To the Editor of the "Norr#-Cuina Dary News."
Sir,-I am quite sure that "A.NR.? is sincere in his convictions and in his re marks born of those _convictions, but he cannot be acquitted of inattention both to my lecture and the correspondence that has followed it I content myself, however, with saying that he has entirely misrepresented my statements. _If anyone is interested in knowing that the Church of Christ has hitherto believed in this matter, and in recent lines of evidence in favour of this historic belief, I invite him to procure a copy of the lecture from the Church of Pngla d Men's Society, and read for himself.
It is quite correct to say—as the writer of Cathedral Notes has said—that there is a wide chasm between the historic view of Holy Scripture, and that to which we are asked to give our intellectual assent to-day.
One view takes the Scriptures to be true throughout, and calls men to trust and follow them; the other affirms that, taken as they stand, they are untrue in many particu-jars, and calls men to check and judge them. One view would. estabolish men's faith in the Scriptures, the other view would destroy their faith in them. '"A.N.R." cordially endorses my confidence that trust in the Scriptures will in the end prevail. am very glad that he does so, but I must warn him that it means the abandonment of those teachings which he appears to defend and uphold.
For the Modern view of Scripture does destroy trust in the Bible. My object in writing this letter is to illustrate this certain truth by three typical instances.
(1) Dent. 31 and 32 contains a series of categorical statements, such as that God called Moses and Joshua into the tabernacle, that He appeared in the pillar of cloud which stood over the entrance of the tent, that He spoke to Moses of what would take place after his death, that He directed him to write a song, recounting this, and teach it to the Israelites for a witness in the future; "so Moses wrote the song the same day and taught it to the children of Israel," "and Moses spoke in the ears of all the assembly of Israel the words of the sig, until they were finished then follows the song.
There can be no doubt what the author of this account intended his readers to understand and to believe. The modern teaching on the contrary is this:
"Tt would be going too far to affirm that the Song cannot be by the same hand! as the body of Dent. At the same time most of the characteristic expressions are different, and it presents many fresh thoughts; so that internal evidence, though it does not absolutely pre-elude its being by the same author, does not favour such a supposition,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.