The Portland daily press., 1898-11-05
s(From the Christian Mirror.

L
AS our readers will remember, two
4 weeks ago the Mirror took occasion to call
in question two Of DR.. Blancoaro's
statements, as published in q report of
his sermon made in the DAILY PRESS
of this city, and also to point out an in
stance of false reasoning in the same SER
mon.
letter from DR.. Blanchard, he acknowl-
edges that he was mistaken in one Of the
statements called in question and that
he may be mistaken in the other, and.
as concerning the matter of his false In
ference ne says nothing, leaves US to in
fer that we were right there also, silence
on his.parT giving consent.
We are quite ready to leave the matter
in this shape. Time is too precious for
us to thrash out the old straw as to the
sbelievability" of Gen. 27:, 2l.23 and
3: II, which the doctor reheaises in his
letter. That is entirely another matter,
upon which we will only say that for
CENTURIES, as the doctor we'll knows, the
church has not made it a test OF the Or
thodoxy of its adherents to accept as lit
! eral fact the narrative of the origin and
fall of humanity given in the second ana
third of Genesis any more than 1T has
insisted upon it that the first chapter OF
Genesis should be regarded as literal
statement of the great truths OF biology,
geology, astronomy, etc. 1t is too late IN
the history of the church and the world
TO go over these matters which an Intel
ngent Christianity has already settled.
1he only point which we criticised was
the one of fact. and the doctor having
conceded that we were right, we have
accomplished our purpose.
In respect of the other fact, concerning
which DIR. Blanchard says he may be
mistaken. we are quite sure that the fur.
ther he investigates the more fully be Will
learn that he is mistaken. This is a
question Of vital interest 1t has to do
with the salvation of ones soul. To fail
to believe the story of mans genesis and
fall in it's literalness is very different
matter from denying to our Lord Jesus
Christ the character which, in all proba
biiity, ninety mine one hundredths of
those who call themselves Christians be.
lieve that he claims for himself.
OF course 1t is very easy to see that it
would be possible for any man to make
such definition of deity as would pre-
vent an Intelligent Christian from believ-
ing In the deity of Jesus. But perfectly
scholarly, biblical, and hence legitimate
conception of deity can be framed, and
mas De6Q lrhfDtu, WAlCu gives STOuuu LOT
even a stronger statementEthan the one
we made and which DR.. Blanchard says
may be true.
AS to the following IN our Congreea-
tional church which the men he names
may have, it would be very hard to de-
eide. AS however they are each one of
them numbered among our personal
friends. we think it would be safe to say
of one and all of them that they would
not hesitate for moment to declare the
criticism which we made two weeks ago,
upon the sermon in question, just
doubtless in some particulars OF doctrine
believed they would differ widely from
the editor of the Mirror, but OF one thing
we are sure that in the movement of the
last ten or fifteen years in the direction of
exaiuing the deity OF the Goldman they
are we'll to the 'front.'
We long. as does our genial friend, DR..
Blanchard for the union OF Chr1stendom.
But we fail to ground our expectation OF
this union, as does he, upon the denial OF
the deity of Jesus and salvation through
his astonishing sacrifice. The fond
prophecies in which DR.. Blanchard in
dulges it will be safe to leave in the
hands of the oncoming century. We Will
not indulge in any vaccinations put
will simply remind our friend that up to
the present hour the scholarship of the
church has neither denied the authority
VI Oou 'toru VI ueGnTOn6u bHS 0Ou-iIiaH,
Jesus Christ.
With these comments we subJoin the
LETTER OF ER. BLANCHARD.
10 the Editor of The Christian Mirror:-
Your criti cisln on my sermon on IRE
adjustments Of Thought in the Churches"
has received my careful consideration.
I was mistaken in thinking that no
one, today, believed ID the story of Adam
an Eve as recorded in tbs book of Genesis
/ may be mistaken in thinking that the
doctrine of the deity OF Jesus has been
very largely given up.
thought that story which tells that
God created the first man out of the dust
that from Adams side. when he was
ASLEEP, GOD took a rib, and of this made
a wo1nan-that talking serpent, who
was the devil. tempted the woman to
pluck an apple from a tree-that Adam
shared with Eve in eating this at her re-