‘Apologetic, then, as I conceive it, is a preparer of the way of faith, an aid to faith against doubts whencesoever arising, especially such as are engendered by philosophy and science. Its specific aim is to help men of ingenuous spirit who, while assailed by such doubts, are morally in sympathy with believers. It addresses itself to such as are drawn in two directions, towards and away from Christ, as distinct from such as are confirmed either in unbelief or in faith. Defence presupposes a foe, but the foe is not the dogmatic infidel who has finally made up his mind that Christianity is a delusion, but anti-Christian thought in the believing man s own heart “A man’s foes shall be they of his own household.” The wise apologist instinctively shuns conflict with dogmatic unbelief as futile. He desiderates and assumes in those for whom he writes a certain fairness and openness of mind, a generous spirit under hostile bias which he seeks to remove, a bias due to no ignoble cause, animated even in its hostility by worthy motives. But, on the other hand, with equal decision he avoids partisanship with dogmatic belief. He regards himself as a defender of the catholic faith, not as a hired advocate or special pleader for a particular theological system. He distinguishes between religion and theology, between faith and opinion, between essential doctrines and the debateable dogmas of the schools. There are many special views held by believers, of which, whether true or false, he takes no cognisance; many controversies internal to faith, such as that between Calvinists and Arminians, with which he does not intermeddle’. – Alexander Balmain Bruce, Apologetics; or, Christianity Defensively Stated (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1892), 37.
Alexander Bruce
Forsyth’s sources and my resourcing
One of the things I am most enjoying about my research on PT Forsyth is mining the pages that he himself mined, tasting the words that he himself tasted, and chewing on some of the thoughts that gave rise to his own. Of late, I’ve been reading Alexander Bruce’s book, The Humiliation of Christ in its Physical, Ethical and Official Aspects. Along with Dorner and Gore, Bruce had a significant impact in the shaping of Forsyth’s own christology, not least his kenoticism.
Here’s a few words from Bruce to chew on:
‘… if descent into the legal standing of a sinner were at all possible, Christ would gladly make the descent. It was His mind, His bent, His mood, if I may so speak, to go down till He had reached the utmost limits of possibility.’ – Alexander B. Bruce, The Humiliation of Christ In its Physical, Ethical and Official Aspects (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1895), 317.
– [McLeod Campbell] speaks the truth, though it may be in an exaggerated form; for, without a doubt, it was the instinctive impulse of the Redeemer to impute to Himself the world’s sin, and in the light of such imputation, to regard the evils of His earthly lot as a personal participation in the curse pronounced on man for sin. It was a satisfaction to His heart to feel that, in being born into a family whose royal lineage and mean condition, combined, bore expressive witness to the misery that had overtaken Israel for her sins, in being subjected to the necessity of earning His bread by the sweat of His brow, in being exposed to the assaults of Satan, in having to endure the contradiction of sinners, in being nailed to the cross, He was indeed made partaker of our curse in this respect, too, our Brother, and like unto His brethren’. pp. 318-9.
I’m heading off tomorrow for a week up in the northern Highlands and to Orkney so it will be a post- and blog-free week. It is mostly the retracing of a trip that I made many years ago on my own and am now looking forward to taking my family. I’ve promised them that I’ll only fish for a day … or two. I’m taking three books: Gilead by Marilynne Robinson, Tommy and Me by Ben Stein, and True History of the Kelly Gang by Peter Carey – in the hope that I may get at least half of one of them read
jasongoroncy.com 