PROFESSOR HUNTER'S QUESTIONS

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2152, 19 May 1914, Page 6

PROFESSOR HUNTER'S QUESTIONS

Sir, —1 was ant <jf town When Professor Hmitor's latest letter appeared, iicijeu my delay in rcplviug. It was Mora' ifl irony tliiui in anger that I coMUmted an yonr twWSjtoiKtoflt's i'nOOTsisteiiewrs. T'nn'" is a -long to-inor-l'otv coming, and his Mtteu® agrvijist tliis _ movement will not survive tlio Boplijsferi.es Ire relies on. I wonder if his indignation is astirtely assumed of . if, oil tlm otliT 'Iwiixl, J:o lifts not Lad lime to read my ■Q.ffewling letter. If neither of these be tuny then ho com-il-S hmisolf to this position: I'luyt no charge can oc convoyed liy menus af a (jn.'StitJiu Theu k<j wv.".\ld not resent the qttory: "I l:\vo you left *>(!' boating yonr wife?" Mv own description of liis questions was that they ware v."?uot.vput charges. I «e not tlm slightest ■reason to retract that description. It is re fresh i.ni: to read youi* c.or■rcspoliftei.t.t's vmsolirltod testimonial to fits own iiononral'le methods in coniro- ■ vorsy. Hp Has charitably pro\ tded a nilo of mterpretatiofi, too, ivijioh_ frees roe from the t»snlt of any invidiam; oor.rparisou. For if a fmcxtion juiiy not imply a oljai'ge, it is ohtimiß that a, statctl|o»t- does not suggest an inference, Agfliii. Professor Hunter attiiinnc-d to mo ti;o « isli (<• exclude ail but Christian teaehers iron) the school's. Pressed to give proof, fife quotes from my letter referring' to hypothetical touchers (on his own theory), wheso, religions eoiirietioiis art* such 'hat tliry violate theia even hv listening to the B'iMe-re.sttei|i; Noiv., of course, there iiro mi sueb teachers. In the passage referred, to. I followed tin? 'iH,illr< <1-1 cac?ic r'" theory to its logical coi'iehisiwn. an ■absuraity., .This your "honourable" corrcs.pfitulciii neatly prctvris irtto a:i attempt to exclude all hut Christian teachers. At the best otie est,n wily opueimlo that His totalise animus against Chiirth i«d Biblo Have temporarily de-st.roycd h|s feus? of piopi'i'tion in matters of evidence. . I}y f«)jiit'ing tlm (T])ewiH.2 spii* fences of the passage iit my tetter, lis mak'es it .ippcar that ilfp Wrtrds, "tl.iofoto whom the. BiSilo is deihiiioly wrong iti its fp.wliing" refers to sm*b as are not Christians. The contest cteu'jy shows that, ftlify those, if fimro lift any, who religiously Hold, with,Kirt-asHtej ii.it iho Christian ptSi.ie >•!' lovp is the codn of slaves, or mlw in any iitlrer way ftro in dirci variance witls the fuiufe» llieistnl f'tliif \1 pnilfiplpa of tjie fii.hle, would he iivi.(H.t:cr.l to tmsttUl the tfharjetor of Chris!inn chdiive:;. fo t'ii.is r:c.v I hold, hilt I emphatically o'.iipc'.. to the tiorvursjou Hip.teof atttiinit-vl to mo hy your f'oVi'PS'lwntevt, I have known well it. i>r'-;it number of leaclteis, and I eannol. retail any under wto.se snpovvision a ScriptUro lYuidmc-losMni would I'-rovo anythiivfi Imt. lro.nrficia.li bo tho f.oad.ic.r,profei!-sciH,v Ciiris! inn ov'iiot. tn mei;t l.io is Stririnsi'' to make hfiolis wiilwnl si raw, as St is, and iho firiid.tjneiita} lift which tlm Mhtavl tesi-hool; of our raoi> \vould !»ivn ti.i'ni. iconM It? wpfemnftd owco it? pes;(ion was establisbeu,—l am. no,, a H wn Ll ws,