Page images

standing. Jerome relates that “ for fifty years after its destruction, until the time of Adrian, there still existed remnants of the city," and evidently during this time Jews (and Christians) had with little or no interruption been living in and around the city ; for Trajan was favorable to them, and under Adrian, A. D. 132, they had become so numerous, that with hope of success they revolted, and for a time held possession of most of the country, as well as of Jerusalem; a fact which certainly indicates a very early return after the destruction by Titus. Then Adrian erected, on the spot which the Christians held sacred as the scene of Christ's burial, a temple to Venus ; the site being known and held sacred therefore only seventy years after the destruction by Titus. That temple of Venus stood till Constantine's day, when he removed it. It would be difficult probably in the history of the world to find another site in proof of whose identity so uninterrupted a chain of tradition could be brought forward. It may be added that the tradition in reference to these sites is in harmony with the traditions as to the track of Jesus's passage from his trial to his crucifixion, and as to the position of the gate through which he issued from the city; and also as to the location of the prison where Peter-outside of the city-was confined, and of " the iron gate” by which he entered the city; all of which, now held as indisputable by Greeks and Latins alike, were doubtless native traditions. As to the second cause liable to innpair the force of a tradition as to any historical site, (the probability that the site may have been intentionally changed,) a moment's thought will satisfy any mind. There could have been no motive surely to change a locality of this nature, but, on the contrary, every motive in every breast-were it the most pious or the most mercenaryevery motive would have induced every professed Christian to retain the true site; for the truth would serve even an enemy's purpose best.*

Perhaps the chief merit of Mr. Spencer's book is his wellsustained endeavor to recall the Christian public to just views in reference to local traditions in the Holy Land. To Dr. Robinson belongs the high honor of having suggested and first most successfully employed the principle that native tradition must be the groundwork of a correct system of Biblical geography. The whole world of subsequent investigators have awarded him the meed of praise; but in following out his principle able scholars have been led (as was to have been expected) to differ from him in some of his conclusions. Mr. Spencer has ably urged the authority of the tradition not only in reference to the scene of Christ's death and burial, but also of his birth * and ascension. Happy indeed that pilgrim to Jerusalem who can cherish in enlightened sincerity such a faith. That man is little to be envied who can survey with indifference the home of patriarchs, prophets, and apostles, and who treads without the emotion kindled by faith on the soil once pressed by Jesus' feet and stained by his tears and his blood. And yet there are those even whose “ feet stand within thy gates, o Jerusalem!” and from mere national prejudice, from bigotry against bigotry, and from incredulity at credulousness, they can stifle the rising of holy enthusiasm in their breasts, and rob themselves of an ecstacy of pious delight, which may be vindicated as both rational and enlightened. The haughtiest Eastern bigotry has a rock of truth for its throne; and the blindest Eastern credulity has a sun-light from heaven to make it radiant. If the Eastern Christian cannot, like the gospel-read disciple of the West, give a “reason of the hope that is in him,” he can and he does give a reason for his faith in the facts of the gospel such as only the sojourner in the home of the gospel ever has known or felt. The enlightened believer of the West, who can avoid both the Scylla of prejudice and the Charybdis of credulity, who can listen to the story of Tomaso as he goes about Jerusalem in the same measure of credence with which he hears the tales of Washington's old servant at Mount Vernon, gains such real knowledge, builds up so substantial a faith, experiences such a rapture of Heaven-sent enthusiasm, as seldom on earth falls to mortal's lot. To mingle for months with the lineal descendants of Abraham and of the first followers of Jesus, to observe how, as a man of fourscore years thinks and speaks of his childhood as no more distant than when a single score of winters had passed over his head, so these children of a hoary antiquity speak of Abraham as we do of a grandfather, and speak of his history as confidently and as familiarly as we do of a man of the last generation,—and especially, living

* The question of tradition alone here comes in review. A single topographical fact, however, may be suggested as one link in a chain to aid in tracing the course of the second wall of Josephus. On the street running east of the Pool of Hezekiah, and near the southeast corner of the Pool, may be seen imbedded in modern masonry four or five ranges of massive stone, in size and style of bevel like those at the foundation of the Tower of Hippicus; forming evidently a portion of an esternal city wall.

* In alluding however to the “Grotto of the Nativity," and the probability that the evangelists would have mentioned it if it had been a cave in which Jesus was born, Mr. Spencer in common with many others forgets that the stables in the East are caves, just as universally as they are of wood among us; and that everywhere the poor may sometimes be found inhabiting them.


yourself the meanwhile in the very land of the Scripture narrative, and listening thus day after day and month after month to their confident traditional tales of their Bible-honored ancestors, to mark how the pride of these children of such an ancestry is touched, and their sensibilities are wounded, when any foreigner doubts their veracity and the truth of their narrative, just as an American's cheek would burn to look on a sneerer at the story of Washington,-he must be less than man who does not come at last

to have his soul infused with the spirit of the atmosphere in which he breathes ; and he can hardly be a Christian who should not return from such a sojourn a more instructed, a more confident, and a better servant of God.

A hint or two for a second edition of the author's work, and a suggestion or two to those who shall take his book as a trareller's guide, and the reviewer bids Mr. Spencer a fellowvoyager's “God speed.” Nothing but a natural attachment to Sir Walter Scott's “ Dominie" could have led the author to make the hero of Gaza bear his family name; and nothing but his severe illness, and the drenching rain, could have prevented his seeing how majestically Olivet towers over Jerusalem from the first point of view on the road coming from Jaffa. The follower and admirer of Mr. Spencer will pardon a dogmatical hint or two : Ramble much and far in the country; carry no arms, if you would maintain respect and avoid difficulty; and, finally, give backshish to men employed with system, and to mendicants from principle as well as with system.


It has been the lot of every new theory to be opposed. Just in proportion to its supposed importance is the degree of resistance which is made to its claims. Columbus advanced a new geographical theory, on account of which he was everywhere ridiculed, and was suffered to languish for years deprived of the power to test its truth. Copernicus was denounced and imprisoned as a heretic for proclaiming his splendid theory of the solar system. Fulton was considered a spendthrift visionary, when he attempted to reduce his theory of navigation by steam to actual practice. And when Carey with his coadjutors announced their sublime plan of

winning a whole hemisphere of pagans to Christ, their theory was pronounced by a distinguished Review “too absurd to waste contempt on.” We do not complain of this opposition to new theories. Indeed we highly approve of it. Otherwise falsehood might occupy a niche consecrated to truth, be worshipped as such by deluded thousands, and exert its deleterious influence upon them without suspicion and without resistance. Scientific men, well knowing the scrutiny to which their theories will be exposed, and unwilling to peril their reputation, are led to be more careful in adopting new theories, to be more rigid in examining their claims to truth, and to wait with greater patience the slow process of collecting and arranging evidence. Hence many false theories die away in the minds that conceived them, while true ones come forth from their authors' brains strong and mature at once, like Minerva, the goddess of wisdom, from the cleft head of Jupiter. Sir Isaac Newton concealed his great theory of universal gravitation for twenty years because a certain motion of some of the planets did not coincide with it. But at length he solved the difficulty of that motion, found its law to agree, with his hypothesis, and then triumphantly published it to the world. What a rebuke is this to tyros, who run to the press with their crude notions, and publish at the same moment their ignorance and folly!

Christians are often found to stand side by side with philosophers in opposition to new theories. Knowing as they do the immense value of divine truth to man, jealous of the honor of their Redeemer, and aware of the unwearied and insidious attempts of infidels to discredit revelation, they are ever ready to resist any system which appears to clash with the Word of God. This is perfectly right. It is what might be expected from their piety and zeal. But theirs should be a candid and intelligent opposition. They should be willing to examine the new theory with patience. It may be true, and as all truths agree, the Bible has nothing to fear but everything to hope from real science. It may be false. Then they have the means of proving its falsehood, and of applying the antidote to the bane. Christian ministers especially should always have the moral courage to investigate whatever claims to be truth, however opposed it may seem to be to revelation, provided it exerts or is likely to exert a considerable influence upon public opinion.

Geology, which claims to be a science, is even now but a new theory to multitudes. By some it is considered only as a theory of the world at variance with established cosmogonies, as visionary and untrue, while others bring against it the graver charge of being hostile to the Scriptures, and oppose it as a powerful weapon in the hands of infidelity to wound the cause of Christ.

Christians may leave scientific men to settle its claims as a theory of the earth, but they should examine it closely and rigidly to know whether it is a friend or a foe of the gospel, or, in other words, whether it is true or false. The most accomplished minds in the world are now directed to Geology The results of their labors are penetrating the common mass of minds, and their statements, whether right or wrong, must have a great influence in society. Educated and pious men should strive to guide public opinion on all the great questions of morals and religion ; but how can they do so, unless acquainted with subjects which seriously affect those questions? If geology is true, it must agree with the Scriptures, rightly interpreted. The God of nature and the God of revelation is one God. If the facts of geology seem to sustain its theory ; if, aside from revelation, the theory appears to be true, and yet it contradicts some statements of the Scriptures, then the cause of the discrepancy may be in our translation or interpretation of those statements. May not philology and sacred criticism change our views of certain portions of the Bible, so as to cause them to harmonize with geology? Or may we not discover principles in geological science which shall so far modify its details as to make them harmonize with the Scriptures as now interpreted ?

That there are facts connected with the crust of our earth no one can deny, whatever may be his theories; and that there are facts in revelation is equally certain, however we may interpret the Scriptures. Between some of the facts in different sciences there can be no comparison, because they have no common points of similarity or contrast. They are in different classes, and refer to different things. But when facts come into the same class, and refer to the same thing, they may be examined in reference to each other. For example, there are no facts in redemption which are in the same class with the facts of geology. Hence revealed religion, meaning now by that term the plan of salvation by Jesus Christ, has nothing in common with science of any kind. But natural religion, meaning by that the history of man and his habitation, has facts in common with many sciences. It is through natural religion that philosophical skeptics attack revealed religion. They seek to level the outer walls in order to reach the citades. It is around the camp of revela

« PreviousContinue »