The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1901-01-05
PROFESSOR PAINE.
Replies To Critics of His Recent Book
aud Refers To His Experience with
the Fraternity Club.
Bangor Commercially

kDuhktA SoAaAAeASA@h}
Prof Levi l.. Paine of the Bangor
Theological seminary returned on We'd
nesday from short trip TO Portland and
Boston. Several weeks ago the Portland
Fraternity club held a nesting at which
Prof. Paine's book was discussed, and
this subject created SO great an interest
that some time ago the club wrote to
Prof. Paine asking him to read before 1t,
a paper taxing up and treating some OF
tine chief topics Of the work.
~ was very glad of the opportunity to
talk to the Fraternity club" said Pror.
Paine, because really wanted TO ex-
plain something's which peopia in general
do not seem to see or understand. In the
first place the principle criticism Of my
book which / have seen and which must
be the most common, is that &c 10 the
most radical utterance, and all that sort
OF thing that has ever been given express
sion. They all talk about my arguments
for Unitsrianism and criticise my peou-
liar and unique ideas of theology. They
say am Unitarian, / am not. i
agree with Unitarians 30 far as they
agree with history. There 1 stop and be-
come a historian. 1 agree with Trinitari-
ans so far as they agree with history, but
there again become scientific writer
Of history and logical critic OF 1t. /
saw that religion like history and every
thing else In the universe in its present
stage of development Is the result OF
Gods law OF evolution ana l prove 1t by
logical argument.
"Thers are three ways in which my
book may be attacked, First by proving
that history is not correct, second By
proving that my criticism is had, and
third by proving that my logic is st
fault, 10 attack me on the grounds that
l am this or that, and that am trying TO
influence the world TO become believers
Ia any particular faith is begging tue
question utterly. Nearly all the criticism
my book has received has been on the
false grounds of my belief In theology. las
matter of fact there is no theology in
the book. 1t is cold soientiH o work TO
be read and regarded as such. 1t ad-
vances no theological opinion over an
other and Is not antagonistio of any body
or anything except untruth, an conceal
ment of it.
81 did not touch ON the resurrection, 1t
was not necessary, but did touch upon
the birth of Christ. / say that since
Christ was man he WAS born as man,
and could have been brought on earth in
no other way. l say this because there
4o M htrtortcal nroof Of nnvthino tn the
contrary. II people can believe In the
divinity of Christ's birth, as matter of
religious faith. and get good from 1t, by
all means let them do so, bus gay as
matter OF a history 1t cannot be believed,
for history has to be proven to be history.
1t is tine same with the other miracles
The laws of the universe have not
changed one iota since the universe be-
gan to exist, and II miracles could hap.
pen 1000 years ago they could happen
now. As historical facts 1 cannot &C.
cent miracles as they are written in the
n ew Testament, as no historian can ac-
cept anything for which he has not salts
factory evidence. that 1t happened
"In expressing my belief OF miracles
do not advance my own theology since
am but writing history as 1t occurred,
and not my own personal belief. Let my
critics tear down my evidence OF facts II
they can, let them prove my logic false IL
they can, but it is unfair for them TO
take me to task for writing facts as they
were and as they are, and tor induotiveiy
reasoning out the lines along which evo-
luton viii carry religion In the future