The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1913-02-13

mun1ty from every possible dueie' Dc
cause of this widespread interest
resurvey of the foundations on which
the institution rests may be of some
value to certain minds.
Appeals for Sabbath observance are
usually based, in religious circles at
least, on tho sanctions. one of which
Is the Creation account in the book
Of Genesis, the other the commands
Of Moses. 1t is argued that God in
stituted the day as a memorial OF
His own rest after the work of Gre
alton and later on REINFORCED 1t
through the legislation of Moses. Ac-
cording to this view the Sabbath was
created and it's provisions arranged
for by divine fiat. To many of US
this logic Is losing it's force and such
sanctioning is breaking down. Indeed,
it is becoming increasingly evident
that this theological appeal is ceasing
men and women.
And for good reasons. So long as
we believed that the Bible is di-
vinely dictated book absolutely infal-
lible throughout, we hesitated to ig-
more or violate its plain pronuncia-
mentos; to tell us that the Bible COM
manded us to do this or that had
weight. But today the dogma Of Bib
lical infallibility is crumbling away.
The Bible has been recovered to US
as a human book. We find in it
wonderfully forceful expression of the
religious experience of a people of
unparalleled spiritual genius. but we
do not find it to be what the Moham-
medans claim for their Koran, an in
fallible book composed in Heaven by
Deity and miracuously purveyed to us
by selected messengers. We find it
more inspired than other books and
yet inspired in the same way, and we
read it as we read other books. So
full of high and permanent qualities is
it that we are convinced 1t is we'll
able to hold it's ground without being
reinforced or buttressed up by some
untenable and irrational theory of in
fallible divine dictation. And 1t is
full of human qualities, Of human
weakness and human strength, human
hatred and human love It's state
ments are to be tested like the state
ments of other writings and it's errors
and mis-statements ore no more bind
ing on us than are the statements or
mistatements of any other book. In
solar as the statements of the Bible
are true they are authoritative because
truth is authoritative wherever 1t is
found, ION heather or on Christian
ground" but we cannot believe that
we are compelled to accept an i'm
probable statement merely because 1t
is found in the Bible. To make AL
mighty God responsible for every SEN
tence in it, as a prominent religious
| worker did in our city recently, is per-
ilous business, especially perilous to
a religious leader because such a po-
sition will inevitably lead honest
hold that the Bible is unique by virtue
Of it's incompatible qualities, a vol
ume written by men whose hearts
were afame with the spirit Of God.
| but we cannot believe that the pro-
cess of Biblical authorship was diff
ferent in it's nature from other work
Of human creation. Undoubtedly is is
the supreme, the indispensable book,
but it differs from other books not in
kind but in degree.
Those of us who have learned to
read the Bible in this light have been
led by the facts Of the case to regard
the account Of the Creation in the
book of Genisis as one of a large fam
lily of myths current among Semitic
people. 1t is not an historical or
scientific description of the way things
came to be nor can it by any juggling
of language be made so. Those who
have endeavored to reconcile Genisis
with Astronomy or Geology have
found it quite impossible. OF course
the Biblical narrative is unspeakably
superior to the crude and polytheistic
productions of the Babylonians and
Cananites. removed from them, in
fact in every way, officially, religious.
lily and esthetica1ly, by almost the
whole diameter of culture. but it re
mains a myth nevertheless, and as a
myth cannot be regarded as regulative
of our modern affairs.
The case is about the same with
the legislation of Moses. That noble
Hebrew was probably the greatest leg
islator of all time. but he did not make
laws for US. If We are to suppose, as
some would have us do, that his reg
ulations were divinely dictated and
therefore infallible and consequently
obligatory on all succeeding genera
lions, it is difficult to see why one
part is not as binding as another
If Moses Sabbath legislation is al
Divine authority why are not his rules
for slaughtering animals OH the altar
and for robing of ministers. equal,
Divine? If we are going to bind our
selves by Mosaic legislation we have
no right to discard any part of it
We have only to state such a propo
sition go see how unreasonable it is
We are no more under obligation t.
obey the laws of Moses than We are