If you sit in judgment on some portion of G.o.d's Word and determine that it is reasonable, and that since it commends itself to your judgment it is therefore acceptable and you will believe it, =that= is not faith in the =Word= but in =your own reason=. You have surrendered your =intellect= to your own conclusions but your =heart= is far from G.o.d. Faith in the Word is surrender to it without pa.s.sing judgment on it.

And yet surrendering one's mind to one's own conclusions about G.o.d is precisely the thing that pa.s.ses for faith in G.o.d on the part of those who have lost their old-fashioned, evangelical faith while they were in the Schools, and yet come out with what they describe as a more intelligent and rational faith in G.o.d and the Bible. In their desperate attempt to survive the wreck of their orthodox faith, they have =reasoned= their way to conclusions about G.o.d that harmonized with what they were taught in the Schools; but the G.o.d they arrived at was the G.o.d of rationalism and not the G.o.d of Revelation.

They will say to the orthodox man, "You and I go by different pathways, but we both arrive at the same G.o.d." But this is eternally impossible! For there is only one pathway leading to the true G.o.d, and that is not followed by =reasoning= one's way out of a shattered faith, but first by =believing= one's way out of darkness into light, and then by believing steadily on in that divinely imparted faith which always shatters the reasonings and conclusions of the rationalists.

To be a believer in the Word puts rationalism out of business, for no one can reason himself into the acceptance of truth he already believes. And on the other hand, to be a rationalist regarding the Word puts faith out of business, for faith is the acceptance of the bare Word of G.o.d without further evidence, and the rationalizer is compelled to reject that att.i.tude toward the Word so that he may have the way left open to reason his way to what he is willing to accept as evidence. This is why so many of those students who sit in the cla.s.ses of the rationalists in our colleges and seminaries lose their faith. Rationalism makes Scriptural faith impossible.

Rationalizing and believing, when the Bible is in question, are mutually exclusive.

The reason for this is not that the facts of Scripture contradict each other, and certainly not that these facts are one thing to faith and another thing to reason. The antagonism does not arise over the =facts= of the Word but over the =interpretation= of them. The rationalist, accepting no interpretation except that furnished by his own puny and incompetent reason unillumined by faith, reaches conclusions absolutely contradicted by those arrived at by the man of faith. The fact is, he could not hope to arrive anywhere else. For how can finite man relate and interpret the few and scattered facts he discovers in the realm of infinite truth? How can a man by searching find out G.o.d?

"By whose interpretation, yours or mine?" is a favorite question which the rationalist asks the believer when the meaning of some Scripture pa.s.sage is in question. By =no one's= interpretation except the =Holy Spirit's=! He alone can interpret the Bible, for He alone knows what He meant by what He wrote. And even the Holy Spirit is able to interpret the Bible to =no one= but the =believer=. For the rationalist, the unbeliever, rejects faith, and thereby completely closes "the eyes of the heart" to the illumination of the Spirit; while the faith of the believer is the very thing that opens the heart to an understanding of the Word. Spiritual apprehension begins only at the point where faith begins.

This is why it is that when the rationalist tries his hand at interpretation he is sure, sooner or later, to bring perfectly harmonious facts into confusion and contradiction.

Take, for example, the facts regarding the development of the human embryo.

The rationalist notes that as it develops it bears a striking resemblance, successively, to the more mature forms of some of the lower animals, in an imagined orderly progress from lower to higher. That this resemblance is a fact no one disputes. There is no controversy over the fact. But when the rationalist attempts to explain this fact, he interprets it to mean that man is the product of evolution, rather than a special creation, as the Bible says he is, and thus he thrusts such confusion and contradiction before us that we are compelled to make a choice between his interpretation and the statements of the Bible. The controversy that results is caused altogether by the rationalist thrusting himself into that place that belongs to the Holy Spirit alone. "=He= shall lead you into all the truth,"

said Christ, and it is presumptuous in the extreme to seek to do the Holy Spirit's work for Him.

We are forewarned of the methods of the modern rationalist in his approach to the Bible by what Christ said to the Jews who were finding fault with what He taught:

"For had ye believed Moses," He said, "ye would have believed Me; for he wrote of Me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe My words?"

This is precisely the pathway modern rationalism has followed. It began by discrediting what Moses wrote, and it has now gone to the length of denying final authority to what Christ said.

Rationalism is both irreverent and destructive when it seeks to do anything with the Word of G.o.d. For that Book is to be handled as =no= other book is.

Behind the historical, and the literary, and the textual, and the philosophical criticism must be a spiritual discernment, born of faith alone, which both dominates and regulates all the rest. For just as a blind man may turn the eyes of his head to the sun and see no physical light, so the rationalist may turn the eyes of his mind to the Bible and see no spiritual truth. It takes the eyes of the heart to see spiritual truth, and they can function only through faith.

=b.= The Method of the Believer.

In order clearly to understand the method of faith, we need right here to guard against another extreme. By the contrasts we have drawn in the last few pages, it is not at all meant that there is no place in the exercise of faith for the exercise also of the intellect at the same time and toward the same object. For, in the nature of things, the intellect =must= be exercised in a mental apprehension of that which is to be believed before the way is even open for faith to begin.

Neither is it meant that reasoning is so out of harmony with and destructive of faith that its exercise in connection with faith is impossible. For faith is not blind credulity; it is not jumping in the dark; it is not an irrational impulse; it is not swallowing something with the eyes shut. It is rather an open-eyed stepping out on to the spiritual foundations of the universe. But notice--it is stepping out on to =spiritual= foundations.

It =is= meant, however, by the contrasts above, that the moment an intellectual apprehension of what is to be believed, followed by a conclusion to accept or reject it according to whether it is reasonable or not--the moment such an att.i.tude is =subst.i.tuted= for the heart acceptance of the bare Word of G.o.d, even though it may be beyond understanding and reason, that moment the normal exercise of mind and reason has degenerated into a rationalism that makes faith impossible.

Notice an emphasis above. Faith is stepping out upon =spiritual= foundations. Then recall that to all except the man of presumption, foundations must be seen before they will be stepped upon. The normal man demands to see where he is going.

Now spiritual foundations can be seen only by spiritual eyes. The natural vision cannot see past the natural realm. And spiritual realities will never be stepped out upon until they are seen. For faith is not an abstract and aimless emotion. It requires an object that can be seen, and one that can be trusted.

It is therefore the one main purpose of the Bible to set before men the one saving Object of faith. This purpose lies behind the multiplied revelations of G.o.d all through the Old Testament, and the gathering together of all those revelations into Christ in the New Testament in such fullness and finality that He could say: "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father."

But G.o.d and Christ must be seen before they can be trusted. Not intellectually or historically, but spiritually seen. And they can be seen only by spiritual eyes. And spiritual vision is possible only through the divine touch. And the divine touch is given only to those who consent; it is not forced on any one. And the att.i.tude of consent is precisely the att.i.tude set forth in Christ's formula: "If any man wills to do, he shall know."

Only by coming into this att.i.tude can any man see G.o.d. "The pure in =heart=," said Christ, "shall see G.o.d." It is a heart att.i.tude. And the meaning of the purity of heart that opens the vision to G.o.d is brought out when Christ is asked the question, "How is it that Thou wilt manifest Thyself unto us and not unto the world?" His answer is of the utmost significance. He says, "If a man love Me, he will =keep My words=." Keeping His words, willing to do His will--this is the att.i.tude that opens the vision to Him. He and the Father can manifest themselves to and be seen by those only who are in the att.i.tude of consent toward the keeping of His words. This is the only att.i.tude that can bring the anointing of the eyes with that eye-salve which opens them to spiritual vision.

But when the eyes, in response to this att.i.tude of willingness toward the will of G.o.d, are once opened to spiritual things, then G.o.d, in all the perfections of His divine character, is seen both in the Bible, the written Word, and in Christ, the living Word, and this two-fold revelation of Him is seen to be as perfect and flawless as the G.o.d who is thus revealed.

Those who think they see imperfections either in the Bible or in Christ are spiritually blind. For when one thinks he sees flaws where there are only infinite perfections, he advertises to all that he is attempting the impossible task of examining spiritual realities with his natural vision, and is therefore pa.s.sing judgment on what he has never seen.

But when the spiritual vision has once been opened, and G.o.d is really seen, in the Bible and in Christ, in all the perfections of His infinitely holy and loving character, the =reason= at once leads to the conclusion from the facts seen that such a Being is to be trusted, and active faith thereby becomes the outgrowth of =that= kind of reasoning. That is, the faith that begins as an att.i.tude of willingness toward the will of G.o.d, through which att.i.tude the eyes are touched into a vision of the character of G.o.d, such a faith comes into and continues in an active submission to that will through the normal functioning of reason.

This shows the vital difference between reasoning and rationalizing, and the relation of each to faith. The effect of reasoning on faith is constructive, while that of rationalizing is destructive. And the heart of the difference between the two traces back, in the last a.n.a.lysis, to those two kinds of vision. The rationalist, unyielding to the touch of G.o.d on his vision, sees only natural facts, and even then he sees them only partially and wholly out of relation to the spiritual revelation of G.o.d in the Bible and in Christ; and thinking that he sees discrepancies between the facts in the natural realm and the statements of Scripture, his =reason= leads him to reject the Bible as infallible and inerrant, thereby making faith in the G.o.d of the Bible utterly impossible. His reasoning powers are simply functioning normally when he concludes to reject the statements about the facts that to him are entirely unseen which do not seem to agree with what he sees. His trouble is not with his reasoning powers but with his vision.

Refusing to see what he is pa.s.sing judgment on, his method of inquiry is rationalizing.

But the believer, utterly yielded to G.o.d and therefore seeing Him through anointed eyes in both the written and the living Word, thus seeing the infinite perfections of His character, is led by the normal functioning of the =same reason= to accept and act on the bare Word of G.o.d without further evidence, because the evidence he sees is all the evidence he needs. It is perfectly reasonable, therefore, for Him to accept all that such an One says in His Word, waiting for the partial and apparently contradictory knowledge in the natural realm to be corrected into harmony with the Bible.

And his reasoning powers are simply functioning normally when he accepts the Bible as infallible and inerrant, for this att.i.tude is based on what he sees. The entire difference between the rationalist and the believer is a matter of vision. The reasoning powers of each simply act in view of what each sees.

This is why reasoning is never out of harmony with faith, while rationalizing always is. For true reasoning in spiritual things is =based= on an att.i.tude of faith, while rationalizing rejects that att.i.tude as an essential preliminary to correct conclusions, and therefore reasons either entirely apart from or in order to faith. Such an att.i.tude as opens the vision does not precede the action of reason, and the conclusions cannot help being destructive of faith, for they are p.r.o.nouncements on things utterly unseen and unknown, and which the Bible says are "foolishness" to the man who sees only through his natural vision. But the att.i.tude of willingness toward the will of G.o.d so opens the vision to the whole spiritual realm that the real foolishness is seen to be even the least attempt to p.r.o.nounce upon or repudiate that which is utterly unseen and unknown.

This is the fundamental reason why there is such divergence, even to the point of mutual exclusion, between the different "interpretations" of Scripture given forth by the believer and the rationalist. The rationalist, with heart and vision closed to spiritual truth, can give no interpretation except that which seems reasonable in view of what he sees; while the believer, in the att.i.tude of faith toward G.o.d, =sees= the interpretation of Scripture through the illumination of the Holy Spirit.

The interpretation of the Word is the very work for which the Holy Spirit has come into the world. That is not all of His work, but a very essential part of it. He is G.o.d's official Interpreter of His truth to the believer.

Not to the rationalizer, but to the believer. And His work is so divinely perfect and absolutely final that all human attempts at interpretation, which are devoid of faith, are an insult to Him. He is the One who wrote the Word, and so He knows the meaning, not only of what He said, but even of what He left unsaid, and therefore none but He can interpret either the words or the silences of Scripture.

For example, when Melchizedek flashes, meteor-like, across the page of Old Testament history, and then disappears without a word as to beginning of life or end of days, who but the Holy Spirit could interpret those silences into spiritual meanings of unfathomable richness? Who but He who was responsible for those omissions could interpret them into some of the richest revelations of all Scripture concerning the eternal Priesthood of the slain and risen Son of G.o.d? And if the Holy Spirit can thus seize upon the very silences of Scripture in showing us the things of Christ, who will deny Him the power to interpret to those who will receive it what He meant by what He wrote? And who but the rationalist and the unbeliever can ever refuse to let Him reveal the perfect harmony between the facts of nature and the scientific references of Scripture?

It is the divine prerogative to =cause= us to understand the Book. When the risen Christ appeared suddenly among the disciples, first frightened and then scarcely believing for joy, He first convinced them that it was really He to whom they had already given their hearts, thus quickening their =faith= into renewed activity, "Then opened =He= their =mind= that they might =understand= the Scriptures." First faith and then knowledge of the truth; this is the scientific order.

Luther saw this when he wrote to Spalatin:

Above all things it is quite true that one cannot search into the Holy Scriptures by means of study, nor by means of the intellect. Therefore begin with prayer that the Lord grant unto you the true understanding of His Word.

Even Spencer had a glimpse of this scientific principle toward the end of his life. In his essay on "Feeling Versus Intellect" he showed that he had lost faith in his former estimate of the place of the intellect in the moral realm when he said:

Everywhere the cry is educate--educate--educate! Everywhere the belief is that by such culture as schools furnish, children, and therefore adults, can be molded into the desired shapes. It is a.s.sumed that when men are taught what is right, they will do what is right--that a proposition intellectually accepted becomes morally operative. And this conviction, contradicted by everyday experience, is at variance with an everyday axiom--the axiom that each faculty is strengthened by the exercise of it--intellectual power by intellectual action, and moral power by moral action.

What can this mean but that Spencer saw, at least dimly, the radical difference between the intellectual and the spiritual faculties?

The logic of all these facts and principles makes only one conclusion possible. When the man of scientific spirit approaches the Book which can reveal its truths to =faith alone=, he will not be unscientific enough to refuse faith to its statements and use his =intellect= alone. For he will see that the one who refuses the att.i.tude of faith toward the Scriptures will be "ever learning and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth,"

while the one who accepts the Word in humble dependence on the Holy Spirit's interpretation of its meaning is on the one solitary highway by which a knowledge of the truth can be reached. When the Church and the Schools, therefore, agree on using this method of approach to the Word of G.o.d, they will at least have started toward the same goal.

2. The =Spiritual= Realm Must Be Given Primacy over the =Natural=.

Let us now see what it will mean to accord primacy to the spiritual realm over the natural.

There is only one possible method of doing this, and that is to interpret in the light of spiritual truth all the facts of the natural realm.

The man of scientific mind will therefore see clearly that he will be utterly incapable of giving such an interpretation to natural facts until he first =knows what spiritual truth is=, and this will mean the laboratory method of the experiment of faith.

But right here you may say that science has nothing to do with the spiritual realm; that scientific investigation stops the moment it reaches that realm; and that therefore to demand the use of these scientific methods in that realm is not only foolish but impossible.

But stop and think a minute. It is both foolish and futile to demand that either the =implements= or the =faculties= used in the scientific realm shall be brought over and used in the pursuit of spiritual truth. This is precisely the thing we are seeking to show. But that does not mean for a moment that the inquirer must therefore give up the =scientific att.i.tude of mind= and cease to work according to the demands of the =scientific spirit= the moment he begins inquiry in the spiritual realm. For that spirit is simply an honest and accurate method of investigation, and because science is compelled to stop at the border of the spiritual realm is no reason why we should cease being honest and accurate when we investigate in that realm. It is perfectly true that the scientist, as such, has absolutely no p.r.o.nouncement to make concerning spiritual truth; but it is equally true that the inquirer in the spiritual realm, if he does not pursue his inquiries by scientific methods and according to the demands of the scientific spirit, will have no p.r.o.nouncement to make either. The man who intends, therefore, to be scientific enough in his spirit to give primary truth its place of primacy by interpreting in its light the truths of other realms, and who, with the instincts of the true scientist, recognizes spiritual truth as primary in its relation to the natural, will be actuated sufficiently by his scientific att.i.tude to determine to know what spiritual truth is, in order that he may be able to interpret natural truth in its light.

This will bring him face to face with Christ's formula for entering upon the knowledge of spiritual truth. Being honestly desirous of knowing what spiritual truth is, he will determine to do G.o.d's will in order that he may find out.

=a.= This Will Mean Surrendering the Heart to G.o.d.

This is the only thing it can mean. For spiritual truth is primarily heart truth, not intellectual truth, and the only way to know heart truth is to surrender the heart to that Holy Spirit of truth who "searcheth the deep things of G.o.d," and who was sent into the world to "lead us into all the truth."

The grammarian, the philologist, the historian, the naturalist, the philosopher, therefore, have no service they can perform here. They cannot carry their apparatus over into the spiritual realm and weigh and measure, estimate and judge, illumine and interpret spiritual truth for us. When we stand here we are on that holy ground where we must lay off our sandals of scientific paraphernalia and stand before G.o.d with open heart ready to hear what He has to say. The moment we get to this realm, the whole apparatus by which truth is received changes from reason to faith.