were the doctrinal statements of the Bible in the form in which they are there presented. The ground of faith is simply the testi- mony of the Scriptures as the Word of God. The objects of knowledge were the speculative or philosophical ideas which under- lie the doctrines of the Bible, and the ground on which those ideas or truths are received and incorporated in our system of knowl- edge, is their own inherent evidence. They are seen to be true by the light of reason. Faith is thus elevated into knowledge, and Christianity exalted into a philosophy. This method was car- ried out by the Platonizing fathers, and continued to prevail to a great extent among the schoolmen. During the Middle Ages the authority of the Church was paramount, and the freest thinkers did not venture openly to impugn the doctrines which the Church had sanctioned. For the most part they contented themselves with philosophizing about those doctrines, and endeavoring to show that they admitted of a philosophical explanation and proof.
Wolfianism. As remarked in the preceding chapter, this method was revived and extensively propagated by Wolf (1679-1754, Professor at Halle and Marburg). His principal works were " Theologia Nat- uralis," 1736, "Philos. Practicalis Universalis," 1738, " Philos, Moralis s. Ethica," 1750, " Verniinftige Gedanken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen, auch alien Dingen iiberhaupt," 1720. Wolf unduly exalted the importance of natural religion. Although he admitted that the Scriptures revealed doctrines undis- coverable by the unassisted reason of man, he yet insisted that all doctrines, in order to be rationally received as true, should be capable of demonstration on the principles of reason. " He main- tained," says Mr. Rose (in his " State of Protestantism in Ger- many," p. 39), " that philosophy was indispensable to religion, and that, together with Biblical proofs, a mathematical or strictly demon- strative dogmatical system, according to the principles of reason, was absolutely necessaiy. His own works carried this theoiy into practice, and after the first clamors had subsided, his opinions gained more attention, and it was not long before he had a school of vehement admirers, who far outstripped him in the use of his own principles. We find some of them not content with apply- ing demonstration to the truth of the system, but endeavoring to establish each separate dogma, the Trinity, the nature of the Re- deemer, the Incarnation, the eternity of punishment, on philosophi cal, and strange as it may appear, some of these truths on math©
46 INTRODUCTION. [Ch. m. — Rationalism.
matical grounds." The language of Wolf himself on this subject has already been quoted on page 5. He expressly states that the office of revelation is to supplement natural religion, and to pre- sent propositions which the philosopher is bound to demonstrate. By demonstration is not meant the adduction of proof that the proposition is sustained by the Scriptures, but that the doctrine must be admitted as true on the principles of reason. It is philo- sophical demonstration that is intended. " Theological Dogma- tism," says Mansel,! " is an application of reason to the su]>port and
defense of preexisting statements of Scripture Its end is
to produce a coincidence between what we believe and what we thii>k ; to remove the boundary which separates the comprehensi- ble from the incomprehensible." ^ It attempts, for example, to demonstrate the doctrine of the Trinity from tiie nature of an in- finite being ; the doctrine of the Incarnation from the nature of man and his relation to God, etc. Its grand design is to trans- mute faith into knowledge, to elevate Christianity as a system of revealed truth into a system of Philosophy.
B. Refutation. The objections to Dogmatism, as thus understood, are, —
1. That it is essentially Rationalistic. The Rationalist demands philosophical proof of the doctrines which he receives. He is not willing to believe on the simple authority of Scripture. He re- quires his reason to be satisfied by a demonstration of the truth independent of the Bible. This demand the Dogmatist admits to be reasonable, and he undertakes to furnish the required proof. In this essential point, therefore, in making the reception of Christian doctrine to rest on reason and not on authority, the Dogmatist and the Rationalist are on common ground. For although the former admits a supernatural revelation, and acknowledges that for the common people faith must rest on authority, yet he maintains that the mysteries of religion admit of rational or philosophical demon- stration, and that such demonstration cultivated minds have a right to demand.
2. In thus shifting faith from the foundation of divine testimony, and making it rest on rational demonstration, it is removed from the Rock of Ages to a quicksand. There is all the difference be- tween a conviction founded on the well-authenticated testimony of God, and that founded on so-called philosophical demonstration, that there is between God and man, the divine and human. Let
1 LimiU of Religions Thought, p. 47. 2 Jiid. p. 50.