The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1913-06-26

restored as an invisible spirit being
then his followers are among us as
spirit beings, are they? He claims
Christ had but one nature-a human
which was destroyed on the cross. If
so HIS personality was destroyed and if
that is so, how could it be re-created.
1t may be created, though it will not be
the old nature, but new personality.
By his theory he destroys the Jesus
who made the atonement for US, and
now we have different Christ from
the one who died on the cross and rose
again. This lf-exalting teaching gives
but one meaning to death. viz: cessa-
ton of being; whereas the Bible gives
another. See Luke 9:16; John 6:53;
5:24; Tim. sc. We have shown that
the resurrection disproves his theory,
that the Bible use of everlasting" dis
proves it, that it is repudiated by the
words of Jesus in Matt. 1928, by the
term second DEATH" by direct revela-
ton of the Bible, and by the story of
the rich man and Lazarus.
He claims Christ existed before His
incarnation. but was created, which is
plain denial of the Deity of Christ.
He says Christ is a god, presumably in
the same sense he himself will be god
Then we have gods many, instead of
one God. But it is claimed that he
(RusselD has had a revelation, so of
course that isettles it. Who would pre-
sumo to deny his claims any more than
they would Joe Smiths or Alexander
Dowie's?
Let me dismiss these presumptuous
claims of this ism with a quotation
from one of the leading Bible scholars
of the day who says of Russell: I'm
repudiating His (Chirst's) claims and
denying HIM as very God, afterwards
became incarnate for us men and our
redemption. 'Millenial Dawnism' send
Him with the singing whiplash of re-
vealed failure, impertinent falsehood,
unspeakable chicanery, or mental de-
generacy before the court of the world
contempt, the laughter of demons and
the delight of that. devil who profits by
His shame. Thus does Millennial Dawn
ism rob, dishonor, deny and blaspheme
the person, the life and character of the
Son of God.
! shall not trespass upon your space
further than to say that the entire theory
or the vagary of one person, does not
seem to be governed by the established
usage of language, but puts his own
construction on the Bible and flaunts it
forth as the light of the age, which dis
pels the mist of the dark ages; while he
is the self constituted leader of divine
truth.
His attempted answers to the ques-
tions asked of Mr.. Weber, show clearly
that he is disqualified to be leader or
guide in divine things though he
tacitly puts himself forward as one
especially capable of giving the truth,
and so the safe guide.
In my previous articles | have
shown the fallacy of his teaching on
these points. so it is not necessary to
repeat here To his followers | would
say be careful lest you be found to be
following leader who will land you in
the ditch.
AS to my motives, they are sufficient
ly sent forth in Proverbs 1927 and
John GIL.
am not dealing personally with the
author of Millennial Dawn, but with its
doctrines, which are opposed to the
creeds of all churches, and believe
contrary to the real teachings of the
Word of God
Thanking you for your space, Mr..
Editor, ! am Yours truly,
HAM.