The Birmingham age-herald., 1905-01-16

he would have been more cautious in his choice of language, and given no oIIense.
 First Cause.
 One of his objectionable sentences was az follows: 'I wonder if you students at Harvard will understand me when l say that I no longer believe in Great flrst Cause" Startling enough, assuredly such an utteranee read out of It's context, but entirely harmless considered In re- lation to its context For the speaker had no idea of meaning that this world made itself without God, and that 1t was un- caused by the divine thought and will. What he meant was simply that ne dld not believe in a Great First Cause con ceived of as a God, who in the Tar fore front of time made the world as an in- ventor his machine, and set 1t a-wnirhng and spinning in space, while he hlmseif dwelt apart from it and watched 1t whirl and spin. through the ages, interfering with 1t only occasionally to prove to men that it hadn't gotten away from him en- tirely; that in spite of his aloofness, and remoteness from this lower realm He could show Himself it's Lord and Master when He willed.
 And this Is no mere surmise as to Dr. Abbotts meaning. for we have his con text which renders 1t impossible that he could nave meant anything else. From that context I take these statements; My God is great and ever-preseni force manifest in all the activities Of man ana all the workings of nature. l believe ia a God who Is in and through and or everything A God who Is close to us. We recogn.sS QIis personality as we recognize the personality Of Q Titan or an Angelo Only God Is always working, always creating, whereas their work is done. God stands near us. Ever in the presence of tod, we come to realize
 his proximity ana love. God makes for good. Mans progress is a progress up- ward Each day Is better than the first"
 Has this the sound of disbelief in God2 Is this to reduce Him to mere evolu- tionary prnciple?' What, then, shall we answer back to St. Paul, declaring in Atfens, nineteen centuries ago. that in God i've live and move, and have our being" ?-that ''He Is not far from every one of us"? And what shall we answer back to the Divine Master Himself teach ing his diciples and saying unto them, that not a sparrow fell to earth without the Heavenly Father, by whom the very hairs of their heads were all numbered?
 On Creation.
 Is Dr. Abbott un-ckristian because he | tells us that the world was not created by God as a finished product in the abys- I nal past, and handed over to the opera ton of secondary .aws''? Is 1t not rather | probable that he was simply repeating | in other language what was said to Scribe and Pharisee, long ago. m this word: My Father worketh hithrtos and | I work2"
 Dr. Abbott said to the Harvard stu dents that he did not believe in an 'ab- sentee God" Do wei If so. why? May we | love and serve Him better, because we think Him from us than confessing his | coseness to us? Or may we conceive or | Him as greater, localized somewhere in infinite space than we may, holding Ills Divinq presence as universal as His uni- | verse, seeing with the author of Aurora | Leigh"
 Earth crammed with heaven, | And every common bush afire with God?' | Why should we "begrude God His uni verse;" Why dream Him remotes by so much as hairs breadth from our hearts and souls? "The kingdom of God Is within you" said the Master, and left no word of record that, where His king dom was, God was not
 Is the Bible Ultimate? | Dr. Abbott's other startling sentence startled by reason of his use of the word ''ultimate' as applied to the bible. tThe 1 bible" he said, "can no longer be ac- cepted as ultimate" Now l can well understand how such a sentence would naturally cause dismay in the minds of many people who attached to this word ultimate significance that 1t did not have for the speaker.
 TO say that the bible is not ultimate was perhaps, to the majority of the people, equivalent to denying It's inspir-
 Continued on Sixth Page)