The Alaska socialist., 1914-02-28
ALESSON IN TRUTH
By vERISSIMUS
(Continued from page D

of their work direct from him, our come pale, our minds recoil i'll horror, and we are ready to exclain- surely these things cannot be truth; surely the in- pulse that led to such deeds must have come from the Prince of Devils rather than loving and beuefcient God.
 It is a great comfort to those who love Truth more than earthly creed to ob- serve unmistakable evidence that the "earth does move', that higher Christ ian thought is now about ready to ac- knowledge and respond to Gods beauti- ful and immtuable law of evolution.
 Prof. pr. Chas. Henderson while chaplain of the Chicago University ex- pressed his utter contempt for certain parts of the bible. He ayers that John the Baptist's God was II better than our Devil", that the things which made David and Solomon saints in their day would land them in the penitentlary i'll our day.. He points to the fact that the bible speaks of David as "a man af- ter Gods own heart" then he almost takes our breath away by assuring us that it is easily susceptible of proof that David was really a criminal, or rather rank type; that it really would have been more truthful to stamp him as an erniss- ary of Satin, or i'll plain terms a man after the Devils own heart
 Now this surely is a most damaging admission tor any clergyman t Q make and the Nationalist whose heart is en- listed in the cause of truth feels inclined to ask why any book that would make so fatal mistake as to clothe coward and a scoundrel with the character of a saint why should it be called the best of books and why should twenty million copies of such book be spread broad cast over the world each year?
 It is perfectly safe to assume that W must judge every book, not by its best but by its worst parts
 This you may say seems paradoxical. But let us see if it is not true. Any book may contain page after page o i whole some thought, of lofty council, but let it display one page of questionable or immoral teaching and it becomes our duty to denounce such book as unsafe. We might, for instance, write magnif- iciently of liberty and the rights of man but if anywhere in our manuscript, we should dare to advocate assassination as a proper or permissible political weapon even if there be only one paragraph of such council---our work would deserve unqualified condemnation. It is not con- tended that books containing some im- morality, pr some false system of phil osophy should never be read; they should perhaps a t times be read by those who are capable of discrimination, but 1t is when you throw about such a volume the mantle of divine authority-when you give it unqualified endorsement, that you soil the mind with slavery--when you call such a book sacred and holy writ---you not only bIaspheme a great and splendid God--but it would seem that you had enlisted under the banner of Satin himself
 We very often hear the orthodox christian, and also many who, are not very orthodox, assert that Skeptics and Rational1sts select few defects, few lmperfections that may be found in the bible, and upon these they train all their artillery of criticism, overlooking i'll their zeal the great bulk of the work