Liber librorum : its structure, limitations, and purpose. A friendly communication to a reluctant sceptic

Contents

PAGB

Prefice to the American Edition * ... 7

Preface 11

Preface To The American Edition

The author of Liber Librorum firmly believes and earnestly defends the Historic Reality and the Supernatural Origin of the Mosaic and Christian systems. He also accepts the Incarnation, the Resurrection, and the Redemptive work of Christ, and the other important truths which these involve. In respect to all these points, his position is decisive, and strongly taken against the scepticism which is so fearfully prevalent in both England and America, in the form of an avowed rejection of these facts and truths, and of a secret misgiving that they may perhaps be outgrown, or set aside by the progress of modern thinking.

He insists also upon the supreme authority of the Scriptures in respect to all questions of religious faith, and upon their permanent and indispensable superiority above all other books, as composed by men divinely aided and inspired. But he contends, b PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION.

that to assert for them smj higher authority or inspiration, is to claim for them more than they claim for themselves, as well as to take a position that is both untenable and damaging to the interests of Christianity. To explain and vindicate what the author believes to be the correct view of inspiration, is one of the principal objects of this treatise. He has had the sagacity to discern, and the courage to avow, that the question of inspiration must be fairly met, and can no longer be either safely or honestly thrust aside. Dr. Arnold of Rugby wrote in 1835 of "the approaches to that momentous question, which involves in it so great a shock to existing notions ; the greatest, probably, that has ever been given since the discovery of the falsehood of the doctrine of the Pope's infallibility. Yet it must come, and will end, in spite of the fears and clamours of the weak and bigoted, in the higher exalting and more sure establishing of Christian truth." The author of Liber Librordm believes that the time for discussing this question has fully come, and he discusses it like a brave and honest man, by looking squarely in the face the difficulties which attend the traditional theories. He does not, however, write for those whose hereditary faith is as yet undisturbed, but for the ' reluctant sceptics ' who find insuperable difficulties in accepti

Preface To The American Edition. 9

ing what they conceive to be the current views of Christianity and the Scriptures.

His leading positions may be briefly characterised by those which he opposes and rejects.

1. He opposes the '' bibliolatry " which idolizes the letter of the Scriptures as against the claims of the Scriptures themselves, and the spirit of their contents.

2. He opposes the pretensions of High Church arrogance, and the pharisaism of sensuous ritualism.

3. He rejects also the narrowness of that theological dogmatism which reads every term and phrase of its creed and catechism between the lines of the Scriptures, and refuses to revise the traditions of schools of theology by the aid of better methods of interpretation.

It would be idle to expect that all the opinions expressed in a volume written in such a spirit, and with such aims, will or ought to satisfy every reader. Some of these opinions are given as conjectures; others are manifestly not well considered. Some of the views of the writer, in respect to future retribution, will be generally set aside, as unsupported by the testimony of the Scriptures. In respect to some points the work betrays marks of haste, both in

thought and composition. But its spirit is earnest,

1*

10 PREFACE TO THE AMERICAN EDITION.

honest, and Christian. It is believed that, as a whole it is eminently adapted to relieve the difficulties of the '^reluctant sceptic," and that it will be welcomed by all those Christian believers who, in these times of trial to their common faith, have full confidence that a frank recognition of the difficulties of their argument is the only wise method of securing for it a triumph. While the book is not, and does not claim to be, an exhaustive argument for the truth of Christianity, it has at least this merit, that it successfully defends it against the ignorance and weakness of many of its defenders.

PEEFAOE.

Whatever may be the cause, it is but too certain that in the present day, both at home and abroad,, multitudes of religious young men, who a few years ago would have ranked as believers, are now, instead of attaching themselves to the Church, silently but rapidly becoming alienated from all Christian worship and communion.

' The fact,' says a recent writer, ^ may be explained as a passing fashion, or as the result of a certain phase of opinion, but it is a fact And its gravity is heightened by the circumsttoce that we meet it in men whose lives are pure, who exhibit least of the worldly self-seeking spirit, who are among the most thoughtful and cultivated. The conventional formulae of the indifference of the corrupt heart or of the love of earthly things are wholly insufficient to ex plain a state of mind than which none is fraught with greater danger/

12 TREFACE.

This general unsettlement of religious belief, it is further remarked, has ' grown from within / the outcome of it is a scepticism reluctant rather than aggressive, which in some of the best men is rapidly passing the border of intellectual hesitation.'

The secret of the success which now attends publications intended to advance a destructive criticism is, that • they speak to men already ' perplext in faith, but pure in deeds,' who received with their first instruction in Christianity statements of doctrine which, in the time of mature reflection, appear to contradict the Divine instincts of justice, mercy, and truth, — the image of God's own eternity in the heart of man. These doctrines, taught as necessary inferences from, or as identical with the facts of Christianity, were once acquiesced in as the creed of Christendom, but now, in not a few cases, repulsion follows the attempt to read and understand them by the light of reason and conscience.'"^

That it may be very difficult to render service to such persons without paining or perplexing timid and anxious spirits is but too probable ; but everything of a merely personal character ought surely to be risked by Christians on behalf of men and women who, even in their unbelief, ha've not cast off the reverential feeling for Scripture which they acquired in youth, and who are always willing to allow that to a Bible training they mainly owe the light and life in and by which they now see.

* Contemporary Review, art. 'Indian Questions,' No. 1, p. 125.

PREFACE. 13

The following Correspondence will perhaps serve to explain the state of things to which reference has been made, better than any merely general observations could do.

March 1867.

OOEEESPOlNrDEIsrCE.

A LETTER.

My dear

Your request that I should lay frankly before you my views regarding the Bible, and that I should state distinctly the particular diflficul ties which have led me to reject it, is certainly a reasonable one. Yet I can scarcely enter on the subject without pain ; nor would I pursue it, did I not feel rather desirous of explaining to you the true position of a multitude of young men who are but too often maligned or misunderstood.

Regarding myself, I need only say that you have known me too long and too well to be in any danger of attributing my unbelief to moral perversion. My manner of life, from my youth up, has been no secret to you, and I have consequently little fear that you will so grossly misjudge me as to suppose that I have any wish to escape obligation by cherishing seep ticism, or any desire to justify lawlessness by denying Divine Law. But I wish to say a word or two on this point for oilers.

The unbelievers of the present day, so far, at least, as I have come into contact with them, are not, as you seem to think,

16 COERESPONDENCE.

irreligious men. Thev are not mockers, neither do they sit in the seat of the scornful. Hundreds of them are, at the present hour, * wearying their souls to solve the problem how to conciliate the convictions to which the tendencies of the age have borne them with respect for time-honoured institutions, and tenderness for the faith of those whom they most love and honour.'

You would be surprised to find how many of these have been educated evangelically ; how many of them are persons of pure minds, generous, benevolent, and self-denying ; how willing many of them are to admit that to the Christian education they have received they owe everything they possess.

It is a mistake to imagine that all, or even the greater part, of these persons either deny the truth of Christianity, or shrink from avowing their conviction that Jesus Christ was the greatest and best being that ever dwelt on earth. They do not dispute that the Bible has, in many respects, a claim to be regarded as the first of books. What they deny is, its Divine character, its authority, its infallibility. They are conscious enough of the darkness which, apart from revelation, hangs over the world in which they live, but they do not see evidence that the Bible has removed that darkness. On the contrary, the more the world advances on its way, and the greater the extent of human knowledge, the deeper seems to them the gloom and mystery which encompasses all things. Life and Death they regard alike as unknown and unknowable. Shadows, in the view of some^ fall even on the character of God. His very existence is by such at times doubted. Whether, if existent, He is benevolent or malignant, they think cannot be proved. It is possible^ they say, when in these moods, that God is ; possible that He is good ; possible that after death, life may be renewed ; but nothing is certain.

To afiirm that men who are in this state of mind are unhappy is often, but not always, true ; for the mind, like the eye, can accustom itself to darkness as well as to light, and

A LETTER FROM A SCEPTIC. 17

where absolute certainty cannot be obtained, the soul can find rest even in a bare possibility.

Anything^y they think, is better than a Gospel, so called, which is in fact no g-ospel or good news at all, since it consigns all but a fraction of the human race to irremediable sorrow ; which exaggerates human sin, and limits Divine mercy ; which throws no sunshine on the dark spots that rest upon humanity, and which brings no balm to those that need it most — the slaves of evil, of ignorance, and of superstition.

As a rule, however, they have no wish to undermine the faith of others, and no desire to deprive anyone of consolations which are dear to him. Their spirit is critical, but not contemptuous; it is historic, not intolerant. They disbelieve in miracles, but they have no disposition to laugh at those who hold to them. That which is to believers a question of Life or Death is to them a matter of pure indifference. Where others are enthusiastic, they are calm and judicial.

To these men I adhere. Their number is much greater than you think, and it is constantly increasing. They have their faults without doubt, but in this respect they are only on a par with their opponents. They may sometimes forget what is due to the cherished beliefs of wise and good men who have inherited the opinions of a dead past, but the rudeness is not wanton ; it arises from the absence of reverence for what others esteem to be Divine rather from any feeling of animosity. Forgive them this wrong, and believe me when I say that whatever your opinion may be of any of us, our own conviction is that we are doing a good work, that we are striving to establish the principle of freedom of enquiry, in opposition to that of acquiescence in dogmas utterly at variance, as we think, not only with the discoveries of science, but with the first principles of morality.

"We are ready to avow our belief that the Bible is responsible for the prevalence of the dogmas to which we object, and therefore, ' while we admit the good that is to be found in it, while we neither altogether reject or despise its teachings, we cannot allow it to be held in the estimation that has hitherto been accorded to it, nor can we permit either it or anything else to come between conscience and God.'

We think that the Bishop of Natal has demonstrated that the Sacred Eecords, as they are called, are not, as a whole, historical, and therefore that the moral and spiritual propositions contained in these books cannot be authoritative. When, therefore, we find in Scripture actions recorded and commended which are immoral; commands given which are iniquitous ; and statutes ordained which are unjust ; we put them aside just as we should do if they were found in any other book. We maintain that many things in the Bible are untrue, and others morally wrong; among the latter we reckon the Mosaic laws regarding slavery, and the instructions given for the extermioation of whole tribes. We are amazed and confounded when we discern that some of these things have been palliated in the writings of a man so great and good as was Dr. Arnold, and that even Lord Macaulay should speak of the Jews as specially selected by God to be 'the ministers of His vengeance, and specially commanded by Him to do many things which, if done without His authority, would have been atrocious crimes.' The principle which underlies this demoralising process is, I need not say, more speciously, and therefore more perniciously, laid down by Bishop Butler in his * Analogy.'

On the general question of inspiration, my own notion is that it ought not to be regarded as anything peculiar to the past, since we are all, in a certain sense, inspired. All truly great men are unquestionably inspired men. On your own showing, every Christian is inspired who is made a partaker of the Holy Ghost. Do you not recognise this fact when you pray, ' Cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of thy Holy Spirit ?' Do you not affirm it when you claim for tlie godly the promise of the Comforter — ' He shall guide you

A LETTER FEOM A SCEPTIC. 19

into all truth?' Can you, then, really believe that Biblical inspiration is anything more or less than the combination in the writers of the two fold gift — genius and piety ? I myself agree with Mr. F. W. Newman, when he says that only one kind of inspiration can be admitted, namely, that of ' an ordinary influence of the Divine Spirit on the hearts of men, which quickens and strengthens their moral and spiritual powers, and is accessible to all (in a certain stage of development) in some proportion to their own faithfulness.' Of course, this is but intuition, and, holding it, the value and importance of revelation in the Scriptures becomes very small indeed : but I cannot help that.

Professor Strauss somewhat expresses my thought when he says that ' God has revealed Himself to mankind at all times — in their own minds, in the works of creation, in the history of the nations, and, finally, in some particularly gifted men whom He raised up as lawgivers and prophets, as teachers and apostles. Such men have risen among all nations, but chiefly amongst the Jews, who very early entertained the notion that there is but one God, that He is the Almighty Creator of heaven and earth, that He is not to be represented by any image or likeness, that He is the Holy Lawgiver, the just Kuler of the destinies of mankind. The religious writings of the ancient Jewish nation being the only ones in which this foundation of true religion is to be found so pure and strong (for which reason even the New Testament relies on and appeals to the Old in this respect) they are also holy to us ; and the books of Moses and Samuel, the Psalms, and the Prophets are indispensable to our edification.

' But they are not trustworthy as records of actual facts. Several remarkable events undoubtedly happened to the Israelitish nation, chiefly in the early period of their history ; they had escaped from servitude in Egypt under strange circumstances, and after a long migration they had conquered the land of Canaan in bloody wars. These occurrences, of course,

20 COBRESPO]:n)ENCE.

continued to live in the mouths of the people from generation to generation. At length some pious Israelite, dwelling on the Divine activity with regard to the departure from Egypt, imagined it in the form in which it stands, as if God had ordered Moses in an oral conversation to deliver His people — osifYLQ had visibly, in the pillar of cloud and of fire, marched before the army, and so forth. This, written down in after times, is probably the real origin of the relations thereof in those writings that are commonly called the books of Moses.' In this way, that which is recorded in the Old Testament as supernatural may, I think, be accounted for.

So with the I:Tew Testament. ' The first Christians naturally asked themselves whence in Christ comes this clearness of mind, this sublimity of spirit, this purity of heart which is nowhere else to be found in any human being ? He was not produced by sinful seed, was their answer ; He immediately descended from God, the fountain of all light. This most likely gave rise to the relations of His supernatural production contained in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St. Luke. As a higher spirit He appeared to have come down upon this earth for a short time ; after His departure from it He seemed to have returned to God, whence He came. This again gave rise to the relations of His resurrection and ascension, and so forth.'

' Christ will indeed come back to judge the world ; only His coming to judge us is not one that is always delayed from century to century, and never takes place ; but the Lord passes judgment every day, for He has given His spirit into our hearts to judge us: punishing us when we are doing or coveting evil, and rewarding us with peace and happiness when we are guided and governed by it. And thus our inward judge — our conscience— purified and sharpened by the Spirit of Christ, is adjudging and preparing to us already in this life reward or punishment, happiness or sorrow, according to what we deserve. This clearly indicates that also in a future life the

A LETTER FROM A SCEPTIC. 21

Divine Judge will assign to each of us that mansion in His Father's house which he has made himself worthy of here on earth. '^

I grant that, in one sense, under this mode of treatment, the Book goes, but in another it remains; remains 'to be read more intelligently than ever, not as the infallible Word of God, which it is not, but the fallible word of man, which it is ; read as containing a record, not of what God said and did, but of what the best minds in past ages thought God said and did. Truth in this way develops. The God of David is an improvement on the God of the book of Joshua. Isaiah's God is not like the God of Moses or of Abraham. The '^ Father " revealed by Jesus is holier, wiser, and purer than them all. Men will indeed have to give up the superstitions of other days — the dogmas that were accepted on trust — the dreams of dim ages past and gone ; but they will build on a surer foundation — they will have a nearer and a dearer faith in One who speaks to His faithful sons to-day ; and they will build their faith and hope on a better thing than an infallible book (even though they could have it), for they will build on an infallible God, who will give to all who seek Him the witness of His own blessed Spirit that " now are we the sons of God.'' Then we shall all see plainly that the Bible is our helper and not our master; that it belongs to the experience and the literature of the past ; and that while we reverence and study it, we are not to build all our hopes upon it, but that we are to trust to the same God as David and Jesus trusted in, that we may receive in the same way and to the same end, the wisdom that made them wise and the inspiration that made them good. The Bible is a book of the past, and it necessarily reflects the errors and the limited experience of the past.' ^

1 The opinions of Professor David Strauss, as embodied in his letter to tho Burgomaster Hirzell, Professor Orelli, and Professor Hitzig, at Zurich, translated And printed for general circulation as a tract.

* ' The Light that Pains,' a tract printed for gratuitous distribution.

22 COERESPONDENCE.

But, apart from these views, many enquiries must be made before I can accept the Bible. Take the four Gospels for instance. How am I to know who wrote them, or when they were written ? How am I to ascertain what means of knowledge the writers had, and whether or no they were eye- witnesses of what they record ? If they were not, I must be told how they got their information. These, and many similar questions, wliich you good people never seem to trouble yourselves about, appear to me to be essential and imperatively to require an answer.

Do not, however, suppose, I pray you, that, being in this sceptical condition, I must of necessity be altogether destitute of serious piety. By no means. I can, and do still occasionally, worship both in the Established Church and among N'onconformists. What I agree with I unite in ; what I dissent from I leave unnoticed. My tastes lead me to prefer liturgical to free prayer, and I cannot but think that one day we shall have forms for public devotion sufficiently aesthetic to gratify the religious sentiment, without involving dogmas which lead only to dispute. It certainly must be allowed that Christianity, whether in all respects true or not in the shape we have it, is eminently useful, highly consolatory to the poor and dependent, a restraint on many which could be ill spared, and an occasion of constant kindness and benevolent activity.

Further, in the absence of individual conviction, Church authority, if not pressed too far, offers many advantages. Amid the restlessness and discomfort engendered by profitless enquiry, it is a satisfaction, in the absence of anything better, to admit the fact that the Church represents the belief of centuries, whether those beliefs be accurate or not ; and that confidence in her, whether well grounded or otherwise, at least ensures quiet, by pacifying where it may not satisfy, and by fostering habits the tendency of which must unquestionably be favorable to domestic happiness, to social comfort, and to the

A LETTER FROM A SCEPTIC. 23

interests of law and order among all classes in the commonwealth.

Such is my case. I have been perfectly frank with you iu stating it, and I cannot but hope that you will answer mo in a similar spirit.

Believe me to be,

Yours cordially,

THE KEPLY.

My Deae ,

You do me but justice when you express confidence that I shall not attribute the intellectual wanderings of the son of my dearest friend to moral causes. I have no right to do this in any case. It is deeply to be regretted that believers should so often be harsh in their judgments of those who, while honest and respectful in their treatment of Scripture, are unable to arrive at settled convictions regarding its authority. Be assured that the highest faith is not favorable either to bigotry or uncharitableness. Confidence in the Bible, when it arises from supposed triumph in argument, or from a blind and hereditary acceptance of its claim, is, I am quite aware, but too often accompanied by an unloving and selfrighteous feeling toward unbelievers ; but this fault is rarely found among persons who feel and acknowledge that their joy, in truth, is the result of a subjective experience of its value, derived from the source and fountain of all truth. And for obvious reasons. The faith which is subjective carries with it that sense of certainty which alone gives repose to the spirit— a repose favorable alike to humility and respect for the consciences of others, and every way out of harmony with either anger or arrogance. Only such a faith is, properly speaking. Divine ; for ' the light in which a man can no longer call man '' master " is light in which he can no longer desire to be called '^ master." He who has this faith will rarely venture to say when and how, and to what extent, his brother man is rebellious to light and guilty in respect of unbelief; will rarely

26 COREESPOIS^DENCE.

attempt to decide as to who is leaning to his own understanding, or who receiving the Kingdom of God as a little child.' ^

And now you must allow me to say that I think you have taken far too favourable a view of a class who seem to me anything hut models for sincere and serious enquirers. Honest doubt, honestly dealt with, is, I believe, mjurious to no one ; but doubt encouraged and indulged soon becomes a habit of the mind, and a very unwholesome one too, not unfrequently weakening, and sometimes destroying the very capacity for estimating moral evidence. It is by no means rare to meet with doubters who are so unreasonable in relation to their difficulties that, in dealing with them, one is more tempted to question the healthiness of the brain than the integrity of the purpose. It is ' the fool ' who says in his heart ' there is no God.'

Some men of this stamp whom I have known were obviously under the influence of an intense and morbid egotism, and others were so completely in bondage to a sense of the ludicrous that they seemed absolutely incapable of dealing with anything seriously^ which could, by a little perverted ingenuity, be made to look grotesque. Few sceptics, I think, are distinguished by the possession of a robust and well-balanced intellect. I doubt not that among these persons are to be found many who may fairly claim to be regarded with the greatest consideration and respect. But this is not the case with all. As among believers are to be seen weak minds as well as strong ones ; bad men as well as good men ; persons who are able to give a sound reason for the hope that is in them, as well as persons who can give no reason at all : so among unbelievers there are not a few who but too plainly indicate that self-complacency and conceit have had very much to do with their doubts, while others are as clearly the victims of pride and a rebellious will — persons who are ob-

* Thoughts on Eevelation, with Special Ecference to the Present Time. By John McLcod CampbcU.

EEPLY TO THE DOUBTER. 27

viously destitute of all reverence^ and perhaps it is not too much to say disbelievers alike in truth and goodness. All this may surely be allowed, without disputing for a moment what you have advanced in favour of your friends.

In relation to your own difficulties, it will only be possible, in a brief letter like this, to glance generally at some considerations which you seem to me to have overlooked.

Your views of inspiration are of course not mine. I certainly regard Biblical inspiration — for I here speak of that only — as something very different from either genius or piety, whether single or combined. I do not think it at all akin to what we sometimes call the inspiration of the poet, of the painter, of the sculptor, or of the musician. I am far, indeed, from disputing that the Giver of every good and perfect gift may justly be regarded as endowing men of genius with all that distinguishes them from their fellows, but when I speak of Holy Scripture as inspired I use' the word in a much higher sense than this. I regard that book — so far as it is God-breathed at all — as inspired in such an exceptional way as to remove its revelations altogether out of the rank, even of the highest of merely human compositions.

I admit, indeed, that you would have good ground for maintaining the continuance of inspiration amongst us, if your application of the text quoted was a right one. But it is not so. It is a very serious and mischievous mistake to apply the words, ' He shall guide you into all truth,' to every believer. To do so, except in a ^oery limited seiise^ is, in my judgment, to destroy the broadest distinction that can be pointed out between inspired and uninspired communications. I am always ashamed at the arrogance — however disguised as humility — which is implied when good men say, as many do, ' the Holy Spirit has taught me this or that ; God fulfils His promise, and guides me into all truth ;' when they ought to say, ' God has revealed in the Bible all truth needful for my salvation from evil, and for my spiritual growth. Just as I