« PreviousContinue »
ence on the course of thought and on the diction ; there is more depth, sincerity and power of impression; words take their shape and coloring from the heart. New occasions, too, sudden emergencies, fresh fields of thought and effort, presuppose changes in the style. Paul addressing the uncultivated Galatians and Paul writing to his beloved Timothy, would be expected to vary his language somewhat. The heart of the same apostle, when he was on the eve of his martyrdom, would overflow with tenderness and solemnity; new words would naturally be introduced ; a patriarchal solicitude would lead to earnest repetitions. This would account for some of the differences which exist between the book of Deuteronomy and the other four books of the Pentateuch. In the case of the inspired writers, new revelations, more powerful operations of the Spirit, a deeper insight into divine truth, would create a necessity for new words, new phrases and an altered style. These causes would occasion the same changes as might occur in merely human productions where the authors were making rapid progress in knowledge, or adopting new methods of culture. The three Pastoral Epistles have many peculiarities; but not more than the epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians. The first epistle to Timothy is said to contain eighty-one of what are anag asyoueva; the second, sixty-three; the epistle to Titus, fortyfour; the epistle to the Philippians, fifty-four; that to the Galatians, fifty-seven ; the epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians together, one hundred and forty-three.
Why then should we create an obstacle to the authenticity or genuineness of the books of the Scripture, where none exist? Why should we apply a rule there which will apply nowhere else? Why do we single out a volume from the vast treasures of literature, and try to maintain that its authors shall be confined to one monotonous, unvarying diction, while in all other literary productions we are charmed with the freshness, the ever varying shades of style and diction? On what grounds must the inspired writers be denied the liberty of adopting new modes of speech, phraseology fitted to new exigencies of thought and outward life, when the utmost liberty is taken by writers of ancient and modern times? The fact of inspiration in the one case and mere natural power in the other, would not materially vary the result.
IV. It is maintained by some critics, “that faith in Christ can set no limits to critical investigations, otherwise faith would hinder the knowledge of the truth.". In other words, the declarations of our Lord
See Vater's Comm. III. 829. De Wette's Einleitung ins. A. T. p. 226
Tone of Arrogant Assumption.
in regard to historical matters, his references to the facts of the Old Testament may be true or they may be erroneous.
Criticism must proceed on its independent course in accordance with these declarations, or in opposition to them, as the case may be. But can we judge of the Old Testament separate from the New? Is not historical criticism compelled to find some of its most important materials in the records of the New Testament? Has it not been established with more certainty than any other event recorded in ancient history, that Jesus Christ came into the world, that he perfectly obeyed the law of God, was full of grace and truth, that in his lips was no guile, that he never accommodated himself to the sinful prejudices of his countrymen, and that all the words he ever uttered are worthy of the most implicit belief ? Is not criticism then compelled to admit these facts and act upon them? Are not his declarations in regard to the Old Testament to be credited without any misgivings? Would he propound as historical facts what he knew to be mere Jewish fables, or uncertain traditions, out of deference to the common belief of his countrymen, or from his unwillingness to disturb their prejudices? No right-minded man will believe any such thing. Every one capable of estimating evidence, or of discriminating fable from facts, must admit the truth, the historical truth of the Gospels. If he admits this, he must also admit that our Lord would not and could not deceive. But he did deceive, if he affirmed those things as historical verities which never occurred. Our faith in Christ must rest on historical facts. It is not a mere subjective feeling. It has its basis on the personal character of the Redeemer, on his truth, his veracity, his perfect knowledge of all past events, on his unshrinking honesty. Historical criticism, therefore, on the Scriptures cannot act independently of faith in Christ. His testimony in regard to the Old Testament is one of the main elements which must come into the account. His word is unerring and decisive.
V. We advert to one more fact, which may be indicative rather of a wrong state of feeling than of an erroneous method or principle of interpretation. We refer to the tone of confident assurance with which a critical judgment is pronounced, the decisive, if not contemptuous air with wbich an alleged erroneous theory is discarded. The manner of the neological critics in this particular is strikingly analogous to that of certain modern writers on the prophecies, who lay down their propositions as if they were mathematical axioms, who seem to have no more doubt that they have arrived at the truth on some most difficult and recondite themes, than if they were the subjects of inspiration themselves. It has been commonly supposed that modesty is an attribute of genius; that deference to the opinions of the great and good of past ages is not inconsistent with the progress of knowledge or with independent investigation. Most men of genius, the great thinkers, the profound inquirers, have written under the conviction that the human mind in its best estate is not infallible, and that an overweening confidence is one of the surest marks of error, or of superficial thought.
As an illustration, we may select the assertions of some of the modern critics in relation to the authorship of the Pentateuch. Lengerke bas the courage to say: “ The question whether Moses wrote the Pentateuch should no more be raised by those who have in themselves any consciousness at all of the development of the history.” De Wette subjoins : “ The controversy can now be only in respect to the time of the post-Mosaic authorship."! Now we suppose that these critics would consider of no account the nearly unanimous opinion in favor of the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch which is beld by the scholars of Great Britain and the United States. These scholars would be set down, possibly, as still laboring under the prejudices of education or of traditional belief. But can the numerous body of learned scholars in Germany, Ranke, Hengstenberg, Drechsler, e. g., be classed in the same category? Is it given to the “liberal” critics of Germany to decide a momentous question for all Christendom besides? Are such summary and sweeping judgments indicative of that honesty and candor of mind which can alone lead to satisfactory results? Are they likely to be acquiesced in, especially when the critics themselves are by no means agreed as to the manner in which the Pentateuch should be dislocated, and its various parts reärranged, and in face, too, of the many corroborating proofs furnished by the Egyptian discoveries in favor of the antiquity and general truth of the Mosaic narratives? In short, assumption and an arrogant tone betray the weakness of the object for which they are enlisted, rather than furnish occasion for doubt and dismay to those who are not inclined to follow in the path which some of the modern critics have marked out.
1 De Wette Einl. ins. A. T. p. 226, 6th ed.
Continuation of the Conversations Lexicon.
NOTICES OF NEW PUBLICATIONS, AND MISCELLANIES.
Die Gegenwart. Eine Encyclopädische Darstellung der neuesten Zeilge
schichte für alle Stände. [The Present. An Encyclopedičal View of the latest History of the Times for all Classes.]
UNDER this title the publisher of the Conversations-Lexicon, proposes to continue that work, from the point where it was left in the ninth edition, of which an account was given in the last number of the Bib. Sacra, pp. 778–790. It is a kind of supplement to that edition ; but it has distinctive characteristics of its own, which give it special value. It is to be published in numbers, each of sixty-four closely printed pages, at the rate of two or three a month. The numbers may be obtained in this country for 12 1-2 cents each - twelve of them will form a volume, to the close of which will be appended a register. This will give a volume of nearly 800 pages about every six months, containing a thoroughly digested account of the events and subjects of the greatest interest in the present state of European affairs.
In this publication, greatly to its advantage, the alphabetical order is dropped, so that subjects can be treated of as they occur, while the interest in them is still fresh. It thus becomes a sort of review for the times. According to the prospectus, the plan proposed is to give an account of the most important movements in religion and theology, in philosophy and art; to discuss all questions that relate to politics, especially the social problems of the day; to give the results of bistorical research, as well as events in recent history; to communicate discoveries in all branches of the natural sciences, and detail the progress of the arts ; and also to give biographical sketches of the leading characters of the age. To carry out this plan, the editor has engaged a body of able and competent contributors; and the numbers as far as issued, of which we have seen seven, show that the work will be both popular and thorough. It enters much more into detail than a regular Lexicon could do ; but this is an advantage to him who wishes to keep up with the times. It treats, for example, very minutely of the revolution in Paris; it gives a full narrative of the contest between the Russians and Circassians ; it supplies a history of the various socialistic and communistic schemes. The thread of historical narration is generally taken up with the year 1840; though, wherever necessary, it runs further back. Perhaps the best view of the work will be obtained by giving the titles of its Articles: The French Revolution of Feb. 1848; the German People, as distributed over the Earth; the Social Movements of the Times; the Newest Discoveries in our Planetary System; the Eastern Provinces of Prussia, in relation to other Nations ; the right Constitution of Armies in a National Spirit ; the Geographical and Political Position of Italy in Relation to other Naţions; Bavarią and its King, Louis I. ; the Christian State; the StreetFight of Paris, in June, 1848; State-Service and State-Officers; Schamil and the Holy War in the Eastern Caucasus (the Circassian war); Socialism and Communism, in France; the Higher Burgber School ; David Frederic Strauss; the Political Relation of the Jews in Germany; the Cavaignac Family; the Occurrences at Mayence, in May, 1848; the German Navy. It promises, in the subsequent Numbers, articles on the Cholera ; Archduke John, the Vicar of the Empire ; the Russian Baltic Provinces; the Gagern Family; the Death-Penalty; Labor; Chemistry and Medicine; the Preliminary Parliament, in Frankfort; Würtemberg; Louis Blanc; Pestalozzi ; the Caucasus; Afghanistan ; Prussia, under William the Fourth.
The historical value of such a work will be apparent from this list of its subjects. Its articles on society and political matters are candid and thorough, and on the liberal side. If we may judge of its theological position by its account of Strauss and his works, we should deprecate its influence in this respect. It is not impartial nor neutral, but shows decided leaning to his subversive criticisms and speculations. And, in point of fact, much of the liberal spirit of Germany in politics is connected with anti-Christian elements. Political freedom is not there born of a zeal for religious liberty, as it was in England and America.
The Academy of Moral and Political Sciences of the French Institute is engaged in the publication of a series of small treatises upon social and political movements and theories of the day. In the preface to the first of these tracts, an account is given of the origin of this enterprize. The “chief of the executive power,” general Cavaignac, summoned the president of the Academy, M, Charles Dupin, to invite that body" to con. cur in the defence of those social principles which were attacked by all sorts of publications. Being persuaded that material order could not be reestablished by means of force, if moral order were not also reëstablished by means of true ideas, he thought that the only way of pacifying men's minds was by enlightening them." The Academy accordingly appointed