The Collected Works of Theodore Parker/Volume 01/Book 4/Chapter 1
BOOK IV.
“No man would be so ridiculous as (since Columbus discovered the new world of America, as big as the old, since the enlarged knowledge of the North of Europe, the South and East of Asia and Africa, besides the new divisions, names, and inhabitants of the old parts,) to forbid the reading of any more Geography than is found in Strabo, or Mela; or, since the Portuguese have sailed to the Indias by the Cape of Good Hope, to admit of no other Indian commodities than what are brought on Camels to Aleppo; or if posterity shall find out the North-east or North-west way to Cathajo and China, or shall cut the Isthmus between the Red Sea and the Mediterranean, will it be unlawful to use the advantage of such noble achievements? If any man love acorns since corn is invented, let him eat acorns; but it is very unreasonable he should forbid others the use of wheat. Whatever is solid in the writings of Aristotle, these new philosophers will readily embrace; and they that are most accused for affecting the new, doubt not but they can give as good an account of the old philosophy as their most violent accusers, and are probably as much conversant in Aristotle's writings, though they do not much value these small wares that are usually retailed by the generality of his interpreters.” A brief Account of the new sect of Latitudemen, by G. B. Oxford, 1662, p. 13, 14.
BOOK IV.
THE RELATION OF THE RELIGIOUS ELEMENT TO THE GREATEST OF BOOKS, OR A DISCOURSE OF THE BIBLE.
CHAPTER I.
POSITION OF THE BIBLE—CLAIMS MADE FOR IT—STATEMENT OF THE QUESTION.
View it in what light we may, the Bible is a very surprising phenomenon. In all Christian lands, this collection of books is separated from every other, and called sacred; others are profane. Science may differ from them, not from this. It is deemed a condescension on the part of its friends, to show its agreement with Reason. How much has been written by condescending theologians to show the Bible was not inconsistent with the demonstrations of Newton! Should a man attempt to reëstablish the cosmogonies of Hesiod and Sanchoniathon, to allegorize the poems of Anacreon and Theocritus as divines mystify the Scripture, it would be said he wasted his oil, and truly.[1]
This collection of books has taken such a hold on the world as no other. The literature of Greece, which goes up like incense from that land of temples and heroic deeds, has not half the influence of this book from a nation alike despised in ancient and modern times. It is read of a Sunday in all the thirty thousand pulpits of our land. In all the temples of Christendom is its voice lifted up, week by week. The sun never sets on its gleaming page. It goes equally to the cottage of the plain man and the palace of the king. It is woven into the literature of the scholar, and colours the talk of the street. The bark of the merchant cannot sail the sea without it; no ship of war goes to the conflict but the Bible is there! It enters men's closets; mingles in all the grief and cheerfulness of life. The affianced maiden prays God in Scripture for strength in her new duties; men are married by Scripture. The Bible attends them in their sickness; when the fever of the world is on them, the aching head finds a softer pillow if such leaves lie underneath. The mariner, escaping from shipwreck, clutches this first of his treasures, and keeps it sacred to God. It goes with the peddler, in his crowded pack; cheer him at eventide, when he sits down dusty and fatigued; brightens the freshness of his morning face. It blesses us when we are born; gives names to half Christendom; rejoices with us; has sympathy for our mourning; tempers our grief to finer issues. It is the better part of our sermons. It lifts man above himself; our best of uttered prayers are in its storied speech, wherewith our fathers and the patriarchs prayed. The timid man, about awaking from this dream of life, looks through the glass of Scripture and his eye grows bright; he does not fear to stand alone, to tread the way unknown and distant, to take the death-angel by the hand and bid farewell to wife, and babes, and home. Men rest on this their dearest hopes. It tells them of God, and of his blessed Son; of earthly duties and of heavenly rest. Foolish men find it the source of Plato's wisdom, and the science of Newton, and the art of Raphael; wicked men use it to rivet the fetters on the slave. Men who believe nothing else that is spiritual, believe the Bible all through; without this they would not confess, say they, even that there was a God.
Now for such effects there must be an adequate cause. That nothing comes of nothing is true all the world over. It is no light thing to hold, with an electric chain, a thousand hearts though but an hour, beating and bounding with such fiery speed. What is it then to hold the Christian world, and that for centuries? Are men fed with chaff and husks? The authors we reckon great, whose word is in the newspaper and the market-place, whose articulate breath now sways the nation's mind, will soon pass away, giving place to other great men of a season, who in their turn shall follow them to eminence, and then oblivion. Some thousand “famous writers” come up in this century, to be forgotten in the next. But the silver cord of the Bible is not loosed, nor its golden bowl broken, as Time chronicles his tens of centuries passed by. Has the human race gone mad? Time sits as a refiner of metal; the dross is piled in forgotten heaps, but the pure gold is reserved for use, passes into the ages, and is current a thousand years hence as well as to-day. It is only real merit that can long pass for such. Tinsel will rust in the storms of life. False weights are soon detected there. It is only a heart that can speak, deep and true, to a heart; a mind to a mind; a soul to a soul; wisdom to the wise, and religion to the pious. There must then be in the Bible, mind, conscience, heart and soul, wisdom and religion. Were it otherwise how could millions find it their lawgiver, friend, and prophet? Some of the greatest of human institutions seem built on the Bible; such things will not stand on heaps of chaff, but mountains of rocks.
What is the secret cause of this wide and deep influence?
It must be found in the Bible itself, and must be adequate
to the effect. To answer the question we must examine
the Bible, and see whence it comes, what it contains, and
by what authority it holds its place. If we look
superficially, it is a collection of books in human language, from
different authors and times; we refer it to a place amongst
other books, and proceed to examine it as the works of
Homer and Xenophon. But the popular opinion bids us
beware, for we tread on holy ground. The opinion
commonly expressed by the Protestant churches is this: The
Bible is a miraculous collection of miraculous books; every
word it contains was written by a miraculous inspiration
from God, which was so full, complete, and infallible, that
the authors delivered the truth and nothing but the truth;
that the Bible contains no false statement of doctrine or
fact, but sets forth all religious and moral truth which
man needs, or which it is possible for him to receive in, and no particle of error:—therefore that the Bible is the
only authoritative rule of religious faith and practice.[2] To
doubt this is reckoned a dangerous error, if not an
unpardonable sin. This is the supernatural view. Some scholars
slyly reject the divine authority of the Old Testament.
Others reject it openly, but cling strongly as ever to the
New. Some make a distinction between the genuine and
the spurious books of the New Testament; thus there is a
difference in the less or more of an inspired and miraculous
canon. The modern Unitarians have perhaps reduced the
Scripture to its lowest terms. But Protestants, in general,
in America, agree that in the whole or in part the Bible is
an infallible and exclusive standard of religious and moral
truth. The Bible is master to the Soul; superior to Intellect;
truer than Conscience; greater and more
trustworthy than the Affections and the Soul.
Accordingly, with strict logical consistency, a peculiar method is used both in the criticism and interpretation of the Bible; such as men apply to no other ancient documents. A deference is paid to it wholly independent of its intrinsic merit. It is presupposed that each book within the lids of the Bible has an absolute right to be there, and each sentence or word therein is infallibly true.[3] Reason has nothing to do in the premises, but accept the written statement of “the Word;” the duty of belief is just the same whether the Word contradicts Reason and Conscience, or agrees with them.[4]
This opinion about the Bible is true, or not true. If true
it is capable of proof, at least of being shown to be
probable. Now there are but four possible ways of establishing
the fact, namely:—
1. By the authority of Churches, having either a miraculous inspiration, or a miraculous tradition, to prove the alleged infallibility of the Bible. But the Churches are not agreed on this point. The Roman Church very stoutly denies the fact, and besides, the Protestants deny the authority of the Roman Church.
2. By the direct testimony of God in our Consciousness assuring us of the miraculous infallibility of the Bible. This would be at the best one miracle to prove another, which is not logical. The proof is only subjective, and is as valuable to prove the divinity of the Koran, the Shaster, and the Book of Mormon, as that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. It is the argument of the superstitious and enthusiastical.
3. By the fact that the Bible claims this divine infallibility. This is reasoning in a circle, though it is the method commonly relied on by Christians. It will prove as well the divinity of any impostor who claims it.[5]
4. By an examination of the contents of the Bible, and the external history of its origin. To proceed in this way, we must ask, Are all its statements infallibly true? But to ask this question presupposes the standard-measure is in ourselves, not in the Bible; so at the utmost the Book can be no more infallible, and have no more authority, than Reason and the Moral Sense by which we try it. A single mistake condemns its infallibility, and of course its divinity. But the case is still worse. After the truth of a book is made out, before a work in human language, like other books, can be referred to God as its author, one of two things must be shown: either That its contents could not have come from man, and then it follows by implication that they came from God; or That at a certain time and place, God did miraculously reveal the contents of the book.
Now it is a notorious fact, first, that it has not been and cannot be proved, that every statement in the Bible is true; or, secondly, that its contents, such as they are, could not have proceeded from man, under the ordinary influence of God; or, finally, that any one book or word of the Bible was miraculously revealed to man. In the absence of proof for any one of these three points, it has been found a more convenient way to assume the truth of them all, and avoid troublesome questions.[6]
Laying aside all prejudices, if we look into the Bible in a general way, as into other books, we find facts which force the conclusion upon us, that the Bible is a human work, as much as the Principia of Newton or Descartes, or the Vedas and Koran. Some things are beautiful and true, but others no man, in his reason, can accept. Here are the works of various writers, from the eleventh century before to the second century after Christ, thrown capriciously together, and united by no common tie but the lids of the bookbinder. Here are two forms of Religion, which differ widely, set forth and enforced by miracles; the one ritual and formal, the other actual and spiritual; the one the religion of Fear, the other of Love; one final, and resting entirely on the special revelation made to Moses, the other progressive, based on the universal revelation of God, who enlightens all that come into the world; one offers only earthly recompense, the other makes immortality a motive to a divine life; one compels men, the other invites them. One half the Bible repeals the other half. The Gospel annihilates the Law; the Apostles take the place of the Prophets, and go higher up. If Christianity and Judaism be not the same thing, there must be hostility between the Old Testament and the New Testament, for the Jewish form claims to be eternal. To an unprejudiced man this hostility is very obvious. It may indeed be said Christianity came not to destroy the Law and the Prophets, but to fulfil them, and the answer is plain, their historic fulfilment was their destruction.
If we look at the Bible as a whole, we find numerous contradictions; conflicting Histories which no skill can reconcile with themselves or with facts; Poems which the Christians have agreed to take as histories, but which lead only to confusion on that hypothesis; Prophecies that have never been fulfilled, and from the nature of things never can be.[7] We find stories of miracles which could not have happened; accounts which represent the laws of nature completely transformed, as in fairy-land, to trust the tales of the old romancers; stories that make God a man of war, cruel, capricious, revengeful, hateful, and not to be trusted. We find amatory songs, selfish proverbs, sceptical discourses, and the most awful imprecations human fancy ever clothed in speech. Connected with these are lofty thoughts of Nature, Man, and God; devotion touching and beautiful, and a most reverent faith. Here are works whose authors are known; others, of which the author, age, and country are alike forgotten. Genuine and spurious works, religious and not religious, are strangely mixed. But the subject demands a more minute and detailed examination in each of its main parts.
- ↑ See the recent literature relating to a Plurality of Worlds for another illustration.
- ↑ It is scarce necessary to cite authorities to prove this statement, as it is a notorious fact. But see the most obvious sources, Westminster Catechism, Quest. 2; Calvin's Institutes, Book I. ch. vi.-ix.; Knapp, ubi sup., § 1-13, especially Vol. I. p. 130, et seq. See also Gaussen's Theopneusty, or the plenary Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, translated by E. N. Kirk, New York, 1842. The latter maintains that “all the written Word is inspired of God even to a single iota or tittle,” p. 333, and passim. See Musculus, Loci communes, ed. 1564, p. 178. But see also Faustus Socinus, De Auctoritate Sac. Scrip. in Bibliotheca Fratrr. Polon. Vol. I.; Limborch, Theol. Lib. I.; Episcopius, Instit. P. IV.
- ↑ The writings of most of the early Unitarians are exceptions to this general rule. They attempted to separate the spurious from the genuine. See earlier numbers of the Christian Examiner, passim; Norton, Statement of Reasons, &c., p. 136, et seq.; Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels, Vol. I. p. liii. et seq. See especially p. lxi. Vol. II. p. cliv., clxii., cxciii., and the whole of the additional note on the O. T., p. xlviii., et seq.; Internal Evidences, &c. (1855), p. 13; and Translation of the Gospels (1855), Vol. II. note E. See also Stuart, Critical History and Defence of the O. T. Canon, Andover, 1845. Dr. Palfrey, ubi sup., denies the miraculous inspiration of all the Old Testament, except the last four books of Moses, and there diminishes its intensity.
- ↑ See Gaussen, ubi sup.; Horne, Introduction to the Holy Scriptures, Philad. 1840, Vol. I. p. 1–187.
- ↑ See this claim made in the Koran, Sales's translation, London, new edition, p. 162, et seq., 206, 372, 400, 152, &c., 219, 127, et al., and the Book of Mormon, (Nauvoo, 1840,) passim.
- ↑ See some pertinent remarks in J. H. Thom's Life of Joseph Blanco White, London, 1845, Vol. I. p. 275, et seq., Vol. II. p. 18, et seq., and the remarks of Mr Norton, p. 250, et seq.; De Wette, Wesen, § 6.
- ↑ It is instructive to see that the Greeks sometimes regarded the writings of Homer with the same superstitious veneration which is often paid to the Bible. They found therein the Neptunian and Vulcanian theory; the sphericity of the earth; the doctrines of Democritus, Heraclitus, and of Socrates and Plato in their turn. See Heraclides Ponticus, Alleg. Hom. in Gale, ubi sup. p. 436, et seq., 488, et seq. Pausanias, IX. 41, p. 452, ed. Schubert, seriously urges the question whether any works from the Shop of Vulcan were then in existence. According to Aristotle, (de Part. Animal. III. 10, p. 87, ed. Bekker,) some concluded in his time that the human head could speak when separated from the body—and that on the authority of Homer, “And while he speaks his head was mingled with the dust.” Ilias X. 427. Some quoted Homer to show that Horses had spoken—as some divines quote Moses to prove the same of the Ass.