THE SYNOD AND THE BIBLE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21641, 6 November 1933, Page 13

THE SYNOD AND THE BIBLE

Sir, —There seems a great tendency on the part of some of your correspondents in tho discussion anent the Anglican Synod and the Bible to disparage or belittle the Old Testament and its teachings. While no thoughtful Christian would maintain that it was essential for a man's salvation that ho believe in the literal fact of a great fish swallowing Jonah, we must not lose sight of the fact that the Old Testament and the New form a unity—neither can bo really understood without the other. Thus Origen, the great Alexandrian Church father (185-254, A.D.), well asserts, "In the Old Testament Now lies concealed, in the New Testament tho Old lies revealed." And Professor James Stalker, of Aberdeen, says, "Without a profound and sympathetic knowledge of the Old Testament, the New can never be fully understood." ("The Atonement," page Sir, —Let me try to be a herald of hope, to those who are in despair at tho thought of disturbing some of the beliefs that had their birth in the childhood of civilisation. As we evolve upward spiritually, as well as bodily, the old order changeth, and new rays of light are absorbed. Tho unseen is much more wonderful than the seen, and wo are just beginning to sense some of tho wonderfulness of it. To my thinking Cowper put it better than anyone has done. "God moves in a mysterious way His wonders to perform. He plants His footsteps in the sea, and rides upon the storm." I congratulate the synod on tho stand it has taken. The change is long overdue; though a tardy guest, give it a welcome. Veritas.

Sir, —New Zealand must keep up with the best religious thought of tho world, and the recent report on Bible teaching by the Anglican Synod is a praiseworthy step in this direction. Honest persons desire the truth, and are equally careful to avoid over-estimating or underestimating tho Bible. They find tho truth lies between tho extremes of fundamentalism and modernism (unlovely words!). While I have some sympathy with every ono of your correspondents, I consider that tho majority of them do not understand the situation and fail to face the facts. Men well trained for the ministry are aware of many divers conceptions of inspiration (as Dr. J. F. Jones should know) and the Bible itself does not settle these. Tho passages in 11. Timothy, iii., 16, and 11. Peter, i., 21, are so general that they would apply to tho Apocryphal books of both the Old and New Testaments. And the Old Testament canon was not settled by tho Jews until after these epistles were written. Christ quoted from tho Old Testament and the Apocrypha, but that did not establish their infallibility. Indeed, Ho took issue with certain passages, 'lf-critica of the synod were versed in tho recent science of textual criticism, as every prepared minister should bo, they would not have attacked tho synod in such a foolish and ignorant manner. They would know that it is impossible for educated men to hold to the old dogmas of Bible infallibility and verbal inspiration. At Scots Hall, on Sunday afternoon last, questions were not permitted, "because they might lead to disorder," according to the chairman (a reflection on himself and the audience), but questions might havo led to the embarrassment and discomfiture of the 'speakers. They cannot answer when we ask: Which is the infallible Bible? Is it tho Protestant or tho Roman Catholic? If the Protestant, is it the Authorised or Revised version? When Bibles and versions. disagee it is obvious that they all cannot bo infallible or verbally inspired by an infallible Spirit. And, if wo had an infallible book or authority, how could fallible men know it? The Roman Catholic Bible has been emended again and again, and will probably be further emended. The Authorised Version of the Protestant Bible is an inferior translation of an inferior text into .language which is to-day obsoleto and misleading, hence the demand for the Revised Version and the Standard American Bible. Even tho Scofield Beference Bible, so largely used by our fundamentalist brethren, does not refrain from condemning the text in certain passages of the Authorised Version! See Rom., viii., 1, margin. "The last ten words are interpolated." I. John, v., 7, margin. "It is generally agreed that v. 7 has no real authority and has been inserted." Let fundamentalists and modernists adhere Btrictly to the truth and they will find that they are not so far apart as Jliey may now suppose. True religion and true Christianity do not depend on any book. God has written His law on tho hearts of men, and Christ taught that tho "Spirit of truth," not a book, would "guide you into all truth." He also taught that "the truth shall make you free." I plead for a spirit of love, which leads to freedom, diversity and tolerance. J. G. Hughes, Th.D.