The Apostasy Still Developing
By C. L. Emerson
THE THREE BABYLONS. No. 10.
The Apostasy Still Developing.
As the church had eagerly accepted the heathen philosophy of Justin Martyr, it was ready for more; so in the latter part of the second century there originated in the church a system of philosophy known as the “Eclectic.” Such as wished to be Christians and philosophers too, belonged to this class. Mosheim speaks of them as follows:— This philosophy was adopted by such of the learned at Alexandria as wished to be accounted Christians, and yet to retain the name, garb, and rank of philosophers. In particular, all those who in this century presided in the schools of the Christians at Alexandria (Athenagoras, Pantaenus, and Clemens Alexandrius) are said to have approved it. These men were persuaded that true philosophy, the great and most salutary gift of God, lay in scattered fragments among all the sects of philosophers; and, therefore, that it was the duty of every wise man, especially of a Christian teacher, to collect those fragments from all quarters and use them for the defense of religion, and the confutation of impiety.—“Eccl. Hist.,” cent. 2, part 2, chap. 1.
Remember to note a few points in passing this quotation. All the teachers in the theological schools of Alexandria thought true philosophy was the most salutary gift of God and was scattered through the writings of pagan philosophers. Now that no Gospel minister is worth the name if he can not dispense the most salutary gift of God, is evident. So no minister is worthy to be a minister unless he has studied the dusty rolls of antiquity and imbibed the ideas of the devil which he put in the minds of his servants. This refined knowledge was to be used to defend religion! It places Satan as the chief Gospel sentinel, setting him for the head watchman on the watch-tower of Zion, to confute impiety and defend Christianity! Now since the principles of heathen philosophy—trusting to man’s wisdom—are what developed heathenism, is not the above true? “Clement of Alexandria was the chief exponent of this system of philosophy.” He had Origen as a pupil. “No one of the fathers, except Origen, has been more censured, in modern times, for an excessive attachment to philosophy.” “He overrated the value of philosophy, or human reason, as a guide in matters of religion.” He “construed the Bible allegorically and fancifully.” (See Mosheim, “Eccl. Hist.,” cent. 2.) He “taught with great applause,” so his teachings were well received. The carnal heart is much better pleased with fancy sketches and allegories than with the plain Word of God that condemns sin. The effect of this applause upon the pupils would be to stimulate them to leave the plain Word and deal in allegories. It was so. We cite Origen himself as an example. Clement “was so blind and misguided as to engage in the hopeless attempt of producing an accommodation between the principles of philosophic science and those of the Christian religion”—no difference between the Word of God and the word of man—no difference between the cause and the cure of sin! (See Mosheim, “Eccl. Hist.,” cent. 2, sec. 25, note 2.) Now it is evident that one who thinks he can accommodate the principles of two systems must believe they agree. Then he can see no difference and so could teach no difference. Here he has philosophy on a level with the Bible—not philosophy exalted to where the Bible should be, but the Bible pulled down into the mire with philosophy. He was a minister of heathenism instead of a minister of Christ. That he places the Bible (the Word of God) and philosophy (the word of man) on an equality, any one can see who will read “Stroma,” book 1, chapter 5. Mosheim says that these philosophers declared “that the difference between Christianity and philosophy was but trifling.”—Eccl. Com., cent. 2, sec. 26, note. I give these only to show that at this time the Word of God as it is, had been given up and was regarded of no more authority than philosophy. The next legitimate step was to regard all philosophy as true, and this was shortly done. When the Neo-Platonic system found place with Saccas as a leader, he declared all philosophy to be true. “He moreover held that the prevailing religions, and the Christian also, must be understood and explained according to the common philosophy of all sects.” Mosheim “Eccl. Hist.,” cent. 2, part 2, chap. 1, sec. 7. If all religions must be explained by philosophy which always agrees with them, then all religions must agree. Then there is no difference between the teachings of the humble Galilean and that religion where they burned their children and committed adultery as religious acts. Origen accepted this system of philosophy. He taught that the Bible has a carnal, a soulical, and a spiritual meaning. These are again subdivided. The carnal meaning is just what the Bible says, and he said that one who followed that would never attain to heaven, but he who followed the spiritual meaning, was sure of heaven. The carnal meaning, then, is just what God says. The spiritual is what Origen says that God says. If you follow what God says, you are sure to go wrong. If you follow what Origen says, you are sure of heaven. Thus has God’s Word been degraded by professedly Christian philosophers. We read that “the influence of this man quickly spread over the Christian world.” “There is no one of the Christian fathers who is more highly commended than he.”—Fathers, pp. 217, 218. This means that the Christian world quickly came to believe that the Word of God as it reads, amounts to little, while man’s ideas of it are everything. Well had it been for the church now had they discarded the Bible and adopted a book of fables, as their rule of faith. Then there would have been something with which to reclaim sinners. The Word would have been left. But when the Word is made to teach that white is black and black is white, what can be done?—Nothing for that church. The only message now is, “Come out of her, My people, that ye be not partakers of her sins.” Origen not only decided that his interpretations were far ahead of God’s Word, but in “De Principiis,” book 4, chapter 1, sections 12, 15, 16, he calls God a liar out and out, and says there are plenty of lies in the Bible. We started out with the proposition that if an apostasy was ever to develop in the Christian church, it would be caused by the church leaving God’s Word. We have briefly shown that this is the way the great apostasy was developed. Men left God’s Word, took their own way, and Satan took charge.