SUNDAY RECRETION.

Evening Star, Issue 19838, 11 April 1928, Page 11

SUNDAY RECRETION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Mr Grainger's reply i<> me on the above is not all clear, and suggests tliaL this gentleman is to a ccitain extent muddled on the subject himsell. [ certainly do mean to say that my claims on" this subject are not Christian claims, hut are emphatically m opposition to any intcrlcrcnec vitli Sunday based on Christian doctrines, creeds, or dogmas. J. thought that nas clear to the veriest school child. Regarding the space and scope allowed 111 the respective claims, Christian and rational, I have learned by bitter experience that the ‘Star’ columns are not open in the same extent or so Ji'celv on the latter as the termer. 'Phis is, of course, not an attitude 1 eeiiliar to the ‘Star’ in contrast to the rest of the New Zealand Tress, but rather the over limited and grudging space allowed such as myself here is more than t could hope to secure elsewhere. Ido not here and now remark on the-wisdom or justice of the opposition shown to publication of Rationalistic views and criticisms, but inlorm ]\lr (irji ol jx lact oi which Jig scorns ignorant. What does Mr Grainger mean by saving that I do not give Scriptural warrant, for what 1 put forward? Any man who vehemently or sincerely defends the Rible and the Christian religion should at least acquaint himself until the authority lie relies on—the Bible. Had this correspondent done so there would bo no need to quote him chapter and verse for the quotations used. My Rationalist friends know that,.! would not at any tinie distort or manufacture a verse which ; wf s not in the Bible when 1 had plainly implied that it was there, and they ’fould, as is usually the case, know nt 1 the quotations, wherever they may he, , simplv because always we find the critic I with "a better and clearer idea and ' knowledge of the Christian religion than the devout believer. I remind _ Mr (iraingcr, therefore, that it is not I who savs that a man should please himself in regard to the uso ol Sunday, hut your correspondent s infallible guide—flic Bible. _ . .. 1 thank Mr (.iraingcr lor his relcrenco to Isaiah on the question of Sunday observance. 1 have looked it up and noted it. Will he now please look up Exodus xxxi., 15, where any man dolin' any work on the Sabbath is to 1,0 killed? Will ho also look up Numbers xv., .‘52-1)6, and read of a practical application of this loving law? Exodus xxxv., 3, forbids the kindling ol a lire even on the Sabbath. Now, d VJ® Christian Bible is an infallible guide and .should be sufficient authority lor directing and restricting the people of an educated and civilised country, why do not our Christian friends advocate the practical and merciless iumlmcnt of these laws? A plain, unequivocal rcplv to this would be appreciated. 1 f as 1 suspect, the pious one replies that the “ law ” was fulfilled in Christ, etc., and has no application to ns, 1 wish to know why the low in Isnitih - is quoted to me? Again, T have before mo a book winch says that “There is not one single text to bo found in the whole of the New Testament containing anything of the nature of a command to Christians, either from the Saviour or His Apostles, to observe the Sabbath. On.the contrary, John v., 16 and Matthew xii., 1,2, !5, 5 record the breaking, and justification for so doing, of the Sabbath by .Jesus Himsell. Then wehaye in Romans xv., 5 and Colossians n., to the words of Paul stressing the right of every man “ to fully he persuaded in Ins own mind,” and not to judge another “in respect . . . of the Sabbath days.” Then wo have m Isaiah—the refuge of our inend Mr Grainger—in chapter xm. the babbatli repudiated as an “iniquity.” hi the Old Testament we have given two different reasons lor keeping the Sabbath and accounts of its inception bv the Almighty, but as there are a dual account of the creation (contradictory, of course), two contradictory records of the stocking of the Ark by Nnali, as well as different versions ol the Ten Commandments, we need not worry much over the Sabbath contradiction. . My reason lor going somewhat Hilly info this question and my request lor space to ventilate it is that a majority of the people are indifferent, contemptuous, or opposed to the Bible commands (Old Testament) to observe the Sabbath and adhere rather to the New, which urges them to be satisfied individually. If only the devout would take note of and obey the injunction not to judge others regarding the matter, this mischievous and unwarranted interference with the secular amusements of our people would cease. Is it not strange that when a Christian wishes to impose his will upon another ho chooses some text favorable to his purpose and ignores those giving contradictory counsel? When it suits his purpose he pens his faith upon the New Testament as being a refined morality compared with the Old, but then, again, he hies himself back to the latter when it suits his purpose. When T instance ksuch brutality as is in the Old Testament, especially the command to kill anyone found picking up sticks on Sunday, 1 am told that .such commands do not now hold because of Christ’s mission, but for all that the Christian clings tenaciously

to the Ten Commandments as a basis or Christian justice, creed, and dogma. When will our Christian friends learn that the alleged commands given to a barbarous people are not binding on civilised, educated persons in another country two thousand or four thousand years after they were supposed to be given?—] am, etc., E.W.F. April 11.