138
March 1927
T h e
K i n g ’ s
B u s i n e s s
The Bible and the Nation N otes of an A ddress by R ev . G. C ampbell M organ , D.D.
T ext : “The grass withereth , the flower fadeth ;. but the word of our God shall stand for ever !’ —Isa. 40:8. I HAVE no understanding of any Christianity that is not interested in the national life. I am not saying— indeed, I repudiate the suggestion—that it is the duty of the Church of God to take part in what may be called party politics. Whenever the Church of God, in any branch, has been dragged at the wheels of any political party, she has become paralyzed. Her duty is not to.be led, but to lead. I am sometimes told that the duty of the Christian minister is to catch the spirit of the age. I pro test. The duty of the Christian minister is to correct the spirit of the age. And from that standpoint I declare that the Church of God must be interested in national affairs. “The grass withereth, the flower fadeth; but the word of our God shall stand for ever.” So said the Prophet Isaiah to the nation of his day. Is that true nationally? Have we, as a nation, outgrown the Bible? Increasingly, during the last thirty or forty years, our national attitude towards the Bible has been very largely that of treating it as something that we have outgrown. In my boyhood days there was being conducted a definite propaganda of hostil ity towards Christianity and towards the Bible. Every Sunday speakers were sent out to address men and women, and the halls used to be crowded. That day has gone, but I feel that for a generation or more, the national attitude has been that of looking on the Bible as something we have outgrown. Someone will say, “You make that dec
teachers say, and applying their teaching a little farther than it should be applied, is saying, “If we have outgrown the Bible scientifically and philosophically, and if we have also outgrown the Bible theologically, really we must have outgrown it altogether” ; and he dismisses it. He respects it because it was his father’s, his mother’s book; but for practical purposes he puts it on one side as something that the nation has outgrown. This has gone on for a genera tion now. I want to discuss these three points as to whether we really have outgrown the Bible scientifically, philosophically, or theologically. Let me, first of all, say to you young people that when these things are ■ affirmed, by whomsoever they may be affirmed, do not believe them simply because someone says these things are so. It is up to you to investigate these things for yourselves before you accept any dogmatic assertion, however unanimous the assertion may seem to be. Unanimity has never been proof of a truth. And if there appears to be a unanimous opinion abroad in the scientific and philosophic world just now—I will not say a unanimous opinion in the theological world—I beg you young folk not to accept it simply because someone, it may be your professor in the science class, tells you to believe it. The most pernicious thing I know in the intel lectual world is a second-hand agnosticism. If you have a first-hand agnosticism, if- you are really facing intellec tual problems, I would stand by you. I would be patient with you as you face those problems, and as you attempt to find a solution for them according to truth. More than forty years ago a man went into the vestry
laration, but how do you account for it?” It is not my business to account for it. It has been, and still is being, dogmatically asserted in certain academic quar ters that we have out grown the Bible in cer tain ways. It is being said, without the slight est apology, that we h a v e outgrown the Bible scientifically, and that we have outgrown it philosophically. And it is also being said, not outside the Church only, but inside, that we have outgrown it theo logically. N ot O utgrown These things are be ing affirmed, and that ubiquitous person, “the man in the street,” as we call him, with his wonderful faculty of thinking over what his
of t h e Metropolitan Tabernacle, after C. H. Spurgeon h a d b e e n preaching, and, shak ing hands with the great preacher, he said, “I have greatly enjoyed your eloquence, but you know, Mr. Spurgeon, I am an agnostic.” And the record has it, and I think the tradition is a true one, that Mr. Spurgeon looked at the man and said, “What did you say? Well—let me see—my Greek may be a little rusty. What is . that ? Let me think —oh, yes, I know. I believe the Latin equiv alent is ignoramus!” Agnosticism can never be the final resting- place of a strong intel lectuality. No man can sit down and say, “I do not know,” and be in tellectually satisfied.
THEYCANNOTSTANDTHELIGH^
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs