Links: Apologetics, Gresham Machen
Created: 2025-02-27 11:07

Note

In Machen's inaugural address to Princeton university in 1915, Machen gave a lecture/essay on History and Faith.

In the essay he gives an interesting apologetic for the truthfulness of Christianity: the disciples were failures! In the Gospels, the disciples are seen as weak, largely ignorant of the truth, they constantly fail to grasp what is taught, moreover, they are cowards. Yet, if Jesus did not rise from the dead these very people are supposedly the ones who lied, spread, and established the Christian faith!

This answer is clearly not satisfying therefore Machen expertly writes:

The disciples might conceivably have come to such conclusions. But certainly, nothing could be more unlikely. These men had not even understood the teachings of Jesus when He was alive, not even under the immediate impact of that tremendous personality. How much less would they understand after He had died, and died in a way that indicated hopeless failure?

Here is a fuller excerpt:

History and Faith

The most astonishing thing in all history is that those same disheartened men suddenly displayed surprising activity. They began preaching with remarkable success in Jerusalem, the very scene of their disgrace. In a few years, the religion they preached burst the bands of Judaism and planted itself in the great centers of the Graeco-Roman world. At first despised, then persecuted, it overcame all obstacles. In less than three hundred years, it became the dominant religion of the Empire and has exerted an incalculable influence upon the modern world.

Jesus Himself, the Founder, had not succeeded in winning any considerable number of permanent adherents during His lifetime. The genuine disciples were comparatively few. It is after His death that the origin of Christianity as an influential movement is to be placed. Now, it seems exceedingly unnatural that Jesus’ disciples could accomplish what He had failed to accomplish. They were evidently far inferior to Him in spiritual discernment and courage. They had not displayed the slightest trace of originality; they had been abjectly dependent upon the Master and had not even succeeded in understanding Him. Furthermore, what little understanding and courage they may have had were dissipated by His death. “Smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.” How could such men succeed where their Master had failed? How could they institute the mightiest religious movement in the history of the world?

Of course, you can amuse yourself by suggesting impossible hypotheses. For instance, you might suggest that after the death of Jesus, His disciples sat quietly down and reflected on His teaching. “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.” “Love your enemies.” These are pretty good principles; they are of permanent value. Are they not as good now, the disciples might have said, as they were when Jesus was alive? “Our Father which art in heaven.” Is not that a good way of addressing God? May not God be our Father even though Jesus is now dead?

The disciples might conceivably have come to such conclusions. But certainly, nothing could be more unlikely. These men had not even understood the teachings of Jesus when He was alive, not even under the immediate impact of that tremendous personality. How much less would they understand after He had died, and died in a way that indicated hopeless failure? What hope could such men have, at such a time, of influencing the world? Furthermore, the hypothesis has not one jot of evidence in its favor. Christianity was never the continuation of the work of a dead teacher.

References

1. [[Machen History and Faith 1915 (marked up).pdf]]