BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Marlborough Express, Volume XLVII, Issue 140, 16 June 1913, Page 5

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

[to the editor.] Sir,—The Rev. W. 0. Robb suggests that I should dispose of Oblenso and possess myself of works such as W. It. Smith's. Were I to follow his advice I would read only one side of the question. As it happens there are in my library works by all the great thinkers, embracing all shades of opinion, from W. R. Smith and Schmiedel to Haeckel and Dujardin. Prof. Smith states: "1 am sure the Bible does speak to the heart of man in words that can only come from God." But is the Bible the only book that so speaks? So convincing was the voice of the Koran that the Crescent was enabled to rise and overthrow the Cross. Were I to adopt the methods of the Christian apologist I would argue that, on that account, the Koran was more powerful than the Bible. Buddhism is infinitely superior to both in that it has no bloodstained sword. How is it that Buddhism has spoken to the heart of man and inculcated the religion of peace while Christian nations, after 20 centuries of Christianity, possess the most diabolical / instruments of death it is possible for man to invent ? Buddhism has conquered 450 millions of people without the sword 1 The Bible is responsible for rivers of blood! And Christian writers have the audacity to inform us that theirs is the only religion, and that it speaks to the heart in words that come from God! I take it for granted that the religious fanaticism and persecuting zeal of the past is also breathed into the heart by the Bible, in which authority for such conduct was-found. Mr Robb says: "Why should the Bible speak the same message to God's people?" Because it is claimed to be inspired truth, and truth, is not a changeable factor that can, in varying degrees, bo adjusted to man, to suit his own little conceptions. Truth admits of no variations, and the disunion of the churches is a standing monument that the Bible is not true. It is absurd to argue that there can be various interpretations of truth, and no honest truth-seeker would suggest it. For example: Apostolical Succession is regarded as indispensable in the three great branches of the Church Catholic. It is absolutely denied by the other denominations. Both claim Biblical authority, but obviously both cannot be right. Were the Bible true it could not possibly give two so widely different dogmas. The "sources of our national, religious, and social life" lie far deeper than the Bible. Rather are they to be found in the remote past in such inscriptions as tho Hammurabi Code. The fierce and senseless intolerance of the Laws of Moses forms a significant contrast to the judicial dignity of the Laws of Hammurabi. Considerations of space prevent me from entering into the question as to the origin of our national, religious, and social life; but, with your permission, I will do so m another ksue.