CHRISTIANITY.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 3076, 2 April 1892, Page 2

CHRISTIANITY.

TO THB KDITOH. Sir, —Iti your issue of tho 10th Maxell a letter (if mine was inserted asking " Agnostic " for definitions fpinri his point of view of (1) Life, (2) Truth, (3) Goodness (4) Sin. I also suggested that he should inform his readers as to his idea of what Christianity is, and what ho would substitute in its place. In tho controversy in which he has been for some time engaged, these are items ot paiamount importance, and should not be ignored. From his silence, we must naturally conclude that he has no lieht to shed on these subjects It is not claimed that Christianity, as we know it, is perfect: a perfect religion would not be suitable _to imperfect men, though an imperfect religion may be perfect in its adaptation. If " Agnostic " can give us something superior to Christianity, I for one will gladly accept it. With regard to his idea of what Christianity is, if we were acquainted with it we would be better able to appreciate his correspondence. I am afraid his idea, like thatof many others, and perhaps mine also, is not the true one, or only true to a degree. Though he has nothing to say on the vital principles of Christianity, he is able to devote a whole column to an attack on the literal authorship of the books ot the Bible. Now this is a subject that may be interesting to critics and literary persons, but in my opinion it has little to do with practical Christianity. Probably as a matter of literature it will never be definitely proved whether Moses wrote the Pentateuch or not. But where does it say in the Pentateuch that it was written by Moses ? It is convenient to call it the Book of the Law of Moses; but those who believe in its inspiration believe it to be the law of God. From internal evidence, I should say that the first chapters were not written by Moses, but were compiled from an earlier work, to which reference is made in various parts of scriptures. All this does not invalidate the claims of the Bible to a spiritual origin. Speaking from my own experience I may say that for inauy years I was as sceptical as '' Aguostio " is with regard to the inspiration of the Bible, but since then I am reading it through for tho third time, and each time I am more fully convinced of its divine origin. At the same time I believe it is not the first and only revelation that has been vouchsafed from God to man, though it is the fullest, purost, and best suited to civilized nations, and modern and future progress. It is therefore not a defect in it, that some ot its moral teachings are to be foundl iu other, and in some cases older books. Tjisciissioiik on religious subjects might be a source of good, but they seldom are, because as rule they are gonerally conducted on one <>r» both sides in an intolerant spirit. J.he days of religious persecution arc not quits over, only the tnoderu weapous aw ridicule, sarcasm, and other offensive methods of speech. These are too often indulged in— perhaps human nature is too frail to resist the temptation of resorting to them, yet would 11 not be well, for religious contraversal ists at any rate, to sit at the feet of Him who says—" Learn of Me, for lam meek and lowly in heart."—l am, etc. TOLEUAKOE.