124

NOT LIKE A MYTH.

he had been as wicked as he was holy. Strauss, of course, feels positive, that the Resurrection of Lazarus is only one of the mythical stories created by the early Christian Church, which found its way into writing somewhere about the middle of the second century.

But would not the story have been more marvellous, if it had been a mere myth, or a forgery? Would it not have affirmed that Lazarus lay in the grave four months, instead of four days? Would there not have been a more startling description of his rising? Would it have related that the stone was rolled away at the command of Christ? Would not the rising Lazarus have been depictured as displaying such supernatural strength as to hurl away the stone, and stand, in a moment, before the observers?

The grandeur of the transaction is described as being too real for it to have been a sham, or the record a fiction. Those sublime words of the Saviour can be no invention-"I am the Resurrection and the Life. He that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live. And he that liveth and believeth in me, shall never die."

SPINOZA'S REMARKABLE SAYING.

125

Who could have invented them? A bad man? His wickedness could not reach the elevation of mind necessary for conceiving the words; and a good man could not lie, or commit such a forgery.

I say, again, I do not wonder at the saying Bayle attributes to Spinoza. The miracle is truly grand as well as palpable. It is attested so clearly by the fact that Lazarus is with the company that sit at meat with Christ afterwards; and the deed was instant-"Lazarus, come forth!" and he comes forth.

No "conditions of Science" are observed here, I say again—perhaps for the twentieth time: I have not counted. Here, indeed, the Saviour transcends the order of Nature, and seals His glorious mission.

126

DEMONIACAL POSSESSION

XII.

REVIEW OF THE RECORD OF CHRIST'S MIRACLES:

I

DELIVERANCE FROM EVIL SPIRITS.

COME to the cases of Demoniacal possession related in the Gospels, without any hesitancy or indecision; because my mind has long been made up to the conclusion that they were real-notwithstanding all that cautious critics, Christian and sceptical, advance by way of demurrer. I do not pretend to any sage perception, as to how the Demons "possessed" human beings. I only contend that such "possession" was an objective fact to use the jargon of modern philosophers: and that it was not mere imagination, or crazy conceit in the persons "possessed."

I desert Hugh Farmer, when we come to this question. He was firmly of opinion that all the cases, of what are called Demoniacal possession, recorded in the Gospels, were simply cases of

MUST HAVE BEEN REAL POSSESSION.

127

mania, or madness. I cannot come to his conclusion-for I hold that Archbishop Trench is right, when he says-referring to the fact that Christ spoke of these cases of dread affliction, as cases of real Demoniacal possession

"Our idea of Christ's absolute veracity, apart from the value of the truth which He communicated, forbids us to suppose that He could have spoken as He did, being perfectly aware all the while that there was no corresponding reality to justify the language which He used. . .

Would there not here be that absence of agreement between thoughts and words, in which the essence of a lie consists? . . . . and what should we have here for a King of Truth ?”

Prebendary Row seeks to drive the Archbishop into a corner, by quoting some of these words, and reasoning thus: "If this position is correct, it involves a principle far more extensive than the case immediately before us. It is nothing less than that our Lord, neither in His formal teaching nor in His conversation, should have used language which was other than scientifically correct." Nay, the Prebendary reasons that, if the Archbishop be

128

CHRIST CAME TO SPEAK TRUTH.

correct, Christ ought to have corrected every scientific error current among the Jews. I humbly think for you know, it is a perilous step to put one's-self between two distinguished churchmen— I humbly think that the Prebendary, by trying to make out a very strong case against the Arch-prelate, has failed altogether.

Christ did not come into the world to correct men's scientific errors; but He came to speak truth. His whole life might have been taken up in correcting men's errors on scientific matters, and His great mission have failed. But, although the great business of the Saviour was not to undeceive men with regard to all the mistakes they made, and the misconceptions they formed of the facts, forces, and order of Nature-neither was it His business, or in agreement with His Divine and holy character, to contribute to their errors, to strengthen their misconceptions, and build them up in their self-deceit.

The authors of the Gospels, beyond a doubt, believed that the cases they report were veritable cases of demoniacal possession. Matthew, Peter, and John, among the disciples, it is thus clear, were believers; and Luke, the physician, while reporting