The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1897-10-02

truthfulness of the New Testament
narratives" l am quite as much
"amazed" that after reading my
article, as he appears to have done, a
man could write such sentence as
that, as he processes to be at anything
| have said. The main purpose OF
the article, as its title might lndi-
cate, was to show that the gospel
itself is its own highest evidence.
This | think | did show. The revela.
tion of the law of love, and the foun-
dations upon which it rests in the
character of God and the relationship
Of mankind; and of the coming end
of evil, and the immortal, glorious
life beyond the grave, are alone suffi.
cient to prove the truth of Christian
ity, and of all the claims Christ ever
made, as related in the gospels. How
then can it stand or fall with the
question of the apostolic authorship
of the New Testament? Therefore
the "lesson from the past history of
the Christian church," does not con
cern me.
While as I said | am willing to
accept any result of legitimate cIiti-
cism, | regret to see any professed
Christian, and especially any clergy
man, take up the crude and now ex-
ploded notions of the Tubingen school
of skeptics, and promulgate them as
true by voice or pen. This was quite
common generation ago, but those
who do it now are behind the times
II believed the gospels taught end
less torment, | might be glad to see
them discredited. If | understood
the Apocalypse as Bro. Lewellen
appears to, possibly l might be
tempted to say as hard things about
it as he and DR.. Martineau do. Ignor-
ance and error, land we all have
enough of them) sometimes tempt
men to do desperate things. But as
it is, | am as fervent an admirer of the
BOOK of Revelation as | am of Johns
gospel; and l very much deprecate
any effort to disparage them, without
sense or reason.
In a word, there never was any
valid foundation for the wild assump-
tions of Strauss and Baur, and what
once appeared to be such have been
entirely swept away by later investi-
cation, of which Prof. Harnack's
studies are only portion. AS an
instance of the logical methods of
this school, / rememh - thirty years
ago one of their talented and popular
lecturers gave notice in the town where
| lived, that he would on certain
day give an account of the origin of
the week, and thus refute the allie
CORY of the creation, as we have it in
the first chapter of Genesis. I went
to hear him perform this remarkable
feat. But he did not so much as
allude to his subject; and spent his
whole hour in telling us the origin of
the names of the days of the week.
Sunday was the suns day, Monday
was the moons day and so on. When
asked if he did not know that the
week existed as a division of time,
with its days numbered, long before
they had any names, his only answer
was sickly smile! And yet he was
an oracle with all the skeptics, and
claimed especially to know all about
the doctrines and methods of the
Tubingen school, which he had made
his study for years. Baur was his
highest authority.
If you can prove the ''non-apostolic
authorship" and fairly refute or dis
prove the "literal truthfulness of the
New Testament narratives" we'll and
good. Truth is always truth. But
these men certainly have not done it.
And until it is done, propriety and
modesty if not love for Christianity,
would seem to indicate on the part
of clergymen at least, discretion in
making such wild assertions, or even
intimations.
FIT. SCOTT, Kan.
THE INWARD LIFE OF JESUS.