Ceaseless controversy †Christianity Essay

The 18th century England was embroiled in ceaseless controversy. The first half of the century was marked by political movements, the rise of skeptics and deists (enlightenment period) whereas in the second half, revival within the church became the issue at stake. Harris states that the century witnessed deterioration in religious tradition, which resulted from a new spirit of individualism, accompanied by the development of new literary forms.1 Ancient records served as the basis for the claims of Christian theology,2 and the deists questioned their authenticity. The deists also ignored revealed religion, laying emphasis on the religion of nature, which is based on reason. As Cragg infers, gradually reason took the place of theology, and served as a principal factor preoccupying the century’s thought. Moreover, its supremacy as a foundation of faith was universally accepted.3 As a result, the deists expressed their objections to Christianity, considering it as a religion contrary to reason. The enlightenment period of the 18th century also came up with biblical criticism. New methods of empirical science were applied to the study of all disciplines, including the Bible.4 Consequently, a number of distinguished writers subjected the Bible to criticism. One of these personalities was Thomas Paine. In his second part of The Age of Reason, he attacked the Bible based on his own investigation. In 1796 Richard Watson, bishop of Liandaff (1737-1816),5 wrote a refutation against Paine’s book, entitled: â€Å"An Apology for the Bible.† Thus, Paine’s The Age of Reason (II) and Watson’s refutation represent enlightenment insights and religious authority respectively, which stood at conflict in the 18th century. By comparing their different perspectives, this paper will demonstrate that Paine’s argument is based on reason whereas Watson’s is based on Biblical authority and tradition. Paine is a believer in natural religion, and so his writings are opposed to the assumptions of revealed religion. For him, God fully reveals himself not in written scripture but through the universe, which can be communicated to anyone without being falsified as the Bible is. Therefore, in his attack against the revealed religion, he primarily searched for defects in the Bible. Raising a moral issue, he quoted a verse from the Bible wherein God ordered the Israelites to attack the Canaanites. From this he concluded that the Bible cannot be the word of God, as it includes a morally defective account which the creator of man by no means commissions to be done.6 According to Paine, it is repugnant to God’s moral justice that he should doom to destruction the crying or smiling infants of the Canaanites. In his reply, Watson demonstrated his defense of the revealed religion. He contends that if we are to despise the revealed religion in this way, the same will be true for natural religion, because it is obvious that earthquakes too swallow up men, women, the little ones, and infants. Then, â€Å"why do you not maintain it to be repugnant to God’s moral justice,† Watson asks Paine, † that he should suffer crying or smiling infants to be swallowed up by an earthquake, drowned by an inundation, consumed by fire, starved by famine or destroyed by pestilence?†7 This indicates that according to Watson, there is also a defect in the deist’s bible, i.e. nature. If the Bible is to be regarded defective in moral accounts because of the destruction of the infants of the Canaanites, Paine’s bible (nature) too is equally defective. In another words, Watson infers that what is revealed in nature is found in the Bible, so they are not contradictory to each other. Therefore Watson argues that it is unfair for Paine to criticize the Bible without equally comparing it with his bible (nature). He strongly expresses his objections as: â€Å"you have no right, in fairness of reasoning to urge any apparent deviation from moral justice as an argument against revealed religion because you do not urge an equally apparent deviation from it, as an argument against natural religion: you reject the former and admit the latter† (Apology, 91). In this way, Watson views Paine’s argument of morality as biased and unjust. For Watson, the Bible which he regards as â€Å"a divine instruction given to some, and traditionally communicated to all† is infallible, for it is the inspiration of God (Apology, 85). In my opinion, all Watson’s arguments lie on this key assumption. He does not critically question the authenticity of the books in the Bible as Paine does. For example, one of the books in the Pentateuch tells us that Moses spoke face to face to God, and wrote down what God had instructed him. This is undoubtedly acceptable for Watson. He does not accept any philosophical thought that may rob him of his Bible. But Paine, following his motto: â€Å"my own mind is my own church†8 accepts only what seems agreeable to his mind. Watson considers the Bible as an infallible guide, but Paine considers his â€Å"reason† as infallible and self-sufficient. While Paine tries his best to prove that the Bible contains morally offensive accounts, Watson learns morality from the Bible. He addressed Paine: â€Å"the Bible, which you despise, has taught me not to judge anyone; it has said to me, ‘who are you to judge another man’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls† (Apology, 7.) Watson came to know everything acceptable to his mind from the Bible, as his confesses: â€Å"God’s word has assured me of all that I am concerned to know† (Apology, 17.)