Is Christianity true?

159 But the circumstances in which the writers of the New Testament were shew the gross absurdity of the infidel on human grounds, so as to leave him without excuse. The truth of Christianity, as a general fact, is established as no other history in the world is; so also are its true character and the details which establish the divine power connected with it. God has granted an external and internal evidence which confounds the infidel — convicts him of being utterly unreasonable; and, of course, graciously strengthens as an outwork, the heart of the true disciple. The infidel pretends to know God so much better before-hand than anybody else, that he can shew that Christianity cannot be true. But the man that would attempt to shew it was not true would prove himself a fool in his wisdom. On no other subject would he be considered of sane mind, if he disputed on such evidence. It is the consciousness, as I have already said, that it is divine, and that it has a claim on the conscience, which is the reason of its being disputed. Were it not, no one would attempt to do it; but man cannot bear God Himself, though he may pride himself on his own thoughts about Him, if he can judge Him.

I cannot here, of course, write a book on the positive evidences of Christianity. But no one is ignorant that there are such, and that the positive proofs of it — proofs such as no event, no system, no person on earth has for itself — have been detailed in the language of every civilized people. Now particular objections leave this all out of sight; yet, where anything has been largely, positively proved, the dwelling on the objections that may be raised, without estimating the positive proofs of the whole system, is a totally unsound mental process. It is a way of judging of the truth of anything which would be admitted in no other case whatever. I do not object to the examination of every difficulty in detail.

In the case of scripture, the positive proof is that of the divinity of the system as a whole. If the system at large is positively proved, a difficulty attached to it which I cannot solve is a demonstration, not of the falseness of the system, but of my incompetence to deal with the difficulty. In such a case, a sound minded man is content to say, "I do not know." The historical facts and documents of Christianity are proved, with an evidence such as no other universally believed event or acknowledged book has any evidence to be compared with, and if proved shew that it is divine. It has met with an opposition which made every document and fact to be scrutinized with a closeness which left only what was incontestable uncontested. This was to be expected, because it presented the claims of a holy God, to which the antagonist will of man never would submit. Hostile heathens, philosophical adversaries, heretical corrupters, foolish advocates, elaborate historians, voluminous commentators, every kind of author and character has been occupied with it from the time of its promulgation, and authenticated its history and its doctrines even when opposing them; and this in the presence of the hostility of religions divinely established or nationally and deeply enracinated on the one side, and sceptical scorn on the other. The books on which the smallest doubt could be cast, doubts were cast upon; and their authenticity made a subject of question as they are by objectors now.

1870 156 I cannot here, of course, write a book on the positive evidences of Christianity. But no one is ignorant that there are such, and that the positive proofs of it — proofs such as no event, no system, no person on earth has for itself — have been detailed in the language of every civilized people. Now particular objections leave this all out of sight; yet, where anything has been largely, positively proved, the dwelling on the objections that may be saved, without estimating the positive proofs of the whole system, is a totally unsound mental process. It is a way of judging of the truth of anything which would be admitted in no other case whatever. I do not object to the examination of every difficulty in detail. In the case of scripture, the positive proof is that of the divinity of the system as a whole. If the system at large is positively proved, a difficulty attached to it which I cannot solve is a demonstration not of the falseness of the system, but of my incompetency to deal with the difficulty. In such a case a sound-minded man is content to say, "I do not know." The historical facts and documents of Christianity are proved with an evidence such as no other universally-believed event or acknowledged book has any evidence to be compared with, and if proved show that it is divine. It has met with an opposition which made every document and fact to be scrutinized with a closeness which left only what was incontestable uncontested. This was to be expected, because it presented the claims of a holy God, to which the antagonist will of man never would submit. Hostile heathens, philosophical adversaries, heretical corrupters, foolish advocates, elaborate historians, voluminous commentators, every kind of author and character has been occupied with it from the time of its promulgation, and authenticated its history and its doctrines even when opposing them; and this in the presence of the hostility of religions divinely established or nationally and deeply enracinated on the one side, and sceptical scorn on the other. On the books on which the smallest doubt could be cast, doubts were cast; and their authenticity made a subject of question as they are by objectors now.

The internal difficulties by which the sceptic seeks to invalidate the inspiration of the New Testament, or at any rate the greater part of them, were noticed already in the second century, and answered. The Jews were as desirous to prove Jesus was not the Messiah, as the sceptic could be now. In a word we are on ground travelled over for eighteen centuries — old infidelity dressed up in a new form, to be met by increasing light and increasing proofs which God in His goodness affords both internal and external.

On the other hand, it is indisputable that no mere intellectual accrediting of God's word will save the soul or bring to God, however legitimate it be to urge the cogency of the evidence as leaving no excuse for unbelief. No doubt conscience must be reached by the action of the Holy Spirit in order to saving acceptance of the truth. The soul, thus illuminated, humbly and gratefully bows to God's word, and grows into an appreciation of its marvellous adaptation to human necessities, of its infinite loving-kindness and its illimitable grandeur. "He that believeth hath the witness in himself" (1 John 5:10). Of this indeed the unbeliever knows nothing, though to the renewed heart, as one has said, "Christ may be as near and real as the man who touches your elbow" — and, I would add, infinitely more so. But the point here pressed is (1) the facts, and (2) the evidence for the facts, which is, as has been said, so exceeding. To sum up the contention of this little paper, without taking the high ground of spiritual evidence to which we are entitled, it is manifest that Christianity is not only a "religion of facts," but of facts irrefragably authenticated.

Let us see if our marks apply here. The subject is important beyond words. If Christ be raised as Scripture asserts the truth of Christianity is proved, and woe betide the man who fails to embrace it!

No historical event has better proof than that of the resurrection of Christ, and that resurrection was God’s seal upon every word that Christ spoke, every deed that He did, and especially upon the character of the work that He did upon the cross. The resurrection is the Divine upholding of every claim made by Christ.

Why do the attackers of the Christian faith endeavour to explain away these prophecies? It cannot be denied, that the Bible is the ONLY Book in all the literature in the world, that has prophesied future events of a world magnitude, and that these prophecies have been fulfilled. No person can deny this. Is this not a staggering fact, proving without a doubt that the Bible is inspired of God, for such prophecies are clearly beyond the power of mortal man? When prophet after prophet foretells future events, unknown to each other, living in different centuries, and sometimes in different countries, and yet not contradicting each other, but prophesying in one harmonious whole, the one and only conclusion that can be arrived at, is that one Master Mind inspired them to write what they did. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Tim. 3:16). “Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21). It is beyond contradiction that there are prophecies in the Bible which have been most strikingly fulfilled. Take two or three outstanding examples. Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, dreamed a dream, interpreted by the Prophet Daniel as being revealed to him by God. He tells us, “There is a God in heaven that reveals secrets, and makes known … what shall be in the latter days” (Dan. 2:28). Four great empires were to arise, Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Grecian, Roman. Three world empires rose and passed into history, whilst the last, the Roman empire, was at the height of its power when our Lord was born into this world. Rome was founded in B.C. 753, and its empire continued till its break-up through the invasion of the Huns and Goths in A.D. 410, a matter of over eleven hundred years. There is nothing in all the literature of the world remotely like this remarkable prophecy, outside of the Word of God. Should this not afford the Unitarian food for thought? If he really understood what this means, and its implications, it would shatter once and for ever his Unitarian beliefs.

Now here again in Isaiah, seven centuries before Christ came, the prophecy of His coming is given. Prophecy is that which utterly shipwrecks a false prophet, and absolutely confirms a true prophet and the more extended the prophecies are the more will that rule hold good. A man might prophesy of one item, and by a lucky chance—a fluke—it might come true, but if he puts two items together, the chances are much more remote that they will come true. If be puts three, four, five, six, or if he puts a dozen together, unless he is inspired in his prophecy, there is not one chance in a million that He will be right. But the Scriptures prophesy not once nor twice, nor a dozen times, but, as we have been saying, over three hundred times, as to the person of Christ, His birth, His life, His death, the results of His work, His glory; and all these things have come true with the exception of the glory to come, which is yet future. How truly they are God’s Word!

H. There is truth in that. We have not now to do with heathenism and Judaism (I mean in our present inquiries, for we know with delight there are missionaries to tell Christ's blessed grace to them). When we meet with infidelity now, it has the character of apostasy and antagonism. It may be open as in the last century, or covert, as in this, but it has essentially this character. Early opposition was not apostasy; nor did it, indeed, deny the miracles; they were too recent. They ascribe them, as Celsus, to magic, or cited Apollonius Tyanaeus as having wrought such too; or the Jews to magic learnt in Egypt, and the theft of the Shem hammaphoresh out of the temple. Still that was antagonism, and had to be so treated. Now it is more. It is apostasy in principle, and has to be treated as such; covert I admit, using Christ's name, but only so much the worse. Christianity has been publicly admitted as the religion of God, its record accepted as the record of God, miracles and all; and then men begin to cavil and oppose and undermine, not being honest enough to throw it off, or sometimes happily kept back by spiritual instinct; but, as a system, it is apostasy in principle. Hence there is less hope, and the record has to be proved, objections answered, miracles to be proved, not a proof. In this case we must shew their folly as reasoners, and trust to the word, if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth. For them I should look much more to the power of the word in grace. If the record have power in them, they will see the miracles with it, and the perfect beauty and suitableness of them in such a revelation of God. Proofs may shew the absurdity of doubts, and so far are useful. They may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men, but cannot give faith. Of this we have sufficiently spoken, and I suppose of general principles so delighted in by Dr. Williams. One soon sees there is not the soberness of inquiry, but delight in one like Bunsen, who, he thinks, may aid in overthrowing scripture as a divine record. You will soon see how little they are to be trusted. I may not be able to answer every objection; but if I find a man make a hundred, and ninety-nine are shallow and foundationless, and his will pierces in it all, I am not much troubled with the weight of the hundredth. Facts and principles will both come before us.

Not only is it impossible to prove this question without faith, but the effect of reasoning on the subject is to destroy faith. If Scripture has to be proved by reason, God is not believed because He has spoken, i.e., there is no true faith. If I believe A because B has said that what A has said is true, I do not believe A at all. I come to a logical conclusion from other evidence that the statement is right I don't believe the person. Similarly, in reasoning about the Scriptures, I may come to the logical conclusion that it must be the word of God, but this is not faith, though faith is almost certain to follow from such a conclusion, but it must be realized that reasoning cannot give faith.