FROM

THE

MILLENNIAL HARBINGER:

FOURTH SERIES.

VOL. VII.]	BETHANY, VA. OCTOBER, 1857.	[NO. X.

      "Beware, lest any man spoil you, through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."--Paul to the Colossians.

      IF human philosophy has in some respects delayed the progress of the present reformation, we need not wonder that the philosophy of some of our friends should have delayed our progress in these essays. [546] We have been obliged to pause in order to correct the misconceptions of some who have had neither the prudence to examine what we have already said, nor the patience to allow to us a full exposition of our subject. It is, perhaps, however, just as well that we have been thus led to dwell more particularly upon the relations which Faith sustains to philosophy, as there are really no questions of more permanent and practical importance than those involved in this discussion.

      This is certainly to us a most legitimate subject. It is not only a Scriptural subject, but it is the very purpose--the original and most praiseworthy purpose of this religious reformation to set up faith against human philosophy in religion, and to establish the claims of Holy Scripture as the sole standard of faith. By human philosophy in religion we simply mean, as we have formerly clearly explained, the admixture of human opinions, theories, or speculations with the simple gospel or revealed truth of the Bible. In the "Declaration and Address," written by our venerated and departed Father Campbell, and published in 1809, it is expressly stated to be the purpose of this religious movement, then in its inception, "to promote simple evangelical Christianity, free from all mixture of human opinions and inventions of men," or what we briefly designate as human philosophy. It is declared to be its most desirable object to lead the "professing subject" of religion "to learn everything respecting his faith and duty, at the mouth of God, without any reference to human authority--to the judgment and opinions of men." This regard to the Divine teaching "would," it is further declared, "at once free the great majority of professing Christians from that perplexing uncertainty and implicit faith to which so many of them are unhappily subjected by the interposition of human definitions and opinions between them and the Bible, many of which are erroneous, and also many of which they are unable to understand so as to determine certainly whether they be just and Scriptural, or not. By such an exhibition, [viz, that of the simple Scripture as proposed,] would professed Christians be delivered not only from these perplexing and dangerous evils, (their faith by this means no longer standing in the wisdom of men but in the power of God: not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Spirit teacheth,) but they would also become better acquainted with the Scriptures of truth--with that all important Word which shall judge them at the last day; and at the same time would come to possess a much more ample and enlarged view of the alone sufficiency and perfection of the Scriptures themselves." The revered author in another place, says, "Our desire for ourselves and our brethren would be, that rejecting human opinions and the inventions of men, as of any authority or as having [547] any place in the church of God, we might forever "cease from further contention about such, things; returning to, and holding fast by, the original standard: taking the Divine Word alone for our rule; the Holy Spirit for our teacher and guide to lead us into all truth, and Christ alone as exhibited in the Word for our salvation." "To all those then," he says further, "that are disposed to see and think for themselves, to form their judgment by the Divine Word itself, and not by any human explication of it--humbly relying upon and looking for the promised assistance of Divine teaching; and not barely trusting to their own understanding--to all such do we gladly commit our cause."

      The reader will now clearly perceive how pertinent and legitimate it is, in view of the original purposes of this reformatory movement, that we should oppose faith to human philosophy in religion, and how proper it is that we should sedulously guard against the admixture of any human theories or speculations with the precious Divine truths which have been developed during its progress.

      But the antagonism between faith and philosophy is distinctly asserted in the apostolic epistles, and we are, therefore, justified in maintaining it, not only upon our own avowed principles as shown above, but upon the authority of the Word of God itself. How often does Paul oppose the faith or "the wisdom of God" to the "wisdom of men." How emphatically does he declare that "when the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe!" How truly does he assert that none of the "princes of this world," however they might be skilled in all the learning of the age, knew that Divine wisdom then revealed in the Gospel, and how earnestly does he preach and teach Christ as the wisdom and power of God?

      Objection has been, however incidentally offered to the title of my essays, because the word philosophy is not qualified. As well might Paul's language be objected to when he says without qualification that "the world by wisdom knew not God." And as well might the objector proceed to misrepresent him as setting the preaching of the Gospel in direct opposition to all truth and wisdom both human and divine, as thus to misrepresent me. No one reasonably expects to find either an essay or a volume in its title merely, for a title is often fanciful and still oftener indefinite from its appropriate brevity. Because we have the announcement of the case in court, of "Clayton versus Smith," is it to be taken for granted that every one in the world of the name of Smith is to be a defendant! When we make proper examination we shall find that in the body of the indictment a particular Smith is meant and named, and we shall find further that the [548] charge against him is not that of being a universal evil doer, but that in a particular case he did unlawfully enter and establish himself upon another man's premises, and hence a writ of ejectment is demanded against him. Just so it is in the present case. Faith is versus philosophy, but not versus all philosophy, nor even versus any particular philosophy in all respects, but against it only in so far as it is an intruder upon premises where it has no right to be. If there be an opposition or an antagonism between Faith and any sort of Philosophy in any sense whatever, this is quite sufficient to justify what I must continue to regard as a very fortunate and appropriate title to my essays--to wit, "Faith versus Philosophy." After all, however, a mere title is a small matter, and people are at liberty to amend it to please their fancy. For my part, I am happy to find, that the only objection worthy of notice, which has been raised, is to the title of my essays, since from this, it may reasonably be inferred that to the positions taken in the essays themselves there can be no valid objection offered. The reader will remark that I have in them no where propounded any human philosophy for his acceptance, but that my appeal has in all cases been directly to the express language of Holy Scripture.

      I affirm it as my deliberate conviction that the mixing up of human philosophy with the Gospel is one of the greatest obstacles in the world to the spread of the truth, to Christian union, and to Christian progress. It spoils Christians. It spoils Christianity. It perverts the simplicity of truth; it arrests spiritual improvement; it converts humility into pride, and charity into bigotry and intolerant opinionism.--What are all the creeds and platforms of the various sects against which we have been contending for so many years, but so many systems of opinions blended with more or less religious truth? What is Calvinism, what Arminianism--but ingenious systems of religious philosophy which are really proposed as substitutes for the Christian faith. What is our Reformation but a plea for the simple Christian faith? and obedience, in opposition to the claims of these systems--in fact, the case of Faith vs. Philosophy? Can we, then, too diligently guard against so fatal an error as the insidious introduction of any of the principles of human philosophy into the teachings of this religious movement, which was expressly intended to call men away from these speculations to the pure Word of God? And should any real friend of the present reformation object to have its teachings and methods of procedure subjected to a candid scrutiny to see if there be any departure from the original principles? Is the mystical philosophy which obtains so extensively among the modern religious parties to be continually a theme of censure, while the sensualistic [549] philosophy is to be quietly suffered to establish itself amongst us as a part of our religious teaching? Shall we arraign the sects for introducing philosophy into religion and in the course of the controversy silently adopt a latent scheme of philosophy, the opposite, indeed, of theirs, but not on that account a whit less fatal to truth and union? However unpleasant the task, I, for one, at least, must protest against such a departure from our own principles and from the simplicity of the gospel, on the part of any individual or number of individuals who have enrolled themselves amongst us. And I shall be most happy if this discussion be the means of arousing any who are "at ease in Zion," who have "settled upon their lees," and subsided into an apathetic stupor under the benumbing influences of a vain and deceitful philosophy, which leads men to content themselves with the mere elements and forms of religion and to oppose themselves to all spiritual progress or growth in grace and knowledge. May each one of them hearken to the apostolic warning, "Awake, thou that sleepest and rise from the dead, that Christ may give thee light."

      For my own part I avow an unwavering attachment to the principles of this reformatory movement. Of this my present effort to remove some of the obstacles which impede its progress may be regarded as a proof. If it has paused for a time, or has not yet succeeded in accomplishing fully its original design, it by no means follows from this that it is a failure. It is a failure with those only who imagine it to be complete. To those who comprehend it aright, it is a great success. Never before since Christianity was first corrupted, have so many of the perversions of the gospel and its institutions been, within so short a period, detected and exposed. Never before since the apostacy, has so much of Christianity been restored, in its original purity, as in this present effort. Where shall we find in any party, now existing, or in any reported in ecclesiastical history, such a return from creeds and traditions to the pure Word of God? Where have we elsewhere the practical restoration of the ordinance of baptism to its primitive character and design as the assurance of pardon to the penitent believer! And above all, in what denomination do we find the Messiahship of Jesus recognized as the true element of the Christian faith--as the rock on which our Saviour builds his church and as the bond of Christian fraternity and regard? Compared with the noble principles and truths which have been already developed, how insignificant appear the petty policies, the human expedients and the narrow bigotries of even the most liberal of the religious parties? How rapidly do these principles diffuse themselves amongst them and how prophetic is the consciousness which we feel that their most strenuous efforts to maintain themselves against the influence of the truths [550] we teach will prove abortive! Let us then thank God and take courage! Great things have been accomplished. The reformation, so far as it has advanced, has proved to be a most successful effort. Let us cherish its principles as the only means of reconstructing and regenerating religious society, and of "restoring pure primitive apostolic Christianity in letter and spirit, in principle and practice." Let us strive to correct all aberrations from the true path to this most desirable object, and seek to remove all obstacles to successful progress. We may rest assured that no partial advance will be sufficient; no partial preaching of the gospel will accomplish God's work. It will not do to stop with baptism for remission of sins and leave the convert deprived by false philosophy of all true faith in the actual indwelling of the Holy Spirit, the impartation of which is the great end of the gospel ministration, and which is the true source of spiritual life and power, both in the individual Christian and in the church itself. The wants of the human soul must be satisfied. The Gospel of Christ preached and received in its FULNESS and its purity, is fully adequate to supply all its wants, and to sustain it gloriously amidst the conflicts of life. Let us then see to it that the whole gospel is preached to sinners--that the whole truth is believed by saints, and that no empty philosophy be allowed to foster a latent scepticism which robs prayer of its efficacy and renders the great and precious promises of the gospel nugatory and vain.

R. R.

[The Millennial Harbinger 28 (October 1857): 546-551.]