La Junta tribune., 1909-11-27

recent sermon at All Souls
church, Colorado Springs,
G spoke as follows:
II Is often said that Unitarians re-
ject the Bible, that they do not ac.
cept its teachings, that they pick out
such portions of 1t as they like and
ignore the rest. that they refuse to
be bound by its authority and many
more accusations Of like sort are
made against us. the justice of which,
suppose In the main. we shall have
to acknowledge. There is an opinion
prevalent that orthodox teliefs, So
called, are based upon scripture. and
are therefore authoritative biblical
achings, while Unitarian and other
heretical beliefs are not based on
scripture and have no biblical con-
firmation. Evangelical Christianity,
1t Is implied, trusts the bible and
takes its authority from scripture,
while liberal Christianity trusts rea.
cSh 0ad tonCs 40 iIOH u.
So far as know there has been
no doctrine held or taught by any
branch OF the Christian church but
what has been defended from the
authority OF scripture. The bible has
been the source OF all sorts Of doc
trines.
Origin Of Unitarianisn.
As for Unitarianism. 1t originated
In accepting and defending the teach.
tngs OF scripture. The early Unitari.
ans. land they go back to New Tes-
lament days and before, as We think
There was no difference between
them and their opponents in regard
TO the nature and authority of the
Bible. 1t was only difference as
to the Interpretation Of Bible utter
ances. The Unitarians obeyed and
accepted what In their understanding
the Bible taught.
Servetus and Socinus defended their
teaching from the Bible as directly
and convincingly as Calvin and Luz
ther theirs. DIR. Claiming appealed
to the Bible as confidently as did
Dr.Lyman Beecher. Unitarians have
always declared that the doctrine OF
DAe Trinity is not a Biblical doctrine.
The reading and study OF the New
Testament has converted many a
student to unitarianism wholly by
the evidence OF scripture Unitarhns
feel that the Bible is weighted on
their side: In the early days OF con.
froversy the question at Issue was
not, What is the Bibleg" but" What
does II teach?" The Bible was ac-
cepted as conclusive evidence by both
sides. the differences grew from In
terpreting and applying the evidence
Both sides were biblicists. Neither
side criticised the Bible, but sought
10 interpret II. So far as the ori.
ginal Unitarianism Is concerned II
accepted the Bible as = supernatural
revelation OF Gods will. but It said
to the Trinitsrisns. this Bible does
not reveal the doctrines you teach.
Unitarianlsm has come now to 4
different view OF the nature and
authority Of scripture than was first
held. do not know. however. that
there has been any greater change
In the valuation OF the Bible by Uni
tarians than by Trinitarixns. The
Unitarian leaders and their constitu-
ency came to the present point Of
view rather sooner than the ortho-
dox. Indeed the orthodox constitu.
ency has hardly come to the point
of view which it's leaders now ac.
nSept There Is not an evangelical
denomination that Is not now look
Ing haltingly and askAnce at some OF
Its own leaders who are advocating
advanced views" Of scripture. The
radical literature on the Bible now
comes from the Evangelical ranks.
Both Unitarian and Trinitarisn have