Christianity and Greek Philosophy Part 7

[Footnote 97: Lange's Commentary, _in loco_.]

[Footnote 98: "O? before de?s?d.--so imports. I recognize you as such."--Lange's Commentary.]

The a.s.sertion that the Athenians were "a religious people" will, to many of our readers, appear a strange and startling utterance, which has in it more of novelty than truth. Nay, some will be shocked to hear the Apostle Paul described as complimenting these Athenians--these pagan wors.h.i.+ppers--on their "carefulness in religion." We have been so long accustomed to use the word "heathen" as an opprobrious epithet--expressing, indeed, the utmost extremes of ignorance, and barbarism, and cruelty, that it has become difficult for us to believe that in a heathen there can be any good.

From our childhood we have read in our English Bibles, Ye men of Athens, I perceive in all things ye are _too superst.i.tious_ and we can scarcely tolerate another version, even if it can be shown that it approaches nearer to the actual language employed by Paul. We must, therefore, ask the patience and candor of the reader, while we endeavor to show, on the authority of Paul's words, that the Athenians were a "religious people,"

and that all our notions to the contrary are founded on prejudice and misapprehension.

First, then, let us commence even with our English version: "Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are _too superst.i.tious_." And what now is the meaning of the word "superst.i.tion?" It is true, we now use it only in an evil sense, to express a belief in the agency of invisible, capricious, malignant powers, which fills the mind with fear and terror, and sees in every unexplained phenomenon of nature an omen, or prognostic, of some future evil. But this is not its proper and original meaning. Superst.i.tion is from the Latin _superst.i.tio_, which means a superabundance of religion,[99] an extreme exact.i.tude in religious observance. And this is precisely the sense in which the corresponding Greek term is used by the Apostle Paul. ?e?s?da????a properly means "reverence for the G.o.ds." "It is used," says Barnes, "in the cla.s.sic writers, in a good sense, to denote piety towards the G.o.ds, or suitable fear and reverence for them." "The word," says Lechler, "is, without doubt, to be understood here in a good sense; although it seems to have been intentionally chosen, in order to indicate the conception of _fear_(de?d?), which predominated in the religion of the apostle's hearers."[100] This reading is sustained by the ablest critics and scholars of modern times. Bengel reads the sentence, "I perceive that ye are _very religious_"[101] Cudworth translates it thus: "Ye are every way _more than ordinarily religious."[102]_ Conybeare and Howson read the text as we have already given it, "All things which I behold bear witness to your _carefulness in religion_."[103] Lechler reads "very devout;"[104] Alford, "carrying your _religious reverence very far_;"[105] and Albert Barnes,[106] "I perceive ye are greatly devoted to _reverence for religion_."[107] Whoever, therefore, will give attention to the actual words of the apostle, and search for their real meaning, must be convinced he opens his address by complimenting the Athenians on their being more than ordinarily religious.

[Footnote 99: Nitzsch, "System of Christ. Doctrine," p. 33.]

[Footnote 100: Lange's Commentary, _in loco_.]

[Footnote 101: "Gnomon of the New Testament."]

[Footnote 102: "Intellectual System," vol. i. p. 626.]

[Footnote 103: "Life and Epistles of St. Paul," vol. i. p. 378.]

[Footnote 104: Lange's Commentary.]

[Footnote 105: Greek Test.]

[Footnote 106: Notes on Acts.]

[Footnote 107: Also Clarke's Comment., _in loco_.]

Nor are we for a moment to suppose the apostle is here dealing in hollow compliments, or having recourse to a "pious fraud." Such a course would have been altogether out of character with Paul, and to suppose him capable of pursuing such a course is to do him great injustice. If "to the Jews he became as a Jew," it was because he recognized in Judaism the same fundamental truths which underlie the Christian system. And if here he seems to become, in any sense, at one with "heathenism," that he might gain the heathen to the faith of Christ, it was because he found in heathenism some elements of truth akin to Christianity, and a state of feeling favorable to an inquiry into the truths he had to present. He beheld in Athens an altar reared to the G.o.d _he_ wors.h.i.+pped, and it afforded him some pleasure to find that G.o.d was not totally forgotten, and his wors.h.i.+p totally neglected, by the Athenians. The G.o.d whom they knew imperfectly, "_Him_" said he, "I declare unto you;" I now desire to make him more fully known. The wors.h.i.+p of "the Unknown G.o.d" was a recognition of the being of a G.o.d whose nature transcends all human thought, a G.o.d who is ineffable; who, as Plato said, "is hard to be discovered, and having discovered him, to make him known to all, impossible."[108] It is the confession of a _want_ of knowledge, the expression of a _desire_ to know, the acknowledgment of the _duty_ of wors.h.i.+pping him. Underlying all the forms of idol-wors.h.i.+p the eye of Paul recognized an influential Theism. Deep down in the pagan heart he discovered a "feeling after G.o.d"--a yearning for a deeper knowledge of the "unknown," the invisible, the incomprehensible, which he could not despise or disregard. The mysterious _sentiments_ of fear, of reverence, of conscious dependence on a supernatural power and presence overshadowing man, which were expressed in the symbolism of the "sacred objects" which Paul saw everywhere in Athens, commanded his respect. And he alludes to their "devotions," not in the language of reproach or censure, but as furnis.h.i.+ng to his own mind the evidence of the strength of their _religious instincts_, and the proof of the existence in their hearts of that _native apprehension_ of the supernatural, the divine, which dwells alike in all human souls.

[Footnote 108: Timaeus, ch. ix.]

The case of the Athenians has, therefore, a peculiar interest to every thoughtful mind. It confirms the belief that religion is a necessity to every human mind, a want of every human heart.[109] Without religion, the nature of man can never be properly developed; the n.o.blest part of man--the divine, the spiritual element which dwells in man, as "the offspring of G.o.d"--must remain utterly dwarfed. The spirit, the personal being, the rational nature, is religious, and Atheism is the vain and the wicked attempt to be something less than man. If the spiritual nature of man has its normal and healthy development, he must become a wors.h.i.+pper. This is attested by the universal history of man. We look down the long-drawn aisles of antiquity, and everywhere we behold the smoking altar, the ascending incense, the prostrate form, the att.i.tude of devotion. Athens, with her four thousand deities--Rome, with her crowded Pantheon of G.o.ds--Egypt, with her degrading superst.i.tions--Hindostan, with her horrid and revolting rites--all attest that the religious principle is deeply seated in the nature of man. And we are sure religion can never be robbed of her supremacy, she can never be dethroned in the hearts of men. It were easier to satisfy the cravings of hunger by logical syllogisms, than to satisfy the yearnings of the human heart without religion. The attempt of Xerxes to bind the rus.h.i.+ng floods of the h.e.l.lespont in chains was not more futile nor more impotent than the attempt of skepticism to repress the universal tendency to wors.h.i.+p, so peculiar and so natural to man in every age and clime.

[Footnote 109: The indispensable necessity for a religion of some kind to satisfy the emotional nature of man is tacitly confessed by the atheist Comte in the publication of his "Catechism of Positive Religion."]

The unwillingness of many to recognize a religious element in the Athenian mind is further accounted for by their misconception of the meaning of the word "religion." We are all too much accustomed to regard religion as a mere system of dogmatic teaching. We use the terms "Christian religion," "Jewish religion," "Mohammedan religion," as comprehending simply the characteristic doctrines by which each is distinguished; whereas religion is a mode of thought, and feeling, and action, determined by the consciousness of our relation to and our dependence upon G.o.d. It does not appropriate to itself any specific department of our mental powers and susceptibilities, but it conditions the entire functions and circle of our spiritual life. It is not simply a mode of conceiving G.o.d in thought, nor simply a mode of venerating G.o.d in the affections, nor yet simply a mode of wors.h.i.+pping G.o.d in outward and formal acts, but it comprehends the whole. Religion (_religere_, respect, awe, reverence) regulates our thoughts, feelings, and acts towards G.o.d. "It is a reference and a relations.h.i.+p of our finite consciousness to the Creator and Sustainer and Governor of the universe." It is such a consciousness of the Divine as shall awaken in the heart of man the sentiments of reverence, fear, and grat.i.tude towards G.o.d; such a sense of dependence as shall prompt man to pray, and lead him to perform external acts of wors.h.i.+p.

Religion does not, therefore, consist exclusively in knowledge, however correct; and yet it must be preceded and accompanied by some intuitive cognition of a Supreme Being, and some conception of him as a free moral personality. But the religious sentiments, which belong rather to the heart than to the understanding of man--the consciousness of dependence, the sense of obligation, the feeling of reverence, the instinct to pray, the appetency to wors.h.i.+p--these may all exist and be largely developed in a human mind even when, as in the case of the Athenians, there is a very imperfect knowledge of the real character of G.o.d.

Regarding this, then, as the generic conception of religion, namely, _that it is a mode of thought and feeling and action determined by our consciousness of dependence on a Supreme Being_, we claim that the apostle was perfectly right in complimenting the Athenians on their "more than ordinary religiousness," for,

1. They had, in some degree at least, that faith in the being and providence of G.o.d which precedes and accompanies all religion.

They had erected an altar to the unseen, the unsearchable, the incomprehensible, the unknown G.o.d. And this "unknown G.o.d" whom the Athenians "wors.h.i.+pped" was the true G.o.d, the G.o.d whom Paul wors.h.i.+pped, and whom he desired more fully to reveal to them; "_Him_ declare I unto you." The Athenians had, therefore, some knowledge of the true G.o.d, some dim recognition, at least, of his being, and some conception, however imperfect, of his character. The Deity to whom the Athenians reared this altar is called "the unknown G.o.d," because he is unseen by all human eyes and incomprehensible to human thought. There is a sense in which to Paul, as well as to the Athenians--to the Christian as well as to the pagan--to the philosopher as well as to the peasant--G.o.d is "_the unknown_," and in which he must forever remain the incomprehensible.

This has been confessed by all thoughtful minds in every age. It was confessed by Plato. To his mind G.o.d is "the ineffable," the unspeakable.

Zophar, the friend of Job, asks, "Canst thou by searching find out G.o.d?

Canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection?" This knowledge is "high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than h.e.l.l; what canst thou know?"

Does not Wesley teach us to sing,

"Hail, Father, whose creating call Unnumbered worlds attend; Jehovah, comprehending all, Whom none can comprehend?"

To his mind, as well as to the mind of the Athenian, G.o.d was "the great unseen, unknown." "Beyond the universe and man," says Cousin, "there remains in G.o.d something unknown, impenetrable, incomprehensible. Hence, in the immeasurable s.p.a.ces of the universe, and beneath all the profundities of the human soul, G.o.d escapes us in this inexhaustible infinitude, whence he is able to draw without limit new worlds, new beings, new manifestations. G.o.d is therefore to us _incomprehensible_."[110] And without making ourselves in the least responsible for Hamilton's "negative" doctrine of the Infinite, or even responsible for the full import of his words, we may quote his remarkable utterances on this subject: "The Divinity is in part concealed and in part revealed. He is at once known and unknown. But the last and highest consecration of all true religion must be an altar 'to the unknown G.o.d.' In this consummation nature and religion, Paganism and Christianity, are at one."[111]

[Footnote 110: "Lectures," vol. i. p. 104.]

[Footnote 111: "Discussions on Philosophy," p. 23.]

When, therefore, the apostle affirms that while the Athenians wors.h.i.+pped the G.o.d whom he proclaimed they "knew him not," we can not understand him as saying they were dest.i.tute of all faith in the being of G.o.d, and of all ideas of his real character. Because for him to have a.s.serted they had _no_ knowledge of G.o.d would not only have been contrary to all the facts of the case, but also an utter contradiction of all his settled convictions and his recorded opinions. There is not in modern times a more earnest a.s.serter of the doctrine that the human mind has an intuitive cognition of G.o.d, and that the external world reveals G.o.d to man. There is a pa.s.sage in his letter to the Romans which is justly ent.i.tled to stand at the head of all discourses on "natural theology,"

Rom. i. 19-21. Speaking of the heathen world, who had not been favored, as the Jews, with a verbal revelation, he says, "That which may be known of G.o.d is manifest _in_ them," that is, in the const.i.tution and laws of their spiritual nature, "for G.o.d hath showed it unto them" in the voice of reason and of conscience, so that in the instincts of our hearts, in the elements of our moral nature, in the ideas and laws of our reason, we are taught the being of a G.o.d. These are the subjective teachings of the human soul.

Not only is the being of G.o.d revealed to man in the const.i.tution and laws of his rational and moral nature, but G.o.d is also manifested to us objectively in the realm of things around us; therefore Paul adds, "The invisible things of him, even his eternal power and G.o.dhead, from the creation are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made." The world of sense, therefore, discloses the being and perfections of G.o.d. The invisible attributes of G.o.d are made apparent by the things that are visible. Forth out of nature, as the product of the Divine Mind, the supernatural s.h.i.+nes. The forces, laws, and harmonies of the universe are indices of the presence of a presiding and informing Intelligence. The creation itself is an example of G.o.d's coming forth out of the mysterious depths of his own eternal and invisible being, and making himself apparent to man. There, on the pages of the volume of nature, we may read, in the marvellous language of symbol, the grand conceptions, the glorious thoughts, the ideals of beauty which dwell in the uncreated Mind, These two sources of knowledge--the subjective teachings of G.o.d in the human soul, and the objective manifestations of G.o.d in the visible universe--harmonize, and, together, fill up the complement of our natural idea of G.o.d. They are two hemispheres of thought, which together form one full-orbed fountain of light, and ought never to be separated in our philosophy. And, inasmuch as this divine light s.h.i.+nes on all human minds, and these works of G.o.d are seen by all human eyes, the apostle argues that the heathen world "is without excuse, because, knowing G.o.d (????te? t?? Te??) they did not glorify him as G.o.d, neither were thankful; but in their reasonings they went astray after vanities, and their hearts, being void of wisdom, were filled with darkness. Calling themselves wise, they were turned into fools, and changed the glory of the imperishable G.o.d for idols graven in the likeness of perishable man, or of birds, and beasts, and creeping things,...and they bartered the truth of G.o.d for lies, and reverenced and wors.h.i.+pped the things made rather than the Maker, who is blessed forever. Amen."[112]

[Footnote 112: Rom. i. 21-25, Conybeare and Howson's translation.]

The brief and elliptical report of Paul's address on Mars' Hill must therefore, in all fairness, be interpreted in the light of his more carefully elaborated statements in the Epistle to the Romans. And when Paul intimates that the Athenians "knew not G.o.d," we can not understand him as saying they had _no_ knowledge, but that their knowledge was imperfect. They did not know G.o.d as Creator, Father, and Ruler; above all, they did not know him as a pardoning G.o.d and a sanctifying Spirit.

They had not that knowledge of G.o.d which purifies the heart, and changes the character, and gives its possessor eternal life.

The apostle clearly and unequivocally recognizes this truth, that the idea of G.o.d is connatural to the human mind; that in fact there is not to be found a race of men upon the face of the globe utterly dest.i.tute of some idea of a Supreme Being. Wherever human reason has had its normal and healthful development, it has spontaneously and necessarily led the human mind to the recognition of a G.o.d. The Athenians were no exception to this general law. They believed in the existence of one supreme and eternal Mind, invisible, incomprehensible, infeffable--"the unknown G.o.d."

2. The Athenians had also that consciousness of dependence upon G.o.d which is the foundation of all the primary religious emotions.

When the apostle affirmed that "in G.o.d we live, and move, and have our being," he uttered the sentiments of many, if not all, of his hearers, and in support of that affirmation he could quote the words of their own poets, for we are also his offspring; [113] and, as his offspring, we have a derived and a dependent being. Indeed, this consciousness of dependence is a.n.a.logous to the feeling which is awakened in the heart of a child when its parent is first manifested to its opening mind as the giver of those things which it immediately needs, as its continual protector, and as the preserver of its life. The moment a man becomes conscious of his own personality, that moment he becomes conscious of some relation to another personality, to which he is subject, and on which he depends.[114]

[Footnote 113:

"Jove's presence fills all s.p.a.ce, upholds this ball; All need his aid; his power sustains us all, _For we his offspring are_."

Aratus, "The Phaenomena," book v. p. 5.

Aratus was a poet of Cilicia, Paul's native province. He flourished B.C.

277.

"Great and divine Father, whose names are many, But who art one and the same unchangeable, almighty power; O thou supreme Author of nature!

That governest by a single unerring law!

Hail King!

For thou art able, to enforce obedience from all frail mortals, _Because we are all thine offspring,_ The image and the echo only of thy eternal voice."

Cleanthes, "Hymn to Jupiter."

Cleanthes was the pupil of Zeno, and his successor as chief of the Stoic philosophers.]

[Footnote 114: "As soon as a man becomes conscious of himself, as soon as he perceives himself as distinct from other persons and things, he at the same moment becomes conscious of a higher self, a higher power, without which he feels that neither he nor any thing else would have any life or reality. We are so fas.h.i.+oned that as soon as we awake we feel on all sides our dependence on something else; and all nations join in some way or another in the words of the Psalmist, 'It is He that made us, not we ourselves.' This is the first _sense_ of the G.o.dhead, the _sensus numinis_, as it has well been called; for it is a _sensus_, an immediate perception, not the result of reasoning or generalization, but an intuition as irresistible as the impressions of our senses.... This _sensus numinis_, or, as we may call it in more homely language, _faith_, is the source of all religion; it is that without which no religion, whether true or false, is possible."--Max Muller, "Science of Language," Second Series, p. 455.]

A little reflection will convince us that this is the necessary order in which human consciousness is developed.

There are at least two fundamental and radical tendencies in human personality, namely, to _know_ and to _act_. If we would conceive of them as they exist in the innermost sphere of selfhood, we must distinguish the first as _self-consciousness_, and the second as _self-determination_. These are unquestionably the two factors of human personality.

If we consider the first of these factors more closely, we shall discover that self-consciousness exists under limitations and conditions. Man can not become clearly conscious of _self_ without distinguis.h.i.+ng himself from the outer world of sensation, nor without distinguis.h.i.+ng self and the world from another being upon whom they depend as the ultimate substance and cause. Mere _cnesthesis_ is not consciousness. Common feeling is unquestionably found among the lowest forms of animal life, the protozoa; but it can never rise to a clear consciousness of personality until it can distinguish itself from sensation, and acquire a presentiment of a divine power, on which self and the outer world depend. The _Ego_ does not exist for itself, can not perceive itself, but by distinguis.h.i.+ng itself from the ceaseless flow and change of sensation, and by this act of distinguis.h.i.+ng, the _Ego_ takes place in consciousness. And the _Ego_ can not perceive itself, nor cognize sensation as a state or affection of the _Ego_ except by the intervention of the reason, which supplies the two great fundamental laws of causality and substance. The facts of consciousness thus comprehend three elements--self, nature, and G.o.d. The determinate being, the _Ego_, is never an absolutely independent being, but is always in some way or other codetermined by another; it can not, therefore, be an absolutely original and independent, but must in some way or another be a _derived_ and _conditioned_ existence.