| Summary: | GUDMUNDSON v. THINGVALLA LUTHERAN CHURCH 325 rerbal and plenary inspiration. It means that every word in the Bible is literally true. . So far as the results of philosophical and scientific inquiry of modern times are against the Bible in the sphere of geology, archaeology, history, geography, biology, and astronomy, I repudiate them. In my judgment any man who believes in the verbal or plenary inspiration doctrine of the Bible must repudiate them." Ihis testimony, offered for the purpose of establishing that the doctrine of plenary inspiration was the presupposed faith of the Lutheran Church of Iceland and of this particular congregation, falls far short of making proof for which it was offered. It may be that Lutheran churches in America generally take the position referred to, but it is no proof as to the position of the parent church mentioned in the constitution of this particular church congregation, nor proof of the position of this congregation on the matter, unless we do what the witness would not do, and construe his testimony as specific where ie intends it to be general. Had this witness information that the Church of Iceland and that of this particular congregation adopted its constitution with no presupposed belief in plenary or verbal inspi ration, still he could truthfully have testified exactly as he did, con ceding the truth of all he has uttered. Witness Glenn testifies on rebuttal for plaintiffs,—he is a member of the United Lutheran Church,—that "I do not know that our church has ever finally declared itself on any theory of inspiration, but the generally accepted theory, I believe, is what is commonly known as the plenary, but as some have stated the verbal, not the mechanical. . . . As far as I know there is no theory of inspiration given in these confessions (referring to the confessions of his particular church), I would say that the church takes inspiration for granted." He draws the conclusion from his interpretation of the constitution of the Thing-valla Congregation, that when they passed the resolution respecting the right of private judgment they departed from the faith of the congre gation, though he admits that "I don't think that (the constitution) of tie congregation refers to inspiration." That his conclusions are drawn from what the Lutheran Church concludes. But again is the Proof lacking as to the original belief of the parent church and the jiarticular one, on inspiration. Plaintiff Guomundson then testified to Rev. Bergman, defendants'
|
|---|