SEPTEMBER, 1925
VOL. 16
NO. 9
k 11■/] 1 Wi 1 B i
THE OLD-FASHIONED MESSAGE FROM AN OLD-FASHIONED PULPIT TO AN OLD-FASHIONED FAMILY IN AN OLD-FASHIONED PEW
I am going to show you how you can make from 3100 to 31000 a month in cash\ - You will be your own boss. You can go to work when you want to. You can quit when you want to. You can set your own hours. You will get your profits in cash every day. You can start without experience, training or capital. And you can earn from 3100 to 31000 a month in this easy, pleasant work. AWonderful New Suit! I have just brought out a wonderful new suit for men. It’s a good suit —stylish, fits fine—and wears like iron. It is made of a marvelous new special cloth that is unusually durable and 1ong-wearing. It withstands treatment that would ruin an ordinary suit. And because these wonderful new suits are so stylish and wear-resisting, they are selling li ke wildfire. Hundreds of men in your territory will snatch at the chance to buy this most amazing suit. A Red Hot Money Maker Does that sound too good to be true? Then read the record of P. L. Hamilton. In less than a month’s time Mr. Hamilton sold 55813 worth of Comer suits. He takes 6, 8, 10 orders at a clip. B. Miller writes: “Suits sell very easily—in fact I find it easy to average one suit order every half hour.” C. H. Mereness made {518 profit in half a day. Robert Rizalda cleared $32 in one day and finds it easy to average 34 an hour. Casey Hurlbut says customers come to his house. He makes as high as {515 an hour. And you have the same opportunity to make this big money right in your own town. Tremendous Demand We are making this wonder suit in tremendous quantities—not one at a time—but by the thousands. All that modern machinery and efficient methods can do to produce big value at small cost is applied in making the new Comer suit. And finally, we are using the same modern efficiency in selling it—direct from factory to wearer through our local representatives. The result is amazing. It brings this suit to the wearer at a price that is revolu tionary—a price that everyone can afford to pay—a price th at makes it the greatest clothing value in years. A M iracle Su it at the Amazing Price of $12.50
Think. 312.50 for a good suit of clothes. You can see immediately that every man is a prospect. A million suits a yeari s our objec tive. Every community in America is swarming with opportunities for sales. And nowi f you are interested i n making money we want to show you how you can make it. We are appointing men in every locality to represent us—to take orders. That’s all. We furnish alii nstructions We de liver and collect. But we must have local repre sentatives everywhere through whom our cus tomers can send us their orders. Experience is not necessary. We want men who are ambitious—industrious and honest. Men who can earn 330 or 340 a day without getting lazy—men who can make 31000 a month and still stay on the j ob. I f you are the right type—you may be a bookkeeper, a clerk, a factory worker, a mechanic, a salesman, a farmer, a preacher, or a
teacher, that makes no difference—the oppor tunity is here and we offerit to you. A Few Hours Spare Time Will Convince You If you feel you want to devote only spare time to the work, that is satisfactory to us. You can earn 310 to 320 a day in a few hours. You will find in a few days thatit will pay you to give this work more time—for your earnings will depend entirely on how many men you see. WRITE TODAY | B H
GIVEN In addition to the big earn ings I have a plan whereby you can get a Chevrolet Coach to help "ou in developing this great business, ail the coupon for full details. I IMPORTANT The Comer Manufacturing Co. is one of the most successful businesses of its kind in the world, with 12 years of experience back of it. It owns and occupies a modern concrete steel building with 65,000 sq. ft. of floor space where it manufactures all of its merchandise. The business has been built on the policy of giving exceptional values to customers, and fair^ square treatment to its re presentatives.
h | are now coming in a flood. Men áre making money faster and easier than they even'hoped. So don’t delay. Writt today for complete descrip tions, samples o f cloth and full information. Do i t now. Don’t send any money. Capital is not required. Just fill out the coupon and mail it for all the.facts. C. E. COMER, Pres., COMER MFC. CO., Dept. 1 0 6 -E, Dayton, Ohio M A I L N O W F O R F U L L D E T A I L S C. E. COMER, Pres., The Comer Mfg. Co., Dept. 106-E, Dayton, Ohio. Please send at once complete details of your new 312.50 suit proposition that offers opportunity for a man without experience or capital to earn as much as 31>000 a month. I understand that this does not obligate me in any way. Name........................................................ ............................................................................................................ Address.........................................,...................•................................... ........................ ......................
T he K ing ’ s B usiness Motto: “ I, the Lprd, do Tceep it; I will water it every moment: lest any hurt it, I will keep it night and day. ” Isaiah 27:3, PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY AND REPRESENTING THE BIBLE INSTITUTE OF LOS ANGELES T. C. HORTON, Editor-in-Chief WM. A. FISHER, Managing-Editor R. H. RICHARDS, Business- Manager CONTRIBUTORS DR. LEANDER S. KEYSER DR. JOHN M. MacINNIS DR. MARK A. MATTHEWS DR. I. M. HALDEMAN WM.JENNINGS BRYAN DR. C. E. MACARTNEY DR. F. E. MARSH DR. W. B. HINSON DR. W. B. RILEY DR. J. FRANK NORRIS DR. CHARLES ROADS THIS MAGAZINE stands for the Infallible Word of God, and for its great fundamental doctrines. ITS PURPOSE is to strengthen the faith of all believers, in all the world; to stir their hearts to engage in definite Christian work; to acquaint them with the varied work of the Bible Institute of Los Angeles; and to work in harmony and fellowship with them in m agnifying the person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ, and thus hasten His coming. Volume XVI September, 1925 Number 9
Table of Contents
BOARD OF DIRECTORS BIBLE INSTITUTE
OF LOS ANGELES
Editorials Page Bryan the Brave— “Defender of the Faith” ............................................ 379 God’s Word Works................................................................ Prayer the Precursor of Revival.................................................................380 Love and Loyalty to Our Lord.................................................................... 380 Crushing the Church of Christ................... .................................... ’...........381 Contributed Articles Another Opponent of Special Creation— Leander S. Keyser, D. D..... 382 Satan’s Triangle— Prof. S. J.Bole............................................................. 384 The True Basis of Christian Unity—Chas. F. Reitzel........................... 386 The Scriptures Authoritative in Their Utterance— Dr. F. E. Marsh..388 The Baptist Bible Union................................................................ Shall We Part With John Three Sixteen?— Hugh R. Monro..................391 The Fishermen’s Club of Long Beach......................................... ..... ..............387 News Items from Iowa Fundamentals Association......................................... 391 A Momentous Decision—RobertYoung..............................................................392 Fine Gold (A Serial Story)— Josephine Hope Westervelt............ ............ 393 Straws and Symptoms............................. ..............................................................395 Our Bible Institute in Hunan'Province (China)..............................................396 Evangelistic Department (Interesting Soul Winning Stories from Real Experience)........................................................... 397 Pointers for Preachers and Teachers (Homiletical Helps)...........................398 The Family Circle (For Fellowship and Intercession)............ ...................... 399 Practical Methods of Personal Work (For Defenders of the Faith).........400 Outline Studies in the Epistles of John—T. C. Horton................................ 401 Christian Endeavor Topics:....................................................................................402 The Children’s Garden (The King’sBusiness Junior)..................................... 403 Best Books ...............................................................................................................405 The Gospel in Bible Lands.....................................................................................406 “Resolved, That Evolution is Unscientific, Unscriptural, Anti-Christian” ....409
J. M. IRVINE President GEO. F. GUY,
V ice-President A. ADDISON MAXWELL T reasurer. DR. A. T. COVERT H. B. EVANS HOWARD FROST C. A. LUX NATHAN NÉWBY J. M. RUST MRS. LYMAN STEWART
J. P. WELLES, Sec. to the Board of Directors
39
. FACULTY DR. JOHN M. MAC INNIS, Dean DR. RALPH ATKINSON, A ssociate Dean REV. JOHN H. HUNTER, Sec. of Faculty REV. WILLIAM H. PIKE, Sec. Evening S ch ool, REV. KEITH L. BROOKS, Sec. Cor. School DR. ERNEST G. RAITT, Supt. Ext. Dept. CHRISTIAN M. BOOKS PROF. ARTHUR A. BUTLER MISS MARIE CARTER . DR. JOHN MARVIN DEAN REV. JOHN A. HUBBARD PROF. H. W. KELLOGG MISS WILMA KRAG MRS. BESSE D. McANLIS PROF. H. G. TOVEY PROF. J. B. TROWBRIDGE W .R . HALE, • A ss’t Superintendent
* auu new auuicases at least one month previous to date of desired change.
CHANGE OF ADDRESS
HpE'DlVAC $1.25 per year. Single copies 20 cents. Foreign Countries * (including Canada) $1.50 per year, or 7 Shillings English money. Clubs of 10 or more 25 cents reduction on each subscription sent to one or to separate addresses as preferred. P. o . Money Order, payable to the “Bible Institute of Los A ngeles.” Receipts will not be sent for regular sub scriptions, but date of expiration will show plainly, each month, on outside wrapper or cover of magazine. MANUSCRIPTS The King's Business cannot accept respon sibility for loss or damage to manuscripts sent to it for consideration. D C A /IT ’I "I' A M P C rvE alV ll 1 1 Should be made by Bank Draft, Express or
R O O K Much confusion and delay will be avoided if orders for books are sent direct to the Biola Book Room. 536-558 S. Hope St., Los Angeles, California, instead 0 f being enclosed in mail intended for The King’s Business. Entered as Second Class Matter November 17, 1910, at the P ost Office at Los Angeles, California, under the A ct of March 3, 1879. A cceptance for mailing at special rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, A ct of October 3, 1917, authorized October 1, 1918. w
BIBLE INSTITUTE OF LOS ANGELES
Los Angeles, California
5 3 6 -5 5 8 S. H o p e S tre et,
W I L L I A M J E N N I N G S B R Y A N **Defender o f the Faith" “ I have fought a good fight; I have finished my course; I have kept the faith.” (2 Timothy 4 . 7 )
R
September 1925
TH E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
379
IBHHHHHHI “DEFENDER OF THE FAITH” A man of might has fallen. William Jennings Bryan, the outstanding Christian layman of the United States, has finished his course. He was a warrior- in the fullest and noblest sense -of the word. When you visualize him,/you see a real /BRYAN THE BRAVE—
¡¡fi
scores of such men throughout the country ready for service and their influence was felt in every walk of life, But now—where ;are they ? Mr. Bryan was. such a man. He was a Christian lay man who; loved- his country, loved his Countrymen, loved His Bible. He was the man best qualified to lead the forces of the church against the subtle foe of Mod ernism and Evolution, and we had prayed much that
man, face set like a flint, eyes lighted with a radiant glow, stand ing four square upon his feet, with Bible in hand, ready to fight for it, ready to die for it, for he had tested it, proved it, believed with all his heart that it was worth defend ing to the death;r if need be, and—true to h i s convictions—he faced its foes and had, the joy of seeing them r e t r e a t under his attack. When you think of this man you think of Joshua,^: of David, of Daniel, of Paul, of the martyrs. You might not agree with him, in everything, as y o u might not have agreed with some of the old prophets,, but—if you had real red blood in y o u r v e i n s , and loyalty and love for your country and for your L o r d in your heart—y ou w o u l d love him. What is the need of t h e s e United States, today? Men! Men of God—m en w i t h a vision—men who see
God would spare him and set him apart for this most definite and desperate need. But God had other plans for- him, and we bow to His will and praise Him for producing such a man as Bryan, the Beloved Layman! GOD’S WORD WORKS The b e s t possible defense of the Word ,of God is not dele gated to the scientists, nor to the schools,, although we rejoice ip the fact that many of the best scientists and scholars the world has ever known have left the clearest testimony to its infallibility, and have faced every foe with a fixed faith and unshaken testimony to its power in their own lives. Every attack ever made upon the Bible has emanated from Satan. Don’t fail to understand this. To his age-old 'weapon, “ Y e a, h a t h ' God said?” . Satan has at tached m a n y new fangled t i t l e s with
CONCLUDING PARAGRAPHS OF MB. BRYAN’S INDICTMENT OF EVOLUTION
“The world needs a Saviour more th an it ever did before, and th ere is only one ‘nam e under Heaven given among men whereby we must be saved.’ ■ “ It is this Name th a t evolution degrades, for, carried to its logical conclusion, evolution robs Christ of th e glory of a ’ Virgin B irth, of the m ajesty ofY lis Deity, and of the trium ph of B is Resurrection. It also disputes th e doctrine of the A tonement, : “ It is for the ju ry to determ ine whether th is attack upon the Christian religion shall be perm itted in the public schools of Tennessee by teachers employed by the State and paid out of th e public treasury. The case has assumed the proportional of a b attle royal between unbelief, th a t attem pts to speak through so-called ‘science,’ and the defenders of th e Christian faith, speaking th rough the legislators of the S tate of Ten nessee, “Again the question ‘W hat shall I dp w ith Je su s?’ must be answered. A bloody, b ru tal doctrine—-evolution— demands, as did the rabble 1900 years ago, th a t He be crucified. But th a t cannot be th e answer of th is jury, representing a Christian State, which answer is eagerly awaited by a praying multitude. “ If the law is nullified, th ere will be rejoicing wherever God is repudiated, .the Saviour scoffed a t and the Bible ridiculed. Every unbeliever of every kind and degree will be happy. “ If on th e other hand, the law is upheld and the faith of school children protected, m illions of Christians will call you blessed and, w ith h earts full of g ratitu d e to God, will sing again th a t grand old song of trium ph:
“F aith of our fathers, living still, In spite of dungeon, fire and sword; Oh, how our h earts beat high w ith joy, Whene’er we h ear th a t glorious word! F aith of our fathers, holy faith; We will be tru e to thee till d ea th !”
things as they were, as they are and as they should be —men who sense the need, the danger and the solution of the problems that confront this land of ours. But—how hard it is for (Ipd to get men ! The call for professional men meets with a ready response. The call of the business world finfls multitudes waiting for the opportunity to make money. But the call of the crucified, risen, -ascended and coming Lord Jesus Christ, finds but a meagre response.. Preachers have a ministry, but they can never take the place of out standing Christian laymen. Fifty years ago there were
which to deceive the elect, as well as his own followers. With Eve it was an apple. Now it is the “ Eve-olution’’ of man on the descending scale of a monkey’s tail. Many fall for it. What is the best argument for the' inerrant Word of God? The Bible believed and lived in the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit. The story of its conquests is the indisputable evidence of its verity. Blind belief in Satan’s erroneous theories of all kinds is the means used to secure the victims who may be willing to make some sacrifices for their false faith
September 1925
TH E K I N G ’ S B U S I N E S S
380
to answer. Listen to His promise-: “ Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I.” Who is the “ am I ” ? He is the “ I Am,”—the Mighty One, È1 Shaddai. He loves to hear the voice of suppli cation from clean lips, and to hear the petition of sanc tified mouths as the cry goes forth for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. . What is a revival? It is the- manifest presence and power of the Holy Spirit in the church. He never fails to respond to such a call.. Pie waits today to baptize with His presence and power for service. He longs to work in and through His own in behalf of others. Are we so busy building buildings, devising new methods of getting people to attend our services, new places of entertainment, new clubs and societies, that our ears refuse to hear the voice of the Spirit? LOVE AND LOYALTY TO OUR LORD Where there is true love, there will always be loyalty; and where there is true loyalty, it will always be founded on love. “God so loved th e world th a t He gave His only begotten Son.” Why did God give His only begotten Son to fallen men? Because He loved them and in His love He mani fested His loyalty to His own law. What law? The law of sin and death. “ The soul that sinneth, it shall die.” God’s love is not a sentimental emotion, bu|§it is a loyal love; and it finds its antithesis in the published report of the action of the Governor of Texas, who, in the few months in which she has occupied a place, of authority, has pardoned 588 criminals. A good woman she is, too, but sèntiment has evi dently usurped her sense ' of justice. Had she had longer experience with criminal conditions, she would not have allowed sentiment to supersede loyalty to the best interests of the people. More and more we are confronted with this spirit of sickly sentimentalism in dealing with criminals. An organized effort is being made to eliminate capital pun ishment, their slogan being, “ The hangman must go.” If this be true, then God’s Word must go also, for its verdict is, “ Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed.” How can any one claim to love God and be disloyal to His Word? This same position is; held by many who profess to be followers of the Lord Jesus Christ towards those who deny the fundamental teaching of the Bible con cerning the Virgin Birth of Christ, and all sorts of apologies are made for these, so-called, “ good men” who in the pulpit play the game, garnishing their mes sages with poetic word paintings,' claim the right to hold their own views of Christ and insist that they are entitled to have the right hand of fellowship from loyal followers of the Virgin-born Son of God. But,—there can be no true love for Christ without loyalty to Him and to His Word. The Scriptures must take the precedence of sentimentalism. God is love, but God is also loud in denunciation of the devil and devilish deceit. Satan is using the Modernists in these
but who, when it comes to outspoken proof of a new life with its new aspirations, new anticipations, new achievements, new devotion, new unselfish sacrifice, new victories over life habits and tendencies, new love for their fellow men,-—-all cults, all evolutionary and other Satanic theories, stand in the background and wonder. The Word is carved upon thousands of tombstones; written upon the pages of thousands of volumes in our libraries; interwoven with the laws of our land. Con trast the nations who are without it with the nations founded upon the Bible, and the evidence is over whelming. God’s Word works! All that is necessary is to give it its rightful place, fix our faith upon it, put it to the test as our fathers did and as so many are doing today. The human heart is the same in its need. The Word of God is the same in its power. The poor, deluded devotees of the devil must be compelled to see its fruit. They must be compelled to hear the testimony from regenerated lives and the new song from the lips of living saints. While we must do all in our power to throw the lime light on the works of Satan and fight against his subtle efforts to destroy our youth, yet we must bear in mind .that the chief argument against him and for the living and written Word of God is developed in those who can say to the world, “ Once I was blind, but now I can see!” GOD’S WORD WORKS! PRAYER THE PRECURSOR OF REVIVAL Conditions in church and state demand that every Christian citizen should carefully face the facts con fronting us. We are drifting—slowly but surely—from the moorings which once held us and are destined to shipwreck unless—what? Unless we are aroused from the slumber that has overtaken us. The atmosphere is permeated with a perfume that has filled our nostrils and overpowered our conscious ness. The man on the watch sleeps with his hand on the rope. The man at the wheel has loosened his hold. There is no stir. Here and there some passenger, half- awake, dreamily asks, “ Whither are we drifting?” but there is no reply. Up and down in the midst of the sleepers appears the form of one bearing a censer from which come the stupefying fumes,—soft, seductive, soothing—pervad ing the whole vessel. The ship drifts on. There are rocks ahead. Destruc tion is the doom of those on board unless some one is aroused. Listen! From above the boat a Voice rings out: “ Awake, thou that sleepest! Arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light!” Do you hear it? It is-a call to prayer! It is a call to service! It is a call to sacrifice! Open your eyes! Look on the great multitude of unsaved souls. Can you pray? Then gather others together and pray. For yrhat? Pray for a revival of love for the Lord, love for the church, love for the lost. Jehovah is waiting, longing
September 1925
TH E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
381
days to play a winning game with many deluded souls through their smooth, soft speeches and exhortations to be loving and kind towards those who deny the fundamental doctrines of our faith. Do not be deceived. True love has a strong, sturdy arm that can strike in defense of the Word of God. True love is manifested in a willingness, if need be, to die the martyr’s death, and it is splendidly illustrated by the reply of the three Hebrew children to Nebuchad nezzar : “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, answered and said to th e king, O Nebuchadnezzar, we are n o t careful to answer th ee in th is m atter. “If it be so, ou r God
“ God so loved the world that He gave.” Through it the history of nations has been changed, and here in our own land, a nation has been built upon the founda tion of the Word of God, prospered and blessed beyond measure. The Bible has had the place of prominence which it deserves. But—“ pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit before a fall.” Satan, with his undying hatred of Christ and His Word, slowly but surely, with his seductive power, has eliminated the Bible from the schools and has even entered the professing church and snared the preachers. He has turned a tide of world
liness upon the church that has stifled its life. Secular movements, worldly amusements, Bible-less pulpits, the dance, the card table, the socials, the smok ing rooms, the movies, - -‘have a large place in the life of the poor emaciated church. Now, as a climax, the devil has taken his seat in the sanctuary of the colleges and seminaries with the purpose of eliminating, every vestige of confi dence in the Bible as the infallible Word of God, and the poor c h u r c h is crushed under the load and pants for the breath of the Holy Spirit. Once t h e church bells were heard sing ing out with a call to t h e communion of saints, and b o w e d heads reverently lis tened to the prayers which were made in
whom we serve is able to deliver u s o u t of th in e hand, O king. “BUT IP NOT, be it k n o w n un to thee, .O king, th a t WE WILL NOT S E R V E T H Y GOBS, n o r worship th e g o l d e n im age which t h o u h a s t set up ” (Daniel 3 :16 -18 ). CRUSHING THE If you have read the B i b l e you are familiar with the de tails of the founding of the C h u r c h of Ch r i s t . You have walked w i t h Jesus over the roads of Pal estine, t h r o u g h the rough byways, o v e r hills and valleys. You have seen the gather ings of the flock from the throngs of the “ common people who heard Him gladly”— received by the few, rejected by the many. C H U R C H OF CHRIST
THE “LAST STRAW”
The church was founded upon the faith of believers in the personal Christ, and it was knit together by the bonds of love for Him whose love was manifested in laying down His life in their behalf; in bearing their sins in His own body and washing them away by the blood of the cross. His followers rallied to Him after His resurrection and gazed upon His scarred body as it ascended into the glory. Through His chosen leaders, the little band grew. In simplicity of life without the burden of forms and ceremonies, eager, loving, they toiled and traveled, telling out the story so sweet to our ears today.. What a priceless penalty they paid! Their lives were not precious to them, but His life was beyond price. The seed was sown in the hearts of men and women and bore fruit in the multiplied lives of others. Down through the centuries the message has come,—
the name of the crucified, risen Lord; eager ears were alert to the reading pf the precious Word of Truth,, and its exposition by saintly men of God was received with joy and thankfulness, while all voices acclaimed glad hallelujahs of praise. Now the seats of learning are centers of a repudiation of the Bible which has given place to “ science” (?). Now youthful tongues gabble glibly of “ protoplasm.” Life is a joke. Sin only provokes a smile. Heaven is a dream and hell is only a “ fireless kitchen.” The great mass of people are altogether churchless, the majority of church members are practically Christ- less, and surely the greatest enemies of both are the so-called “ learned professors” who seek to undermine faith in God. Will there be a change ? Can the load be lifted? How can it be done? Who will do it? What do you say?
September 1925
TH E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
382
1
C o n t r i b u t e d A r t i c l e s WmâÊËÊ .
■
] ■
fi
* " A n o th e r O ppon en t of Special C re a t io n AN ANALYSIS OP II1S ARGUMENTS ,___ By Leander S. Keyser, A. M., D. D., Hamma Divinity School, Springfield, Ohio It is always a pleasure to p resen t The K ing’s Business Fam ily w ith an article from th e pen of Dr. Keyser, th a t valian t Defender of th e F aith , who always shoots stra ig h t and h its th e m ark. H MILITANT evolutionist, who has recently come somewhat to the fore, is Dr. Edward L. Rice, Professor of Zoology in Ohio Wesleyan University — a school th a t was founded hy the Methodist them— all in a row, ending w ith the modern man. Does such an origin and evolution of man give you “ enlarged” views of God? How infinitely below th e doctrine of special creation in the divine image! . Theistic Evolution
Church in th e days when th a t denom ination was thoroughly evangelical and when th e fath ers toiled and sacrificed to found it in order th a t th e ir children m ight have academic train in g according to th e stand ard s and faith of th eir church. Dr. Rice recently published an article in “Christian W ork” (New Y ork), a well-known liberalistic jou rn al th a t p rin ts something underm ining to the evangelical faith in almost every issue. In introducing the author, th e editor says of him : “He here presents succinctly and persuasively the case for evolu tion from th e standpoint of one whose faith in God is not shaken bu t ra th e r enlarged by th a t explanation.” To th is statem en t we must object. The argum ents are not “ persuasively” presented. They are th e same old m aterial, th e 's am e methods of presentation, the same speculations and the same, non-sequiturs. The au tho r him self adm its in several places th a t the doctrine of creation would also explain all the facts. Well, then, th a t very adm ission should prevent evolutionists from presenting th e ir doctrines in the dogmatic way as if they were actually demonstrated. is th e Evolutionary" Theory Uplifting? Moreover; we fail to see why evolution should give any man an “ enlarged” conception of God. W hat is th e re about the doctrine th a t God brought man up th rough the beasts of the forests and jungle by means of th e fierce and bloody struggle for existence th a t would give us “ enlarged” faith in God and His ways? W hat is it th a t is so uplifting about such a doctrine? Compare it w ith th e Biblical teaching th a t God created man directly in His own sim ilitude, made him a rational, sentient, moral and sp iritu al being a t the sta rt, and placed him in a garden, so th a t he m ight have a fair chance for his moral development and sp iritu al life. Does not th is la tte r view give us a larg er and higher con ception of God, His reasonableness, His love, His justice? F o r example, Van Loon (ano ther m ilitan t evolutionist) says th a t it “took m an’s ancestor’s about a m illion years to learn to walk on th e ir hind legs,” meaning th at, prior to th a t exploit, they were animals going about on all-fours! Sup pose God did it th a t way— does it “ enlarge” our respect for Him? Wells, Conklin, Osborn, Gregory, Kellogg, and the “ Hall of Man” in the American Museum of Science— all represent prim itive man as a very b ru tal and ferocious being. According to th e ir pictures, he looks very much like the baboon and gorilla. He is even placed side by side w ith
Let us note some things said by Dr. Rice, th is professor in a Christian university. H e/says th a t th e theistic evolu tion ist sees “ in the first chapter of Genesis an inspired poetic statem en t of God’s creative power; bu t no in e rran t text-book of science.” As is invariably the case, our evolutionist shoves the Bible to one side to make way for his theory. We have never yet found an exception to th is ru le: the Bible is never accepted at its honest face value by th e purveyors of evolu tion. It is always trea ted as if it has said things it does not mean, or made many e rra n t statem ents in its cos mogony. It contains only th e “ideas, of the Hebrews.” It is not a rea l historical narrative. So all evolutionists hold. We challenge any one to point out an exception. Our au tho r regards the first chapter of th e Bible as a “ poetic statem en t.” We must deny this. It is no t poetry; it is smooth and beautiful prose. More th an th at, the very style of it indicates th a t th e w riter m eant it to be accepted as literal history. Poetry may be fiction; history purports to tell the tru th , and to tell it w ithout the disguise of decorative draperies. Such is th e style of the original Hebrew .jn which the first chapter of the Bible was w ritten. Dr. R ice'Says th a t the first chapter of Genesis is “ no in e rran t text-book of science.’I. If it is not “ in e rra n t,” then it musji be erran t. W hat confidence can then be placed in it as a divinely inspired work? T h at would make God directly a fallible being or else one who intentionally deceives His people. Does any one hold, however, th a t Genesis was intended for a “ text-book of science” ? No one does! That is merely a caricature, after th e m anner of the modernists, of the position of the conservatives— a veritable man of straw . The Bible is not a text-book of science, and no one has eVer said it was; but, being a divinely inspired book, when it touches upon the subject of n atu ra l science, it must tell the tru th . If it blunders or deceives regarding n atu ra l things, how can it be tru sted when it tells us about higher m atters — those of ethical and sp iritu al reality. Surely the God who “ created the heavens and th e e a rth ” (Gen. 1 :1 ) ought to know how He brought vegetables, animals and man into being. It is a strang e h iatus in logical thinking to suppose th a t God would have pu t the n arrativ e, of the creation of the world into poetic and fictional form.
September 1925
TH E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
383
. The “Vestige” Myth In speaking of anim al “ vestiges” still left in the human body, Dr. Rice declares th a t they “m ark the la st feeble appearance of organs useful to some ancestral form living under different environm ental conditions, hu t now become useless and being gradually evolved out of existence.” Is tha't science? “Is it verified know ledge” ? Competent physicians tell us th a t the verm iform appendix, th e coccyx, the gall bladder, the p itu itary and other endocrine glands perform a useful function in the hum an organism and th a t no man is complete w ithout them. A t least, we know th a t no hum an baby is ever born w ithout them , and so it stands to reason th a t they belong to the in teg ral man, even though not all of them are absolutely essential th roughou t his whole life. A man can live w ith one eye gone, or w ith most of his teeth removed, bu t no one would hold th a t two eyes and a full set of teeth do not belong to the normal person. Our evolutionist inform s us th a t th ere are “a hundred and eighty unnecessary p arts” in th e hum an body, “ some of them seriously in terfering w ith th e running of the machine” "" Then, tu rn ing against the Biblical doctrine of special creation, he springs the question: “Would a divine mechanic of unlim ited power create a machine of. such palpable imperfection as th e hum an body” ? We th ink th is a p ertin en t question, and will give the reply. In asking it, Dr. Rice must have forgotten th a t he himself professes to believe th a t God evolved man from the" lower forms of life. Then God m ust be responsible for having evolved m an’s body w ith its “ palpable imperfection.” How, then, will evolution exonerate God? It would seem ra th e r to increase His shortsightedness and blundering, because He took so many m illions of years to bring fo rth so imperfect a result. So th a t argum ent is rendered futile. Who is Responsible fo r Bodily Defects?. • However, Christian theology, based on the teaching of the Bible, does not hold God directly responsible fo r the imperfections of man’s body and its liability to disease and death, nor for any of the other untow ard and evil facts in the world of n atu re or mankind. The Bible teaches plainly th a t all these things are the resu lt of sin. In the beginning ' G od, made; all things “good” and “very good” (Gen. 1). He said to th e moral being whom He had created good, “ In the day thou eatest thereof thou sh alt surely die,” con noting th a t he had not by th is original creation the seeds of death in his body and .soul. The serpent, the cattle and the soil came under a b light on account of m an’s sin, for man was created to be th e head of the n atu ra l realm (Gen. 3). P a u l's a y s plainly th a t death .came by sin (Rom. 5:22; 1 Cor. 1 5 :21 ). He also teaches th a t “ the whole creation groaneth and trav aileth in pain tog eth er un til now” (Rom. 8 :2 2 ). But th ere is also th e promise in th e same context th a t the tim e will come when the creation shall be restored —^ ‘delivered from th e bondage of corruption into the glor ious liberty of th e children of God.” Thus the Bible gives the best philosophy of all th e phenomena of the world. “A fter Its K ind ” Rejecting the Biblical statem en t (Gen. 1) th a t each spe cies was created to reproduce “afte r its kind,” our au tho r bolds th a t the varieties of races in the hum an fam ily negate th a t .doctrine. “Clearly th is common paren tage,” -he says, referring to the Biblical account of the creation of Adam and Eve, “ cannot have been identical a t once w ith the H o tten to t and the American Indian, w ith the Chinese and the Anglo-Saxon. The special creationist is absolutely driven to the evolutionary explanation of the modern human races.”
No; we do not th ink it as bad as th at. All th e modern human races belong to the hum an species or genus. They can interbreed w ithout producing a progeny th a t is sterile. The changes th a t have been produced in the hum an family are something very different from th e evolution of non-life into life, of vegetable life into anim al life, of animal life into hum an life. Therefore, when the Bible teaches th a t each type was made to procreate “afte r its k ind ,” th a t means, not th a t each individual will be an exact duplicate of all others, bu t th a t th e distinct type itself shall be stabilized. The Origin oif th e Races The conservative in terp reters of th e Bible are not- com pelled to fall back on evolution to explain the various races of mankind. They are modest enough to adm it th a t they do not know how th is differentiation came about. There are not sufficient scientific data a t hand to enable any of us to form a h ard and fast judgment. Nor is it necessary. We can still deal w ith all human beings, whatever their race and color, as belonging to th e hum an genus, and as th erefo re capable of salvation th rough Jesus Christ. We m ight offer some guesses, a la th e evolutionists, on the problem of ethnic origins, bu t we would not proclaim them dogmatically, as do the evolutionists. Accepting the Bib lical records, we m ight say th a t God Himself, when He con fused th e language of the people a t Babel and scattered them over th e earth, may have injected some change into th e germ-plasms or the pigments th a t gave rise to th e var ious races. But we assert nothing; we simply offer this as a suggestion th a t would account adequately for the results. Many ethnologists th ink th a t varieties of climate and other environm ents afford a fairly reasonable expla nation. A good book on this subject Js John B. Tannehill’s “Naamah and N imrod: A Defense of the F aith of our F ath e rs.” Mr. T annehill’s proposed solution is not dog m atically set forth, bu t only tentatively, and yet it seems quite reasonable. "We reg ret th a t Dr. Rice confuses creation and evolution. He speaks about God, as first cause, “revealing His cre ative power through the n atu ra l phenomena of evolution.” Then he quotes Gen. 1:27: “And God created man in His own image; in th e image of God created He him .” But creation means to bring something new into exis tence, something th a t had no prior existence (creatio ex n ih ilo ); whereas evolution means th e development of some thing th a t already exists. Terms should be used w ith pre cision, or th ere can be no hope of coming to an understand ing. If God intended to teach in Gen. 1:27 th a t He evolved man th rough the animals into His own image, He should have said so plainly. He should have used th e proper verb: tsamach, which means to “ grow,” in some places “to cause to grow,” instead of b ara, which means to bring something into being th a t had ho previous existence. In closing we would ask th e evolutionist w hether he would identify the bestial prim itive man of evolution with the first man of Genesis, who was created in the image of God, was placed in a garden, and held in telligen t commun ion w ith his Maker. Was th e Piltdown man created in the divine image? Was th e ape-man of Java? Was the Nean derth al man? Were th e Cro-Magnon men, who, coming up from the M editerranean Sea into Central Europe, pounced upon the N eanderthal race, and exterm inated them root and branch? If none of these prim itive folk were “ created” in the divine image, when did th a t image come into existence in the soul of man? Yes, th e evolutionary theory causes many more difficulties th a n it explains.
384 THE K I N G ’ S B U S I N E S S u^ r ; Satan’sTriangle: Evolution, Philosophy and Criticism S. J . Bole, P rofessor of Biology, Wheaton College, Illinois In view of th e w idespread in te rest a t th is tim e in th e teaching of evolution, which has been greatly intensified by the recen t tria l in Daytòn, Tennessee, which resu lted in th e conviction of th è young school teacher who know ingly violated th e law of th e S tate and ta u g h t evolution to his pupils,— th is fifth article by P rofessor Bole will be of especial value as to th e p resen t statu s of th is theory. September 1925
P re sen t and F u tu re of Evolution W hat about the present and w hat about th e fu tu re of . evolution? “As ye sow so shall ye reap .” We have been sowing th e teachings of evolution for many years now, from th e k ind erg arten to th e .university. ' We m ust accord ingly expect to go on reaping its resu lts; materialism , mod ernism , and unbelief. Then again we read in 2 P eter: “But th ere were false prophets also among the people, even as th ere shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord th a t bought them and bring upon themselves sw ift destruction.” If weighed in the balance, evolution is found w anting; but th a t does not mean th a t it is or will be given up. One interesting point is shown by th e changes in books. Authors w riting from ten to tw enty years ago called evolu tion a theory; today, they call it a fact. The evidence in favor of it, during th is same time, has decreased ra th e r than increased. We shall quote briefly from a few of the newer textbooks. P rofessor Sinnot w rites:- -“As to th e fact of evolution th e re is now practically no doubt in the m inds of scientific men” (Botany, p. 229,' 1923).. A. 8. P earse of W isconsin w rites: “Among scientific men evolution is no longer on trial, bu t is accepted as a fact” (General Zoology, p. 342, 1917). H. H. Newman of Chicago w rites: “The theory of evolu tion is as definitely established as are th e Laws of Gravity, the Atomic Theory, The Ionic Theory” (Outlines of General Zoology, p. 406, 1924). Dr. Charles Schubert of Yale w rites: “There is now no question about th e tru th of organic evolution as opposed to the theory of special creation” (H istorical Geology, p. 49, 1924). P rofessor M artin of Iowa S tate College w rites: “Today it (evolution) is accepted not only by biologists, b u t by theologians and all thinking men” (Botany w ith Agricul tu ra l Applications, p. 562, 1919). The above are quite common statem ents as to evolution being a fact. These same w riters adm it, however, th a t th ere is much disagreem ent among themselves ‘as to its cause or causes and th a t b u t little evidence is available. Such statem ents as the following indicate this: “W hat is under discussion among th e biologists is the method by which n atu re has brought about the manifold organic changes th a t we see. No more in tricate problem confronts man. It is therefore not rem arkable th a t the entire solution or even th e main p arts of it are no t yet at h and” (Schubert, H istorical Geology, p. 50, 1924). “I t must be remembered th a t the generalization (fact of organic ev o lu tio n ), is not itself, and probably never can become, an established fac t” (Sm ith, Overton, G ilbert and others of Wisconsin, A Text book of General Botany, p. 350, 1923). “ It must be adm itted th a t as yet we do not fully under stand th e m anner in which evolution has tak en place and the 'factors which have been responsible for it. In the past th ere has been perhaps too much unsupported speculation on th e problem and too little pu rsu it of facts” (Sinnot, Botany, p. 229, 1923).
Chapter 4 THE PRESENT STATES OF EVOLUTION
IJROFESSOR LUTHER TOWNSEND in his excellent little book on the “ Collapse of Evolution’’ closes his volume w ith these words “Need there be a moment’s hesitation in saying th a t the hypothe sis of e v o lu tio n -ito g e th er w ith all other speculations so far as they are dependent upon it or are attached to it, new theology, higher and destructive criticism included— has collapsed beyond any possible recovery?” Is th is statem ent of Professor Townsend, w ritten tw enty years ago, coming tru e? Has the tidal wave of Evolution subsided during these tw enty years? ' Suppose we go to th e masses first and ask them. We find th a t many people believe the doctrine although they may not be able to define th e word “ Evolution.” They have read about it, h ere and there, in a paper, magazine or book. They have accepted it largely by faith w ithout thinking much about it. Suppose we next go to th e schools of our country. Some of them ta u g h t evolution twenty years ago. More teach it today. Many a Christian College has ceased to “ contend for th e fa ith ” during th e past two decades: Almost every university, college and high school in the country now teach evolution. S trangely enough th is teaching is no t confined to biology but may include English, history, sociology, psy chology and other subjects. More th an this, most of the theological sem inaries teach it. Scientific F iction In tw enty years, hundreds of books and thousands of articles have been w ritten in favor of the hypothesis. But few articles, pamphlets, and books have been w ritten against it. This la st is p artly due to the fact th a t most book and magazine publishers don’t care to publish any th ing against evolution. It is a subject th a t will “ play up” well especially in the hands of fiction w riters like Conan Doyle, H. G. Wells, Van Loon, and Thompson. The Amer ican public w ant something sensational and the teachings of evolution ra th e r th an the Bible best serve this purpose. But it may be objected some of these au tho rs like Wood ruff, Conkling, Osborn, Newman, and Thompson are profes sors in universities. Would you say th a t these serious w riters pu t fiction in th e ir articles and text books? Yes, they do. They, themselves, insist th a t a good scientist must have a ra re so rt of imagination. This kind of imagination can re su lt only in scientific fiction. However, w riters against th e doctrine are now seemingly on the increase. H ighly educated and scholarly men like Prof. F airb airn and Dr. Morton of England, and McCann, Ralph B arton P erry, and Louis T. Moore, of th is country are a few of these. In the Sunday School Times for April 25, 1925, we read these words: “More and more books of a sci entific character are appearing against the hypothesis of evolution. It is being weighed in th e balance, and in many respects is found w anting.” I
September 1925
385
TH E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
“ Our knowledge of many of th e causal factors of evolu tion is still as it has always been, in a highly theoretical and speculative sta te ” (Newman, Outlines of General Zoology, p. 432, 1924). Three Aspects of Organic Evolution We stated in Chapter Two th a t th e ■ th ree aspect's of organic evolution are Origin of life, Process, and Results. Suppose we add “ Cause” to these three, giving Origin, Cause, Course, and Results, and asking ourselves once more ju st how much concerning each of these aspects is fact and how much fancy. We have already seen th a t th e evidence for th e origin of life, is all in favor of special creation, bu t w hat is m eant by resu lt? This refers to living and extinct life on th e earth. There are about 600,000 kinds of living animals and 250,- 000 kinds of plants a t present known to science: Evolu tion claims th a t these have all evolved from a single one- celled parent. M artin’s description of th is.is as follows: “Evolution refers to th e processes or Changes whereby new forms arise from previously existing forms, * * * The first organism s to inhab it the earth are supposed to have been single celled. * * * From these one-celled organ ism s, others arose consisting of more th an one cell, and these were followed by organism s still more multicellular, * * * and so on the process continued, giving rise to all the various kinds of plants and animals we now have” (Botany, p. 558, 1919). W hat evidence have we of this?, None a t all. Isn ’t there somewhere in history, the record of some plan t or animal changing into ano ther kind of plan t or anim al? No, we haven’t a single record. Isn’t th ere th en one example of such change found in th e fossils in th e rocks? No, not a single example. W hat about mutations,—we hear so much about them ? We have never had a m utation th a t was dif feren t from the p aren t and th a t would no t cross back w ith th e parent. A rose-mutation is always a rose, and a pigeon- m utation is always a pigeon. Therefore th ere is no evolu tion here. W hat evidence have we, then, th a t these 850,- 000 kinds of life have evolved from a common ancestral form? None a t all. On the p art of evolutionists, this is pure assumption. The Cause of Evolution F o r every cause th ere is an effect and for every effect th ere is a cause. There is no exception to this in logic or in science. G rant th e evolutionist the assumption th a t the results of life are due to evolution, then th ere must be a cause for th is effect or result. This we call th e process, cause, mode, or method. Suppose we consider th e causal aspect of evolution briefly. Henry Fairfield Osborn w rites on th is as follows: “We know— th a t th ere has existed a more or less com plete chain of beings from monad to man (the assumed resu lt again)-^-. We do not know th eir in tern al causes, for none of .the explanations' which have in tu rn been offered during the last hundred years satisfies the demands of observation, of experiment, of reason ” (The Origin and Evolution of Life, p. 10, 1917). F airb airn has this to say: “The more the process is simplified th e more complex does it require the cause or the sufficient reason of, the movement to be; and 'the more u rgen t does th e demand become th a t th e action of th e cause be immediate, contin uous, universal.—W ithdraw or paralyze th is cause, and N ature as its effects ceases, i;e., w ithou t the sup ernatu ral the n atu ra l can neither begin nor continue to be.” (The Philosophy of th e Christian Religion, pp. 39, 56). But evolution has no place for the supern atu ral, th e re fore, there is no efficient cause according to Fairbairn.
We like Dr. Menge’s logic w ith reference to th is ques tion. He w rites: “We have been reversing the order of things, by forget ting th a t if a tiny cell or organism has th e ability or poten tiality of becoming a highly complex animal it must be much more complex th a n th e la ter organism into which it is to grow. For, surely, th e smaller an object may be, which can contain all th a t it is later to become, th e g reater in •complexity it must be. And, if such a tiny object is so intensely complex, it could not have suddenly sprung into existence w ithout an intelligence of some kind arrang ing it. The stud en t of depth has been driven into out and out skepticism of anything being tru e in science, or has gone over en tirely to mysticism.— For example, Physics tells him th a t no more work can be obtained from a machine than is p u t into it, and th a t nothing can rise higher th a n its source. Then the evolutionist tells him th a t more complex forms come from those less complex. This belies both laws, for intelligence is certainly something higher, and more than non-living m atter. And Intelligence cannot be explained in term s of either physics or chem istry” (General and Professional Biology, pp. 410, 411, 1922). We may agree w ith Bateson and many others, then, th a t the cause of evolution is not and probably never can be known. The Course of Evolution But what about th e course or path of evolution? T hat th is is very uncertain also is seen in th is statem en t by Shull: “ In tracing the descent of the larg er groups, still g reater uncertainty exists, * * * th e v ertebrates have plainly come from a gill-bearing animal. * * * There has been much controversy over th e question w hether th e mammals, for example, sprang from a rep tilian or an amphibian ances to r * * * j t has been held probable th a t th e annelids and arthropoids have descended from common ancestors, partly because the members of both these phyla are segmented. * * * Tracing such supposed pedigrees was fashionable among zoologists during the la tte r th ird of th e nineteenth century, un til it was realized how speculative is the process” (Principles of Animal Biology, p. 358, 1920). The path of evolution is generally shown by a diagram or tree of life. These vary greatly as scientists are not a t all agreed as to th is path. Then, again, evolution doesn’t always mean “ upward and onward.” M artin has th is to say about regressive evolution: “Most generally evolution resu lts in the origin of organ isms w ith tissues and organs better differentiated and thu s b etter adapted to perform special functions, bu t in some cases evolution moves backward, resu lting in the origin of organisms w ith tissues and organs fewer and less differen tiated. Thus through regressive evolution the Bacteria and Fungi are though t to have arisen from th e Algae” (Bot any, p. 290, 1919). Regressive evolution is difficult to explain and almost impossible to picture. Trees of life are pictured as growing upward and outward. Regressive evolution can’t be shown on such a tree, to th a t th e p ath or course of evolution is also seen to lie in the realm of th e imagination. W h at Is th e Conclusion? Did you say evolution is a fact? W hat are th e evidences? They are included und er these four heads: (1) the origin of life, (2) th e cause of evolution, (3) the path of evolu tion, and (4) the resu lts of evolution. But we have ju st found th a t th e evidences back of each of these four aspects of organic evolution are ag ain st not fo r the idea of evolution. And yet scholarly men call evolution a fact! (To be continued)
Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs