Lord Jesus come into her heart? And would He not go with her right past those fierce dogs? She did not like to have to confess to old Mrs. Green, either, but the Lord Jesus would help her do that, too. The next Sunday Wilma Mae could hardly wait f o r Sunday school time to come. But at last she was at the church and had found Miss Doris in a corner, ar ranging an object lesson. “Oh, Miss Doris,” she caroled. “ I did it! I asked the Lord Jesus to come into my heart and He did. I am saved now.” “Oh, I’m so glad,” the teach er exclaimed, hugging Wilma Mae close. “ But what was wrong last Sunday, dear?” Wilma Mae looked very sober and then, hanging her head a bit for the shame of it, she told her teacher what had held her back— of the thing she knew was wrong but did not want to put right. “But He took all that sin right out of my heart,” she finished jubilantly, “and then, after I was saved, I wanted to take the watch back.” “And do you know what you have since you’ve taken the Lord Jesus as your Saviour, Honey?” “No, what?” “God’s own Word tells us, in John 1:12: ‘But as many as re ceived him, to them gave he pow er to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.’ You see, now you’re a child of God, a princess in the household of God, because you’ve received the Lord Jesus Christ as your Saviour.” “A princess in the household of God!” Wilma Mae repeated won- deringly. She caught her breath to think how very nearly she had missed all the joy that was hers now. Then she bowed her head, with her teacher, this time in thanksgiving to God who had saved her. And on this Sunday, when she left the Sunday school class, there were no tears. Her face was bright with happiness. Was she now a Princess in the household o f God! ¡ ¡ f j ]
Science and the Bible by Bolton Davtdheiser, Ph.D.
The “Double Revelation” Theory
I N recent years the “ double reve lation” view of science and the Scriptures has been espoused and promoted by some Christian men who might not do so if they knew something of its origin and impli cations. According to this view God has given man two revelations. One of these is the revelation through the Bible, and the other is a revelation through nature. It is implied or def initely stated that in spiritual and moral matters we should go to the Bible for guidance but in matters re lating to the physical wor ld we should look to nature for the answers. The eminent Henry Ward Beecher is said to have been the most influ ential preacher in America for a generation. In New York he built the largest congregation in the na tion, starting with nine members. His approach to religion was to lib eralize it. In 1885 he published a sermon on “ The Two Revelations” and dedicated himself to forwarding the message it contained. The opening sentence of the ser mon was: “ That the whole world and the universe were the creation of God is the testimony of the whole Bible . . . but how he made them—whether by the direct force of a creative will or indirectly through a long series of gradual changes — the Scriptures do not declare.” Beecher was con vinced that it was by the latter means over a span of time which in cluded many mi ll i ons of years. Parallels to this sentence by Beecher in his sermon on “ the two revela tions” may be found today in vari ous articles intended for the guid ance of conservative Christians. Beecher said some things which sound very familiar because they are being said today. He told his con gregation that evolution is the meth od by which creation came about. He said that evolution is no longer a controversial matter in the scien tific world and that 99% of the men of science of his day did not doubt its truth. He enumerated Christian men with well-known names who ac cepted evolution and found no diffi culty in doing so. He had praise for the evolutionists, calling them “ ad venturous surveyors who are search
ing God’s handiwork,” while those who opposed their views he called “ vaguely bigoted theologists, igno rant pietists, and jealous church men:” He said that ministers who preached aga ins t evolut i on were “ men pretending to be ministers of God, [who] with all manner of gri mace and shallow ridicule . . . and unproductive wisdom enact the very feats of the monkey in the attempt to prove that the monkey was not their ancestor.” Beecher also spoke of the “ gran deur” in the evolutionary concept and assured his people that it would “ take nothing away f r om the grounds o f true religion.” He preached that a practical result of accepting the evolutionary concept of creation would be the improvement of morality. Men today have less excuse than Henry Ward Beecher for making such statements. With our advantage of historical perspec tive we can trace to. the evolutionary concept with its “ survival of the fit test” together with the philosophy of pragmatism at least a portion of the blame for such widely diverse evils as juvenile delinquency, un scrupulous practices in big business, the first and second world wars, and the rise of fascism and communism. In the religious sphere it had much to do with the rise to prominence of modernism. It is frequently said — and it is a corollary of the double revelation theory — that the Bible is not a textbook of science. Since the reve lation given by God in Scripture is a part of the double revelation theory, it follows that those who hold this view should accept as true those parts of the Bible which concern areas in the realm of science. But the tendency is for these men not to do this. Instead they put the em phasis on the current views of scien tists, even when these conflict with plain statements of Scripture. Henry Ward Beecher put much emphasis on the principle of the brotherhood of man. He stressed social action and made slurring re marks about salvation by grace. The espousal of the double revelation theory leads in this direction. m
AUGUST, 1967
31
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs