NEW

"

CONNEXION MAGAZINE.

OCTOBER, 1870.

Theology and General Literature.

DANGERS AND DUTIES;

A SERMON

FOR THE TIMES.

BY SAMUEL HULME.

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come."2 Tim. iii. 1.

No former times-not even the times of the Arian controversy in the fourth century, not even the times of the Reformation in the sixteenth century-have brought under discussion more important questions than those which now disquiet the minds of Christian men in England. These questions do not relate to speculative opinions, but to moral and religious principles on which the most solemn issues depend. If the intelligent Christian, having strong confidence in the steadfastness of the Divine purpose in the plan of redemption, and in the sufficiency of Christ as Head of the mediatorial dispensation, calmly anticipates the end when "His enemies shall become his footstool," yet is he often anxious about those dangers to the cause of Christ which the evil passions of men import into the conflicts that precede and contribute to the final triumph. No one than the Apostle Paul ever surveyed with a clearer eye the chequered evolutions of the ages to come, or anticipated with a surer faith the final triumph of Christ and his cause; yet in the text, illumined by the Spirit of prophecy he sees dangers to the Church not far off, and like a faithful watchman lifts up a warning cry, that by timely vigilance and preparation, if conflicts with evil men and evil principles cannot be averted, yet the dangers incident thereto may be escaped; and thus both conflicts and dangers may contribute to the Church's purity, concord, and stability.

The phrases "last days," "last times," and "latter times," as used in Scripture, are indefinite, sometimes referring to a period close upon the final judgment, and sometimes to a period close upon the time in which the writer lived. The class of predictions to which our text belongs is probably not exhausted in any single period, but comprehends recurrent periods in which the Church passes through similar perils. "Last days," as used by the apostle, cannot be interpreted as more definite in its reference than a future time in the present dispensation. "Perilous" means fierce, furious, difficult, trying, dangerous.

M M

"Perilous times" relate to the Church, and include general society only so far as it is connected with the Church. The apostle points to a state of general defection in the Church, whose characteristics he boldly sketches, and sums up in these profoundly comprehensive words, "Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." We presume not to lift the veil which conceals the future, and read out to you the events with which it is replete, but rather restrict ourselves to events passing around us, open to every eye, with the dangers they imply and the duties they impose.

Christ did

These dangers relate to articles of faith. The connection between opinions and practice, between theology and morals, has been perceived in all ages. Hence the importance attached to clear and fixed opinions on Scripture verities; hence, also, the jealousy with which doctrines have been guarded and assaults upon them repelled. But now we are told, "Dogmatic beliefs were not insisted upon by Jesus Christ, either in relation to his person, atonement, or resurrection. Obedience to the laws of his kingdom, was the main point." "A dogmatic temper is nothing better than intellectual ritualism, which not only diverts men's minds from moral questions, but unfits them for the duties of life. not teach his disciples an elaborate creed, but a moral code." "A man may be a Christian without a full and firm belief in Christ's theology." These bold assertions, heard on many sides, are untrue to facts, and untrue to reason. They are untrue to facts, because we have conclusive evidence in the Gospels that Jesus Christ did instruct his disciples with a view to the formation of their dogmatic beliefs concerning his person, atoning death, and resurrection from the dead. They are untrue to reason, because God has established in the constitution of our natures a connection between the understanding and the heart, the reason and the will, which connection we cannot break. Does not a false theology lie at the foundation of the idolatry, superstitions, pollutions, and crimes of Paganism? Do not my opinions concerning the person and work of Jesus Christ necessarily regulate my dispositions and conduct in reference thereto? If I deny the fact of the incarnation, and believe that Jesus Christ was no more than a mere man, how can I render to him Divine honours? If I deny that his death was a sacrifice of atonement for the sins of the world, how can I trust in it as the meritorious ground of my justification and eternal salvation? To ignore dogmatic beliefs, or to depreciate the importance of correct theological opinions, is not only unreasonable and unscriptural, but fraught with the greatest danger, as it reduces Christianity to a mere moral system; nor can that moral system have much hold on the heart or life, when associated with erroneous, vague, or unsettled opinions concerning the theological teachings of Christianity.

The Bible is a revelation of truths not discoverable by reason. It contains an authentic history of the works and ways of God, especially of his moral government of the world; it proclaims the method of man's reconciliation to God by Jesus Christ; and it gives Divine authority and sanction to moral rules, which, if previously known by man, would have been mere opinions without power to mould his character and govern his life. To adjudicate on the nature

and sufficiency of the evidence by which the Bible is attested as a revelation from God, to find out its meaning, and to apply that meaning to the moral ends for which it has been given is the province of reason. But beyond this some claim for reason, competence and authority to separate the true from the false in this revelation, and under the pretence of rationalizing the Bible, and eliminating therefrom all that is unreasonable, they cut out some of its most important historical portions with the unsparing severity of infidelity, and fritter away some of its most important doctrines and blessings.

As both Nature and Revelation are Divine works, they cannot, contradict each other. In determining a question raised by scientific discoveries, it is important that the whole of the facts be collected, compared, and interpreted; and that the propositions based upon them, or the inferences drawn from them, be logically warranted by the facts. In determining the harmony of scientific facts with Scripture, it is necessary that both be correctly interpreted and compared. But some enthusiastic students of physical science having found a few facts, with indecent haste and ardour plead them against the historical statements of the Bible, as if impatient to convict it of falsehood-as if science were intolerant of religion. For example, strata have been found in England, America, and on the Continent of Europe, containing bones of animals mingled with flint implements, from which conclusions have been drawn which assign a higher antiquity to man's residence on the earth than the Scriptures appear to warrant. But such conclusions, whether true or false, are premature, so long as the origin and age of these strata are unsettled questions. Yet unsettled they are, as the most distinguished men differ from each other thereon, and even the same man differs from himself at different times. Hence geologists, whose opinions are entitled to great respect, hold not only that such conclusions are unwarranted by the facts, but that the facts collected are so incomplete, and so imperfectly understood, that no conclusions can be based upon them.* Hastily to generalize facts, and to leap rashly to conclusions, is a temper as hostile to the progress of sound science as dangerous to religious faith.

"The method taken by Sir C. Lyell to solve the problem of the antiquity of man in the West of Europe, is to prove two propositions:-I. That man was contemporary with several animals no longer seen in the same regions, and with some which are no longer found living on the earth. II. That an interval of time, enormous as compared with the reach of human annals, though small as compared with the immeasurable ages of the history of the earth, separates our present epoch from the extinction of the mammoth, woolly rhinoceros, and cavern bear. The first of these propositions is of great importance in geology; the second may have higher interests of another kind. For the first we hold the evidence now brought together by Sir C. Lyell to be strong, though not conclusive, both from gravel-beds and from caverns. The remaining doubts in the case of gravel-beds arise from the fact that the bones of quadrupeds found in the gravel are in general so scattered as to suggest their derivation from an earlier repository. If that were so, the flint tools, which display very little signs of local displacement, may be of later origin, though of contemporaneous deposition. In the case of caverns where the bones and flints have been often and much displaced by the water, there is room for a similar doubt; but every fresh example of the concurrence of human implements with quadrupedal bones strengthens the argument for the contemporaneity of men and the animals, and thus, by

Historical criticism has made great progress within the present century in England, France, and Germany. In judging of the credibility of Scripture history, we apply the same rules as in judging of the credibility of any other history. Yet, wholly disregarding these rules, or trifling with them, such men as Renan, Strauss, and their followers in this country, reject as legends certain facts in the Gospel narratives, and accept other facts as true, in the most capricious manner, though both rest on the same historical foundation; and this licentious process is applied to the Gospels for the purpose of elaborating a character of Jesus Christ preconceived and fictitious, altogether inconsistent with the Gospel narratives and with the belief of the Church. No history can stand before criticism so unscientific, which strikes at the historical character of Jesus Christ, that by destroying its reality it may destroy Christianity which rests upon it.

Not less fraught with danger is the attempt to revive amongst us, in its authoritative form, the theology of the Fathers. The writings of the Greek and Roman Fathers must be regarded as amongst the richest treasures of the Church. They contain Scripture criticism and exposition; theological and moral discussions; defences of Christianity against pagan idolatry, philosophy, and governments; and some im

degrees, the proposition has been brought within the range of reasonable acceptance, at least provisionally, and for those countries where the observations have been made."-Quarterly Review, October, 1863.

The following remarks of the Duke of Argyle on the Scriptural and Christian aspects of the question are important:-"Man is the latest work (in the order of creative acts). Recent discoveries have thrown no doubt on this, but, on the contrary, have all tended to confirm it. I know of no one moral or religious truth which depends on a short estimate of man's antiquity. On the contrary, a high estimate of that antiquity is of great value in its bearing upon another question much more important than the question of time can ever be-viz., the question of the unity of the human race. We must, indeed, be very cautious in identifying the interests of religion with any interpretation (however certain we may have assumed it to be) of the language of Scripture upon subjects which are accessible to scientific research. We know from past experience how foolish and how futile it is to do so; but, unquestionably, the unity of the human race, in respect to origin, is not easily separated from some principles which are of high value in our understanding, both of moral duty and religious truth; and precisely in proportion as we value our belief in that unity, ought we to be ready and willing to accept any evidence on the question of man's antiquity. The older the human family can be proved to be, the more possible and probable it is that it has descended from a single pair. My own belief is, that all scientific evidence is in favour of this conclusion; and I regard all new proofs of the antiquity of man as tending to establish it on a firmer basis."

Bishop Butler, with his wonted sagacity and candour, thus states the conditions of the question: "Now the just consequence from all this, I think, is that the Scripture history in general is to be admitted as an authentic, genuine history, till something positive be alleged sufficient to invalidate it; but no man will deny the consequence to be, that it cannot be rejected or thrown aside by us as of no authority till it can be proved to be of none, even though the evidence now mentioned for its authority were doubtful. This evidence may be confronted by historical evidence on the other side, if there be any, or general incredibility in the things related, or inconsistence in the general turn of the history, would prove it to be of no authority. But since, upon the face of the matter, upon a first and general view, the appearance is that it is authentic history, it cannot be determined to be fictitious without some proof that it is so."-" Analogy," Part II., chap. vii.