Bible Theology and Human Reason, part 4

From the Presbyterian Magazine, October 1858. Edited by Dr. Van Rensselaer. Pages 452-458.

“Bible Theology Consistent with Human Reason”
Part 4

III. God’s beneficent design and wish to restore man to his original purity, and the difficulty of reconciling the claims of his justice, with the designs of his mercy.

Nature teaches us not only that there is a God, a great, self-existent, omnipotent Creator, but that this God, in his creation, has looked to the comfort, well-being, and happiness of his creatures in the disposition of his Providence. The only fact, in the remotest degree militating against the thousand proofs of his beneficence, is his permission to the existence of sin; and even that seems to be only the consequence of the bestowal upon man of the gifts of free agency. That such a God should not desire the restoration of man to a state of holiness – a state consistent with his own attributes – would be utterly at war with all the manifestations of his Providence.

But if such be the desire of Omnipotence, who shall it be effected? What difficulty lies in the way of an immediate, unconditional restitution of man to his original state of purity? That it is in the power of God to do this is unquestioned. It is true that an essential attribute of the Most High, without which we would not recognize his perfection, is justice. A just retribution to the wrongdoer, is not only demanded by the obedience of the righteous, but enters into all the ideas which human reason can devise of the Ruler of the Universe—such an idea has been universal with mankind from the earliest ages, and is not only consistent with, but demanded by human reason. To that reason, then, a difficulty exists in reconciling the claims of divine justice with the designs of divine mercy. It may be replied, that this is but an apparent difficulty. With Omnipotence all things are possible. Granted, but how does human reason dictate that this apparent difficulty can be avoided? A thousand expedients might be suggested by an all-wise and omnipotent God; but we are inquiring into the consistency of the alleged revealed scheme with human reason—of this reason, then, we must demand a scheme—and this brings us to the consideration of our fourth point, viz.:

IV. The reconciliation of these conflicting attributes by the scheme devised, viz.: the expiation of man’s sin by the vicarious sacrifice of a being combining the infinity of the God with the mortality and finite nature of the man.

Bible Theology and Human Reason, part 3

From the Presbyterian Magazine, October 1858. Edited by Dr. Van Rensselaer. Pages 452-458.

“Bible Theology Consistent with Human Reason”

Part 3

II. Man’s fall from this original state of purity and holiness, and the consequent corruption and depravity of his entire nature.

We might here appeal again to the sages of antiquity to show that the perverseness of man’s nature, and his tendency to do wrong, was by them all admitted as a fact, differing, as they did, only in the causes assigned in explanation of the fact. With some, the mind was a blank paper, and received from education the perverted, sinful dispositions. With others, as before stated, his nature was pure, but excess indulged in, caused the errors of his life. While with others, his evil passions were held to be his original nature, and education and culture alone transformed him from a beast into a civilized man. But we need not this testimony. We have an unerring witness in the consciousness of each individual, and this witness we propose now to examine. Let every man review his own life, take up one by one every honorable, noble, praiseworthy act which memory has retained—spread open before himself, as if to the All-seeing eye, every hidden motive conspiring upon his will, to produce his action, select the one to this own search, most free from unworthy motives, and then confess to himself whether even his own consciousness cannot discover in the hidden recesses of his heart some trace of selfish love, some taint which bars the claim of perfect purity in all its bearings. If the blurred eye of erring man can thus discern the trace of sin, how polluted must it seem to the undimmed vision of perfect holiness and purity. Strive as we may against it, with shame confess it to ourselves, and straight resolve that in the future we will not again be forced to confess so mortifying a fact, and yet again and again in our own self-communings we discover this underlying stratum of selfishness, tingeing every fountain that breaks forth from the heart.

We thus find in human nature these conflicting elements, the one indicating a pure, perfect, and holy origin, the other evidencing a depraved and corrupt principle pervading the entire soul. By the unaided light of human reason, then, we discover in man the relics and evidence of a perfect original, but so marred and defaced by error and sin as to destroy its symmetry, and almost obliterate its proportions.

What disposition will the Creator make of such a creature? This question brings us to the consideration of the third point, viz.:

III. God’s beneficent design and wish to restore man to his original purity, and the difficulty of reconciling the claims of his justice, with the designs of his mercy. (Part 4)

Bible Theology and Human Reason, part 2

From the Presbyterian Magazine, October 1858. Edited by Dr. Van Rensselaer. Pages 452-458.

"Bible Theology Consistent with Human Reason"

Part 2.

I. Man’s original creation in a state of purity and holiness.

It is a fact well known, that ancient philosophers had arrived at this truth without the revelation of the bible. Aristotle bases his system of ethics upon the assumption that all human passions are pure, and that error lays only in the excess. He carries the doctrine far beyond its legitimate results, but still it effects the purpose for which we use it, viz., to show that human reason discovers in human nature such relics of original purity as to authorize the belief of the existence of such a state. But without invoking the authority of any great name, we may arrive at this truth ourselves. Let us examine the human heart, analyze its passions, explore the deep regions of original motives, and we shall be forced to the same conclusion. As to the better feelings and affections—love, gratitude, pity, &tc.—argument is unnecessary. To the baser passions, then, let us appeal; for example, envy, revenge, hatred, avarice, covetousness. Is there a foundation of good, a corner-stone of purity, upon which such passions as these are reared? A few moments’ reflection will show that there is.

To admire the good, to seek to arrive at its attainments, is laudable. To remove real obstacles in the way is necessary to success. Real or imaginary thwart our purposes, and produce unpleasant reflections. A successful aspirant in the same race becomes in our eyes an obstacle to the attainment of the desired end, and hence Envy.

To love and protect those dependent upon and dear to us, is praiseworthy. To shield them from present harm and future injury, is pleasing and grateful to a generous heart. Every injury unprevented by us, grates harshly on these better feelings, reproaches our self-love for neglect, and demands a reparation, and hence, Revenge.

To love the right must necessarily produce a contrary feeling for the wrong. If both right and wrong make the same impression upon the heart and excite the same feeling, there could be no incitement to the one nor prevention of the other. The existence of real or imaginary wrong gives rise to this repulsive emotion of the heart, and hence, Hatred.

To provide not only for present wants, but to lay up for future necessities, is the prudent foresight of a reasonable being. So great and unexpected are the events which a day brings forth, that the teachings of experience prompt to the accumulation of more than actual necessity requires. This desire for accumulation becomes a master passion, and hence Avarice, and in its train, Covetousness.

The list might be extended until we had exhausted every passion. Sufficient illustration has been given for our purpose, viz.: to demonstrate the traces of a pure fountain for all the dark schemes flowing forth from the human heart.

While we have thus to dig deep into the foundations of the passions to seek for laudable motives, it requires but ordinary observation to arrive at the conclusion, that by some means the waters have become bitter and the streams turbid, and this brings us to our second proposition, viz.:

II. Man’s fall from this original state of purity and holiness, and the consequent corruption and depravity of his entire nature. (Part 3)

Bible Theology and Human Reason, part 1

From the Presbyterian Magazine, October 1858. Edited by Dr. Van Rensselaer. Pages 452-458.

“Bible Theology Consistent with Human Reason”
Part 1

The philosophy of the plan of salvation, as revealed and developed in the sacred Scriptures, has so often been considered, and the consistency of the revealed with the natural law so often shown, that one cannot expect to advance any new views of the one or proofs of the other. Yet so varied is the human mind that the presentation of the same idea clothed in different words, or from a different point of view, will sometimes make an impression, never before following a score of previous repetitions. With this view, we propose to consider the consistency of the theology of the Bible with human reason.

We will not stop with the atheist to argue that there is a God, a great creative, self-existent, omnipotent first cause. Nor will we repeat the conclusive and uncontradicted argument derived from history and observation, to show that man is a religious creature, acknowledging always his dependence upon a Supreme Being or Beings, and thereby evidencing, from the internal consciousness of the entire race, our relation as subjects of a higher power. We are tempted to enter upon the enticing field of god’s external providences, to show how mercy and goodness are exhibited in all his creation, thence to draw the conclusion that this mercy and goodness would not stop short at the provision for our carnal wants, and leave unsupplied that intense thirsting of the soul for the spiritual and eternal. And hence, that it is natural that we shall expect such light upon these great interests as would satisfy the craving of the spirit and make plain and sure the path of rectitude. This light is the true religion. It would be pleasant and easy to examine the many lights which have been exhibited to the world, each claiming to be the true emanation from the Deity, and to show that to the enlightened mind none can claim so high a regard from the intellect as that portrayed in the Christian Bible, and thus demand for it the meed [sic] of being the true light of the world—the true religion—until some purer, more spiritual, more reasonable system disputes with it the palm. All these points however have been so clearly, elaborately, conclusively exhibited and illustrated by others that we propose to take them as granted for our present purpose, and from this stand-point to apply to this best of religious systems the crucible of human reason, and independent of its pre-eminence thus established, to examine its claim to Divine authority and human obedience.

We confine ourselves to internal evidence. We leave out of our consideration all the usual external proof derived from human, and consequently fallible testimony. We propose to take the system as if offered now, for the first time, for our adoption, and without other evidence of its genuineness than its own consistency with our finite reason.

The cardinal fundamental truths taught in the religion of the Bible may be reduced to the following:

1. Man’s original creation in a state of purity and holiness.
2. Man’s fall from this state, and the consequent corruption and depravity of his entire nature.
3. God’s beneficent design to wish to restore man to his original purity, and the difficulty of reconciling the claims of his justice with the designs of his mercy.
4. The reconciliation of these conflicting attributes by the scheme devised, viz., the expiation of man’s sin by the vicarious sacrifice of a Being combining the infinity of the God with the mortality and finite nature of the man.
5. The terms upon which this atonement is made efficacious, viz., Faith in the heart and consistency in the life.

Are these truths consistent with the teachings of human reason?

[I will post this, Lord willing, in 6 parts, including this introduction.]

Hannah More - Prayer

Excerpted from The Spirit of Prayer, by Hannah More. New York: Swords, Stanford, and Co., 1883, pages 16-18.

Chapter II.
The Duty of Prayer Inferred from the Helplessness of Man, pp 16-18.

Man is not only a sinful, he is also a helpless, and therefore a dependent being. This offers new and powerful motives for the necessity of prayer, the necessity of looking continually to a higher power, to a better strength than our own. If that power sustain us not, we fall; if he direct us not, we wander. His guidance is not only perfect freedom, but perfect safety. Our greatest danger begins from the moment we imagine we are able to go alone.

The self-sufficiency of man arising from his imaginary dignity, is a favourite doctrine with the nominal Christian. He feeds his pride with this pernicious aliment. And, as we hear much, so we hear falsely, of the dignity of human nature. Prayer, founded on the true principles of Scripture, alone teaches us wherein our true dignity consists. The dignity of a fallen creature is a perfect anomaly. True dignity, contrary to the common opinion, that it is an inherent excellence, is actually a sense of the want of it; it consists not in our valuing ourselves, but in a continual feeling of our dependence upon God, and an unceasing aim at conformity to his image.

Nothing but a humbling sense of the sinfulness of our nature, of our practised offences, of our utter helplessness, and constant dependence, can bring us to fervent and persevering prayer. How did the faith of the saints of old flourish under a darker dispensation, through all the clouds and ignorance which obscured their views of God! "They looked unto him, and were enlightened!" How do their slender means and high attainments reproach us!

David found that the strength and spirit of nature which had enabled him to resist the lion and the bear, did not enable him to resist his outward temptations, nor to conquer his inward corruptions. He therefore prayed, not only for deliverance "from blood-guiltiness," for a grievously remember sin, he prayed for the principle of piety, for the fountain of holiness, the "the creation of a clean heart," for "the renewing of a right spirit," for "truth in the inward parts," that the "comfort of God's help might be granted him." This uniform avowal of the secret workings of sin, this uniform dependence on the mercy of God to pardon, and the grace of God to assist, render his precatory addresses, though they are those of a sovereign and a warrior, so universally applicable to the case of every private Christian.