In the end of the 17th century and the be ginning of the 18th century the minds of Eng lish Churchmen were engaged by the Deistic controversy. This had to do with the evidences of Christianity. The Copernican astronomy, changing men's conceptions of the physical uni verse, the discovery of China, or better its re discovery and its effect upon the imagination of thoughtful men, and the attacks of the British clergy upon the miracles of the Roman Catholic Church, brought on a crisis. The new astronomy suggested the thought that the God of so great a universe could not be identi cal with Jehovah, the God of a Semitic people; nor could men conceive of the earth, no longer central but a mere planet, as the scene of the drama of the incarnation and the redemption; the consideration of China with the thought of its relatively high civilization suggested that if China had got on so well without the special teaching of the gospel with the light of reason only, the special revelation must also be value less to Englishmen; and the attacks of the clergy upon the Roman Catholic miracles as the frauds of priests led to the position that all miracles, including those of the Bible, may be put into the same category. It was further urged that the description of Jehovah in the Bible and in the doctrines of the Church does not accord with the righteousness and wisdom and power' ower of the God disclosed by nature. The conception of nature as a vast machine was taking possession of men's minds, and God was thought to be the maker and starter of the machine, and as having no further occasion to interfere with its running. He was not denied, therefore, but He was made infinitely remote, and there seemed no opportunity for miracle, redemption or prayer. The attack called forth a multitude of replies, the 'Analogy' of Bishop Butler being the most effective and distin guished. He argued that revealed and natural religion are not opposed, but that the second Supplements the first, and that its peculiarities are what we should expect from a study of nature itself ; and that further, the difficulties urged by the Deists against the God of the Bible lie with equal force against their own teaching of the God of nature. It was further argued in particular, that the account of the gospel miracles is to be accepted, because the witnesses were competent, and moreover had everything to lose and nothing to gain by their invention, proving their sincerity by dying as martyrs. The Wesleyan revivals were perhaps influential than the arguments of the apologists by supplying the powerful evidence of the effectual working of Christianity in the hearts and lives of men. From England the controversy was carried to France, and to Ger many, with phases too varied for even the briefest review here.
In the 19th century, from the middle dec ades on, the apologetic warfare was renewed, with issues far more fundamental. Already
Hume had stated positions which threatened the beliefs of Churchmen and of Deists alike, and under the influence of an extreme empiri cism, reinforced by influences from German philosophy, men denied that God could be known at all. Hence apologetics again busied itself with the first division of topics, and dis cussed man's capacity for knowing the Infinite, and reviewed all the evidences for God's ex istence in the light of the modern science of knowledge. The progressive establishment of the scientific conception of the universe also revived the discussion as to miracles and forced a renewed examination of the whole subject. In addition the historic credibility of the gospel narrative and the authenticity of the Biblical writings have been re-examined from many points of view, while the discovery of the an cient religions of the past and of the living re ligions of Asia have caused prolonged debate as to the uniqueness and the absoluteness of the Christian teachings. Hence, the apologist is engaged in a discussion which involves phi losophy, science, history, comparative theology and criticism.
In general, we may put apologists at present into three classes: those who hold substantially the old positions and seek in part by compro mise and in part by adaptation to show that their essential truth may be maintained not withstanding the progress in philosophy and science; those who abandon the old arguments, and overcome the conflict between science and philosophy on the one hand and theology on the other, by adopting wholly the modern views and reconstructing theology by their aid; and those who attempt to discriminate between religion and science and philosophy, and by penetrating more completely into its essence to find an independent basis for the religious life which shall abide however men's views may change in these other departments. Particular arguments in reply to special attacks are of less moment than a discussion of the meaning and essence of Christianity itself, and of the prin ciples which underlie all defenses of its truth. That is, this age needs not so much an apology or defense of Christian truths as a thorough going study of the science of apologetics itself.
Butler, (Analogy of Re ligion' ; Paley, of Christianity' (1848); Stephens, 'History of English Thought in the 18th Century' ; Ebrard, (Christian Apolo getics); Fisher, (Supernatural Origin of Chris tianity) (1875), and The Grounds of Theistic and Christian Belief' ; Harnack, A., is Christianity?' (1901) ; Hettinger, of Christianity' ; Smythe, (Through Science to Faith' (1902); Kaftan, The Truth of the Christian Religion' (1894); Knox, The Direct and Fundamental Proof of the Christian Re ligion' (1903).