The Topeka state journal., 1900-03-26
HOWE'S MISTAKES.
Continued from First Page.)

Continued from First RaEe-)
Suppose I reply by another statement
Every man who attacks the faults or
his child is at heart an enemy to the
child, and wishes his destruction, Tor
the child is the accredited representa-
tive of his father, and the most import
ant part Of him In spite OF these two
statements, one of which is as wise as
the other, the faults of the church Will
be aSSailed for the benefit of religion
and mankind: and parents will con-
tinue to attack the faults Of their chill
dren for the good of the children and
humanity. Here is a fourth Civilized
men should have a better religion than
savages, yet we are sending mission
aries to the savageS to teach them a re-
ligion we stole from them" And this
I'VE have one hundred and forty relig-
ious denominations in this country
alone, each eager to prove that all the
others are wrong; and they are more
energetic in this respect than IN any
other" Here is a point where the
churches are especially vulnerable
Some of the spirit still remains. 1t IS
rapidly becoming less But making the
statement just as strong as the facts
will allow, it is not true that the
churches are more energetic to prove
all others wrong than in any other
thing. or think Of this other state
rnent which could not be made by any
one who knew the least thing about the
facts, to the effect that the Jews bor-
row GQ LQeIT EEll2lO4 ITOiu TIE AALA5N-
ianS. The reverse comes far nearer be-
ing the truth. For broadly speaking,
Christianity is the outgrowth of Juda-
isn-Or as some one has put 1t. the
Towering of the Hebrew religion These
are but some half dozen of many SINH
lar statements. equally unwarranted by
a candid Interpretation Of the facts or
the probabilities
There is one statement in particular
to which I wish to call your attention;
: he cr- +-.-r fe5 he in.
ference drawn from it is not correct.
Quoting d Doctor Of Divinity, Mr-HOwe
says: The Oldest manuscripts Of any
part of the New Testament takes US no
nearer the words of Jesus than some
time in the fourth century" His infer
ence is that no part of the New Testa-
ment was written until sometime dur
ing the fourth century. From refer
ences in the writings Of the early Chris
tianS and their opponents, we know
that nearly all Of what is now the New
Testament was written before the close
of the second century. Probably none
of the genuine letters Of Paul were
written later than A D. 65. The earIl-
est of the Gospels, Markf was probably
written not far from A D. 20. Luke and
Matthew were probably written some
time between then and the year 100 A.
D The date of Johns gospel is the
most uncertain Of all. and 1t is prOba-
bic that it was not written TIL the last
of the second century. This is the Opin-
ion of what would probably be called
the most radical of the critics. The first
three gospels are the more accurate ac-
counts of the life and teachings of
Jesus. Until written down the knowI-
edge of Jesus life and teaching was
communicated orally Thus time and
opportunity were given for errors to
creep in, and they undoubtedly did
creep in; but certainly not the errors
of three hundred years. And yet Mr..
Howe says: THE best authorities admit
that no part of Christ's alleged teach
ingS were written until some time in
the fourth century, No good
authority ever said so, and 7
doubt if any bad or Indifferent one
ever did It was perhaps natural
to cOnfOund the earliest manuscript
with the first writing, and to forget
that even in modern times first editions
are sometimes lost, and we have the
words of the author only in the second
or the third edition of his works. The
earlier manuscripts of the writings Of
the New Testament were lost, and the
earliest one that came down TO US dates
from the middle of the fourth century.
1t is no more than just to say that this
quotation and the others I have made,
and still more that might be made, con-
Wet their author of writing from INSULT
cient knowledge of the history of Chris
tianity and of religion in general
About revivaIS Of the ordinary sort,
and evangelists Of the ordinary sort, I
feel much as Mr.. Howe does. I see good
coming from them, I think I see far
more evil Some of the converts begin
a. moral Improvement that is permanent
That is good. Some need to be revived
periodically, this is about half way
good Good while they are doing well,
bad when they lapse Many I fear go
through the following process, and it
is for this reason that 1 think the or
binary revival does more harm than
good. They think that somehow their
whole nature is to be made over by
this conversiont That they will hence
forth do right and want to do right
The excitement dies. They are much
the same as before. They want to do
wrong the inclination is not dead They
do do wrong. They feel they have been
deceived, that there is nothing in re-
Iigiou- Before they had Indefinitely be-
lieved in il as a possibility of good at
any rate Now they do not They do
not understand that right doing. not
making it the rule Of your Hfe-partie-
wrong till the habit was well fixed
is not something to be achieved in a
moment of conversion That is merely
a beginning. The rest is the result Of
effort. hard and persistent. Like any
other habit. good or bad, it Is a growth
I dislike the ordinary revival because
1t IS often understood to be a short cut
to that to which there is no short cut.
the formation Of character, SO that the
final result is immoral
I think Mr.. Howe is right in main
tanning that the churches have often
placed too much stress On doctrine. and
too little On practical morality They
have too often forgotten that ii is more