The Presbyterian of the South : [combining the] Southwestern Presbyterian, Central Presbyterian, Southern Presbyterian. [volume], July 02, 1919, Page 2, Image 2

About The Presbyterian of the South : [combining the] Southwestern Presbyterian, Central Presbyterian, Southern Presbyterian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1909-1931

Image provided by: Library of Virginia; Richmond, VA

                
Roman catholicism is supposed to
be a unit all over the world, including all
countries ami nationalities. It would l>e ex
pected, therefore, that Catholics would look
upon Catholic churches wherever found with
some consideration at least. We arc told, how
ever, that when the Austrians invaded Italian
territory they seemed to take special delight in
desecrating and destroying churches. The Aus
trians are considered among the most loyal of
all the subjects <>f the Pope. The Philadelphia
Inquirer says: "The report of an Italian 'so
ciety to aid churches ruined in the war' shows
that in Venice ami Gorizia more than a hun
dred churches were destroyed and nearly that
number seriously damaged. This was not an
accidental result of I lie lighting. The churches
were not merely shot at; they were looted as
well. A special dispatch to The Inquirer from
Rome shows that millions of dollars' worth of
vestments, vessels, altar furnishings and bells
were taken away. Many of these can never
be replaced, even though the Italian claim for
reparation should include a demand for their
return. This is the more singular in that Aus
tria, above all other European nations, has been
faithful to Roman Catholicism. Her armies,
if any, might be expected to show peculiar rev
erence for the shrines of the faith. It will be
recalled that the Pope sent a special plea to
Vienna for the exemption of Venice and other
Italian cities from destructive bombing by air
planes. There was, indeed, a general feeling
that the Austrians would shrink from imitating
the barbarities of the Germans, which partook
of sacrilege to religious minds. But all the evi
dence goes to show that they had no compunc
tions on this score. The work of reconstruc
tion in Venice, as the same dispatch points out,
will be as difficult as the work in France. The
Austrian occupation lasted but a little over a
year, yet in that time an incredible work of de
vastation was done. That the doers of it shall
pay as far as possible is mere justice. The
Peace Conference can hardly decide other
wise."
MANIFOLD INTERPRETATIONS.
Men have often wondered how so many di
verse and contradictory theories and creeds
may arise from the. same Scripture. Views a>
different as heaven and earth are held and
substantiated by the word. Is there a stable
system of interpretation which will always
yield the same result? Can interpretation be
reduced to an exact science? Is there any
well-authenticated theory by which we can
surely and authoritatively arrive at certain re
sults? What is the Scripture? Is it an ag
gregation of all the wisdom of the past, from
all kinds of minds, mathematical, intuitive,
imaginative, or is it the plain Word of God in
spired and therefore inerrant ? having but one
meaning?
For us at least this volume of sixty-six bookr;
is just God's Word. If we have settled ih.3
question of inspiration, then we have settled
the whole thing so far.
What sort of a revelation would God give
to us?
We are groping in the dark; we must have
light on the most vital of all subjects, or per
ish.
When we are trying to tell a man the vital
truth upon which his well-being directly de
pends, what kind of form do we put our neces
sary information in?
In the most intense and clear-cut language.
We do not dwell on the intricacies of philoso
phy ? nor do we give wings to our imagination
nor indulge in hyperboles.
Is it not fair to infer that God, in giving as
this body of all important truth, would speak
to us plainly, in clear-cut language, not leading
us into the misty regions of imagination, .a or
up into the region of philosophy? Plain mat
ter-of-fact language would be used.
Then the historical and common-sense inter
pretation of Scripture is the one we ought to
adhere to.
There is a mystical and allegorical method
which began with Origen,' and is becoming
popular today.
It is the method which finds moral lesson.?
iu the fairy tales of the day. Only this method
translates every simple fact and statement out
of the real into the unreal realms, and from
that deduces moral lessons.
The best equipment for an exegete is an
abundant imagination ; one -that finds a mystical
meaning in every nail of the Tabernacle or
stopping-place of the children of Israel, every
vision or mind-picture that passed before the
soul of an inspired saint ? and out of the twi
light of imagination, draws moral lessons for
us. It is evident this method of expounding
Scripture is dependent on the dreaminess of
t lie mind. It is clear that some minds are much
more finely endowed with imagination than
others. Tn fact, some minds are completely
carried away by the faculty of imagination and
every other one becomes atrophied.
Imagination is a splendid enduement of thf
mind, but only when in proportion to others.
When it absorbs the others, then every kind of
fantastic vagary arises.
It is largely due to the complete surrendei
of our minds to this one faculty that the mill
tiform theories arise.
We feel sure the Bible is a common-place
book for common-place people to find the truth
in. Hence in our judgment the historical and
eommonsense method is the only one permissi
ble, and this ought always to yield the same
result.
Our interpretations and especially our creeds
deduced from Scripture are faulty because we
fail in our ignorance, intentional or not, to
take in the whole content. By putting two
Scriptures utterly uneorrelated together v;e
may prove anything. Suicide is established by
Divine injunction if we will unite -the verse
which states that Judas went and hanged him*
self, with the command in another place about
an entirely different thing, "Go thou an'1 do
likewise." The absurdity of this will save our
exegesis, but it is not one whit more vicious
than much of the bolstering up of our views
by separate and unconnected verses.
The whole tenor of Scripture is always to
be taken into account. ? We ought to study
the Bible as a whole, not in isolated passages.
Especially ought we to come to its study with
minds steady and clear-seeing, holding our im
agination in abeyance and asking for wisdom
from on high.
The Bible is a plain book for plain people.
A. A. L.
? Contributed
TITHING. ARTICLE NO. 2.
By Mr. C. B. Stevens.
In your issue of .Tune 11, 1919, Rev. II. II.
Leach, in his reply to my article on Tithing,
published in your paper April 23d last, funis
fault with my criticism of present day meth
ods, amongst others that of tithing. It is
therefore evidently necessary to give Scriptu
ral authority for the statements made at that
time, and I shall quote liberally from God's
word to support my position.
Rev. M. B. Lambdin, in bis excellent arti
cle on "The Law of the Tithe" in your issue
of May 21st last, answers very fully and very
scripturally Mr. Leaeli's reply touching thin
phase of my remarks, so I shall not answer
his objections on that point, but go on to lb a
very important doctrine of Sonship, which I
take pleasure in again calling attention to.
Quoting my own article, I restate the fact so
clearly set forth in all the Scriptures (New
Testament) that the follower of Christ is not
a servant, as in the old dispensation of law,
but a child, a son, an heir of God, and joint ,
heir with Jesus Christ. What says God's
word? "Henceforth 1 call you not servants,"
says the Master, John 35:15. "As many as
are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons
of God," Rom. 8:14. "Ye have not received
the spirit of bondage again to fear: but ye
have received the spirit of adoption, whereby
we cry, Abba, Father," Rom. 8:15. "The Spirit
itself bearing witness with our spirit that we
are the children of God," Rom. 8:16. "And
if children, then heirs, heirs of God and joint
heirs with Christ," Rom. 8:17. "Ye are all
the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus,"
Gal. 3:26. "Thou art no more a servant, but
a son : and if a son, then an heir of God
through Christ," Gal. 4:7. "Now are we the
sons of God," 1 John 3:2.
In our heavenly Father's sight are we ser
vants, or are we sons? Praise His holy name,
we are indeed his blood-bought children, the
sons of his love !
Mr. Leach finds fault with my statement
concerning Christian liberty. Let us see what
Holy Writ says in this regard. "Now there
fore why tempt ye God to put a yoke upon
the neck of the disciples which neither our
fathers nor we were able to bear," says Peter,
Acts 15:10. "Christ is the end of the law
for righteousness to every one that believeth,"
Rom. 10:4. "A man is not justified by the
works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus
Christ," Gal. 2:16. "I, through the law, am
dead to the law, that I might live unto God.
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live*
yet not I, but Christ liveth in me," Gal. 2:19.
20. "Christ hath redeemed us from the curs?
of the law, being made a curse for us," Gal.
3 :13. "The law was our schoolmaster to bring
us unto Christ, but after faith is come, we are
no longer under a schoolmaster," Gal. 3:24.
25. "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty
wherewith Christ bath made us free, and be
not entagled again with the yoke of bond
age," Gal. 5:1.
In view of these plain truths of Scripture,
are we under the law or are we under grace?
Mr. Leach says we are not under the "law
as a basis of our salvation, but we are under
it as a rule of duty, and quotes Christ's words
in John 14:21: "lie that hatli my command
ments and keepeth them he it is that loveth
me." As I read my Bible all that Jesus taught
in that upper room talk, as recorded in John
14, 15, 16, 17, touching his commandments,
had absolutely nothing to do with the Ten
Commandments given to Moses on Mou.it
Sinai. Christ .said, "This is my command
ment, that ye love one another, as I have loved
you," and this is miles above Sinai's law.
The last objection was in regard to "can
celing the destruction between the common
and the holy." My position is this: The
child of the heavenly Father shares with his
Lord not one-tenth of his money, but ten
tenths. Not one-seventh of his time, but seven
sevenths. He cannot draw the line, for all is
his Father's and all his Father's is his, 1 Cor.
3:21; Eph. 3:19.
Do we mean to lessen reverence for lib?*
Lord's Day, or tighten the purse-strings of