THE BIBLE AND SCIENCE ON CREATION.

Waipa Post, Volume III, Issue 134, 6 August 1912, Page 3

THE BIBLE AND SCIENCE ON CREATION.

TO THE EDITOR. SIR,— I gave a public lecture eleven years ago in Liverpool on this subject chosen by, and at request of Professor Thomas, M.A., of Bangor University, at which there was discussion, and since then have given the same facts and most dates in sermons at Home, in St Andrew’s, and other well-known Auckland, Wellington, and Nelson churches, but never before been so publicly and unprovokedly insulted by a . . evangelical minister while defending God’s Word against Secular history; nevertheless, I still challenge refutation not contradiction, and can give proofs of truthfulness of quotations and authorities, if desired. The few quotations (not a excerpt or evasion) from Dr. can be sneered at from a study chair, seeing the doctor is at the other side of the world ; otherwise three minutes of his time here would do wonders, as he is well-known, and his • works possessed by educated layitien even in New Zealand.

Not being accountable to Rev. F. W. Clarke, 1 can leave your readers to decide if I have wandered from “Bible versus Secular History,” and leave them also to find out the probable “Spiritualistic Medium”wandered to by him, who could, since July 26th., so conveniently bring up a younger Sargon 11. from 11. Kings written about 887 8.C., or from 126 to 129 years before the older Sargon I, from Isaiah, written

about 761 8.C., and yet his time be 3800 B.C. Pre-historic authors or “inventors” (no need to strain at this “Gnat,” and swallow “Camel” of 3800 8.C.) may well be out of Court. Scientific guesses of 3 to 800 million years for “age” of 20 to 850 thousand years for glacial period andjup to 3 billion years for end of earth, surely justifly preference for and recommendation of Bible history, especially for all events and dates from at least B.C. and back-

wards, as this is in no way disparaging to Encyclopoedias etc. for later dates and events. I

shall continue to prefer and recommend the Bible, Dr Dimbleby (still premier), and the great Unsectarian and Lay Bible and Christian B. C. and A. Association behind him, with the other Christian authorities in harmony with Bible, while the Rev. F. W. Clarke should be left to his religious and. largely sacerdotal authorities not in harmony with the Bible. —I am, etc., R. P. deßidder. [We have deleted certain portions of Mr de Ridder’s letter. Had we not done so there is every probability that this discussion (which we have no desire to see further ventilated in our columns) would have merged into a mere wrangle on personalities.A-ED. W.P.]