SPERO'S REPLY.—(Continued).

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3709, 13 November 1880, Page 2

SPERO'S REPLY.—(Continued).

(To the Editor of the Erening Star.)

Sib,—My argument then is, that con. sidering the existing status of society, both Ministers of religion and the people generally, fairly act up to the practices and precepts inculcated by Christ—that the Christianity of the age is of a more practical character than in the days of the Apostles—the poor and the afflicted are better cared for in the magnificent institutions in our fatherland, which are being perpetuated in our colonies, maintained by subscriptions, and existing as monuments of lore and charity. In estimating the teaching of Christ and his Apostles it is necessary we should consider the effect a literal obedience thereto would have upon society. For-instance the injunction "Go and sell all that thou hast and give it to the poor " is just one ef those that cannot be obeyed. The Queen and her family could not do that, any more than the man with many home ties to cherish and protect. To follow out such, a principle would beget in the masses a spirit of laziness and mischief, destroy all law and order in the State, establish a communism of the worst order, and deprive the people of their self-reliance and manliness; the same reasoning being applicable to the social condition of all men. I cannot understand why ministers' wives should not dress well, and wear jewels if tbey like without derogating in any way from a purely Christian character. - Depend on it . nothing would be more enervating to a people than a slavish submission to a limp and sentimental faith, which in the end would destroy vastly more than it would save. I regard religion as a necessary institution, which must adapt I itself to the progression of human intellect. We do not now believe in witches* but John Wesley and Caboin did, and I would remarkably like to hear a minister declare such a belief orthodox in this year of grace. We also know the socalled Mosaic account of the creation, the sun and moon standing still, the sun going back fifteen degrees on the dial, and many other equally wonderful stories are not credited by anyone of average intelligence as facts, and yet for hundreds of years to deny their literality would have doomed the heretic to the stake, and in my opinion the day is not far distant when the good sense of the people will rise superior to the multitude of doctrines and dogmas which hold millions in a state of mental bondage. It must be oonoeded religion has heretofore adapted its . teachings somewhat to the growing intelligence of the age, and mast continue to do so, or it will inevitably become the subject of ridicule and contempt. Now >as to Sceptic's last.—He writes " Nature gives denial to the existence of a God." Let us dwell for a little upon this momentous and daring assertion. Consider, an atom of matter has no sense of feeling or motion, is inert, an aggregation of atoms is the same. Does not this simple fact suggest that to imbue them ' with an organism which possesses an active principle, some distinctive power is necessary, which must be infinitely- oreative in power? Regard the works of nature in their wonderful and varied beauty; life everywhere, and no form of life that does not proclaim a creator. Nature is the book of all books, which speaks of God, and in it there is not a lie, or a statement which requires the cunning of logic, or a sophist to make the reader believe, bat the origin of creation is a subject too deep for human research, new,theories have been from time to time propounded* and will be again, but who is to judge of their truth? Many of them have not survived the .generation in which they originated. I believe matter indistruo* table, and therefore eternal. Chemical forces may alter its form, bat no process can annihilate it. Water by heat is eon* verted into an invisible power, which by condensation again becomes water, metals . are held in solution, bat by a simple process can be precipitated. I do not therefore think it rational to believe in the eternity of that which is indistruotable. Aristotle declared a simple not in the couplet, " The race of Gods, &c," for the simple reason the deities in his mythology were essentially of human extraction, and therefore the offspring of nature., In con* elusion I ask " Sceptic" to give his opponents some tangible opportunity for discussion, for it is "irrational" for a writer to treat of a subject by innuendo and plead his letters are not written to provoke' controversy. Let us know what are the articles of his belief or unbelief, and What sort of knowledge he desires to acquire.— I am, &c, Spibo. .