199
T HE K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
Ini regard to the “ two wealthy oil men” mentioned by Mr. Ellis (refers ring to the “two laymen” who published and sent out free, the twelve volumes of “ Fundamentals” ) R. H. Boll of “ Word and Work” says: “This is not itself th e coal th a t got into th e higher critic’s shoe. The real reason th e ashes are flying concerning these two laymen is th a t they everlastingly sa t down on th a t camouflaged infidelity which has been propagated ‘w ith a th o r oughness suspiciously (and certainly) Teutonic’ in its origin, and which these ape- ing professors have repeated afte r th e ir German professors. This stuff which has eaten th e h ea rt ou t of Germany, these professed p atrio ts would fain foist upon th is nation also.” All who possess copies of “ Fundamentals” know they were printed, not for the propagation of the doctrine of Christ’s second coming, hut in defense of the inspiration of the Scriptures and all the fundamental doctrines of Christianity to which the Spirit of God has through the centuries, set His seal. Thousands have said, “ Praise God for the two laymen and the Funda mentals.”—K. L. B. A. HANDSOME PROPOSITION from the Seminaries A few weeks ago, Dr. Cortland Myers, writing to the Baptist Watch man-Examiner, said among other things, “We must protect our young men in the ministry from false teaching and false teachers. Here is one of the great reasons for the sad, lack in the number of young men entering this holy calling. I have now placed my finger on a sore spot, hut if it is cancerous, better make the discovery, and like a good and skillful surgeon* cut it out before its deadly branches creep any further into the body of the church. Some of the seminaries are bemoaning the lack of students but fail to see that the abominable new theology imported from Germany is one of the principal sources of the trouble. Place a higher critic behind the teaching desk and a question mark after the fundamentals of Christianity, and at last you can close the doors of these institutions and then close the doors of the church.” Dean J. F. Yichert of Colgate Seminary came back with a vengeance at Dr. Myers for daring to insinuate that there might be anything cancer ous about any of our theological seminaries. He said I “ If it he still insisted th a t any of the teachers of our sem inaries are denying th e fundam entals of our C hristian faith, are tearing the Scriptures to ta tte rs and are dethroning Jesus Christ, I should like to suggest an investigation. All our sem inaries would welcome it. NONE OF US ENJOYS BEING LIED ABOUT. Let th e re be an IMPARTIAL JURY, composed n o t of men who move in a closed circle of ideas (by which he evidently means—-men whose views of S piritual things are bounded by w hat God alone has to say in His W ord) h u t men who are acquainted w ith th e problem s of science and philosophy, who know something of th e CRITICAL AND HISTORICAL METHODS OF INVESTIGATION. Let such a ju ry be impaneled. We shall welcome it to o u r class room s and w ait w ith calm ness fo r its verdict.” Generous proposition—is it not? It would of course have to fall to the heads of the critical seminaries to select such a jury, for a jury composed partly of “ liberals” and partly of those who cling to the Scriptures, would make a terrible mess of it. Furthermore, the presence of any kind of a jury in a seminary would naturally put everyone on their guard against making any statements that might he interpreted in only one way. And what jury would want to spend four years in each of the seminaries, which
Made with FlippingBook - Online magazine maker