that ask him."

The new interpretation is going to be comprehensive. It is going to be
built, not on a single metaphor, but on everything that Jesus and
the apostles said. Right there is where the old interpretations went
astray. They seized upon one figure of speech and made that the
determining factor in the entire interpretation. Jesus said many
things, and so did His apostles, and all of them must contribute to
the final interpretation.

Two things are to be hereafter made very clear: The first is that God
reveals Himself in Jesus Christ. The old views were always losing
sight of that great fact. There was always a dualism between God and
Christ. I remember what my conception was when I was a boy. I thought
that God was a strict and solemn and awful king, who was very angry
because men had broken His law. He was just, and His justice had
no mercy in it. Christ, His Son, was much better-natured and more
compassionate, and He came forth into our world to suffer upon the
cross that God's justice might relax a little, and His heart be opened
to forgive our race. I supposed that that was the teaching of the
New Testament, it certainly was the teaching of the hymns in the
hymn-book, if not of the preachers. And when I became a young man,
I supposed that that was the teaching of the Christian religion. My
heart rebelled against it. I would not accept it. I became an infidel.
A man can not accept an interpretation of God that does not appeal to
the best that is in him. No man can accept a doctrine that darkens his
moral sense, or that confuses the distinction between right and wrong.
I would not accept the old interpretation because my soul rose in
revolt against it. I shall never forget how, one evening in his study,
a minister, who had outgrown the old traditions, explained to me