in Antioch.

[78] All this was quite clearly pointed out by Ritschl nearly
forty years ago. See _Die Entstchung der
alt-katholischen Kirche_ (1850), p. 108.

[79] "If every one was baptized as soon as he acknowledged
Jesus to be the Messiah, the first Christians can have
been aware of no other essential differences from the
Jews."--Zeller, _Vortraege_ (1865), p. 26.

[80] Dr. Harnack, in the lately-published second edition of
his _Dogmengeschichte_, says (p. 39), "Jesus Christ
brought forward no new doctrine;" and again (p. 65),
"It is not difficult to set against every portion of
the utterances of Jesus an observation which deprives
him of originality." See also Zusatz 4, on the same
page.

IX: AGNOSTICISM AND CHRISTIANITY

[1889]

Nemo ergo ex me scire quaerat, quod me nescire scio, nisi
forte ut nescire discat.--AUGUSTINUS, _De Civ. Dei_, xii. 7.

[81] The present discussion has arisen out of the use, which has
become general in the last few years, of the terms "Agnostic" and
"Agnosticism."

The people who call themselves "Agnostics" have been charged with
doing so because they have not the courage to declare themselves
"Infidels." It has been insinuated that they have adopted a new name
in order to escape the unpleasantness which attaches to their proper
denomination. To this wholly erroneous imputation, I have replied by
showing that the term "Agnostic" did, as a matter of fact, arise in a
manner which negatives it; and my statement has not been, and cannot
be, refuted. Moreover, speaking for myself, and without impugning the
right of any other person to use the term in another sense, I further
say that Agnosticism is not properly described as a "negative" creed,
nor indeed as a creed of any kind, except in so far as it expresses
absolute faith in the validity of a principle, which is as much
ethical as intellectual. This principle may be stated in various ways,
but they all amount to this: that it is wrong for a man to say that he
is certain of the objective truth of any proposition unless he can
produce evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is
what Agnosticism asserts; and, in my opinion, it is all that is
essential to Agnosticism. That which Agnostics deny and repudiate, as
immoral, is the contrary doctrine, that there are propositions which
men ought