Publication date
4/15/03
Volume
24
Number
8
The WatchTower
Views from the Watch Tower
The Watchtower Magazines
../literature/watchtower/1903/8/1903-8-1.html
 
 
VOL. 
XXIV 
ALLEGHENY, 
PA., 
APRIL 
15,1903 
KAISER 
WILLIAM'S 
THEOLOGY 
No.8 
About 
a 
year 
ago, 
at 
the 
German 
Emperor's 
instance, 
Pro­ 
fesGor 
Delitzsch 
delivered 
an 
address 
at 
the 
palace. 
He 
spoke 
on 
recent 
excavations 
in 
Babylon; 
attempting 
to 
show 
that 
the 
findings 
entirely 
discredited 
the 
Bible 
and 
proved 
that 
the 
Hebrews' 
intelligence 
of 
religious 
things 
came 
to 
them 
from 
the 
Babylonians. 
The 
impression 
went 
out 
that 
the 
Emperor 
was 
much 
pleased 
with 
that 
discourse, 
and 
evidently 
had 
lost 
his 
respect 
for 
the 
Bible. 
This 
greatly 
distressed 
some 
of 
his 
orthodox 
subjects 
and 
encouraged 
the 
Socialists, 
many 
of 
whom 
are 
reputed 
to 
be 
unbeli~vers-agnostics. 
To 
offset 
this, 
t~e 
Emperor 
has 
recently 
inVIted 
Professor 
Harnack 
to 
address 
hIS 
court 
on 
the 
same 
theme 
;-Professor 
Harnack 
being 
rated 
as 
"orthodox." 
(\Ve, 
however, 
could 
not 
rate 
the 
Professor 
as 
orthodox 
or 
Biblical. 
He 
holds 
that 
the 
Babylonian 
findings 
confirm 
the 
Bible 
records 
in 
some 
respects 
j 
viz., 
that 
there 
is 
a 
sufficient 
agreement 
between 
these 
witnesses 
and 
the 
Bible 
to 
prove 
that 
the 
Bible 
is 
not 
a 
fabZe,-that 
it 
records 
some 
facts 
of 
actual 
occurrence. 
However, 
Professor 
Harnack 
does 
not 
accept 
t~e 
Bible 
as 
of 
divine 
origin 
as 
do 
we, 
and 
hence 
discrecUts 
~ts 
dates, 
and 
accepts 
instead 
the 
uncertain 
decipherings 
of 
hiero­ 
alyphics 
relating 
to 
many 
dynasties 
(which 
may 
have 
existed 
~ontemporaneously) 
and 
by 
stringing 
these 
out 
one 
after 
the 
other, 
he 
and 
his 
associates 
count 
thousands 
of 
years 
which 
the 
Scriptures 
do 
not 
allow.) 
Additionally, 
the 
Emperor 
prepared 
a 
letter 
which, 
as 
was 
intended, 
has 
been 
made 
pubbc. 
In 
it 
he 
sets 
forth 
his 
re­ 
ligious 
views 
and, 
it 
is 
said, 
has 
quite 
satisfied 
his 
people. 
In 
this 
connection 
it 
should 
be 
remembered 
that 
the 
Emperor 
is 
summus 
episcopus 
of 
the 
Prussian 
Protestant 
church-its 
chief 
bishop, 
or 
overseer. 
Commenting 
on 
the 
Emperor's 
action, 
the 
London 
Times 
correspondent 
says:- 
"Orthodox 
Protestants 
seem 
to 
have 
apprehended 
that 
the 
foundations 
of 
the 
State, 
as 
well 
as 
the 
Church, 
would 
be 
un­ 
dermined 
if 
the 
summus 
epi.~copus 
encouraged 
heterodoxy. 
The 
question 
has 
a 
deep 
political 
bearing 
also, 
because 
the 
Social 
Democrats 
are 
professedly 
anti-Christian 
in 
a 
doctrinal 
sense, 
and 
because 
nearly 
all 
the 
Liberals 
are 
freethinkers. 
The 
Con­ 
servative 
press 
is 
satisfied 
that 
the 
Kaiser 
holds 
to 
the 
essen· 
tials 
of 
orthodox 
Protestantism, 
and 
the 
Liberal 
press 
is 
pleaSed 
because 
the 
Kaiser's 
statement 
upholds 
the 
freedom 
of 
research 
and 
speculation 
for 
scholars. 
"The 
Catholic 
Kolnische 
VolT.s 
ZeitUl1g 
sees 
danger 
in 
this 
distinction 
between 
the 
learned 
and 
the 
'people,' 
and 
the 
Rad­ 
ical 
Berliner 
Tageblatt 
comes 
to 
the 
far-fetched 
conclusion 
that 
the 
Kaiser's 
fearless 
initiative 
will 
produce 
the 
greatest 
and 
most 
triumphant 
impression 
in 
England 
and 
America, 
and 
may 
help 
to 
inspire 
friendlier 
feelings 
there 
for 
'our 
Germanic 
cousins.' 
" 
The 
"orthodox" 
are 
evidently 
easily 
satisfied. 
We 
trust 
that 
readers 
of 
ZION'S 
"VATCH 
TOWER 
have 
a 
much 
more 
dig­ 
tinct 
idea 
of 
the 
inspiration 
of 
the 
Bible 
writers-the 
apostles 
and 
prophets-than 
has 
the 
Kaiser. 
We 
cannot 
with 
him 
count 
Moses 
in 
along 
with 
Shakespeare 
and 
the 
Kaiser's 
grand· 
father 
and 
Homer 
and 
Charlemagne. 
Moses 
was 
both 
a 
prophet 
and 
It 
type 
of 
the 
great 
Prophet, 
and 
hence. 
to 
us, 
belongs 
to 
an 
entirely 
different 
class 
from 
the 
worldly-wise 
and 
great. 
\Ye 
quote 
a 
portion 
of 
the 
letter:- 
"I 
distinguish 
between 
two 
different 
kinds 
of 
revelation­ 
one 
progressive, 
and, 
as 
it 
were, 
historical; 
the 
other 
purely 
reliP.'ious, 
as 
preparing 
the 
way 
for 
the 
future 
Messiah. 
'Regarding 
the 
former, 
it 
must 
be 
said, 
for 
me 
it 
does 
not 
admit 
of 
a 
doubt, 
not 
even 
the 
slightest, 
that 
God 
reveals 
him. 
self 
continuously 
in 
the 
race 
of 
men 
created 
by 
him. 
He 
breathed 
into 
man 
the 
breath 
of 
his 
life 
and 
follows 
with 
fatherly 
love 
and 
interest 
the 
development 
of 
the 
human 
race. 
In 
order 
to 
lead 
it 
forward 
and 
develop 
it, 
he 
reveals 
himself 
in 
this 
or 
that 
great 
sage, 
whether 
priest 
or 
king, 
whether 
among 
the 
heathen, 
.Jews 
or 
Christians. 
Hammurabi 
was 
one; 
so 
was 
Moses, 
Abraham, 
Homer, 
Charlemagne, 
Luther, 
Shake­ 
speare, 
Goethe, 
Kant 
and 
Emperor 
William 
the 
Great. 
These 
he 
sought 
out 
and 
endowed 
with 
his 
grace 
to 
accomJ?lish 
splen­ 
did, 
imperishable 
results 
for 
their 
people 
in 
their 
mtellectual 
and 
physical 
provinces. 
according 
to 
his 
will. 
How 
often 
my 
~randfather 
pointed 
out 
that 
he 
was 
only 
an 
instrument 
in 
the 
Lord's 
hands. 
. 
. 
. 
"The 
legislative 
act 
on 
Sinai, 
for 
example, 
can 
be 
only 
regarded 
as 
symbolically 
inspired 
by 
God. 
When 
Moses 
had 
to 
reburnish 
well-known 
paragraphs 
of 
the 
law, 
perhaps 
derived 
from 
the 
code 
of 
Hammurabi, 
in 
order 
to 
incorporate 
and 
bind 
them 
into 
the 
loose, 
weak 
fabric 
of 
his 
people, 
here 
the 
histo· 
rians 
can 
perhaps 
construe 
from 
the 
sense 
of 
wording 
a 
connec­ 
tion 
with 
the 
laws 
of 
Hammurabi, 
the 
friend 
of 
Abraham. 
This 
is 
perhaps 
logically 
correct. 
But 
that 
will 
never 
dis- 
guise 
the 
fact 
that 
God 
incited 
Moses 
thereto 
and 
in 
so 
far 
revealed 
himself 
to 
the 
people 
of 
Israel." 
The 
Emperor 
has 
evidently 
become 
quite 
tinctured 
with 
higher·critic 
infidelity. 
If 
Moses 
concocted 
the 
Law 
with 
the 
assistance 
of 
a 
heathen 
legend 
which 
had 
been 
extant 
several 
centuries 
before 
he 
was 
born, 
he 
perpetrated 
a 
fraud 
at 
Mt. 
Sinai,-a 
stupendous 
fraud-when 
he 
represented 
that 
it 
was 
directly 
God 
given. 
Was 
our 
Lord 
also 
deceived 
respecting 
Hammurabi's 
law, 
palmed 
off 
by 
Moses 
as 
of 
divine 
origin! 
And 
were 
all 
the 
Jews, 
including 
the 
apostles, 
deceived? 
Hear 
our 
Lord's 
words, 
"Did 
not 
Moses 
give 
you 
the 
Law?" 
(John 
7: 
19) 
When 
our 
Lord, 
after 
his 
resurrection, 
would 
establish 
the 
faith 
of 
the 
disciples 
on 
the 
way 
to 
Emmaus, 
we 
read: 
"Be­ 
ginning 
with 
Moses 
and 
all 
the 
prophets 
he 
expounded 
unto 
them 
the 
Scriptures," 
etc. 
(Luke 
24: 
27) 
Did 
he 
begin 
by 
quoting 
a 
fraud, 
a 
deceiver 
who 
had 
palmed 
off 
Hammurabi's 
law 
for 
a 
new 
divine 
code? 
'Vhoever 
believes 
so, 
cannot 
be­ 
lieve 
in 
our 
Lord's 
claims 
to 
Messiahship; 
for 
surely 
Messiah 
could 
not 
be 
inspired 
to 
know 
what 
was 
in 
man 
and 
yet 
be 
deluded 
as 
present-day 
wise 
men 
claim. 
If 
these 
men 
are 
right 
Stephen, 
the 
first 
martyr 
to 
follow 
the 
Lord 
in 
death, 
for 
his 
sake, 
was 
deceived 
also. 
See 
his 
testimony 
concerning 
Moses 
in 
Acts 
7 
:35·44, 
noting 
specially 
vss. 
38 
and 
44. 
Who 
that 
believes 
Moses 
a 
deceiver 
and 
a 
fraud 
could 
longer 
accept 
the 
inspiration 
of 
the 
words 
of 
the 
Apostle 
Paul 
on 
any 
subject, 
after 
noting 
his 
eulogy 
of 
Moses 
and 
the 
Law 
of 
God 
given 
by 
his 
hand? 
He 
says: 
"It 
is 
written 
in 
the 
law 
of 
Moses." 
( 
I 
Cor. 
9:9) 
Again 
he 
recites 
an 
incident 
of 
Moses' 
presence 
in 
Mt. 
Sinai, 
not 
as 
a 
part 
of 
a 
stupendous 
fraud, 
but 
as 
a 
fact; 
saying, 
"Moses 
..•. 
put 
a 
vail 
over 
his 
face." 
(2 
Cor. 
3:7-13; 
Ex. 
34:29, 
30, 
35) 
Again 
he 
ascribed 
that 
law 
to 
ffild, 
declaring 
it 
so 
"just 
and 
holy 
and 
good" 
that 
no 
fallen 
man 
could 
keep 
it. 
(Rom. 
7: 
9-12 
) 
He 
even 
recites 
circumstantially 
the 
giving 
of 
the 
Law 
Covenant 
at 
Sinai, 
pointing 
out 
that 
this 
was 
a 
type 
of 
the 
ushering 
in 
of 
the 
New 
Covenant.-Heb. 
12: 
18·26. 
''The 
Law 
was 
given 
[of 
God] 
by 
Moses, 
but 
grace 
and 
truth 
came 
by 
Jesus 
Christ." 
"Moses 
verily 
was 
faithful, 
as 
a 
servant 
over 
all 
his 
house"-he 
was, 
therefore, 
not 
a 
fraud. 
-John 
1: 
17; 
Heb. 
3: 
5. 
The 
great 
and 
worldly-wise 
are 
all 
to 
stumble 
into 
just 
such 
unbelief 
respecting 
God's 
Word, 
but 
the 
faithful 
are 
to 
be 
kept 
by 
the 
power 
of 
God 
through 
faith 
and 
by 
assistance 
die 
vinely 
granted 
in 
this 
"evil 
day." 
"A 
thousand 
shall 
fall 
at 
thy 
side, 
but 
it 
[the 
pestilence 
of 
infidelity] 
shall 
not 
come 
nigh 
thee." 
The 
elect 
will 
stand 
on 
a 
sea 
of 
glass, 
as 
it 
were 
mingled 
with 
fire, 
and 
be 
able 
to 
sing 
intelligently 
"the 
song 
of 
Moses, 
the 
servant 
of 
God 
[not 
a 
fraud], 
and 
the 
Lamb."­ 
Rev. 
15:3. 
Quoting 
further 
from 
the 
war·lord-bishop 
we 
are 
touched 
to 
sympathy 
by 
his 
"blind 
unreason" 
in 
the 
following 
"most 
or· 
thodox" 
sentence,-in 
which 
he 
attempts 
to 
discuss 
what 
he, 
evidently, 
in 
no 
sense 
understands. 
How 
true 
that 
"the 
natural 
man 
receiveth 
not 
[comprehendeth 
not] 
the 
things 
of 
the 
spirit 
of 
God: 
neither 
can 
he 
know 
them 
because 
tliev 
are 
Spirit- 
ually 
discerned." 
(1 
Cor. 
2: 
14) 
He 
says:- 
• 
"Christ 
is 
God, 
God 
in 
human 
form. 
He 
redeemed 
us 
and 
inspires 
us, 
entices 
us 
to 
follow 
him. 
We 
feel 
his 
fire 
burning 
in 
us. 
His 
sympathy 
strengthens 
us. 
His 
discontent 
destroys 
us. 
But, 
also 
his 
intercession 
saves 
us. 
Conscious 
of 
victory, 
building 
solely 
upon 
his 
'Yord, 
we 
go 
through 
labor, 
ridicule, 
sorrow, 
misery 
and 
death, 
for 
we 
have 
in 
him 
God's 
revealed 
Word, 
and 
he 
never 
lies." 
RELIGIOUS 
FREEDOM 
GRANTED 
BY 
THE 
CZAR 
OF 
ALL 
THE 
RUSSIANS 
St. 
Petersburg, 
(Press 
Cable) 
.-The 
Czar 
has 
issued 
a 
de 
cree 
providing 
for 
freedom 
of 
religion 
throughout 
hif! 
domino 
ions, 
establishing 
to 
some 
degree 
local 
self-government 
and 
making 
other 
concessions 
to 
the 
village 
committees. 
Among 
the 
measures 
outlined 
by 
the 
Czar 
for 
the 
attain­ 
ment 
of 
these 
ends 
is 
reform 
of 
the 
rural 
laws, 
which 
is 
to 
be 
effected 
with 
the 
advice 
of 
persons 
who 
possess 
the 
confidence 
of 
the 
people. 
The 
system 
of 
administration 
in 
the 
various 
governments 
and 
districts 
is 
to 
be 
examined 
by 
representatives 
of 
the 
different 
localities 
concerned, 
with 
the 
view 
of 
effecting 
the 
necessary 
amendments. 
Measures 
are 
also 
to 
be 
taken 
to 
relieve 
the 
peasantry 
of 
the 
burdens 
of 
forced 
labor. 
The 
decree, 
which 
was 
issued 
in 
commemoration 
of 
the 
an· 
niversary 
of 
the 
birthday 
of 
Alexander 
111., 
is 
considered 
to 
be 
the 
most 
significant 
aet 
of 
state 
since 
the 
emancipation 
of 
6erfs. 
The 
public 
hails 
it 
as 
the 
proclamation 
of 
a 
new 
era, 
opening 
up 
bright 
prospects 
of 
the 
early 
imrrovement 
of 
Rus· 
sian 
internal 
administration. 
[3177] 
~115-116) 
Vou. XXIV ALLEGHENY, PA., APRIL 15, 1903 No. 8 KAISER WILLIAM'S THEOLOGY About a year ago, at the German Emperor’s instance, Professor Delitzsch delivered an address at the palace. He spoke on recent excavations in Babylon; attempting to show that the findings entirely discredited the Bible and proved that the Hebrews’ intelligence of religious things came to them from the Babylonians. The impression went out that the Emperor was much pleased with that discourse, and evidently had lost his respect for the Bible. This greatly distressed some of his orthodox subjects and encouraged the Socialists, many of whom are reputed to be unbelievers—agnostics. To offset this, the Emperor has recently invited Professor Harnack to address his court on the same theme;—Professor Harnack being rated as “orthodox.” (We, however, could not rate the Professor as orthodox or Biblical. He holds that the Babylonian findings confirm the Bible records in some respects; viz., that there is a sufficient agreement between these witnesses and the Bible to prove that the Bible is not a fable,—that it records some facts of actual occurrence. However, Professor Harnack does not accept the Bible as of divine origin as do we, and hence discredits its dates, and accepts instead the uncertain decipherings of hieroglyphics relating to many dynasties (which may have existed contemporaneously) and by stringing these out one after the other, he and his associates count thousands of years which the Scriptures do not allow.) Additionally, the Emperor prepared a letter which, as was intended, has been made public. In it he sets forth his religious views and, it is said, has quite satisfied his people. In this connection it should be remembered that the Emperor is summus episcopus of the Prussian Protestant church—its chief bishop, or overseer. Commenting on the Emperor’s action, the London Times correspondent says :—— “Orthodox Protestants seem to have apprehended that the foundations of the State, as well as the Church, would be undermined if the summus episcopus encouraged heterodoxy. The uestion has a deep political bearing also, because the Social mocrats are professedly anti-Christian in a doctrinal sense, and because nearly all the Liberals are freethinkers. The Conservative press is satisfied that the Kaiser holds to the essentials of orthodox Protestantism, and the Liberal press is pleased because the Kaiser’s statement upholds the freedom of research and speculation for scholars. “The Catholic Kolnische Volks Zeitung sees danger in this distinction between the learned and the ‘people,’ and the Radical Berliner Tageblatt comes to the far-fetched conclusion that the Kaiser’s fearless initiative will produce the greatest and most triumphant impression in England and America, and may help to inspire friendlier feelings there for ‘our Germanic cousins.’ ” The “orthodox” are evidently easily satisfied. We trust that readers of Zion’s WatcH Tower have a much more distinct idea of the inspiration of the Bible writers—the apostles and prophets—than has the Kaiser. We cannot with him count Moses in along with Shakespeare and the Kaiser’s grandfather and Homer and Charlemagne. Moses was both a prophet and a type of the great Prophet, and hence, to us, belongs to an entirely different class from the worldly-wise and great. We quote a portion of the letter :— “I distinguish between two different kinds of revelation— one progressive, and, as it were, historical; the other purely religious, as preparing the way for the future Messiah. ‘Regarding the former, it must be said, for me it does not admit of a doubt, not even the slightest, that God reveals himself continuously in the race of men created by him. He breathed into man the breath of his life and follows with fatherly love and interest the development of the human race. In order to lead it forward and develop it, he reveals himself in this or that great sage, whether priest or king, whether among the heathen, Jews or Christians. Hammurabi was one; so was Moses, Abraham, Homer, Charlemagne, Luther, Shakespeare, Goethe, Kant and Emperor William the Great. These he sought out and endowed with his grace to accomplish splendid, imperishable results for their people in their intellectual and physical provinces, according to his will. How often my grandfather pointed out that he was only an instrument in the Lord’s hands. . . “The legislative act. on Sinai, for example, can be only regarded as symbolically inspired by God. When Moses had to reburnish well-known paragraphs of the law, perhaps derived from the code of Hammurabi, in order to incorporate and bind them into the loose, weak fabric of his people, here the historians can perhaps construe from the sense of wording a connection with the laws of Hammurabi, the friend of Abraham, This is perhaps logically correct. But that will never dis [3177] guise the fact that God incited Moses thereto and in so far revealed himself to the people of Israel.” The Emperor has evidently become quite tinctured with higher-critic infidelity. If Moses concocted the Law with the assistance of a heathen legend which had been extant several centuries before he was born, he perpetrated a fraud at Mt. Sinai,—a stupendous fraud—when he represented that it was directly God given. Was our Lord also deceived respecting Hammurabi’s law, palmed off by Moses as of divine origin? And were all the Jews, including the apostles, deceived? Hear our Lord’s words, “Did not Moses give you the Law?” (John 7:19) When our Lord, after his resurrection, would establish the faith of the disciples on the way to Emmaus, we read: “Reginning with Moses and all the prophets he expounded unto them the Scriptures,” etc. (Luke 24:27) Did he begin by quoting a fraud, a deceiver who had palmed off Hammurabi’s law for a new divine code? Whoever believes s0, cannot believe in our Lord’s claims to Messiahship; for surely Messiah could not be inspired to know what was in man and yet be deluded as present-day wise men claim. If these men are right Stephen, the first martyr to follow the Lord in death, for his sake, was deceived also. See his testimony concerning Moses in Acts 7:35-44, noting specially vss. 38 and 44. Who that believes Moses a deceiver and a fraud could longer accept the inspiration of the words of the Apostle Paul on any subject, after noting his eulogy of Moses and the Law of God given by his hand? He says: “It is written in the law of Moses.” ( 1 Cor. 9:9) Again he recites an incident of Moses’ presence in Mt. Sinai, not as a part of a stupendous fraud, but as a fact; saying, “Moses .... put a vail over his face.” (2 Cor. 3:7-13; Ex. 34:29, 30, 35) Again he ascribed that law to God, declaring it so “just and holy and good” that no fallen man could keep it. (Rom. 7:9-12) He even recites circumstantially the giving of the Law Covenant at Sinai, pointing out that this was a type of the ushering in of the New Covenant.—Heb. 12:18-26. “The Law was given [of God] by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” “Moses verily was faithful, as a servant over all his house’—he was, therefore, not a fraud. —John 1:17; Heb. 3:5. The great and worldly-wise are allto stumble into just such unbelief respecting God’s Word, but the faithful are to be kept by the power of God through faith and by assistance divinely granted in this “evil day.” “A thousand shall fall at thy side, but it [the pestilence of infidelity] shall not come nigh thee.” The elect will stand on a sea of glass, as it were mingled with fire, and be able to sing intelligently “the song of Moses, the servant of God [not a fraud], and the Lamb.”— Rev. 15:3. Quoting further from the war-lord-bishop we are touched to sympathy by his “blind unreason” in the following “most orthodox” sentence,—in which he attempts to discuss what he, evidently, in no sense understands. How true that “the natural man receiveth not [comprehendeth not] the things of the spirit of God: neither can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.” (1 Cor. 2:14) He says:— “Christ is God, God in human form. He redeemed us and inspires us, entices us to follow him. We feel his fire burning in us. His sympathy strengthens us. His discontent destroys us. But, also his intercession saves us. Conscious of victory, building solely upon his Word, we go through labor, ridicule, sorrow, misery and death, for we have in him God’s revealed Word, and he never lies,” RELIGIOUS FREEDOM GRANTED BY THE CZAR OF ALL THE RUSSIANS St. Petersburg, (Press Cable).—The Czar has issued a de cree providing for freedom of religion throughout his dominions, establishing to some degree local self-government and making other concessions to the village committees, Among the measures outlined by the Czar for the attainment of these ends is reform of the rural laws, which is to be effected with the advice of persons who possess the confidence of the people. The system of administration in the various overnments and districts is to be examined by representatives of the different localities concerned, with the view of effecting the necessary amendments. Measures are also to be taken to relieve the peasantry of the burdens of forced labor. The decree, which was issued in commemoration of the anniversary of the birthday of Alexander III., is considered to be the most significant act of state since the emancipation of serfs, The public hails it as the proclamation of a new era, opening up bright prospects of the early improvement of Russian internal administration. 115-116)

This website uses cookies to improve the website and your experience. By continuing to browse this website, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. If you require further information or do not wish to accept cookies when using this website, please visit our Privacy Policy    Terms of Use    .