September 1928
T h e
K i n g ’ s
B u s i n e s s
518
Man’s Upward Tumble T HE problem of the origin of. evil in the world has proved altogether too much for the Evolutionist thus far. The only reasonable account of it is that given in the Scriptures, and since this is irreconcilable with the evolu tion theory as commonly held, the Evolutionist will brush aside the problem of sin as o f little importance rather than accept any part of the Genesis story. Dr. D. C. Gardner, of Stanford University, was quoted by the papers a few weeks ago as saying that the whole Genesis story o f man’s fall from a state o f perfec tion,.is merely an attempt to account for the fact of evil; “ The mystery o f the origin of evil remains unsolved,” he said,' “ but, I would like to correct the fundamental error that beclouds the whole problem. That error is theological. The teaching o f evolution has destroyed the theory o f original innocence. Since the beginning of time, man has been struggling slowly upward. I do not believe that even moral evil is a curse, but rather a means toward a higher goal.” If this is accepted, there is no alternative but to believe that sin had its origin in the primitive animalism of man. His natural animalism, left over to him in the upward climb from the brute state, has got the better o f his higher impulses.:: Did God deliberately weight man down with animal ism for millions of years? If so, man has not had a fair chance. He cannot justly be held accountable. It is just at this point that the bars are let down to the dangerous teaching expressed by Dr. Gardner— that moral evil is not a curse, but just a stepping stone upward. Light views of sin must always accompany this teaching, and where sin is underestimated, the cross o f Christ is accordingly depreciated. A thousand times rather give us the Genesis account of the fall of man than this modern idea of a fall upward ! It is'in accord with all that we know of man. It is the only vindication of God. God created man innocent and happy; gave him delightful surroundings and a beautiful com panion— every chance to make good. Desiring from him the trustful obedience of a child, not the -enforced obed ience of a mere slave, God gave man the power of choice, with full warning as to the consequences of a wrong choice. Even when a wrong choice was made, God revealed Himself in grace, provided a plan of redemption and a promise o f final triumph. God allotted to him a sentence that would make for man’s highest good under the circumstances and reserved the severest condemnation for the tempter, not the deluded victim. Who can accuse God ? Where will you find a more adequate explanation of things as they are? Has the Evolutionist or anyone else anything to offer that will work better than God’s revealed plan of salvation? ate jgi “ A Good Run, Sir—A Very Good Run.” R A ILROAD Men, a trainmen’s: publication, recently carried the story of Bennie Locke, veteran engineer of “ the Easton Mail” on the Lackawanna Railroad, who, having reached the age of 70, has been pensioned. The story of this Christian engineer is most remarkable. During the greater part of his long term o f service, it was always Mr. Locke’s custom, when he stepped into the cab of his engine, to remove his cap and utter a whis pered prayer for divine protection for the crew and pas sengers on each day’s run. He was and is one o f the finest characters that the railroad world has produced. Mr. Locke has the most remarkable record in the
statement. In the light of what has happened to Mr. Mauro, we are wondering if this is another indication of which way the wind is blowing. If the acceptance of any particular commentary is to be made essential to the cor rect understanding of the Word of God, will not the Fundamentalists cóme under the same charge they have been making against Russellism, Eddyism, Mormonism, Romanism and a dozen other systems requiring their adherents to view the Bible only through the eyes of speci fied teachers? Let it be understood, we are not placing the Scofield Bible on the same plane as the writings just mentioned, for Dr. Scofield and his editors are true to all the great fundamentals, and their comments have been a great bless ing to hundreds ,of- students. In some particulars; how ever, some o f our greatest expositors necessarily differ. There is a grave danger in making the Scripture of private interpretation, depriving the student of thS|privilege of letting the Holy Spirit be his instructor. , This issue should be squarely faced by our Funda mentalist leaders and a decision promptly reached. Is the case of Mr. Mauro to be taken as a precedent ? Is Funda mentalism to be redefined ? Shall we enlist with us all who hold God’s Word the infallible rule of faith and practice, declaring themselves for the great essential doc trines? Certainly no man living has borne a more effec tive testimony against modernism and evolution than has Mr. Philip Mauro.
Made with FlippingBook Annual report