Bible Influence.

Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 25 June 1913, Page 3

Bible Influence.

Reply to Mr Claud Hopper.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir —,Mr Hopper states in his last letter to you that the general influence of the Bible has never been at issue between us. I wondered why his attacks were so feeble, his defence so ineffective and his quibbles so far away from the point; that explains it if he never intended for a moment to uphold that the influence of the Bible was other than good —generally. He speaks of questionable tac-' tics because of the inclusion of the word ' general 'in my challenge. In my letter of April 25th I said that " your correspondent has stated that the Bible had the effect of stifling legitimate ambition, retarding studies, and inspiring most deadly fears," and " that he used this as an argument against the use of the Bible in our State schools, thus inferring that this is its general effect." Why did he not point out then, that he never for a moment hinted that this was its general effect ? In my first letter published, Feb 26th, I said : " Your correspondent's inference that the Bible had and still has a bad influence on character is emphatically wrong /and I can prove it from personal Experience and observation." Why did he not say then, that fthis point was not at issue between us and that he did not the general influence of Ithe Bible. When I said " I could fnot let this false inference to tbe palmed off on your readers Iwithout vigerous protest," if he [bad said then that he never iniierided any such thing, it would lhave explained his silence when 11 challenged him to try and es- \ tablish this inference, and it would have looked better than ■retiring step by step under attack, land then as a last resource say- • ing " this point was never at issue l: between us." ll H^ hlfc spoken of the terrors 9 of the Bible,' he has likened the Igood old Book to ' a wiff from the Ifcottomless pit across the thermal round about Mokai,' he fffes attributed to the Bible many gevil influences and bad impressions, yet when I challenge the Itruth of these statements and object to these supposed effects as fcfalse and unnatural, after feebly Kind vainly attempting to hold his Cround he turns round and says W- Oh ! I was not speaking gener-

ally ; —I. was careful to refer to a personal not a general effect." He thus extricates himself from a false and certainly —as his figurative language in last weeks letter suggests —a very humiliating position.

Now, if Mr Hopper did not think that this personal effect of the Bible was its general effect, why did he raise objections on this ground to the general use of the Bible in our State schools ? Again, from the fact of his writing and from the nanner of his writing, it is plain that in his opinion this effect of the Bible on himself is its natural effect and therefore —• as a natural carrollory—its universal effect, (which is far more comprehensive than the word general). Further, having voiced this opinion publicly it would have looked better instead of making the lame excuse that' this point was never at issue between us' when challenged to debate the point on public platform, if he had admitted that/this point was no longer at issue between us.

However, Mr Editor, if my opponent no longer wishes to controvert this point, let me ask your readers to consider all that has been said and I feel sure they will unhesitatingly admit the truth of the words of the Marquis of Northampton, who in his message to the Bible society this year said, " No nation or empire owes more than we do to the Bible. It has been and is, the inspirer of all that is best in our national life,.. • and in our individual character. The debt which the British Empire owes to the publication of the Holy Scriptures is incalculable." In closing let me say, ignoring the exceptions (of which there are some to every general rule), the Bible has been the inspirer of the best of thoughts, and the creator of the finest and noblest characters, its influence has been and is mighty and magnificient.. Quod Erat Demonstrandum. I am, etc, Horace W. Milner. 21-6-13.