THE BIBLE.

Waikato Times, Volume 105, Issue 17711, 15 May 1929, Page 8

THE BIBLE.

ENTHUSIASTIC MEETING. MODERNISM DENOUNCED. EVOLUTION TEACHING OPPOSED The Hamilton Town Hall was well filled last night when lectures were given by visiting clergymen and others to uphold the absolute authority of the Bible. Much enthusiasm was shown and a strong resolution was passed in opposition to the teaching of evolution in the public schools. The Mayor (Mr J. R. Fow) presided. In a brief speech he declared that nothing could undermine the authority or the uplifting influence of the Bible. Rev. Dr. H. N. McLean, M.A., of the Presbyterian Church of Canada, said the insignia of the French Huguenots consisted of an anvil with hammers scattered around—the anvil standing for the Word of God, which withstood all blows. He would speak on the subject, “Christ Hoists the Danger Signal.” He quoted Christ’s saying. “Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing.” These false prophets claimed to be ministers of Christ, and quoted the Scriptures. They professed to have a great veneration for the Bible. They even professed to have more love for. the Bible than when they believed it to be the Word of God! Christ had described these false prophets as “ravening wolves,” cruel and remorseless. They were determined to do more and more mischief. “By their fruits ye shall know' them.” When lie found a man tampering with the Word of God he could not believe that man had anything to teach. When he found a man wanting to undermine Genesis and to substitute some silly monkey theory he was sure that man’s message was not in accordance with the teaching of Christ, who had upheld Genesis. A man who cast doubts on the miracles of the Bible had nothing to teach.

Financial Support.

Mr McLean defended Rev. A. A. Murray’s statement made at Auckland that Christians should not give their financial support to those who were tearing the Word of God to pieces. Criticism of this exhortation was not justified. If there were men manufacturing bombs here in Hamilton to blow up their neighbours, should not the people withhold their financial support from such men? Similarly people were not justified in giving their support to men who were pasting doubt on the Word of God. Such men were doing' the Devil's work, lie was speaking these words in love. The Devil had deceived such people, and they were trying to deceive others. No one could be neutral in this matter. They should refuse to be stampeded by the Devil or any agency the Devil might employ. The Seat of Authority. Rev. A. A. "Murray- spoke on the subjest, “Have We a Revelation from God?” lie said the speakers were there for the purpose of confirming their hearers’ faith in the Bible as the Word of God. In his boyhood they had never heard any criticism of the Bible. If any minis'er in his district had criticised the Bible in those days he would almost have been tarred and feathered. But a great change had come over this country and the world. Everywhere there was questioning as to whether the Bible was the Word of God. The Bible League stood for the absolute authority and inerrancy of the Word of God. It was an interdenominational body. If God had not spoken, then they had nothing to believe, said Air Murray. They would not stake their eternal welfare on mere opinions. Conscience was not the seat of authority; conscience might lead him to put his cows into a neighbour’s paddock to eat Hie voung grass for a few hours before daylight. The conscience could be defiled. Paul’s conscience, before his conversion, had led him to persecute and stone the Christians. Nor was man's reason the seat of authority. They found men judging the Bible by the standard of reason. But if. they accepted reason as their guide in religion they would land in utter scepticism and darkness and despair. Nor was the Church the scat of authority. Protestants did not believe in the dogma of infallibility of the Church. Not even the early Apostolic Church had been vested with authority; its heresies had been attacked by Paul, Peter, and John. Fourthly, our religious experience was not the seat of authority. The Mohammedans and the Buddhists also had their religious experience. “One Having Authority.” When the p GO P Ie heard Jesus speak they said he “ spake as one having authority.” The literal translation of the passage was, “ He spoke from the mouth of God.” The first three recorded utterances of Christ—on the occasion of His temptation—were quotations from the Scriptures. They lvid the Bible on the authority of the Son of God. It' Jesus was an ignorant man, be was not fit to be our Saviour. If a man denied the Hones is account of creation, he set himself against the authority of the Son of God. They heard it'said that, if Christ were alive to-dav, He would believe very differently. ’Did they believe that? (Voices: Ko ) ' Christ was omniscient. He needed not to be instructed by man. lie had set his seal on Moses’ authorship of the Pentateuch and His word was final. His authority was that of omnipotence. He stilled the storm, 'urned water into wine, cleansed lepers and healed all manner of diseases. Suppose they granted—which they did not—that His knowledge was limited during his lifetime, how did they account for his statement to the Disciples on the Ernmaeus road, “ These were the things that I said unto you while ’ I was with you i Iho Bible came to them with the full authority of the Son of God. “ Not One Jot or Tittle.”

Dr. W. IL Pettit, quoted the warning from Jeremiah: “The remnant of Judah shall know whose word shall stand. Mine or theirs.” He also quoted Christ’s saying: " He that rejecteth Me and receiveth not My word, hath One that judgeth him.. The words which I have spoken the same small judge him in the last day.” The war of to-day was not only a war of intellect but a war of spiritual forces, a war of God and Satan. A leading English modernist visiting New Zealand had said that there was a conflict of two forces—the forces of secularism and the forces of superstition and that the forces of superstition were being marshalled to fight a losing battle. But theirs were the forces of God and “ if God is with us, who can be against us?" Those who built upon the testimony of the Son of God could be sure that he would bring them in the last day into the presence of the Father. The reason why people were being led away from their belief in the Bible was that they did not know it. If the boys and girls had a full knowledge of the Bible, they would find in it amplo

protection against unbelief. Christ had left his followers In no uncertainty, said Dr. Pettit, as to whether the Bible was the Word of God or a mixture of truth and falsehood. He had said “ not one jot or tittle shall pass from the law till all is fulfilled.” They could not expect that their finite minds should be able to understand'all the thoughts of God. It was the pride of the human heart setting itself against the wisdom of God. Christ had not only authenticated the Old Testament but authenticated beforehand the writings of the New Testament. Christ had said; “ When the Spirit of Truth is come, he shall lead you into all truth.” They found from the beginning to end of the Scriptures their claim to be the Word of God.

This was no paltry conflict but was a war on which hung the eternal destiny of every woman and every man. If the Bible was the Word of Go.d, it was their duty, to proclaim it to the world. The two great cornerstones of the attack on the Bible were the theory of evolution and the denial of the miracles. Once they were prepared to jettison the testimony of the Son of God, they had taken a step towards the blackness and darkness of agnosticism. The Modernists accused them of shutting their eyes to facts, but that was a libel. Their opponents could not show' one fact which contradicted one statement in the Word of God. Philosophical speculations clothed in the garb of scientific knowledge were what they must avoid. They w'ere not going to be let down when they stood with the Son of God on this wonderful Word. People said the first chapter of Genesis was absurd because it declared that vegetation was created before the sun. He quoted against this view the statement of Professor Dana that the first thing that struck the scientific reader in Genesis was the evidence of divinity in the whole order of creation. He also quoted the statement of a large number of scientists, published in 1805, regretting that an attempt was being made to cast doubt on the truth and authenticity of Holy Scriptures. The truth of the Bibla was attested by true science and also by the fulfilment of the Scriptural prophecies. Who but God could have unfolded the happenings of the centuries far ahead? Who but God could have foreshadowed the birthplace of; Christ .and the whole story of His lif “| and death and final triumph? To disregard these prophecies and their fulfilment was to shut their eyes to the light. Dr. Pettit concluded his address with a stirring appeal to all to adhere to their faith in Christ and the Scriptures. A Resolution.

Mr Harold Coop moved:. “ That this meeting enters its most vigorous protest against the teaching of evolution being Introduced into our publio schools and calls upon the Government to put a Stop to it at once." Rev. P. B. Fraser, M.A., in seconding the motion, said that this move toward leaching evolution in the schools was unprecedented in th'e British Empire. The public schools were not the place where agnosticism should be taught while Christian teaching was excluded. Some of them were, ready to go to endless trouble to see this wrong put right. The people in many of the American States had become aware that large numbers of the'young people were becoming sceptical as a result of the teaching'in the universities. They were passing legislation to prevent such teaching, lie did not ask such drastic nWasures here, but appealed to the good sense of the people and Parliament to restore the education system to where it had been. If they did not heed this request, the people might be forced to take drastic measures. '

The motion was carried without dissent.

Dr. Pettit suggested that a meeting should be called in Hamilton for the discussion of the question of the teacuing of evolution in the schools. The meeting signified its approval of the suggestion.