AUTHENTIC REPORT OF THE THEOLOGICAL DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE REV. W. COOKE AND MR. JOS. BARKER, HEID DURING TEN NIGHTS IN NEWCASTLE, I certify this report, taken (and revised while passing Inv. Sethink LONDON: J. BAKEWELL, 80, NEWGATE STREET; MAY BE HAD THROUGH ALL BOOKSELLERS. PREFACE. Bur few prefatory remarks are necessary. My antagonist is well known as one who was once a popular advocate of christianity, but who has since renounced almost everything of religion but a nominal profession of it, and has employed his powers to undermine that Gospel he once defended. My resi-dence in his locality was singularly providential---unsought and unexpected by myself; and equally so my collision with him. Though I had known him intimately in his better days, I had no desire to come into contact with him, and indeed felt inclined to lay it down as a principle in my conduct to avoid any public collision. But sent to repair the broken walls which he hath ruthlessly thrown down, and to preach the Gospel to a people scattered and bewildered by his pernicious doctrines, and surrounded by a community of tens of thousands whose minds were abused by his misrepresentations, I felt called upon at length to oppose error by proclaiming the truth, and to neutralize misrepresentation by publishing facts. I was thus forced into the arena, and was challenged by my opponent to meet him in public Discussion. This, I declined at first, neither deeming myself qualified for debate, nor thinking it the best way to defend and exhibit truth. These challenges, however, were repeated and renewed almost every week in his publications; and the same honour was extended to all other ministers. Still declining, my antagonist often insinuated to his readers that a secret consciousness of the unsoundness of our principles was the true cause of our not accepting his challenges. Therefore, looking at the fact that this insinuation was believed by thousands, and that immense masses of immortal souls were being deceived and ruined by his sophistry and perversions of Holy Scripture, I at last resolved, in the name of David's God, to meet the vaunting Goliah. A committee, formed of about twenty-five ministers and Christian friends of high respectability, and connected with the several Evangelical Denominations, gathered around me, arrangements were made, and the Discussion followed. Respecting the arrangements, I have to observe that almost every advantage my opponent desired was conceded to him, in order to preclude the possibility of his evading the contest. 1. The subject, "What is a Christian?" was chosen by himself. This, and this alone, was accepted by me. 2. The time was fixed by himself to suit his own convenience. 3. The place was chosen by himself. 4. The time for each speaker was determined by Mr. Barker. He did indeed at first desire the time to be unde ned, and that each speaker should occupy a whole evening at once, if he thought proper. To this my Committee strongly objected, alleging that on such a principle there could be nothing like discussion, and therefore it was proposed to Mr. Barker that each disputant should, after the first evening, occupy alternately 20 minutes, or half an hour. But to this Mr. Barker resolutely objected, and insisted either that the time should be undefined, or, as the only concession he would make, the disputants should at least be permitted to speak for one hour and a half at a time. To this, therefore, I and my Committee consented. 5. The standard of appeal was agreed to, chiefly in compli ance with Mr. Barker's wishes. I and my Committee desired the received text to be the standard. To this, however, Mr. Barker objected, and, therefore, to cut off all occasion for his evading the discussion, it was proposed to extend the appeal to the authorities prescribed in the terms of discussion. From these facts, my readers will see that all my opponent's complaints about my introducing the incarnation of the Saviour were unfounded, as that was necessarily implied in the question we had to discuss; and that all my opponent's quotations from modern writers were totally in violation of the law, which limited our quotations from the Fathers to the first three cenuries. But my chairman urged me to allow my opponent to proceed, alleging that it would be impossible for him to continue the discussion, unless permitted to read those copious extraces, and that by allowing him to proceed in his own way, he would the more fully unmask himself to the audience, and be left without excuse. To this I submitted. The reader will clearly perceive that my opponent came expecting to introduce ten subjects; that is, for each disputant to deliver a lecture on a separate topic each night. This would have been an evasion of discussion, and an imposition upon the public, and therefore I resisted it. The doctrines of human depravity, eternal punishment, and the hired ministry, which Mr. Barker foisted in to eke out his time, of course I had not time to dwell upon in the discussion. My object was to devote, special attention to establish the doctrines of the Incarnation, the Trinity and Atonement, subjects abundantly sufficient for ten nights. Other matters will be noticed in a separate treatise, which the purchaser may bind with the Discussion. The public will now see what Mr. Barker's sentiments really are, and deception can be practised no longer; and they will see, too, the sophistry, the falsehoods, the perversions of Scripture, and the denial of Scripture authority, which are necessary to uphold his tottering system of delusion. I desire to testify my personal obligations to my friend Mr. Grant, for the important services he rendered as secretary to my committee, and as my chairman in the Discussion. November 15th, 1845. W. COOKE, |