as the chief human virtue. The best hopes of life, according to Schopenhauer, are those of personal extinction. Thus his one-sided emphasis of the will led him out into a religion akin in spirit to Buddhism and far away from Christian ideals. The over-emphasis of sensibility also in religion has produced all manner of fanaticism and extravagance. "Feeling good" has loomed up so large as an element in religion that "doing good" has too often found a very subordinate place.

Psychology has taught us to study the mental life under three aspects, namely, thought, feeling, and will. These are the inseparable elements of personality. And any attempt to set forth the meaning of the religious life must reckon with each. From this it will be seen that psychology must be looked to to afford us light upon many of the problems wThich a philosophic interpretation of religion raises. The facts of religion are of a very different nature from the facts of biology or physics or chemistry. Religious facts are the expression by living men of the thoughts, feelings, and volitions which possess them, while the facts of natural science are occurrences in a fixed mechanical order. These religious acts of men are, furthermore, efforts to satisfy their pressing needs — the need of the physical organism for food, the need for protection from the elements or deliverance from impending evil, relief from the sense of guilt, the strengthening of their hopes. Thus it will be seen that all we can know concerning the nature and workings of the human mind will stand us in good stead when we come to the problems of religion. Without some knowledge of psychology no one can get on in the philosophical study of religion. Here is one reason why the philosophy of religion developed late. It was necessary that men should first gain a knowledge of the human mind and its processes before the vast mass of material secured through investigation of the life, beliefs, customs, and practices of primitive peoples could be interpreted, and the early chapters in the history of religion written.

Then, again, religion claims to be based upon knowledge. We often use the word "faith" and say that faith is the organ of religion. But this faith cannot be regarded simply as the projection of our fond hopes. To think of faith as devoid of that element of certainty which we assume for knowledge is to reduce faith to the level of probability and to set it over in sharp antithesis to knowledge. The purely subjective side of religion would remain, but that would cease to have authority. Let a man be convinced that religious faith is simply the projection of the earnest longings and fond hopes of the soul, and religious faith will cease to hold him. A thoroughgoing agnosticism leaves no place for religion except as beneficent convention or custom. But religion must lay claim to valid knowledge. We shall take up these matters more fully in their place.

An interpretation of the religious life, therefore, demands that we find and set forth some adequate grounds for religious certainty. To do this is one of the great purposes of these studies. If we can do this, we shall see that faith is but a phase of knowledge and the same foundations underlie that portion of experience called religion as underlie the whole of experience.

In these studies we shall first seek to expound briefly that philosophic world- view upon which we must rest our fundamental Christian conceptions. Some criticism of the world-views wilich leave no place for Christian belief must be offered. From the body of Christian belief we shall endeavor to select those great basal truths which are fundamental to Christianity. And by Christianity we do not mean a creed nor a theological system, but a great religious faith.

The Method Both Scientific and Philosophic. The method used by scholars in the modern study of religion is scientific. This means the careful collection of facts, and then the induction of the principles. This is, in a general way, the method of science, and it has yielded rich results in the hands of investigators in the field of religion. There is need also for the method of philosophy. The modern philosopher builds on the results of the scientific investigator. On the basis of the facts gained he seeks the underlying principles in the hope of explaining the facts in their origin and relation. These results are to be gained through systematic, rational reflection. The modern philosophical method demands logical consistency of course. Reason is supreme, but the experience of generations of philosophizing has shown that abstract speculation is barren. Only as rational reflection concerns itself with the great practical values of life is it able to gain results which make it worth the while. The pathway to the heights of truth does not lie through abstract speculation. We therefore frankly confess that, while Ave shall follow the philosophic method in our discussion, we shall try not to lose sight of the great moral and religious values in life. Too much has been already written in the realm of religious philosophy from the standpoint of abstract speculation with the result that its value for life has been very slight.

Justification of the Philosophic Treatment of Religion. The admissibility of the method of rational reflection applied to the study of religion has been called in question. There are those who hold that religion is not a proper subject for philosophic treatment at all. The objections fall into two classes : first, from those who deny that we can have any knowledge, properly speaking, of realities which lie beyond the senses. These objectors would assure us that knowledge is confined to the realm of sense-experience and those things which we may know from reasoning from the data furnished in sense-experience. Herbert Spencer is perhaps the most prominent thinker whose position would necessitate this objection. His doctrine has come to be recognized as typical of modern agnosticism. It must suffice here to say in regard to such an objection that it is superficial and fails to recognize the supersensuous element in all knowledge. It is really not so much an objection to philosophy as applied to religion as it is an objection to sound philosophy itself. In Chapter III we shall attempt more fully to dispose of this objection of the agnostic. The second class of objections to the application of the scientific method to religion may be summarized as follows: It is urged that religion, or religious experience, transcends mere knowledge. It implies a supernatural element — a revelation or communication of the thought and will of God to the individual. Hence God has given a special revelation. This we must accept, and anything further is unnecessary. The use of the reason, especially a strict method of research such as is used for the discovery of finite knowledge, is not properly to be applied to the religious life, which always rests upon the simple acceptance of a divine revelation. Of course this objection is not generally offered against historical nor archaeological studies hi religion, but it is sometimes urged against all attempts to formulate a philosophy of religion or to seek in psychology any light upon the facts of religious experience.

But granting that there is and always must be a considerable difference between the facts dealt with by natural science and those which come under our observation when we take up the study of religion, we may nevertheless urge that the acceptance of religion as resting upon the foundation of a divine revelation in no way forbids the full use of reason in dealing with the facts of the religious life.

For, upon what ground shall we believe the revelation to be divine? And surely we must believe it divine in order to accept it as authoritative. Only two possibilities are open : first, that of an authority external to ourselves which shall be absolute; or, second, the recognition that there must be grounds in reason for the acceptance of the revelation as divine, and hence authoritative. The Eoman Church takes the first position and answers every attempt within her borders to give reason free play with the absolute dictum of authority. The Church has declared certain doctrines to be true, therefore they are to be received by all as authoritative. The Church has set her seal of approval upon certain books, therefore they are to be accepted by her adherents as divine revelation. The second possibility is that even though a divine revelation be accepted as authority, there must be some grounds for such acceptance, and these must lie in reason. The reason must furnish the credentials for accepting the revelation as divine, and if that is so, it means that the content of the revelation must, on the whole, approve itself to reason. Thus it appears that unless we are ready to accept the voice of external authority as absolute and take our place beside the Romanist, we must leave for reason an important place in dealing with religion — granting fully that religion rests for its foundation, not only upon those truths which have emerged as the result of reasoning, but also upon truths which have come as revelation. There can be, then, no valid objection against the critical method as offered to the study of religion. It is no less reverent to study, with all the help afforded by modern scientific knowledge, God's work in the human spirit than it is to study his work in the human body or in that larger human body we call society.

We do well to remember that the broader study of Christianity itself has come by way of a scientific and philosophic study of primitive religion and then of the non-Christian religions. We now speak freely of the evolution of religion, but in doing so we only state in brief and current phraseology the method in which the religious consciousness and life have developed. And to speak of the evolution of Christianity does not mean that our religion is of "natural" origin, but only that it stands at the summit of a revelation of the Divine which has mauifested itself in a gradually developing moral and spiritual consciousness in man. When Christianity is studied systematically beside the great ethnic faiths, the comparisous and the contrasts which emerge show Christianity's immense superiority. Just as evolution applied to humanity means that the human species stands as the crown of an upward development of organic life through countless ages, so the evolution of Christianity means that our religion is the highest point in an age-long revelation of God, beginning in the dim twilight of the remote past and ending in that hour when God revealed his great love as a sufferer on Calvary with and for men, in order that through this supreme revelation men might be won for obedience to and fellowship with him. This marks the highest possible level of moral and spiritual growth.

Historical-Critical Treatment of Sources. It remains to add a word concerning the use of the historical-critical method in the study of religious literatures and other sources. The method is conveniently called historical because through historical research we gain many of the facts of the religious life of mankind. The sources for this historical research are monuments, inscriptions, literary remains, etc., which have come down to us from former ages. To reconstruct the life and thought of a former age is the task of the historical critic. The method is called critical because the principles of literary criticism and interpretation play an important part in a proper interpretation of these various records which we have received from former ages. Other important sources for the study of religion are the studies of uncivilized peoples living to-day in various parts of the world by scholars in anthropology and ethnology, or by travelers, explorers, and missionaries who write from first-hand knowledge. The number of these source books has greatly multiplied until now there is hardly a spot in the whole world whose native tribes have not been studied by trained observers and the results of the study recorded in original published works which are available to students of ethnology and primitive religion.1 We have sought in the preceding paragraphs to outline the philosophic method in the study of religion. We have tried to set it forth as the method not only for the studies attempted in this volume but as the method followed by all modern students of the science and philosophy of religion. The dogmatic method of treating religion with its constant appeal to some external authority is a thing of the past among scholars. In the study of the religious life and of the development of the religious consciousness the method of research must be employed. This forbids that we should generalize except in accordance with facts furnished in experience. Through the method of philosophy we seek the underlying relations and the ultimate causes so far as they may be inferred. This is the only method which nets certain and permanent results. In this way only can Ave come to the conviction that the truths of religion are in harmony with the truths of science and every other realm of human thinking.

1 Among the most valuable and recent of these works are those by Tyler, Frazer F. Ratzel, A. W. Howitt, and Spencer and Gillen.

Chapter I

In a very true sense the relation of philosophy to religion is expounded and illustrated in the entire discussion to follow in these studies. The main purpose of this work is to bring some of the results of well-matured philosophy to the service of Christian thinking. It will be of interest and profit, however, at the outset to suggest a few things concerning the relation of historic Christianity to philosophy as both developed from age to age; at the same time indicating some of the conceptions of philosophy which are fitted to serve as a rational norm for Christian teaching and experience.

Early Christianity and Philosophy. The aim of philosophy is primarily to satisfy the reason, enabling us to find a systematic and rational interpretation of experience. Religion, on the other hand, is the whole expression of the human spirit in faith, beliefs, worship and conduct with reference to a world of unseen and eternal existence. Our religious convictions come from the needs of the inner life. We long to know God and persist in our search after him, not because we hope to understand God and find in him a means of comprehending the mysteries of existence, but because we feel our own need of some one greater and more powerful than ourselves. The Divine Being is

26 FOUNDATIONS OF CHRISTIxVN BELIEF

primarily an object of our worship, not a problem for our intellect. When men seek only to understand God, the way of thought grows dark. All attempts to comprehend the Divine through rational speculation from Origen to Hegel end in conceptions which are abstract, remote, and unfitted to satisfy the needs of the human spirit. Even in Christian theology when we come away from a consideration of the so-called "metaphysical attributes" of God, we find we have greatly multiplied our perplexities at the expense of assurance and comfort. While, on the other hand, the soul's resolve to trust God and to love him, even in those hours when it seems most nearly impossible to understand him, is an act of faith and brings rest to thought and moral courage.

Jesus No Philosopher. The origin of Christianity is Jesus Christ. We recognize fully that our religion as a great spiritual movement in history first grew in the rich soil of Judaism. And yet Christianity was no mere enlargement of Judaism. Jesus had, indeed, been carefully trained in the faith of his fathers. The words of the Old Testament came easily and accurately from his lips. But we do not study his wonderful teachings long before becoming convinced that we have here something far beyond the spirit and precepts of the Jewish religion. Indeed, Jesus swept away Judaism so far as it was a system of external rites and legal devices to gain the divine favor. The keynote of Jesus's teaching is that all the demands of the moral law will be fully met by a joyous love to God as the heavenly Father, and a fraternal regard for others as brothers in the great Divine Family. Jesus's first followers were born and bred in the Jewish faith and it was difficult for them to break the bonds of Jewish thought and feeling. But Christianity could not be confined within the limits of any national faith, and in a few years after the death of its Founder it is being proclaimed as a spiritual message for all mankind.