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)
Folosim fișiere de tip cookie pentru a vă oferi o experienţă mai bună online și pentru a îmbunătăți acest site. Continuând să utilizați acest site, vă dați consimțământul asupra utilizării cookie-urilor. Dacă doriți mai multe informații sau nu acceptați folosirea acestor fișiere când utilizați site-ul nostru, vă rugăm să accesați paginile Politica de ConfidențialitateCondiții de utilizare.