Runcorn Examiner. — 1893-05-20 (Runcorn, Cheshire, England)

SNODGRASS.  WHAT IS SALVATION  Sir,—Tho above simple question was recently put to such of your readers as might see their way clear to rush in with an answer. To the great disappointment sf the party who put the question no answer came. I am not likely to crack such a hard theological nut, but will, with your permission, sir, just talk a little at it,  always keeping at a safe distance. For near upon thirty years I have been an interested, and, at times, an active looker-on of religious polemics, trying by such hard study as was possible to me,to solve the question of an hereafter, so that at least such conscience as I possess should be at rest, and the conclusion I have come to is, that I know as much as the parson, and, that he knows as much as I do, about the Almighty and His ways, and that both put together, we know nothing. I know that we " kno'w-nothing " people, mine ha for a pretty good share of ridicule. It is assumed that we are careless about the matter, that we are not honest in our inquiry, that we stifle the still small voice—and so on. No stone is too big to throw at us. We are fitted to bring children into this world, but not fitted to take care of them. Some of us are endowed with great intellectual powers, yet, ere we can gain a seat in Parliament we must go through a slow course of murdsr. In fact murder and persecution become a fine art in the hands of Christians when a determined opponent to traditional Biblical exposition dares to be thorough. My charges are strong, yet the history of the past dozen years will bear them out. I can fancy some saying " Oh yes, that's all right, but why reap all this stale history up, under the heading of your letter ?" I worked for years alongside of Mr. Bradlaugh, and Mrs. Besant. I knew their honesty of purpose. I had heard a leading Unitarian, of all other men, state in the Cooperative Hall that it was " license not liberty these people want." I had repelled base insinuations when I had heard their names bracketed in an unseemly manner together, and yet Mr. Editor, I lived to see, and to know that there ware none tio poor whether in press, pulpit, , or market place to do reverence to the memory of oue who surely knows now what salvation is. Yes, we" know-nothing" folk ask from those who are paid servants of the public, those who are supposed to pass a large portion of their time in prayerful study of the bible what is the salvation we all have to die for before we can have its blessing. Let us come right down to the fundamental question. , Salvation means" to be saved from the bondage of sin, and liability to eternal death." The theological sin, as here given, is the sin we are supposed to have inherited from the Garden of Eden episode. Eternal death so far as I can understand it, must mean simply annihilation when physical death conies to us. It may mean to some theological casuist some kind of spiritual resurrection so that the soul may be fitted to endure the torments of hell. On this latter point I am quite willing to follow any kindly light that may offer to lead me on to truth.  I have been much interested in the spirited discussion between Mr. Dignum and Harry Esmond, but,after all, I could only ask—well, what matter whether it is Tweedledum or Tweedledee ? Sir Edwin Arnold. has given to us a beautiful Indian litefature, but not, in my opinion, one that is likely ever to become in touch with the spirit of the coming ages like the ethical portion of the New Testament. It is with the so-called supernatural sides of the later books as compared with the