The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-12-21

each other-is for man to invite woman
into the pulpit,
hen Protestant conservatism, y adds
oall Hamilton, sis arguing against the
pope, 1t is as strong nationalist as any
philosopher could ask, I" and she clinches
her statement with long quotation from
an Evangelical newspaper. Then she
charges that this same Protestant rational
Ism, when graphing with doctrinai ration
alisin, turns its back on its own reasoning
Here is her argument continued:
Assume for moment that the Christian
CONSCIOUSNESS does not give MS assurance
concerning the divine authority and in
spiratlon of the Scriptures; what does2
Inc church The minister? The coun-
eHE The assemblies The bishops?
Your Christian consciousness must give
you assurance concerning them! The
creed tells you what Paul means, but
what tells you that you may trust the
creed? The church bids YOU trust the
catechisn1, but your own Christian CON
seriousness must answer for the church.
You take just as much responsibility by
sitting In judgment on the Thirty-nine
articles which interpret the Bible as you
90 by sitting in Judgment on the Bible.
fon take as much responsibility in ac-
cepting the apostles. You perform the
most momentous act Of private judgment
IN relinquishing private Judgment.
The iiteralists, Gail Hamilton claims,
play into the hands of the "blatant and
boastful agnostic who never went ankle
deep IN Scriptural or other investigation,
but who makes more noise shouting and
splashing III the shoals than the whole
squadron of evolution makes in sailing the
wide sea over" She will not permit the
ratlonaiistic Investigators of the Scriptures
to be confounded or classed with the scot
fers, but she holds that the marvellous
stories in the Old Testament are either
purely CONGRATULATIONS, if you like it,
Tor we already see that she is not afraid of
that word-or that they are picturesque
and poetical descriptions of actual occur
renee by writers not yet familiar with the
workings of nature. She finds natural
causes for the destruction of Sodom
and Gomorrah, and FOR the calam-
ity which overlook Lots wife, who
may have been caught in a
shower of sulphur and saltpetre, which
covered her. A possible, and even proba-
bic, explanation of the prolongation of the
day which Joshua prohted by. she finds in
the wonderful sunglows, which as recently
as 1873 lighted up the land long after the
hour when dusk was to be expected She
acknowledges that scientific skepticism
made some breaches in those solid walls of
water between which the children of Israel
were supposed to have made the passage
through the Red sea, but reminds us that
rationalism found at Suez bar extending
from one shore to the other, which at times
is now almost laid bare by a favorable con-
junction of low tide and strong east wind,
while on either side of the bar the water is
deep. There is similar bar at Bar Har-
Dor, with which, of course, Gail Hamilton
is familiar Note the snapper and the end
of the whip as she adds:
The Red sea tide is an irregular one
not always to be depended upon for with
drawal. But it came to pass, in the course
of nature, by the Discriminate counsel and
foreknowledge of God, that the frightened,
fleeing Israelites found the bar so barred
that they could cross it. By the course of
nature? Certainly. So the record says.
The Lord caused the sea to go back by
strong east wind all night. That is nature,
not miracle. That is the way the Red sea
bar is always barred. The Israelites came
safely through between the deep waters on
each side. The Egyptians plunged in after
them, hot-headed; but before they had
crossed the waters began to flow down
again-not miraculously, not falling upon
them from wall above their heads, but
slowly rising beneath their feet; rising
tide, only muddy at first, SO that they
drove heavily, clogging their wheels, and
even leaving them sticking fast in the
mud. The water deepened, slowly rising,
but always rising SO that the hot haste of
pursuit had time to cool, and leaders took
counsel and decided that it was too danger
Gus to attempt further passage against
the threatening waters, and turned back
and fed i'll panic-too latei too iatel
The feet had hardly time to flee
Before il brake against the knee,
And all the world was in the sea
DIR. Talmage asks: "Why not be frank,
and say. Il believe the Lord God Almighty
came TO the brink of the Red Sea, and
with His right arm swung back the bill
lows on the right side, and with His left
arm swung back the pillows on
the left side, andthe absshed
water stood UP hundreds of feet high,
while through their CLASSY wall the sea
monsters gazed with atfrighted eyes on the
passing Israelites?'
Because we do not believe it. Because
the Bible does not say SO. 1t was Moses
who came to the brink of the Red Sea and
swung his arms. That is like a man. The
Lord God caused the sea to go back by
strong east wind all night. That is like
God. Doubtless DR.. Talmage, with his
irrepressible energy, would have made a
much greater stirabout of the waters right
and left than the Lord God made with His
commonplace east wind; but after all, the
east wind is "A good deal of a blow. Even
Dr. Talmage can not belittle il, nor does
exegesis require it.
1t is impossible to even glance at all the
arguments advanced by Gail Hamilton in
the 300 and more pages of her book, for
every page almost is an interesting study
in itself She wars not against religion
nor against the Scriptures, but she does
war against the human decree that she
shall accept unquestioned the dogmatic
definition or Interpretation ofreligion and
the Scriptures handed down by the
ologians or councils as human and fallible
rs herself. "0f things as they are" she
says, "ot Christianity pure and simple, we
scarcely hear. What we are chiefly
taught is the opinions which many gcner-
atoms have formed about Christianity.
When any part of these opinions Is seen to
be false and begins TO be reft away the cry
IS that Christianity lies bleed
ing that another assault has
been made upon it," God. she
holds. spoke To Abram as God speaks to
us II there was any special verbal COM
munication, then Abram did not walk by
faith. but by knowledge, and his obedience
has no moral lesson for us. Literal calls
to the patriarchs and prophets she declines
TO believe in. The words of Moses, she
holds, can be safely interpreted, just as the
words of Emerson are. Morality and re-
hgion were established; society was known
TO have existed ages preceding Abram, and
the Jews were not chosen people, except
in the sense that their characteristics
made them the best fitted to cling stub