The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1907-10-10

fruitful source Of infdelity. but this
speaker failed to qualify this state
ment In such4a way as TO really eX-
press his own and his colleagues true
Idea ana position. II he had only
added by Its meaning being nliseon-
strued, he would have stated the nNaSt
position of those who Were upholdinE
the original wording.
No one dares accuse all those who
voted against the amendment OF deny
Ing that the Bible is the Word OF God.
as one OF the speakers on the other
side Implied. 1t was certainly on the
part OF those who spoke and voted on
that side a, conscientious effort to
frame an unussailable expression OF
the truth which both sides desired to
be emphasized. Some may not have
noticed 1T. but 1t was a Significant fact
that as DR.. Huntington was closing his
speech he opened the Bible; and said:
II shall now read you q passage from
the Word Of God" and he read Heb.
&. and 2.::s"God, who at slindry times
and in divers manners spake I'm times
past unto tho fathers blythe prophets.
Iariath In THESE last days spoken unto
kus by HIS oSon, whom He hath APP
pointed to. be heir OF all things, by
whom also HeBmade the. Horld.sssly
Otjier5 a Amendments.
| II was indeed most unfortunate tina I
I The deputy,tn used the. above quotation
that the expression, "the Word Of God.
Twas a fruitful source OF 7infidelity.'
and claimed it as its own. His words
! We're the means Of convincing many.
that the original expression was really
unsafe, for as more than one said, (
this is the logical end to which a man
Iwill 90 who holds to the Bible as be-
Ing 1.-THE record OF Gods revelation"
etc, we must vote for the amendment.
1t is unfortunate that he did not do
himself the justice TO explain his
meaning at once.
Once more, 1t must bearemembered
that the final vote on the amendment
does not mean that any OF the dopu-
ties do not consider the Bible to he the
Word Of God, using the expression $
generally accepted by the minority of
people and leaving out all theological
hair-splitting and queer interpreta-
lions. 1t simply means that all agree
I'm holding the truth, or certainly most
| OF them. and only differ In the way OF
expressing 1t. each thinking theirs the
clearer expression and the other the
Involved. later action justittes this
conclusions, for in the afternoon. with
almost no debate, further am ndment
was adopted. so that the preamble as
amended in that section now reads.
ACKNOWLEDGING the Holy Scriptures
OF the Old and New Testaments TO be
the Word Of God, the record of God 8
| revelation of Himself in His Son.
The point was gained. declaring un-
equtvocallS the church's faith that the
EBiblc is the Word OF God. accepting
1.-THE original words as expressing what
lit contains. rA
Why lie Introduced II.
/ In the afternoon mother amendment
was adopted, changing the expression
"early in the seventeenth century to
IN the. year 1907 and still another,
changing expression .asS from the
Hands Of faithful men they have re-
iceived the same. to .as FROM the 1apos-
tiles times they have existed This
Twas IN that part which refers to the
ministry, and IS simply one more con
servative step endeavoring to make
this preamble conform to the words Of
the Prayer Book, In this condition the
lprenmble lies over for further consid-
Ieration9 until Friday at II A. NJ.
Naturally. the question arises, What
i does 1t all mean? Why vase preamble
introduced at all?
/ DR.. Huntington answer red by saying
lit was rnere,v q mum
4 into the constitution, He denies that
4 1t is merely a. number Of baltcd