232 REVIEWS OF RECENT BOOKS 



and a belief in eternal punishment are necessarily connected. There 

 are as many passages in Scripture looking forward to the final des- 

 truction of evil as there are to the eternal separation of the good and 

 the wicked. 



In reading the first three letters of this volume one is led to 

 think that the author is championing the cause of a more liberal 

 theology, but he soon finds that such is not altogether the case. 



After arraigning the old fashioned views of hell, the personal 

 devil, and future punishment, he begins a tilt with the liberal 

 theologians, the Broad Churchman, and the Modernist. 



We regret that in his able satire upon his Satonic Majesty he 

 failed to remember that ridicule is not argument. This is the only 

 section of the book (Letter IV) which is somewhat marred by lack of 

 reverence. We don't mean reverence for the devil, but reverence for 

 the idea of God. 



In his criticism of liberal theology, the author comes close to con- 

 fusing Christianity and orthodoxy, or to put it in another way, he 

 appears to think that being a Christian is the same thing as holding 

 certain well defined theological propositions. This is a common 

 mistake, but we would not expect to find it cropping out in the book 

 of a man who is a close student of religion. 



Jesus Christ undoubtedly taught certain great truths, — the Father- 

 hood of God, the value of the individual soul, free salvation for all, 

 the Kingdom of God on earth, love and service of our fellowmen, life 

 through death, and He claimed to speak with authority as Son of God 

 and Son of Man, but He did not formulate any extensive creed. The 

 test of discipleship which He gave was the following, "If any man 

 will be my disciple, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and 

 follow me." The human mind naturally tends to formulation, and 

 hence it was natural that creeds came into existence, but it still 

 remains true that Christianity is a life based on faith rather than an 

 intellectual apprehension of mysterious doctrines. 



The author appears to be as much disturbed by the re-interpreta- 

 tion of Christian doctrines as he is by the preaching of the doctrine of 

 eternal hell. 



Surely he must believe that truth is not static. It is something 

 that lives and grows. The glory of the Christian religion is that it is 

 capable of development and expansion. It does not like Mohammedan- 

 ism arrest all advance in thought. 



He raises the question as to whether a clergyman of the Church 

 who feels bound to reinterpret old doctrines in the light of modern 

 knowledge should retain his office. He does not charge those who do 

 remain in the Church with dishonesty, but he appears to think that at 

 least they are in a false position. We agree with him that one who 



