The
Atonement (Excerpt)
PART
FIRST:
AN
ATONEMENT CONSISTENT WITH REASON
CHAPTER I.
COMPARISON
OF NATURE AND MORALITY
The
psalmist well says: “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament
showeth his handiwork.” Ps. 19:7. The works of the material creation are
wonderful. When we look at the countless globes in the heavens, and consider
the inconceivable distances which separate them, and consider that they move in
exact and harmonious order, compared with which the working of the most perfect
machinery that man ever made is rough and jarring, we may somewhat appreciate
the words of the psalmist; and we cannot wonder that Dr. Young said: “The
un-devout astronomer is mad.”
Every
well-executed work of design speaks the praise of the designer. And wherever we
see arrangement, order, harmony, especially in mechanism, in movements, we know
that there is a designer. We cannot be persuaded that any successful piece of
machinery is an accident; we cannot by any effort bring our minds to believe
that the works of a watch, or anything similar to them, came by chance, or
happened so. They need no voice to speak to us to assure us that they had their
origin in power and intelligence, or in mind.
So said
David of the material heavens: “There is no speech nor language; without these
their voice is heard.” Or as Addison beautifully expressed it:— “What though no
real voice nor sound, Amid their radiant orbs be found; In reason’s ear they
all rejoice, And utter forth a glorious voice, Forever singing as they shine—
The hand that made us is divine!”
- 9 - J.
H. Waggoner
But, while
the works of nature may arouse us to devotional feelings, they cannot guide our
devotions. They but give evidence of the existence of an almighty Designer, but
they cannot reveal him to us.
Man
himself is “fearfully and wonderfully made;” and he may stand in awe at the
thought of his Maker; he may feel a sense of responsibility and of
accountability to his Creator; but if left to the voice of nature alone, the
highest shrine at which he will bow will be that of “The Unknown God.” He may
even recognize the voice of conscience within him reproving him of the wrongs
which he is conscious that he commits; but nature does not reveal to him the
manner of service which would be pleasing to his Creator and Preserver, nor the
means of freeing him from the guilt and consequences of his wrongs.
The
psalmist, no doubt, had this train of thought passing through his mind, for,
after ascribing to the creation all that it can do to incite us to devotion, he
abruptly turned his subject, saying: “The law of the Lord is perfect,
converting the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple.
The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandments of
the Lord are pure, enlightening the eyes.” (Ps 19:7,8)
Man is
highly exalted as to his capacities; there are wonderful possibilities in his
being. Yet left altogether to himself he is helpless, especially in the
understanding of morals. And this is not at all surprising; for no one is
expected to understand the will of a governor, or the laws of the Government
under which he lives, unless they are revealed to him.
The
psalmist, as quoted in this paragraph, ascribes to the law of the Lord an
office which it is not possible for creation or nature to fill. The
commandments of the Lord impart instruction, important and necessary
instruction, which we cannot learn by observation, nor by the study of the
material universe. No proof ought to be required on this point. The most
powerful telescope or microscope can never reveal a single moral duty, or point
out a remedy for a single moral wrong.
Now we
attach no blame to nature because it does not perform the office of a written
revelation. No such purpose was embraced in its design. We do not learn the
laws of our Government by walking
The
Atonement - 10
through
the fields, by studying her dimensions and natural advantages, nor by noting
her public improvements. When we have learned all that we can possibly learn
from nature, we find beyond that an absolute necessity for direct revelation.
Opposers
of the Bible are often men who declare that the doctrines of Christianity are
contrary to reason; contrary to the conclusions legitimately drawn from our
study of nature, of the deepest researches of science. Especially has the
doctrine of the Atonement been made the subject of strong opposition, some
affirming that it is immoral in its tendency, and is based on principles which
are not in conformity with justice. But we think the whole objection is founded
on misapprehension; and the object of this present argument is to show that
reason is not opposed to the idea of atonement, but rather leads to it; that a
coincidence of strict justice and mercy demands it; and that it vindicates the
majesty of law, and therefore honors the Government. It is also our object to
show that a written revelation is but the supply of an acknowledged want; that
the gift of such a revelation is but a conformity to the plainest, simplest
principles of government, principles which are universally recognized. And, therefore,
consistency requires that such a revelation, when given, should be universally
received and accepted.
The
present is a mixed state, of good and evil.
It is not
our purpose now to inquire why it is so; we are viewing it as we find it—as it
is; not as we might wish it were.
And
confined in our views to the present state, and to observation alone, or merely
to reason without a written revelation, it is impossible to vindicate the
justice of the controlling power, whether that power be called God or nature.
Virtue is often trampled in the dust, and ignominiously perishes in its
representatives. Vice is exalted on high, triumphs over justice and right, and
its very grave is decorated with flowers, and honored with a monument. In the
operations of nature, there is no discrimination manifested, and without
discrimination there can be no conformity to justice.
True, we
see many exhibitions of benevolence, but we see also many things which cannot
be reconciled with it. The righteous and the wicked, the just and the unjust,
the innocent and the guilty, the aged and the little child, alike share the
bounties of Providence,
- 11 - J.
H. Waggoner
and
together fall by the pestilence, or sink beneath some sweeping destruction.
These
facts have troubled the minds of philosophers, and caused the short-sighted
philanthropist to be faint of heart. Many, reflecting on these things, and
judging in the light of their own unassisted reason, have doubted that the
world was ruled in wisdom and justice, and even denied the existence of a
supreme, intelligent Being.
It seems
singular that they who discard the idea of an intelligent Cause, of a personal
supreme Being, generally invest nature with the attributes of such a Being, and
ascribe to it all the wisdom of design and the merit of virtue. They talk of
the laws of nature, of their beauty, their harmony, their excellency, as if
nature were the sole guide of correct action, and the proper arbiter of
destinies. They lavish encomiums on her operations as if she never tortured an
innocent person nor permitted the guilty to escape.
As before
remarked, we find no fault with nature; but we do find fault with the
unreasonable position assumed by her devotees. The laws of nature answer well
their purposes. But this class of philosophers endeavors to make them answer a
purpose for which they never were designed, and which they cannot fulfill. And
we think that by correct reasoning it will be easy to show that their ideas are
mere fallacies.
We would
raise the inquiry, When they who deny the work of a supreme, personal Creator,
speak of “the laws of nature,” what do they mean by the expression? It cannot
mean the laws made by nature, as we speak of the laws of man, or of the laws of
God; for nature never made any laws. Nature never knew enough to make a law.
She could not deliberate; she could not plan; she did not have a knowledge of
the future, whereby she could judge what was suitable, and devise means adapted
to the end. Or, if she made the laws, she must have existed before she made
them. How, then, were her operations regulated before laws existed? Is there a
man living who will claim this for nature? Not one.
We have
been thus particular in our queries on this point because we wish to notice
another phase of this subject. It has been said by some that they do not deny
the existence of the God of the Bible—of
The
Atonement - 12
a
personal, supreme Being; but yet they believe in the eternity of matter; that
there never was done such a work as that of creating, in the sense of causing
things to exist. And that matter, or nature itself, being eternal, the laws of
nature must be eternal also, because they inhere in matter. Thus, they say, you
cannot imagine that matter could exist and gravitation not exist. And so of all
the laws of matter.
But, we
reply, this leads to the same result which we have been examining. If the laws
in here in matter, they are essential to the very existence of matter; and it
follows that, to suspend or reverse these laws would be to suspend the
existence of matter, that is, to destroy it. In this view a miracle is an
impossibility. Thus: Matter is not dependent on any power in the universe for
its existence. But its existing laws are necessary to its existence. Therefore
the laws of matter, or of nature, are beyond and independent of any power in
the universe.
Against
this theory we have objections to bring. It is not a part of our present
purpose to argue against it from the Bible, as we shall try first to establish
principles, natural and legal, outside of Bible proof. It is possible to
present an argument which must be conclusive to believers of the Bible, besides
the direct declarations of that book in favor of the existence of miracles,
such as causing iron to swim upon the water, raising the dead, etc. But we
waive this, and affirm that, in admitting the existence of God, these have not
changed the issue before examined. This theory is open to all the difficulties
which we find in the hypothetical theory of nature making her own laws.
We have,
then, harmony of movement without intelligence; mechanism without a mechanic; a
design without a designer; a result in marvelous wisdom without plan or
deliberation. To avoid the unscientific fact of a miracle, they have presented
before us the greatest miracle which could be imagined! And David was mistaken
when he said “the heavens declare the glory of God;” for if nature, and its
laws, and its harmonies, and its almost infinitely varied operations attendant
upon them, existed from eternity, and not by the creative power and act of God,
then we ask, with an earnest desire for information, What did God ever do? What
can He do? Why does He exist? And would not nature and its laws “move and have
their being,” as they did from eternity, if God did not exist?
(to be continued)
No comments:
Post a Comment