THE BIBLE CONTROVERSY.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3654, 11 September 1880, Page 2

THE BIBLE CONTROVERSY.

(To the Editor of the Evening Star.)

Sis, —In a recent letter I informed the public that I intended to send you another upon the Jhmaculate Conception.. I hare, however, seen reason to alter ray mind after reading that diabolical letter (I can use no milder term) of your correspondent, " Sceptic ": he is a sceptic and no mistake. I shall now publish the letter I intended for your journal in my next number of Enoch, where no sceptic or anyone else will get an entrance in answer, unless he writes common sense aud tells the truth; neither will I argue with such people, it is useless, for those who 'believe not Moses and the prophets would not believe thongh one rose from the dead. The Immaculate Conception is a matter of too deep and grand a character to bo the subject of criticism by an atheist such as is sceptic. He can by no possibility understand it, or know anything about it, bis very bsmity to the truth of God precludes him from having any knowledge in spirital matters. In all the late Bible controversy one very conspicuous fact is apparent, and that is the moral cowardice of these sceptical writers, they are all either ashamed or lie. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, - Peter, &c, were never ashamed of their names, or afraid to expose themselves to the obloquy that the advocacy of Christianity in their days was certain to bring upon them; yea, more, they .were not afraid of: imprisonment, or even death. But these modern Bceptios lore darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil; so no name if you please is their motto.- They are the agents of Satan, and his work they do,l so the most of them prefer to stab Christianity and those who advocate it, in the dark, while at the same time they insiduously instil iuto the minds of the simple their infernal blasphemies. Christianity; notwithstanding its degeneracy in modern times, is the best system, of religion the world has. ever had, and until these ncoffers can produce a better let them hold their tongues and stay their pens. A few words as regards the controversy itself: It has |done some good . at any rate by putting the public teachers of religion on their metal. I trust they are somewhat more enlightened also regarding what is going on outside their little circles—ah! and inside their circles too. It has also done good in that it has brought out very much of truth, which would not probably have seen the light at the Thames without the controversy.; One especially of the " Enquirer's" letters contains very much of truth upon subjects that have ever been foggy in the minds of modern religious teachers and their hearers. We may notice these subjects elsewhere. But on the whole my conviction is the same as that of Thomas Cooper—viz., that public disdiscussions whether in halls or journals, by mouth or pen, on the evidences of Christianity seldom do any real good but very often do much harm. The champions of infidelity and atheism, big and little, are so crooked and unprincipled in their manner of proceeding ai often to be unworthy of notice. They come up to the encounter determined to win by fair means if they can, otherwise by foul, to win is their object, for anything else they care little about. It is difficult to discover that they hare any object in view except to win; they are too, much excited to -listen to truth, so it cannot get a fair entrance. into their minds, while on the other hand, many, young fresh minds are contaminated by the infidel rubbish that is laid before them, and are ultimately ruined by ifa pernicious effects. The above is abomt the substance of Cooper's judgment, and I don't think, him far wrong. At any rate we have had enough of the controversy for the present, I, think so.

Wimjam Wood.