THE PRESBYTERIAN ASSEMBLY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22422, 17 November 1934, Page 19

THE PRESBYTERIAN ASSEMBLY

TO THE EDITOR ; Sib, —Since the Bible is a universal .hook and vitally concerns each one of ,«a T . was Very , much ’ interested, in Dr Dickie’s moderatorial address. ' He says; “It becomes a pressing task of presentday theology to Work font a doctrine of biblical Authority,-” etc. Why is it such a pressing task now? , What -have the theologians of the. past 1900, years, been doirig to" leave us, in the dark until the present tirue? And what will _be the result to :the millions of ' Christians 'of past ages, who, according to “present-day-theology” have not understood the Scriptures, and therefore cannot have worshipped 'God acceptably? As a matter of fact the Scriptures are capable of., being understood by the simplest when they, are read; with a sincere desire to know what'God says. God has no favoiirities.-" He is riot concerned about “modern scholarship,” which 'thinks'such a lot of itself.. On the contrary, He says “ Knowledge puffeth up,” and. we see that frequently proved by modern theologians. They seem to think that their pronouncements on Holy Writ must be accepted by all. They claim to be authorities,' They go through a theological college, ■ where they study much theology and’ apparently very little Scripture, and they treat the revelation of God as a science, to be understood by man. If it is what .if claims ,to be, the revelation of God, their part is to obey it and seek to get others to do' so. If it is riot from God,:the logical thing to do'is to cast it away altogether and boldly proclaim it a fraud. arid a lie from beginning, to .end. .... , .

, .But.' these gentlemen are' not willing to do,that; ; They condescend to God and : His Word; fay picking out bits here and there to suit' themselves, and they pretend to 'be able to tell the world that some parte are. true. and some false! They remind me of job’s sarcasm to his comforters, “ Ye are the people and wisdom “will, die with you! ” They seem really -to thfhk that what they say is wisdom! They write '“Rev.” "before their names .button ' their collars at - the back, mount a’pulpit (after .an-elder has run up the steps-and plumped a big Bible on to a nice fat red velvet, cushion)look down on their congregation (in .more ways than one, probably), and begin, “Dearly be: joved brethren! ” The “ beloved ” are expected to accept all “the findings of modern' scholarship,” to swallow it whole. Some do —and some don’t! Certainly, the “beloved” pay well for it. I would advise young university men who are out of. work and who are not particular about loyalty, to the Scriptures to become “modern theologians.” It would mean for them a good salary, good house, good position, with no anxiety about the future. There is not .much mental strain attached to it. All one meeds to dp is to quote other “ modern theologians ” and claim all the scholarship there is in the profession, while declaring the opposition is composed of ignorant men, narrow and bigoted! To me this modern theology seems - all a-game of bluff. Surely these men must know that the Word of God is the Word, of God, and that man can neither add.to it nor. take from it. There seems something queer about the fact that these “ modern theologians,” so learned, so devoted to God and .the Scriptures, are the first to discover that the Bible is so hill of error, that Christ was not what He claims to be, etc. If the Presbyterian Assembly in Dunedin claims Jo be “modern,” the members made a 'sorry showing on November IS, according , to newspaper reports. It is well known throughout New Zealand' that the Rev. . P. B. Fraser is not modern. As John Knox stood for the infallibility of the Scriptures, so does Mr- Fraser, against the modernists. He has remained true to the doctrines of the Presbyterian Church. They have departed far from them. There is not the shadow of a doubt that John Knox was anything but a "modern theologian.” His theology and Mr Fraser’s are the same, so far- as I can see, yet a “modern” rules in Knox College, and Mr Fraser is not given even a decent hearing in assembly if the newspaper report is correct. Their actions ■and speech -were neither courteous nor dignified. One modern theologian said Mr Fraser " looked like a lost soul,” another rang a bell (the paper does not say why), another made an unimportant intimation about a coal, while, to crown all, another “ moved that the police be called to remove Mr Fraser”! Brave men! John Knox did not fear to face Mary Queen of Scots for conscience’sake, neither docs Mr Fraser fear ;to face the assembly for the same reason. I am only a poor ignoramus, and perhaps

T am . mistaken in my judgment of these first-class modern theologians, but on the evidence- it seems to me that they, and Mary Queen of Scots are in the same boat, ivjule John Knox and Mr P. B. Fraser ate in another. Royalty said, Down with the'Bible arid up with the theologians.” John Knox said, “Up with the Bible and down with the theologians.” God says, “The Word of God abideth for ever,” and His Word is the last word,— l am, etc.,. AnOucAn. Christchurch. ’