SCRIPTURE CONTROVERSY.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3735, 14 December 1880, Page 2

SCRIPTURE CONTROVERSY.

(To the Editor of the Ereninß Star.) Sis,—Far from being wiser or better than the rest of mankind, prophets and J nests have advanced opinions of the )eity, so gross and blasphemous that nothing short of profound ignorance could believe or tolerate them. No quality except bold presumption distinguishes them. They were borne and sustained as ordinary mortals, and were never actually dealt with in any different manner than other men, neither did the Deity disclose himself to, or select them to proclaim his laws, nor do we find in their statements anything of an exalted character respecting the Deity. For the most part their writings and the arrangement of them are so obscure and disorderly as to render them unintelligible, leading to the opinion that they themselves did not understand them. The reverence in which prophets and priests hare been held is consequent upon their boasted intimacy and personal intercourse with the Deity, and that their doctrine came directly from him. Dreams and visions were the favourite; medium of these feigned or fancied communications. Dreaming in itself is an accidental circumstance, natural to all people, but the assertion that God chooses this medium of communicating with mankind is either a vain self-imposition or a premeditated fraud, unworthy of belief. But are we bound to believe or respect the dreams of our fellow creatures, who are as susceptible of error as ourselves, and equally fallible in lying, deceit and imposture:? In the present day prophets and priests are held in much greater respect than in their own times. They were then frequently punished for falsehood, privy conspiracy, and rebellion. Prophets have always been much mo/c respected when they have had physical force to back up their pretensions. A prophet who could slay 24,000 men as Moses did in one day, would certainly convert or pervert many unbelievers, notwithstanding which, Ahab, the King of Israel, consulted 400 prophets who were all false as shown by the result of their vaticinations. They contradicted each other, and out of this large number of professional soothsayers not one truthful man could be found. What credibility then should be given to them or to I the vaticination mongers and prophet readers of the present day, who, like their ancient brethren, seek to promote their sinister purposes by persuading people that they are wiser in divine things than others P The most subtle and designing men have invariably concealed their sinister purposes under the cloak of religion. These prophets hate formed finite and unworthy notions of the Deity. Some describe him as entirely corporeal; others as sensitive and material, and with all human passion*; some that God has nothing in common with ourselves and

matter, and that he is entirely beyond our comprehension. No attempt is ever made to reconcile these palpable contradictions, and we are only asked to credit them upon the evidence of people who believe a calf to be God, and upon such contradictory writings as declare that man is master of his own actions, and then that he has no control over his propensities without the particular grace of God. I purpose here* after considering the causes of belief in a divinity.—l am, &0., Sceptic.

(To the Editor of the Evening Stab.) Sib,—" Sceptic " in his writings contemplates truth too much on specula tire principles, and omitting practical relations. Take, for instance, the character of God. " Sceptic" appears chiefly employed in investigating the absolute existence of divine attributes, and in pursuing these investigations has had much to do with the nature of infinity and the connection between cause and effect, la the greatness or the littleness, the darkness or the splendour of his specula* tions, he has entirely lost sight of the practical bearings of the truth, and , though he may hare brought out some; thing to bewilder or. dazzle the imagination, it is nothing that makes a powerful appeal to the heart. Why not let all useless speculation alone; or, on the other hand, exhibit the character of God chiefly through the relations he sustain* to us, and in connection with the duties which we owe to him. Exhibit him as our Father in Heaven, from whom cometh down every good gift, and to whom we are bound to render homage of the heart, and the obedience of the life; as our Councillor, who has condescended to instruct us in respect to every part of our duty, and whose teachings we are bound to heed; as our Judge, at whose tribunal we ± are finally to render an account, and by whose hand our eternal retribution is to be measured out. Instead of leading us into a maze of abstruse speculations respecting unity, tell us that" the Lord our God is one God, and him only shall we serve 1." Instead of perplexing us with a mass of unintelligible jargon concerning - the essential properties either of corporeal or spiritual existence, simply desorible to us that" God is a spirit," and in oonoeotion with this declaration charge us to " worship him in spirit and in truth." . This latter mode of viewing the divine oharacter, while it is far more* simple, is also far more impressive than the former; and that, while the one is adapted to lift the whole soul to God, the other leaves it to admire the beauty, or lose itself, in the mazes of its own speculation.—l am, &c, W.