| Vol. I. | DECEMBER, 1880. | No. 12. |
There are a great many questions asked upon the subject ofconversion, and as many answers given as there are theoriesof religion, and many persons listening to men's theories uponthis subject are left in doubt and darkness in reference to what isand is not conversion. You ask the Mormons, who fully believetheir theory of conversion, and they will refer you to theirown experience and the experience of the loyal, self-sacrificingdevotees of their faith. Ask the Roman Catholic and he willgive you an answer corresponding with his theory of religion.All Protestant parties give you their experience, and refer you totheir loyal and self-sacrificing brethren for the truthfulness oftheir theories of conversion. In the midst of this conflict andmedley of contradictions what are we to do? Shall we accepttheir experience as the infallible rule by which to determinethe right from the wrong in matters pertaining to our presentand eternal salvation? A strange rule, in view of the greatcontrariety of opinions and our liability to be misled. Itwould justify Mother Eve, she being deceived. But "she wasfound in the transgression." We may be deceived and foundin transgression. This strange rule would justify Saul; for heverily thought he ought to do many things contrary to Jesus,which things he did, and did them in all good consciencetowards God and man, yet he was a blasphemer and injurious.The Master, in view of our liability to be deceived, gave us a[Pg 442]rule of conduct in reference to our communications in thesewords: "Let yo