One of the most common excuses offered for human creeds is, that “We want something to keep us together—something to bind us in union.” This apology is based virtually upon the same two preposterous assumptions we have before mentioned. It assumes, with great apparent innocence, that the Bible can not keep us together, that it cannot bind us in union. Then it assumes, with much modesty, that a human creed _can_ keep us together—bind us in union—_can do_ what the Bible _can not do_. This, it appears to us, should startle any good man at once. These assumptions are arrogant in the extreme, and not only arrogant, but made without any regard to facts. Do human creeds keep churches together? We assert, fearless of successful contradiction, that the whole history of human creeds proves that they do not keep churches together. Let us take one look at three of the most popular creeds in this country, and see what they have done in keeping churches together. How has the Baptist creed succeeded? Has it kept the Baptists together? By no means. From the one original Baptist stock we have now not less than nine or ten parties of Baptists. How has the Presbyterian creed succeeded in keeping its adherents together? It is thought to be a very wise and powerful document. Has it kept Presbyterians together? It has succeeded no better than the Baptist creed. With all its adhesive power, Presbyterians, within the last century have sundered into some eight parties. This needs no commentary. How has the Methodist Discipline succeeded? It is itself nothing but an offshoot of the Episcopalian creed, which did not prevent the Methodists from stranding off from the established church. The Discipline has not been in operation more than one hundred and twenty years. How has it succeeded in keeping Methodists together during that period? During that time Methodism has stranded into some eight or ten fragments. What comment this furnishes upon the efficacy of human creeds to cement together. Other creeds have done no better; and yet, in the face of all this, men want human creeds to _keep them together_! All history shows, beyond all dispute, that wherever human creeds have prevailed, divisions have abounded, partyism has increased, and unity has been diminished. But where the people had confidence in the Bible, the law of God, the “perfect law of liberty,” union has more widely extended, and peace has more generally prevailed. Why then, in the name of reason, hold on to human creeds to keep churches together, when they have so universally failed, and refuse the Bible, which has never failed? Faith in a creed can not convert persons, or bring them to God. If they are Christians at all, faith in God, the Redeemer and Savior of men, in the Word of God, in the Gospel of Christ, has made them such, and to God and the word of his grace they should commit themselves, their everlasting trust, and not allow themselves to be divided by human creeds.