BLENDING LIGHTS. CHAPTER I. Tendencies to Error-Subjects to be Studied-Practical Let no one, upon a weak conceit of sobriety or an ill-applied moderation, think or maintain that a man can search too far, or be too well studied, in the Book of God's Word, or in the Book of God's Works, -Divinity or Philosophy, but rather let men endeavour an endless progress or proficiency in both; only, let them beware that they apply both to charity and not to arrogance; to use, and not to ostentation; and, again, that they do not mingle or confound these learnings together.-Bacon. M ANY have lost their early faith in the Bible, and are following its guidance with faltering footstep. Between them and hitherto accepted truths, the sciences have been placing apparently insurmountable obstacles. The trustful simplicity with which they once read the Sacred Record, has almost perished. Inferences by the man of science, conflicting with interpretations of Scripture by the theologian, have rudely shaken their most cherished convictions. They are not infidels, they are not sceptics, for doubt is distasteful to them; they long for more definite expositions and a firmer faith. B Such, possibly, may be some of you. In the midst of such discussions as are at present in progress, perplexity is not unnatural. Your most anxiously sustained investigations have hitherto only multiplied difficulties, and a sense of responsibility alone constrains you to linger over conclusions from which your judgment recoils. This hesitancy of belief may be at the outset disheartening; yet it may be inseparable from that clearness of insight and that force of character, which, in the end, commonly create the stablest convictions, and evoke proofs to shield them. To shun or denounce you because you cannot acquiesce in what we believe, is inconsistent not only with the lessons of philosophy, but with His example who came to "bear witness to the truth." What is your duty, with the Natural Sciences on the one hand appealing so largely to your Reason, and the Scriptures on the other hand appealing so constantly to your Faith? Obviously, to depreciate neither, but to welcome both the Sciences and the Scriptures, to ascertain their harmony, to note their differences, and to accept all the treasures of truth which they may bring. Indifference is inexcusable as is excessive zeal, and apathy as antagonism. The Bible, free to us as are the fields of science, challenges the severest scrutiny. It is the boldest of books, and demands the application of every test. As it is the most comprehensive history in the world, and gives the amplest scope for research; as its earliest records are the oldest in existence, and its latest utterances shed light far into the future; as it touches depths and reaches heights which no other book can approach; as it brings into closest connection the Visible and Invisible, Natural Law and Supernatural Influence, the condition of Man and the character of God; it is exposed to assaults which no other book can bear. Systematic and persistent study is required at your hand, that you may estimate aright not only the facts and arguments brought against the Bible, but those also which are adduced in its favour. The task may be arduous, but this price is not too great for the settlement of questions so momentous; and if the solution of some of them may have to be for a season postponed, yours will be the satisfaction which the conscientious improvement of every opportunity invariably fosters. Different lines of investigation may be profitably followed, but we may suggest the following as exhaustive, or nearly exhaustive, of the most prominent questions which modern research has raised. As the Bible is confessedly related to the natural sciences, archæology, history, and modern civilization, let it be placed successively in the midst of their facts, and let us see to what extent its statements can bear their light. There are many questions which none of us can honestly avoid; and while some may remain unsettled, the unbiassed review of those solutions which have been already offered, and which have been generally accepted, will be found to confirm Scripture instead of confuting it. 1. As to Science.—Have astronomy and geology given evidence for or against the eternity of the visible universe? Has biology determined the origin of life? whence is it? Have comparative anatomy and physiology, psychology and ethics, established more than one origin for the human race? Are the incidental allusions in Scripture contradicted or confirmed by the more recent discoveries in Natural Science? 2. As to Archæology.-Can the Bible confront prehistoric revelations? Antiquity is pouring over the oldest records increasing light. Ruins, monuments, inscriptions, parchments, have been emitting their wondrous testimonies, parallel with Scripture histories. Assyria, Egypt, Palestine, Greece, Rome, in their histories, revolutions, and domestic episodes, have all been interwoven with the statements of Scripture as with those of no other book. To what purpose has historic criticism dealt with the sacred page? Is the Bible yielding, or is it growing brighter in the crucible of archæology? 3. As to Modern History and Civilisation.-By its claim to uplift and bless the human race, the Bible is separated from all other books. It proposes to revolutionise man's moral history here, and to prepare him for a future whose course it in part delineates. Has it failed, or is it failing? Has it been enfeebled by the lapse of ages? Has it become effete amid changes which have given intellect new instruments and reason new spheres ? Has it lost its former hold of the human mind, and is it sinking amid the tumult of bitterly conflicting opinions? Has ever tribe been found which it could not raise and enlighten? or has ever civilisation outshone, in any land, its intellectual and moral splendour? 4. As to the Supernatural.-If the Bible is the book which it professes to be, and which we hold it is, the ordinary and the extraordinary, the natural and the supernatural, must be associated in its character and history. What is the warrant which men of science adduce for repudiating the supernatural while they accept the natural? and by what reasoning does the Christian apologist attempt to preserve their connection? Is there no evidence around us in the contrasts of barbarism and civilisation, as well as in the histories of nations, in their relation to prophecy? and are there no facts in the strangely revolutionised lives of thousands in the Christian Church, which proclaim the singular moral force of the Word of God? Assuming that you are willing to follow such a course of study as we have sketched, either to remove doubts which may be lingering in your own mind, or to aid some brother in his struggle to win the repose which you have gained, we shall, at the outset, offer some suggestions as to the spirit and the method by which your work should be characterised. It is of much importance to know, in the first place, what is, and what is not yet, within your reach. 1. Do not assume the possibility, in the present state of our knowledge, of demonstrating a perfect agreement between Science and Scripture, or rather between the inferences of the Philosopher and the interpretations of the Theologian. Much remains to be ascertained before that result can be realised. The natural sciences are confessedly incomplete; some of them are only in their infancy, and can teach us little. Many years may pass before they can be brought into perfect accord with the Bible. As the facts of natural science have not been all ascertained and classified, as its laws have not been all recognised, and as the inferences of to-day may be modified by the discoveries of to-morrow, it is absurd to be demanding immediate evidence of a perfect agreement between Scripture and science. Apparent contradictions are, at the present stage, unavoidable. There must first be an exact and exhaustive examination of all those points at which the Scriptures and the sciences touch each other; for so long as a single fact or a single law remains unknown, some important or essential truth, intimately related to the Bible, may be concealed. While the natural sciences continue incomplete, natural theology must necessarily have an imperfect foundation. As confessedly dependent on what is incomplete, natural theology can have neither the comprehensiveness nor the definiteness which characterises supernatural theology, as dependent on what is now complete and unvarying. We can |