3. The atonement of Christ produces the necessary effect upon the human soul, in restoring it to affectionate obedience, which neither philosophy, law, nor perceptive truth could accomplish.
The wisdom of Divine Providence was conspicuous in the fact that, previously to the introduction of Christianity, all the resources of human wisdom had been exhausted in efforts to confer upon man true knowledge and true happiness. Although most of the great names of antiquity were conspicuous rather for those properties which rendered them a terror and a scourge to mankind; and although society, among the ancients, in its best state, was little better than semi-barbarism, yet there was a class in society, during the Augustan and Periclean ages, and even at some periods before the last-named, that was cultivated in mind and manners.
From this class, individuals at times arose who were truly great—men distinguished alike for the strength, compass, and discrimination of their intellect. In all the efforts of these men, with the exception of those who applied themselves exclusively to the study of physical phenomena, the great end sought was the means or secret of human happiness. All admitted that human nature, as they found it, was in an imperfect or depraved condition, and not in the enjoyment of its chief good; and the plans they proposed by which to obtain that happiness of which they believed the soul susceptible, were as various and diverse from each other as can be imagined. No one of these plans ever accomplished, in any degree, the end desired; and no one of them was ever adapted to, or embraced by, the common people. The philosophers themselves, after wrangling for the honour of having discovered truth, and making themselves miserable in the pursuit of happiness, died; and man was left unsatisfied and unhappy, philosophy having shed only sufficient light upon his mind to disclose more fully the guilty and wretched state of his heart.
There are, perhaps, two exceptions to these remarks as applied to the great minds of antiquity: those are Socrates and his pupil Plato. These men, with a far-penetrating insight into the constitutional wants of man, contemplating the disordered and unhappy condition of human nature, and inquiring for a remedy adequate to enlighten the mind, and give the heart a satisfying good, perceived that there was not in the resources of philosophy, nor within the compass of human means, any power that could reach the source of the difficulty, and rectify the evil of human nature, which consisted in a want of benevolent affection.[35] Inferring from the nature of man what would be necessary, and trusting in the goodness of the Deity to grant the requisite aid, they expressed their belief that a Divine Teacher would come from heaven, who would restore truth and happiness to the human soul.[36]
[35] That Plato had some idea of the want, and none of what was necessary to supply it, may be seen in the fact that in order to make men love as brethren, which he saw to be necessary, he recommended a community of wives to the members of his ideal republic. [Back]
[36] In Plato’s dialogue upon the duties of religious worship, a passage occurs, the design of which appears to be, to show that man could not, of himself, learn either the nature of the gods, or the proper manner of worshipping them, unless an instructor should come from heaven. The following remarkable passage occurs between Socrates and Alcibiades:—
Socrates.—To me it appears best to be patient. It is necessary to wait till you learn how you ought to act towards the gods, and towards men.
Alcibiades.—When, O Socrates, shall that time be? and who shall instruct me? for most willingly would I see this person, who he is.
Socrates.—He is one who cares for you; but, as Homer represents Minerva as taking away darkness from the eyes of Diomedes, that he might distinguish a god from a man: so it is necessary that he should first take away the darkness from your mind, and then bring near those things by which you shall know good and evil.
Alcibiades.—Let him take away the darkness, or any other thing, if he will; for whoever this man is, I am prepared to refuse none of the things which he commands, if I shall be made better.—Platonis Alcibiad. ii. [Back]
It is strange that among philosophers of succeeding ages there has not been wisdom sufficient to discover, from the constitutional necessities of the human spirit, that demand for the instruction and aid of the Messiah which Socrates and Plato discovered, even in a comparatively dark age.
There are two insuperable difficulties which would for ever hinder the restoration of mankind to truth and happiness from being accomplished by human means. The first, which has been already alluded to, is that human instruction, as such, has no power to bind the conscience. Even if man were competent to discover all the truth necessary for a perfect rule of conduct, yet that truth would have no reformatory power, because men could never feel that truth was obligatory which proceeded from merely human sources. It is an obvious principle of our nature that the conscience will not charge guilt on the soul for disobedience, when the command proceeds from a fellow man who is not recognised as having the prerogative and the right to require submission. And besides, as men’s minds are variously constituted, and of various capacities, there could be no agreement in such a case concerning the question, ‘What is truth?’ As well might we expect two schoolboys to reform each other’s manners in school, without the aid of the teacher’s authority, as that men can reform their fellows without the sanction of that authority which will quicken and bind the conscience. The human conscience was made to recognise and enforce the authority of God; and unless there is belief in the Divine obligation of truth, conscience refuses to perform its office.
But the grand difficulty is this:—Truth, whether sanctioned by conscience or not, has no power, as has been shown, to produce love in the heart. The law may convict and guide the mind, but it has no power to soften or to change the affections. This was the precise thing necessary, and this necessary end the wisdom of the world could not accomplish. All the wisdom of all the philosophers in all ages could never cause the affections of the soul to rise to the holy, blessed God. To destroy selfish pride, and produce humility—to eradicate the evil passions, and produce in the soul desires for the universal good, and love for the universal Parent, were beyond the reach of earthly wisdom and power. The wisdom of the world in their efforts to give truth and happiness to the human soul, was foolishness with God; and the wisdom of God—Christ crucified—was foolishness with the philosophers, in relation to the same subject;[37] yet it was Divine philosophy: an adapted means, and the only adequate means, to accomplish the necessary end. Said an apostle, in speaking upon this subject: ‘The Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom; but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness: but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.’ The Jews, while they required a sign, did not perceive that miracles, in themselves, were not adapted to produce affection. And the Greeks, while they sought after wisdom, did not perceive that all the wisdom of the Gentiles would never work love in the heart. But the apostle preached ‘Christ crucified,’ an exhibition of self-denial, of suffering, and of self-sacrificing love and mercy, endured in behalf of men; which, when received by faith, became ‘the power of God, and the wisdom of God,’ to produce love and obedience in the human soul. Paul understood the efficacy of the cross. He looked to Calvary and beheld Christ crucified as the sun of the Gospel system. Not as the moon, reflecting cold and borrowed rays; but as the Sun of righteousness, glowing with radiant mercy, and pouring warm beams of life and love into the open bosom of the believer.
[37] From an observation of one of the Fathers, it would seem that after the Gospel had been preached among the Greeks, many of them perceived its adaptedness to accomplish the end for which they had sought in vain. ‘Philosophy,’ says Clemens, of Alexandria, ‘led the Greeks to Christ, as the law did the Jews.’
Concluding paragraph of the apology of M. Minucius Felix in defence of Christianity, A.D. 250:
‘To conclude: the sum of our boasting is, that we are got into possession of what the philosophers have been always in quest of; and what, with all their application, they could never find. Why, then, so much ill-will stirring against us? If Divine truth is come to perfection in our time, let us make a good use of the blessing; let us govern our knowledge with discretion; let superstition and impiety be no more; and let true religion triumph in their stead.’ [Back]