THE KING’S BUSINESS 1 27 for? To tell men how to find their way home to God.” Correct, but if it is full of historical and scientific inaccuracies,-it cannot tell any clear thinker the way home to God. In the closing sentence in his article, the writer seems to try to hedge. He says, “ Besides the general trend of investigation runs continually more strongly to demonstrate the exactitude of Scripture, even in details not necessary to its mission. Scholarship is more and more positively affirming the Bible to be reliable history.” These words are true, but they invalidate the whole earlier part of the editorial. The fact is that what has been called “ scholarly criti cism” of the Bible is being discovered to be utterly unscholarly. It is true that many who have read more or less of the German Destructive Criticism of a generation ago, (or Scotch or English echoes of it) and have not kept abreast o f modern discoveries in the domain of archaeology and of biblical criticism are still making these old assertions and boasting of their scholarship in doing ’ it ; but, in doing so,, they show that they are not scholarly no"r up to date, but unfortunately they do have the ear of a large share of our teachers in univer sities and theological seminaries and are undermining the 'faith of men who are to take the pastorates of our churches at home, and alas! are even going to the foreign field and doing an awful work in upsetting the immature thinkers among the native converts who are preparing for missionary work. Secular Papers Defending the Bible, while Some of Our Theologians Are Undermining Faith in It. I N striking contrast with the editorial in THE CONTINENT, a Presbyte rian paper, is one in COLLIER’S WEEKLY, which is not supposed to be a religious paper. We give the same herewith : “Back to the Bible” “ Certain of our wise men of today have shaded away sin till it becomes an expression of temperament. They tell us that we sin, because our grand father sinned, and because our home is situated in the wrong block. These are clever words of clever comforters, and surely they ought to wipe away forever the tears'from our eyes. But they do not speak to human need. They leave the sinning one to continue in despair. He does not ask that his sin shall be explained away. He wishes forgiveness and a fresh start. In the Book, which is not read as it once was, there are no soft words about sin. But the way out is shown. And not only is forgiveness offered in this Book, but man’s need o f comfort is met. There is comfort in plenty. These writers knew the human heart. »They saw man broken by his toil and his grief. And»for this, too, they' had the answer. They told of a Being of love, hidden just back of this rude and temporary universe. This love, they said, is conscious of how the littlest child and the old man »re sick at heart for one to come close to their loneliness. Has the human heart changed under the wear of the centuries, so that sin no longer seeks forgiveness and grief has no need of a comforter? Have our ships sailed so far that they have revealed to us a braver continent than the field where pain once reigned? Is our science so acute that it has banished failure from man’s life? Is man’s heart at last self-sufficient and all-sufficing?”
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online