Christianity against infidelity...

Preface

The writer of the following pages is aware, that the subject of which they treat has been often and ably discussed by others ; but he is also aware, that their works, for the most part, are of too voluminous or too critical a character, to engage the attention of that numerous class of readers who might be induced to go through a less labored and less imposing volume. The works of Lardner, the most valuable ever written in defence of the Christian religion, are not probably seen, much less read, by one in five thousand of the great mass of the people. And nearly the same remark may be made in relation to the works of Macknight, Leland, Stackhouse, Gregory, Newton, Home, and even those of Watson and Paley. It is well known that Paley's volume is more extensively circulated and read than any other work on the same subject, and yet it is presumed that there are more who have not read it, than who have.

The object aimed at in the present volume is, the throwing together in as small a space as possible an outline of the Christian argument ; not with the expectation of making it a substitute for the works mentioned, but with the hope that it may

IV

PREFACE.

serve as a kind of introduction to them. Some may perhaps be persuaded to read this volume because it is small ; and having read this, we trust they will be sufficiently interested in the subject to pursue it farther, and enter into a thorough investigation of the argument in all its bearings. Tt is not expected that those who have made themselves familiar with the valuable productions which have been named, will give these pages a perusal — for such they were not intended.

It may be well to say here, that no claims are advanced on the score of originality. The very nature of the subject is such as to show that any very formidable pretensions in this respect would be unfounded. The writer has availed himself ot all the materials within his reach, and only regrets that he had not access to more. It is believed that due acknowledgments are made for debts contracted in this respect. As to the style, but little need be said. It has been the aim throughout to state every proposition in plain aud intelligible terms, without any seeking for superlatives. The reader will doubtless think the language might have been more studied, and he will perhaps discover not a few transgressions of the rules of composition ; but if he understands thef argument without difficulty, we will not occupy his time with apologies.

CONTENT S

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER - 9 CHAPTER I.

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. OBJECTIONS.

Sect. I. — An examination of the argument against the existence of a Supreme Intelligence founded upon the laws of Nature - — - 15

Sect. II. — An examination of the argument founded on

the asserted eternity of matter - 23

Sect. III. — An examination of the argument founded upon the laws of matter, or its inherent properties - 28

Sect. IV. — An examination of the argument from chance 33

Chapter II. I Direct Evidence Of The Existence Of God

Sect. I. — Evidence from the human body as a whole - 44 Sect. II. — Evidence of design in individual parts of the body. The arm — joints — -muscles — handheart— mouth - - * - - - 53 vi

Contents

Sect. III.— Evidence from external nature — adaptation to the wants of man — abundance of the useful, and scarcity of the hurtful— the camel — the rein-deer — the planetary system— the combined forces of projection and gravitation effecting the revolution of the planets - 66

Chapter III

A REVELATION REASONABLE AND PROBABLE. INSUFFICIENCY OF THE LIGHT OF NATURE.

Sect. I. — A revelation reasonable and probable — from the wisdom of God — from the practical admission of all nations in all ages — from the goodness

Sect. II. — The light of Nature not adequate to the wants of man — shown from pagans of the present day — from the doctrines of ancient philosophers—of modern philosophers - - - 81

Chapter IV

NECESSITY OF A REVELATION PROVED FROM THE RELIGIONS AND MORALS OF THE WORLD PREVIOUS TO CHRISTIANITY. IS THAT NECESSITY ANSWERED BY CHRISTIANITY %

Sect. L— Religious opinions. 1. Opinions respecting God.

2. Religious worship. 3. Origin of the world.

4. Origin of the human race. 5. A future state. Corrections offered by Christianity - 95 Sect. II. — Morals. 1. Ofphilosophy. 2. Jurisprudence.

3. Religion, The morality of Christianity as corrective of these - - - - - 106

Chapter V. Historical Evidence For The Truth Of The Christian History

Sect. I. — Were there Christians eighteen hundred years ago % The continued evidence of history from the present day upward to the time of Christ 130

CONTENTS.

Vll

Chapter VI. Historical Evidence Continued

Sect. I. — Were the books which compose the New Testament written by the disciples of Christ ? Argument from circumstances - 138 Sect. It— Direct historical evidence - 144 Sect. Ill— Have the books of the New Testament been

corrupted T - - - - - 169

Chapter VII. Internal Evidence Of The Truth Of The Gospel History

Sect. I. — Argument from the character of the religion

and of its Author - 184

Sect. II. — Argument from the simplicity and circumstantiality of the history 195

Sect. III. — Argument from the honesty of the writers in

recording their own faults - 202

Sect. IV.— Argument from the fact that many of the events are precisely what we should expect under the given circumstances - - - - 209

Sect. V. — Argument from the nature of the facts mentioned, which, if false, would have led to immediate exposure - 220

Chapter VIII

external evidence for the truth of the gospel history.

Sect. I — Argument from the acknowledgments of the

early opposers of Christianity - - - 230

Sect. II. — Argument from the rapid progress of Christianity on its first appearance - - - 239

Sect. III. — Argument from the sufferings of the first

Christians ------- 252 viii

CONTENTS.

Sect. IV.— Argument from existing institutions. Lord's Supper — First day of the week. The conclusion of the whole argument - - - 258

Chapter IX. Objections Answered

Sect. I: — Hume's argument agaiDst miracles - - 272 Sect. II. — Miscellaneous objections to the Christian miracles. False miracles. Ignorance of the age in which they were wrought. "Why was not the whole Jewish nation converted % - - 282 Sect. III. — The differences or variations in the Gospel Histories. Trial of Mr. Paine's "incontrovertible position." Its absurdity - 293

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

1. Every one who is in the habit of looking around him in the world, must be satisfied that, within a few years, the progress of Infidelity has been great. It is certain that the number of those who have fallen within its influence, is, at the present time, by no means small ; and it is equally certain that this fact may be traced to well known causes, to causes wholly independent of argument for or against Christianity. It must be evident to all who have had the benefit of observation in this respect, that not a few of those who are Infidels know but very little of the history, or indeed of the principles, of that religion which they have rejected as mere fable.

2. This remark, it is readily admitted, will not apply to all w r ho have cast aside the faith of Christ. The writer is acquainted with some, for whom he has ever entertained sentiments of respect, men who have doubtless read much on the subject, and w r hose present unbelief is the result of this reading. But even here he is inclined to the opinion, that the works which have been perused, are principally those which have been written against the Christian religion, while those written in to

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTFR.

reply to them, and in support of the Christian religion, have been mostly, if not altogether neglected. And it is verily believed that if such persons would read the same amount for Christianity, that they read against it, the complexion of their views and feelings with regard to its truth and value, would be essentially changed.

3. Aside from these, however,the remark already made is true, that a large number of the unbelievers of the present age are in a great measure ignorant of the very nature of the Christian religion, and altogether ignorant of the external evidences by which its advocates attempt to prove it, what it professes to be, a religion from God. They are Infidels not because they know, but because they do not know. They have never taken the trouble to acquaint themselves with the historical proof for the truth of the Gospel records, they have never studied those labored and conclusive works that have been written in their defence. They know nothing about these things, and it is to be doubted if the majority of them ever heard of a half dozen works of this character. This is not meant in severity, but as a simple statement of what is believed to be the facts of the case, of what might unquestionably be established, if examination were made, by numerous examples.

4. If, then, these persons will not inform themselves with regard to these particulars, it is surely nothing very surprising that they should be turned aside by specious and seemingly plausible objections, aided, as they usually are, by an accompaniment of sneers and sarcasms. It is not at all to be wondered at, that such individuals should be sceptical, when the little knowledge they

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

have on the subject, if knowledge it maybe called, is all on one side, and that with the laugh in its favor. They hear these objections and sneers every day; they are repeated again and again by those who have learned them, and, having nothing to offer on the other side, and supposing because they have not, nothing can be offered, it is perfectly natural that they should at last become Infidels, and yet the Christian argument be not in the least affected by such results. Every one can and must see, that they are Infidels, because they are entirely unacquainted with the evidences for the truth of Christianity.

5. Another cause to which is owing much of the Infidelity of the present age, is the vain and silly notions, so prevalent among a certain class, in relation to what is termed Philosophy. Young men imagine now, that they have only to reject Christianity, and pronounce it all imposition and priestcraft, and they are philosophers at once. It seems to be the received opinion among them, that universal scepticism is evidence of a great mind ; and nothing, in the estimation of such, can be surer proof of intellectual superiority, than to treat all religion as mere fable, fit only to amuse women and children. Hence come the wild and groundless assertions touching Christianity, which are so often and so confidently repeated, and hence the many rude observations, and ruder jests respecting its meek and benevolent Author. These things are regarded as demonstrations of having risen above the common herd of mankind, and outgrown their prejudices and superstitions. And there is a certain pride they feel in plunging thus

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

fearlessly into the whirlpool of Infidelity, while lesser minds tremble even to approach the brink. They flatter themselves that they are looked up to by the multitude as men of courage and sense.

6. But we would assure these young men, in friendly language, that they mistake. Scepticism is not philosophy, nor is unbelief any evidence of knowledge or of superior strength of mind. There is a wide difference between the two, and it is a difference well deserving their attention. The gaping crowd may wonder to hear them treat with levity, things that other men have been wont to regard as sacred — those of like spirit with themselves may call it Philosophy — but they may be satisfied that men of calm and sober judgment will look upon their conduct with feelings very wide from these. The pretensions of Christianity, whether true or false, are of too serious a nature to be trifled with. The existence of a supreme and all-ruling Intelligence — his character and government — whether we are his offspring or friendless orphans in the broad waste of the world — whether we live for to-day only, and then go down forever in darkness and nothingness, or whether there is beyond this an existence of endless advancement, and glory, and happiness — these are questions concerning which poor human nature can never cheat itself into indifference, and they are questions, which no man of reflection, which no philosopher, will approach but with sober thought. And those young men do sadly mistake the nature of true philosophy, and the character of a great mind, who think to give evidence of possessing either, by treating these momentous subjects with con-

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

tempt, or ridicule, or any thing that borders upon lightness.

7. If this does not satisfy them, if they will yet indulge the vain dream that the rejection of Christianity makes them philosophers, and brings them into the society of great minds, we have one farther request to make of them. It is, that they will compare themselves and the leaders of modern scepticism, with such men as Pascal, Grotius, Blackstone, Seldon, Melmoth, Lardner, Priestley, Brown, Boerhave, Addison, Johnson, Whiston, Euler, Ferguson, Bacon, Locke, Boyle, John Kepler, Sir Humphrey Davy, Sir Isaac Newton, and a host of others of the same class. These are men than whom no greater ever lived, men whose names will be honored as long as learning, science, and philosophy shall have being ; yet these were all modest and humble believers in the religion of Jesus of Nazareth. We desire the young men of whom we speak, to pause a moment here, and contrast themselves with these giant minds, and then, if they will, talk about philosophy, and the credulity and weakness of Christians.

8. A few words farther, and we have done. As has been already observed, there is reason to believe that a large proportion of the Infidels of the present day, are so, not because they know, but because they do not know, because they are ignorant of the merits of the great question at issue. And we do verily believe that any man of a candid mind, who will come calmly to the examination of the evidences for Christianity, and will go through the examination uninfluenced by hostility or prejudice— we do believe, that that man will

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

rise from the finished task a Christian. If there are those who choose to scoff, rather than make this investigation, we would say to them, in the words of another, tC It becomes you to consider, with great seriousness and attention, whether it can be for your interest to esteem a few witty sarcasms, or metaphysical subtleties, or ignorant misrepresentations, or unwarranted assertions, as unanswerable arguments against revelation ; and a very slight reflection will convince you, that it will certainly be for your reputation, to employ the flippancy of your rhetoric, and the poignancy of your ridicule, upon any subject, rather than upon the subject of religion."

9. In closing, we urge every unbeliever to make the investigation for himself: we are far from wishing any one to trust the word of Christians for the truth of their religion. We wish all to examine it, to sift it to the bottom, and not to hold it unless they find it good. If the present volume shall lead any to enter into such an examination, its object will have been gained.

Chapter I

THE EXISTENCE OF GOD. OBJECTIONS.

Section I

AN EXAMINATION OF THE ARGUMENT AGAINST THE EXISTENCE OF A SUPREME INTELLIGENCE, FOUNDED UPON THE LAWS OF NATURE.

1. As the existence of a Supreme Intelligence lies at the very base of Christianity, and as all attempts to establish the truth of the latter, without having first established the truth of the former, would be regarded by the unbeliever as premature and vain ; we shall therefore make this the starting point in our observations. It may seem, perhaps, to some a work of supererogation, to enter upon the discussion of a question which is regarded, by not a few, as having only one side ; bat our answer is found partly in what has just been stated, that the truth of this is the foundation on which the Christian system must rest, and partly in the fact, that, however strange it may appear for reasonable beings to deny the existence of God, surrounded as they are with the innumerable witnesses of this truth, it must nevertheless be admitted that many do deny it, and offer what they deem sufficient reasons for this denial. Under these circumstances, then, it becomes our duty to meet these reasons or arguments, not by pronouncing them absurdities at the outset, because this will not satisfy those who advance them, but by patiently and candidly examining them, and pointing out their irrelevancy, or want of consistency or force, or whatever may be their peculiar weakness. It is our design to meet in this spirit some of the objections to the being of an Intelligent First Cause of all things ; or, perhaps with more propriety it might be said, some of the arguments offered by way of showing that there is no evidence which necessarily proves the existence of such a Supreme Intelligence. Having done this, we shall bring forward some of the evidences which go to establish this fact, as we think, beyond question.

2. Much has been said about the laws of Nature, — they have been a favorite theme upon which some have delighted to expatiate in all the luxury of metaphysical philosophy, and their harmony, regularity, power and efficiency have been extolled in terms of rapturous praise. These laws, it is affirmed, are sufficient, and more than sufficient, for the production of all the wonderful and mighty effects which we behold around us, and which we call the works of God. But while we much admire the poetry and beauty of these descriptions of Nature, we have some doubt of the propriety of deifying her laws, and we cannot but call in question that philosophy which ascribes to them Omnipotence, Omniscience, and an universal and ever active benevolence ;

for such are the principles which we see in operation in the mighty machinery of the universe. This must be admitted by the worshipper of reason, and the child of science : he cannot, he will not deny that less than almighty power and unlimited wisdom could control and direct the ten thousand times ten thousand worlds which the discoveries of astronomy have unveiled to our view ; — he must admit this, wmether he ascribe the pow r er and wisdom to a God or to the laws of Nature. But here let us pause a moment, and ask the objector what he means by the laws of Nature, because unless we have a clear and definite conception of this particular, all our labor will be misspent.

3. What then does he mean by Nature 1 The earth, the solar system, the universe of systems, suns, and planets ? From the manner in w T hich the expression is used we should judge this to be its signification, and it is presumed that the correctness of this w r ill not be disputed. But we must be permitted to say to the objector here, that he assumes the very question in debate. It is for him to show how these systems, suns, fee, came to exist in the first place. Does he still affirm that they were produced by the operation of the laws of Nature 1 but these are Nature itself, and it is for the existence of this Nature that we wish him to account. Let us look at this a little more closely. We ask how the earth, for example, w T ith its regularity of form and motion, and all its beauty of scenery and variety of animal life, came into being 1 We are told that it was the effect of the laws of earth ; but this does not answer the question, — earth could have had no laws until it was earth. To talk therefore about the laws of earth, before the existence of earth, is unphilosophical, and involves a contradiction in language. It is only necessary to make the application of this argument to nature, and the difficulty of the objector will at once be made manifest. The inquiry is, how Nature, by which he means the universe of worlds, with all their connections and influences, came to exist ? The reply is, It is the result of the laws of Nature. But Nature could have had no laws until it had an existence, and it is this existence which the unbeliever is called upon to explain, and for which he is required to assign a cause. Until this is done it is all in vain to talk about the laws of Nature, because that is a point in the discussion which we have not yet reached ; we must account for the thing itself, before we make its laws the ground for argument.

4. As there has been much indefinite and even loose reasoning concerning this particular, it will not be thought out of place perhaps to extend our remarks a little. No man who wishes to arrive at truth, will indulge in the use of any terms without a clear and distinct meaning being attached to them, at least in his own mind. No single circumstance has done more to retard the progress of science and knowledge, and to perpetuate the dominion of error, than the repetition of words and phrases, with which those who employ them have connected no definite ideas. It cannot be expected that we should enable others to understand us, if we do not understand ourselves, and have no just and welldefined conceptions of what we mean to convey by the terms we use. If the premises of our positions are not clear and intelligible to our own minds, it cannot be supposed that the conclusions drawn from them will be intelligible to the minds of others. Notwithstanding, however, this is so important a point, there is reason to believe that the expression " laws of Nature," is in the mouths of a vast proportion of those who use it, a phrase without meaning, a phrase by which they do not themselves know what they intend to signify. This appears from the assertion so often made, and which has been noticed, that the laws of Nature are adequate to the production of Nature itself. It must be evident to every one who will reflect a moment, that nothing can be more inconsistent than to suppose the natural causes which we see in operation around us, formed our world in all its beauty and harmony. So far from this, they are the result of that formation, and could not have existed had not that formation existed before them. Hence the assigning the laws of Nature as the producing cause of the universe, is reversing the order of things, and making that the cause which is only an effect, or rather it is making an effect its own cause, which is certainly illogical and at war, length and breadth, with all true philosophy. Let it be fixed in the mind then that the laws of Nature could not have had a being until after the construction of Nature, that they arise from the combination of things, from their several positions, and mutual relations to each other ; in one word, that they are the streams and not the fountains, the offspring and not the parent of creation. Let these facts be kept in the van of argument, and the objector required to meet them fairly, and it will be found that he is thrown back again to his starting place.

5. For the purpose of showing more clearly the bearing of the above reasoning we will produce an example by way of illustration. Take the case of water, the constituents of which are hydrogen and oxygen, in the proportion of one part by weight of hydrogen to 7 1-2 parts of oxygen, and two parts by bulk of hydrogen to one of oxygen. The inquiry is, How came these gases to combine in these definite proportions so as to form water ? It must be remembered that there can be no laws of water until it is made ; " but oxygen and hydrogen," says a judicious writer, "no more tend to form water, nor of themselves could form it, than any other of the numerous things which also consist of them. Neither oxygen nor hydrogen could, or ever would move itself in that exact proportion, and so unite with the other as to form water. To suppose them able to separate themselves from their several elementary accumulations in the precise quantities necessary to form the aqueous fluid, and to agree together to combine in these quantities only, and in firm and lasting union, is to give to each of them a mind, a thought, a foresight, a plan, a will, a resolution, and a spontaneous self-motive for this special purpose, which would make every particle of each an intelligent, thinking, and choosing being. This idea would be preposterous." # " As soon as water was

* Cicero sneers at the Stoic, for supposing that " the world was a wise creature, and had a mind, which, by its own agency, constructed its frame, and still moves and governs it." Cic. Lucul. p. 92.

formed, the properties and the laws of water would begin. They could not have any anterior existence. They are not in the oxygen ; they are not in the hydrogen. They could not be before water was. This is a clear and decided example, how the laws of Nature and the properties of things arise from creation, and subsequent to it, and never form or produce it ; for the same reasoning is applicable to every substance of Nature, and to all its laws and agencies." #

6. The preceding argument, is, we think, irresistible. The unbeliever may indeed say that the combination of the oxygen and hydrogen so as to form water was owing entirely to their affinity for each other ; but in saying this, he abandons the original position, and destroys his own argument. If it was the affinity for each other of its materials and their consequent combination, which formed water, then it was not produced by the laws of water ; and hence in the application the unbeliever admits that the world or universe in its present state was not produced by the laws of Nature, but was owing to the tendency or affinity of the substances of which it is composed. We have done, then, with that doctrine which teaches that Nature is the effect of the laws of Nature. The argument is now placed upon a new ground, but not a less difficult one for the objector. He affirms that water is the result of the affinity which oxygen and hydrogen have for each other, and which causes them to unite in its formation. But does he not perceive that this only removes the difficulty one step

* Turner's Sacred History of the World, v. ii. p. 277—8.

backward without solving it ? The inquiry now is, How came oxygen and hydrogen to exist ? or, if we make a direct use of this illustration again, we ask, If the universe as it is now, was the effect of the mutual affinity of its materials, how came these materials into being 1 It will be seen that such an answer is no explanation of the phenomena ; — the existence of these materials is still to be accounted for, and the task of explanation on this point will be found no more easy than on the other. If the unbeliever can tell us how these came to exist at the first, he will have accomplished something, — otherwise he is yet in the dark.

Section II

AN EXAMINATION OF THE ARGUMENTS FOUNDED ON THE ASSERTED ETERNITY OF MATTER.

1. To relieve himself from the difficulty of the preceding argument, the unbeliever will probably resort to the old assertion, that matter is eternal. We know of but one argument that has ever been advanced to prove the eternity of matter, and that is grounded upon another assertion, that it is indestructible. But here likewise we call for proof. If in reply to this call it be said that we cannot destroy a single particle of anybody, nor annihilate so much as one atom, it is readily granted. But what then 1 Does it follow from this that matter is indestructible 1 We cannot do a great many things which can nevertheless be done. Because we cannot destroy a single grain or atom, it is by no means certain, therefore, that it cannot be destroyed. We cannot create a single atom ; and the abstract argument drawn from this fact, has the same force against the existence of matter, as the one just named has against its destruction.

2. However, be this as it may, we regard the point as having but very little bearing upon the question at issue. Suppose we grant that matter is eternal, or that the materials of which the universe is composed have existed from eternity ; what advantage does the unbeliever derive from this admission ? Certainly nonewhatever ; his course is involved in the same darkness as before. A moment's consideration will show this. Does the eternity of matter explain all the wonderful phenomena of the world around us ? Does it account for the order and harmony of the solar system — for the regular and exact revolutions of the planets — for the complicate, yet nicely balanced influences by which for ages they have been kept in play without once deviating from their path ? Does it account for the ten thousand forms of animal and vegetable organization which are found on the surface of our globe 1 Does it account for the existence of that wonderful creature, man ; and solve the mystery of mind ? # Not one of these questions can be answered in the affirmative, not one of these problems is solved by the eternity of matter.