New Britain herald., 1917-12-26
PASTOR HARRIMAN'S SERIES
 ON EVOLUTION ATTACKED


 Belshazzer, a Cyrus possibly a Daniel and Darius? Until lately the only things they Qenied were the stories of the Golden image, the fiery fur mace, the den of lions, the hand writ ing on the wall and the story Of Me- buchadnezzar being turned out to grass. But it turns out that mucn other Bible history is incorrect, that Belshazza never was king that he was not the son of Nebuchadnezzar as the Bible over and over states, that Babylon fell without the loss of lire and that there was no king Darius at all. Have you told your people these things? We venture you have not nor you never will. What else oo the monuments show?
 That at least one thousand years be- fore Moses was born, there were cooes Of laws in Babylonia, so much more extensive and complete, of much higher moral character than Israel ever possessed at any period
 That the stories of creation, fall and flood were old in Babylon1a no man knows when and that the Bible stories are copied either from them or from some older tradition. Have you in formed your people of these facts? Have you told them that reliable his tory in both Egypt and Babylon1a goes a thousand years back of the creation of Adam according to the Bible? Have you told them that the different races are depicted on the monuments more than two thousand years before the Bible flood? Have you told them that the oldest traces of man, from Green1ands icy noun tains to Indias coral strand and from Scandinavia to the Cape of Good Hope are precisely the same, the same stone implements, the same rise to those of metal, that beneath these ancient civilizations are these primitive traces of primeval man, that the monu- ments prove beyond the shadow of doubt, that man has never fallen, but has constantly risen? These facts ef- fectua1ly dispose of the theory that to Moses was first given the law, and also of the necessity of of>"redemption' from a mythical fall" Will you tell me how much better than plain lying is the concealment of these indisput- able evidences of the Bible errors on these points. The critics are the men who are saving the Bible. It has fallen almost into utter neglect through the absurd claims for it's infallibility and plenary inspiration.
 Why, pray, should not a sensible man be glad that there was some mistake about God telling men to kill an animal and burn it to make a sweet smelling savor in His nostrils? Or that He did not command to kill all but the maidens, and give them fo ho iro of diseased meat but permit it to be sold to a foreigner. That He never gave directions for the sale of ones own daughter to be a slave, and to demand the sacrifice of every first born son?
 That all the stories of lust and mur- der and all sorts of crimes so utterly uncondemned in every instance?
 What sensible man that will not re- joice to learn that man has not fallen and for the sin of Adam condemned to eternak torture in defiance of every principle of justice, as though one should be punished for the sin of an- other. Ezekiel knew better than this
 Is it not more to the credit of the Grand Architect, or at least as much, to have worked by the plan of evo- lution as by fiat?
 Do you think that any writer of the Bible supposed for moment that he was writing something that at some future time was to be called holy, sacred and inspired?
 Don't you think that if the writer of the first chapter of Genesis had supposed that any one would be so stupid as to understand it literally, he would have labelled it poetry?
 Just as we'll claim that the Pil- grim's Progress was a literal Pilgrim age; just as much sense in it.
 Don't you know that Jesus set aside as something that savage man had outgrown, some of these primi- tive laws and did He not disregard others? Is it possible that you have not read what the Prophets, Amos, 1 Moses, Micah, Isaiah and especially Jeremiah said about these primitive ! laws and regulations about sacrifices. full moons fringes, per fumeries, arks and tabernacles? No modern heretic, not even Ingersol, so scathingly denounced these things than they?
 Is it not about time you fellows 1 were catching up to them after 2.50O l years. Much of the theology of the l great Pres. Church which have weekly attended for seventy years, l would disgrace Hottetot, and the | clergy are so meekly subservient to a 1 few men like you and Matthews, Fox | and few of these editors that have ! that they fear to cast off 1 this milestone of the confession, at 1 the same time saying, "Oh, we don't ] believe such and such things" They l are justly held inconsistenly when 1 they profess to accept the confession | and then preach doctrine squarely the 1 contrary, protesting to believe that | every mans destiny is irrevocably fixed from all eternity and then stand