The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1888-06-30

OhO DlDlCs OhllobAhh
have been timid at the wrong point
They have deemed it dangerous to
admit that there is any error, the most
trivial, in the Bible, lest some weak
spirits should be led to distrust the
whole. If we begin with exceptions,
where shall we end? Can people be
trusted to discriminate? But if we do
not begin, where shall we end? If we
do not recognize palpable imperfections
in the setting Of truth, will not men
become doubtful concerning that which
is the very essence of truth? Not to
discriminate is to hold the door wide
open for unbelief,
Another illustration of the advan-
tage needlessly accorded to aggressive
infdelity is the existence and even re-
quirement of the belief that God deals
unequally with men, in respect to
eternal destiny. Why, Mr.. Ingersoll
asks, has God left millions upon mil
lions of men through the generations
without any revelation Of himself?
Why did he leave the truth even of his
existence only to "a few half-crazed
prophets, or to a cruel, heartless, and
ignorant church.? "They" the Pres
byterians) "do claim that the light of
nature, without the torch of the Pres
byterian creed, is insufficient to guide
any soul to the gate of heaven. They
do insist that even those who never
heard of Christ, or never heard of the
God Of the Presbyterians, will be
eternally lost; and they not only claim
this, but that their fate will illustrate
not only the justice but the mercy OF
God" He is attacking the opinion
that those who do not have knowledge
of Christ in the earthly life will be
eternally lost. His underground is
immense if he may hold his opponents
to the supposition that God deals SO
uneQually with men, and in respect to
eternal destiny, as to withhold from
some the Gospel of salvation which he
gives to others. The possibility of
misusing freedom to the extent even of
the loss Of the soul, provided the way
of life was open, terrific as that possi-
bility is, will not be lightly denied by
any one who is aware Of his own per-
sonality. Mr.. Ingersoll is obliged to
add to his invectives on the cruelty of
unending retribution an elaborate argu-
-nnent in denial of human freedom and
responsibility. But to those who do
not deny the possibility of irreparable
loss under the misuse of the Gospel, it
is difficult to believe that without any
Gospel whatever millions Of men may
sink into eternal death. If Scripture
is silent on the fate of the heather,
and Christ died for the world, shall
those be suspected as enemies of the
faith who would rid Christianity of this
incubus which has been needlessly
fastened upon it? Shall those who re-
fuse to entertain such an opinion and
who confess ignorance, or those who
cherish the hope that before the judg-
ment there will come to all men the
grace of God in Christ, be suspected as
holding dangerous opinions? Here,
again, many Christian apologists have
been timid at the wrong point. If the
earthly life is not decisive for all, will
not many who have the Gospel defer
repentance? Possibly, even if illOgi
cally. But if it is taught that God
withholds from multitudes the Gospel
which is necessary to salvation while
he. gives the Gospel to others, will not
men be alienated from a God who ap-
pears to be SO unequal in his dealings?
And is not this a greater danger?
1t is at the very points where we have
been trying to replace narrow by COM
prehensive, and irrational by reasonably
Christian theories that aggressive in
fidelity is most intense and persuasive.
And we think it as great a service to
put Christian doctrines at their best
against attack from unbelief, as to
maintain untenable ground for fear of
imaginary weak brethren.
Nobody may congratulate himself
that there is superlative piety in ex-
treme conservatism of doctrinaI opin-
ion. AT the point where tenacity of
opinion hinder3 the adj
vance and weakens the defence of
truth it becomes that timidity which
is really lack of faith, and which is
most fruitful of mischief There is no
virtue in standing still and beating
time when the commander summons
us forward where the battle is hot.
1t is aside from our present purpose
to indicate the weakness of aggressive
infidelity as shown in many parts of
Mr.. Ingersoll's attack. His criticisms
on the argument from design are
fOrcible as against certain forms of it,
but nugatory as against that purpose
which is unfolding in nature and his
tory, and which the progress of man
kind abundantly illustrates. His argu-
ments that men are responsible, not for
their opinions which they cannot help,
bat for their conduct only, is pitiable