Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1908-09-05
tracts may be useful Speaking Of the
position Of Adam our progenitor. to the
human race. the encyclopedia says

\ tracts may, pc useEul. speaking " LIZ
position of Adam, our progenftor. to the
| human race. the encyclopedia says
| .'Materialism sees in man. d mere pro-
| duct of nature. It is difficult to see
how it makes place for self-conscious-
ness The unity of tho race is also
| given up; and SO logically Darwinisn
leads to a belief In a plurality of race
| origins. Theology, on the other hand,
holds fast to the personality of man,
| but has from the beginning of the SCI
cnce. waveretl in regard 60 the position
occupied by Ada M toward the race. The
pldest Greek fathers ara silent upon this
| point If@naens Is the first to touch
It; and he maintains that the first sin
was the sin,of the race, since Adam was
| its head CHI xiii q; v. xii 3; cf. r.
Seeberg Doslnengsschiehte /. Leipsic.
1885, p. So. Qrigen, on the other hand.
holds that man siHned because he had
| abused his liberty when in a pre- exist
lent state IN Adam seminally We're the
| bodies of all his descendants. Contra
Celsu,n, w; -.) Gregory Nasianzen,
| Giegory of Nyssa, and Chrysostom de-
rive sin from the fall. Tertullian. Cyl
prian, Hilary. Ambrose, and Augustine,
represent the Biblical standpoint. Pela-
gtus saw in Adam only bad example
which his descendants followed. Semi
Pnlagianism similarly regarded the first
sin merely as opening the flood gates
to iniquity: but upon this point Angus
tinianisia since 1t was formulated has
dominated the church--in Adam the
race sinned'
a very instructive article is found on
the Apostolic Council at Jerusalem in
the year 81 or - of our era. This arti-3
Gle states the occasion for the Council,
ha y.Ae Inf
plains what at first sight seems to be
contradiction between the accounts in
the Acts and the Letter to the Gala
tians,
Under the title Of Baptism, that sub
jact Is very fully discussed, and the
arguments on both sides are given. On
,he origin of infant baptism the au-l
thor says that no time can be as
signed for the beginning of the prac-
tee" and his deduction is that 1t must
be of apostolic origin but he points out
| that Tertulian opposed 1t. while Cypri-
an, in this third century. defended it..
| he adds: 1t must be admitted that
adult baptism was the rule and infant
| baptism the exception in the apostolic
| age, and not until the fifth century,
whom the church was widely established
| IN the Roman empire, was infant bap-
| tism general"
IN the article on Baptism for the
Dead, tho following Interpretation of
The Well known worse, / Cor. XVI 20, Is
offered: 1T probably consisted in the
yicarious baptism of a living Christian
Tor Catechumen who had died un-
haptlzed the latter being thereby ac-
counted as baptized and received into
bliss" Other interpretations are also
given.
This gives an idea Of the nature OF
this Important work. In some instances,
wc fancy. the tendency toward the
most advanced higher criticism Is
! more pronounced than warranted by
tho trun results attained along that line
Of research. This Is very marked in the
article on Abraham. for instance, and
many others. But, 1t Is nevertheless G
whole library of religious knowledge
and Invaluable as u work of reference.