To
professed Protestantism to-day, the Bible is not held in any true sense as an
educational book. The science of the unbelieving world, the philosophy and the
literature of ancient Greece and Rome, have a far larger place than has the
Bible, in that which is recognized by Protestants as education. The highest
course in college or university is the classical; and this course derives its
title of "classical" from the fact that the literature of Greece and
Rome is the predominant element in the course. This is true, even with those who
are studying for the ministry of the gospel of Christ. But how the study, for
years, of literature which is essentially Pagan can be a preparation for the
preaching of the gospel which must be wholly Christian, no one has attempted to
explain.
Not
only is worldly science and Pagan literature more courted by Protestantism than
is the Bible, in education; but the very theory of education held by Socrates,
and continued by Plato and Aristotle, -- "doubt," "a profound and
consistent skepticism," -- is held to-day in the education recognized by
Protestantism, in school, college, university, and even in the theological
seminary. For instance, the Outlook of April 21, 1900, in describing and urging
"A Needed Educational Reform," says: --
"The
educational processes of our time, -- possibly of all time, -- are largely
analytical and critical. They consist chiefly in analyzing the subjects brought
to the student for his examination, separating them into their constituent
parts, considering how they have been put together, and sitting in judgment on
the finished fabric. or on the process by which it has been constructed. . . .
The process presupposes an inquiring, if not a skeptical, mood. Doubt is the
pedagogue which leads the pupil to knowledge."
And
in the North American Review for April, 1900, there was published an article
entitled "The Scientific Method in Theology," written by a professor
of philosophy in Union College, Schenectady, N. Y.; who was educated at Amherst
and Yale; spent two years in philosophical study in Germany; and from 1883 to
1885 was instructor of philosophy in Wesleyan University. Thus, every
circumstance of the article is a pledge that it is authoritative as to the
scientific method in theology, and in that article it is said: --
"Every
man, because he is a man, is endowed with powers for forming judgments, and he
is placed in this world to develop and apply those powers to all objects with
which he comes in contact. In every sphere of investigation, he should begin
with DOUBT, and the student will make the most rapid progress who has acquired
the art of doubting well. . . . We ask that every student of theology take up
the subject precisely as he would any other science: that he begin with
DOUBT."
It
never can be denied that this is simply the repetition in modern times of the
Socratic theory of education. And this, not only in college and university, but
in the theological seminary where young men are professedly to be trained in
"the science concerned with ascertaining, classifying, and systematizing
all attainable truth concerning God, and His relation to the universe; the
science of religion; religious truth scientifically studied." This, not
only in college and university, where men are to be fitted only for the everyday
affairs of the world; but in a professedly Christian school, where men are to be
fitted preeminently for the Christian profession, and to be educators in
Christianity.
In
every sphere of investigation, the student is taught and expected to "begin
with doubt," in this study of the science of the "truth concerning
God." And this when the truth of God itself, given in His own Word, is that
"without faith it is impossible to please Him;" and "whatsoever
is not of faith is sin." Since, then, God has stated it, that "without
faith it is impossible to please Him," and "whatsoever is not of faith
is sin;" and since, in the theological seminaries of professed
Christianity, the student is expected, "in every sphere of
investigation," to "begin with doubt," it is certain that in that
system of education, every student is systematically taught to begin in the way
in which it is impossible to please God, and which is only the way of sinning.
And this as the preparation for the ministry of the gospel!
This
authoritative statement of the scientific method in theology shows that even in
the Protestant schools of to-day, in which is taught particularly the science of
the knowledge of God, the process is directly opposite to that which is stated
in the Word of the Lord Himself. God has said that "he that cometh to God
must believe that He is, and [must believe] that He is a rewarder of them that
diligently seek Him." The "scientific method" of education
to-day, even in Protestant schools which teach the science of God, is inevitably
that he who cometh to God must doubt that He is, and must doubt that He is a
rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.
The
result of such a process can not possibly be anything else than that a man --
each individual for himself, or else, and ultimately, a representative for all
-- shall put himself above God; and there, sitting as judge, subject the wisdom
and knowledge of God to the dictates of human reason.
Nor
is this simply a deduction from the quotation already made, though it is clearly
deducible from that quotation. It is actually stated in this article in the
sentences immediately following the one already quoted: --
"We
ask that every student of theology take up the subject precisely as he would any
other science: that he begin with doubt, and carefully weigh the arguments for
every doctrine, accepting or rejecting each assertion, according as the balance
of probabilities is for or against it. We demand that he thoroughly 'test all
things,' and thus learn how to 'hold fast that which is good.' We believe that
even the teachings of Jesus should be viewed from this standpoint, and should be
accepted or rejected on the ground of their inherent reasonableness."
Thus,
reason being set above Jesus Christ -- who is God manifest -- to analyze, to
criticize, to judge, His teachings, for acceptance or rejection, as the
individual's doubting reason shall decide -- this is manifestly to set reason
above God: which, in turn, is to put reason itself in the place of God as God.
Follow
this process a little in its direct working, and see how completely it lands
to-day precisely where Inspiration declares that it landed in its original
course, and in its prime: --
"The
great and distinctive element in all induction is the formation of the
hypothesis, and there can be no inductive science formed, of any sort, where
this is not the chief feature."
"What,
then, is to be understood by an hypothesis? And what is the process the mind
goes through in bringing it to view? -- An hypothesis is a supposition, a guess,
or conjecture, as to what the general effect is which includes the given
particular effects, or what the cause is which has brought about the given
effects.
"Much
might be said about the conditions most favorable for the making of a good
hypothesis; but the chief thing that concerns us for our present purpose is the
fact that every hypothesis, however formed, is always the product of the
constructive imagination. All previous acts are simply by way of gathering
material for the imagination to rearrange, and recombine into a new creation. .
. .
"It
is for this reason that men of science, in all realms and in all ages, have
always been men of powerful imaginations. The Greeks were the first great
scientists of the race, because they were far more highly endowed than any other
people with great imaginative powers. What they saw, excited these powers, and
urged them to conjecture, to reason about things, and try to explain their
nature and cause."
There
is here no room to inquire whether or not this process to-day lands where landed
the same process in ancient Greece; because that is where precisely, in so many
words, the article itself lands. And how could this process be more fittingly
described than it is in the Scripture, written directly as descriptive of this
identical process in ancient time: "When they knew God, they glorified Him
not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and
their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became
fools, and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to
corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping
things." Rom. 1:21-23.
And
how can the rest of the description there given (Rom. 1:24-32) be escaped, when
this process shall be followed to-day? For even in the quotation last above
made, it is admitted that the scientific method in theology to-day is identical
with that of old, of which the Greeks, "the first great scientists of the
race," were the exemplars; and this, "because they were far more
highly endowed than any other people with great imaginative powers." And
their exercise of these "great imaginative powers" in precisely the
way above outlined, did lead them into the condition which is described in the
remaining verses of the first chapter of Romans.
And
yet, this process, by means of "the constructive imagination,"
contemplates "a new creation"! And who shall be the creator in this
new creation? -- None other than the human individual himself, who by guesses
gathers "material for the imagination to rearrange, and recombine, into a
new creation." This, then, makes man a creator in the place of the Creator.
Follow
yet further the scientific process in theology, and see what is the ground upon
which its followers land, as to knowledge: --
"Given
the hypothesis, the next step in the scientific process is to verify it: and
this is done by making the hypothesis the major premise of a deductive
syllogism, and noting the results. If the conclusions coincide with the obtained
facts, with which we started, the hypothesis is probably the correct one [the
italics here are the author's]; and other things being equal, may be accepted as
established truth. From this outline of the scientific method, we see that no
induction can be established beyond a high degree of probability; that is, no
one can ever be absolutely certain that the hypothesis he assumes is veritably
true. All generalizations in every science thus have their logical basis in the
theory of probabilities.
"When
Bishop Butler asserted that 'probability is the very guide of life,' he might
have added, 'and we have no other.' . . .
"Great
thinkers, from Thales, Plato, and Moses, have had their theologies, -- their
explanations of the origin of the universe, as they understood it, -- and many
of these explanations have been of extraordinary merit; but even St. Paul
himself could never have been certain that his explanation was more than a
probably true one."
Than
is therein stated, how could it be possible more clearly to state the
impossibility of attaining to knowledge by that method? The result of this
method, as here authoritatively stated, is exactly described in the Scripture
concerning our own time when it speaks of those who are "ever learning, and
never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." 2 Tim. 3:7.
And,
as if this writer should make it absolutely certain that only probability is the
sole ground as to knowledge, which can ever be reached by this process, he
really goes to the limit, and declares: --
"Whether
there ever existed on the earth such a person as Jesus, and what He experienced,
are purely matters of historical evidence. And as everything that is a matter of
evidence is a matter of probability, this must be also."
And
where does the process finally land? What is its ultimate?
"In
a certain sense, the mind takes a leap into the dark: it literally passes per
sallum [by a leap] from the realm of the known to the realm of the
unknown."
And
that is precisely where this process landed, and this was its ultimate, in
ancient time, when at Athens, the fountain of this theory of education, they set
up that monument of their ignorance, with its inscription, "TO THE UNKNOWN
GOD."
But
such is not the Christian process, nor is such the ultimate of the Christian
process. In the Christian process, faith, which is the gift of God, accepts the
truth of God; and thus in the mind and heart there is accomplished "a new
creation." And the Creator in this new creation is God Himself, manifest
through Jesus Christ our Lord, by the Holy Ghost. And in this, in the truest
sense, the mind takes a leap, not "into the dark," but into the light.
It truly, "literally, passes per saltum," not "from the realm of
the known to the realm of the unknown," but from the realm of the unknown,
the realm of ignorance, to the realm of the known, the realm of certain
knowledge, even the knowledge of God. For we "know Him that is true, and we
are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ." 1 John 5:20.
Does
this not show, then, that the world in this time, and by this means, has
well-nigh reached the point which in ancient times it had attained when the
world by wisdom knew not God, and was alienated from the life of God through its
ignorance? And are we not therefore also in the time when again in the wisdom of
God it shall please God "by the foolishness of preaching" -- preaching
the plain, simple, powerful gospel of Jesus Christ, the power of God and the
wisdom of God -- "to save them that believe"?
It
is not true that "we have no other guide of life" than "the
theory of probabilities." We have as the guide of life the certainty of
truth, in the Word of God, as revealed in Jesus Christ, who Himself is "the
Truth," through the Spirit of God, who is the very "Spirit of
truth."
It
is not true that "even St. Paul himself could never have been certain that
his explanation was more than a probably true one." For Paul's explanation
was simply the preaching of the truth of God, derived from God. And not only
Paul, but every other Christian, can be certain that the Word of God which he
receives is certitude itself. And this certitude of the knowledge of truth he
finds, not by reason guided by doubt, but by revelation to faith.
Whether
there ever existed on earth such a person as Jesus, and what He experienced, are
far more than merely "matters of historical evidence." And it is not
true that "this must be" only a matter of probability. Every Christian
knows that Christ lived in this world, that He was crucified that He died and
rose again, and that He lives to-day. For every Christian knows by veritable
knowledge of revelation and experience that Jesus is acquainted with every
feature of his life in the flesh. Every Christian knows that Jesus was
crucified; because he himself has been crucified with Him. Every Christian knows
that Jesus died, for he himself has died with Him. Every Christian knows that
Jesus rose from the dead, for he himself is risen with Him. And every Christian
knows that Jesus, having risen from the dead lives to-day; for he himself lives
with Him. Nor is this, in any sense, a guess, or a conjecture. It is a matter of
very truth, in the certitude of knowledge.
Yet
these simple things which every Christian knows, and which are but the A B C of
Christianity, demonstrate that true Christianity, and even the professed
Christian world to-day, are again set completely at opposites by the world's
method of education. And these statements of the methods of education to-day,
methods recognized even by the Protestant churches, show that instead of doubt
being as is professed, "the pedagogue which leads to knowledge;" upon
the authority of its own masters it is seen to be what it is in truth, the
positive and chosen obstruction to all knowledge.
The
Outlook presented it as a "problem of education" that "sorely
needs to be taken up by our educators" -- "the problem how religion
can be preserved and promoted while education is being acquired." That is
intensely true. But that problem never can be solved by any method of education
of which doubt is in any degree an element; for doubt simply undermines all true
religion. Faith, faith is the grand element of the true religion. It is only by
an education in which faith is the beginning, the process, and the end that can
ever be solved "the problem how religion can be preserved and promoted
while education is being acquired." And this will do it; for this is
Christian education.
Surely
there is needed, and sorely needed, to-day, an educational reform. And, since
the educational process of to-day is one in which doubt is the beginning the
course, and the end, it is certain that the only true educational reform for
to-day is one in which faith is the beginning, the course, and the end: and that
faith, the faith of Jesus Christ, the faith which enables him who exercises it
to comprehend, to understand, and to know, the truth, and only the truth -- the
truth as it is in Jesus.
In
this it is not implied that in everything the Greeks were absolutely ignorant.
There were many things that they learned as little children. There were many
valuable facts of observation and experience that they knew. But in that which
was their philosophy and their science, that which to them was preeminently
wisdom and knowledge -- in this they were absolutely ignorant. And this which to
them was preeminently wisdom and knowledge, but which was in truth sheer
confused ignorance -- this was made to color all else and give to that the cast
of ignorance.
That
which was as plainly true and easily to be understood as that A is A was not
allowed to remain plain and simple knowledge, but it must first be doubted, and
then through a process of hypothesis, premise, and conclusion, and then a new
premise and conclusion, must be reasoned out to a final conclusion, and so
"demonstrated." And thus that which was simple truth, and easily known
if only believed, was overshadowed and utterly vitiated by their doubting and
skeptical reasoning. Thus truth, faith, and knowledge were annihilated; and in
their place was substituted falsity, doubt, and ignorance.
They
"changed the truth of God into a lie . . . . And even as they did not like
to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do
those things which are not convenient; being filled with all
unrighteousness." Rom. 1:25-29.
It
is proper to inquire, What did Greek education accomplish for the Greeks, both
directly and ultimately?
It
can never be denied that mentally Greek education carried the Greeks to the
highest point that has ever been attained in this world in education that was
only human. The Greek language was developed by the Greek mind to the point
wherein it excelled all other human language in its capacity and facility of
expressing nice distinctions of thought. Of this it has been well said that
"It traces with ease distinctions so subtle as to be lost in every other
language. It draws lines where all other instruments of the reason only make
blots."
In
art, whether in sculpture or in architecture, the Greek education developed a
standard that has never in the world been equaled. In physical culture, the
development of the human form, also, Greek education attained the highest point
that has ever been reached by any nation.
All
this, Greek education undeniably did for the Greeks. But what did it do for them
morally? Mental attainments that developed the fullest of all human languages,
the most consummate skill in art, and the completest symmetry of the human form,
-- what did these attainments develop as to character? Everybody knows that the
results in this respect could not be truly set down in this book, without
endangering its seizure by the police; and making the author liable to
prosecution for circulating obscene literature.
It
is impossible to walk amongst even the ruins of Greek art without being
constantly offended with the perpetual portrayal and even the deification of
drunkenness and lust, in the otherwise marvelous productions. In poetry, the
highest form of that wonderful language, it is the same. The Greek poets
developed a mythology in which the gods were portrayed as perpetually indulging
the basest of human passions, and in which every idea of divinity was debased to
the most degraded level of humanity.
And
what did this education -- the literature, the art, the physical culture, all
that it produced -- do for the Roman people when adopted by them? Deep-dyed as
was the iniquity of Rome before she expanded into Greece, yet this iniquity was
only given a deeper touch by that which was derived from Greece. Rom. 1:21-32 is
a description of both. And the world knows the ultimate results -- Greece and
Rome perished so entirely that no part remained. The people of Greece to-day are
not Greeks; the Greek nation to-day is not Greek. The people of Rome are not
Romans. The world knows that Greece and Rome were annihilated by the flood of
the barbarians of the wild forests of Germany. And when this flood of barbarism
swept over Greece and Western Rome, the vices of the open life of even the
highest classes were such as fairly to bring the blush to the iron cheeks of the
Germans. A writer of the times declares: "We are worse than the barbarians
and heathen. If the Saxon is wild, the Frank faithless, the Goth inhuman, the
Alanian drunken, the Hun licentious, they are, by reason of their ignorance, far
less punishable than we, who,
knowing the commandments of God, commit all these crimes.
"You,
Romans, Christians, and Catholics, are defrauding your brethren, are grinding
the face of the poor, are frittering away your lives for the impure and
heathenish spectacles of the amphitheater, and wallowing in licentiousness and
inebriety. The barbarians, meanwhile, heathen or heretics though they may be,
however fierce toward us, are just and fair in their dealings with one another.
The men of the same clan, and belonging to the same kin, love one another with
true affection. The impurities of the theater are unknown amongst them. Many of
their tribes are free from the taint of drunkenness: and among all except the
Alanians and the Huns, chastity is the rule."
This
being the ultimate result of Greek education both to Greece that originated it,
and to Rome, both pagan and "Christian," that adopted it; and this
result coming solely as the consequence of the essential immorality of that
education; has demonstrated to the world forever the essential vanity and
impotence of everything which claims to be education, in which character is not
the one sole aim.
Annihilation
being the result of Greek education to both Greek and Roman, what else than this
can possibly be the result in a society or a nation which in education adopts
the method which is Greek, and in its highest and most honorable course of
education the literature, which is Greek and Roman?