Lucile nodded. “I’d
be worried, too, if I were in his place.
He’s the champion of what looks to be a losing cause.
Here are more than eight hundred adults, at least half of whom are
unbelievers, and all of them together can’t answer the evidence produced
by one man. Mr. Dare is
slowly but surely backing them all into a corner.”
“That’s true,” responded Mrs. Emerson.
Mr. Emerson regarded his wife in surprise.
“So you think the sceptics’ cause is lost?”
“Don’t you?” she countered.
He hesitated.
“Come now, Dad, ‘fess up,” teased Lucile.
“Is my whole family against me?” he smiled.
“I’ll answer you some other time, for Mr. Dare is beckoning me to
join him on the platform.”
After a few words of greeting, the lecturer went straight into his
subject. “I had planned to
quote from many noted unbelievers of recent times:
Carlyle and Blatchford of England, Goethe and Strauss of Germany,
Rousseau and Renan of France, and Tom Paine and Robert Ingersoll of America.
All these, though famous the world over for their agnosticism, have
written words of ardent praise concerning Christ.
“But you ask for the opinions of modern sceptics.
You shall have them. Let
us turn to that famous unbelieving radical, H. G. Wells.
It is not necessary to identify him for this audience.
Will you read, Mr. Emerson, the passages from his pen, marked in this
July, 1922, issue of the American Magazine?”
“With pleasure,” replied Mr. Emerson, as he took the magazine:
“ ‘Jesus of Nazareth . . . is easily the dominant figure in
history. I am speaking of Him,
of course, as a man, for I conceive that the historian must treat Him as a
man, just as the painter must paint Him as a man. . . . To assume that he
never lived, that the accounts of His life are inventions, is more difficult
and raises more problems in the path of the historian than to accept the
essential elements of the Gospel stories as fact.
“ ‘Of course you and I live in countries where, to millions of
men and women, Jesus is more than a man.
But the historian must disregard that fact; he must adhere to the
evidence which would pass unchallenged if his book were to be read in every
nation under the sun.’ “
“Notice the limits Wells sets for himself,” interrupted the
lecturer. “He speaks solely as a historian; he accepts only evidence
that is unchallenged and that would be accepted by every nation in the
world, and yet observe the amazing conclusions he reaches. Will you please continue reading, Mr. Emerson?”
“ “Now, it is interesting and significant — isn’t it?
that a historian, setting forth in that spirit, without any
theological bias whatever, should find that he simply cannot portray the
progress of humanity honestly without giving the foremost place to a
penniless Teacher from Nazareth.
“ ‘The old Roman historians ignored Jesus entirely; they ignored
the growth and spread of His teaching, regarding it as something apart from
life. . . . He left no impress on the historical records of His time.
Yet, more than nineteen hundred years later, a historian like myself,
who does not even call himself a Christian, finds the picture centring
irresistibly around the life and character of this simple, lovable Man. . .
“ ‘We sense the magnetism that induced men who had seen Him only
once to leave their business and follow Him.
He filled them with love and courage.
Weak and ailing people were heartened by His presence.
He spoke with a knowledge and authority that baffled the wise and
subtle. . . .
“ ‘So the historian, disregarding the theological significance of
His life, writes the name of Jesus of Nazareth at the top of the world’s
greatest characters.’ “
“How different are these statements from those one would expect
avowed unbelievers to make,” said David Dare, as Mr. Emerson returned the
magazine and sat down. “They
are forced by the stern facts to pay such astounding homage to Christ and
Christianity. If even half of what the sceptics say of Christ and
Christianity is true, it is clear that there is nothing else, no other
influence in the whole wide world, that is worthy to be named in the same
breath.
“I could quote in detail from the writings of unbelievers
themselves how Christianity has freed the slave, stopped infanticide as a
common public practice, established hospitals, raised the position of women,
brought liberty, and changed the lives of millions for the better.
All these things we may infer from the statements of H. G. Wells.
Now, Mr. Emerson, who would you say has taken the place of Ingersoll,
as a leading doubter?”
Mr. Emerson considered a minute.
“Well, H. L. Mencken, editor of American Mercury, and author
of a number of very modernly rationalistic, sophisticated books, not only
fills his place, I would say, but has made a definite place of his own.
He is certainly much better educated than Ingersoll, as sneering as
Voltaire, and as modern as Bernard Shaw.”
“I have here a book of Mencken’s published in 1930, called ‘Treatise
on the Gods.’ I have
marked a number of passages for you to read, if you will,” said David
Dare.
Mr. Emerson opened the book to page 227, and read:
“ ‘The historicity of Jesus is no longer questioned seriously by
anyone, whether Christian or unbeliever.
The main facts about Him seem to be beyond dispute.’ “
“Now turn to page 255,” directed the lecturer.
“ ‘It is not easy to account for His singular and stupendous
success. How did it come about that One who, in His life, had only the
bitter cup of contumely to drink, should lift it Himself, in death, to such
vast esteem and circumstance, such incomparable and world-shaking power and
renown?’ “
“Now, according to Mencken,” said Dare, “Jesus has power to
shake the earth, and he admits frankly that he cannot account for His having
this power. But that is not all. Please
read pages 266 and 267.”
“ ‘Unless the whole New Testament is to be rejected as moonshine,
it seems to be certain that many persons saw Him after His supposed death on
the cross, including not a few who were violently disinclined to believe in
His resurrection. . . . Upon that theory . . . the most civilized section of
the human race has erected a strange structure of ideas and practices so
vast in scope and so powerful in effect that the whole range of history
showeth nothing parallel.’ “
“Mencken has a violent dislike for the Jews, and expresses it
vigorously,” the lecturer went on to say.
“I mention this because I do not agree with him, and also to show
that he makes his own case more difficult by this attitude.
The mystery of how the Jews could produce such literature as the
Bible amazes us no less than it amazes Mencken.
Now read pages 345, 346, and 347, please.”
“ ‘The Bible is unquestionably the most beautiful book in the
world.’ “
“Just a minute, Mr. Emerson,” interrupted Mr. Dare.
“To hear sceptics talk on the street corner and to hear them
arguing with ministers, you would think the Bible the most revolting Book in
the world. But here is
America’s most noted modern agnostic telling us that without any question
the Bible is the most beautiful Book in the world.
This is an admission that sceptics can show nothing to compare with. But read on.”
“ ‘Allow everything you please, . . . no other literature, old or
new, can offer a match for it.
“ ‘Nearly all of it comes from the Jews, and their making of it
constitutes one of the most astounding phenomena in human history.
For there is little in their character, as the modern world knows
them, to suggest a talent for noble thinking. . . .
The
Jews could be put down very plausibly as the most unpleasant race ever heard
of. As commonly encountered,
they lack many of the quantities that mark the civilized man: courage,
dignity, incorruptibility, ease, confidence. They have vanity without pride, . . . and learning without
wisdom. . . .
“ ‘Yet these same Jews, from time immemorial, have been the chief
dreamers of that race, and beyond all comparison, its greatest poets.
It was Jews who wrote the magnificent poems called the Psalms, the
Song of Solomon, and the books of Job and Ruth; it was Jews who set
platitudes to deathless music in Proverbs; and it was Jews who gave us the
beatitudes, the sermon on the mount, the incomparable ballad of the Christ
Child, and the twelfth chapter of Romans.
“ ‘I incline to believe that the scene recounted in John 8:3-11
is the most poignant drama ever written in the world, as the Song of Solomon
is unquestionably the most moving love song, and the twenty-third psalm the
greatest of hymns.
“ ‘All these transcendent riches Christianity inherits from a
tribe of sedentary Bedouins, so obscure and unimportant that secular history
scarcely knows them.
No heritage of modern man is richer and none has made a more
brilliant mark upon human thought, not even the legacy of the Greeks. . . .
“ ‘The story of Jesus . . . is touching beyond compare.
It is indeed the most lovely story . . . ever devised. . . . Beside
it the best that you will find in sacred literature of Moslem and Brahman,
Parsee and Buddhist, seems flat, stale, and unprofitable.’ “
As Mr. Emerson returned the book and sat down, the lecturer stepped
to the edge of the platform and spoke:
“There is much more from these agnostic writers.
Wells and Mencken, that I would like to quote.
But these extracts serve to show that these ultramodern sceptics
admit that Jesus is the most powerful force in all the world.”
“But,” interrupted Mr. Emerson, “why is it that while it is
true unbelievers make such statements, they still do not become Christians?
If they put any great store by the views you have had me read, why
haven’t they ceased their scepticism and become Christians?”
Murmured applause followed his questions.
David Dare turned smiling to Mr. Emerson, then back to the audience:
“A very good question, and perfectly proper and logical.
It is not my place to say why Wells, Mencken, Lecky, Mill, and others
whom I have quoted, have still, in the face of these admissions, called
themselves sceptics. But it is
a fact that a large number who were unbelievers have left their scepticism
and become ardent, professing believers.
Next week it will be our privilege to consider some of them.”
