(Compiled from a Work Entitled "Mr. Durant of Salt Lake City.")  
BY BEN E. RICH.
 
This pamphlet is written in the form of a conversational discussion, because in this style information to the reader can be conveyed by a method that is at once simple and agreeable.
 
The scene of this narrative is a small town in the southwestern part of Tennessee, which we shall call Westminster. In this pretty village is a home of entertainment for strangers. It can scarcely be termed a hotel as it partakes largely of the character of a private residence with accommodations for a limited number of guests, and visitors are attracted to it by its home-like characteristics. A planter named Marshall was the proprietor of the premises, which are known as Harmony Place.
 
At the particular time of which we write (Sept., 189-), the house had three guests—a lawyer named Brown, who had selected Westminster as a place favorable for the establishment of the practice of his profession; a physician named Slocum, who had a similar intention, and a clergyman named Fitzallen, a tourist who was traveling in the pursuit of health and pleasure.
 
At this time another visitor made his appearance. He was an attractive looking man aged about thirty, with genial manners and a striking clear method of presenting his thoughts in the course of conversation. This was Charles Durant, who hailed from the West.
 
The evening of the first day that marked the stranger's advent into Westminster saw the entire personnel of Harmony Place on the veranda.
 
One subject after another was taken up, discussed and disposed of, or at least laid aside to give way to some other. The conversation proceeded from point to point until the topics of {264} the quiet gathering assumed more the aspect of an intellectual melange than anything else. Two subjects which agitate us nationally and sometimes locally more than any other—politics and religion—had, so far escaped; they had not, however, been unthought of, and presently the latter was begun by the minister saying:
 
"Representing to some extent, as I do, the church, I am pleased to be able to state that in the matters of organization, discipline and places of worship, America is thoroughly Christianized."
 
"I partially concur with you," said the lawyer, "and yet I belong to no church at all—do not, in fact, endorse Christianity as a department of civilized life."
 
"Why, how is this?" said Fitzallen, "I thought nearly everybody in this country must be orthodox to some extent, at least."
 
"Not so with me, I assure you," the other replied, "and the strange part of it is, that my views are the result of investigation and the peculiar explanations of those who make religious teaching their calling. Those who accept the creeds which are supposed to base their tenets upon the Bible, do not, it appears to me, live up to their professions, and the clergy—no offense intended—are more addicted to money-getting than soul-saving."
 
The stranger from the West was listening to all this with the air of one deeply interested. It was as if a desired opportunity had come, and he was not reluctant about replying when questioned as to his own views. It came when the churchman, after announcing his determination to "labor" with the infidel, turned to the newcomer and said:
 
"I do not know whether you will be for or against me in this discussion, but as you come from what we of the East are prone to regard as the land where restraints are not severe, I presume you are disposed to assist him rather than me."
 
"Well, gentlemen," said Durant, "this topic interests me, and while I and my opinions are unknown to you all, I will, if agreeable to you, endeavor to throw some light upon the subject. I am a believer in religion and lay claim to a testimony of the truth of the gospel of Christ from a divine source, and yet I often find myself opposed by ministers."
 
"I cannot imagine why this should be the case," said Fitzallen, "if you are, as you state, a true believer in Christ and have a witness of Him."
 
"If you will permit me to ask a few questions during your conversation with Mr. Brown, I may be able to take a general {265} part in the discussion, provided, however, that should we differ upon any point it will be in a friendly manner."
 
"Certainly," said the clergyman, "I am sure it will be a pleasure to me to have you join in our conversation, and I do not doubt that Mr. Brown and the other gentlemen feel the same way."
 
The entire party expressed approval of the proposed interchange of opinions.
 
"Then, Mr. Brown," said Fitzallen, "what particular part of the Christian faith appears to you as being the most difficult to understand?"
 
"I confess there are many. However, let us commence with one of the principles of your belief. I will refer to some of the literature of the Church of England. The first article of religion contained in the Church of England Prayer-Book is: 'There is but one living and true God, everlasting; without body, parts or passions; of infinite power, wisdom and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things, both visible and invisible: and in the unity of this Godhead there are three persons of one substance, power and eternity—the Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost.' According to this, then, your belief is that the Father, Son and Holy Ghost are one person, without body, parts or passion."
 
"You have certainly quoted correctly from the prayer-book; I fail to see anything wrong with that. What fault have you to find with it?"
 
"I cannot form a conception of a God who has neither body, parts nor passions. So far as the Bible is concerned, I fail to see from what part of that book you derive such a conclusion."
 
"Well, Mr. Brown, using your own language, 'so far as the Bible is concerned,' let us do as Isaiah commands, 'go to the law and to the testimony' (Isaiah viii: 20) and I will soon convince you that the Bible plainly sets forth the fact that the Father and the Son are one. In fact, Jesus himself declares that He and His Father are one (John x: 30). Is this not true?"
 
"Excuse me," said Durant, "but is it not more reasonable for us to believe that He meant that He and His Father are united in all things as one person?—not that they are actually one and the same identity?"
 
"Certainly not," said the reverend, "our Savior meant just what He said when He declared that He and His Father were one."
 
"I differ from you," said the stranger, "for He also asked {266} His Father to make His disciples one, even as He and the Father were one, as you will see by reference to John xvii:20 and 21, and by your argument it must have been His wish for those disciples to lose their separate and distinct identities."
 
"Stranger," said Mr. Brown, "your view of the case, I must confess, appears reasonable."
 
"Let me ask," said the preacher, "did not Jesus say, 'He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father.'" (John xiv: 9.)
 
"Yes," said the westerner, "for as Paul says, 'He was in the express image of His (Father's) person' (Heb. i: 3), and this being the case, Jesus might well give them to understand that when they had seen one they had seen the other. When Jesus went out to pray, He said, 'O, my Father, if it be possible let thus cup pass from me: nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt.' (Matt. xxvi: 39.) Now then, to whom was our Savior praying? Was he asking a favor of himself?"
 
"Oh, no; He was then praying to the Holy Spirit."
 
"By such admission you have separated one of the three from Jesus, for in the beginning you declared that the three were one; and now that we have one of the three separated from the others, let us see if we can separate the other two. In order to do this, I refer you to the account of the martyrdom of Stephen. While being stoned to death he looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and that Jesus was standing on the right hand of God. (Acts vii: 55.) Would it not be impossible for a person to stand on the right hand of himself? In further proof that Jesus is a separate person from the Father we will examine the account of His baptism. On coming up out of the water, what was it that lighted on Him in the form of a dove?" (Matt. iii: 16.)
 
"We are told it was the Spirit of God."
 
"Exactly! And whose voice was it that spoke from the heavens, 'This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased!' (Matt. iii: 17.) Now, mind you, there was Jesus, who had just been raised from the water, being one person, the Holy Ghost which descended from above and rested upon Him in the form of a dove, making two personages; and does not the idea strike you very forcibly that the voice from heaven belonged to a third person? And then again I will draw your attention to—"
 
The churchman was getting heated. Said he: "These are things which we are not expected to understand; and, my young friends, I would advise you to drop such foolish ideas, for—"
 
"Excuse me. Did you say 'foolish ideas?' Why, my dear {267} sir, we are told in the Bible that 'This is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou has sent.' (John xvii: 3.) Therefore it should be our first duty to find out the character and being of God. You say we are not expected to understand these things, while the Bible says these are what we must understand if we desire eternal life. It also says we can understand the things of man by the spirit of man, but to comprehend the things of God we must have the spirit of God; and as you profess to be one of His servants, you are presumed to be in possession of the necessary light to understand the true and living God, also Jesus Christ whom He sent. You say God has no body; did our Savior have one? If so, then His Father had one, for I have just proved by the words of Paul that Christ was in the express image of his person. (Heb. i: 3) Jesus appeared in the midst of His disciples after His resurrection with a body of flesh and bones, and called upon His disciples to satisfy themselves on this point by touching Him; 'for,' says He, 'a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have.' (Luke xxiv:39.) Then He called for something to eat and He did eat (verses 42, 43), and with this tangible body He ascended into heaven and stood, as Stephen says, on the right hand of God. (Acts vii:55.) Now if He has no body, what became of the one He took away with Him?"
 
"This is nonsense! You know that God is a spirit, and I think we would better not delve too deeply into matters which we are not permitted to comprehend."
 
"Pray listen a while longer, for I have yet more to say in regard to what you call nonsense, although if it be such, I must insist that it is Bible nonsense. You say God is a spirit; does that prove He has no body? We are also told we must worship Him in spirit. Am I to understand from this that we must worship him without a body? Have you a spirit? Yes. Have you also a body? Yes. Were you made in the image of God, body and spirit? So says the Bible. Man was created in the image of God. (Gen. i: 26, 27.) Then God has a body and, consequently, must have parts. Moses talked with Him face to face, as one man talks with another (Ex. xxxiii: 11), and he also saw His back parts. He promised (Num. xii: 8) to speak with Moses mouth to mouth. We are told in the fifth chapter of Deuteronomy that He has a hand and arm. The Psalm (cxxxix: 16) tells us He has eyes, and Isaiah (xxx: 27) says He has lips and tongue. John describes His head, hair and eyes. (Rev. i: 14.) And as for passions, we are told in the Bible that He exercises love and is a jealous God. Are {268} these not parts and passions? It would appear that all who believe in the Scriptures must conclude that they are parts and passions, and that the Creator is a God after whose likeness we are made."
 
"Well, I had no idea when I commenced this conversation with Mr. Brown that I was to find such an antagonist in yourself. One would naturally come to the conclusion that you had made the Bible a study."
 
"I have as a Christian studied the record; in fact, at a very early age my parents required me to commit and remember a very important verse in that good old book. It is found in the fifth chapter of the gospel according to St. John, being the 39th verse, and reads as follows: 'Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me.'"
 
"That is proper, but I must again warn you against plunging into mysteries which we cannot understand."
 
"But Peter tells us that 'no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation' (II. Peter i:20), and these are the things which we should seek for information upon; for lack of information by the ministers upon these points is to a great extent, the cause of many persons being in Mr. Brown's frame of mind today."
 
"If your assertion be correct, perhaps it would be better for me to withdraw and leave Mr. Brown in your hands."
 
"I beg your pardon," said Durant, "I did not mean to offend you; I will endeavor to be more careful during the rest of the conversation."
 
"We will resume the discussion at another time. Tonight I only intended remaining a short time, having an important engagement; so, if you will excuse me, I will wish you all good evening."
 
"Well," said Mr. Brown, "things have taken a very peculiar turn. I seem to be out of the contest. I have heard more that appears reasonable from you, Mr. Durant, regarding religion than ever before in my life, and I must also admit that if my early teaching on religious matters had been of this character, I believe I would have been a Christian. I am somewhat familiar with the doctrines of different Christian societies, and from the way you express yourself regarding the personality of God, I would like very much to hear your views regarding other differences. Do you disagree with these ministers very much on other principles?"
 
"I am afraid the difference on many important principles is just as great as that concerning the personality of God. But {269} if you really desire to go with me in this search after the kingdom of God, and the others are willing, I assure you it will give me great pleasure."
 
Unanimous approval was expressed at once, and Mr. Brown continued, saying:
 
"I never before had as great a desire in this direction, and must confess that my curiosity has become quite aroused."
 
"Then," said Durant, "we will take King James' translation of the Scriptures as the law-book, and 'Seek ye first the kingdom of God' for our text; and if we should discover before we have finished that the teachings of men differ greatly from the teachings of Christ, I will be somewhat justified in saying that religionists have 'transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant.'" (Isaiah xxiv: 5. Jere. ii: 13.)
 
"Very well," said Mr. Brown, "I will proceed," and obtaining the family Bible he continued: "And should your assertions prove correct, it would account for the increase of infidelity, and it might also cause others as well as myself to stop and consider. Now, then, to the 'law and testimony.' Give me the chapter and verse, that I may know you make no mistake."
 
The doctor then for the first time took part, saying: "I am also becoming very much interested, and think I shall join you with my Bible. Let us all come into the circle."
 
"All right, we will examine the Gospel of Jesus Christ from the Bible, principle by principle. In order to have a clear understanding concerning this, it will be necessary for us to go back to the days of our Father Adam. Through the transgression of our first parents, death came upon all the human family, and mankind could not, of themselves, overcome the same and obtain immortality. To substantiate this, see first, second and third chapters of Genesis, Romans 5th chapter and 12th verse, and I. Corinthians 15th chapter and 21st and 22nd verses. But in order that they should not perish, God sent His Son Jesus Christ into the world to satisfy this broken law and to deliver mankind from the power of death. (John iii: 16; Romans v: 8; I. John iv: 9.) And as all become subject to death by Adam, so will all men be resurrected from death through the atonement of Christ (I. Cor. xv: 20-23; Rom. v: 12-19), and will stand before the judgment seat of God to answer for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression. (Acts xvii:31; Rev. xx:12-15; Matt. xvi:27.) Am I right as far as I have gone?"
 
"Yes," said the doctor, "I have been following you with your quotations, and find them correct. Proceed."
 
{270} "Then I have proved one of the principles of some of the so-called Christians incorrect, for they do not believe that the wicked will have the same chance of resurrection as the righteous. Jesus Christ did not die for our individual sins, except on condition that we conform to the plan He marked out, which will bring us a remission of our sins. The only way we can prove that we love Him is by keeping His commandments (John xiv: 15); therefore, if we say we love God and keep not His commandments, we are liars and the truth is not in us. (I. John ii: 4.) I think I have proved to your satisfaction that there is something defective in their understanding of the attributes of God, and I think I can prove also that they do not keep His commandments. Christ has given us to understand two things which you must remember while on this search after the 'kingdom of God.' First, that we must follow Him; secondly, that when He left His disciples He was to send them the Comforter that would lead them into all truth; therefore we must follow Christ and accept all the principles which were taught by His disciples while in possession of the Holy Spirit, though it should prove the whole world to be in error."
 
"Thus far your arguments are reasonable, also in accordance with Holy Writ; and as there is no other name given us except Jesus Christ whereby we can be saved (Acts iv: 12), you may now lay before us the conditions; but give us chapter and verse as I said before, that we may know you speak correctly."
 
"We will now examine into the conditions; but first remember that God does not send men into the world for the purpose of preaching contrary doctrines, for this always creates confusion, and God is not the author of confusion, but of peace. (I. Cor. xiv: 33.) Paul has said if any man teach another gospel let him be accursed. (Gal. i: 8, 9.) The first condition is this: To believe there is a God (not the kind mentioned in the English prayer-book), but the God that created man in His own image, and to have faith in that God and in Jesus Christ whom he has sent."
 
"Go on," said the party in concert.
 
"Well," continued Durant, "the kind of faith required is that which will enable a man, under all circumstances, to say, 'I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God Unto salvation.' (Rom. i: 16.) This is the kind of faith by which the worlds were framed; by which Noah prepared an ark; by which the Red Sea was crossed as on dry land; by which the walls of Jericho fell; it was by faith that kingdoms were subdued; righteousness was wrought; {271} promises were obtained, and the mouths of lions were closed. (Heb. xi: 32, 38.) This faith comes by hearing the word of God (Rom. x: 17), and the lack of this faith and the absence of prayer and fasting caused even the Apostles to fail on one occasion in casting out devils. (Matt. xvii: 14, 20.) No wonder, then, that without faith it is impossible to please God. (Heb. xi: 6.) Faith, then, is the first grand stepping-stone to that celestial pathway leading towards salvation. The more we search into eternal truth, the more we discover that God works upon natural principles. All the requirements which He makes of us are very plain and simple. How natural that the principle of faith should be the primary one of our salvation! With what principle are we more familiar? Faith is the first great principle governing all things; but great as it is, it is dead without works. (James ii:14-17.) We must not expect salvation by simply having faith that Jesus is the Christ, for the devils in purgatory are that far advanced. (James ii: 19.) In fact, if you will read the entire second chapter of James you will see that faith without works is as dead and helpless as the body after the spirit has departed from it. It is folly to think of gaining exaltation in His presence unless we obey the principles he advocated (Matt. vii: 21), for no one speaks truthfully by saying he is a disciple of Christ while not observing His commandments. (John viii:31.) In fact, the only way by which man can truthfully say he loves Jesus Christ is by keeping His commandments." (John xiv: 12-21.)
 
"Is it not recorded in Holy Writ," said the doctor, "that if we believe in the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved?"
 
"You have referred to the words used by Paul and Silas to the keeper of the prison. These disciples were asked by this jailer what should he do to be saved, and was assured, as you have quoted, 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.' Then the disciples immediately laid before them those principles which constitute true belief, and not until this man and his house had embraced the principles taught by these disciples were they filled with true belief and really rejoiced. (Acts xvi: 31, 33.) You see by this example that we must not deceive ourselves by thinking that we can be hearers of the word only and not doers. (James i: 22, 23.)
 
"But," said the lawyer, "here is a passage found in the tenth chapter of Romans, which, in my opinion, will be difficult for you to explain. The passage referred to reads as follows: 'If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the {272} dead, thou shalt be saved.' Now, then, it looks to me as if salvation is here promised through faith alone. How do you explain it?"
 
"Very easily. Let us thoroughly examine this passage in all its different phases. In the first place, this letter was written by Paul to individuals who were already members of the church. They had rendered obedience to the laws of salvation, and having complied with those requirements were entitled to salvation, providing their testimony remained within them like a living spring; and in order that they should not become lukewarm, Paul exhorted them to continue bearing testimony of the divinity of Christ, and not let their hearts lose sight of the fact that God had raised His Son from the dead, and inasmuch as they kept themselves in this condition, salvation would be theirs. This is the only sensible view one can take of this passage. Unquestionably Paul was speaking to sincere members of the church, who had been correctly initiated into the fold of Christ, not aliens living 1800 years after."
 
"That appears to be correct, but further on in the same chapter we find this expression: 'For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.' It appears to me here that reference is not made to those who had embraced the gospel and those who had the faith, but salvation is made general to whomsoever shall call upon the name of the Lord." (Rom. x: 13.)
 
"Exactly, but the next verse gives an explanation so simple that none can fail to understand it: 'How, then, shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard, and how shall they hear without a preacher? So, then, faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.' In other words, if there is faith, there have been works, and having true faith, no person will remain in that condition without complying with further works of salvation to which that faith urges him."
 
"I see," said Brown, the others remaining silent, but interested; "you are right."
 
"Now, then, gentlemen," said Durant, "I maintain as before stated, that faith is the first principle of the gospel leading to salvation, but it will not bring us to the summit of the ladder—water—without the other principles."............