SCRIPTURE CONTROVESY.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3724, 1 December 1880, Page 2

SCRIPTURE CONTROVESY.

(To the Editor of the Evening Star.) Sib,—" Mistaken religionists who promulgate strange views of God, or a system of revelation in which man is not

raised to God, but God brought down to man's level, were the infidel makers of this and every other century." There is terrible truth and deep logical force in the above words. The Rev. Mr Neill merits

the praise of the entire community for having spoken so boldly, io fairly, and"so . truthfully, not only in this instance, but in all his public utterances. His recent lectures upon Scriptural subjects are not only the best in a literary aspect, but, „ manifest much erudition, both minute and comprehensive, of sacred and profane history, and a liberal roognition of secular knowledge and science. The calm, mode* rate and gentlemanly spirit in which he conducts his arguments display a sincere and perfect knowledge of the subject with Christian consideration and good breeding.' His intimate acquaintance with the works and thoughts of the foremost theological thinkers, and his perfectly fair method of exegisis display a free and liberal con- /',. stitution of mind. All denominations of Christians may devoutly wish for many ... more such gentlemen to uphold the tottering fabric of modern Christianity. Let us, however, ascertain whether the assumption that infidels hare n6 devotion ■ or proper notion of Deity, is cornet. To the question, What is God P he replies, in the language of St. Paul," The universal , Being, ' in whom we live and move and have our being."' This answer imports nothing of the finite, unworthy notions of the Deity as entertained by the Christians of the present time. v If, as i« generally,', admitted, all things are in God, as a necessity all things most proceed from His essence, and be or partake thereof. Entire material being could not be conceived . or sustained in a Being who is not thus constituted. Neither of the four first (Ecumenical or General Councils of the Christian Church denied the truth of Tertullian's proposi- . tion " that whatever is not corporeal if nothing." He maintains that every exit*, tenceis a body. He asks—"Who will deny that God-is a body, although God if a Spirit ? " Surely the Council of, Nice, under Constantino and Pope Sylvester* in' 325; that .of Constantinople, under Gratian, Valentinian, Theodosius, and, Pope Damasus, 381; Ephesus, under Theodosius 2nd, Valentinian, and Pope Gelestin, 431; and that of Chaladon, under Valinentinian Marpi&nus, and Pope Leo the Great, 451, ..would have condemned false doctrine of, one argaing ; : against Appelles and Praxes*. Few;' oersoosi are satisfied with simple ideat of * God. An unprejudiced mind, cannot reeoooue the notions which prophets and priests have . in all times formed of the Diety. Some describe' God as a being entirely cor* poreal. He is seen seated (clothed)* in the form of an old man, ai fire, as a dove, as tongues of fire, and at ' light. They depict him with feet, hands, eyes, ears, heart, nostrils, fingers, and speak of him as resting, walking, speaking, arguing, reasoning, coming down, Ac They represent the Deity with every finite human passion and mortal infirmity —jealousy, anger, hatred, love, repentance, wrath, passion, love of glory, fury, vengeance, sorrow, merciful and merciless, , benevolent, weary, revengeful, fearful,. likes and dislikes, displeasure—and.then.,. having quoted scripture to prove that man,, is formed in God's image, they inline* ■ diately deny that there is any resemblance between the copy and the original. The Christianity of the present day is merely a respectable heathenism, and the God of the people, as represented by the different sects, undergoes as many changes and transformations as did the Pagan God Jupiter amongst a people who we, in our boasted enlightenment and faneieid ; superiority, call benighted heathen.—l* am, &c, Scxpnc. Thames, 29th Nov., 1880.