Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1906-06-23
Claims That He Takes Middle
Ground on the Revelation
Question.
HE IS A "RATIONALIST.'
Moses More a MNih Than Man
Jesus - Spiritual Genius"-ilc-
ligiOn Product Of Evolution.

you publish lu the same issue. / GER
tainly have no complaint to this very
fair method OF using me and probably
II we continued the discussion lndeh-
Ditoly we would occupy just as dis
tinctiye positions as We do now.
write. however, for one reason 10 ac-
knowledge the teX,ual correction you
make On regard 10 the book from which
the verHe referring 90 the tables OF
the Law was taken in my sermon /
am very sure / referred 20 IL correctly
as coming from Exodus, but In the
somewhat hastily prepared abstract
prepared Sunday afternoon for the
press ! mis-WrOte TO- and lack Of time
prevented the proof-reading / always
intend 10 give 10 anything prepared
for public reading As 20 the main
position however ] stand by my guns
and reiterate my belief in religious
evolution rather than the theory you
So yal.antly defend Of revelation COM
ing down alb extra and ready-made
from above.
As ] said an my sermon 7 am per-
fcctly willing o. have the distinction
drawn with all clearrcss between this
railroads.&c. and Cummon-sense view
OF religion and that OF orthodoxy which
bases dts whole guperstructure upon
these peculiar lntcrfcrtnces in the nat
ural order called revelations. How
ever ] must deny your right 90 COM
nit me % either one or the other OF
the two alternatives you mention. /
certainly 90 hot believe in revelation
as YOU define revelation nor do / be-
liayc or need 90 believe that the SUD-
iect matter az these sO-called reyela-
lions h. perpetrated as a deliberate
fraud II seems 90 me you commit the
very common fallacy against the un-
divided middle. 60 use the term OF
formal logic u is remarkable no"
few things admit of being transhNed on
the horns of a dilemma. II Is always
TEMPTING TO the novice IN argument
80 say "a thing is either this or mat
acccurng the extremely hazardous mn
rlicatiou that II is nothing else blut
i'm q learned Campalgner OF the ell-
iorIal columns % Is unexpected. rs
"a matter Of fact % is very seldom saie
20 make such sweeping assertion
ahout anything One may So" OF
man who does something apparently
LACKING Judgment that he is either
fool or a knaye. and we would haId'l
e,.er h. rem. He may have been
partly foolish and partly knaNlsn OF ne
may have been either foolish OF hlas
ish On one instance, yet "ould nov W
either a fool or knaNe IN 'olo,
So when YOU say "But II "hat ~ re-
corded OF Moses concerning ms Nl'c'
course with Deity IS not true, Moses ~
a fraud" or when you make the seli-
oral assertion concerning the leIsoll.
SUPPOSED 90 have revelations, lne
Che reVelatlous) were either "nat ne
were claimed TO be or the indlNluuals
narrating them were liars ana charia-
fans impostors and frauds you are
making q similarly sweeping assertion
You can only make such an asseI tl9u
bv utterly ignoring the claim on lhe
NOT iDconsiderabIe body of LlbeIal
like myself who thlnk we
have found middle ground pet"een
th,so two alternatives. And l IAN
IN see your warrant for saying that
.Tha Unitarian minister's position can
not be maintained by good reason OF
sound logic" Whatever the reasons
may be worth. ] am not attempting 10
maintain il by a tallacy Now stop
and thiuk and | am sure you must al
nil that n Is possible 10 believe, from
INV evolutionary point OF Vie" hlhu
Won Moses 10 have been a somewhat
1.brlouq hero In early Hebrew uadl-
lions more a myth than a man, nero
,h,ut whom wondrous tales were toid
lafaro Israel mad q written language
ana in whose mouth laws were put al
tborrb MANI Of these laws apparently
originated centuries atterWald. why
Dav I not find such o. view both logl-
.ai 10 me and reasonable? By what au-
.borify can anyone say | must ether
-pad The Bible literally and with what
sooms to me 10 be childish credulity or
.lsa regard IL 90 be either "a congerlcs
m errors hut a collection OF falsehoods
ma frauds" To read the Bible IN e.
Nor ,yay would seem 20 me TO be inc
,,tt OF Ignorance and credulity. l ma
bc prble to he a great literature OF
,r,,t pa1pIe with the gospels tackled on
~ ,r o5ssndum giving the imperfect
.torisg Of the Nfo and the more lmper-
.,ct transcript Of the words OF a re-
rarkabio spiritual genius. one jesus OF
For me II does not s'ann |
,plrt or alone. II Is part OF me /
TrrI I.g literature WIN il' ''att'''Nf 49, I
$ not given 10 70 as 20 any literature /
,v me genius 81 its makers. II | SEQ |
he revelation of God 10 be so wide as /
"a irelnde thc Jew ana his old Tesla |
ront. Jesus and Ills gospel rather than |
RI be- measured by either or both am
therefore, 10 be classcd as one who re-
rseall these things as frauds? ] might /
,v to Won either sou must take my
voiutionarv point Of view or else hold
~ 80 orthodox theory n revelation
IN, would he wrong Tor ] would leave
had Of account a small but noteworthy
lass Of radical atheists who really take
~ rosition that the Bible and Chris
i,niiv are an frauds, a position You
.orid land mo in by the iogerdemain OF
our logic. . .
I thank YOU Tor tho courtesy on your
roatmcnt and trust you viii give me
,aoe to make this brief defense ~ my
Isi,i,D FRANK FAY EDDY.