FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72  
73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   >>   >|  
lieved that whereas the unbaptized were subject to the inimical decrees of the stars, the regenerate were immune. Judged by our standards this belief is magical, just as the Jewish eschatology is mythological. Neither has part or lot in modern thinking; this does not necessarily prove that they are wrong, but it means {77} that the problem for us is not one of details, but of opposing systems, the parts of which cannot be interchanged. We can, with logical propriety, accept the Graeco-Jewish eschatology or the Graeco-Oriental sacramental regeneration if we reject modern thought. But we cannot, except in intellectual chaos, combine the two, or appropriately express modern thought in language belonging to the ancient systems. The modern man does not believe in any form of salvation known to ancient Christianity. He does believe that so long as life lasts, and he does not know of any limit to its duration, good and evil are realities, and those who do good, and are good, achieve life of increasingly higher and higher potentiality. If anything were gained in practical life by calling this "salvation," it would be right and wise to do so. But in fact it is disastrous, for it obscures thought and confuses language. Thus there is no doubt as to the general resemblance of the Christian offer of salvation to that of other cults, and the obvious point of difference--the presence of the Jewish eschatology--has no claim to superior truth. What, then, are the points of difference between Christianity and the other cults which explain the triumph of the Church? Two popular but probably mistaken explanations may first be discussed. It is often said that Christianity had an enormous advantage in that Jesus was an historic person, whereas the Lords of the other cults were not. But {78} closer analysis does not confirm the importance of this difference. The initiates of the other cults believed that their Lords were historic persons, just as Christians believed that Jesus was. They had, indeed, lived a long time ago, but this was no disadvantage: any one who reads Tatian's _Oratio ad Graecos_ can see how antiquity, not recentness, was regarded as desirable. The general argument of Christians was not that Jesus was historic, and the other Lords were not, but that he fulfilled a true offer of salvation, made in a more remote antiquity than any pagan religion could claim, while the heathen Lords were demons, misunde
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72  
73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

modern

 

salvation

 

historic

 

thought

 
Christianity
 

difference

 

Jewish

 
eschatology
 

Graeco

 
Christians

systems

 

higher

 
ancient
 

language

 

antiquity

 
believed
 

general

 
explanations
 

obvious

 

points


explain

 

superior

 

triumph

 
Church
 

discussed

 

presence

 

mistaken

 

popular

 

persons

 

argument


fulfilled

 

desirable

 

regarded

 

recentness

 

remote

 

heathen

 
demons
 
misunde
 
religion
 

Graecos


confirm
 

importance

 

initiates

 

analysis

 

closer

 

advantage

 

person

 

Tatian

 

Oratio

 

disadvantage